Survey Response So far

Here's a brief status report on how the data collection from the surveys is going so far.  A separate blog entry gives the faculty opinion on issues important to the schools and also nationally.  I've now visited one half the schools and am about to visit the second half in the next three months

Responses by University as of Noon 1/17/2009

University	Visited already	Responses
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo	Yes	8
Illinois Institute of Technology	No	1
North Carolina A&T State College	Yes	5
Penn State University	Yes	7
University of Colorado	Yes	9
University of Kansas	Yes	7
Missouri University of Science and Technology	Yes	4
University of Nebraska - Lincoln	Yes	3
University of Wyoming	Yes	7
Other		1
Tennessee State	No	1
Total		52

Academic Rank of Respondent

Rank	Number
Professor	16
Assoc. Professor	17
Assistant Prof	15
Instructor	3
Adjunct	1
Total	52

Primary Discipline of the Respondent

Discipline	Number
Architectural Engineering	10
Architecture	5
Structures	20
HVAC	5
Electrical Power	3
Lighting	3
Environmental	1
Construction Management	5
Other	11
Total	52

Experience of the Respondents - Average

Note that there is a great range in the details

Area	Average Years
Teaching Experience	13.9
Industry Experience	8.3
Years teaching AE Design	9.9

Professional Registration of the Respondents

Note that these are not mutually exclusive

Registration	Number
PE	36
RA	5
Other	7
Total Respondents	40

University of Kansas (KU) Visit - December 8th & 9th 2008

On December 8th &9th I spent two informative days at the University of Kansas (KU), my eighth sabbatical visit. Thanks to the efforts of Tom Mulinazzi and Craig Adams (Department Head) I met eight faculty currently teaching the design aspects of the AE program and others as well. As on my previous trips everyone was welcoming and helpful, making my visit both productive and enjoyable.

What did I learn?

About the KU Architectural Engineering (ArcE) program

•  It's a five year program Bachelors program with longstanding ties to the Architecture program, ties that the department wishes to strengthen again.
• Many faculty are proud of this tie and feel that it distinguishes their program from most other ArcE programs.
• Administratively it has an unusual history.  
• Until recently it was an independent program reporting jointly to the School of Architecture and Urban Planning, and also the Engineering School.  
• In 2001 it moved fully to engineering as part of the newly renamed department of Civil, Environmental & Architectural Engineering.  
• Students for the ArcE program are still admitted by the Architecture program.
• Of the 24 tenure-track faculty in the department the ArcE faculty 5-6 would probably state that their primary identification is as ArcE faculty.
• There are also several full-time auxiliary faculty who are important to the program.

Teaching Methods and Curriculum

• Although the number of Architecture studio courses has decreased in recent years, there's still a strong architectural studio experience in the first two years with studios similar to those for architecture students although now taught separately with higher student-faculty ratios for ArcE's. 
• Design in some form is present throughout the student's five years
• There are design problems in the first year introduction to Architectural Engineering course
• Architectural design starts in the first year and extends through the sophomore year
• Students take discipline design classes in the intermediate years and have design problems as part of some of the discipline analysis courses
• The capstone design sequence is two semesters long - 6 credits each semester and thus intense
• The first semester is organized sequentially into three parts addressing structures; mechanical; electrical (power) & lighting
• In the second semester students choose an discipline area in which to specialize
• The program offer four emphasis areas which are achieved by selection in the capstone sequence and through electives selected by the students.
• Building Environmental Systems (HVAC, energy, acoustics)
• Lighting/Electrical
• Building Construction Engineering and Management
• Building Structural Systems
• AE students must take the FE exam to graduate
• There is graduate study in the department for ArcE's with the MS in ArcE and the PhD in Civil.  
• It's also possible, and encouraged, to continue on to a Master of Architecture - currently 2-3 students per year follow this option.
• The faculty take pride in preparing students for industry.
• They take advantage of industry contacts (primarily from Kansas City) as adjuncts, consultants in the design classes, and as full-time auxiliaries.
• There is also considerable pride on the quality of their teaching as a group.
• Faculty identified use of many teaching methods
• Lecture in many classes - often spiced with field trips and guest lecturers.
• Studio in Architecture
• Modified studio in several classes
• Case Study - as examples in lecture classes

