24.01.2013 Views

FY14 SoE Performance Plan - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

FY14 SoE Performance Plan - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

FY14 SoE Performance Plan - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>FY14</strong> School of Engineering<br />

<strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Polytechnic</strong> <strong>Institute</strong><br />

David V. Rosowsky, Ph.D., P.E.<br />

Dean of Engineering<br />

Rev. 2, November 2012<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> Engineering


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 2<br />

“The Grand Challenges we face as a society, a nation, and a planet are more complex and<br />

more urgent than at any time in our history. As engineers and educators, we have the<br />

opportunity – the obligation – to work to make a difference.”<br />

“As has always been the case, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> stands firmly committed to ensuring an exceptional<br />

educational environment, hiring and retaining a world-class faculty, and building an<br />

infrastructure befitting a world-class research university. If you have been on campus in the<br />

last couple of years, you have witnessed the physical transformation that has taken place at<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> – a re-envisioned campus community for the next century.”<br />

“We should periodically reflect on the privilege we all enjoy of working at a premier university,<br />

of the opportunity to shape minds and inspire future engineering professionals, and to foster<br />

intellectual discovery by our undergraduate and graduate students.”<br />

“Support one another and expect great things. You won’t be disappointed.”<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

― David V. Rosowsky, Dean, <strong>SoE</strong>


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 3<br />

Table of Contents<br />

Section I: Executive Summary 6<br />

<strong>FY14</strong> New Key Initiatives 6<br />

Section II: <strong>Institute</strong>-Wide Highest Priorities 8<br />

Section III: <strong>SoE</strong> Priorities, Goals, Strategies and Action <strong>Plan</strong>s 11<br />

Section III.1: People<br />

Faculty Growth 11<br />

Non-Tenure Track Faculty 15<br />

Faculty Recruiting: Improving Practices and Procedures 17<br />

Doctoral Student Recruiting 19<br />

Diversity 19<br />

Faculty Development 22<br />

Staff 23<br />

Section III.2: Place<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> as “Community” Initiative 26<br />

Recognizing, Rewarding, and Celebrating Excellence 27<br />

Elevating our Visibility, National Reputation, and Rankings 28<br />

Review of School-wide and Departmental Centers 30<br />

ABET-Critical Teaching Laboratory Upgrades 32<br />

Departmental Advisory Councils 32<br />

Section III.3: Programs<br />

Focal Themes for the School of Engineering 33<br />

Increasing Participation in Undergraduate Research 34<br />

Common First Year 35<br />

Globalization of our Students 38<br />

Coupled Enrollment Management and Faculty Growth <strong>Plan</strong>s 40<br />

Increasing the Size of our PhD Programs 43<br />

Engaging the <strong>Institute</strong>: Creating Value, Uniqueness, and New Opportunities 45<br />

New Degree Programs, Tracks, and Concentrations 46<br />

Design 47<br />

Advanced Manufacturing Programs 48<br />

School of Engineering Educational Outreach Center 50<br />

Archer Center after 20: Visioning and <strong>Plan</strong>ning the Future of the Archer Center 52<br />

On-campus Masters (Professional) Degree Programs 53<br />

Exploring a New Distance Education Model 54<br />

Seeding New Initiatives (Research Directions) 55<br />

New Large-Scale Research Initiatives 55<br />

Academic Advising 60<br />

Section IV: Assessing our Progress 61<br />

Section V: Resource <strong>Plan</strong> 61<br />

Section VI: Fundamental and Undergirding Requirements<br />

Space Utilization and Needs 62<br />

Information Technology and Information Management Infrastructure 62<br />

Capital Fund Request 63<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Advancement Initiatives, Goals for the School of Engineering 66<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 4<br />

Tables:<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Enrollment and Research Expenditure Data (Fall 2005-present) 14<br />

School of Engineering Diversity (comparison to national averages) 20<br />

2012 USN&WR Rankings of Engineering Programs at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> 29<br />

School of Engineering Overview Data (Fall 2005-Fall 2011) 76<br />

Engineering Data (ASEE) – Fall 2008 77<br />

School of Engineering Faculty (2006-present) 78<br />

School of Engineering Student Enrollments (2006-present) 79<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Bachelor’s Degrees Conferred: department and gender (2008-2012) 80<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Bachelor’s Degrees Conferred: department and ethnicity (2008-2012) 81<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 5<br />

The School of Engineering – its faculty, staff, students, and alumni/ae – stand<br />

firmly behind the goals of the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>. This support is the result of<br />

consistent and strategic outreach and engagement by the Dean and the<br />

leadership of the School. The entire School of Engineering is invested in and<br />

committed to the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

The <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> lays out our strategic priorities and serves to guide the<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> over a multi-year period toward its highest priority goals. Those who<br />

have been here since the first <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> was written, more than 12 years<br />

ago, and those that have been part of the <strong>Institute</strong> since its implementation,<br />

understand and appreciate the importance of this document and the<br />

transformational impact it has had on our academic programs and our campus.<br />

The refreshed <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> will be just as important and impactful as we<br />

move into the decade ahead.<br />

In Fall 2012, the faculty and staff in the School of Engineering fully engaged in<br />

the important refresh process for the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

The <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

A comprehensive strategic plan for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Polytechnic</strong> <strong>Institute</strong><br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> pursues this goal: To achieve greater prominence in the 21 st century as a top-tier world class<br />

technological research university with global reach and global vision.<br />

“<strong>Rensselaer</strong> is poised at a time of great opportunity. As new technologies drive the economy and shape<br />

society, our historic mission and our core academic strengths position us to capitalize on this<br />

technological revolution. The <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> serves as our catalyst for change. A comprehensive<br />

strategic plan for the <strong>Institute</strong>, it defines our core enterprises for the <strong>Institute</strong>, and sets forth our goals<br />

for the coming years.”<br />

― Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson, 18 th President of <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Polytechnic</strong> <strong>Institute</strong>


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 6<br />

Section I: Executive Summary<br />

The <strong>FY14</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> for the School of Engineering is ambitious, forward-looking, and engaging.<br />

The <strong>Plan</strong> identifies broad efforts and specific actions that directly support the <strong>Institute</strong>’s highest<br />

priorities as laid out in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, as well as those that address priorities identified for the<br />

School of Engineering. The <strong>SoE</strong> and <strong>Institute</strong> priorities are very closely aligned.<br />

The priorities, goals, and action plans recommended in this <strong>Plan</strong> were developed from an inclusive<br />

process of engagement of the <strong>SoE</strong> Leadership Team (deans, department heads, directors), and through<br />

their efforts, the engagement of the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty and staff.<br />

The specific initiatives fall under one of three priority areas for the School of Engineering in the coming<br />

years, namely the elevation of People, Place, or Programs. Our faculty and staff will be fully engaged in<br />

the realization of our collective goals: (1) to provide a world-class educational environment for our<br />

students, (2) to create an environment that engenders respect for all faculty, staff, and students, and (3)<br />

to build a culture that is conducive to learning and discovery.<br />

1. Rankings: We will improve the School of Engineering undergraduate and graduate rankings to<br />

be among the top-20 (public and private) and top-10 (private) by 2017.<br />

2. Promoting Accomplishment: We will actively promote our accomplishments and successes,<br />

points of pride, and uniqueness to appropriate audiences around the country.<br />

3. Culture: We will foster a culture of respect that engenders cooperation, innovation, and<br />

professional pride.<br />

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING <strong>FY14</strong> NEW KEY INITIATIVES<br />

1. Advanced Manufacturing: THE “MILL”<br />

In spring 2012, we launched the Manufacturing Innovation Learning Laboratory (MILL). Focused on<br />

educating the next generation of manufacturing leaders and pioneers, the MILL builds upon the<br />

success of its predecessor, the Advanced Manufacturing Laboratory (AML), which has produced<br />

undergraduate student teams that have won national awards in each of the last 5 years from the<br />

Society of Manufacturing Engineers and/or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The<br />

evolution of the AML to MILL reflects the need to train future manufacturing leaders in<br />

manufacturing innovation, advanced manufacturing methods, and nanomanufacturing.<br />

Key to the MILL’s continued success will be the expansion of the MILL educational space, in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

The expansion will involve constructing a mezzanine level at the east end of the existing MILL CII<br />

high bay space. The space will house advanced manufacturing equipment, include a shared large<br />

project area, and common design and meeting spaces. This will allow us to support new<br />

undergraduate and graduate-level advanced manufacturing classes including the Advanced<br />

Manufacturing Processes course. AMP will showcase advanced technologies in the areas of<br />

additive manufacturing, composites, advanced machining, manufacturing systems control and<br />

simulation, nano and micro manufacturing, and advanced industrial robotics.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 7<br />

Starting in summer 2012, we engaged in pre-construction talks and planning meetings with<br />

leadership in the Office of the Vice President of Administration. We also have been developing a<br />

business model and a resource development model (built around both corporate and individual<br />

support) for the MILL.<br />

2. Undergraduate Education, Advising: ENGINEERING ADVISING CENTER<br />

In response to the continued rise in student-faculty ratios, and in order to deliver critical services<br />

with fewer staff and meet our commitment to delivering a world-class engineering education (in all<br />

dimensions), the leadership of the School has determined that our students would be better served<br />

by a common advising experience during the first two years. A centralized advising model for the<br />

School would (1) ensure consistency in quality of advising, (2) engage advisors equitably from across<br />

the School’s departments, (3) enable and encourage efficiencies in utilization of faculty and staff to<br />

provide essential advising responsibilities, (4) provide students greater flexibility and access to high<br />

quality advising throughout the academic year, and (5) help the School highlight and promote the<br />

full range of academic programs and majors available to students.<br />

In summer 2012, the Deans and Department Heads agreed to move forward with a School-wide<br />

advising center model. A committee of faculty, staff, and students is developing specific<br />

recommendations for the operation and staffing of this center. We have already identified space<br />

and will require only modest funds to reconfigure this space to serve as the new advising center. A<br />

Director of First-year (Core) Engineering will need to be hired/appointed. The Director will run the<br />

advising center, serve as an important-point person in the School’s pedagogical innovation activities,<br />

and interface with CLASS initiatives. Our hope is to have the new Engineering Advising Center<br />

operational by fall 2013.<br />

3. Undergraduate Education, Enrollments Across the School: COMMON FIRST YEAR<br />

In response to continued enrollment growth in selected majors, and the need to rebalance<br />

enrollments within the <strong>SoE</strong> across the 7 academic departments (and 11 undergraduate programs) to<br />

relieve demand on the three most oversubscribed programs (mechanical, biomedical, and<br />

aerospace engineering), we will be moving toward a true “common first year” in Engineering. While<br />

Core Engineering was implemented, in part, to support a common course model for all engineering<br />

students, program curricula evolved that captured students as early as their first semester. (For<br />

example, most programs have their own introductory courses in lieu of a common “Introduction to<br />

Engineering” course.)<br />

The common first year model is considered a best practice in most of our benchmark schools. We<br />

will replace all program-specific introductory courses with a single “Introduction to Engineering”<br />

course (built around the successful pilot course) and move toward a system in which students<br />

cannot declare their major until after the first year. All first-year <strong>SoE</strong> students will simply be<br />

“Engineering” students. This will provide the greatest opportunity for students to gain exposure to<br />

the various engineering disciplines (fields, opportunities) before declaring their specific major. We<br />

believe this will help to alleviate overcrowding in selected majors while enabling lesser subscribed<br />

programs to realize their enrollment goals. Enrollment rebalancing across our programs and<br />

departments is a key objective for the School.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 8<br />

Section II: <strong>Institute</strong>-wide Highest Priority Initiatives and Overarching Goals<br />

This section cross references, with narratives in Section III or Appendix B (available separately), specific<br />

actions the School of Engineering will undertake in <strong>FY14</strong> that directly support the <strong>Institute</strong>’s highest<br />

priorities. As noted throughout this <strong>Plan</strong>, the <strong>SoE</strong> and <strong>Institute</strong> priorities are closely aligned. It’s essential<br />

that this point be communicated not only to the <strong>Institute</strong> leadership and the faculty and staff in the<br />

School of Engineering, but to the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> alumni. The Dean of Engineering and the President must<br />

continue to coordinate their messaging of this point to faculty, staff, and alumni in order to engender<br />

the greatest support for both the <strong>Institute</strong>’s priorities as described in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> and the<br />

School’s priorities described herein.<br />

OVERARCHING GOALS<br />

Physical and Cyber Infrastructure<br />

Staff, p. 23<br />

ABET-Critical Teaching Laboratory Upgrades: Enhancing the Learning Experience, p. 32<br />

Advanced Manufacturing Programs, p. 48<br />

Exploring a New Distance Education Model, p. 54<br />

Space Utilization and Needs, p. 62<br />

Information Technology and Information Management Infrastructure, p. 62<br />

Faculty Renewal, Expansion, and Retention<br />

Faculty Growth, p. 11<br />

Non-Tenure Track Faculty, p. 15<br />

Faculty Recruiting: Improved Practices and Procedures, p. 17<br />

Diversity, p. 19<br />

Faculty Development, p. 22<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> as “Community” Initiative, p. 26<br />

Coupled Enrollment Management and Faculty Growth <strong>Plan</strong>s, p. 40<br />

Stronger Larger, Higher Impact Research Portfolio<br />

Doctoral Student Recruiting, p. 19<br />

Faculty Development, p. 22<br />

Review of School-Wide and Departmental Centers, p. 30<br />

Focal Themes for the School of Engineering, p. 33<br />

Increasing the Size of our PhD Programs, p. 43<br />

Seeding New Initiatives (Research Directions), p. 55<br />

40-30-10-10-10 (intellectual diversity, balance across the <strong>Institute</strong>)<br />

Doctoral Student Recruiting, p. 19<br />

Diversity, p. 19<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> as “Community” Initiative, p. 26<br />

Increasing Participation in Undergraduate Research, p. 34<br />

Common First Year, p. 35<br />

Globalization of our Students, p. 38<br />

Engaging the <strong>Institute</strong>: Creating Value, Uniqueness, and New Opportunities, p. 45<br />

New Degree Programs, Tracks, and Concentrations, p. 46<br />

Design, p. 47<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 9<br />

School of Engineering Educational Outreach Center, p. 50<br />

Archer Center after 20: Visioning and <strong>Plan</strong>ning the Future of the Archer Center, p. 52<br />

On-campus Masters (Professional) Degree Programs, p. 53<br />

Academic Advising, p. 60<br />

University Positioning (the three thirty-fives): Ranking, Selectivity, and Diversity<br />

Doctoral Student Recruiting, p. 19<br />

Diversity, p. 19<br />

Recognizing, Rewarding, and Celebrating Excellence, p. 27<br />

Elevating our Visibility, National Reputation, and Rankings, p. 28<br />

Coupled Enrollment Management and Faculty Growth <strong>Plan</strong>s, p. 40<br />

Increasing the Size of our PhD Programs, p. 43<br />

Engaging the <strong>Institute</strong>: Creating Value, Uniqueness, and New Opportunities, p. 45<br />

Strengthen the Resource Base<br />

Departmental Advisory Councils, p. 32<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Advancement Initiatives, Goals for the School of Engineering, p. 66<br />

<strong>FY14</strong> INSTITUTE-WIDE HIGHEST PRIORITIES<br />

Grand Challenges<br />

Focal Themes for the School of Engineering, p. 33<br />

Increasing Participation in Undergraduate Research, p. 34<br />

Common First Year, p. 35<br />

Globalization of our Students, p. 38<br />

Advanced Manufacturing Programs, p. 48<br />

Seeding New Initiatives (Research Directions), p. 55<br />

Strategic <strong>Plan</strong>ning: <strong>Rensselaer</strong> at 200<br />

Faculty Growth, p. 11<br />

Faculty Development, p. 22<br />

Increasing the Size of our PhD Programs, p. 43<br />

Engaging the <strong>Institute</strong>: Creating Value, Uniqueness, and New Opportunities, p. 45<br />

New Degree Programs, Tracks, and Concentrations, p. 46<br />

Exploring a New Distance Education Model, p. 54<br />

CLASS… Student Experience<br />

Staff, p. 23<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> as “Community” Initiative, p. 26<br />

Increasing the Size of our PhD Programs, p. 43<br />

Archer Center after 20: Visioning and <strong>Plan</strong>ning the Future of the Archer Center, p. 52<br />

Academic Advising, p. 60<br />

Center for Science<br />

Space Utilization and Needs, p. 62<br />

Fundraising – Strategic Focus<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Advancement Initiatives, Goals for the School of Engineering, p. 66<br />

Global Engagement<br />

Globalization of our Students, p. 38<br />

Exploring a New Distance Education Model, p. 54<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 10<br />

On Strategic Partnership—<br />

“(We) have responsibility for maintaining world-class engineering programs in a time of global<br />

economic stress, and ensuring our curricula and facilities are modern, relevant, forward-looking,<br />

and inspiring. The entire School of Engineering is invested in this endeavor, which requires creative<br />

thinking and new partnerships with industry, other universities and research organizations, state<br />

and federal agencies, and our alumni.”<br />

On Diversity—<br />

“Our thinking on diversity continues to evolve. Our concern is no longer just about ensuring<br />

access. Our focus now is on building a diverse academic community to maximize the potential for<br />

new ideas. It is not a set of goals imposed by social pressures or government programs, but rather<br />

a set of goals established to elevate the University and push out further in scholarship, creativity,<br />

and knowledge creation. We seek diversity not only because it's the right thing to do, but because<br />

it's the smart thing to do.”<br />

On Our Students—<br />

“Students choosing to study engineering are changing. They are more sophisticated, more<br />

passionate, and more globally aware. They think about social justice. They are opportunistic and<br />

entrepreneurial. And they recognize that an engineering degree will open doors to careers in<br />

business, law, medicine, scientific research, and public service.”<br />

On Community—<br />

“Diversity and inclusiveness go hand-in-glove, but they are not the same. Indeed, diversity and<br />

inclusiveness are complementary and synergistic: one enhances the other and each is necessary to<br />

truly realize the other.”<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

― David V. Rosowsky, Dean, <strong>SoE</strong>


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 11<br />

Section III: <strong>SoE</strong> Priorities, Goals, Strategies and Action <strong>Plan</strong>s<br />

This section describes a series of priorities, goals, and action plans for the School of Engineering,<br />

developed from an inclusive process of engagement of the <strong>SoE</strong> Leadership Team (Deans, Department<br />

Heads, Directors) and, through their efforts, the engagement of the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty and staff. For each topic<br />

the key portfolios (and their roles) are clearly indicated and any projected resources needed in <strong>FY14</strong> are<br />

indicated. Strategic initiatives (and associated action items/goals) also are included.<br />

The specific initiatives (new and continuing) fall under one of three priority areas for the School of<br />

Engineering, namely the elevation of People, Place, or Programs. Our faculty and staff must be fully<br />

engaged in the realization of our collective goals: (1) to provide a world-class educational environment<br />

for our students, (2) to create an environment that engenders respect for all faculty, staff, and students,<br />

and (3) to build a culture that is conducive to learning and discovery – a Community of Scholars.<br />

Section III.1: PEOPLE<br />

FACULTY GROWTH<br />

Key Portfolio: School of Engineering<br />

Coupled with the enrollment management strategy described later in this plan, and in order to bring our<br />

student/faculty and undergraduate/graduate student ratios into alignment with peer research schools,<br />

the School of Engineering must continue to increase the size of its faculty. As described elsewhere in the<br />

<strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, we will build our instructional and research capacity around tenure-track and tenured<br />

faculty, supplemented as deemed appropriate (to meet our instructional and educational program<br />

goals) by a small number of adjunct faculty, lecturers, and/or Professors of Practice.<br />

We propose a faculty growth plan for the <strong>SoE</strong> that increases the engineering faculty size by about 30<br />

over a three-year period. This is an aggressive plan, but one that is needed to reverse the recent trends<br />

in teaching loads and class sizes (resulting from essentially uncontrolled enrollment growth and several<br />

years with higher-than-normal numbers of faculty departures) and to realize the objectives of the<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> (percentage of total <strong>Institute</strong> enrollment, student/faculty ratios, and faculty<br />

productivity). Our primary objective must be to grow the size of our faculty. This will have the following<br />

desired outcomes for the School of Engineering and the <strong>Institute</strong>:<br />

1. Faculty will be hired in strategic areas for the <strong>Institute</strong> and for the School of Engineering (as<br />

described elsewhere in this <strong>Plan</strong>) allowing us to build capacity for research and scholarship in<br />

key areas.<br />

2. Student/faculty ratios will be brought down to desired levels, competitive with peer schools and<br />

ensuring we can provide the best possible educational experience for our students.<br />

3. Teaching loads will be balanced across the School and lowered to levels competitive with peer<br />

schools, thereby enabling growth in our research program and in the size of our doctoral<br />

programs.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 12<br />

4. The <strong>SoE</strong> faculty size will be closer to the “correct percentage” of the total <strong>Institute</strong> faculty given<br />

the short-term target that Engineering represent not more than 50% of the total student<br />

enrollment within three years, and the longer term target for Engineering of 40% (consistent<br />

with the 40/30/10/10/10 goal of the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>).<br />

5. Engineering faculty members are among the most productive at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> in garnering<br />

extramural research support (as individual investigators, multi-investigator teams, or large<br />

multi-unit or multi-university centers). Increasing the size of the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty will afford the<br />

greatest increase in extramural research funding to the <strong>Institute</strong>, with the associated indirect<br />

costs, as well as graduate tuition revenue from extramural grants. Last year, the School of<br />

Engineering was responsible for more than $8M in indirect costs returned to the <strong>Institute</strong> and<br />

generated more than $4.5M in graduate tuition revenue. This combined total (approximately<br />

$13M) from the <strong>SoE</strong> has been stable over the last five years, a period during which the faculty<br />

size has declined slightly. Therefore it is reasonable to anticipate that an increase in <strong>SoE</strong> faculty<br />

size of approximately 23% (30 additional faculty in the next three years) will result in about a<br />

23% increase in this amount or about $3.25M in additional revenue per year 1 .<br />

A two-year projection for faculty growth and commensurate increase in productivity is shown in the<br />

table at the end of this section (with selected data from Table 1 in Appendix A). Note also that this table<br />

includes projections for student enrollments in <strong>SoE</strong>. These targets, and the steps we will take to reach<br />

them, are described in Section III.3.<br />

In <strong>FY14</strong>, we will continue to hire into the four “clusters” (announced last year as part of our multi-year<br />

faculty hiring initiative) with expertise aligned with one or more of the following areas. (Note that some<br />

areas are listed multiple times, under different headings.) The <strong>Institute</strong> strategic thrusts 2 supported by<br />

these areas are shown in parentheses after each major heading. The most likely department homes for<br />

faculty hired in specific areas are shown after each area.<br />

ENERGY SYSTEMS CLUSTER (Energy and the Environment, Computational Science and Engineering,<br />

Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials)<br />

Cyber-physical systems (Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

Controls and/or mechatronics (Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

Energy Systems (Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

Nuclear (Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering)<br />

Advanced materials/energy (Chemical and Biological Engineering)<br />

Decision analysis/network sciences (Industrial and Systems Engineering)<br />

1 This estimate is expected to be conservative as retiring faculty are replaced with more research-active faculty and<br />

as the number and size of larger center-level grants increases.<br />

2 The <strong>Institute</strong> strategic thrusts, as described in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, are: Nanotechnology, Computation and<br />

Information Technology, Biotechnology, Media and the Arts, and Energy and the Environment.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 13<br />

INFRASTRUCTURE CLUSTER (Energy and the Environment, Computational Science and Engineering)<br />

Structural/materials (Civil and Environmental Engineering)<br />

Transportation (Civil and Environmental Engineering)<br />

Geotechnical (Civil and Environmental Engineering)<br />

Decision analysis/network sciences (Industrial and Systems Engineering)<br />

Cyber-physical systems (Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING CLUSTER (Energy and the Environment, Nanotechnology and<br />

Advanced Materials)<br />

Robotics (Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering; Electrical, Computer and Systems<br />

Engineering)<br />

Aerospace materials/structures (Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering)<br />

Manufacturing (Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering)<br />

Optical systems packaging (Materials Science and Engineering; Mechanical, Aerospace, and<br />

Nuclear Engineering)<br />

Biomaterials (Materials Science and Engineering; Biomedical Engineering)<br />

Advanced materials/energy (Chemical and Biological Engineering)<br />

BIO-ENGINEERING CLUSTER (Biotechnology and the Life Sciences, Computational Science and<br />

