Chemical Engr: Engineering

1CRITERIA DIMENSION ONE 
(Centrality to Mission/Validation Context)

Context:
Describe why and when the program was created.
(150-word limit)

  Chemical Engineering (ChE) combines chemistry and engineering to find more efficient ways to change raw materials into useful products. It includes the design, development, and production of many products such as fuels and petrochemicals, plastics, fibers, paper, foods, building materials and pharmaceuticals. At the middle of the twentieth century there was a growing need for this expertise in southern California, the location of four major engineering design companies, several refineries, and chemical companies. Furthermore, this area was projected to undergo both a large population and economic growth. At that time only one other university in southern California and three universities in northern California had ChE programs. The Cal Poly Pomona ChE was therefore created in 1967 to help meet the immediate need for this expertise. Graduates of this program would have been exposed to a ¿learn by doing¿ training and would therefore be well qualified to begin their professional careers.  

Comment:
The purpose of this question is to establish the history and context of the program-its original goal and/or focus.  We are interested in the evolution of the nature and character of the program.


Criterion 1.1: Internal and external demand for the program:      
Demand for a program will be recognized at different levels.  In some cases a program’s demand may be represented by the trend in the number of applicants each year or while other program’s demand may be better represented by recognizing courses taught as service or general education for the larger University population.


Indicator 1.1.1
Number of students enrolled in the program:

Fall 00 Fall 01 Fall 02 Fall 03 Fall 05
134.00 120.00 126.00 126.00 144.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

Comment:
It is recognized that some programs categorize students according to major while other programs categorize students by options. Double majors do not constitute a significant number of students.


Indicator 1.1.2
External Demand- Total number of applications each year for the program: 

First time Students Fall     

00 01 02 03 05
  84.00   63.00   83.00   63.00   150.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

First-time Students Winter

01 02 03 04 06
  4.00   3.00   1.00   2.00   (empty)

(Value provided by the Administration)   

First-time Students Spring

01 02 03 04 06
  2.00   3.00   2.00   (empty)   (empty)

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Fall

00 01 02 03 05
  37.00   44.00   43.00   37.00   47.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Winter

01 02 03 04 06
  15.00   13.00   12.00   11.00   12.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Spring

01 02 03 04 06
  (empty)   (empty)   (empty)   (empty)   (empty)

(Value provided by the Administration)   

Comment:
These data may be used to understand the overall external demand for a program.


Indicator 1.1.3
Annual admits to the program:

First-time Students Fall    

00 01 02 03 05
  68.00   54.00   30.00   23.00   112.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

First-time Students Winter              

01 02 03 04 06
  2.00   3.00   1.00   1.00   (empty)

(Value provided by the Administration)    

First-time Students Spring

01 02 03 04 06
  1.00   3.00   (empty)   (empty)   (empty)

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Fall

00 01 02 03 05
  13.00   19.00   17.00   15.00   36.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Winter

01 02 03 04 06
  8.00   6.00   6.00   4.00   6.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Spring

01 02 03 04 06
  4.00   2.00   3.00   (empty)   4.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

Comment:
These data may be used to understand the show rate of students accepted/enrolled.


Indicator 1.1.4
New student enrollments in program:

First-time Students Fall    

00 01 02 03 05
  24.00   17.00   19.00   16.00   32.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

First-time Students Winter              

01 02 03 04 06
  1.00   2.00   1.00   1.00   0.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

First-time Students Spring              

01 02 03 04 06
  1.00   (empty)   (empty)   (empty)   0.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Fall             

00 01 02 03 05
  10.00   13.00   11.00   10.00   15.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Winter

01 02 03 04 06
  7.00   3.00   5.00   2.00   5.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

New Transfers Spring

01 02 03 04 06
  3.00   2.00   2.00   (empty)   3.00

(Value provided by the Administration)   

Comment:
These data may be used to establish how effective a program is in enrolling perspective students. Low numbers could be used as a justification for additional resources. 


Indicator 1.1.5
List the degree options and the number of students in each. (Fall 2005)

No degree options available for this program.

(Value provided by the Administration)


Indicator 1.1.6
Internal Demand: (Fall 2005)

FTE taught in General Education
0.00

FTE taught in Service Courses
0.00

Total FTE Taught By Program
20.60

Comment:
Please note that service courses are defined as those courses consisting of 50% or more students outside the major. These data may be used to support a program’s internal demand as an integral part of the University Mission.