AE Content Issues

• Balance of curiculum ingredients
• In my conversations I found a number of different views on the appropriate balance of  curriculum agreements
• The strongest, though not unanimous, belief was that the architecture emphasis was important
• Structures was perceived as being the dominant curriculum element and discipline emphasis by some, with a desire for more MEP
• There's an effort to reestablish a former strength in lighting
• Sustainability
• Faculty cited multiple elements related to sustainability in the current curriculum although it isn't explicitly emphasized .
• BIM
• There will be a new BIM course next term.
• Other than that it wasn't generally perceived as particularly important by most faculty although several tied it, sustainability and economic design together as jointly important.
• Coordination with Other departments and Programs
• As noted above the relationship with the architecture program is considered highly important and there is considerable effort to improve it.
• There was little mention of a desire to establish relationships with other departments (although some are doing so) or institutions.

Students

• Departmental Enrollment is approximately as follows
• 240 Civil Engineers
• 175 Architectural Engineers
• ?? Environmental Engineers
• ArcE graduates work approximately as follows:
• Construction & Structures each 1/3
• MEP 1/6
• Other 1/6
• Admission for ArcE students is fairly selective
• They are limited by the places available in the initial architectural studios
• An estimate was that only 1 in 3 is admitted
• They have high ACT scores, amongst the highest in all engineering
• There is considerable encouragement to get international experience
• There are study-abroad relationships with Newcastle University in Australia as well as a new one with Leeeds in the UK.

Observations

• The administrative changes in the department disrupted its operation for a number of years, but there is now a sense of optimisim and a desire to continue what all regard as as strong, unique tradition.
• As is the case at many of the other institutions I've visited there in some curiousity about the results of my study, but there's little apparent interest in significant cooperation with other Architectural Engineering programs.
• I believe that this is the case for most of the programs because there's little benefit perceived to come from such cooperation and because there's a significant rivalry with nearby instutitions.

Missouri University of Science and Technology - 12/4-5 Visit

On December 4-5 I spent two worthwhile days at Missouri University of Science and Technology (MS and T), my seventh sabbatical visit. Thanks to the efforts of Stuart Baur I met seven faculty currently teaching the design aspects of the AE program and others as well. As on my previous trips everyone was welcoming and helpful, making my visit both productive and enjoyable.

What did I learn?

About the MS&T program

•  It's young – established in 2001, accredited 2005
  

• It was created because a study showed that previously many Missouri residents were leaving the state to get an ArchE education and as a way to increase university enrollment without a major resource commitment.
  

• It's growing – started at about 30 students and now about 90 entering as freshmen and 150 in the last two years (compared to about 225 in CivE)
  
  
  
  • The enrollment seems to be stabilizing, although if it grows there could be implications for faculty needs and class sizes.
    
• It's undergraduate and teaching focused
  
  
  
  • They pride themselves on small (<30) class sizes
    
• They're in a strong department (Civil, Architectural and Environmental) which has:
  
  
  
  • Very loyal, supportive alumni – the amounts of money raised directly from alumni by the department amazed me
    
  • A handsome new (2001) building with excellent teaching and research spaces
    
  • A strong, long-established, diverse civil engineering curriculum
    
    
    
    • Civil structural students actually take fewer structures courses than ArchE students
      
• An unusual university structure – there are no deans
• A faculty appointment system that explicitly recognizes their program affiliation. Out of 23 tenure track faculty
  
  
  
  • Two in-department tenure track are 100% ArchE
  • One is about 70% ArchE
  • Others are partially ArchE if they teach courses ArchE's take
• Tenure and promotion criteria address teaching and research approximately equally with service valued as well.
  