Engineering)<br />

Biomaterials (Materials Science and Engineering; Biomedical Engineering)<br />

Bioimaging (Biomedical Engineering; Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

Computational molecular science (Chemical and Biological Engineering)<br />

Biocomputation/computational biology-Constellation Chair (Biomedical Engineering; Electrical,<br />

Computer and Systems Engineering)<br />

Tissue engineering/regenerative medicine-Constellation Chair (Materials Science and<br />

Engineering; Biomedical Engineering; Chemical and Biological Engineering)<br />

Biocatalysis/metabolic engineering-Constellation Chair (Chemical and Biological Engineering)<br />

We propose the three-year hiring plan (<strong>FY14</strong>-FY16, funding permitting) shown below. The specific target<br />

areas for FY15 and FY16 (the second and third year in the faculty growth plan proposed herein) will be<br />

determined based on success in the previous years’ searches and needs arising from faculty departures<br />

or retirements. Unless otherwise specified (e.g., for senior or endowed chair positions), we propose to<br />

hire at either the assistant or associate professor ranks, enabling us to cast the broadest possible net for<br />

the best possible talent while meeting our diversity objectives. We will continue to carefully monitor our<br />

rank-diversity across the School and within individual departments to ensure a balance of faculty ranks<br />

and provide stability.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 14<br />

Searches initiated in FY13, positions to start Fall 2013 (<strong>FY14</strong>) – 15 positions 3<br />

Objective: increase <strong>SoE</strong> tenure/tenure-track faculty to 147 4<br />

Searches initiated in <strong>FY14</strong>, positions to start Fall 2014 (FY15) – 15 positions<br />

Objective: increase <strong>SoE</strong> tenure/tenure-track faculty to 154 3<br />

Searches initiated in FY15, positions to start Fall 2015 (FY16) – 15 positions<br />

Objective: increase <strong>SoE</strong> tenure/tenure-track faculty to 161 3<br />

School of Engineering Enrollment and Research Expenditure Data<br />

FY06<br />

Fall 05<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

FY07<br />

Fall 06<br />

FY08<br />

Fall 07<br />

FY09<br />

Fall 08<br />

FY10<br />

Fall 09<br />

FY 11<br />

Fall 10<br />

FY12<br />

Fall 11<br />

FY13<br />

Fall 12<br />

<strong>FY14</strong><br />

Fall 13<br />

FY15<br />

Fall 14<br />

T/TT faculty 141 146 139 143 134 136 132 140 147 154<br />

Research expenditure<br />

per faculty ($K)<br />

347 356 354 369 350 343 391 400 410 420<br />

Total annual research<br />

expenditures ($M) f<br />

48.9 52.2 49.2 52.8 46.9 46.6 51.6 56.0 60.3 64.7<br />

Undergraduate<br />

enrollment<br />

2846 3042 3007 3087 3221 c 3077 d 3147 e TBD TBD TBD<br />

Graduate enrollment, 505/ 530/ 502/ 506/ 491/ 494/ 480/ 500/ 550/ 600/<br />

Troy (FT/PT)<br />

55 48 44 56 50 58 41 50 50 50<br />

UG student-to-faculty<br />

(T/TT) ratio a<br />

20.2 20.8 21.6 21.6 24.0 22.8 23.8 TBD TBD TBD<br />

UG-to-G (FT) student 5.6 5.7 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.1 6.6 TBD TBD TBD<br />

ratio b<br />

ACTION ITEM: Seek approval to hire 15 new<br />

tenured/tenure-track faculty 3 in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

Indirect returned to<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> ($M)<br />

7.6 8.4 8.2 8.4 8.2 8.4 8.9 9.0 9.5 10.0<br />

a Target = 15:1 (excluding Co-terminal Masters students) Note: shaded numbers are projections<br />

b Target = 4:1 (excluding Co-terminal Masters students)<br />

c Includes 166 Co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

d Includes 178 co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

f Includes 15 co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

e Expenditures based on USN&WR data (a blended calculation)<br />

3 Specific position requests (departments, strategic thrust areas, rank) will be submitted to the Provost’s office in<br />

late 2012. The Provost then develops and forwards a recommended set of ranked position requests based on<br />

requests received from all five Schools. Board approval on any new searches typically comes by the first week of<br />

March.<br />

4 This assumes 6-8 faculty departures from <strong>SoE</strong> each year. This number is based on historical trends and careful<br />

forward projections for the next three fiscal years. Also included in these figures is the assumption that all<br />

approved FY13 searches will be concluded by Fall 2013.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 15<br />

NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office, Division of Human Resources<br />

LECTURERS AND PROFESSORS-OF-PRACTICE (PoP)<br />

Fixed-term (multi-year appointment) teaching faculty are an important segment of the School of<br />

Engineering instructional faculty. The non-tenure/tenure track faculty are contributing members of the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> faculty and play an essential role in our ability to deliver a world-class engineering education to our<br />

students.<br />

The <strong>SoE</strong> is well known for innovative educational programs, including hands-on experiences, projectbased<br />

learning, studio classrooms, and design throughout the curriculum. These experiences call for a<br />

diverse faculty including those who bring professional practice and design experiences to the curricula.<br />

Such faculty are best attracted to <strong>Rensselaer</strong> on a continuing, non-tenure track appointment, yet one<br />

that has a definite career path (see below).<br />

We propose adding three new Lecturer/PoP faculty 5 in <strong>FY14</strong>. These individuals are hired at a far lower<br />

total cost than tenure-track faculty members (i.e., 9-month salary only, no startup costs), are hired on a<br />

fixed-term basis (i.e., no long-term contract or expectations of tenure), and carry far larger teaching<br />

loads than tenure-track faculty members (i.e., 2-3 times the number of courses per year). In some cases,<br />

these faculty are better positioned to assist with capstone design experiences, academic advising, and<br />

advising of student chapters and teams. We have a number of examples of “model” Lecturers and<br />

Professors-of-Practice in the School of Engineering. They receive some of the highest teaching ratings,<br />

have received awards for both teaching and advising, and (in many cases) have gone above and beyond<br />

their job requirements to mentor students, provide career guidance, and connect students with<br />

professional society activities.<br />

CAREER TRACKS FOR LECTURERS AND PROFESSORS-OF-PRACTICE<br />

In 2011, working closely with the Provost’s Office and the Office of Human Resources, we successfully<br />

completed a process to convert the many different types of non-tenure-track instructional faculty hired<br />

into the former clinical faculty category into three tracks: Adjunct, Lecturer, and Professor of Practice.<br />

5 One in MANE (mechanical engineering design and manufacturing), one in MSE (experimental techniques,<br />

materials characterization), and one in CEE (structural engineering design)<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM: Seek approval to hire three new<br />

Lecturers/Professors-of-Practice 5 in <strong>FY14</strong> in order to<br />

(a) meet our expected teaching demands, and (b)<br />

reduce our reliance on gap hiring each fall.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 16<br />

We will continue to work with these offices to develop appropriate career path “tracks” (e.g., Senior<br />

Lecturer, Distinguished Professor of Practice) within these categories.<br />

Track 1: Professor of the Practice (PoP)<br />

These are individuals with considerable industry or other specialized experience that allows them to<br />

bring a unique and needed experience base to the undergraduate academic program in one or more<br />

departments in the <strong>SoE</strong>. These faculty are hired to contribute to the undergraduate academic mission of<br />

the <strong>SoE</strong> (including classroom teaching, laboratory instruction, capstone design experiences) and may<br />

also be expected to participate in advising, seminars, facilitating co-op or internship programs, and<br />

engagement with other student learning programs on campus. All Professors of the Practice are<br />

expected to have earned the PhD degree. The title of Distinguished Professor of Practice (DPoP) will be<br />

reserved for those having exceptional qualifications and experience (e.g., a former CEO, Senior VP, or<br />

other high-level position attained in a major corporation, or member of the NAE). In certain cases, the<br />

PoP (or DPoP) may not have earned the PhD degree but is expected to have earned a graduate degree.<br />

The PoP (and DPoP) appointments will be made for 3-5 years, with renewal possible contingent on (1)<br />

performance, (2) needs of the program(s), and (3) availability of funds.<br />

Track 2: Lecturer<br />

These are individuals who have earned the PhD degree and are hired exclusively to contribute to the<br />

undergraduate academic programs in one or more departments in the <strong>SoE</strong> (including classroom<br />

teaching, laboratory instruction, capstone design experiences). The individual may be appointed to the<br />

rank of Lecturer or Senior Lecturer depending on their qualifications and experience. Those on multiyear<br />

appointments will have the opportunity to proceed upward in these ranks through a clearly defined<br />

set of performance criteria and metrics (analogous to the promotion process for tenure-track faculty).<br />

The Lecturer track appointments will be made for 1-3 years with renewal possible contingent on (1)<br />

performance, (2) needs of the program(s), and (3) availability of funds.<br />

Track 3: Adjunct Faculty<br />

These are short-term (e.g., one semester or one year) appointments of individuals holding an advanced<br />

degree who are hired to meet a critical teaching need. Adjunct faculty will be hired on an “as-needed”<br />

basis without any expectation for renewal or continuation. They can be hired on a part-time (e.g., 1-2<br />

courses per semester) basis or a full-time (3-4 courses per semester) basis for the hiring term. In the<br />

event they are hired to teach one or two courses, they will be paid “per course” at a rate that is<br />

competitive with other universities in the region. In the event they are hired on a “full-time” basis for<br />

the (up to one year) hiring period, they will be paid a salary commensurate with teaching experience<br />

and competitive with other universities in the region. Adjunct faculty have no ranks within the title and<br />

therefore no opportunity for career path or promotion. The positions themselves are non-renewable,<br />

however individuals who perform well in their role may be considered for subsequent adjunct<br />

appointments as needed.<br />

We will work closely with the Provost’s Office and the Office of Human Resources in <strong>FY14</strong> to complete<br />

the clinical conversion process through the addition of definite career paths where appropriate. In doing<br />

so, we will clearly define expectations for each position, intended length of contract and terms for<br />

renewal, and paths for professional development and promotion (where appropriate). We will continue<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 17<br />

to review the salary structure across each of the new position/tracks, along with the experience and<br />

qualifications of each individual in these positions, and take steps to correct any salary parity/equity<br />

issues that are identified. The result will be less ambiguity, more transparency, clearer expectations, and<br />

improved morale across the non-tenure/tenure-track faculty in the School.<br />

FACULTY RECRUITING: IMPROVING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of Human Resources, Office of the Provost<br />

We must increase the size of our faculty. Even if engineering is to become a smaller percentage of the<br />

overall undergraduate enrollment, we must realize growth in our research programs and doctoral<br />

enrollment to become competitive with aspirant peer research universities. This will require a period of<br />

faculty hiring that more than compensates for faculty departures/retirements, thus increasing<br />

significantly the size of the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty.<br />

As we prepare for a multi-year faculty hiring initiative, the time is right to carefully review current<br />

practices and the procedures surrounding the hiring of new faculty to optimize the enormous efforts put<br />

forth by various offices and departments across the <strong>Institute</strong>. Collectively, we should strive to achieve<br />

greater efficiency (shorter times, lower costs, less paperwork, fewer steps) to enable the most nimble,<br />

responsive, aggressive, and ultimately successful hiring process possible.<br />

At present, the faculty hiring process (including position approval and advertisement, the routing and<br />

approvals of hiring packages, and the ability to make small but strategic changes within authorized<br />

searches) is, at times, cumbersome. Working closely with the Office of Human Resources, significant<br />

improvements have been realized in the last two years. We will continue to work together to identify<br />

opportunities for even greater efficiency in the coming year, with particular emphasis placed on<br />

shortening the time required to post advertisements for approved searches, enabling the Dean to make<br />

minor changes within and across active searches, and reducing the time from when the hiring package is<br />

completed to when an offer can be extended.<br />

Such operational efficiencies (improvements) will help us attract the very best faculty to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. This<br />

is especially important as we seek to compete with the top research universities worldwide for new<br />

faculty in the coming years.<br />

ACTION ITEM/GOALS: In searching for, recruiting, evaluating, and hiring future faculty members,<br />

we will:<br />

1. Align searches with the strategic needs of the <strong>Institute</strong> and the School of Engineering.<br />

2. Develop the deepest possible applicant pool with highly qualified candidates from top<br />

universities and diverse backgrounds including those from under-represented groups.<br />

3. Hire those with the greatest promise for excellence in teaching and excellence in scholarship.<br />

4. Ensure resources are made available (financial, infrastructure, and mentoring) to maximize their<br />

potential for success.<br />

5. Complete searches in a timely manner and extend competitive offers early in the hiring season.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 18<br />

Streamlined Constellation Chair Recruitment<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, School of Science, Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary<br />

Studies, Office of the Vice President for Research, Office of the Provost, Office of Human Resources<br />

The Constellations represent an enormous opportunity for <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. Through constellation hires,<br />

significant and world-renowned strengths in key scientific and engineering disciplines are brought into<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong>, thereby opening up new frontiers of research and expanding existing research portfolios.<br />

Hiring key high-value faculty requires agility at all stages of the recruitment and hiring process.<br />

In order to capitalize on this opportunity, and quickly begin to realize the tremendous opportunity these<br />

newly endowed chairs offer, we must seek to engage more broadly and efficiently the academic<br />

community. The senior faculty and other chaired professors, in particular, must become engaged in the<br />

recruitment process. And the academic leadership must be empowered, through both processes and<br />

commitment to efficiency (agility), to quickly forward the most promising candidates for approval by the<br />

President. A new strategy for recruiting and hiring Constellation Chairs was put forward as part of the<br />

FY13 <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>s for the Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies (CBIS), the School<br />

of Engineering, and the School of Science. This strategy, which was approved and adopted last year and<br />

is being used presently, has the following key steps/milestones:<br />

1. Identify high-value candidates (CBIS Director, Deans, Departments)<br />

2. Invite candidates to campus to meet with key decision makers (CBIS Director, Departments)<br />

3. Assess dual interests (candidates and <strong>Rensselaer</strong>) (CBIS Director, Cognizant Dean, Cognizant<br />

Department Head, Provost) – “go/no go” decisions to move forward<br />

4. Establish the core (startup) needs of the candidates (CBIS Director, Cognizant Dean, Cognizant<br />

Department Head)<br />

5. Conduct preliminary discussions with the President (CBIS Director, Cognizant Dean, Provost) –<br />

“go/no-go” decision to move forward<br />

6. Develop P&T packages (Cognizant Department Head and Dean)<br />

7. Candidate meeting with the President – “go/no-go” decision to extend offer<br />

8. Assemble final hiring package (Provost, CBIS Director, Cognizant Dean, Cognizant Department<br />

Head, Vice President of Human Resources)<br />

9. Send out offer letter (Vice President of Human Resources, Provost)<br />

The goal of the new hiring strategy for Constellation Chairs is to reach the first “go/no-go” decision (Step<br />

3) within 1.5 months following identification of a high-value candidate. Steps 4 and 5 should then be<br />

completed within 0.5 months and scheduling the candidate meeting with the President should also<br />

occur in this timeframe (with the meeting confirmed upon completion of Step 6). Step 6 should be<br />

completed within one month (including receipt of letters). Following the meeting with the President<br />

(Step 7), intensive discussions with the candidate commence with Steps 8 and 9 being completed within<br />

one month. This results in a total time to hire of four months.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 19<br />

We will work closely with the Dean of Science, the Director of CBIS, the Provost, the Vice President of<br />

Research, and the Vice President of Human Resources (within this framework) to bring forward the most<br />

highly qualified candidates for these exciting new positions in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

DOCTORAL STUDENT RECRUITING<br />

Key portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office/Dean of Graduate Education<br />

Faculty must make it a priority to actively recruit “blue chip” PhD students. One focus must be on those<br />

from the very top universities worldwide. Another focus must be on highly qualified US applicants. Only<br />

by focusing efforts on both groups can we build a truly diverse graduate student body. Competition for<br />

top PhD students is extremely fierce. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is competing with many other top universities, both<br />

private and public, and many schools are offering extraordinary packages (with stipends in the $30K-40K<br />

range, plus tuition). We must present <strong>Rensselaer</strong> as a truly exceptional environment for graduate study<br />

and research, where faculty are deeply committed to mentoring graduate students, and unmatched<br />

opportunities exist for cross-disciplinary research. Where applicable, the unique resources, programs,<br />

and core facilities at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> should be promoted. While working to grow the size of our doctoral<br />

program (discussed elsewhere), we will continually strive to elevate the quality of our graduate<br />

students.<br />

Specific initiatives include:<br />

1. Specific print and web media pieces aimed at increasing the visibility of <strong>SoE</strong> doctoral<br />

programs; targets for print pieces include top engineering schools worldwide, selected<br />

undergraduate colleges and universities in the US, and engineering deans and department<br />

heads/chairs at US institutions.<br />

2. Department Heads and Deans will communicate a consistent message about the priority<br />

placed on supervising and mentoring PhD students.<br />

3. Faculty annual review documentation will include specific steps taken to recruit PhD<br />

students, successes, and identification of future opportunities.<br />

4. Establishing School-based graduate fellowships as a top <strong>SoE</strong> priority for <strong>Institute</strong><br />

Advancement.<br />

DIVERSITY<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office, Division of Human Resources, Provost’s<br />

Office/Dean of Graduate Education, Office of Minority Student Affairs<br />

The School of Engineering is committed to building an inclusive and diverse academic community. This is<br />

a key element of the Community of Scholars initiative. As a profession, engineering has seen a steady<br />

increase in the number of women. However, the most current National Science Foundation (NSF) data<br />

indicate that the percentage of women graduates from undergraduate engineering degree programs has<br />

slightly declined nationally, i.e., from 20.6% in 2000 to 18.2% in 2010. The American Society for<br />

Engineering Education (ASEE) also reports that the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded to women is<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 20<br />

dropping. ASEE’s Engineering by the Numbers 6 reports that 18.4% of the bachelor’s degrees awarded in<br />

2010-11 were awarded to women, while 25.6% of engineering bachelors degrees at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> were<br />

awarded to women in the same year. At <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, the number of underrepresented minorities<br />

earning bachelor’s degrees has remained relatively constant, varying from 9.8% to 10.3% (averaging<br />

about 10%) over the last five years. ASEE reports that among all engineering programs, the national<br />

percentage of undergraduate engineering degrees awarded to African Americans and Hispanics in 2010-<br />

11 was 12.7%, compared to 10.3% at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. As of Fall 2012, the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty (tenured and tenuretrack)<br />

includes 5% underrepresented minorities and 15% women. Nationally, Asian-Americans now<br />

represent 24.9% of T/TT engineering faculty members, up from 17% in 2001. ASEE reports that the<br />

percentage of female engineering faculty nationally increased from 8.9% in 2001 to 13.8% in 2011. ASEE<br />

reports slight increases in both African-American and Hispanic faculty from 2001, each rising a half of<br />

one percent to about 2.5% and 3.7%, respectively, or 6.2% total. The summary below shows that<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> is essentially performing at (or above, in the case of degrees awarded to women) the<br />

national averages in terms of diversity of faculty and students, with the exception of engineering<br />

degrees awarded to underrepresented minorities (where we lag by about 20% at the undergraduate<br />

level and about 30% at the doctoral level).<br />

School of Engineering Diversity (Comparison to National Averages)<br />

2011 figures: National Average 4 <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

% women T/TT faculty in engineering 13.8% 12.9%<br />

% African-American and Hispanic T/TT faculty in<br />

engineering<br />

% undergraduate engineering degrees awarded to<br />

women<br />

% undergraduate engineering degrees awarded to<br />

underrepresented minorities*<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

6.2% 5.3%<br />

18.4% 23.7%<br />

12.7% 10.3%<br />

% engineering masters degrees awarded to women 22.7% 29.0%<br />

% engineering masters degrees awarded to<br />

underrepresented minorities*<br />

11.2% 6.0%<br />

% engineering doctoral degrees awarded to women 21.8% 23.0%<br />

% engineering doctoral degrees awarded to<br />

underrepresented minorities*<br />

7.7% 5.4%<br />

*African Americans and Hispanics only (Native Americans reported separately)<br />

6 ASEE Engineering by the Numbers, annual report by Bryan L. Yoder, Ph.D., Director of Assessment, Evaluation,<br />

and Institutional Research, ASEE.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 21<br />

We must continue to enhance diversity among our undergraduate students, graduate students, and<br />

faculty. We must take a broad view of diversity and seek the broadest possible representation within<br />

each of these groups. In some cases, this may mean specific efforts to increase the number of students<br />

from underrepresented groups; in others it may mean increasing the number of women or US citizens.<br />

We must ensure a safe and supportive environment for all faculty, staff, and students. Finally, we must<br />

foster an academic community that values individuals, respects differences, and celebrates cultures.<br />

In <strong>FY14</strong>, we will continue our benchmarking and best-practices surveys of our peer/aspirant institutions,<br />

focusing on those who have been successful for a sustained period of time in recruiting and retaining<br />

students from underrepresented groups into engineering. This will inform a set of specific<br />

recommendations that we will (a) implement or (b) forward to the President for approval and/or<br />

support.<br />

In <strong>FY14</strong>, as we did in FY12 and FY13, we will take specific steps (e.g., collect best practices, invite<br />

consultants from other universities to visit with our department heads and search committee chairs,<br />

outreach to colleagues at top universities) to develop a broader and deeper pool of faculty applicants<br />

from underrepresented groups. We will continue to make diversity a top priority in faculty hiring in the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> and will increase the percentage of faculty hired from underrepresented groups in the coming year.<br />

In addition, we will:<br />

1. Engage fully with all offices on campus having responsibility for student recruiting and diversity.<br />

2. Increase the percentage of women undergraduate students in the <strong>SoE</strong> to 35% in five years.<br />

3. Increase the percentage of underrepresented minority undergraduate students in the <strong>SoE</strong> to<br />

15% in five years.<br />

4. Increase the percentage of women faculty in the <strong>SoE</strong> to 25% in five years.<br />

5. Increase the percentage of faculty from underrepresented groups to 10% in five years.<br />

To increase the size, quality, and diversity of the graduate applicant pool, we will:<br />

� Work with <strong>SoE</strong> academic departments, the Provost’s Office/Dean of Graduate Education, the<br />

Graduate School, the Office of Admissions, the Office of Minority Student Affairs, and the Vice<br />

President for Research to develop and grow faculty-initiated recruitment partnerships with peer<br />

and aspirant universities in New York and surrounding states, universities that do not have<br />

doctoral programs, and HBCU’s and HHSU’s. These schools can serve as feeder schools for our<br />

graduate engineering programs and, with assistance from Enrollment Management, we will<br />

track the number of inquiries, applicants, admits, and enrollments from these pipeline<br />

institutions.<br />

To increase minority enrollments in our graduate programs, we will:<br />

� Work with the Provost’s Office/Dean of Graduate Education, the Office of Minority Student<br />

Affairs, and the Office of Enrollment Management to develop and offer graduate fellowships to<br />

attract graduate minority students as well as support to pay for campus visits for the most highly<br />

qualified prospective students.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 22<br />

To increase the graduation rates for underrepresented minorities, we will:<br />

� Engage with the Provost’s Task Force on freshmen preparation and support service by the <strong>SoE</strong><br />

Director for Diversity on the <strong>Institute</strong>-wide Intervention Team. A mentor program involving<br />

students and faculty is being developed in the School of Engineering with a focus on academic<br />

success for all students. As part of this program, the departments will engage their students in<br />

activities to build self-confidence, develop critical thinking, and educate students about<br />

potential career paths (including graduate and professional school). Student organizations such<br />

as SWE, NSBE, SHPE, Tau Beta Pi, IEEE, Eta Kappa Nu, ASCE, ASME, BMES, and AiCHE will be<br />

called upon to launch and sustain the mentoring programs across the School of Engineering.<br />

ACTION ITEMS/GOALS:<br />

1. Increase the percentage of women undergraduate students in the <strong>SoE</strong> to 35%<br />

in five years, and the percentage of underrepresented minority undergraduate<br />

students in the <strong>SoE</strong> to 15% in five years.<br />

2. Increase the percentage of women faculty in the <strong>SoE</strong> to 25% in five years.<br />

FACULTY DEVELOPMENT<br />

Key Portfolio: School of Engineering<br />

The School of Engineering has experienced significant turnover in faculty in the last few years as senior<br />

faculty retired and were replaced by new faculty. This, coupled with plans for faculty growth in the<br />

coming years and increased competition from other universities for highly successful early career<br />

faculty, underscores the importance of a robust faculty mentoring program. As our outstanding faculty<br />

are promoted and tenured and continue their professional development, the most successful once again<br />

become recruiting targets by other top universities. It is equally important, therefore, that our midcareer<br />

faculty are properly mentored and guided toward their next promotion and that outstanding<br />

faculty receive timely promotions as both recognition and incentive to remain at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.<br />