(Optional) If appropriate, please comment on the internal demand data
(100-word limit)

  The FTE taught by the program is quite strong considering the program during the past two academic years has had only 2 & 3 full time faculty who teach only ChE core courses. The program also uses at 50% & a 33%FERP faculty & 2 other part time faculty members to teach the remaing ChE core courses. Starting in 2004 the ChE program taught ChE302 as a service course for Aerospace engineers (39 students in Fall 2005)

The CME Dept. also has two full time and five part time MTE faculty who teach service courses for the following majors (ChE, ECE, Computer,ME, Aerospace & Industrail Engineering). These faculty taught 5 sections of MTE208(171 students), 6 sections of ME350L(95 students), 2 sections of MTE207 (78 students).

W. Dong will teach EGR475 (Ge synthesis) during summer 2006.


Indicator 1.1.7
Describe the profile of incoming students:  (Fall 2005)

First-time Student GPA

  3.42   3.47

Mean/Median GPA (Value provided by the Administration)

First-time Student SAT scores

  1,128.00   (empty)   (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25th and 75 th percentile scores (Value provided by the Administration)

First-time Student ACT scores

  23.00   (empty)   (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25 th and 75 th percentile scores (Value provided by the Administration)

First-time Student GRE scores

  (empty)   (empty)   (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25 th and 75 th percentile scores (Value provided by the Administration)

First-time Student Gender
Male                         Female

73.00 % 27.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

First–time Student Ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic 0.00 %
American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.00 %
Asian/Pacific Islander 27.00 %
Hispanic 23.00 %
White, non-Hispanic 47.00 %
Nonresident alien (empty) %
Race/ethnicity unknown 3.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student GPA

  2.93   2.93

Mean/Median GPA (Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student SAT scores

  (empty)   (empty)   (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25th and 75 th percentile scores (Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student ACT scores

  (empty)   (empty)   (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25th and 75 th percentile scores (Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student GRE scores

  (empty)    (empty)    (empty)

(Total Math and Verbal) Mean score/25% and 75% 25th and 75 th percentile (Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student Gender
Male                         Female

33.00 % 67.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student Ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic 0.00 %
American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.00 %
Asian/Pacific Islander 33.00 %
Hispanic 40.00 %
White, non-Hispanic 13.00 %
Nonresident alien (empty) %
Race/ethnicity unknown 13.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Comment:
These data are intended to provide information about both the diversity and excellence of students in the program. 

(Optional) If appropriate, please comment on the external demand data
(100-word limit)

 


Criterion 1.2: Essentiality of the Program:

Indicator 1.2.1
How does this program contribute to meeting the educational needs of the campus, region, and/or state?
(200-word limit)  

  The Cal Poly Pomona (CPP) ChE accredited program is targeted to train men and women of multiple cultures in a broad, continuously progressing and challenging engineering field. The mission of the Chemical Engineering program is to prepare baccalaureate graduates with the skills necessary to contribute through their professional careers to a highly technical society that is global in scope, while paying particular attention to the energy, biotechnology, environmental and materials needs of the State of California. The CPP ChE established educational outcomes to accomplish this by developing engineers who are:· Capable of recognizing, stating and solving problems with attention to economics, the environment, health and safety,· Able to apply their ideas to create practical solutions,· Able to clearly communicate and implement solutions,· Capable of tackling new problems and exploring new developments in the field of Chemical Engineering,· Able to be active Life Long Learners, and· Capable of being responsible Citizens  

Comment:
Please consider the fundamental knowledge and skills, what makes the program unique, and/or how it addresses employment or market needs.


 Criterion 1.3: Support of the polytechnic mission of the university and support for campus-wide programs and priorities      

Indicator 1.3.1
Describe how the program promotes “learn by doing” activities. Give evidence and examples of how these activities are embedded in the program curriculum.
(150-word limit)

  · The ChE program establishes a strong foundation in the basic sciences , other engineering and the ChE core by requiring 16 experimental labs in GE, support and core. In addition this program also requires 7 computer simulation & design labs The program requires a two quarter capstone design and a two quarter interdisciplinary project. Several of these latter projects are supported by industrial clients. Our students gain valuable ¿learn by doing¿ experience by preparing exhibits, making presentations and by participating in events and competitions sponsored by professional societies and CPP., (more than 25 in 2005/2006). The program has an active Industry Advisory Council(more than 25 companies). These companies assist our students and our program with hands on experience through internships, field trips. The uniting of Chemical and Materials engineering in 1984 has enabled our students to have a strong materials background which compliments their skills in Chemical Engineering.  