• There is also support from faculty in other departments as well as adjunct faculty.
  
  
  
  • Because of a Missouri-Kansas agreement there are no Architecture programs in the public system
    
    
    
    • This means that MS&T had to hire two architects to teach the architectural portion of the ArchE program
      
    • Tenure and promotion criteria are the same as for other departmental faculty, a source of some uncertainty.
      

Teaching Methods and Curriculum

• The curriculum is still evolving
  
  
  
  • It started at 138 credits, but has been reduced to 128 credits by university mandate
    
    
    
    • At that level most students take about 4-1/2 years to graduate
      
• Students are offered four concentration options although there is no official declaration process: Structures, Building Systems; Construction Engineering and Project Management, and Construction Materials
  
  
  
  • These concentrations are achieved by the students choosing their two “technical electives” in one of the three areas
    
  • They may also use their two “free electives” if they wish to specialize even more
    
• Architectural and/or Architectural Engineering design experiences occur in three classes (203, 204, 205), the one-semester capstone class (298) as well as discipline-specific design experiences in other courses.
  
  
  
  • Senior (capstone) design is organized in teams of approximately a dozen students working on a “real” project. Each student has an individual design task (IDT) and individual presentation in addition to the group presentation given by the team leader whose IDT is the project management.
    
  • All of these classes are taught in what I would call a “modified studio” method
    
• HVAC, acoustics and electrical courses are taught by faculty from other departments
  
  
  
  • There is some concern about how to continue these courses since the current faculty may become unavailable in the near future, with no tenure-track replacements likely from the departments. The department is advertising for an MEP faculty and is considering distance education options (an initial effort that way was not a success, but it may be revisited).
    

AE Content Issues

• Sustainability
  
  
  
  • This is perceived as an significant area, with more organization desirable
    
  • It's included in several courses already
    
  • One faculty is pursuing LEED certification
    
  • The Solar Decathlon competition has been important both because of strong student involvement and because it has led to several courses (electives) being developed
    
• BIM
  
  
  
  • The general attitude is “wait-and-see” with a number of faculty thinking it is a fad or a mere skills course that would better be taught at a trade school such as Rolla Technical Institute (RTI).
    
• Bachelors + 30
  
  
  
  • As with BIM, the general attitude is “wait-and-see” with the many changes of definition and apparent goals being noted.
    
• Student Ethics
  
  
  
  • Ethics arose at least once as an area needing attention – particularly the problems of copying work
    

Students

• The program has no special selection criteria or enrollment cap
  
  
  
  • MS&T is fairly selective as an institution, with the 2^nd highest ACT scores in the state.
    
• Students are very involved with student organizations and service
  
  
  
  • There are multiple strong student organizations including: AEI; Engineers Without Borders; Solar Decathlon.
    
  • Students have a service requirement – which (at least in part) involves fund-raising telephone solicitations to alumni
    
  • The institution has a strong supporting role – there is a campus center, with plans for a new building to support such activities
    
• Graduates of the ArchE (and department) pursue careers approximately as follows:
  
  
  
  • Construction – 30%
    
  • Structures 30%
    
  • Graduate studies 10%
    
  • Other – balance
    
• Work Experience
  
  
  
  • Students generally have some work experience in the field while they at MS&T
    
    
    
    • About 95% have a summer work experience, at least once
      
    • About 20% have a CoOp work term at some point
      
  • The faculty find this experience valuable
    

Observations

• Attitudes about AE Design
  
  
  
  • Most faculty believe that “AE Design” is a valid concept and that it involved working with more than a single system. Beyond that there was considerable diversity of definitions.
    
• Need for faculty in MEP disciplines
  
  
  
  • As noted above, while they have been fortunate in finding faculty from other departments, most of these faculty are likely to become unavailable in the near future. There is considerable concern, as at other institutions, about how to get these faculty. The problems that they see are:
    
    
    
    • Where to find such faculty because they are in short supply
      
    • How to make them “tenurable” given the institution's requirements and the general research atmosphere.
      