Significant progress has been made in formalizing expectations/procedures for the development of<br />

junior faculty and making more transparent all procedures related to promotion and tenure (P&T). In<br />

2010, the School of Engineering (1) created a P&T Guide Document for all engineering faculty members,<br />

and (2) completed a new <strong>SoE</strong> Mentoring Guide to ensure a more consistent and effective mentoring<br />

process. In the coming year, we will introduce an Outstanding Faculty Mentoring Award to recognize a<br />

School of Engineering faculty member who has consistently, enthusiastically, and effectively mentored<br />

junior faculty toward academic success.<br />

Each <strong>SoE</strong> academic department has a formal mentoring program for their untenured assistant<br />

professors that is initiated in the first year and continues through the promotion and tenure decision.<br />

Currently, all <strong>SoE</strong> assistant professors receive a mentoring letter (providing both assessment and<br />

guidance) each year from their mentor and Department Head.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 23<br />

Specific initiatives:<br />

1. The <strong>SoE</strong> leadership will dedicate a meeting each academic year to discussing best practices for<br />

junior faculty mentoring and develop a list of required and recommended procedures for each<br />

department. The Dean will be kept informed of the specific mentoring plans for each new<br />

faculty member by the end of their first semester. The Department Heads will be required to<br />

provide a summary of the new faculty mentoring activities/progress during their annual<br />

performance reviews.<br />

2. The <strong>SoE</strong> leadership will dedicate a meeting each year to discussing expectations for all three<br />

faculty ranks and to develop a mentoring program for tenured associate professors. The<br />

intention is to ensure that associate professors are (1) performing as expected for a tenured<br />

faculty member in the <strong>SoE</strong>, and (2) making appropriate progress toward their next promotion.<br />

Department Heads are expected to monitor these mid-career mentoring programs for their<br />

faculty members.<br />

3. The <strong>SoE</strong> will find appropriate ways to promote and advertise our faculty mentoring programs as<br />

departmental and school-wide resources and to demonstrate to potential faculty our<br />

commitment to their success at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.<br />

We will:<br />

1. Through our faculty mentoring and other faculty development and support programs, we will<br />

create an environment that enhances our faculty members’ potential for professional success<br />

and timely promotion through the faculty ranks.<br />

2. Become known as a School that takes seriously the role of faculty mentoring and has a<br />

demonstrated record of success.<br />

3. Develop faculty members who are highly sought after by other universities, but who choose to<br />

remain at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.<br />

STAFF<br />

Key Portfolio: School of Engineering, Division of Human Resources<br />

GOAL: To support the educational and research mission of the <strong>Institute</strong> and the School of Engineering<br />

by developing a highly efficient, effective support staff. To meet this goal, we will:<br />

1. Improve staff development opportunities;<br />

2. Fill mission-critical staff positions; and<br />

3. Continue to foster, and enhance, the <strong>SoE</strong> staff culture of collegiality, respect, and mutual<br />

support.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

We will develop faculty members who are<br />

highly sought after by other universities,<br />

but who choose to remain at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 24<br />

Staff Development Opportunities<br />

We will support career development opportunities for our financial, technical, administrative, and<br />

student support staff who are central to our teaching and research missions.<br />

� We will provide funds and release time to attend workshops, classes, and short courses in<br />

support of the goals of the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

� We will work with the Division of Human Resources to review and evaluate current staff PMTs,<br />

reclassify positions where appropriate, and rectify any inequities or funding inconsistencies.<br />

� We will review and develop (where needed) operational plans for our financial and student<br />

services staff, using the Technical Support <strong>Plan</strong> as a model.<br />

Staff Hiring Needs<br />

The School of Engineering is now severely understaffed as a result of staff attrition. We will continue<br />

our staff optimization review (described in the next section) to ensure that critical support needs are<br />

met across the School until such time that the School can return to appropriate staffing levels. In order<br />

to ensure that we are meeting the most critical needs, staff duties and responsibilities are being<br />

reviewed and modified as necessary. This may result in the possibility of new hires or reclassifications.<br />

The School will work with the Office of Human Resources to promote the best possible resolution to the<br />

staffing issues we face.<br />

Through our experience over the past year, we determined that there are some areas where staff<br />

members are routinely working well beyond the expectation of their current PMT. We will work with<br />

the Office of Human Resources to evaluate these positions and to correct those issues that may exist<br />

within the School.<br />

In summer 2012, we completed a review of both our undergraduate and graduate student support<br />

services staffing to identify ways we could improve efficiency, assess how our student services staff are<br />

being utilized across the seven <strong>SoE</strong> departments, and determine if there are functions that could be<br />

shared. Several specific recommendations came out of that review including creating a School-wide<br />

Undergraduate Advising Center to provide a coordinated, friendly, open environment where first and<br />

second-year undergraduate students can receive answers to their academic program (administrative)<br />

questions and receive both staff and peer academic advising. Faced with continued enrollment growth<br />

in Engineering and resulting challenges in ensuring our students all receive timely, accurate, and<br />

effective advising, we will move forward with this new academic advising center model in <strong>FY14</strong>. This<br />

Advising Center will be staffed by current staff (on a part-time, limited basis) from each department.<br />

These dedicated student services staff will provide academic advising support thereby allowing our<br />

faculty members to focus their advising (and mentoring) activities on issues related to career planning,<br />

study abroad, post-graduate study, etc. Faculty advisors would continue to be involved in reviewing the<br />

educational progress of their advisees. The Advising Center will be run by a Director of Core<br />

Engineering (someone holding an MS or PhD degree and appointed at the Lecturer rank, but<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 25<br />

alternatively this could be a professional staff person with the right experience in academic advising)<br />

who will be responsible for administering the Core Engineering program and the undergraduate<br />

curriculum for Engineering first and second-year students. The Director will also take a leadership role in<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> and <strong>Institute</strong> orientation activities and coordinate our engagement with both the First-Year<br />

Experience and CLASS initiatives.<br />

Two years ago, as a result of our staff optimization review, we established a Technical Services Support<br />

<strong>Plan</strong> in which our technical staff came together to support all academic units within the School. The<br />

purpose of the <strong>Plan</strong> was to address any voids in technical service/operations areas. A “Tier II” plan was<br />

developed to cover mechanical technology, electronics technology, computer systems (IT) support,<br />

manufacturing technology, and special technical support, taking into account that the primary daily<br />

responsibilities of our technical staff remain in their home units as indicated in their individual PMTs,<br />

with support provided to other departments as schedules and availability of personnel allow. Our Tier II<br />

plan experience has indicated that the IT support group provides the primary technical support needed<br />

by our academic units on a regular basis for a reliable computing environment for Engineering faculty,<br />

students and staff. Although necessary and successful in the short term, this Tier II support system<br />

cannot continue to provide the level of service and support that is needed as we experience growth in<br />

our undergraduate and graduate programs and the technologies used to support our students become<br />

increasingly more complex.<br />

We have identified a need for two additional Desktop Support Analysts to maintain computers and<br />

information infrastructure, particularly in our teaching labs, to ensure a reliable computing environment<br />

for students, faculty, and staff, and to assist in the daily support of faculty and staff computers in the<br />

School. The responsibilities include maintaining <strong>SoE</strong> classrooms, assisting approximately 165 faculty<br />

members and staff to resolve hardware/software issues, researching new technologies for future<br />

implementation, and forward-planning the incorporation of new technologies to accommodate our<br />

growth and offer continued service at lower costs.<br />

In anticipation of completing the Nanoscale Characterization Core (NCC), planning for the appropriate<br />

staffing level is now essential. This is necessary to ensure the implementation and continued operation<br />

of the new state-of-the-art facility, to ensure adequate training and access, and to support research<br />

programs campus-wide. We envision the need for a director-level NCC manager (ideally someone<br />

holding a PhD and appointed at the Lecturer or Professor-of-Practice rank, but alternatively this could be<br />

a professional staff person with the right combination of technical expertise and management/lab<br />

directorship experience) who will have primary responsibility for management of the administrative and<br />

technical resources, infrastructure, and technical staff associated with the operation of this new<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> core facility. This position is necessary to ensure the infrastructure is maintained and <strong>Institute</strong>wide<br />

access is allocated in the best interests of the scientific programs of the facility. As research grows<br />

in nanomaterials, polymer nanocomposites, materials computation, glasses, and electronic materials,<br />

renewable energy solutions, and materials for biological and biomedical applications, it will be necessary<br />

to hire a qualified person with industrial experience who is dedicated to managing this core facility. In<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 26<br />

anticipation of the teaching needs associated with this rapidly growing field, someone appointed as a<br />

Lecturer or Professor-of-Practice (PoP, see footnote 5 ) would also be able to assist in meeting our<br />

teaching needs in Materials Science and Engineering.<br />

Thus, the four most critical <strong>SoE</strong> staff needs in <strong>FY14</strong> are anticipated to be:<br />

1. Desktop Support Analysts (2)<br />

2. Director of Core Engineering (Lecturer preferred, senior staff member possible)<br />

3. Director of Nanoscale Characterization Core (Lecturer/PoP preferred, senior staff member<br />

possible)<br />

Staff Utilization/Optimization <strong>Plan</strong>s<br />

In FY10, the <strong>SoE</strong> Technical Support Staff completed an exercise to develop a two-year operational plan,<br />

called the “<strong>SoE</strong> Technical Support <strong>Plan</strong>.” This plan was reviewed and ultimately approved by the <strong>SoE</strong><br />

Dean in September 2009 and was subsequently distributed to the entire <strong>SoE</strong> faculty and staff. The<br />

motivation for this plan was the reduction in force that occurred earlier in the year and the subsequent<br />

need to ensure critical technical staff functions were being performed and essential teaching and<br />

research support needs in the <strong>SoE</strong> were being met. The intention of this operational plan is not to<br />

demonstrate that the <strong>SoE</strong> can continue at the present (reduced) technical staffing level, but rather to<br />

undertake an optimization exercise and ensure critical technical support needs are provided until such<br />

time that we can return the technical staff to appropriate levels. (Anticipating faculty growth and the<br />

creation of new equipment-intensive labs associated with the NSF Smart Lighting ERC, the nanomaterials<br />

characterization laboratory, and other facilities, it is further expected that the technical staff<br />

size will need to increase commensurately.)<br />

This exercise undertaken by the <strong>SoE</strong> Technical Support Staff has been extremely successful. To that end,<br />

it is expected that the IT Support Staff (a subset of the broader Technical Support Staff) and the<br />

Financial Staff within the <strong>SoE</strong> will complete similar operational plans in FY13 and <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

These operational plans, developed under difficult circumstances, are clear evidence of the commitment<br />

shown by the <strong>SoE</strong> staff to the success of the School and toward ensuring that we provide the best<br />

possible educational experience for our students. This is a special group of talented and hard working<br />

individuals. The <strong>SoE</strong> faculty, our students, and the <strong>Institute</strong> administration should recognize how<br />

fortunate we are to have such a dedicated staff.<br />

Section III.2: PLACE<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> AS “COMMUNITY” INITIATIVE: CREATING A COMMUNITY OF SCHOLARS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office, President’s Cabinet<br />

This is a key initiative set, now in its fourth year, aimed at (1) improving operational efficiency within and<br />

among portfolios, (2) increasing transparency and communication, and (3) improving faculty morale in<br />

the <strong>SoE</strong>. The <strong>SoE</strong> leadership will continue to refer to a common objective of creating a “Community of<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 27<br />

Scholars” that includes faculty, staff, and students. In doing so, we will continue to elevate the culture of<br />

respect within our School and create an even more productive and inclusive environment in which to<br />

learn and explore. The underlying tenets of the Community of Scholars are:<br />

1. All faculty, staff, and students are critical to the success of our School.<br />

2. A culture of respect engenders greater cooperation, innovation, and professional satisfaction.<br />

3. We are all bound by the common objectives of creating the best possible educational<br />

experience for our students and creating an environment in which scientific exploration and<br />

discovery can truly flourish.<br />

As specific and continuing initiatives, we will:<br />

1. Invite campus leaders/administrators to meet with <strong>SoE</strong> leadership and stakeholders at regular<br />

leadership meetings. Facilitate open discourse and create meaningful engagement. Follow-up<br />

with suggestions for improving operational efficiency, transparency, and productivity.<br />

2. Recognize and reward achievement, celebrate our successes (internal awards, school-wide<br />

announcements, external publications and promotional materials).<br />

3. Empower faculty and staff to improve efficiency, operation, and management of units within the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> (engage in crafting and implementing an annual performance plan).<br />

4. Engage faculty, staff and students in School-wide events (2-3 per year), recruiting (faculty, staff<br />

and students), and promotion (outreach events, alumni events).<br />

5. In support of the CLASS initiative, work closely with Student Life to identify Faculty Deans and<br />

participants in the Faculty Fellows program from among <strong>SoE</strong> faculty.<br />

6. Gather and maintain a current set of all <strong>Institute</strong> policies related to faculty and staff hiring,<br />

promotion and tenure, separation agreements, post-retirement appointments (titles). Make<br />

these easily accessible by all <strong>SoE</strong> faculty and staff.<br />

7. Establish and communicate a clear list of expectations for faculty at all ranks in terms of (a)<br />

teaching, (b) research, (c) professional service, and (d) department citizenship. Include each of<br />

these categories in the annual review process in all <strong>SoE</strong> departments.<br />

8. Regularly communicate developments (and progress) related to possible future changes to<br />

teaching load policy, graduate tuition policy, teaching assistant allocation policy, graduate<br />

admissions policies including waivers of specific requirements, and P&T criteria so that faculty<br />

can anticipate these changes and plan accordingly.<br />

RECOGNIZING, REWARDING, AND CELEBRATING EXCELLENCE<br />

Key Portfolio: School of Engineering<br />

In building a Community of Scholars, we must take steps to recognize outstanding performance and<br />

exceptional achievement. We must celebrate the accomplishments of our faculty, staff, and students<br />

and join with their peers and professional colleagues when they are recognized by national and<br />

international awards. In doing so, the School of Engineering will become an example for the other<br />

academic units on campus.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 28<br />

The School of Engineering hosts an annual Achievement Awards Dinner (typically held in April or May in<br />

conjunction with the Davies Award presentation) at which it presents Research Excellence Awards<br />

(multiple), Education Excellence Awards (multiple), Team Awards (multiple), and an Outstanding<br />

Professor Award (one). These recognitions include a cash award. As a result of financial constraints, the<br />

School has offered fewer of these awards and reduced the cash awards in recent years. However we<br />

maintain that this awards program is important for our faculty and the program should be expanded to<br />

recognize outstanding staff and graduate students. In addition to our current awards, which are funded<br />

by the <strong>SoE</strong>, we propose to add the following annual awards in the coming years:<br />

1. Outstanding Graduate Teaching Assistant Award<br />

2. Outstanding Staff <strong>Performance</strong> Award<br />

3. Outstanding Faculty Mentor Award (for junior faculty mentoring)<br />

In addition, the following specific initiatives will be continued:<br />

1. “Celebrating Excellence” postcard mail-out series (announcing major awards, new centers or<br />

large grants, new faculty, endowed chair appointments, student chapter recognitions, student<br />

team awards, etc.);<br />

2. Track all nominations (at department level) of faculty for major awards and honors, tie this to<br />

the performance review of department heads, endowed chairs, and senior faculty.<br />

ELEVATING OUR VISIBILITY, NATIONAL REPUTATION, AND RANKINGS<br />

Key portfolios: School of Engineering, <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement, Strategic Communications<br />

National rankings, such as those compiled by US News & World Report, are widely used by prospective<br />

students and their parents, the media, and of course universities themselves. While no ranking system is<br />

perfect (or without bias), the USN&WR rankings nonetheless have become the “standard” by which<br />

programs are measured. These rankings, of both undergraduate and graduate programs, are updated<br />

annually and remain the most widely recognized rankings of US universities and programs.<br />

As a private research university, we naturally compare ourselves to peer private institutions. However<br />

many of the top engineering schools are at large public universities. Public and private universities differ<br />

in many ways which directly impact rankings, not the least of which are size (enrollments and faculty<br />

numbers), access to federal and state resources, class sizes and teaching loads. While important to<br />

remain aware of where our programs stand among all research universities, it is appropriate to focus on<br />

our relative ranking among peer private research universities when representing the national rankings of<br />

the <strong>SoE</strong> and its departments/programs.<br />

Top universities understand the need to maintain or elevate their rankings. They also understand that<br />

this takes both vigilance and resources. The most successful programs – those who have consistently<br />

been highly ranked and those who have made the most significant gains in their rankings – commit the<br />

resources needed to an aggressive promotional program. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> has focused its promotional<br />

efforts at the <strong>Institute</strong> level, which is appropriate for a university of its size and with its reputation for<br />

integrative, technologically-based research. However, this approach has less impact on national rankings<br />

of individual schools and programs than more unit-specific promotion. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> should support both<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 29<br />

institute-wide and unit-specific promotion in order to meet its dual objectives of (1) improving<br />

recognition and reputation of the overall university and (2) elevating the program and school-specific<br />

USN&WR rankings. It is the latter that has been shown to most directly correlate with student quality,<br />

success in faculty recruiting, and even less tangible outcomes such as reputation among funding<br />

agencies.<br />

As we take steps to increase student quality, hire outstanding new faculty, create world-class research<br />

facilities, and continually improve the educational experience for our students, we must at the same<br />

time promote our accomplishments and celebrate our successes. And this must be done at a high level<br />

of quality, directed at the right audiences, and sustained year-to-year. Universities, particularly those<br />

who draw visibility and strength in reputation from the national rankings, have become very skilled at<br />

“playing the rankings game.” <strong>Rensselaer</strong> must play in this arena to ensure it is properly ranked<br />

(recognized) by its peers.<br />

2012 USN&WR Rankings of Engineering Programs at <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

(Top-25 rankings among all universities, public and private, shown in bold. Note that these nearly all correspond to<br />

top-10 rankings among privates only. Significant upward movements in rankings are indicated in footnotes.)<br />

Undergraduate Graduate<br />

Program All universities Private only All universities Private only<br />

Overall (School of Engineering) 23 7 12 42 17<br />

Aerospace Engineering NR NR 19 6<br />

Biomedical Engineering NR NR 34 18<br />

Chemical Engineering NR NR 21 8 8<br />

Civil Engineering NR NR 29 9 12<br />

Computer Engineering NR NR 26 12<br />

Electrical Engineering NR NR 25 11<br />

Environmental Engineering NR NR 41 10 18<br />

Industrial Engineering NR NR 21 7<br />

Materials Engineering NR NR 19 8<br />

Mechanical Engineering NR NR 27 12<br />

Nuclear Engineering NR NR 13 2<br />

NR = not ranked by USN&WR in 2012<br />

Specific initiatives (on-going):<br />

1. The <strong>SoE</strong> and each department will develop a three-year plan for enhancing its visibility,<br />

improving its rankings, and extending its recognition nationally and internationally.<br />

2. Working closely with the Office of Strategic Communications and External Relations and with<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Advancement (as appropriate), the <strong>SoE</strong> will develop a three-year plan for creating and<br />

7 The School’s undergraduate ranking improved from 27 th in 2011 to 23 rd in 2012.<br />

8 CBE’s graduate ranking improved from 27 th in 2011 to 21 st in 2012.<br />

9 CivE’s graduate ranking improved from 36 th in 2011 to 29 th in 2012.<br />

10 EnvE’s graduate program ranking improved from 47 th in 2011 to 41 st in 2012.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 30<br />

distributing print and web-based media specifically aimed at increasing visibility and improving<br />

rankings. This may include (1) annual <strong>SoE</strong> magazine, (2) departmental and/or <strong>SoE</strong> annual<br />

report(s), (3) departmental newsletters, (4) <strong>SoE</strong> research report, and (5) promotional mail-outs<br />

(e.g., post-cards) announcing new appointments, new centers or large grants, or other points of<br />

pride. These pieces will do more than help to improve our rankings, they will improve our<br />

visibility and brand-recognition.<br />

3. Working closely with the Office of Strategic Communications and External Relations and with<br />

other academic portfolios, create high-impact promotional pieces highlighting innovative, multidisciplinary,<br />

and unique educational and research programs at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. These should<br />

highlight <strong>Institute</strong> thrust areas, core facilities, and areas of excellence or uniqueness among peer<br />

research universities.<br />

4. Develop and implement a plan to re-focus faculty effort on undergraduate engineering<br />

education, innovation, and pedagogy, with the dual objectives of (1) returning <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to<br />

visibility and prominence in innovative instructional programs and (2) achieving the desired<br />

balance between teaching and research across the School.<br />

We will:<br />

1. Develop internal and external resources to promote the School of Engineering.<br />

2. Actively promote our accomplishments and successes, points of pride, and uniqueness to<br />

appropriate audiences around the country.<br />

3. Improve the School of Engineering undergraduate and graduate rankings to be among the top-<br />

20 (public and private) and top-10 (private) by 2017.<br />

4. Reinforce <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s reputation as an innovator in engineering undergraduate education and<br />

a national leader in the dialog on engineering education.<br />

REVIEW OF SCHOOL-WIDE AND DEPARTMENTAL CENTERS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of Research<br />

There are a number of Centers that exist within the School. These centers are active, they engage a<br />

significant number of faculty and students, and many have demonstrated success in positioning the<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

Selected 2012 Rankings:<br />

Ranked #4 on list of World’s Best Engineering Schools (Business Insider)<br />

Top-5 on list of “Wall Street’s Top Technology Schools” (Wall Street & Technology)<br />

Top-25 (tied for 23) on list of Best Undergraduate Engineering Programs (USN&WR)<br />

7 <strong>SoE</strong> graduate programs are ranked in the top-25 among all (public and private) universities<br />

6 <strong>SoE</strong> graduate programs are ranked in the top-10 among private universities.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 31<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> to be competitive for federal, state, and industry funding for research. The missions, scope, and<br />

degree of industrial engagement, however, vary considerably among the current centers.<br />

As part of our continual assessment and improvement process, we will formally review each of our<br />

current centers under the School of Engineering and initiate a regular cycle of center reviews going<br />

forward. This will allow us to evaluate center productivity and engagement, invest where appropriate in<br />

the activities and growth of centers, and promote the successes of the centers and their participating<br />

faculty and staff. Where centers are found to no longer be justified, either resulting from a change in<br />

focus or a continuing lack of productivity, steps will be taken to sunset the center. Both the review of<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> centers and any decisions to sunset a center will be done in consultation with the Vice President of<br />

Research.<br />

Centers are important parts of the <strong>SoE</strong> academic portfolio. They create synergies for collaborative and<br />

interdisciplinary research, they bring students and faculty together to work on often complex problems,<br />

and they create a sense of community around a research area. Through their successes, they bring<br />

visibility to the School and the <strong>Institute</strong> and can serve to elevate our national reputation in strategic<br />

areas. Their missions, however, must extend beyond just research and must include measurable<br />

contributions to our academic programs. Centers must represent a value proposition not only for our<br />

faculty but for our students as well. Center directors must include this in their strategic plans and be<br />

held accountable for this in the annual review process.<br />

School of Engineering Centers (name; FY12 expenditures; director)<br />

Center for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (CEES); $2.15M; Dobry and Abdoun<br />

Gaerttner LINAC Center; launched as a center in 2012<br />

NSF Smart Lighting Engineering Research Center (ERC); $5.18M; Karlicek<br />

NSF Engineering Research Center (ERC) for Ultra-wide-area Resilient Electric Energy<br />

Transmission Networks (CURENT); $0.2M (launched October 2011); J. Chow<br />

Center for Infrastructure, Transportation, and the Environment (CITE); $1.08M; Holguin-Veras<br />

Center for Multiphase Research (CMR); $0.50M; (center is being phased out)<br />

Center for Modeling, Simulation, and Imaging in Medicine (CeMSIM); $2.0M; De<br />

Center for Flow Physics and Control; $1.23M; Amitay<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Centers with Significant <strong>SoE</strong> Faculty Participation (name; FY12 expenditures; director)<br />

New York State Center for Automation Technologies and Systems (CATS); $2.82M; Wen<br />

Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies (CBIS); $13.76M (~50% in <strong>SoE</strong>); Dordick<br />

Computational Center for Nanotechnology Innovations (CCNI); $1.0M; Shephard, et al.<br />

Center for Integrated Electronics (CIE); $2.79M (most in <strong>SoE</strong>, includes Focus Center); Shur<br />