Indicator 1.3.2:
List Service Learning Courses and the communities or organizations that have been affected (See University definition of designated Service Learning Courses) (04-05)

In 2004/05 T.K. Nguyen & C.L. Caenepeel collaborated with a team of 5 ChE majors and 4 IPOLY students in the development of the ChemECar. The IPOLY students assisted with the development of fuel cell technology to power a model car. This developmental study was successfully completed and the team placed second at the AIChE competition at UC Berkeley.  

Comment: 
In light of the Cal Poly Pomona mission to link theory and practice, please outline how this program integrates this goal. List or describe service learning courses.

Indicator 1.3.3
Describe how the program supports campus-wide priorities/initiatives such as Teacher Preparation, Honors Program, Life Long Learning and Interdisciplinary teaching.
(150-word limit)

During the 2003/04 year C L Caenepeel served on the University WASC Committee and assisted with the writing of the general education portion of this report. C L Caenepeel made a presentation to prospective engineering majors at the 2005 Honors Program Open House and at the 2004 ¿Learner Centered¿ CPP conference. W Dong has assisted with reviewing applications for the Honors Program. V Ravi serves on the University Research Council. W Dong is a founding member CM3D research group. B Hacker is a PI for the Advanced Grant which is promoting the interest of women and minorities in science and engineering. W Dong assisted with the development & teaching of an interdisciplinary GE course (EGR 475). During the 2004-06 academic years W Dong and V Ravi advised interdisciplinary student teams on their EGR 481/42 projects. Dr. Dong¿s students (Chenistry, Biotechnology and Chemical Engineering) worked on the use of aerogels to facilitate drug delivery and Dr. Ravi¿s students (Materials, Industrial, Chemical, M S Mechanical) researched the design and testing of titanium alloys.  


2 CRITERIA DIMENSION TWO
(Quality/Outcomes)

Criterion 2.1: Learning assurance       
This section informs the Prioritization and Recovery Planning Committee of the program’s achievements in supporting the university goals to promote, enhance and/or improve: teaching, learning, and educational programs; research, scholarly, professional, and creative activities; support for students; the campus environment; and, to increase community involvement.

The information adds to a better understanding of the relationship of department activities to the success of the university in meeting its mission.

Indicator 2.1.1
Number of full-time & part-time faculty serving the program:  (Fall 05)

Number of full-time faculty
5.00

FTE lecturers
1.00

Please include changes or trends that may be relevant to these data.  Also describe policies and practices for role of lecturers that may be relevant to the discipline or market conditions.
(150-word limit)

 

Indicator 2.1.2
Percentage of FTE instruction provided by tenure and tenure track faculty in the upper division/ graduate courses in the major: (Fall 05)

Tenure/Tenure Track (Upper division courses)
78.00 %

Lecturer (Upper division courses)
22.00 %

Tenure/Tenure Track (Graduate, Professional, Credential courses)
0.00 %

Lecturer (Graduate, Professional, Credential courses)
0.00 %

Please include changes or trends that may be relevant to these data.  Also describe policies and practices for
(150-word limit)

 

Indicator 2.1.3
Student-faculty ratio in the program: (Fall 05)
49.30 To 1

Comment:
It is recognized that some faculty members serve multiple programs. The Dean will assist programs in establishing the ratio.

Indicator 2.1.4
Major/Faculty (Serialized Faculty) Ratio: (Fall 05)
83.90 To 1

Comment:
It is recognized that some faculty members serve multiple majors.  The Dean will assist programs in establishing the ratio.