  • They are explicitly considering distance learning options despite an unfavorable initial experience.
    
    
    
    • Some faculty question the effect of this approach on the students, at least in core concentration areas.
      

About my Sabbatical Project

• Importance of Department Structure
  
  
  
  • For the first time I explicitly posed a question as part of my discussion whether it might be the case that independent “AE departments are likely to have stronger scholarly focus and success compared to those programs” that are combined with others in the departmental structure.
    
  • The response that I received was that it might be the case, but that it wasn't feasible for a variety of reasons including external funding resources.
    

University of Nebraska-Lincoln in Omaha - Peter Kiewit Institute - 12/2/2008

On 12/2/2008 I visited the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's Architectural Engineering program, my sixth sabbatical trip. Thanks to the efforts of Clarence Waters I interviewed six faculty currently teaching in the AE program, the executive director of the Peter Kiewit Institute Winnie Callahan, and others as well.  As on my previous trips everyone was welcoming and helpful, making my visit both productive and enjoyable.

What did I learn?

About the Architectural Engineering program

• It's young – they just celebrated their 10^th birthday
  
• It's an accredited Masters program – though students may leave with an unaccredited bachelors degree after four years
  
• It's very selective – because of the masters degree there is a cutoff of a 3.0 GPA at the beginning of the third year
  
  
  
  • Because of this cutoff the retention rate within the program from freshman to final year was reported to me as 30%
    
• It's growing – there enrollment is currently about 300 students (counting those not yet past the cuttoff) and increasing.
• They have superb facilities – the Peter Kiewit Institute (PKI) in which they are housed, is designed to expose all the building systems and allow their use in classes.
• They are well supported – Thanks to the support of the Omaha business community, particularly Mr. Walter Scott, the AE program is well supported financially and has working ties to the very large AE firms community.
• They're eager to interact with other AE programs – perhaps through distance learning exchanges (they have excellent facilities).
  
  
  • In particular, they're eager to attract excellent faculty thanks to their pattern of growth and good support.
• Their administrative structure is unusual
  
  
  • They're part of the Peter Kiewit Institute which incorporates elements of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and University of Nebraska at Omaha as well as a large and very successful business partnership program.
  • They're part of the UNL college of engineering, but they're not officially a department – the relationship is through the Pieter Kiewit Institute.
• Their explicit tenure and promotion criteria for most faculty are 50% teaching, 40% research, 10% service. So far as I could tell these criteria were used explicitly in at least the annual evaluations of faculty.
• They're very proud of what they're doing – with good cause so far as I can see.

Teaching Methods and Curriculum

• Their major focus is building energy systems, though structure is an option. The also have one of the few acoustic emphases in AE programs.
• It's a five-year program because it's a Master's program
  
  
  • Anticipation of the move towards the masters as a first professional degree was a key factor in setting up the curriculum.
• They have, and make good use of, excellent laboratory capabilities in all the disciplines.
• Because they're part of the the PKI they have extraordinary opportunities to work with the large and successful group of AE firms in Omaha.
  
  
  • They take advantage of that through site visits and professional involvement in classes.
  • This involvement is particularly important in their capstone design class (5^th year) where each team of students works with an industry team involving all disciplines that meets with the students throughout the semester.
• Construction Engineering (not Management) is another member of the PKI with strong ties to the AE program.

AE Content Issues

• BIM is being introduced into classes, but it does not appear to have a high importance in their thinking.
  
• Similarly, sustainability issues are certainly present because of the energy systems focus, but they were not emphasized by any of the faculty in our conversations.
  
• The faculty were quite happy with they way they've had the opportunity to shape their program and did not raise any other content issues.
  

Students

• As noted above the program is highly selective. As a result, the student test scores (ACT) are the highest in the college of engineering.
  