NY State Center for Future Energy Systems (CFES); $3.26M (almost all in <strong>SoE</strong>); Sun<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> Nanotechnology Center (includes NSF NSEC); $2.75M (almost all in <strong>SoE</strong>); Siegel<br />

Scientific Computation and Research Center (SCOREC); $1.79M (almost all in <strong>SoE</strong>); Shephard<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 32<br />

ABET-CRITICAL TEACHING LABORATORY UPGRADES: ENHANCING THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Administration Division<br />

Laboratory and design experiences are cornerstones of all <strong>Rensselaer</strong> engineering curricula. Capital<br />

funds were provided in each of the three years prior to FY11 for undergraduate laboratory renovations<br />

and new equipment purchases. However, no additional funds for instructional laboratory improvement<br />

were provided in either of the FY11 or FY12 budgets.<br />

With our next ABET site visit scheduled for fall 2013, $600K (or 39%) of the of the $1.528M FY13 <strong>SoE</strong><br />

<strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> capital request was provided for FY13 as Phase-1, of the ABET-Critical Laboratory<br />

upgrade. As of September 2012, 83% of the most critical items identified for Phase-1 have been ordered<br />

and we are on track to have 100% ordered and installed by October 2012.<br />

We now within one year of the ABET Site visit (which could occur as early as September 1, 2013). The<br />

remaining $928K of these ABET-critical upgrades (i.e., those specified as being needed in the last ABET<br />

review in 2007) must be completed prior to the 2013 ABET visit and evaluation. Specific requests and<br />

funding amounts needed to fulfill this Phase-2 need are identified in Section VI.<br />

These upgrades/enhancements are considered critical to the continued accreditation of our engineering<br />

programs. Phase-2 funds are requested for ABET-critical laboratory needs in CEE, ECSE, MANE, and MSE,<br />

while more modest funds are needed to upgrade teaching laboratories in BME and CBE. Funding for<br />

these instructional laboratories has been pushed off until the year of the visit. As a result, we have a<br />

very tight window to complete these upgrades prior to the ABET review. We are now in a must-fund<br />

situation and the full funding for these ABET-critical laboratory upgrades must be provided July 1 this<br />

fiscal year.<br />

DEPARTMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCILS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement<br />

The School of Engineering and its seven departments benefit from oversight, input, engagement, and<br />

support of advisory boards and councils. These advising groups, consisting primarily of alumni, are<br />

critical links to the profession of engineering as well as to many of the companies that hire our<br />

graduates. Further, these advisory groups provide essential timely oversight of our academic programs<br />

and guidance in the development of our curricula. This is an important element in the continual<br />

assessment and improvement processes that form the underpinnings of ABET accreditation. Advisory<br />

councils can also play substantive development roles through individual or corporate philanthropy or by<br />

facilitating visits by the Dean or Department Head to groups of alumni within the region, across the<br />

country, or around the world.<br />

The <strong>Institute</strong> has operated since 2005 under policies that govern the establishment of advisory councils<br />

and the appointment of advisory council members. The model establishes clear ties to development and<br />

challenges all of us to carefully form these important advisory groups such that we maximize value to<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 33<br />

the School or departments, ensure a diversity of committee membership (with professional, age,<br />

gender, and racial diversity objectives), and potential for philanthropy.<br />

There are standing advisory councils in nearly all <strong>SoE</strong> departments. Invitation to serve on advisory bodies<br />

at either the School level or the departmental level is an honor. Expectations must be made clear and<br />

boards must be regularly engaged and held accountable for providing meaningful oversight, guidance,<br />

and support. We all must take responsibility for formulating and proposing such advisory groups of the<br />

highest caliber. Through their successes and their capabilities, advisory council members can help us to<br />

reach our collective goals for the School of Engineering.<br />

Department Heads are encouraged to appoint, on an ad hoc basis, any task committees consisting of<br />

alumni, practicing engineers, and/or academic professionals needed to meet specific departmental<br />

needs such as curriculum/program review or special event organization. However appointment to the<br />

Dean’s Leadership Council or a Departmental Advisory Council is a more significant appointment and<br />

these groups must be formed and maintained according to <strong>Institute</strong> policies.<br />

A template for Advisory Council By-Laws was developed in the Dean’s Office and provided to each<br />

Department Head in summer 2012. The by-law template was modeled after the new by-laws for the<br />

Dean’s Leadership Council and was developed in close consultation with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement.<br />

Section III.3: PROGRAMS<br />

FOCAL THEMES FOR THE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING (TMM and HHL)<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Strategic Communications and External Relations<br />

The School of Engineering <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> is written to support the strategic goals of the <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

<strong>Plan</strong>. Our research continues to be closely aligned with the <strong>Institute</strong>’s five signature thrust areas, and<br />

our on-going and planned faculty hiring directly supports the most promising and strategic opportunities<br />

within and across these five signature thrusts. Fully consistent with the signature thrust areas identified<br />

in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, we have identified two focal themes for the School of Engineering. These focal<br />

themes emerged over the last three years and have been adopted by the School leadership as both<br />

“beacons”and “guideposts” for setting strategic direction and operationalizing plans to achieve our<br />

goals.<br />

FOCAL THEME 1: Transformational Materials and Manufacturing (TMM)<br />

FOCAL THEME 2: Human Health and Livability (HHL)<br />

These two themes were selected to be engaging and widely encompassing, to be challenging and<br />

opportunistic, to be resonant with both our existing strengths and our shared vision for the future of the<br />

School, and above all – to inspire and focus new synergies across the School and the <strong>Institute</strong>, in areas<br />

that are critical to ensuring our nation’s economic prosperity, a sustainable future for our planet, and the<br />

health and quality of life of all its inhabitants.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 34<br />

We will use these two themes to guide us in the coming years as we seek to grow the size of our faculty,<br />

develop new and exciting academic programs, build new centers of excellence in research, and further<br />

promote the School of Engineering nationally and internationally.<br />

INCREASING PARTICIPATION IN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH<br />

Key Portfolios: Provost’s Office, School of Engineering<br />

Given the quality of our undergraduate students, and the mission of the <strong>Institute</strong> to develop into a<br />

leading technological research university, a robust undergraduate research program is essential. This is<br />

especially true in the School of Engineering where many of our graduates will go on to graduate school<br />

and/or careers in research. Our students are extremely bright and inquisitive. They actively seek out<br />

value-added experiences to supplement their academic programs. For engineering students, these often<br />

include co-op or internship experiences or guided research experiences under the direction of one or<br />

more faculty members.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

The School’s two focal themes were selected to be engaging<br />

and widely encompassing, to be challenging and<br />

opportunistic, and to be resonant with both our existing<br />

strengths and our shared vision for the future of the School.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 35<br />

Along with growth in the size of the PhD programs, growth in the number of undergraduate students<br />

participating in research is a School-wide goal. A robust undergraduate research program can serve as a<br />

pipeline of our best and brightest students into our graduate programs. Given the quality of our<br />

undergraduates, and with the proper mentoring and guidance, it certainly seems reasonable that some<br />

of our best prospects for “blue chip” PhD students will come from our own undergraduate students. We<br />

must nurture these top prospects and guide them, starting as early as their sophomore or junior years,<br />

into our graduate programs. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> has a unique mechanism in place that allows those<br />

undergraduate students receiving scholarships to continue to receive that financial assistance into their<br />

Masters program. We should be promoting this advantage.<br />

Some smaller universities require an honors thesis or similar experience for all of their undergraduate<br />

students, effectively mandating some type of research participation or directed study. This is not<br />

practical or appropriate for the School of Engineering at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, given our current student-to-faculty<br />

ratios, as it would create an unmanageable burden for our faculty. Further, a true research experience is<br />

expected to only be appropriate for a portion of our students, not all of them. Students have limited<br />

time to dedicate to such value-added experiences and some may choose (appropriately) to seek a<br />

different type of opportunity (e.g., study abroad, internship, co-op assignment, service learning<br />

experience, etc.).<br />

The co-terminal program has proven successful and may see significant growth (if we so desire) in the<br />

near future, given changes in hiring trends in many engineering fields as well as proposed changes for<br />

professional licensure. The co-terminal program is intended to allow a student to complete a BS and MS<br />

degree in five years. The MS degree is, in effect, a pre-professional (terminal) degree. Undergraduate<br />

research can be a valuable component to the combined BS/MS program and may lead some of these<br />

talented and highly motivated students to continue for the PhD degree.<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> faculty will be encouraged to engage undergraduate students, where appropriate, in their ongoing<br />

research and appropriate support mechanisms will be created where possible. We will work closely with<br />

the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies and the Vice President for Research, as appropriate, to<br />

realize our goals for growth in the percentage of our undergraduate students participating in research.<br />

COMMON FIRST YEAR<br />

Key Portfolios: Enrollment and Admissions, Provost’s Office, School of Engineering, School of Science<br />

As part of the ABET continual assessment and improvement process, the <strong>SoE</strong> is continually modifying<br />

the curricular requirements in each of its academic programs to ensure the highest quality educational<br />

experience for our students. The goal of our first-year curriculum is to provide an experience that is<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM/GOAL: Increase the percentage of <strong>SoE</strong><br />

undergraduate students having at least one research<br />

experience while at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> from 20% to 50%.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 36<br />

complementary to the science, mathematics, and first-year HASS courses, to introduce students to the<br />

engineering profession, and to develop technical and problem solving skills. The first-year curriculum<br />

lays the foundation for key engineering science courses in the sophomore and junior years.<br />

Over the last two years, the <strong>SoE</strong> examined alternatives that will meet several important objectives for a<br />

first-year engineering experience and that serves the needs of all our students. Among these are a basic<br />

understanding of and capacity for analytical problem solving, a basic understanding and development of<br />

skills in engineering graphics and communication, familiarity with engineering analysis and systems,<br />

appreciation of the design process and its role in the engineering profession, and an awareness of global<br />

issues that impact the practice of engineering. The first-year curriculum should also expose our students<br />

to the various degree options, professional opportunities, and career paths so that they can make<br />

informed decisions about their choice of degrees. Finally, the first-year experience should help students<br />

to foster the important relationships with faculty that will serve them throughout their academic careers<br />

and beyond. Operationally, such a revised experience should be sustainable in terms of faculty and<br />

physical resources for approximately 820 students per year initially, reducing to about 650 in the coming<br />

years if and when the <strong>SoE</strong> enrollment is reduced to the <strong>Institute</strong>’s first target of 50% of total enrollment.<br />

Any changes to the first-year experience should not add to the total credit hours required in our degree<br />

programs.<br />

Among the key questions we continue to address in our curriculum assessment are the following:<br />

� How can we enhance students’ appreciation for engineering and understanding of the various<br />

engineering disciplines early in their academic programs?<br />

� What is the right balance of hands-on experience, computing, tool utilization (e.g. CAD,<br />

MATLAB, LabVIEW), modeling and model-based problem solving (e.g., using MATLAB), analysis,<br />

and design in the curriculum?<br />

� Do existing math and science courses at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> meet the needs of a contemporary<br />

undergraduate engineering education?<br />

� How should we balance the general requirements with engineering degree subjects to optimize<br />

teaching resources?<br />

� Can we deliver courses more efficiently?<br />

� What abilities/skills should be acquired in the freshman year to best prepare our students for<br />

further engineering study?<br />

� What alternative pedagogical models would enhance first-year student learning and preparation<br />

for further engineering study (e.g., problem-based Learning, active learning, hands-on projects,<br />

learning communities)?<br />

� Are the current HASS requirements appropriate? How do HASS course offerings meet the needs<br />

of contemporary undergraduate engineering education?<br />

� Do we have the resources needed to affect any recommended changes to enhance the<br />

undergraduate educational experience?<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 37<br />

A new introduction to engineering course was piloted in the <strong>SoE</strong> in FY12 (and is being repeated in FY13)<br />

that addresses some of the issues listed above. Key to any pilot experience is the scalability in terms of<br />

the available faculty resources. (This has restricted the effective implementation of previous proposals.)<br />

The pilot experience is being directed by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies in the School of<br />

Engineering and will be evaluated at the conclusion of the fall 2012 semester. At that time, we will<br />

examine mechanisms for phasing in this new required (one-credit) course for all incoming Engineering<br />

students.<br />

In response to continued enrollment growth in selected majors, and the need to rebalance enrollments<br />

within the <strong>SoE</strong> across the 7 academic departments (and 11 undergraduate programs) to relieve demand<br />

on the three most oversubscribed programs (mechanical, biomedical, and aerospace engineering), we<br />

will be moving toward a true “common first year” in Engineering. While Core Engineering was<br />

implemented, in part, to support a common course model for all engineering students, program<br />

curricula evolved that captured students as early as their first semester. (For example, most programs<br />

have their own introductory courses in lieu of a common “Introduction to Engineering” course.)<br />

We will replace all program-specific introductory courses with a single “Introduction to Engineering”<br />

course (built around the successful pilot course we initiated last year) and move toward a system in<br />

which students cannot declare their major until after the first year. All first-year <strong>SoE</strong> students will simply<br />

be “Engineering” students. This will provide the greatest opportunity for students to gain exposure to<br />

the various engineering disciplines (fields, opportunities) before declaring their specific major. We<br />

believe this will help to alleviate overcrowding in selected majors while enabling lesser subscribed<br />

programs to realize their enrollment goals. Enrollment rebalancing across our programs and<br />

departments is a key objective for the School.<br />

The School is currently evaluating changes in admissions and enrollment procedures (in close discussion<br />

with the Provost and the Vice President for Enrollment) to restrict students from being able to declare<br />

their major with the School until the end of the first year.<br />

The common first-year model has been widely adopted at top engineering schools. By restricting the<br />

declaration of majors until after the first year, we will see fewer transfers from one major to another in<br />

the first two years. The common first-year model also suggests ways we can better “steer” (guide)<br />

students and “balance” (manage) enrollments within the School. This is especially important as<br />

enrollment in the School continues to be very large.<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Initiatives<br />

At present, more than 60% of the incoming first-year students declare Engineering upon arrival. Of<br />

these, about 75% declare a specific major (degree program) while the remaining 25% are “undecided”<br />

(or “undeclared”). One of the objectives in the proposed enrollment management model (described<br />

elsewhere) is to encourage students to consider the range of majors/programs offered in the <strong>SoE</strong>, and<br />

ultimately to select a program that is not (at present) over-enrolled. Our goal should not just be to<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 38<br />

distribute proportionately the students among the various <strong>SoE</strong> departments, but should also be to<br />

minimize the number of students transferring in or out of the School.<br />

We will create a first-year curriculum through which students can consider different degree options and<br />

career paths prior to declaring a major. The “undecided” (or “undeclared”) label, however, carries some<br />

negative connotations. To some, this designation appears to have a second-class status or somehow<br />

suggests students who are not yet mature or sophisticated enough to know what they want to study.<br />

Nothing could be further from the truth and we must make room for the fact that not all 18-year olds<br />

can make an informed decision about their life-long career. To others, the perception may exist that<br />

those who declare a major may get preferential treatment in course or advisor selection.<br />

We will create a “flexible first-year” curriculum in the <strong>SoE</strong> that enables students to explore options and<br />

make an informed selection of major before the start of their second year. This is not a new concept.<br />

However the trend in recent years has been toward customizing the first-year curriculum for degreespecific<br />

objectives. Such curricula can remain for those who declare majors upon entering <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

and who feel certain they will not change their major. But the flexible first-year (F1Y) curriculum will be<br />

promoted to all incoming <strong>SoE</strong> students. This first-year curriculum (as discussed elsewhere) will include<br />

exposure to all of the degree options, majors, and career paths available to engineers. Such broad<br />

exposure is presently lacking in our curriculum. The flexible first-year will also be specifically marketed<br />

to potential future students (applicants) as a selling point for <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.<br />

There may be good reasons to expand the flexible first-year to encompass both the School of<br />

Engineering and the School of Science. For example: (1) a more even distribution of students across the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> and SoS (which tend to draw from the same groups of students), (2) stronger alignment in curricula<br />

between the two schools, which could lead to more efficient course offerings/scheduling, and (3) fewer<br />

departmental transfers by students later in their programs.<br />

GLOBALIZATION OF OUR STUDENTS<br />

Key Portfolios: Provost’s Office, School of Engineering, <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement, Strategic<br />

Communications and External Relations<br />

Background: Globalization of the Undergraduate Educational Experience<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> seeks to become a university with global reach and global impact. To achieve this goal, our<br />

faculty must have a global influence and reputation, and our students must have an experience at<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> that includes a global perspective in decision-making. It is difficult to have a truly global<br />

perspective without having traveled extensively or lived in another country. The School of Engineering<br />

has worked diligently since FY06 to develop a program that would permit a significant number of<br />

students to have a study abroad experience as a part of their regular academic program. This was a key<br />

element of the <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>s of FY07 through FY10. REACH (<strong>Rensselaer</strong> Engineering Education<br />

Across Cultural Horizons) was announced in the Spring of 2006. The <strong>Institute</strong>-wide version of the<br />

program was publicly announced as part of a Presidential Colloquium in April 2009 and the first cohorts<br />

of students traveled to our first two partner schools (Technical University of Denmark and Nanyang<br />

Technological University of Singapore), while we welcomed similar cohorts to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. In Fall 2009,<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 39<br />

our second cohort of students traveled to the two partner universities for their semester abroad. In the<br />

first full year of operation of these two innovative exchange agreements, approximately 60 <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

engineering students participated in this study abroad program while a similar number from our first<br />

two partner schools have been welcomed to our campus.<br />

The FY10 <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> had as a goal that up to 25% of the junior class in the <strong>SoE</strong> would have an<br />

international experience of this type in FY11. Resource requirements, both in personnel and fiscal<br />

support, which would allow us to realize this objective, were laid out in some detail as part of the FY10<br />

<strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>. Our experience in developing preliminary relationships with several universities was<br />

also described. However, the financial challenges that started to affect the <strong>Institute</strong> in 2009 did not<br />

allow for the necessary investment, and expansion of the program to include additional university<br />

partners overseas was not realized. At the beginning of FY10, the administration of all international<br />

programs at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> was transferred to the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. REACH<br />

(<strong>Rensselaer</strong> Education Across Cultural Horizons) is now an <strong>Institute</strong>-wide initiative that covers all<br />

international programs for undergraduates at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, including study-abroad, faculty-led<br />

experiences, summer experiences, and other activities that will contribute to the globalization of our<br />

students and to the <strong>Institute</strong>’s goal of becoming a university with global reach and global impact.<br />

Since FY11, the School of Engineering has played a supporting role to the Vice Provost for<br />

Undergraduate Education, as he seeks to broaden the portfolio of international experiences for<br />

undergraduate students across the entire campus. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs facilitates<br />

the development of academic programs that make it possible for <strong>SoE</strong> students to complete a semester<br />

abroad at any of several high quality engineering schools, while not delaying their time to graduation.<br />

The School of Engineering will continue to cooperate with the Office of the Provost to develop<br />

additional types of international experiences for our students (e.g., faculty-led experiences,<br />

international research experiences).<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Initiatives<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> has made a commitment to expand the number of opportunities and broader participation<br />

by our undergraduates in international programs. There are good reasons why not all <strong>SoE</strong><br />

undergraduates can (or should be required to) study abroad. Among these are family financial<br />

constraints, desire to participate in a co-op or internship experience, participation in varsity athletics,<br />

medical or other personal restrictions on travel. Further, the tight oversight in curriculum (content and<br />

sequencing) provided by ABET limits the degree to which adequate flexibility can be built into each of<br />

the different engineering degree plans to facilitate a semester abroad. In FY11, the process within the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> for transferring credits from overseas programs was streamlined, international advisors were<br />

identified in each <strong>SoE</strong> department, and information is now being provided to each engineering student<br />

on the optimal time for a study abroad experience within each of our 11 undergraduate programs.<br />

The <strong>Institute</strong>-wide goal of increasing the global awareness of all of our students is a tremendous and<br />

laudable goal for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> and the <strong>SoE</strong> can help the <strong>Institute</strong> to reach its objective in terms of student<br />

participation. Rather than portraying this as a requirement for study abroad (which most people<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 40<br />

interpret to mean a semester or summer-period taking formal courses – with all necessary articulation<br />

agreements in place – at a university in another country), the <strong>SoE</strong> will promote a menu of options from<br />

which each student may select that will broaden their exposure to other cultures, other languages,<br />

and/or the engineering challenges of other countries (academic, professional practice, regulatory,<br />

financial or policy-related). Among the options that may be included in the menu are:<br />

1. Semester-long study abroad<br />

2. Summer-session study abroad (faculty-led)<br />

3. Winter intersession study abroad (faculty-led)<br />

4. Summer or semester-long undergraduate research experience overseas<br />

5. Employment, internship or co-op experience with company overseas<br />

6. Volunteer mission or service learning experience in another country<br />

7. Employment, internship or co-op experience with international company or agency (e.g., World<br />

Bank, USAID) working in the US<br />

Some of these may consist entirely of academic coursework or research in an immersive environment<br />

while others may include both class-like instruction, guided tours of culturally and scientifically relevant<br />

sites, and socio-cultural immersion.<br />

We will continue to:<br />

1. Create and promote options to our students<br />

2. Seek meaningful globalization experiences both within and outside the US<br />

3. Explore the creation of a minor or certificate program in global awareness for <strong>SoE</strong> students<br />

4. Develop financial and other resources to offset costs of participation (<strong>SoE</strong> and IA)<br />

5. Create vehicles and outlets for the promotion of international activities by <strong>SoE</strong> students and<br />

faculty to broader on- and off-campus communities (<strong>SoE</strong> and SC&ER)<br />

COUPLED ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT AND FACULTY GROWTH PLANS<br />

Key Portfolios: Enrollment and Admissions, School of Engineering, School of Science, School of<br />

Architecture, Lally School of Management and Technology, HASS<br />

The School of Engineering accounts for about 60% of the total undergraduate enrollment at the<br />

<strong>Institute</strong>. Given the current (and likely future) faculty size, the vision laid out in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, and<br />

both physical and financial constraints, this percentage is too high. Our student-to-faculty ratios are<br />

among the highest in our peer group and well above that of nearly all major research universities (see<br />

Table 2 in Appendix A).<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM/GOAL : Increase the percentage of <strong>SoE</strong><br />

undergraduate students participating in an international<br />

experience while at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> from less than 10% to 30%.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 41<br />

The <strong>SoE</strong> undergraduate enrollment must be reduced to (1) realize the goals laid out in the <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

<strong>Plan</strong>, (2) move student-faculty ratios into alignment with peer and aspirant peer research universities,<br />

(3) provide more time for faculty to prepare grants through which to generate additional sponsored<br />

research and grow our doctoral program enrollments, and (4) move our undergraduate-to-graduate<br />

student ratio from nearly 6:1 down to that of our peer institutions (on the order of 4:1).<br />

In the last few years, plans for addressing the ballooning undergraduate enrollment have focused on (1)<br />

limiting the number of first-year students admitted into the <strong>SoE</strong>, and (2) rapidly growing the size of the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> faculty. In recent years, despite efforts to communicate realistic enrollment targets, our yields of<br />

new engineering students continued to increase. For example, despite indicating a target in 2009 of 650<br />

new engineering students, we had an actual yield of 781 new first-year engineering students in Fall<br />

2009. This difference, more than 20% above our target, had been typical in each of the previous few<br />

years. (Included in the FY10 <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> was a plan to increase the faculty from 142 to 175 by<br />

2011. As of Fall 2011, the <strong>SoE</strong> faculty size was 132. The global financial crisis has changed the landscape<br />

substantially and continues to constrain our plans for growth.)<br />

However, this trend was halted in FY11 with incoming class of engineering students (Fall 2010) held just<br />

below 650, for the first time in several years and as recommended in the FY11 <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

This commitment was continued in FY12 with an incoming class of engineering students (Fall 2011) held<br />

to about 680. With the support of the President and the Board of Trustees, we must continue to reduce<br />

the size of the incoming engineering class and limit the number of transfers into engineering (i.e., to not<br />

exceed the number of students transferring out of <strong>SoE</strong>). We propose to limit the number of first-year<br />

engineering students in each of the next three years to not more than 650, and then to begin<br />

decreasing the overall size downward to a steady-state target of 550. This steady-state enrollment<br />