Indicator 2.1.5
Average class size: (Fall 05)

  Lecture Lab Activity Supervisory
Remedial 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lower Division 36.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Upper Division 9.33 6.00 0.00 0.00
Graduate 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Please provide comments about specific class sizes that may be related to accreditation or space limitations.
(100-word limit)

 

Indicator 2.1.6
Describe the status of student learning outcome assessment programs.  
(150-word limit)

A self-study (included quantitative assessment and conclusions) of the ChE program was completed in 2005 and used for the ABET evaluation of the program. By soliciting input from the program¿s core constituencies (students, faculty, industry and alumni) new student learning outcomes were established. The educational outcomes were mapped against the ABET program outcomes. The ChE core curriculum was mapped versus the outcomes by identifying whether specific courses introduced, emphasized or reinforced outcomes. The program uses the following assessment tools on an annual basis: sophomore/senior self-assessment, focus group evaluation of specific courses, ChE fundamentals exam, evaluation of oral reports at CoE Projects Symposium, senior design performance at CoE Projects Symposium and embedded assessment in selected lecture courses. The ChE program is working collaboratively with its IAC to assess the performance of students 3 to 4 years after graduation relative to the established program educational objectives.  

Comment:
Describe whether you are developing a plan, implementing a plan, evaluating data, or using data to affect the program.

Indicator 2.1.7
Describe how the program’s curriculum or teaching pedagogy has changed as a result of internal or external assessment. 
(200-word limit)

The core curriculum has been streamlined to include fewer courses and units for the degree. We are blending concepts rather than compartmentalizing them. We have introduced a new measurements and properties of materials laboratory in the first year curriculum and moved transport lab 1 to the end of the second year in order to give the students a better understanding of classroom concepts. Also we have modernized some of the upper division laboratories to include computerized data acquisition. We have implemented learning cafes in order to establish mentor/protégé relationships between lower and upper division majors and to improve critical thinking skills.  

Comment:
You may include interactions with stakeholders, advisory boards, etc.


Criterion 2.2: Preparation of students for a diverse/global community 
Indicator 2.2.1
Describe courses/experiences related to global and/or diversity issues that are available to students.
(150-word limit)           

Our ChE 441/451 course has been modified to focus on environmental awareness and pollution control. Our ChE 443/453 plant design project requires a site determination based on global issues. Diversity is a foundation and strength of the ChE program because our students are multi-cultured and 50% of our graduates are women. W Dong assisted with the development and teaching of an interdisciplinary course that focuses on a diversity issue (EGR 475 Beyond Currie: Women in Mathematics, Science and Engineering).

Comment:
These could be on or off campus experiences international travel etc. 

Indicator 2.2.2
Diversity of the Faculty:

Male (Fall 05)
75.00 %

Female (Fall 05)
25.00 %

Black, non-Hispanic (Fall 05)
0.00 %

American Indian/Alaskan Native (Fall 05)
0.00 %

Asian/Pacific Islander (Fall 05)
75.00 %

Hispanic (Fall 05)
0.00 %

White, non-Hispanic (Fall 05)
25.00 %

Nonresident alien (Fall 05)
0.00 %

Race/ethnicity unknown (Fall 05)
0.00 %

Please describe policies and practices or current efforts to address the diversity of the faculty serving the program.
(150-word limit)

 


Criterion 2.3: Faculty research and creative activity

Indicator 2.3.1
List faculty peer reviewed publications and creative activities: (Years 03-04, 04-05, 05-06)

Department wide

Detailed description of the following items may be found in an attachment for this document. This attachment was mailed to both Dean Way & Dean Hohmann-2003-04 Winnie Dong:-1 peer reviewed article-3 proposals, 2 funded, 1 pending-1 invited paper-1 professional conference-4 grants-2 research activities-5 reviewed journal articles/textbooksV.A. Ravi-4 peer reviewed articles-6 proposals, 1 pending, 4 declined, 1 no response-7 invited lectures-6 conference presentations-1 research activity-1 contract C.L. Caenepeel-1 professional conference presentation C. L. Caenepeel - 1 contract(funded) 2004-05Winnie Dong-4 proposals, 1 funded, 2 pending, 1 declined-3 professional conferences-5 grants-1 research activity-3 journal articles5 reviewed journal articles/encyclopedia sectionV.A. Ravi-6 conference presentations-1 peer reviewed journal publication-1 grant-3 journal articlesC.L. Caenepeel and T.K. Nguyen-1 contract(funded) 2005-06Winnie Dong-3 peer reviewed publications-2 proposals, 2 pending-3 professional meetings-1 conference presentation-2 research activities-2 grantsV.A. Ravi-4 peer reviewed publications-3 invited lectures-4 conference presentations-1 workshop-1 grant-1 proposal, 1 currentLloyd Lee-2 peer reviewed publications-3 proposals, 1 funded, 2 pending C.L. Caenepeel-1 professional conference-1 conference presentation, C.L. Caenepeel, T.K. Nguyen & K.H. Pang-1 contract (funded)

Comment:
This information should be available in the annual report.

