-
It
seems that the institution has learned from Phase 1, and is proposing
strategic changes and activities that focus on enhancing student
retention and an increase SEM
students pursuing graduate degrees. There also appears to be a strong
commitment from the administration to this project's goals, evidenced
by the institutionalization of several Phase 1 activities (such as the
required freshman orientation, the mandatory participation of all
students in clustered courses, the mandatory teaching portfolio, and
the creation of the Associate Dean's office for all entering freshmen).
MIE's
Phase 2 proposal expands and continues to institutionalize successful
activities initiated in Phase 1 (e.g., curriculum innovation, cluster
program, enhancement of ACES
facilities, research experience for undergraduates and faculty
development). Nevertheless, the proponents have not made a strong case
how the new approach will increase the number of SEM
graduates or the number of students pursuing graduate degrees in three
years during Phase 2. It seems that the institution should re-assess
and set realistic goals in terms of SEM
baccalaureate production and number of students pursuing graduate
degrees, that these goals are known by all stakeholders involved, and
that they are periodically assessed to provide feedback to stakeholders
and re-engineer strategies.
Workplan Performance: Administrative
The
transition of leadership from the Provost to a faculty member, Dr.
Benjamin Flores, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer
Engineering as PI with the Deans of the College of Engineering (Dr.
Andrew Swift) and the College of Science (Dr. Tom Brady) as Co PI comes
at a good time to more closely align the program elements where the
majority of the culture change is occurring. The PI will provide strong
and persuasive leadership. The Advisory Committee strongly supports the
change and the new PI. The reporting structure is to the Provost
providing the PI with the institutional support and resources necessary
to maintain/institutionalize change.
To further
strengthen the ties between the College of Science and the College of
Engineering, an Associate Dean of Science and Engineering, a
non-traditional appointment has been designated. This position directly
links the Colleges to the Entering Student Program, Circles of Learning
for Entering Students.
-
This MIE
project is fortunate to have an excellent External Advisory committee
that has devoted considerable time and effort throughout the evolution
of the project. The committee has a good balance of academic and
industrial people. The committee played a crucial role in the early
stages of the project by forcing the issue of expanding the coverage
beyond a pilot group. The committee seems to listen and respond rapidly
to the most important issues of the project without micromanaging the
operation. It should continue to play a significant role in advising on
aspects of a smoothly implementing significant systemic change during
the second Phase of the project. The chair of the advisory committee
has taken a central role in defining issues when necessary and has had
the support of other members who participate actively. The proactive
participation of this advisory committee in Phase 2 is one of the most
positive aspects of this proposal. The Advisory Committee could play an
important supportive role in the eventual full institutionalization of
the project. The most recent meeting of the Advisory Committee just
before the site visit was reported to have been significantly
productive.
-
To better transition students from the Entering Student Program to the major, MIE Phase 2 proposes to:
- Align and integrate the SEM
course materials, for example in biology and chemistry; and chemistry
and mineralogy/petrology and material science and engineering.
- Design lower division SEM curricular course blocks, i.e. interdisciplinary learning communities.
- Design a common core for three majors in engineering that will provide the background to all three programs.
These
changes should provide students with less redundancy, a roadmap to
understanding the different careers, an easier transition to the major
and more effective learning experiences beyond the crucial first year.
Reform efforts need to be expanded to all four years.
ACES and the expansion of ACES
is a positive force providing student support and a resource faculty
can use to enhance learning. The leadership team paid particular
attention to student needs and patterns of space use in planning for
the expansion.
A more aggressive program (i.e. more proactive rather than passive) will be initiated by CETaL
to support the curricular changes with pedagogical and multimedia
resources. Without a focused program of faculty development for the
faculty in the departments of the targeted SEM courses, "real" learning will not take place.
Increased
attention to training and/or planning needs to be focused on the
faculty involved in the cluster of courses component of CIRCLES.
-
This area is a real strength of the UTEP MIE program. The number of students participating in the REU program at UTEP under MIE
auspices has steadily increased from 21 in 1995-96 to 68 in 1998-99. In
the current semester 44 students are participating. Students are
enthusiastic about their research projects and seem to genuinely
benefit from many aspects of the experience. The stipend paid ($750 per
month) is substantial enough to provide the main source of support for
these students. While most students participate in the REU program at UTEP,
steps are currently underway to expand the number of students getting
research experience elsewhere. Places at Sandia, University of Michigan
and University of Colorado, among others, have been secured for UTEP REU
students next summer. Students prepare posters for a research fair that
describe their projects and are encouraged to publish their work with
their faculty mentors. One model for larger groups of REU
students, termed "Affinity Groups," is currently being formalized and
disseminated from the Computer Science Department to other UTEP departments. This model has proven successful in developing student skills and ownership into the research project.
-
UTEP
has done an exceptional job at providing support for undergraduate
students. The first form of support is financial support through
substantial stipends from the REU
project, through peer mentoring and tutoring, and through external
internships and research experiences. Because of the financial
situation of most of the students, these types of paying jobs that
complement their educational experience are very beneficial.