  
  
  • Despite predictions that there would be trouble attracting good students, that has not been the case.
    
• There seems to be a high level of student activity outside classes. I noticed five or six student organizations with active programs, including AEI.
  

Observations

• As what I've recorded above indicates, this program is unusual in many ways: youth, support, selectivity, emphasis, degree accredited.
  
• They have a clear mission that has support from faculty, students (I deduce), the PKI institute and the Omaha business community.
  
• One opportunity that they have not yet embraced that is inherent in the PKI mission is a close collaboration with the Information Technology branch of the PKI – a collaboration that was explicitly intended by the founders of the PKI.
  
• A repeated topic of conversation was the tension between Omaha and Lincoln. This tension has been evident in many ways, starting with the founding of the PKI and continuing today.
  
• If I were a mobile faculty member with both a research and teaching interest this would be a very attractive location.
  

About my Sabbatical Project

• The importance of the administrative structure and the support of the larger community were again emphasized.
• The difference between four-year and five-year program's ability to explore technical issues in depth was also again apparent.

Penn State Visit - November 17-18 2008

On November 17th & 18th I visited Penn State, my fifth sabbatical trip. Thanks to the efforts of Dr. Chimay Anumba (department head) and Kevin Parfitt I interviewed 11 faculty and discussed this sabbatical topic with about five others at lunch on the 18th.  As on my previous trips everyone was welcoming and helpful, making my visit both productive and enjoyable.

What did I learn?

About the Penn State program. It is:

• Big: 500 undergraduates plus graduates students; 18 full time faculty
  
  
  
  • this is in keeping with Penn State - 44,000 (corrected 11/21/2008) students on this campus I was told
• Old: It was founded in 1910
• Independent: it's in it's own department in the college of engineering
• Proud: It claims (with much evidence to support it) that it is the "preeminent" AE program
• Forward looking: it has been working with BIM and sustainability for some years. It has identified "High Performance Buildings" as a focus area incorporating both of these topics.

Teaching Methods and Curriculum

• The undergraduate curriculum offers 4 tracks, covering all of the generally accepted AE sub-disciplines with students graduating in the following approximate percentages (corrected 11/21/2008):
  
  
  • 
    
    

    Structures	35%
    Construction Management	35%
    HVAC	15%
    Electrical/Lighting	15%

• The fifth year of the program allows considerable depth, including 4 semesters of architectural design.
• About 50% of the students pursue a bachelors+masters program - again made easy by the 5th year
• There is a strong emphasis on meeting the needs of industr
  
  
  • A few faculty felt there was too much such emphasis
• The emphasis in design classes, particularly Senior Thesis (year-long), is on individual rather than team projects
  
  
  
  • There are team projects in prior classes
  • Students are explicitly required to demonstrate both depth in a discipline area and breadth by work in two other areas
• Design Teaching are primarily what I would call "studio" and "Modified Studio"
• In other classes there is a significant amount of hands-on lab work as well computer software.
• "Practitioner Instructor" faculty are an important resource to the department, bringing industry experience to the mix.
• The department is monitoring the Bachelor's + 30 goal of ASCE
  
  
  
  • They feel that they meet the intent of the criteria already although there is concern about specific wording issues.

Issues

• BIM (Revit Architecture) has been part of the curriculum for about five years and is rapidly becoming the primary tool, with plans to expand to Revit Structural and MEP.
• Sustainability is at the heart of the department's mission statement and is incorporated into many of the classes
  
  
  
  • Construction Management Faculty seem to be leading in the both the BIM and sustainability areas, though the HVAC and Lighting faculty have long been concerned about sustainability issues.(corrected 11/21/2008)
    
• The university reward (Tenure and Promotion) system concerns many of the faculty
  
  
  
  • A number feel some variation (there was considerable variety) of the sense that what is important to industry and their graduates is not what is rewarded by the T&P system.
  • Others felt that that the teaching loads prevented their pursing what was important to them and the reward system - research
• The department has good, cooperative relationships with both Civil Engineering and Architecture for both course offerings and some research projects.