Indicator 2.3.2
Describe any resources available for professional travel excluding resources made available by the College Dean, Faculty Center, Research and Graduate Studies, or President’s travel funds. (Years 03-04, 04-05, 05-06)
(150-word limit)

03-04: BP and Chevron/Texaco discretionary monies used to send 6 ChE students to AIChE meeting in Reno.04-05: BP and Chevron/Texaco discretionary monies used to send 5 ChE students to AIChE meeting in Berkeley.Studentscompeted in Chem E Car competition and placed second 05-06: BP and Chevron/Texaco discretionary monies used to send 12 ChE students to AIChE meeting in UC Davis, competed and placed third at AIChE project presentation competition, Monies from BP Grant used to provide one course release time for TK Nguyen  

Indicator 2.3.3
Describe policies, practices and resources for encouraging professional, scholarly and creative activities.
(150-word limit) 

CME RTP document specifically encourages professional, scholarly and creative activities. Travel requests are submitted to the department chair who reviews them and supports them at ADCOM meetings where department chairs recommend to the dean based on the quality of the proposals. In addition research and project contracts and grants are written so that a portion of the funding supports creative activities. The department chair has on occasion assisted faculty with planning and writing grants and contracts.  


Criterion 2.4: Quality of student advising       

Indicator 2.4.1
Describe policies and practices for academic advising within the program.                      
(150-word limit)

The ChE program places an academic hold on all new students during the fall quarter and all other ChE students in the winter quarter. As a result of this hold students are required to meet with their academic advisors to review their academic plans for the year. To facilitate this effort a spread sheet has been developed to list planned courses taken and the impact of projected grades on both overall and Cal Poly Pomona GPA. Once a year faculty meet with assigned students who have completed the second stoichiometry course or are completing their senior design. These meetings are used to review the students self-assessments relative to the established educational outcomes. Particular attention is noted with regards to what the student must do to improve performance and how the ChE program might be improved.

Indicator 2.4.2
Graduation rates: by gender and ethnicity:

Values for indicator 2.4.2, graduation rates by gender and ethnicity, are empty for all programs. Graduation rates for first-time freshmen and transfer students are provided for undergraduate programs only. These data were omitted from the reports because it was not feasible to assemble them from existing systems at this time, due primarily to conversion/cross-over issues between Banner and PeopleSoft.

First time freshman 6-year graduation rate

32.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic (empty) %
American Indian/Alaskan Native (empty) %
Asian/Pacific Islander (empty) %
Hispanic (empty) %
White, non-Hispanic (empty) %
Nonresident alien (empty) %
Race/ethnicity unknown (empty) %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Transfer Student 3-year graduation rate

25.00 %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Ethnicity

Black, non-Hispanic (empty) %
American Indian/Alaskan Native (empty) %
Asian/Pacific Islander (empty) %
Hispanic (empty) %
White, non-Hispanic (empty) %
Nonresident alien (empty) %
Race/ethnicity unknown (empty) %

(Value provided by the Administration)

Indicator 2.4.3
Number and percentage of Students “At Risk”:

Fall 00 Fall 01 Fall 02 Fall 03 Fall 05
27.00 20.15% 37.00 30.83% 35.00 27.78% 34.00 26.98%   23.00 15.97%

(Value provided by the Administration)

Describe any policies or procedures related specifically to at-risk students (150-word limit)

Any student whose overall, CPP, or core GPA is below 2.0 is on academic probation and must meet with their CME academic advisor on a quarterly basis until their GPA is above 2.2. During these sessions the advisors evaluate time management skills and prioritization of responsibilities with students. Students are also encouraged to repeat courses for which they have received failing grades. Spreadsheet calculations are performed to demonstrate to these students how as a result of repeating courses and filing grade replacements (up to 16 units) will return them to good academic standing. Students are also encouraged to participate in study groups. On some occasions students are advised to consider different academic majors that are within both their area of interest and capability. When appropriate students would be advised to seek the support of Student Disability Services.  