The second, and deeper, support is that of peer support. ACES
is the physical place where students can congregate to study together,
to study alone or to reach out for help or companionship. ACES
has long hours and is centrally located. The facilities are conductive
to learning and interacting. In the current semester, there are some
1700 students, mostly engineering students, who have asked for access
to ACES. ACES
is clearly the centerpiece of developing community for these previously
disconnected students. Phase 2 will see an expansion of ACES to build satellite facilities to reach more science students.
Another important component of student support is peer tutors, available at ACES,
and peer mentors for the clusters. These upper class students provide
academic assistance as well as role modeling and nurturing.
-
The number of SEM
baccalaureate degrees has not risen during the project, however this
could be due to a dip in overall university enrollment during this
period. University enrollment has turned the corner and is beginning to
rise. This, coupled with the evidence of improved first year retention,
gives every promise of substantially increasing the number of SEM
undergraduate degrees granted within the next five to ten years. The
breakdown of degrees does not show an even representation across
departments. The sciences, with notable exception of biology, are not
popular degree choices. Engineering disciplines fluctuated somewhat
over the past several years, with electrical, civil and mechanical
engineering being the leading choices with small numbers in
metallurgical engineering.
To increase the number of students choosing science and to improve utilization of non-biological faculty and facilities, UTEP
plans to introduce an environmental science degree. According to a
survey of students, about a quarter indicate a strong interest in the
environment and a likely choice of this degree. Industry interest in
hiring students with this degree appears strong. In summary, this new
program is likely to improve the pipeline of students into science and
to strengthen the current science departments. It is also envisioned as
a pipeline to masters and Ph.D. programs in environmental science at UTEP.
A
similar, but less mature, plan is the "green engineering" certificate
program. This program is envisioned as four complementary courses that
would increase an engineering student's understanding and appreciation
of the environmental issues surrounding many engineering projects and
encourage design of sustainable systems. While this objective is
laudable, the certificate program needs rethinking and fleshing out. It
was not demonstrated that this certificate program would increase the
number of students choosing engineering and it is not clear that the
students would be prepared for career paths that they would not
otherwise be prepared for. UTEP
may want to consider other mechanisms to introduce green engineering
including reaching all engineering students through a seminar or
interdisciplinary project work. A clearer picture of employers' needs
and the best way to prepare students to meet these needs should be
achieved before plans are finalized to introduce "green" to the
engineering curriculum.
The MIE
team needs to formulate realistic goals for increased baccalaureate
degrees by discipline over the next three years. These goals should be
periodically reassessed by the team, as actual figures are available
and be used to guide the program throughout the project.
-
There is some evidence that students with REU experience have a greater tendency to choose graduate school. About 30% of science students with REU
experience have recently chosen to attend graduate school with a
smaller proportion of engineering students doing the same. However, not
much data is available on students attending graduate school and since
the MIE
project has not yet graduated students with its full cadre of programs,
it is too early to judge the effects on graduate school entry. There is
every reason to believe that the emphasis on an undergraduate research
experience will improve graduate school attendance. Part of MIE
includes a seminar on the GRE, a critical component of graduate school
admissions. While most students who attend graduate school choose to
remain at UTEP,
there should be renewed and continued emphasis to students that there
are many graduate school options. Students should be encouraged to
consider non-UTEP
programs, and then these students can be used as mentors and role
models for future students considering graduate studies away from El
Paso.
-
The evaluating team identified the following successful elements in UTEP's MIE model: Student Clusters, ACES, faculty development (CETaL),
strong advisory board, undergraduate research activities, and
leadership development through peer mentoring. Although the
effectiveness in increasing the number of SEM bachelor's degrees and the number of students pursuing graduates degrees has yet to be proven, it appears that the elements of UTEP's MIE
Program can very well be adopted or adapted successfully by
institutions that serve underrepresented minorities communities,
especially those institutions with a large commuter student body.
To
that effect, dissemination efforts within the state of Texas and
elsewhere should be given a higher priority in the proposed work plan.
Documentation and dissemination of successful activities, such as
clustering of courses, undergraduate research experiences and creating
and maintaining an effective advisory board, is critical.
-
There
has been a smooth change of PI's and co-PI's from the first to the
second phase of the project. The new PI is quite competent and
committed and will report to the Provost. The two co-PI's are the Deans
of the College of Science and of the College of Engineering. They will
actively participate in the management in two roles: as co-PI's and as
members of a Sustainability Committee. The purpose of this committee is
to ensure that the MIE
activities become an integral part of the University structure upon
completion of the project. The newly proposed Sustainability Committee
for Phase 2 administration is chaired by the Provost and it includes
the PI and co-PI's. It also includes the Vice-President for Student
Affairs, the Associate Vice-President for Undergraduate Affairs, the
Associate Vice-President for Graduate Studies, the Associate
Vice-President for Academic Affairs and the Associate Dean of Science
and Engineering.