Students

• Penn State is a highly selective program
  with a capped enrollment of 100 students per year
  
  
  
  • Students are admitted only after having achieved at least a 3.0 average in their first year at the university
• Their attrition rate from the program is negligible from 2nd through 5th year.
• The relative numbers of Structural, Mechanical and Electrical graduates are recognized not to match the job opportunities in industry.
  
  
  
  • Since all their graduates receive multiple job offers this is not a high priority issue.
• The fall-semester Penn State Job Fair is the big hiring opportunity. The number of firms attending (166 this year) far outnumbers the students (~100)
  
  
  
  • Firms have found that hiring interns from the fair is an excellent way to hire graduates ultimately.
  • Professors value the internship experience of their students.
  • NCAT and Tennessee State both participate in the Job Fair
• About 30% of the students are female.

Observations

• Few of the faculty expressed much interest in how other AE programs
  operate or the Architectural Engineering Institute (AEI).
  
  
  
  • Some expressed interest in arriving at a more specific definition of AE for accreditation purposes
  • It's my belief that Penn State has much to offer other AE programs and that there might well be things they could learn beneficially as well.
• While the research efforts and graduate program are not the focus of my study, I'd note that both seem to be very healthy and well organized.
• As noted in the introduction, Penn State is a very proud institution that believes it is preeminent in AE education. Since I haven't visited all the AE programs yet I couldn't proclaim a "best", but everything I saw impressed me. I came away with definite ideas about how to improve my own program.

About my Sabbatical Project

• What Jay Pluckett had first suggested to me was reemphasized on this visit, that it's important to distinguish between four-year and five-year programs in any analysis. It's clear that the extra year offers many opportunities for increased depth and breadth.
• I'll also be looking at the difference between stand-alone and combined program departments (e.g. Civil + AE + xxx).

Learning about Qualitative Research

If you're an engineer who thinks of undertaking a similar "qualitative research" project this post may be of interest to you.  My intent is to reflect on the self-education process I've undertaken and recommend a book that I found helpful.
   
As a person who thinks of himself as an engineer first, with other interests riding well behind, I undertook this sabbatical project in what now seems a naïve way. My belief was that I would create a survey and talk to faculty at the relevant institutions (all 17 accredited AE schols) and write up the state-of-the-art in teaching architectural engineering design.  I knew that I would have a number of apparently technical problems collecting the data and ensuring that I drew valid conclusions from that data.  I knew too that I was entering a field that is essentially a humanities or social sciences field, but I didn't really understand what that meant.
   
In the months since the project was approved I've formulated the survey and have started the interview process.  Talking with colleagues from other disciplines, picking the software I'd use (NVivo), and continuing my reading about my topic I've learned a great deal, much of which is humbling.  I've become far more aware of the complexity of this process and the many different approaches that have evolved in different fields to understanding phenomena like the one that interests me.
   
I recently read with great care Readme First for a User's Guide to Qualitative Methods 2nd Edition, by Richards and Morse - 2006, Sage.  It's written primarily for people like me, beginners in the field who need orientation and specific steps to ensure that what you produce meets the standards of good qualitative research.  Probably most important for me was the early delineation of the three major approaches to qualitative research: Phenomenology, Ethnography, Grounded Theory.  My early explorations in the area of qualitative research brought up Grounded Theory so I had assumed that's what I was doing.  The authors' careful delineation of the purposes and methods of each of these approaches made it clear to me that in fact what I was doing was a form ethnography, which in turn implied a different approach to collecting and analyzing the data. 
   

Of course I'm not an expert from having read a single book, but thanks to it I feel that I have a much greater likelihood of producing something that has a reasonable chance of withstanding critical scrutiny.