Comment:
Below 2.2 Cal Poly Pomona GPA for undergraduates and below 3.0 GPA for graduates

Indicator 2.4.4
Number of degrees granted:

00 01 02 03 05
21.00 17.00 13.00 19.00 20.00

(Value provided by the Administration)

Indicator 2.4.5
Describe current opportunities for students to apply knowledge in the program through; internships, summer programs, research opportunities, co-op, part-time jobs relating to university course work, teaching associates, etc. (150-word limit)

All ChE students are required to complete an EGR 481/482 project. During 2003-2006 four of these projects have been supported by companies with contracts ranging between $20K and $50K per year. The CME faculty also work closely with its Industry Advisory Council (IAC) members in facilitating placement in summer internships. In recent years this has resulted in internships with the following companies and universities: Avery Dennison, Intelligent Energy BP, Sempra Utilites, Chevron, MWD, Fluor, Schiff and Associates Cal Tech and New Mexico Tech. Dr. Ravi, Dr. Dong and Dr. Lee have also used grant monies to support undergraduate research projects. We also facilitated the placement of one of our current students on an externally funded fuel cell research project. The CME department also regularly informs by email all ChE students about both science co-op and other career related opportunities.  

Indicator 2.4.6
Describe current structures/processes provided by the program to facilitate student job placement. (150-word limit)

The CME chair annually communicates with liaisons from Chevron, Fluor, Conoco Phillips, and BP about internship opportunities for lower division students. Students are encouraged to seek these opportunities because they often result in full time employment upon graduation. In addition CME faculty works with its IAC (25 to 30 companies) and network of company contacts which include alumni to facilitate the placement of our students upon graduation.  


Criterion 2.5: Contribution to the sense of community and the intellectual quality of the campus

Indicator 2.5.1
Describe the current co-curricular and extra activities for students supported by the program (i.e.: clubs, social events, performances.)
(150-word limit)

All ChE majors have an opportunity to be members of student chapters of American Institute of Chemical Engineers, International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineers, American Society of Metals and SAMPE. Each of these clubs has a faculty advisor who is involved in club activities. We also encourage students to participate in the Maximizing Engineering Potential program, SWE, Society of Hispanic Engineers, National Society of Black Engineers, and for those who qualify, Omega Chi Epsilon. The department has an annual holiday party in December, and a senior banquet at the end of the academic year. Students also are invited to participate in the annual alumni event. The program also support student external presentations at the following society meetings: AIChE, ISPE, ASM, and ACS during the last academic year.

Indicator 2.5.2
List speakers, symposia, workshops, etc. provided by the program over the past year. 

-Herric Chan,(Amphastar) Opportunities in the Pharmaceutical Industry ¿November 2005-H. Handi,(Cytec) Statistical Quality Control in a Manufacturing Company ¿ March 2006-Michael Donahue,(INVENSYS) Industrial Pollution control in Developing Nations ¿ March 2006-K Duraiswami, (Intelligent Energy) Clean Energy from Fuel Cells ¿ Feb. 2006Milles Heller, (Conoco Phillips) Pollution Control for FCCU ¿ March 2006J Valdez, (BP) Internship Opportunities at BP ¿ Oct. 2005Amit Kumar, (J H Research) Disposable Food Service Packaging ¿ Feb 2006E Fodran, (Northrup Grummand) Microstructural Evolution & Thermal Stability of Al-Ce-Ni Ternary Eutectic ¿ Feb. 2006D Solomos, (Beckman Coulter) Research Opportunities at BC ¿ Feb 2006Anu Vij, Control of VOC Emissions ¿ April 2006Lloyd Lee, (CPP) Nanotechnology ¿ March 2006Daniel Wu, (Worley Parsons) Opportunities at Parsons ¿ Jan 2006  


3 CRITERIA DIMENSION THREE
(Efficiency)

Criterion 3.1: Utilization of physical space            

Indicator 3.1.1
Describe the general space needs of the program and current utilization of space excluding temporary relocations:
(200-word limit each field)
                                                                                                                   
Instructional Space (Classrooms/Labs)