Although the structure of the
Sustainability Committee seems somewhat redundant, such may be
necessary to facilitate the institutionalization of the project. It is
hoped that the Sustainability Committee will actively share its actions
and plans with the External Advisory Committee. The function of the
External Advisory Committee, as proposed, is to conceptualize and
critique changes planned for Phase 2. The overall management structure
as described seems very good.
-
The
proposed second phase is well focused and the cost effectiveness of the
project is considered very good. The University has a reputation for
being a good steward of the resources allocated. On a rough measure it
seems that there are annual expenditures that can be estimated between
$1000 and $800 per student affected by the project. The REU
expenditures of $750 per month, while considered high by the standards
of other institutions, seem necessary to make the participation of
low-income undergraduate in research activities. Unfortunately we do
not have yet graduation figures of students subject to the full
benefits of the project or of their advancement to graduate school.
However, even without those figures, given the extension of project
activities to other segments of the University positively influencing
the institutional culture of greater attention to undergraduate
teaching and assistance, the project is considered cost-effective.
-
There
is evidence that several aspects of the model have been or are in the
process of being institutionalized in the targeted colleges and the
university, i.e. things learned in MIE are being transported to the rest of the university.
Naming a Sustainability Committee to ensure that the components of the MIE
model become an integral part of the university upon completion of the
grant is a first: step towards institutionalization and/or expanding
the model to the entire university, but clear mechanisms/processes need
to be put in place explicitly and involve Chairs/faculty. The President
anticipates that the funds generated from increased retention will be
adequate to institutionalize the effective program components. This
assumption needs to be quantified more explicitly in long term
planning. Examples of components that have been institutionalized and
or expanded to other areas of the university are:
The
Entering Student Program, Circles of Learning for Entering Students,
under the direction of the Associate Dean of Science and Engineering,
was expanded in fall 1998 to all entering SEM
students. This first year program includes the clustering of courses
(mathematics, English and seminar), a mandatory one-week Orientation
Program, intervention and advising. Science and engineering faculty,
teach in the seminar program. The University has committed 0.5m dollars
to this program. Leadership in provided by a committed and experienced
administration.
Of the eleven new faculty members hired with MIE
funds, six have already been moved to the university budget and three
more will be moved next academic year. Two faculty members have left;
one position is being filled (Industrial Engineering); the other is
occupied by a visiting professor and is not planned to be replaced by a
tenure line faculty. MIE Leadership needs to assure that a process is in place to assure MIE goals are fundamental to all new hires in the University.
Initial
steps, from the President's Accountability Plan, have been taken
towards insuring that effective teaching is valued and rewarded by
institutionalizing teaching portfolios and revising the tenure and
promotion checklist to include teaching portfolios. Workshops are
planned for faculty on teaching portfolio development and for
administrators on how to evaluate portfolios. There is still a concern
that there is not more widespread buy in and the message is not clear
that teaching will be rewarded.
The Center for Teaching
and Learning is now across the University and is partially funded by
University funds. By the end of Phase 2 it will be funded fully by
University funds.
-
MIE's
Phase 1 assessment strategy was not robust enough to provide program
administrators with outcomes data necessary to refocus strategies and
reallocate resources. Moreover, the Phase 2 proposal fails to present
outcomes data and explanation as to why the Phase 1 target SEM
bachelor degrees and students pursuing graduate degrees were not met.
It appears that were it not for the vision and guidance of the Advisory
Board, the project's goals and objectives could not have been achieved.
Nevertheless, Phase 2's assessment strategy is extensive, holistic and
involves both quantitative as well as qualitative components. Realistic
projections of student graduation rates and student pursuing graduates
studies should be made so that program managers can assess
effectiveness and efficiency of the model. Formative evaluation data
should be used to not only to inform all stakeholders (students,
faculty, administration, advisory board and accreditation agencies) but
more important, it should be utilized to re-focus and re-engineer
activities and resources according to results. The plan should include
how the data will be used to refocus the program.
-
There
is no definitive evidence at this time of a reward system involving
tenure, promotion and raises, for faculty actively participating in the
teaching-intensive activities of the project. This is a matter of
concern for the site visit team. However, there are positive signs that
faculty will be made more aware of the necessity to document their
activities in new ways, including teaching portfolios. It is clear that
the institution has to strive for a delicate balance between the
teaching needs stemming from its undergraduate open admission policies
and its research goals. The flexible admission policies require renewed
focus on undergraduate activities and active tenure-track faculty
participation in the educational process. Changes in institutional
culture are difficult to institute, particularly under the pressures of
external standards existing at other institutions. The issue of an
adequate reward system will be tested within the term of the proposal
and will be carefully observed by advisors and faculty alike. The
results of an inadequate reward system would seriously diminish the
enthusiasm with which participating faculty will embrace the goals of
the project and would put in jeopardy its success. Furthermore,
establishing an adequate reward system would critically enhance the
impact of this project as a model to other institutions.