General Faculty Meeting
October 30, 1997
Al Wallace opened the meeting at 3:00 and reviewed the actions of the Faculty Senate. He noted that the Faculty-Trustees dinner is scheduled for December 4.
Alan Desrochers spoke of the positive review of
Preface to the State of the Institute Address – President Pipes
In spite of our need to be efficient and cost-effective, our
greatest opportunity lies in growth. We
have to grow. Significant growth
initiatives are already underway in such programs as the interactive learning
program, the new campus-wide information system, the acquisition of the
These programs are made possible by the faculty. The Institute’s drive toward greater prestige and distinction is a result of the work of all faculty although particular credit should be extended to:
· Shyam Murarka, Toh Ming Lu, and Ron Gutmann for their work in forming the Center for Advanced Interconnect Science and Technology.
· Gary Gabriele, Debbie Kaminski and Bill Jennings and the Engineering faculty for their work on the new engineering curriculum.
· Bill Jennings and Edward Maby for creation of circuits and electronics studios.
· Cheryl Geisler, Brian Lonsway, Don Millard, Mark Sheppard, Al Wallace, John Kolb and Jack Wilson for their work toward the $2.4 million Intel Technology grant.
· David Porush, June Deery, Neil Rolnick, Cheryl Geisler and Branda Miller for the EMAC program.
· Selmer Bringsjord, Mike Kalsher and others for the development of the new Minds and Machines program.
· Mark Shephard for leading the team which obtained an $850,000 grant to improve our computer visualization capabilities.
Gene Simons and Shubu Xu for the ongoing
development of the
· Sandra Nierzwicki Bauer and her team for the renewal and growth of the Darrin Fresh Water Institute.
· Sandra Nierzwicki Bauer and the Biology Department for the development of the undergraduate bioinformatics program.
· Bob Spilker for his leadership of the biomedical program, which was recently recognized as the top department in the country.
Brian Lonsway for development of the
· Les Rubenfeld for his pre-college initiative and obtaining the $50,000 Bell Atlantic grant.
· Al Wallace, Alan Desrochers, Jon Newell, and Debbie Kaminski for providing their leadership on the Faculty Senate during this time.
The efforts of these people and other faculty are making a
real difference. We are now ranked in
the top 50 colleges and universities in the
Also, the freshman class is the largest in five years,
largely attributable to the faculty outreach in recruiting. Significantly, we had no summer “melt” of
applicants this year.
We are in an era of global growth – and yet mature industries. We need to understand opportunities around us and how to plan and focus, and leverage our strengths in terms of what the world needs. We cannot rely on philanthropy and must find ways to generate new net revenue. We need to strengthen our core in teaching and bring greater focus to research. We need new business plans and new funding sources. We especially need a strategy to pull all of this together and put it into action.
In summary, this is a very exciting time for the
Institute. The Institute is strong, growing,
and has great potential. We have a
significant opportunity to focus and strengthen the
L. Peters: There is a concern that partnerships often fail, and that we need careful planning and success criteria to be partners.
Pres. Pipes: Jack Wilson is heading a committee to develop how to be an effective partner, particularly with our first partners-to-be, American corporations.
B. Messler: Given so many cross-discipline activities, will the new unit-based budget system be a hindrance?
Pres. Pipes: Yes, but we can’t let it. Now, we want to keep things simple and school-based.
?: Where in the world will we go?
Response: Anywhere although the greatest opportunities today
appear to be in
S. Cozzens: Where is the goal of diversity in the priorities?
Pres. Pipes: Diversity and globalization are closely related. Diversity is a major Institute commitment… and will always be a commitment.
H. Roy: Do we do any market research to assess the needs for programs of this type?
Pres. Pipes: EMAC was an example of a program for which the
faculty simply felt thee was a strong need, although the Admissions Office also
does research. The
K. Connor: Attendance at this meeting is poor (about 40 people). How will you promote the excitement and spirit of these initiatives?
Pres. Pipes: We have Rensserv, the Poly and the Review – although my greatest challenge is how to work on the problem. I’ve had fireside chats with almost the entire faculty.
D. Ellison: What does the world “need” from us? I can think clean water, (other examples of environmental services)… we can deliver.
Pres. Pipes: Our students will produce that. We didn’t create the
The Provost Search – Bruce Watson
Bruce listed the members of the committee and said that they were currently following up on nominations. He reported that the committee has met with Deans, the Faculty Senate, students, chairs and directors across the Institute to solicit their wants and needs in this area.
Key criteria he noted that what they are using to drive the search include these:
· A leader and advocate of the faculty
· An accomplished scholar and experienced administrator
· An effective communicator
· A financial wizard
· A broad, interdisciplinary viewpoint
· A record of concern for students
· Capability to make decisions
· A commitment to diversity
· A commitment to being provost
He also indicated that the Committee expects to submit candidates to the President early next year and said he would heed Prof. Medicus’ advice to “take warning signs seriously.”
Respectfully submitted: Jeff Durgee