Program has one instructional laboratory (Unit Operations lab 17-1123) and one shared instructional laboratory with Mechanical and Civil Engineering (fluid mechanics lab). The program uses these labs for the following undergraduate laboratory classes: CHE 143L, 322L, 333L, 435L, 436L. By 2007-08 curruculum year we will be teaching two sections of these labs per year. The program also uses a projects lab (17-1223) for required EGR 481/482 and funded projects. The program also shares a computer lab in 17-2109 with Aerospace and Civil Engineering. The following computer labs are held in this room: CHE 141L. 142L, 211L, 312L, 451L., 452L, and 453L. The ChE program has priority scheduling privileges for one classroom (17-2123), which is sufficient to accommodate only some of the classroom needs. Additional classroom space is usually obtained by coordination with other programs within the College of Engineering.  

Non-instructional Space

Offices: -5 individual offices to accommodate all tenure and tenure-track faculty, including the department chair -1 shared office to accommodate FERP faculty-1 shared office with one desk to accommodate 7 part-time faculty-1departmet office to accommodate Administrative Support Coordinator and department operation-1 office to accommodate the department technician  

Comment:
The PRPC is interested in understanding the approximate amount of space that is currently used to run the program.  Are the spaces shared spaces that may be used by other programs throughout the day, week or quarter.  Does the program utilize dedicated space that is used by the program exclusively by one program or class and is not open to other programs due to scheduling, unique equipment or security requirements? Do programs share non-instructional spaces? Do tenure/tenure track faculty members share office space?


Criterion 3.2: Utilization of human resources           

Indicator 3.2.1
Percent of total FTE taught by full-time vs. part-time faculty:

Percent of total undergraduate FTES by part-time (Fall 05)
(empty) %

Percent of total graduate FTES by part-time (Fall 05)
(empty) %

Percent of total undergraduate FTES by full-time (Fall 05)
(empty) %

Percent of total graduate FTES by full-time (Fall 05)
(empty) %

Comment:
The PRPC is interested in looking at how much of an individual program’s curriculum is being taught by full-time and part-time faculty.  The committee does not have a bias about whether a high ratio of one or the other is preferred or if a balance is ideal.  The intent of the ratio is to provide a context within which the committee can make comparisons.

(Optional) If appropriate, comment on the average FTE taught. 100-word limit

 

Indicator 3.2.2
List the number and nature of administrative support staff dedicated to the program.

Number: 1.00
Nature: (empty)

Comment:
The PRPC recognizes that the number of administrative staff is not necessarily established by a program, nor is the number of support staff necessarily an indicator of the quality of a program.  The committee is interested in looking at the number of staff (i.e. Administrative Coordinator) that may be directly assigned to a program.  If a staff person is shared between programs estimate the amount or ratio as a percentage of the assignment of the staff person to the program based on FTES. 

Indicator 3.2.3
Number of technical and instructional support staff.
1.00

Comment:
The PRPC recognizes that technical and instructional staff members are often shared between programs within a department or a college. Estimate the amount or ratio as a percentage of the assignment of the staff person to the program based on FTES in the individual programs supported. 

(Optional) If appropriate, comment on the administrative structure of your staff. 100-word limit

The preferred administrative structure should be that the CME Administrative Support Coordinator and the CME technician receive work requests from the CoE Dean, CME chair, CME faculty, other faculty, and students. Subsequently these requests are prioritized by both the CME chair and these two individuals.  


Criterion 3.3: Utilization of technology           

Indicator 3.3.1
Describe the use of computer technology to enhance course delivery and/or course administration.(150-word limit)

The program uses computers in various aspects of the curriculum, including: engineering analysis and design (MATLAB, EXCEL, HYSYS, and PROVISION), laboratory data acquisition and processing (EXCEL, and specialized software), use of standard office software (MS WORD, POWER POINT, etc), department website, and individual faculty websites for dissemination of course material. Faculty in the program also use computer technology to supplement class lectures and to maintain course records. The computer is used by the instructors for every course in the curriculum. However it should be noted that only 17-2109 is a smart classroom. Other classrooms require the use of portable computer technology.  

Comment:
The PRPC is interested in how technology is being utilized by the program.  This use includes regular in-class presentation technologies and course administration (i.e. Blackboard, WebCT, or similar) as well as on-line materials and communications. 


