Click for next page ( 158


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 157
APPENDI X C LETTER TO EVALUATORS COMMITTEE ON AN ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY-RELATED CHARACTERISTICS OF RESEARCH-DOCTORATE I'ROGRAMS IN THE UNITED STATES Estal~lisl'c~i I'y Alec omit it rice Board of Ass~-iate`] Research Councils Office of the Staff Director / National Research Council / 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. / Washington, D.C. 20418 April 14, 1981 Dear As you may already know, our committee has undertaken an assessment of research-doctorate programs in U.S. universities. The study is exam- ining approximately 2,650 programs in 31 fields in the arts and humanities, biological sciences, engineering, physical and mathematical sciences, and social sciences. A study prospectus is provided on the reverse of this page. You have been selected from a faculty list furnished by your institu- tion to evaluate programs offering research-doctorates in the field of Chemical Engineering. On the first page of the attached form is a list of the 79 programs that are being evaluated in this field. These programs produce more than 90 percent of the doctorate recipients in the field. In order to keep the task manageable, you are being asked to consider a randomly selected subset of 50 of these programs. These are designated with an asterisk in the list on the next page and are presented in random sequence on the evaluation sheets that follow. Please read the accompanying instructions carefully before attempting your evaluations. We ask that you complete the attached survey form and return it in the enclosed envelope within the next three weeks. The evaluations you and your colleagues render will constitute an important component of this study. Your prompt attention to this request will be very much appreciated by our committee. Sincerely, ~~_W Lyle Jones For the Study Committee Enclosures COMMITTEE MEMBERS Marcus Alexis Winfred P. Lehmann Kumar Patel Robert M. Bock Saunders Mac Lane Michael 1. Pelczar, Jr. Lyle V. Jones, Co-Chairman Philip E. Converse Nancy S. Milburn Jerome B. Schneewind Gardner Lindzey, Co-Chairman lames H. M. Henderson Lincoln E. Moses Duane C. Spriestersbach Paul A. Albrecht Ernest S. Kuh James C. Olson Harriet A. Zuckerman 157

OCR for page 157
158 RESEARCH-DOCTORATE PROGRAMS IN THE FI ELD OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING (a DESIGNATES THE PROGRAMS WHICH YOU ARE ASKED TO EVALUATE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES.) INSTITUTION - DEPARTMENT/ACADEMIC UNI' UNIVERSITY OF AKRON - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AUBURN UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES - ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CUNY, THE GRADUATE SCHOOL - ENGINEERING CLARKSON COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CLEMSON UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, E!OULDER - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING COLUMBIA UNIV-GRAD SCHOOL OF ARTS ~ SCI - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT, STORRS - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CORNELL UNIVERSITY, ITHACA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE, NEWARK - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING - GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO, MOSCOW - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIV OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY, AMES - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, MANHATTAN - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS - CHEMICAL AND PETROLEUM ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LEHIGH UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, BATON ROUGE - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK - CHEMICAL AND NUCLEAR ENGINEERING MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, AMHERST - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST LANSING - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, ANN ARBOR - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIALS SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, COLUMBIA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING - UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, ROLLA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY, BOZEMAN - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMISTRY AND CHEMICAL ENGINEERING NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, RALEIGH - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY, STILLWATER - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIALS SCIENCE * OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY, COVALLIS - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH - CHEMICAL AND PETROLEUM ENGINEERING POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PRINCETON UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PURDUE UNIVERSITY, WEST LAFAYETTE - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE - CHEMICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RICE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RUTGERS UNIVERSITY, NEW BRUNSWICK - CHEMICAL AND BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING STANFORD UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, GAINESVILLE - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SUNY AT BUFFALO - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - CHEMISTRY/CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIALS SCIENCE SUNY, COL OF ENVIR SCI ~ FORESTRY (SYRACUSE) - PAPER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE - CHEMICAL, METALLURGICAL, AND POLYMER ENGINEERING TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, AUSTIN - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING -- TULANE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING ~ UNIVERSITY OF TULSA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING * UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, SALT LAKE CITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY (ST LOUIS) - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

OCR for page 157
159 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, MADISON - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE - CHEMICAL ENGINEERING YALE UNIVERSITY - ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE

OCR for page 157
160 INSTRUCTIONS At the top of the next page please provide the information requested on the highest degree you hold and your current field of specialization. You may be assured that all information you furnish on the survey form is to be used for purposes of statistical description only and that the confidentiality of your responses will be protected. On the pages that follow you are asked to judge 50 programs (presented in random sequence) that offer the research-doctorate. Each program is to be evaluated in terms of: (1) scholarly quality of program faculty; (2) effectiveness of program in educating research scholars/scientists; and (3) change in program quality in the last five years (see below). Although the assessment is limited to these factors, our committee recognizes that other factors are relevant to the quality of doctoral programs, and that graduate programs serve important purposes in addition to that of educating doctoral candidates. A list of the faculty members signficantly involved in each program, the name of the academic unit in We i ch the program is offered, and the number of doctorates awarded in that program during the last five years have been printed on the survey form (whenever available). Al though this information has been furnished to us by the institution and is believed to be accurate, it has not been verified by our study committee and may have a few omissions, misspellings, or other errors. Before marking your responses on the survey form, you may find it helpful to look over the full set of programs you are being asked to evaluate. In making your judgments about each program, please keep in mind the following instructions: (1) Scholariv Oualitv of Program Faculty. Check the box next to the term that most closely corresponds to your judgment of the quality of faculty in the research-doctorate program described. Consider only the scholarly competence and achievements of the faculty. It is suggested that no more than five programs be designated "distinguished." (2) Effectiveness of Proaram in Educating Research Scholars/Scientists. Check the box next to the term that most closely corresponds to your judgment of the doctoral programs effectiveness in educating research scholars/scientists. Consider the access- ibility of the faculty, the curricula, the instructional and research facilities, the quality of graduate students, the performance of the graduates, and other factors that contribute to the effectiveness of the research-doctorate program. (3) Change in Program Quality in Last Five Years. Check the box next to the term that most closely corresponds to your esti- mate of the change that has taken place in the research- doctorate program in the last five years. Consider both the scholarly quality of the program faculty and the effectiveness of the program in educating research scholars/scientists. Com- pare the quality of the program today with its quality five years ago--not the change in the programs relative standing among other programs in the field. In assessing each of these factors, mark the category "Don't know well enough to evaluate" if you are unfamiliar with that aspect of the program. It is quite possible that for some programs you may be knowledgeable about the scholarly quality of the faculty, but not about the effectiveness of the program or change in program quality. For each of the programs identified, you are also asked to indicate the extent to which you are familiar with the work of members of the program faculty. For example, if you recognize only a very small fraction of the faculty, you should mark the category "Little or no familiarity.' Please be certain that you have provided a set of responses for each of the programs identified on the following pages. The fully completed survey form should be returned in the enclosed envelope to: Committee on an Assessment of Quality-Related Characteristics of Research-Doctorate Programs National Research Council, UH-638 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington. D.C. 20418 Our committee will be most appreciative of your thoughtful assessment of these research- ooctorate programs. We welcome any comments you may wish to append to the completed survey form.

OCR for page 157
16 1 PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: HIGHEST DEGREE YOU HOLD: ( ) PH.D. ( ) OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY): YEAR OF HIGHEST DEGREE: INSTITUTION OF HIGHEST DEGREE: A C D G. YOUR CURRENT FIELD OF SPECIALIZATION (CHECK ONLY ONE): ( ) AERO-/ASTRONAUTICAl ENGR. B. ( ) AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING ( ) BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING ( ! CHEMICAL ENGINEERING . ( ) CIVIL ENGINEERING F. ( ) COMPUTER ENGINEERING ( ) ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING H. ( ) ELECTRONICS I. ( ) ENGINEERING MECHANICS U. ( ) INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING FORM NO. 3606-75 K. ( ) N. ( ) O. ( ) P. ( ) MATERIALS SCIENCE L. ( M ) MECHANICAL ENGINEERING I METALLURGY I NUCLEAR ENGINEERING I OPERATIONS RESEARCH I PETROLEUM ENGINEERING O. ( ) SANITARY/ENVIRONMENTAL ENGR. I SYSTEMS DESIGN SYSTEMS SCIENCE I ENGINEERING, GENERAL I OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY): INSTITUTION: UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, ROLLA FORM NO. 3606-01 DEPARTMENT/ACADEMIC UNIT: CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TOTAL DOCTORATES AWARDED 1976-80: 15 PROFESSORS: David AZBEL, Orrin K. CROSSER, Marshall E. FINDLEY, James W. JOHNSON, Gary K. PATTERSON, X. B. REED Jr, Raymond C. WAGGONER, H. K. YASUDA ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS: A. I. LIAPIS. David B. MANLEY, Robert A. MOLLENKAMP, Bruce E. POLING ASSISTANT PROFESSORS: Neil L. BOOK, Partho NEOGI, Oliver C. SITTON SCHOLARLY QUALITY OF PROGRAM FACULTY 1. ( ) DISTINGUISHED 2. ( ) STRONG 3. ( ) GOOD 4. ( ) ADEQUATE 5. ( ) MARGINAL 6. ( ) NOT SUFFICIENT FOR DOCTORAL EDUCATION O. ( ) DON' r KNOW WELL ENOUGH JO EvALuaTE FAMILIARITY WITH WORK OF PROGRAM FACULTY 1. ( ) CONSIDERABLE FAMILIARITY 2. ( ) SOME fAMILIARITY 3. ( ) LITTLE OR NO FAMILIARITY EFFECTIVENESS OF PROGRAM IN EDUCATING RESEARCH SCHOLARS/SCIENTISTS 1. ( ) EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE 2. ( ) REASONABLY EFFECTIVE 3. ( ) MrNIMALLY EFFECTIVE 4. ( ) NOT EFfECTIVE O. ( J DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE CHANGE IN PROGRAM QUALITY IN LAST FIVE YEARS 1. ( ) BETTER THAN FIVE YEARS AGO 2. ( ) LITTLE OR NO CHANGE IN LAST fIVE YEAR 3. ( ) POORER THAN FIVE YEARS AGO O. ( ) DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE

OCR for page 157
162 INSTITUTION: DEPARTMENT/ACADEMIC UNIT: CHEMICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIALS SCIENCE TOTAL DOCTORATES AWARDED 1976-80: 16 UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA FORM NO. 3606-02 PROFESSORS: Arthur William ALDAG Or, Rooert Jay BLOCK, Alfred CLARK, Raymond Deweitt DANIELS, Carl Edwin LOCKE, Cedomir M. SLIEPC~VICH, Kenneth Earl STARLING, Francis Mark TOWNSEND, William Reid UPTHEGROVE ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS: John Michael RADOVICH, Samir Salim SOFER ASSISTANT PROFESSORS: Lloyd L. LEE SCHOLARLY QUALITY OF PROGRAM FACULTY I. ( ) DISTINGUISHED 2 . ( ) S T RONG 3. ( ) GOOD 4 . ( ) AOc OUATE 5. ( ) MARGINAL 6. ( ) N07 SUFFIC)_. O. ( ) DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE FAMILIARITY WITH WORK OF PROGRAM FACULTY 1. ( ) CONSIDERABLE FAMILIARITY 2. ( ) SOME FAMILIARITY 3. ( ) LITTLE OR NO FAMILIARITY EFFECTIVENESS OF PROGRAM IN EDUCATING RESEARCH SCHOLARS/SCIENTISTS 1 . ( ) EXTREMELY EFFECT IVE 2. ( ) REASONABLY EFFECTIVE 3. ( ) MINIMALLY EFFECTIVE 4 . ( ) NOT EFFECT I VE O. ( j DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE CHANGE IN PROGRAM QUALITY IN LAST FIVE YEARS 1. ( ) BETTER THAN FIVE YEARS AGO 2. ( ) LITTLE OR NO CHANGE IN LAST FIVE YeaR 3 . ( ) POORER THAN F I VE YE ARS AGO O. ( ) DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE INSTITUTION: OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY, STILLWATER FORM NO. 3606-03 DEPARTMENT/ACADEMIC UNIT: CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TOTAL DOCTORATES AWARDED 1976-80: 15 PROFESSORS: K. J. BELL, B. L. CRYNES, J. H. ERBAR, R. N. MADDOX, R. L. ROBINSON ASSISTANT PROFESSORS: G. L. FOUTCH, A. G. HILL, M. T. JAHANGIRIANS, J. WAGNER SCHOLARLY QUALITY OF PROGRAM FACULTY 1. ( ) DISTINGUISHED 2. ( ) STRONG 3. ( ) GOOD 4. ( ) ADEQUATE 5. ( ) MARGINAL 6 . ( ) N07 SUFF I C I ENT FOR DOCTORAL EDUCAT TON O. ( ) DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH! TO cVALUATE FAMILIARITY WITH WORK OF PROGRAM FACULTY '. ( ! CONSIDERABLE FAMILIARITY 2. ( ) SOME FAMILIAR, rY 3. ( ) LITTLE OR NO FAMILIARITY EFFECTIVENESS OF PROGRAM IN EDUCATING RESEARCH SCHOLARS/SCIENTISTS 1. ( ) EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE 2 . ( ) Rc ASONABL Y EFFECT I VE 3. ( ) MINIMALLY EFFECTIVE 4. ( ) N07 EFFECTIVE O. ( J DON'T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE CHANGE IN PROGRAM QUALITY IN LAST FIVE YEARS 1. ( ) BETTER THAN FIVE YeARS AGO 2. ( ) LITTLE OR NO CHANGE IN LAST FIVE YEAR 3. ( ) POORER THAN FIVE YEARS AGO O. ( ) DOI&" T KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO EVALUATE