(550 engineers in each class, or 2200 total undergraduates excluding those in the co-terminal BS/MS<br />

program) would bring us to the desired 40% of the total <strong>Institute</strong> Enrollment – the 40/30/10/10/10 goal<br />

established by the President and the Board.<br />

We are proposing a series of initiatives that will have the desirable effect of reducing the number of<br />

undergraduate students in Engineering at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> over a multi-year period. <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, like many<br />

private universities, is highly dependent on tuition. Furthermore, the majority of the most highly<br />

qualified students who choose to apply to (and ultimately attend) <strong>Rensselaer</strong> are drawn to engineering<br />

majors. It is likely that engineering students also drive the average SAT scores higher <strong>Institute</strong>-wide.<br />

Nonetheless, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is undergoing a transformation to a fully realized university with the<br />

appropriate goal that the <strong>SoE</strong> play a central, but not dominant, role. In fact, this should be our goal as<br />

well for three very important reasons: (1) the value of our faculty, programs, and departments increases<br />

when we become part of a greater university, (2) the many fields of engineering are increasingly<br />

dependent on interactions with professionals from other disciplines, perhaps most notably the natural<br />

sciences, social sciences, policy and management, and as such our students must be exposed to these<br />

fields, and (3) by reducing the undergraduate enrollment in the <strong>SoE</strong> we can begin moving toward the<br />

four objectives laid out at the beginning of this section.<br />

The problem that too many of our students are coming to <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to study engineering is not<br />

something that the <strong>SoE</strong> can solve independently. However, we can partner with the other Schools to<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 42<br />

find solutions to our enrollment overload. Embedded in this <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> are recommendations for<br />

combinations of enrollment management strategies and faculty growth in the <strong>SoE</strong>.<br />

We will:<br />

1. Work with the Vice President of Enrollment to establish appropriate admission targets for <strong>SoE</strong><br />

and evaluate mechanisms for improving the balancing of enrollments across <strong>SoE</strong> departments.<br />

2. Establish, maintain, and enforce appropriate pre-requisites in key “gate-keeper” courses in each<br />

year of the curricula for all <strong>SoE</strong> majors.<br />

3. Cap enrollments in departments in the <strong>SoE</strong>, allowing students to declare other <strong>SoE</strong> majors (until<br />

they hit their caps). This strategy must be coupled with early introductions to the various <strong>SoE</strong><br />

departments and degree options in the first year, as proposed elsewhere. [Note that capping<br />

majors, in the <strong>SoE</strong> or elsewhere, may not be possible within the current policies at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.]<br />

4. Work with other Schools to promote or create degree programs that attract people with<br />

interest in engineering but who may favor a curriculum/degree that is more interdisciplinary in<br />

nature or may better prepare them for a career in research, for example. The objective would<br />

not be to create majors for students who are not admitted to the <strong>SoE</strong> but rather to create<br />

attractive majors for the types of students who historically have selected a traditional<br />

engineering major. Examples are presented later in this section.<br />

5. Create a common first-year option for students interested in <strong>SoE</strong> (and possibly SoS) majors. This<br />

allows maximum flexibility for students to select their major at the end of the first year. Coupled<br />

with an active enrollment management strategy, this could also help to reduce the number of<br />

undergraduate students in <strong>SoE</strong>.<br />

6. Hire additional full-time faculty in <strong>SoE</strong> in order to bring the student-faculty ratios,<br />

undergraduate-to-graduate student ratios, and teaching loads into alignment with our peer and<br />

aspirant peer institutions.<br />

We must reduce our undergraduate enrollments and there are a finite number of ways we can achieve<br />

this goal (around which so many other goals for our School are built). No single approach is likely to gain<br />

acceptance, nor is any single change likely to have the desired impact quickly. Rather, a combination of<br />

the ideas proposed below should be advocated and implemented in a properly phased approach such<br />

that disruptions can be minimized and systems across the <strong>Institute</strong> can have time to adjust/adapt to a<br />

changing enrollment landscape. But the time has come to make some difficult decisions and to<br />

implement bold programs not only for faculty and infrastructure growth but for enrollment<br />

management as well.<br />

A plan was submitted to the President for approval in October 2011 with two key elements for actively<br />

managing the enrollments in the School of Engineering: (1) gate-keeper (pre-requisite) courses in all <strong>SoE</strong><br />

programs, and (2) limiting transfer admissions into engineering.<br />

Specific initiatives:<br />

1. The <strong>SoE</strong> has proposed a strategy for enrollment management based on: (1) reallocation of<br />

students across the departments/majors within <strong>SoE</strong>, (2) enforcing pre-requisite requirements in<br />

each year of the curriculum, and (3) limiting transfers into the School of Engineering. The latter<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 43<br />

will require our working closely with the Vice President for Enrollment. Once the proposed<br />

strategy is approved, it will be implemented and progress toward our goals will be monitored.<br />

2. The <strong>SoE</strong> will work with the SoS to explore the feasibility and value of a common first-year across<br />

the two schools.<br />

In summary:<br />

We must sustain efforts to lower our undergraduate student to faculty ratio. This is necessary for two<br />

reasons: (1) to be competitive with our peer and aspirant peer institutions in terms of class size as well<br />

as advising and teaching loads, and (2) to grow our research enterprise in order to expand our doctoral<br />

program enrollments, again bringing us into alignment with other top research universities (graduate-toundergraduate<br />

student ratios). Our student-to-faculty ratios are far above any major research institution<br />

(public or private).<br />

We will accomplish this through four mechanisms:<br />

1. The Vice President for Enrollment must lower the intake of new and transfer engineering<br />

students.<br />

2. The other Schools must promote their programs to applicants, incoming students, and first-year<br />

students and, where necessary, create new programs that will be attractive to students coming<br />

to <strong>Rensselaer</strong> with yet-undefined interests in engineering-related fields.<br />

3. The <strong>SoE</strong> must maintain and enforce pre-requisites in key “gate-keeper” courses in each of the<br />

four years of the curriculum.<br />

4. If permitted, and as needed, the <strong>Institute</strong> could implement a system of enrollment caps (tied to<br />

academic performance) on consistently oversubscribed programs.<br />

INCREASING THE SIZE OF OUR PHD PROGRAMS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office/Dean of Graduate Education<br />

Growth in the size of our PhD program, along with associated pre-faculty mentoring programs and<br />

placement of our doctoral graduates at leading universities and labs worldwide, is essential to raise the<br />

visibility and reputation of the <strong>SoE</strong> and <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. It is also essential for reducing our<br />

undergraduate/graduate student ratio from nearly 6:1 (presently) to 4:1 or lower (in line with peer and<br />

aspirant peer engineering colleges at research universities). Even with a goal of decreasing<br />

undergraduate enrollment in the <strong>SoE</strong> from more than 3000 to 2200 (excluding co-terminal students),<br />

this will require increasing our on-campus graduate enrollment from 500 to 730 to achieve a 3:1 ratio.<br />

While the co-terminal program provides an opportunity to increase the number of masters students on<br />

the Troy campus, it is the growth in the doctoral programs that will have the greatest impact on our<br />

rankings and reputation. Appropriate targets and growth rates must be established for both masters and<br />

doctoral programs School-wide and it is expected that these may vary by department based on current<br />

enrollments, trends, opportunities and market needs.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 44<br />

We propose to grow the PhD programs through the following mechanisms:<br />

1. Existing and proposed <strong>Institute</strong> programs including tuition discount, tuition cost-sharing model<br />

(e.g., as required by NIH), and reduced registration costs (equivalent of one credit hour) in the<br />

final semesters<br />

2. Target assistantship resources provided by the Dean of Graduate Education for the most<br />

promising new PhD students<br />

3. Develop financial recognition (reward) mechanisms for completed PhD supervision (examples<br />

could include funds for use by PhD student/graduate to attend national conferences,<br />

discretionary funds for use by supervising faculty, outstanding dissertation awards, and<br />

outstanding doctoral advising awards)<br />

4. Automatic REU-type support (as provided by NSF) for PI’s of federal grants that include full<br />

support of doctoral students<br />

5. Continue to develop and promote programs to prepare our doctoral students for careers in<br />

academia 11,12 . We are working closely with the Dean of Graduate Education on these “prefaculty”<br />

programs aimed at educating our PhD students on how to prepare for (and apply for)<br />

university positions (both tenure-track faculty and post-doctoral researcher positions). These<br />

activities seem appropriate to be included as part of plans to expand CLASS 13 to include<br />

graduate students.<br />

Current number of <strong>SoE</strong> full-time graduate students on the Troy Campus: 500<br />

3-year goal: 600<br />

5-year goal: 700 14<br />

11 The goal of these programs is to prepare our graduates to compete successfully for academic positions. The<br />

placement of our PhD graduates in academia is a metric the <strong>SoE</strong> uses to assess both quality and impact of our<br />

doctoral programs.<br />

12 Fall 2012 workshops are being held October 23 rd and November 8 th .<br />

13 CLASS stands for “Clustered Learning, Advocacy, and Support for Students.” Launched at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> in 2010,<br />

CLASS is built upon its award-winning First-Year Program to offer customized support for sophomores and has<br />

been expanded to reach all undergraduate students. In the coming year, CLASS will be expanded to include<br />

graduate students as well.<br />

14 Target can only be achieved through the implementation of modified tuition policy for federal grants.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM/GOAL : Increase the graduate enrollment in the<br />

School of Engineering to 600 in the next three years.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 45<br />

ENGAGING THE INSTITUTE: CREATING VALUE, UNIQUENESS, AND NEW OPPORTUNITIES<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, School of Science, School of Architecture, Lally School, EMPAC<br />

The School of Engineering can play a significant role in elevating the broader <strong>Institute</strong> through the<br />

creation of academic programs, opportunities for joint research, and the development of unique valueadded<br />

programs for our students. The <strong>SoE</strong> is a drawing card for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> with proven ability to attract<br />

very high caliber students to the <strong>Institute</strong>. As discussed earlier, we must take an active role in creating<br />

attractive non-<strong>SoE</strong> degree programs as options to the ABET-accredited engineering degree programs in<br />

order to begin moving our undergraduate enrollment to target levels (e.g., 50% of the <strong>Institute</strong> in three<br />

years, 40% in five years).<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> students are among the best in the country. They are bright, inquisitive, and talented. Like<br />

many intellectually curious students, our undergraduates demand challenges and new opportunities to<br />

expand their knowledge and build on their classroom education. We must answer their calls and provide<br />

value-added programs that challenge our students and help them make informed decisions about their<br />

post-baccalaureate endeavors.<br />

We should work with the other Schools to develop, promote, and sustain programs of interest to <strong>SoE</strong><br />

students and those coming to <strong>Rensselaer</strong> with interests in engineering. Examples may include new<br />

programs (certificates, minors, or undergraduate degrees) in architectural engineering, sustainability<br />

and design, engineering project management, financial engineering, and electronic media arts.<br />

As specific initiatives, we will:<br />

1. Increase the number of <strong>SoE</strong> students participating in undergraduate research.<br />

2. Engage the Lally School in developing certificate and/or minor programs in engineering<br />

management, manufacturing, technology commercialization and entrepreneurship.<br />

3. Engage the School of Architecture in developing certificate and/or minor programs in building<br />

sciences.<br />

4. Engage with HASS in developing certificate and/or minor programs in sustainability and design.<br />

5. Engage the School of Science in developing certificate and/or minor programs in engineering<br />

physics, engineering chemistry, engineering geosciences, computational biology, or other topics.<br />

6. Work with EMPAC and other groups on campus (e.g., VPR, Vice Provost for Undergraduate<br />

Studies) to create opportunities for <strong>SoE</strong> undergraduate students to participate in on-going<br />

research and performance-related projects at EMPAC.<br />

7. Promote the scholarly, creative, and innovative use of EMPAC as a platform for research and<br />

teaching. The School of Engineering will participate in developing new programs to facilitate use<br />

of EMPAC and its world-class capabilities by faculty and students.<br />

Note that items 2-5 (certificate and/or minors) may be viewed as a precursor to the establishment of full<br />

degree programs. This is a key element of the proposed enrollment management initiative described<br />

earlier.<br />

Other unique programs which must be promoted and highlighted wherever possible include:<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 46<br />

1. O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Lab (MDL)<br />

2. Manufacturing Innovation and Learning Laboratory (MILL)<br />

3. Archer Center for Student Leadership Development<br />

4. Co-terminal BS/MS program<br />

5. LITEC, Mobile Studio, FIRST Robotics Competition, the Mercer Lab, and other hands-on<br />

programs<br />

6. Inventor’s Studio, PDI, the Lemelson-<strong>Rensselaer</strong> Student Prize competition, and related<br />

programs<br />

Unique programs and value-added opportunities for our students are assets to <strong>Rensselaer</strong> and must be<br />

promoted as such.<br />

NEW DEGREE PROGRAMS, TRACKS, AND CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of the Provost<br />

We will continue to explore and evaluate options for new academic programs (degree tracks or<br />

concentrations, minors, program pairings) which provide new and relevant academic preparation for our<br />

students, are attractive to both potential students and the employers of our graduates, and are<br />

consistent with our goals for enhanced visibility, recognition, and rankings.<br />

In FY12, the Bachelor of Science in Engineering Science (BSES) degree program was re-established and a<br />

series of degree plans were developed. These are being promoted to incoming students as flexible and<br />

potentially attractive options for students seeking an engineering-centered education but who do not<br />

plan to enter the engineering workforce upon graduation. We see this as an especially attractive option<br />

to students who plan to pursue graduate study in business, law, or medicine, for example.<br />

We will continue to work with the other four Schools to develop and promote joint degree programs<br />

(program pairings) that are both attractive to our students and both valuable and impactful in terms of<br />

the types of graduates we are producing.<br />

We will develop and launch a Manufacturing Certificate program in the School of Engineering.<br />

We will develop new Biomaterials Track (concentration area) within the undergraduate program offered<br />

by MSE. While relying on some courses provided by BME (as well as Biology and other departments), it<br />

is envisioned this degree plan will be attractive to a number of students who would otherwise have<br />

enrolled in BME. (Biomedical Engineering enrollments are currently very large.)<br />

We will develop and launch a new Robotics/Mechatronics Track (concentration area) within the<br />

undergraduate program offered by ECSE. While relying on some courses provided by MANE, it is<br />

envisioned this degree plan will be attractive to a number of students who would otherwise have<br />

enrolled in MANE. (Mechanical Engineering enrollments are currently very large.)<br />

In FY12, we forwarded a proposal to the Provost for a Master of Science in Cyber-Security degree<br />

program, which would be offered jointly by the <strong>SoE</strong> and SoS. The complete proposal was delivered to<br />

the Office of the Provost and the Office of the Chief Information Officer and is still being reviewed. In<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 47<br />

<strong>FY14</strong>, we will consider the possibility of similar jointly administered graduate degree programs (between<br />

the <strong>SoE</strong> and SoS) in (1) environmental sciences and systems, and (2) hydrologic sciences/water. We will<br />

forward for approval at least one of these two new degree programs by the end of 2013.<br />

DESIGN<br />

Key Portfolios: all five Schools<br />

Design is a hallmark for the School of Engineering and for <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. We are well known for innovative,<br />

cross-cutting, and highly effective programs that integrate real-world design experiences into our<br />

engineering curricula. Our graduates are highly recruited, in part, because of their exposure to these<br />

programs while at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is ranked among the top design schools in the world. We must<br />

continue to innovate and promote our unique programs in design as they both help to recruit top<br />

students to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>.<br />

O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Laboratory<br />

Key Portfolio: School of Engineering<br />

The mission of the O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Laboratory (Design Lab) is to provide clinical<br />

real world experiences for students that build confidence and teach integration of discipline specific<br />

knowledge with practice on challenging multidisciplinary design projects. The Design Lab administers<br />

multidisciplinary capstone projects for most computer and systems, electrical, industrial, materials and<br />

mechanical engineering students, constituting more than 50% of the <strong>SoE</strong> undergraduate students.<br />

Approximately 25 project teams are organized each semester with two thirds of them (16) being<br />

supported by the equivalent of $40K annual extramural grants for a total of $640K in the last fiscal year.<br />

Two major strategies will guide the Design Lab through the next fiscal year and beyond, as we seek to<br />

increase the education value for our students and their impact as engineering professionals.<br />

Strategy 1: We will seek to expand our sponsorship base in the Design Lab from 16 projects to 25<br />

projects and a total of $1M. In the process we will work to integrate a greater number and broader<br />

cross-section of students from across the <strong>SoE</strong>. In the past two years we successfully integrated<br />

materials engineering students into the Design Lab. This year we will focus attention on biomedical<br />

engineering. In the future, we will continue in the same general direction to grow student participation<br />

from aeronautical, civil, chemical, and environmental engineering with a complementary growth in<br />

funded student projects. Our expanded financial base will permit additions in professional and<br />

administrative support staff along with associated infrastructure development.<br />

Strategy 2: We will leverage our success in the Design Lab to expand upon efforts for “educating<br />

engineers to design a better world.” This will include integration with existing project-based learning<br />

and team teaching initiatives in cooperation with the Vice Provost and Dean of Undergraduate<br />

Education, Vice Provost for Entrepreneurship, Office of Technology Commercialization and the Archer<br />

Center for Student Leadership. In addition to capstone, we will use venues such as ENGR-2050<br />

Introduction to Engineering Design and the curriculum in Design, Innovation and Society (DIS) as<br />

conduits to support the African Initiative, Design for Sustainability, and Student Invention.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 48<br />

Design Collaborative at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> (DECO).<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, School of Science, Lally School, School of Architecture, HASS<br />

The emerging vision of the Design Collaborative at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> (DECO) is to bring together the design<br />

interests and capabilities across the <strong>Institute</strong> to create a venue for interdisciplinary design research and<br />

a Masters-level degree in design. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> graduates continue to gravitate toward design programs<br />

around the country, and we have an opportunity to capture those students (and others) into a tuitionpaying<br />

program that builds on the strong interdisciplinary programs (and brand recognition) already<br />

established at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. The focus of DECO will be on technical design as it relates to society,<br />

sustainability, and entrepreneurship. The MS graduates will be leaders in the design of technology that<br />

enhances the quality of people’s lives. The degree will include a strong practical outreach component<br />

(i.e., design projects, workshops, internships, design firm affiliations, consultancy). Research conducted<br />

as part of DECO will seek to understand the structural barriers to creativity, semantics for enhancing<br />

design collaboration, design for sustainability, and management of complex system design.<br />

The DECO concept is expected to evolve over the coming academic year, with the possibility of a<br />

proposal for first offerings in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

ADVANCED MANUFACTURING PROGRAMS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of the Vice President of Administration<br />

In spring 2012, we launched the Manufacturing Innovation Learning Laboratory (MILL). Focused on<br />

educating the next generation of manufacturing leaders and pioneers, the MILL builds upon the success<br />

of its predecessor, the Advanced Manufacturing Laboratory (AML). The evolution of the AML to MILL<br />

reflects the need to train future manufacturing leaders in manufacturing innovation, advanced<br />

manufacturing methods, and nanomanufacturing.<br />

Key to the MILL’s continued success will be the creation, in <strong>FY14</strong>, of an upper level and graduate level<br />

class named Advanced Manufacturing Processes (AMP) with resources to support undergraduate and<br />

graduate-level advanced manufacturing classes, a common teaching/meeting space for all<br />

manufacturing-related courses, an additive manufacturing center, and a common large project space.<br />

This class will reside in the MILL. The creation of the AMP will involve constructing a mezzanine level at<br />

the east end of the existing MILL CII high bay space. The space will house advanced manufacturing<br />

equipment, include a shared large project area, a common design and meeting spaces.<br />

The MPL will showcase advanced technologies in the areas of additive manufacturing, composites,<br />

advanced machining, manufacturing systems control and simulation, nano and micro manufacturing,<br />

and advanced industrial robotics for undergraduate and graduate lab modules for these technologies.<br />

The advanced labs offered in the MPL will be part of the educational modules in classes at both the<br />

undergraduate and graduate levels.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 49<br />

Starting in summer 2012, we engaged in pre-construction talks and planning meetings with leadership in<br />

the Office of the Vice President of Administration. We also have been developing a business model and<br />

a resource development model (built around both corporate and individual support) for the MILL and<br />

the classes which use the MILL including the new AMP class.<br />

Manufacturing has been a cornerstone of both research and education at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> for decades. Our<br />

undergraduates have had the opportunity to gain valuable hands-on experience through the Advanced<br />

Manufacturing Laboratory (AML) and Haas Technical Education Center. Our students in these classes<br />

have been recognized for their knowledge and efforts through awards from student competitions<br />

sponsored by the Society of Manufacturing Engineers and the American Society of Mechanical<br />

Engineers.<br />

In 2012, we rebranded and re-envisioned the AML, launching the Manufacturing Innovation and<br />

Learning Laboratory (MILL). The MILL’s unique facilities and its staff host manufacturing classes, support<br />

senior capstone design courses in addition to a broad range of courses across the curriculum, and are<br />

actively involved in the School of Engineering K-12 outreach programs. A new manufacturing certificate<br />

program is currently being developed in the School of Engineering. The manufacturing experience our<br />

students have gained has lead to successful start-ups including Bull-Ex and Ecovative Design.<br />

In addition to the educational focus of the MILL, the Center for Automation Technologies and Systems<br />

(CATS) brings together critical industrial players in New York State and supports both scale-up of new<br />

technologies and manufacturing research. For example, fuel cell membrane technology was scaled up<br />

through the CATS (with help from Pemeas) and is now owned by BASF. This then lead to an NSF IGERT<br />

training grant, multiple DOE fuel cell manufacturing grants, and a number of NYSERDA grants. This is a<br />

common story from the CATS.<br />

There is a strategic opportunity to renovate the manufacturing infrastructure on campus and create a<br />

state-of-the-art research and education manufacturing facility. The School of Engineering has been in<br />

discussions with the Office of Vice President of Administration in 2012 to forward-plan space<br />

renovations in CII for the expansion of the MILL. The expansion proposal (vetted and approved in<br />

concept in summer 2012) is being socialized with selected alumni and corporate partners to seek both<br />

engagement and support. Funds to renovate the CII MILL are expected to come from a combination of<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> support (capital requests) and philanthropic support (both individual and corporate, see<br />

Section VI). Funds for the operation and maintenance of the MILL are expected to come from a<br />

combination of philanthropic support (including in-kind equipment donations) and project sponsorship<br />

(using a model similar to that used in the O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Lab, or MDL).<br />

This attention to advanced manufacturing programs is vital to the nation’s economy as outlined by<br />

the United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), on which<br />

President Jackson serves. In its report to the President, PCAST has made the skills gap in advanced<br />

manufacturing a major priority if the nation is to remain competitive in this critical area.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 50<br />

While the United States has shipped some manufacturing overseas, manufacturing of emerging<br />

technologies is still a critical and growing part of the national economy. For example, Global Foundries<br />

and General Electric have both made significant investments in manufacturing technology in the Capital<br />

District in recent years. There also is a national emphasis on nanomanufacturing as well as the necessity<br />

for improved manufacturing for fuel cells, batteries, wind turbines, sensors, and composites. These<br />

trends create an excellent opportunity for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to take a leadership role (and establish both<br />

prominence and visibility) in this important field, both in research and education.<br />

We should move as quickly as possible to undertake this expansion in physical space, as programmatic<br />

expansion plans continue to evolve. Funding for the MILL expansion (see Section VI-Capital Requests)<br />

should be a priority in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

“The evolution of the AML to MILL reflects changes in the field and in the<br />

marketplace. Industry is looking for future leaders who are versed in time-tested<br />

manufacturing techniques, yet experienced and fluent in micro, nano, bio, and<br />

other leading-edge manufacturing technologies.”<br />

“Advanced manufacturing is essential to reinvigorating American innovation and<br />

to creating high-paying jobs across all technology sectors. The MILL positions<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> and its graduates to make bigger, bolder contributions toward these<br />

important national goals.”<br />

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH CENTER<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of Student Life<br />

The School of Engineering Educational Outreach Center (EOC) was opened in 2011 both to support<br />

existing programs and to align resources to grow a sustainable interdisciplinary <strong>SoE</strong> Education and<br />

Outreach community. Both pre-college and outreach programming are essential components of the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong>’s Community of Scholars Initiative and are interwoven throughout the fabric of our community<br />

through its student organizations, research centers, and academic departments. Such programming is<br />

designed to engage and encourage a diverse population to explore a future within science, technology,<br />

engineering and math (STEM) fields of study at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> either through direct interactions with K-12<br />

students and / or K-12 educators.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