Criterion 3.4: Utilization of time 

Indicator 3.4.1
Describe the current use of alternative scheduling (i.e. evenings, weekends, school breaks and summer) to facilitate or improve student academic progress. (150-word limit)

The undergraqduate ChE program is primarily designed for full time students. Because of the size of the department, lecture and laboratory courses are typically offered during the daytime hours. During the summer of 2006 ChE 302 will be taught by Dr. Lloyd Lee. He will also teach an evening graduate course during 2006-07. The CME Department also provides support to other programs in the College of Engineering, for example, three evening sections of 350L and one evening section of MTE 208 are being taught during spring 2006. In addition the CME faculty allow students to schedule extra time in laboratories to complete projects. On many of these occasions CME faculty meet with these students after hours and on weekends. This most definitely contributes to the students graduating in a timely manner.  


Criterion 3.5: Management of financial resources   

Indicator 3.5.1
Program teaching cost: (Year 05-06)

Cost per WTU
$ (empty)

Cost per FTES
$ (empty)

Comment:
The PRPC recognizes that this cost changes over time depending on the number of students and the faculty members teaching in the program.  There is no target value rather the value serves as context.

Indicator 3.5.2
Current total operating expenditures: (Year 05-06)
$ 578,151.00

Indicator 3.5.3
External funding generated: (Year, 04-05)

Cash Gifts
$ (empty)

Gifts in Kind
$ (empty)

Annual Fund
$ (empty)

Comment:
The PRPC is interested in understanding how well supported a program may be by ongoing fundraising efforts at the program, College or University levels. 

Indicator 3.5.4
Other revenues generated by the program per Serialized Tenured and Tenure Track faculty.

Grant and Contract Activity

02-03 03-04 04-05
$ (empty) $ (empty) $ (empty)

Indirect Cost Recovery for Fiscal Year

02-03 03-04 04-05
$ (empty) $ (empty) $ (empty)

Open University

03-04 04-05 05-06
$ (empty) $ (empty) $ (empty)

Comment:
Include in this area research grants that sponsor research activities and or release time.  Also include sponsored classes and revenue generated through continuing education or Open University classes that is reimbursed to the program.

(Optional) If appropriate, comment on the resource indicators above.
(150-word limit)

 


4 CRITERIA DIMENSION FOUR
(Opportunity Analysis of the Program)

Criterion 4.1: Opportunities for growth or enhancement in meeting the University Mission

Indicator 4.1.1
Describe how and in priority order areas you would change your program to greater enhance or facilitate the University Mission if your program’s resources were increased permanently.

  • Faculty
  • Staff
  • Equipment
  • Recruiting
  • Operating Budget
  • Facilities
  • Other

(300-word limit)

Consistent with the university mission the most critical resource for the ChE program is faculty. Starting in fall 2006 this program will have only 2 full-time tenure-track faculty. Therefore, it is essential that two new ChE faculty be recruited for this program. Money must be made available to facilitate recruiting outstanding faculty that better represents the culture and gender distribution of the programs population. Serious consideration must also be given to the fact that starting salary must be competitive in order to attract faculty who will model leadership and life long learning to our students. Because of the need to continue the effective learn-by-doing educational model at CPP, the ChE program needs to upgrade its computers ($65K), software and licensing ($10K/year), and modernize and maintain its laboratories ($20K/year). This will include the purchase of PLC hardware and control valves ($35K). Because of demonstrated research strengths of materials faculty and their importance in supporting the ChE program new metallographic equipment ($50K and $3K/year) and an electron microscope ($250K and $10K/year) should be purchased. Also an automated rolling mill should be purchased ($10-15K).Money should be made available to support release time for faculty to write proposals and papers ($50K/year for 5 faculty). Travel and project support moneys should be made available for students ($5K/year). The ChE program would also benefit from a student assistant who would aid in development of new laboratory experiments ($7500K/year). All classrooms should be upgraded to smart classrooms, in particular 17-2123, 17-1631 and 17-1635.  

Comment:
For each program, briefly describe what you would do if you had a permanent increase in state funding and why. For example, it could be that hiring more serialized faculty is the most pressing need to meet and sustain the demands of growth and insure student success. Perhaps new laboratory equipment and lab assistance is needed to replace outdated equipment, maintain quality and keep the curriculum relevant. Faculty travel, release time for a vital department need, or any other use of funds could be part of your proposal.