―David V. Rosowsky, Dean, <strong>SoE</strong>


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 51<br />

EOC K-12 Educational Outreach<br />

The EOC is in its second year of managing the Engineering Ambassador (EA) program and has increased<br />

the diversity of the undergraduate participants. There are currently 30 EA undergraduate engineering<br />

students: 47% female students (increase from 33%), 27% minority students (increase from 22%)<br />

representing a wide variety of engineering disciplines. These carefully selected and guided<br />

undergraduate students design presentations specifically for use in K-12 classrooms that include handson<br />

activities. In the 2011-2012 school year alone, over 2500 middle and high school students from local<br />

urban, rural and suburban schools were introduced to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s engineering programs and learned<br />

about engineering careers from some of our best undergraduate students and ambassadors of<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong>. Several <strong>SoE</strong> faculty members have had EAs create K-12 presentations/modules based on<br />

their research. The EA program has also expanded its role on-campus by supporting <strong>SoE</strong> sponsored<br />

activities across the institute including the First Year Experience, Exploring Engineering Day, Black Family<br />

Technology Day, Accepted Student Day, and other events.<br />

EOC Research Center and Projects Educational Outreach<br />

The EOC supports faculty efforts to prepare grant submissions to agencies that have specific<br />

requirements for education outreach components as part of their projects. Wherever possible, we<br />

leverage resources from across the <strong>SoE</strong> and the <strong>Institute</strong>. For example, the EOC supports both the NSF<br />

Smart Lighting ERC and the NSF CURENT ERC pre-college high school summer student enrichment<br />

programs through the Summer at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> and plans to collaborate on a professional development<br />

opportunity for K-12 educators to learn about relevant cutting-edge research and educational strategies<br />

to incorporate into their classrooms. The EOC also works closely to support the educational outreach<br />

mission of all <strong>SoE</strong> Departments. For example, the EOC identified corporate funding and provided<br />

logistical support to enable the <strong>SoE</strong> Manufacturing Forum Group to host the inaugural National<br />

Manufacturing Day. This event attracted more than 100 high school students and educators who spent<br />

a day touring and learning about the <strong>Institute</strong>’s manufacturing laboratories (the MILL, Clean Room, CATs<br />

Fuel Cell lab, Robotics lab, and others).<br />

EOC , Archer Center for Student Leadership Development, and Diversity Collaboration<br />

The EOC continues to work closely with the Archer Center for Student Leadership Development and the<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Office of Diversity to build the infrastructure for a diverse summer community to support REU’s for<br />

visiting undergraduate students from PUI institutions. This model was successfully implemented last<br />

summer and included a graduate mentoring training program. The EOC will share information on the<br />

program developed to support a diverse undergraduate community of researchers and will encourage<br />

faculty to pursue REU support knowing that the infrastructure and logistical support is in-place to build<br />

and support a robust mentoring community across all REU programs at the <strong>Institute</strong>.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 52<br />

EOC Online Presence<br />

The EOC will continue to maintain a website highlighting all of the Education and Outreach activities<br />

within the <strong>SoE</strong>. The site will feature faculty, staff, and students as well as related events and<br />

opportunities to become engaged.<br />

Moving Forward<br />

We will continue to support the development of faculty-driven and center-based proposals to ensure all<br />

education and outreach components are included.<br />

We will continue to be creative in supporting existing center-based and faculty-driven education<br />

outreach efforts. For example, the EOC will coordinate a scholarship application process to encourage a<br />

needy and diverse population of students to participate in the ERC student enrichment program by<br />

offering free tuition, room and board to attend the ERCs enrichment programs.<br />

We will develop a sustainable and institutional based high school <strong>SoE</strong> research program allowing faculty<br />

to register on-campus high school appropriate research opportunities and the skills required while high<br />

school students will be able to apply and be competitively selected. This will also include working to<br />

match minority and underrepresented high school students with caring graduate students and faculty<br />

mentors.<br />

We will support the Student Advisory Council School of Engineering (SACSOE) in an advisory role to<br />

ensure effective involvement within the <strong>SoE</strong> student organization community.<br />

In support of the Engineering Ambassador Program, we will:<br />

� Support an aggressive 2012-2013 EA education outreach schedule that will potentially increase the<br />

number of K-12 students exposed to the EA presentations by 60%.<br />

� Continue to identify new resources (industrial and agency support) to ensure the EA program can be<br />

sustained and can grow to meet anticipated demand.<br />

� Increase diversity among the ambassadors to achieve 50% women students and 30% minority<br />

students.<br />

ARCHER CENTER AFTER 20: VISIONING AND PLANNING THE FUTURE OF THE ARCHER CENTER<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Vice President for Student Life, Office of the Provost, <strong>Institute</strong><br />

Advancement<br />

The Archer Center celebrated its 20 th anniversary in FY13. Graduates from the center’s programs have<br />

reached leadership positions in their careers, many return regularly to participate as guest speakers in<br />

Archer Center classes and programs, and a select group has been engaged with campus leadership,<br />

including the Dean of the School of Engineering and the Director of the Archer Center, to consider (and<br />

plan for) the possibility of a significantly expanded Archer Center in the future. We regularly hear from<br />

our alumni about the tremendous value the Archer Center programs provided while they were students.<br />

But we also hear that the need for the type of professional training and preparation the Archer Center<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 53<br />

provides will only increase in the years ahead, and that <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is unique in how it provides this<br />

training to its students. We should capitalize on this uniqueness. The Archer Center is a discriminator for<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong>. As the Archer Center’s vision and programming expands, creating stronger links between<br />

academic life, student life, and residential programs, it can become a signature element of CLASS.<br />

The School of Engineering is the primary academic customer of the Archer Center’s programs. (The<br />

second largest customer overall may be Athletics.) As such, the School of Engineering is both deeply<br />

committed to its future and highly motivated to see its programs continue to evolve, expand, and<br />

become even more integrated with our classroom and laboratory instructional programs. We see a<br />

future for Archer that may include programs for graduate students, that may work more closely with<br />

team-based design projects, and that may partner with faculty on ways to innovate curriculum and even<br />

instructional delivery. We see a future for Archer that facilitates greater industry participation in our<br />

classrooms and design studios, that guides our students toward increased participation in internships<br />

and co-op assignments, and that may one day offer off-site programs, creating a new and potentially<br />

significant revenue stream for the <strong>Institute</strong>.<br />

Realizing such a future will require (first) the will of the <strong>Institute</strong> leadership. Second, it will require new<br />

funds be raised in support of an expanded and sustainable Archer Center. And third it will require a<br />

dynamic, entrepreneurial, and visionary director.<br />

We will work closely with the Provost and the Vice President for Student Life to explore this exciting<br />

opportunity, and with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement to raise new permanent (endowed) funds for the Archer<br />

Center.<br />

ON-CAMPUS MASTERS (PROFESSIONAL) DEGREE PROGRAMS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office/Dean of Graduate Education<br />

Changes in our graduate tuition policy have had the effect of significantly reducing the Masters<br />

enrollment in the <strong>SoE</strong>. Where once this was a strong part of our graduate program, accessed by many<br />

companies and individuals in the region and nationally, the high cost of tuition has made it unattractive<br />

(or infeasible given educational reimbursement allowances). Unless there is a change to the tuition<br />

policy, it is unlikely we will ever recover that segment. However, this also presents an opportunity for us<br />

to reconsider the role Masters-level education should play in the School of Engineering. Unlike public<br />

institutions that have a more implicit role in training graduate engineers for professional practice, one<br />

could argue that <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is a private research university whose core mission should be the education<br />

of bachelors and doctoral students. But, in fact, the degree to which this argument may be valid<br />

depends on the specific engineering discipline. In many engineering fields, the Masters degree has<br />

become the entry-level degree for professional practice. Trends in hiring (particularly in the consulting<br />

fields), plans for possible changes to requirements for professional licensure, and the demand for<br />

engineering graduates with exposure to topics beyond what is covered at the bachelors level all point to<br />

the need for more Masters-level graduates in engineering. The question comes back to “What do we<br />

believe <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s role should be in preparing engineering graduates?” This will need careful<br />

reflection, informed by advisory boards, by each <strong>SoE</strong> department.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 54<br />

The success of the co-terminal (five-year BS/MS) program offers tremendous opportunity for those<br />

departments wishing to promote or expand their Masters degree programs. Students who are receiving<br />

scholarships while undergraduates are eligible to continue their support into a fifth year. This should be<br />

marketed as an attractive and affordable option for our best students as early as the sophomore year.<br />

Specific initiatives:<br />

1. Each department will develop a plan for offering Masters degree programs. These will be<br />

coordinated at the School level to enable effective promotion of all available on-campus<br />

programs to prospective students. Impact on teaching loads, balance across degree programs,<br />

and program costs (facilities, instruction, etc.) must be considered.<br />

2. Explore with the Lally School possible Masters level programs in engineering management,<br />

technology commercialization and entrepreneurship, or other topics. The successful Systems<br />

Engineering and Technology Management (SETM) Masters program can serve as an example.<br />

3. Begin a study to investigate the feasibility/value of creating off-site graduate certificate,<br />

executive-style, or Masters degree programs. This could include off-site or web-based<br />

instruction. Such programs could serve two important objectives: (1) extending <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s<br />

global reach and impact, and (2) providing a potentially significant cash flow into the <strong>SoE</strong>. This<br />

must be evaluated very carefully. Many universities have far more experience with such<br />

programs, not all of it favorable.<br />

EXPLORING A NEW DISTANCE EDUCATION MODEL<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, DoTCIO, Office of the Provost<br />

As Dean of the School of Engineering, I serve as Chair of the Dean’s Council for the NSF Smart Lighting<br />

ERC. Through that council, and participation in the broader Northeast Engineering Dean’s Council (an<br />

informal group of engineering deans at more than ten universities in the region), an idea has emerged<br />

for a model for distance delivery that enables students at any of the participating campuses to register<br />

for (very carefully) selected courses offered by another institution. It was decided that we would seek to<br />

identify ONE COURSE at each participating institution in an area of nationally recognized strength for<br />

that university, and ONE FACULTY MEMBER in that area who is nationally recognized as a leading<br />

scholar-researcher in that field. It was further resolved that the deans (in the Northeast Engineering<br />

Dean’s Council) would explore funding opportunities through the National Science Foundation and<br />

elsewhere to operationalize the proposed distance delivery model. This could support, for example, the<br />

installation or upgrade of equipment necessary to stream video, facilitate two-way interactions across<br />

sites, and so forth.<br />

The ERC has committed, through its programming and multi-year strategic plan, to offer an upper-level<br />

technical elective and/or graduate course to the other ERC partner universities in such a distance<br />

delivery mode. (One of the partner institutions is Boston University, whose dean serves on the<br />

Northeast Engineering Dean’s Council.) We envision that the best choice of course for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to<br />

offer to the broader group of northeast engineering schools would be in the area of (1) smart lighting, or<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 55<br />

(2) nanomaterials. This would both meet the objectives and leverage the resources (intellectual as well<br />

as financial) of both organizations.<br />

We will commit to delivering a course via a distance delivery mechanism to a select group of<br />

universities, in exchange for access to a course provided by their campus, in <strong>FY14</strong>. We will work closely<br />

with the Office of the Provost to address issues of course equivalency (articulation) and registration (i.e.,<br />

equivalent course numbers at the participating institutions).<br />

SEEDING NEW INITIATIVES (RESEARCH DIRECTIONS)<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Office of Research, School of Science, School of Architecture<br />

See also: Appendix B (available separately)<br />

The School of Engineering continues to focus on two galvanizing themes (or “focal areas”):<br />

Transformational Materials and Manufacturing and Human Health and Livability. The two focal areas<br />

serve as both a lens to focus collaborative efforts on important problems and a beacon that shines on<br />

future directions and initiatives for the School. We will explore new and appropriate research directions<br />

for the School of Engineering and <strong>Rensselaer</strong> with the objectives of (1) positioning <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to address<br />

grand challenges, (2) elevating the visibility and reputation of faculty, students, and programs, (3) linking<br />

expertise, talent, and capacities across the <strong>Institute</strong>, and (4) establishing <strong>Rensselaer</strong> as a leader in<br />

research in key emerging fields.<br />

Areas to be considered in <strong>FY14</strong>:<br />

� INFRASTRUCTURE, RESILIENCE, AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT<br />

� ENERGY (SYSTEMS, SCIENCES, AND SOLUTIONS)<br />

� FUNCTIONAL TISSUE ENGINEERING<br />

� NANOMANUFACTURING<br />

� IMAGE AND DATA SCIENCES, VISUALIZATION/PERCEPTUALIZATION<br />

� CYBER SYSTEMS AND SECURITY<br />

� COMPUTATIONAL MOLECULAR SCIENCE<br />

NEW LARGE-SCALE RESEARCH INITIATIVES<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, School of Science, Office of Research<br />

See also: Appendix B (available separately)<br />

We are proposing three possible large research initiatives that could lead to significant new funding<br />

streams to the <strong>Institute</strong> and establish <strong>Rensselaer</strong> as a leader in important new areas. In <strong>FY14</strong>, we will<br />

actively pursue large centers or institutes in each of these areas, in cooperation with the Office of<br />

Research and the School of Science, and working closely with the President’s Office and of course<br />

cognizant federal agencies, state agencies, and industry consortia, and corporate partners.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 56<br />

Infrastructure, Resiliency, and the Built Environment<br />

In August 2012, The National Academies released its report “Disaster Resilience: a National Imperative”<br />

authored by the Committee on Increasing National Resilience to Hazards and Disasters and the<br />

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. This report not only highlights the nation’s<br />

vulnerabilities but lays out specific recommendations for: assessment, policy, investment, and<br />

mitigation, at all levels and across a wide range of constituencies – government, community and<br />

nonprofit organizations, the private sector, research community, and the general public. This report<br />

further underscores the vulnerability of the nation’s infrastructure (built, power/energy, transportation,<br />

cyber, agricultural, public health and health care, etc.) to both natural and technological hazards, the<br />

potential for devastating losses (deaths, dollars, and downtime) that may result from future disasters,<br />

and the need to undertake structural (physical infrastructure) and non-structural (social) measures to<br />

reduce risk and increase resiliency.<br />

Academia will play a critical partnership role with industry and government agencies in addressing the<br />

grand challenge of disaster resilience, providing expertise in topic areas beyond traditional engineering<br />

disciplines (e.g., hazard modeling, risk analysis, systems modeling and response, architecture, planning,<br />

economics, human and organizational behavior), natural synergies across disciplines (intellectual “mashups”),<br />

and educational platforms to prepare future generations of problem solvers and leaders.<br />

A number of leading research universities already have established multidisciplinary centers addressing<br />

natural hazards. However, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is uniquely positioned, both in terms of size (agility, crossdisciplinary<br />

activity, technological depth) and existing strategic thrust areas to make a major impact<br />

across the spectrum of Infrastructure, Resiliency, and the Built Environment topics. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> can<br />

position a set of unique alliances to address some of the most complex resiliency problems by<br />

integrating fundamentally new technologies (e.g., materials) within a robust framework for analysis of<br />

complex systems (e.g., modeling, simulation).<br />

The study of technological (human-induced) hazards, thus far, is largely topic-focused, e.g., terrorist<br />

attack (including bio-terrorism), cyber-security, smart grid vulnerability, etc. All of these topics are<br />

inherently multidisciplinary and must be studied as such. The focus on natural and technological hazards<br />

is giving rise to a new breed of engineer/scientist, one who is versed in the technological, sociological,<br />

and economic dimensions of risk, who is trained in techniques of risk assessment and risk<br />

communication, and who understands the connectivity between and across disciplines, whether focused<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

We are proposing three new large research<br />

initiatives that could lead to significant new<br />

funding streams to the <strong>Institute</strong> and establish<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> as a leader in important new areas.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 57<br />

on mitigation strategies, post-disaster response logistics, or the concomitant impacts on food, water,<br />

material resources, health, and security.<br />

With topical experts in risk analysis, hazards, modeling of complex systems, economics, policy, and many<br />

relevant technical fields (e.g., structural engineering, architecture, materials, bioengineering, coastal<br />

engineering, electric power and communications, networks, transportation, wind and earthquake<br />

engineering), research universities are well suited to providing both significant contributions and<br />

leadership in the study of disaster resilience considering infrastructure and the built environment.<br />

Universities are best positioned to consider, in an integrative fashion, the interconnections between the<br />

social (community preparation, risk communication, emergent behavior), the structural (physical<br />

infrastructure and built environment), and the technical (use of information technology and systems)<br />

aspects necessary for resilience of the built environment. In addition to providing research and<br />

education, universities can serve as state, regional, and national resources for assessing and quantifying<br />

infrastructure system risk and changes in risk with time, developing technologies and evaluating<br />

strategies for improved resiliency and communicating risk to stakeholders, emergency managers,<br />

decision-makers, and the public.<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> is well positioned to make immediate contributions in many of these areas, and in fact has<br />

expertise and reputation for outstanding work in the areas of modeling of hazards, remote sensing,<br />

post-disaster response logistics; design of buildings, bridges, dams, and other civil infrastructure for<br />

natural hazards; power distribution/smart grid; modeling and analysis of social networks; remote<br />

sensing of civil infrastructure, biotechnology and bioengineering, and sustainable building systems.<br />

However, focusing these activities around a common theme would leverage these currently individuated<br />

areas to create new synergistic activities that would, in turn, help to position the <strong>Institute</strong> for new<br />

resources. Strategic investment (new faculty, seed grants, center support) and messaging (external<br />

communications, corporate and government relations) would accelerate this positioning.<br />

The theme of Infrastructure, Resiliency, and the Built Environment has both the social urgency<br />

(relevance) and the technological challenges that can capture the imagination and intellect of faculty<br />

scholars in all five Schools at the <strong>Institute</strong>. It can create campus-wide discourse and engagement,<br />

bringing the <strong>Institute</strong> together to work toward solving one of the most critical challenges of our time.<br />

Finally, this important theme takes advantage of historical and emerging <strong>Institute</strong> strengths and<br />

positions <strong>Rensselaer</strong> to make significant contributions in a vital area of national security – one that is<br />

highly appropriate for a leading technological research university.<br />

Nitride Center of Excellence<br />

Gallium Nitride (GaN) based compound semiconductor devices will be the foundation of new optical and<br />

electronic systems critical to the development of solid state lighting, smart grid power electronics, high<br />

bandwidth communications, advanced optical display systems, solar energy generation and UV<br />

industrial and germicidal systems. The rapid and successful evolution of GaN-based semiconductor<br />

systems across this wide range of applications requires both fundamental and applied research in<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 58<br />

advanced materials, device design and systems implementation for the United States to establish a<br />

sustainable leadership position in this critical technology space.<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> is well positioned, both intellectually and geographically, to take a leadership role in<br />

developing the fundamental technology and educating the technical workforce needed to lead the<br />

development of advanced GaN based technologies and applications. Intellectually, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> has a<br />

strong and long held position of excellence in lighting and power electronics systems engineering that is<br />

now driving the demand for GaN materials and device development. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> also has one of the<br />

strongest collections of GaN materials, optical and electronic device design expertise in the nation.<br />

Geographically, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is positioned in the middle of a growing academic and industrial silicon<br />

nanotechnology superstructure now creating a vast, technology support ecosystem synergistic with<br />

the support structures required to advance GaN materials and device development. Furthermore, the<br />

greater New York area is home to many of the specialized industries now growing to supply materials<br />

and equipment needed for GaN device development, as well as large systems industries developing new<br />

applications requiring unique GaN device and systems performance advantages.<br />

GaN semiconductors and the broad range of applications they enable are synergistic with all of the<br />

signature thrusts of the <strong>Institute</strong> and leverage the expertise found in more than half of the 35 research<br />

centers currently at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. Coupled with broad government energy and defense interests in GaN<br />

based technologies, the potential funding base for a <strong>Rensselaer</strong> centered Nitride Center of Excellence<br />

could approach $100M/year in government and global industrial funding, positioning <strong>Rensselaer</strong> and<br />

the greater Albany area as a global pan-semiconductor technology powerhouse for decades to come.<br />

This unique opportunity is time limited as the global industrial focus on GaN is expanding rapidly.<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> should move quickly to coordinate its local but broadly distributed scientific and engineering<br />

expertise, grow both local and global industry interest, and develop support from federal and state<br />

funding agencies to create a Capital District led (centered and <strong>Rensselaer</strong>) GaN Center of Excellence.<br />

Simultaneously, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> should start with smaller initiatives like a <strong>Rensselaer</strong> centered GaN Power<br />

Electronics Consortium (being planned as of Fall 2012). Properly designed, these smaller initiatives will<br />

create scalable internal organizational and administrative structures, initially segmented by GaN<br />

applications specific activities (including solid state lighting at the ERC and LRC) to build the foundational<br />

structures, policies and organizational infrastructure to support growth toward the grand vision set at<br />

the highest institutional levels.<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> for Transformational Materials<br />

Throughout history, the application of new materials has provided the advances in critical technologies<br />

that have driven the rise (and fall) of civilizations. However, it is not the discovery of materials per se<br />

that leads to these advances, it is the ability to engineer (process) materials into forms that have the<br />

desired properties and performance. In modern times, the transition of materials discovery to materials<br />

technology has had both stunning successes and disappointing failures. Thus, the discovery of giant<br />

magnetoresistance (GMR) in ultra thin metallic multilayers led to a revolution in computer hard drive<br />

storage in the late 1990’s. The invention of erbium self-amplification of optical signals in silica fibers<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 59<br />

enabled the modern communications age. On the other hand, the technological promise of high<br />

temperature superconductors has not been realized, nor has the promise of carbon nanotube<br />

reinforced polymer composites.<br />

Even where the transition from materials discovery to technology is successful, time scales can be<br />

glacially slow. Mastery of the iron-carbon phase diagram and the concomitant ability to mass produce<br />

steel ultimately enabled the industrial revolution, but the development process took two thousand<br />

years. At the other extreme, the GMR and Er-doped fiber examples above are exceptional in that they<br />

went from discovery to application in about a decade. Development cycles of 15-20 years are more<br />

typical, generally requiring enormous levels of trial-and-error and investment. The shortening of the<br />

materials technology development cycle, through the development of more predictive materials<br />

processing pathways, may have the greatest pay-off of any engineering development in the coming<br />

century. The fundamental challenge in developing new materials technologies is that while there is<br />

ever-improving capability to describe and predict the equilibrium states of materials, there is no<br />

systematic or universal method to describe or predict the kinetics of non-equilibrium pathways during<br />

materials processing. A key goal for <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is thus to take leadership in defining a universal<br />

“intellectual infrastructure” for mapping the kinetics of materials evolution during materials<br />

processing.<br />

Substantial stimulus in addressing these challenges is being provided by a major new federal investment<br />

in this field, the Material Genome Initiative (MGI), announced by the White House in June 2011, and<br />

aimed at radically shortening the length of time necessary for materials development cycles, thereby<br />

substantially enhancing manufacturing competitiveness in the nation. The original per annum<br />

investment in the MGI is slated to be over $100M, but it has the potential to grow to more than $1B per<br />

year. <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is extremely well positioned to assume leadership in this national initiative. We have<br />

strong expertise in the pre-requisite fields of engineering and science, a growing experimental and<br />

computational infrastructure, and the highly collaborative, inter-disciplinary environment necessary for<br />

success in this endeavor. With judicious investment and the formulation of the optimum vision, we<br />

can take a central role in a renaissance of US manufacturing.<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> has considerable strengths in the following areas: materials science, simulation and<br />

modeling, data science, materials-biology interface, in-situ characterization and control, and<br />

manufacturing. At the nexus of these fields could be the “<strong>Institute</strong> for Transformational Materials<br />

(ITM)” – a national center focused on the transformation of new materials into new materials<br />

technologies. While the MGI will be one funding platform for this <strong>Institute</strong>, we envision its funding<br />

base, community, and impact to be far broader. It would incorporate partnerships with federal and<br />

state agencies, industry, government laboratories, and collaborating academic institutions. Our vision is<br />

that this <strong>Institute</strong> will become the go-to center for new materials manufacturing developments in the<br />

nation. Major interim goals will be to establish a node on the NSF National Nanotechnology Users<br />

Network, and a major MGI-funded Center. A possible long-term vision would be to serve as the nexus<br />

for a National Laboratory focused on manufacturing, to create an epicenter for future national<br />

economic competitiveness.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 60<br />

ACADEMIC ADVISING<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Provost’s Office<br />

Advising<br />

A strong undergraduate academic advising program is one of the key elements of the <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

The <strong>SoE</strong> has always supported a faculty-based advising experience and will continue to do so. Given the<br />

student/faculty ratios, as high as 40 in some programs (with some faculty in over-subscribed majors<br />

advising more than 50 students), we must identify mechanisms that will retain this faculty-centered<br />

approach while not overloading our faculty with individual advising appointments. Most importantly,<br />

students must have access to critical information that they need to proceed through their programs<br />

without making simple but preventable errors in their programs.<br />

The <strong>SoE</strong> Office of Undergraduate Education will work with the academic departments to better organize<br />

student support services so that routine matters need not wait for individual faculty attention. In the<br />

long term, a central facility for student services as a support unit for advising for all the academic<br />

departments should be developed. However, in the near term (at least through the next year), the <strong>SoE</strong><br />

Office of Undergraduate Education will coordinate the disparate resources and effectively communicate<br />

the availability of these resources to all <strong>SoE</strong> students. This will include careful coordination of services<br />

with the Advising and Learning Assistance Center and the Dean of Students’ Office. Concomitant with<br />

this effort, a web-based advising handbook will be developed for <strong>SoE</strong> students and faculty. Our vision is<br />

that the collective knowledge of academic requirements will be effectively distributed throughout the<br />

School of Engineering so that students can quickly get the answers to their questions. This will reserve<br />

faculty contact time for true career mentoring, identification of undergraduate research and other preprofessional<br />

opportunities (e.g., study abroad, internship and co-op), and sharing of goals and<br />

experiences.<br />

A New Advising Model<br />

In response to the continued rise in student-faculty ratios, and in order to deliver critical services with<br />

fewer staff and meet our commitment to delivering a world-class engineering education (in all<br />

dimensions), the leadership of the School has determined that our students would be better served by a<br />

common advising experience during the first two years. Such a centralized advising model for the School<br />

would (1) ensure consistency in quality of advising, (2) engage advisors equitably from across the<br />

School’s departments, (3) enable and encourage efficiencies in utilization of faculty and staff to provide<br />

essential advising responsibilities, (4) provide students greater flexibility and access to high quality<br />

advising throughout the academic year, and (5) help the School highlight and promote the full range of<br />

academic programs and majors available to students. After their second year, students would be<br />

assigned advisors in their home departments. It is in the junior and senior years that faculty can be most<br />

effective in advising on technical electives, co-terminal and other graduate study options, and planning<br />

for post-graduate employment.<br />

In FY13, the School began examining the possibility of moving to a common first-year advising<br />

experience for all engineering students. In part to provide better and more uniform quality advising<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 61<br />

during this formative year for our students, and in part to address the increased numbers of first-year<br />

students in Engineering, we have determined such a model is both appropriate and preferable. We will<br />

further develop plans for our School-wide first-year advising model (including space and staffing needs)<br />

with hopes of implementing the new model in Fall 2013. This new model will not require any additional<br />

faculty or staff support and space exists within the <strong>SoE</strong> that can be renovated 15 and repurposed as an<br />

advising center.<br />

Section IV: Assessing our Progress<br />

In broad terms, my goals as Dean are to: (1) advance the School of Engineering, (2) ensure resources for<br />

the future, and (3) create a work environment based on mutual respect and shared goals. The goals laid<br />

out in this report will be periodically assessed to determine (1) when a goal has been achieved, (2) when<br />

additional efforts and/or resources should be directed toward achieving a goal, and (3) when a goal<br />

should be revised or updated in response to changes in expectations or environment. The associated<br />

action items described throughout this <strong>Plan</strong> include specific measures for benchmarking against other<br />

universities, establishing and communicating performance criteria, regularly reviewing progress toward<br />

meeting goals (e.g., in annual performance reviews and advisory board meetings), and reporting<br />

progress to both internal and external audiences (e.g., targeted promotional pieces). In some cases,<br />

action items call for exploring possible opportunities or directions, while in others they are specific and<br />

task-oriented. Many action items require direct faculty participation, underscoring the need for faculty<br />

engagement to achieve our goals.<br />

Section V: Resource <strong>Plan</strong> (resource estimate, reputational and revenue enhancement, time period)<br />

FACULTY GROWTH<br />

Projected resources needed in <strong>FY14</strong> Salary, startup, and hiring costs for 15 new T/TT faculty members<br />

Projected resources needed in FY15: Salary, startup, and hiring costs for 15 new T/TT faculty members<br />

Projected resources needed in FY16: Salary, startup, and hiring costs for 15 new T/TT faculty members<br />

CRITICAL STAFF NEEDS<br />

Projected resources needed in <strong>FY14</strong>: funding for three critical staff needs in support of educational<br />

and research programs in <strong>SoE</strong><br />

15 A modest amount of funding for renovation of space for this important initiative is requested as part of our <strong>FY14</strong><br />

capital request.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM: Benchmark progress being made against the<br />

goals stated in the School of Engineering <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>,<br />

and report progress annually to the School of Engineering<br />

faculty, staff, and Dean’s Advisory Council.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 62<br />

CAPITAL FUND REQUESTS (See Section VI): $3,464,000 in <strong>FY14</strong><br />

Potential revenue enhancement (<strong>FY14</strong> and beyond)<br />

� Development activities and strategies as described in Section VI, including endowment of<br />

programs, faculty positions, and departments<br />

� Revenue from tuition-paying Masters students<br />

� Additional indirect cost recovery from expanded research program(s) and new center(s)<br />

Section VI: Fundamental and Undergirding Requirements<br />

SPACE UTILIZATION AND NEEDS<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Administration Division<br />

We will continue to work with Campus <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Facilities Design to promote efficient space usage<br />

and provide necessary laboratory renovation for new faculty and research groups with expanding needs.<br />

The highest priorities are renovation of laboratory space for new faculty hires and expansion of research<br />

laboratories and graduate student offices in the Watervliet Incubator. Other activities include creation<br />

of space for the <strong>SoE</strong> Undergraduate Advising Center, and both short- and long-term space planning for<br />

the Ricketts Building and space made available with the construction of the new Center for Science.<br />

Specific priorities associated with faculty hiring:<br />

� Availability of suitable office/suite space in CII and CBIS for Constellation hires<br />

� Timely renovation of laboratory space for incoming new faculty hires<br />

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE (UTILIZATION<br />

AND NEEDS)<br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, Division of the Chief Information Officer, Strategic<br />

Communications and External Relations<br />

Beginning in FY10, in part due to reductions in staff, the <strong>SoE</strong> transitioned to a more flexible IT and web<br />

support mode of operation in which IT resources are shared amongst departments and the Dean’s<br />

office. As discussed earlier, this continues to work well; however, additional resources may be required<br />

in the coming year. Additional priorities for <strong>FY14</strong> include the consolidation of servers into central<br />

locations in the JEC, continued updates to the many <strong>SoE</strong> websites, and development of new sites for<br />

graduate student recruiting, student and alumni profiles, and outreach programs.<br />

As laptop computers have become more common for use by faculty in classrooms, the number of<br />

permanent computers in the classrooms has been reduced. The use of laptops by teaching faculty<br />

allows us to maintain state-of-the-art computer tools for instruction and demonstration in the<br />

classroom and will only become more popular in the years ahead. However this raises the issue of how<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 63<br />

laptops can be purchased/replaced periodically. Many federal grants expressly prohibit the purchase of<br />

computers. Thus, faculty supported by these federal grants are unable to purchase new computers (for<br />

themselves or their students) using grant funds. In light of limits on returned indirect to faculty PI’s and<br />

severe reductions to non-salary budgets, the <strong>Institute</strong> should consider a program to enable periodic<br />

replacement of faculty computers. Such programs are common at other major research universities and<br />

a survey of best practices could easily be conducted. Failure to enable periodic upgrades of computers<br />

used by faculty for teaching and research will severely impact our ability to be effective, competitive, and<br />

successful at either.<br />

Many colleges and universities (as well as high schools) are introducing smart boards into their<br />

classrooms. With both internet connectivity and touch screen capabilities, smart board<br />

technology opens up new opportunities for instruction and interactive learning. Piloting some of these<br />

smart boards in our studio classrooms would provide an opportunity to test their efficacy within our<br />

teaching and learning culture at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. A program to install smart board systems in selected<br />

classrooms should be implemented in the coming year. It would be most effective if this were done at<br />

the <strong>Institute</strong> level, in appropriate classrooms across the academic schools, however a smaller program<br />

within the School of Engineering can be considered if only limited funding for such a program is available<br />

at this time. Upgrading the technology bases and capabilities of our instructional facilities is essential to<br />

delivering a world-class engineering education.<br />

CAPITAL FUND REQUEST<br />

In conjunction with the strategic research initiatives and enhancement of curriculum, we request the<br />

following capital fund investments in <strong>FY14</strong>.<br />

Research (see: Appendix B, available separately)<br />

(1) Remainder of Phase 2 of the Nanoscale Characterization equipment investment of a Field<br />

emission transmission electron microscope equipped for three-dimensional and cryogenic<br />

capabilities for biological tomography, among other applications. Total funds requested: $1.0M<br />

(2) GaN Metal Organic Chemical Vapor Deposition (MOCVD) and back-end manufacturing<br />

equipment for the Smart Lighting NSF ERC, supporting advanced Nitride materials science,<br />

device design, and sustainable energy systems development. This is a major core equipment<br />

need to build <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s reputation as a leader in the semiconductor foundation critical to<br />

sustainability research in smart lighting, smart grid and advanced solar systems concepts. This<br />

capability facilitates studies in the fundamental chemistry and physics of Nitride materials and<br />

devices and supports advanced device and nitride systems engineering development work. The<br />

commitment, estimated at $2,500,000 ($1,000,000 in <strong>FY14</strong> and $1,500,000 in FY15; 30%<br />

industry cost-share will be sought on the FY15 equipment purchase). Total requested costs:<br />

$1.9M over two years.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 64<br />

Education (see: Teaching Laboratory Upgrades, p. 28)<br />

(3) ABET-critical undergraduate laboratory improvements, as identified in, and since, the last ABET<br />

review and must be completed prior to the next scheduled evaluation visit (Fall 2013). For FY13 it<br />

was decided that these expenditures be spread over multiple years, with Phase-1 ($600K of the<br />

$1.528M requested) provided in FY13. The remainder ($928K), or Phase-2 of that request is<br />

contained herein. We must undertake these teaching laboratory enhancements during the<br />

Summer 2013 time period of <strong>FY14</strong> so that all these essential upgrades are completed by our next<br />

ABET site visit in Fall 2013 (which could be scheduled as early as September 1). Total funds<br />

requested: $928,000.<br />

a. BMED teaching laboratory, and capstone (culminating experience) design course upgrades:<br />

BMED-4010 Biomedical Engineering Laboratory equipment upgrades (replacement of<br />

obsolete equipment, provide equipment with new capabilities which better represent<br />

modern instrumentation encountered in practice) - $14,740; BMED-4600 Biomedical<br />

Engineering Design – Power supply; Measurement and analysis sensors; cabling and<br />

adapters upgrade - $4,084. Phase-2 Total: $18,824.<br />

b. CBE teaching laboratories (CHME-4150, 4160, 4170) equipment upgrades, renovation, and<br />

equipment repair. Renovation - $14,351; Repairs - $1,459; Upgrades - $21,131. Phase-2<br />

Total: $36,941.<br />

c. CIVL and ENVE undergraduate laboratory renovations and development. Structural lab<br />

upgrade (CIVL 2570, CIVL-4070, CIVL-4080) $103,210. New transportation lab (CIVL-2030,<br />

CIVL 4660) $99,500. Environment engineering lab upgrade (ENVE-2110, ENVE-4150, ENVE-<br />

4180, ENVE-4350) $35,900. Phase-2 Total: $238,610.<br />

d. CORE Engineering undergraduate equipment upgrade. Replacement of essential equipment<br />

serving multiple courses (ENGR-1300, ENGR-2050, ENGR-4710, ENVE-4720, and Capstone<br />

Design course for multiple degree programs including AERO, MECL, and BMED) Phase-2<br />

Total: $62,677.<br />

d. ECSE instructional laboratory renovations and upgrades. Electric power lab (ECSE-4130)<br />

upgrade of obsolete and outdated equipment - $119,513. ESCE computer studio (serves nine<br />

ECSE UG courses) upgrade of broken and obsolete equipment - $14,608. Phase-2 Total:<br />

134,127.<br />

f. ISE instructional laboratory computing equipment upgrade (ISE-4220, ISE-4600, ISE-4270).<br />

Total: $1,024.<br />

g. MANE undergraduate laboratory renovation, upgrade, and development. Thermal fluids<br />

laboratory renovation and upgrade (MANE-4020), $72,585; AERO Fluid dynamics laboratory<br />

upgrade (MANE-4910) $29,900; Mechanical systems lab upgrade (MANE-4040, MANE-4260)<br />

$128,312. Phase-2 Total: $230,797.<br />

h. MSE undergraduate laboratory upgrade in support of multiple required undergraduate<br />

courses (MTLE-4100, MTLE-4150, MTLE-4200, MTLE-4400, MTLE-4450). Total: $205,000.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 65<br />

(4) MILL /CII High Bay Mezzanine Expansion. Total funds requested: $1,022,000 (estimate prepared<br />

by Claude Rounds’ office in summer 2012 and includes all architectural and engineering design<br />

work, fees and permits, and contingency)<br />

Safety<br />

(5) LINAC facility security improvements including perimeter fencing and lighting. Total: $64,000.<br />

Administration<br />

(6) Capital improvements to the space identified for the Engineering Advising Center. Total<br />

estimated cost: $50,000.<br />

Total <strong>SoE</strong> Capital Fund Request in <strong>FY14</strong>: $3,464,000<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 66<br />

INSTITUTE ADVANCEMENT INITIATIVES, GOALS FOR <strong>SoE</strong><br />

Key Portfolios: School of Engineering, <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement<br />

We will work with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement (IA) to implement effectively and<br />

responsibly the new constituent-based development model in <strong>SoE</strong>. The Dean will<br />

work closely with the Vice President of IA and the Senior Advancement Officer (for<br />

<strong>SoE</strong>) to cultivate and steward new gifts to the <strong>Institute</strong>, the School, and the <strong>SoE</strong><br />

departments, labs, programs, and initiatives, as approved by the President. We will<br />

maintain focus on gifts that support the <strong>Institute</strong>’s highest priorities: (1) support for<br />

students (scholarships, fellowships), (2) support for faculty (Fund for Faculty<br />

Excellence to enable and realize the President’s immediate goals for faculty growth),<br />

and (3) unrestricted funds to support the President’s highest priorities and new<br />

initiatives for the campus, as laid out in the recently refreshed <strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.<br />

The following “fundamental tenets” have been established as we develop and implement the new<br />

constituent development model within the School of Engineering. These tenets will drive our<br />

advancement agenda in the School.<br />

� <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is an elite technological research university ranked among the best in the United<br />

States.<br />

� <strong>Rensselaer</strong> is increasingly dependent on significant philanthropic support to continue to attract<br />

the best faculty and provide a world-class education to our students.<br />

� As tuition has had to rise, we are committed to providing more financial aid to deserving<br />

students to ensure access to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. Thus, actual tuition revenue supports a lower<br />

percentage of what it costs to deliver a <strong>Rensselaer</strong> education.<br />

� We must partner with our most visionary and supportive alumni to ensure (1) <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

remains accessible to talented and highly motivated students from underrepresented minority<br />

groups and from families with limited financial means, and (2) <strong>Rensselaer</strong> remains competitive<br />

with the world’s top technological research universities and continues its ascension among this<br />

elite group.<br />

The Dean of Engineering is fully engaged in development efforts on behalf of the School and the<br />

<strong>Institute</strong>. The Dean has worked effectively with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement to identify and foster strategic<br />

relationships with alumni and corporate partners. The Dean also works, as requested, in support of<br />

development efforts on behalf of the President’s Office or the broader <strong>Institute</strong>.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 67<br />

In FY11, based on recommendations put forward by the Dean of Engineering to the President, the<br />

School of Engineering was approved 16 to engage in strategic fundraising activities aimed at developing<br />

new resources for (1) students, (2) faculty, (3) programs, and (4) facilities. A new constituent-based<br />

(decentralized) model for advancement was approved to be implemented in the School of Engineering<br />

in early 2011. In fall 2011, a new Senior Advancement Officer for the School of Engineering was hired.<br />

These three pivotal changes marked a significant and exciting change for the School of Engineering.<br />

Where appropriate, and where <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement identifies suitable opportunities, department<br />

heads or chaired professors in the School of Engineering are being asked to engage in development<br />

efforts. This new model for development at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> offers the greatest promise for gifts in support of<br />

specific departmental initiatives or programs. In many cases, alumni prefer to build relationships directly<br />

with department heads. Finally, this model is enabling department heads to develop recurring support<br />

(much needed discretionary funds) for their department. In all cases, department heads will work<br />

directly with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement. The Dean will become engaged where appropriate but will remain<br />

fully informed of all development efforts across the School.<br />

In addition to the <strong>SoE</strong> partnership opportunities proposed and subsequently approved in FY11, the<br />

following additional priorities are being proposed for the School of Engineering:<br />

Advanced Manufacturing Programs at <strong>Rensselaer</strong><br />

In spring 2012, we launched the Manufacturing Innovation Learning Laboratory (MILL). Focused on<br />

educating the next generation of manufacturing leaders and pioneers, the MILL builds upon the success<br />

of its predecessor, the Advanced Manufacturing Laboratory (AML). The evolution of the AML to MILL<br />

reflects the need to train future manufacturing leaders in manufacturing innovation, advanced<br />

manufacturing methods, and nanomanufacturing.<br />

Key to the MILL’s success will be the creation, in <strong>FY14</strong>, of the Manufacturing Processes Lab (MPL) with<br />

resources to support undergraduate and graduate-level advanced manufacturing classes, a common<br />

teaching/meeting space for all manufacturing-related courses, an additive manufacturing center, and a<br />

common large project space.<br />

Starting in summer 2012, we engaged in pre-construction talks and planning meetings with leadership in<br />

the Office of the Vice President of Administration. We also have been developing a business model and<br />

a resource development model (built around both corporate and individual support) for the MILL.<br />

The Center for Automation Technologies and Systems (CATS) and the MILL sit in contiguous space in the<br />

CII, but have reached capacity and some of the facilities for both (including office space) are elsewhere<br />

on campus. There is a strategic opportunity to renovate the manufacturing infrastructure on campus<br />

and create a state-of-the-art research and education manufacturing facility. The School of Engineering<br />

16 Gift categories for the School of Engineering and its academic departments were approved by the President<br />

March 15, 2010. The Deans and Department Heads in the School of Engineering are working closely with <strong>Institute</strong><br />

Advancement to pursue support within these approved guidelines.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 68<br />

has been in discussions with the Office of Vice President of Administration in 2012 to forward-plan space<br />

renovations in CII for the MILL. The expansion proposal (vetted and approved in concept in summer<br />

2012) is being shared with selected alumni and corporate partners to seek both engagement and<br />

support. Funds to renovate the CII are expected to come from a combination of <strong>Institute</strong> support<br />

(capital requests) and philanthropic support (both individual and corporate). Funds for the operation<br />

and maintenance of the MILL are expected to come from a combination of philanthropic support<br />

(including in-kind equipment donations) and project sponsorship (using a model similar to that used in<br />

the O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Lab, or MDL).<br />

The advancement opportunities listed below would allow us to (1) invest in targeted equipment for<br />

emerging technologies including nanomanufacturing, (2) regularly upgrade equipment, (3) create a<br />

space that facilitates the integration of manufacturing research and education, and (4) support<br />

continuing education of the technical staff in these facilities.<br />

� Endowment (and naming) of the Manufacturing Innovation and Learning Laboratory, $2.5M<br />

($500K immediate investment in capital improvements, and $2M permanent endowment)<br />

� Endowment (and naming) of the Center for Automation Technologies and Systems (CATS), $5M<br />

Endowed Center of Excellence: the “Alumni Giants” model<br />

The <strong>Institute</strong> has a long history of successful graduates who have risen to the top of their fields, who<br />

have led major corporations, and who have had significant impacts on the nation and the world. Many<br />

of these giants in their fields have inspired others to reach higher and achieve success themselves. Their<br />

inspiration and mentorship is often fondly remembered by those students, young engineers, and<br />

colleagues whose lives have been touched.<br />

In discussions with alumni/ae, we have come to realize the extent to which our alumni can be rallied<br />

around one of these giants in the field who either graduated from <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, taught at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, or<br />

(in some cases) both. Alumni/ae may be motivated to support a larger (collective) gift to honor this<br />

individual. The goal of such a gift would be to successfully engage a small number of large gifts ($250K or<br />

larger) around a common theme. (This is not intended as a “crowd sourcing” model of alumni giving in<br />

which a very large number of small gifts are collected, as might be typical in an annual fund model.)<br />

As an example, we have been speaking with alumni/ae having an interest in a making a gift to honor Dr.<br />

Robery G. Loewy ‘47, former Provost and <strong>Institute</strong> Professor at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>, now emeritus professor at<br />

Georgia <strong>Institute</strong> of Technology, member of the National Academy of Engineering, and a giant in the<br />

field of rotary wing aircraft design.<br />

A collective $3M gift (combining endowment and spendable funds) could be used to support, e.g., four<br />

Patroon graduate fellowships or two full graduate fellowships ($2M, endowed), 10-15 undergraduate<br />

student researchers per year ($500K, endowed), and startup funds for a new faculty member ($500K,<br />

spendable). In another case, the collective $3M gift could be used to support, e.g., an endowed career<br />

development professorship ($1.5M, endowed), the startup funds for this new faculty member ($500K,<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 69<br />

spendable), one Patroon graduate fellowship ($500K, endowed), and two Patroon undergraduate<br />

scholarships ($500K, endowed).<br />

Student Leadership Initiatives: the Archer Center<br />

We propose to raise new funds in support of the Archer Center 17 to (1) increase the permanent<br />

endowment of the center to become less reliant on funding through the <strong>Institute</strong>’s annual budgeting<br />

process, (2) expand the offerings and programs in the Center to include leadership training<br />

opportunities for graduate students, and (3) increase the size of the Archer Center teaching staff to<br />

accommodate program growth. A large, permanent endowment could further endow a new Director<br />

position, provide funds for all print and web informational materials, support travel costs for invited<br />

speakers, and support the creation and management of a Student Leadership Training conference held<br />

(e.g.) every other year at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. New funds in support of student leadership initiatives (through the<br />

Archer Center) will enable us to solidify our leadership position in this important area 18 and properly<br />

promote this truly unique curricular and co-curricular set of experiences afforded to our students.<br />

� Support for the Archer Center for Student Leadership Development, non-endowed fund<br />

� Permanent endowment for program expansion in the Archer Center, $5M minimum<br />

Design Initiative: Multidisciplinary Design Lab (MDL)<br />

The MDL celebrated its 10 th anniversary last year and plans are being developed to expand the reach of<br />

this innovative facility by accommodating a greater number of undergraduate students (from additional<br />

departments) and including multidisciplinary design experiences for our graduate students. In addition,<br />

as the number of students gravitating toward service-based design projects increases, there is a need to<br />

develop a sustained source of funding for these often unsponsored projects.<br />

� “Build a Better World” MDL Project Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed (named) “Build a Better World” Design Fund, $1M minimum<br />

Joint Engineering/Architecture Initiatives<br />

Building on the success of the Bedford Professorship, and in anticipation of additional joint activities and<br />

programs between <strong>SoE</strong> and SoA, funds will be sought to support practicing architects and engineers as<br />

“Professors of Practice” – bringing real world experience, challenges, and design opportunities to our<br />

classrooms – and enable more of our students to participate in faculty-led study abroad programs.<br />

� Bedford Programs Support Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed (named) Visiting Professorship in Design, $2M minimum<br />

17 School of Engineering students participate in the Professional Development (PD) sequence of courses offered by<br />

the Archer Center and many of our students elect to participate in Archer’s highly successful Professional<br />

Leadership Program (PLP).<br />

18 The Center for Student Leadership Development at <strong>Rensselaer</strong> was created in 1989 (renamed the Archer Center<br />

in 1991), while the Gordon-MIT Engineering Leadership Program was created at MIT in 2009.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 70<br />

Engineering Advising and Academic Services Office<br />

In response to the continued rise in student-faculty ratios, and in order to deliver critical services with<br />

fewer staff and meet our commitment to delivering a world-class engineering education (in all<br />

dimensions), the leadership of the School has determined that our students would be better served by a<br />

common advising experience during the first two years. A centralized advising model for the School<br />

would (1) ensure consistency in quality of advising, (2) engage advisors equitably from across the<br />

School’s departments, (3) enable and encourage efficiencies in utilization of faculty and staff to provide<br />

essential advising responsibilities, (4) provide students greater flexibility and access to high quality<br />

advising throughout the academic year, and (5) help the School highlight and promote the full range of<br />

academic programs and majors available to students.<br />

The current space used in JEC for all undergraduate engineering advising (new students and transfers)<br />

and management of the common (“Core”) curriculum is inadequate. This space is not well configured to<br />

accommodate the flow of students this office routinely handles. As the number of engineering students<br />

has grown over the years, and the responsibilities of this office and its staff have increased, we are<br />

increasingly space-constrained for these critical student-centered operations. We propose to expand<br />

this office into part of the space being used as a student lounge, resulting in a smaller lounge area and a<br />

significantly expanded engineering academic services office.<br />

� Endowed (named) Engineering Advising and Student Services Office, $2.5M ($500K facility<br />

upgrade funds + $2M permanent endowment)<br />

Pre-College Education Initiatives<br />

Additional funding and permanent (endowed) support are needed to expand the School of Engineering<br />

K-12 outreach activities (focusing on urban schools and low-income communities) and further develop<br />

the Center for Initiatives in Pre-College Education (CIPCE) as a center operated jointly by the SoS and<br />

<strong>SoE</strong>. The plans for expanding CIPCE (programs, reach, and impact) are described elsewhere in this<br />

document.<br />

� Engineering Diversity Initiatives Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed (named) Engineering Diversity Initiatives Fund, $1M minimum (also listed below)<br />

� CIPCE Support Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed Center for Initiatives in Pre-College Education (CIPCE), $2M minimum<br />

Diversity Initiatives: Recruitment and Retention<br />

Sustaining funds are sought to enable new and more aggressive initiatives aimed at improving diversity<br />

among our students (entering and graduating from our programs) and faculty in the School of<br />

Engineering. Specific initiatives are described elsewhere in this document. Funds to be used for: (1)<br />

undergraduate scholarships (need-based), (2) graduate fellowships (supplements to assistantships), (3)<br />

invited seminars (i.e., best practices on creating a diverse student or faculty body), (4), Bridge Program<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 71<br />

support or other summer preparatory/enrichment programs in <strong>SoE</strong>, (5) faculty recruiting funds, and (6)<br />

faculty mentoring program support.<br />

� Engineering Diversity Initiatives Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed (named) Engineering Diversity Initiatives Fund, $1M minimum (also listed above)<br />

Named Chairs, Professorships<br />

The School of Engineering currently has two levels of endowed chairs, one at the senior level and the<br />

other at the career development level. Each is endowed at a different level and, historically, the<br />

Scholar’s Fund provided to the chair holder also varied by level. Over the last few years, as career<br />

development chairs were used for senior faculty (i.e., as retention mechanisms when senior endowed<br />

chairs were not available), there have been inconsistencies in the <strong>Institute</strong>’s awarding of Scholar’s Funds<br />

to chair holders. The President has mandated that this be resolved so that all endowed chair holders at<br />

the rank of Full Professor receive the same Scholar’s Fund amount annually. These funds are provided by<br />

the <strong>Institute</strong> to the <strong>SoE</strong> during the annual budgeting process.<br />

In order to create additional recruiting and retention mechanisms for exceptional faculty, at both midcareer<br />

and senior ranks, we propose to unify the Endowed Chair model (eliminate future Career<br />

Development Chairs) and establish Endowed Professorships. We also propose developing fixed-term<br />

(non-endowed) Career Development Professorships which will enable us to retain fast-rising junior<br />

faculty.<br />

� Endowed (named) Chair, $3.5M minimum (this is the existing chair model, $30K annual Scholar’s<br />

Fund provided to chair holder), plus funds for faculty startup<br />

� Endowed (named) Professorship, $2.0M minimum ($20K annual Scholar’s Fund provided to<br />

professorship holder), plus funds for faculty startup<br />

� Fixed-term (non-endowed) <strong>SoE</strong> or Department Career Development Professorship, $50K<br />

annually for four years ($20K annual Scholar’s Fund provided to professorship holder)<br />

Unit-Based Graduate Fellowships<br />

Graduate Fellowships currently are administered centrally; that is, awards are made by the Graduate<br />

School. While this may appear to offer efficiencies, it is not the ideal model for maximizing the utility of<br />

these valuable recruiting tools. Graduate fellowships should be awarded by the departments as their<br />

faculty are the most knowledgeable about the applicants’ credentials, interests, and career goals. The<br />

departments are also in the best position to evaluate alignment of student interests with faculty<br />

research activities. As we seek to grow the size, quality, and diversity of our doctoral programs – and<br />

face increasing competition from other top universities for the best students – we must enable the<br />

departments to engage fully in the recruitment process. To that end, we propose to raise new fellowship<br />

funds that will be administered, in full accordance with <strong>Institute</strong> policies on graduate support, to top<br />

prospective doctoral students.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 72<br />

� Department-based Graduate Fellowship Fund, non-endowed<br />

� Endowed (named) Department-based Patroon Graduate Fellowship, $400K<br />

� Endowed (named) Department-based Full Graduate Fellowship, $1M<br />

Reigniting the Flame Initiative<br />

Funding is sought, both immediate and permanent (endowment), to support the Reigniting the Flame<br />

initiative in the School of Engineering. The two key program elements for which funding will be sought<br />

are (1) the <strong>SoE</strong> Educational Innovation Fund, and (2) the <strong>SoE</strong> Master Teacher Fund. Gift funds for<br />

educational innovation will be used to support faculty-driven efforts to create and develop new<br />

pedagogy, new methods of instructional delivery and/or to fuse classroom and experiential (lab-based,<br />

hands-on) learning, and new learning laboratories. The Master Teacher Model (currently being<br />

considered) will identify, recognize, and support the very best teaching faculty in the School of<br />

Engineering annually. Modest funds will be provided to this very select group of faculty (selected<br />

annually) to be used (e.g.) to support undergraduate or graduate teaching assistants who can help<br />

develop new learning modules. Master Teachers will commit to making themselves available to <strong>SoE</strong><br />

faculty as a resource and will conduct periodic workshops for our faculty and graduate teaching<br />

assistants. Master Teachers will be held up as examples of outstanding faculty.<br />

Better World Engineering Professorships<br />

As we continue to expand <strong>Rensselaer</strong>’s global reach and global impact, we seek opportunities to bring<br />

faculty from engineering schools in other countries to our campus, to engage them in our teaching and<br />

research activities, and to expose our students to the engineering challenges and opportunities in other<br />

parts of the world – specifically, those in developing nations. This is fully consistent with goals of the<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>, the objectives of the REACH program, and the motivation behind the Better World<br />

Engineering initiative launched in the School of Engineering last year 19 .<br />

An idea that has emerged as we seek to “bring the world to <strong>Rensselaer</strong>” at a time when international<br />

travel and study abroad opportunities are less and less accessible (due to high costs), is to bring scholars<br />

from engineering programs at universities in developing nations to our campus for a period of one<br />

semester or one academic year. During their visit, they would have a teaching load that includes one<br />

regularly taught course in the School of Engineering and one special topics course. They would also<br />

engage with a student project, team, professional society, or organization to advise them in an<br />

engineering service learning project related to a specific need in their home country. We refer to these<br />

visiting scholar-ambassadors as “Better World Engineering Visiting Professors.” We will continue to<br />

develop this new concept and work closely with <strong>Institute</strong> Advancement to raise new gift funds for this<br />

important initiative. Our goal is to be able to invite our first BWE Visiting Professor by 2015. At steady<br />

state, we envision this program supporting 1-2 visiting scholars per year.<br />

19 See news release: http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=2869; BWE webpage: www.scer.rpi.edu/bwe/<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 73<br />

Endowed Professor-of-Practice Teaching Faculty<br />

Some engineering disciplines require design instruction/experience that often is better provided by<br />

highly credentialed practicing engineers. Coupled with the challenges we are facing in select programs<br />

with very high student/faculty ratios, it is both pedagogically appropriate and economical to consider<br />

strategically adding Professors of Practice (newly created positions, non tenure accruing, fixed-term) in<br />

selected programs. The Professor-of-Practice (PoP) model is working exceptionally well in the<br />

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE), with one PoP teaching upper level electives in<br />

transportation engineering. This faculty member consistently receives some of the highest evaluations<br />

and has become an invaluable member of the department’s regular faculty, serving on committees,<br />

advising students, and supervising design projects. It is proposed that we expand this model, first in CEE<br />

by adding a PoP in each of the other three areas (structural, geotechnical, environmental), and later in<br />

MANE and MSE. As E&G resources are limited and it is unlikely we can reallocate more than a small<br />

percentage of funds to support such hires, we must seek extramural support (either fixed term or<br />

permanent). We will work with the <strong>Institute</strong> (Provost, VP Finance, VP of Human Resources) as<br />

appropriate and where possible to optimize existing salary funds that could be used for such positions.<br />

But the larger source of support will have to come from new gift funds. We will work closely with<br />

<strong>Institute</strong> Advancement to raise new funds to support the hiring of Professors of Practice in carefully<br />

selected programs within the School of Engineering. Such a model is well utilized by many of the best<br />

engineering schools, particularly those located within a metropolitan area.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

ACTION ITEM: Seek approval for these new gift<br />

categories as amendments to list approved by<br />

the President in October 2010.


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 74<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

APPENDICES<br />

Appendix A. SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING DATA, October 2012<br />

Appendix B. SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH INITIATIVES [available separately]<br />

ALSO AVAILABLE SEPARATELY:<br />

VOLUME II, containing <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>s from the following units within <strong>SoE</strong>:<br />

Department of Biomedical Engineering<br />

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering<br />

Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering<br />

Department of Electrical, Computer, and Systems Engineering<br />

Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering<br />

Department of Materials Science and Engineering<br />

Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering<br />

Office of Undergraduate Education<br />

Office of Women in Engineering and Diversity<br />

O.T. Swanson Multidisciplinary Design Laboratory


APPENDIX A:<br />

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING DATA, October 2011


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 76<br />

7 Includes 156 Co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

TABLE 1: School of Engineering Overview Data, Fall 2005 - Fall 2011<br />

(Note: shaded figures represent <strong>Institute</strong> values or percentages of the <strong>Institute</strong>)<br />

FY 07<br />

Fall 06<br />

FY 08<br />

Fall 07<br />

FY 09<br />

Fall 08<br />

FY 10<br />

Fall 09<br />

FY 11<br />

Fall 10<br />

FY 12<br />

Fall 11<br />

Annual Research Expenditures<br />

($M) 1 52.2 49.2 52.8 46.9 46.7 51.6<br />

Tenured & Tenure Track Faculty 2 146 139 143 134 136 132<br />

Research Expenditures:Faculty ($K) 356.2 354.0 369.2 360.0 343 391<br />

Graduate Enrollment 2 (FT/PT),<br />

Masters and Doctoral 530/48 502/44 506/56 491/50 494/58 480/41<br />

Graduate Students: T/TT Faculty 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.7 4.1 4.0<br />

Masters Students (FT) 3 84 84 72 46 40 32<br />

Doctoral Students (FT) 3 446 418 434 445 454 448<br />

School Funded Graduate Students<br />

(TA+SRA+IRA) 184 184 192 203 198 205<br />

Externally supported Graduate<br />

Students (RA) 210 218 231 209 200 200<br />

Graduate Students on Fellowship 29 35 29 27 46 46<br />

Master's Degrees Granted 4<br />

Doctoral Degrees Granted 4<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Undergraduate Enrollment 3<br />

126/358<br />

35%<br />

97/163<br />

60%<br />

3042/5148<br />

59%<br />

156/384<br />

41%<br />

86/158<br />

55%<br />

3007/5119<br />

59%<br />

131/313<br />

42%<br />

66/131<br />

51%<br />

3087/5367<br />

58%<br />

151/374<br />

40%<br />

77/151<br />

51%<br />

3221 5 /5539<br />

58%<br />

160/416<br />

38%<br />

71/131<br />

54%<br />

3077 6 /5348<br />

58%<br />

133/359<br />

37%<br />

74/136<br />

54%<br />

3147 7 /5240<br />

60%<br />

<strong>SoE</strong> Undergraduate:T/TT Faculty 20.8 21.6 21.6 24.0 22.8 23.8<br />

Bachelor's Degrees Granted 4<br />

1 From data prepared for USN&WR Survey<br />

685/1244<br />

55%<br />

716/1143<br />

63%<br />

569/1076<br />

53%<br />

2 From Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Data Book 2008/09<br />

3 From Registrar's Enrollment Statistics<br />

4 From Registrar's Degree Statistics<br />

5 Includes 166 Co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

6 Includes 178 Co-terminal Masters (BS+MS) students<br />

739/1265<br />

58%<br />

746/1281<br />

58%<br />

710/1244<br />

58%


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 77<br />

University<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

Undergraduate<br />

Enrollment<br />

(FT)<br />

Table 2. Engineering Data - Fall 2008*<br />

Graduate<br />

Enrollment<br />

(FT)<br />

Tenured-Tenure<br />

Track Faculty<br />

(FT)<br />

Undergraduate<br />

Enrollment/<br />

Faculty<br />

Undergraduate/<br />

Graduate<br />

Enrollment<br />

<strong>Rensselaer</strong> 3077 552 141 21.8 5.6<br />

Cornell 3051 1657 236 12.9 1.8<br />

Lehigh 1584 560 110 14.4 2.8<br />

Carnegie Mellon 1593 1397 133 12.0 1.1<br />

Rice 902 553 107 8.4 1.6<br />

Stanford 2401 3373 239 10.0 0.7<br />

MIT 1837 2706 366 5.0 0.7<br />

Johns Hopkins 1405 2703 136 10.3 0.5<br />

Northwestern 1425 1254 173 8.2 1.1<br />

Columbia 1436 1657 161 8.9 0.9<br />

Georgia Tech 7165 3572 447 16.0 2.0<br />

Illinois - Urbana 5943 2539 416 14.3 2.3<br />

Purdue 6601 2231 305 21.6 3.0<br />

UT-Austin 4749 2099 259 18.3 2.3<br />

Texas A&M 6561 2698 349 18.8 2.4<br />

UC Berkeley 3173 1774 246 12.9 1.8<br />

UC Davis 2719 1093 210 13.0 2.5<br />

Michigan-Ann Arbor 5100 2518 332 15.4 2.0<br />

Virginia Tech 5815 1936 338 17.2 3.0<br />

Duke University 1173 577 95 12.3 2.0<br />

*From ASEE 2008 Edition "Profiles of Engineering and Engineering Technology Colleges"


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 78<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

Table 3. School of Engineering Faculty (2006-present)<br />

FULL TIME TENURED/TENURE-TRACK FACULTY<br />

Fall<br />

2006<br />

Fall<br />

2007<br />

Fall<br />

2008<br />

Fall<br />

2009<br />

Fall<br />

2010<br />

Fall<br />

2011<br />

Fall<br />

2012<br />

Total 146 139 143 134 136 132 135<br />

Tenured 107 103 108 104 103 102 109<br />

CLINICAL FACULTY/LECTURERS (*includes gap clinicals)<br />

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

BME 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 1.5 1.5<br />

CBE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0<br />

CEE 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0<br />

ISE 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0<br />

ECSE 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0<br />

MSE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0<br />

MANE 2.5 3.5 4.5 7.5 9.3 8.8 8.8<br />

Total 7.5 8.5 8.5 14.0* 16.3* 15.3* 15.3*<br />

FACULTY RETIREMENTS/SEPARATIONS/NON-RENEWALS<br />

BME<br />

CBE<br />

CEE<br />

ISE<br />

ECSE 1<br />

MSE 2<br />

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

1 1 1<br />

1 1 1 1<br />

1 1<br />

MANE 2 4 1<br />

1<br />

2<br />

1<br />

1 1<br />

Total 5 6 4 2 3 4 1<br />

ACCEPTED POSITIONS AT ANOTHER INSTITUTION<br />

BME<br />

CBE<br />

CEE<br />

ISE<br />

ECSE<br />

MSE 2 2<br />

MANE<br />

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

1 1 1 1<br />

1 1<br />

1<br />

1 1<br />

1<br />

2<br />

1<br />

2 4 2<br />

Total 2 7 3 3 6 4 2<br />

Total<br />

departures: 7 13 7 5 9 8 3<br />

1<br />

1


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 79<br />

Table 4. School of Engineering Student Enrollments (2006-present)<br />

UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT* (Note: in the case of dual-major students, on the first major is counted)<br />

Department 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT<br />

BME 220 249 321 345 368 379 376<br />

CBE 143 148 226 299 301 288 313<br />

CEE 227 241 313 332 326 311 311<br />

ISE 101 106 116 125 129 131 142<br />

ECSE 530 469 592 588 541 500 525<br />

MSE 48 67 86 98 87 92 99<br />

MANE 906 958 1200 1206 1167 1120 1128<br />

Undeclared 866 769 233 228 157 165 213<br />

Eng. Sci. 1 - - - 1 - -<br />

Total UG 3042 3007 3087 3221 3077 2986 3107<br />

GRADUATE SCHOOL ENROLLMENT – MASTERS*<br />

Department 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT<br />

BME 3 1 4 2 9 3 4 1 4 0 6 0 10 1<br />

CBE 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0<br />

CEE 9 0 7 2 7 6 3 4 1 2 4 0 3 3<br />

ISE* 3 1 5 1 2 4 2 3 5 2 5 2 2 1<br />

ECSE 39 6 41 9 24 11 12 9 11 6 7 5 8 2<br />

MSE 2 8 5 5 5 3 4 4 3 4 0 2 4 3<br />

MANE 26 2 20 5 25 6 20 6 15 7 10 5 7 4<br />

Total Master's 84 20 84 25 72 34 46 29 40 22 32 14 34 14<br />

GRADUATE SCHOOL ENROLLMENT – DOCTORAL*<br />

Department 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br />

FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT<br />

BME 22 0 20 0 22 1 23 1 33 1 32 1 40 1<br />

CBE 75 1 66 0 69 1 66 0 66 5 65 1 82 3<br />

CEE 37 1 36 2 32 1 35 2 30 3 36 1 32 1<br />

ISE 1 35 4 32 1 22 2 25 3 24 5 18 3 10 3<br />

ECSE 139 11 119 7 126 9 116 7 105 10 113 9 110 9<br />

MSE 34 2 43 0 46 0 50 0 55 3 57 2 54 3<br />

MANE 104 9 102 9 117 8 130 8 141 9 127 10 124 16<br />

Total Doctoral 446 28 418 19 434 22 445 21 454 36 448 27 452 36<br />

GRAND TOTALS 3620 3553 3649 3762 3629 3507 3643<br />

1 Eng Sci (master's/doctoral) students included with ISYE (formerly DSES)<br />

* From Registrar’s 5 th -week enrollment statistics<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 80<br />

School of Engineering<br />

Bachelor’s Degrees Conferred, 2008-2012<br />

Sorted by Department and Gender<br />

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 TOTAL<br />

Dept M F M F M F M F M F M F<br />

BMED 44 37 35 26 33 27 51 30 45 46 208 166<br />

CHBE 27 18 27 12 29 22 40 26 51 16 174 94<br />

CEE 71 21 41 17 52 27 60 29 62 28 286 122<br />

ISYE 22 7 21 8 32 16 27 15 21 12 123 58<br />

ECSE/EPOW 143 12 113 13 148 13 116 26 107 16 627 80<br />

EPHY/ESCI 3 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 8 0<br />

MANE 257 35 209 26 271 43 246 57 235 44 1,218 205<br />

MATL 15 4 13 5 15 10 14 8 21 6 78 33<br />

Total 582 134 462 107 581 158 555 191 542 168 2,722 758<br />

% Female 18.7% 18.8% 21.4% 25.6% 23.7% 21.8%<br />

In 2010, 25.6% (191 of 746) engineering degrees were awarded to women compared to 18.2%<br />

reported nationally by NSF. [SOURCE: National Science Foundation/Division of Science Resources Statistics;<br />

Women, Minorities, & Persons with Disabilities in S&E, Bachelor’s Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Sex,<br />

Race/Ethnicity, and Citizenship, 1999-2010, Table 5-13]<br />

ASEE’s Engineering by the Numbers reports that in 2011, 18.4% of bachelor’s degrees awarded in<br />

engineering were awarded to women, compared to 23.7% (168 of 710) engineering degrees<br />

awarded to women at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. [SOURCE: www.asee.org/papers-andpublications/publications/college-profiles/2011-profile-engineering-statistics.pdf]<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 81<br />

School of Engineering<br />

Bachelor’s Degrees Conferred, 2008-2012<br />

Sorted by Department and Ethnicity<br />

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 TOTAL<br />

Dept M F M F M F M F M F M F<br />

BMED 44 37 35 26 33 27 51 30 45 46 208 166<br />

Black 2 3 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 2 7 8<br />

Hispanic 0 3 1 3 1 0 5 1 6 3 13 10<br />

Native Am 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

CHBE 27 18 27 12 29 22 40 26 51 16 174 94<br />

Black 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 5 3<br />

Hispanic 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 0 1 1 7 7<br />

Native Am 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0<br />

CIVL/ENVE 71 21 41 17 52 27 60 29 62 28 286 122<br />

Black 4 4 2 0 0 2 4 1 2 0 12 7<br />

Hispanic 2 1 1 1 4 4 3 2 10 2 20 10<br />

Native Am 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

DSES/MGTE 22 7 21 8 32 16 27 15 21 12 123 58<br />

Black 2 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 1 6 4<br />

Hispanic 1 1 1 0 4 1 1 2 3 1 10 5<br />

Native Am 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

ECSE/EPOW 143 12 113 13 148 13 116 26 107 16 627 80<br />

Black 7 3 5 1 3 2 2 1 3 2 20 9<br />

Hispanic 8 0 7 3 12 1 7 0 7 1 41 5<br />

Native Am 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0<br />

EPHY/ESCI 3 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 8 0<br />

Black 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

Hispanic 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1<br />

Native Am 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

MANE 257 35 309 26 271 43 246 57 235 44 1,218 205<br />

Black 7 1 3 0 3 0 2 3 1 1 16 5<br />

Hispanic 15 2 8 3 14 4 11 2 14 3 62 14<br />

Native Am 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 5 1<br />

MATL 15 4 13 5 15 10 14 8 21 6 78 33<br />

Black 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

Hispanic 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 2<br />

Native Am 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0<br />

Totals<br />

TOTAL M+F <strong>SoE</strong> 716 669 739 746 710 3,480<br />

Black 22 11 14 4 9 7 13 7 8 12 66 36<br />

Hispanic 27 8 20 12 38 13 29 9 41 11 154 54<br />

Native Am 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 7 1<br />

Total Minorities 51 19 36 16 49 20 42 17 50 23 227 91<br />

MINORITIES AS %<br />

of TOTAL <strong>SoE</strong><br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

70/716<br />

9.8%<br />

52/669<br />

7.7%<br />

69/739<br />

9.3%<br />

59/746<br />

7.9%<br />

73/710<br />

10.3%<br />

318/3,480<br />

9.1%<br />

In 2010, <strong>Rensselaer</strong> graduated 7.9% minorities (Black, Hispanic and Native American) with bachelor’s degrees in engineering compared to 12.7%<br />

(Black, Hispanic, Native American) reported nationally by NSF. [SOURCE: National Science Foundation/Division of Science Resources Statistics;<br />

Women, Minorities, & Persons with Disabilities in S&E, Bachelor’s Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Sex, Race/Ethnicity, and Citizenship, 1990-<br />

2010, Table 5-13]<br />

ASEE’s Engineering by the Numbers, reports 11.2% minorities (Blacks and Hispanics) earned bachelor’s degrees in engineering in 2011, compared<br />

to 10.3% at <strong>Rensselaer</strong>. [SOURCE: www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles/2011-profile-engineering-statistics.pdf]


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 82<br />

About the <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>—<br />

The <strong>FY14</strong> School of Engineering <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> is the fourth in a series of annual performance plans<br />

prepared by Dean Rosowsky. Each plan is vetted by the entire School of Engineering faculty and staff, with<br />

opportunity to provide input during a month-long open comment period each fall. Selected sections are also<br />

vetted by other constituencies including the Provost’s Deans Council and other <strong>Institute</strong> portfolio leaders,<br />

undergraduate and graduate students, the Dean’s Advisory Council, and selected other alumni. The annual<br />

performance plan document is prepared in July-September, feedback is generally solicited in October and<br />

November, and the plan is finalized in December.<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING


<strong>FY14</strong> <strong>SoE</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Page 83<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING<br />

RENSSELAER ENGINEERING

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!