North Carolina A&T State University

On November 12th I visited visited North Carolina A&T State University (NCAT), my fourth sabbatical trip. Thanks to the efforts of Sameer Hamoush (Dept. Head) I met all faculty currently teaching the design aspects of the AE program and others as well.   As on my previous trips everyone was welcoming and helpful, making my visit both productive and enjoyable.

What did I learn?

About the NCAT Program

It has a sixty-plus year history of providing a path for African-American (and other) students to enter the professions, both Architecture and Engineering.

• Until the mid-1990's as many architects as engineers emerged from the program.
• Now, with changes in registration requirements, the program is solely engineering-focused, with the majority of the graduates going to work in construction firms.
• Enrollment has fluctuated with varying university admissions policies. It is currently near or at it's highest - 36 students in the capstone design class this year, versus 15 or so only four years ago.

Teaching is the primary responsbility of the department

• Teaching loads are demanding, with course loads of 9-12 credits/semester being common.
• The growth in enrollment has been coincident with a loss of faculty for various reasons, resulting in increased class sizes and teaching loads.
• As in other institutions the university-level atmosphere is changing. More research expectations are being placed on faculty without a corresponding decrease in teaching load or increase in research resources.

Teaching Methods and Curriculum

• The curriculum makes an effort to include all the ABET-identified building systems.
  
  
  
  • There is little construction management included.
• Faculty varied in their identification of teaching methods used in the curriculum.
  
  
  
  • Lecture is the predominant teaching mode.
  • The two Architectural Design courses (taught by department architectural faculty) use a modified studio method
  • The two-semester capstone design sequence uses teamwork extensively, focusing (usually) on the engineering design of building plans taken from a real multistory project. The effort is to take students all the way through schematic, design development and construction document phases.
  • Individual instructors make significant efforts to introduce site visits, visiting lecturers and other methods to bring the external world into the classroom.
• At one point the program had a Masters degree in AE, but that was dropped in 1998 when enrollment decreased.
  
  
  
  • In 1995 the program changed from a 5-year to a 4-year program, in signficant part as a response to the change in architectural registration requirements.
  • There's little discussion of ASCE's possible move to a Bachelor's+30 program. When I raised the issue, there were signficant doubts about its benefits.
• Because the faculty is quite small (5 full-time currently), coordination appears to be quite informal.
• There appears to be some tension in relation to the design classes between those with a practice background and those without because of differring views of what's important.

AE Content Issues

• Sustainability is significant concern with one faculty member as a champion.
  
  
  
  • There is a LEED certification course
  • Sustainability examples are introduced into at least some of the design courses.
• BIM is not seen as a major issue
  
  
  
  • There appears to be little attention paid to it overall
• The Bachelors+30 movement, as noted above, is not given much attention.
• Most faculty attention is on student-related issues, including those of providing good teaching when dealing with the heavy loads experienced.

Students

• As noted above, the school has a proud history of providing opportunity for African Americans.
• AE students are about 3/4 of the department's current senior class of 40 students
• Many arrive not fully prepared in math and sciences, which contributes to a significant attrition rate from freshman to senior year (80 entering with about 30 graduating were current numbers though they should be adjusted to reflect the growing enrollment)
• Many work 20 or more hours a week in non-engineering jobs in order to meet the financial demands, with consequent effects on their academic performance.
• Despite intense efforts on the part of the faculty many do not see the value of preparing for the FE exam, thus producing a performance that disappoints the faculty.

Observations

• The faculty are proud of what their students are able to achieve, while recognizing that many students must live with issues that prevent them from always achieving full potential.
• A number of faculty expressed interest in the results of this study, wanting to see themselve compared to other schools.
• The teaching loads are extremely high, leaving little time in most cases for experimentation or research.
  
  
  
  • Some though, are remakably successful at maintaining a research and professional society engagement despite the loads and limited resources.
• I didn't have time to visit student classes, though several faculy were disappointed at not being able to show me what their students were doing. Those students I observed in and around the deparment were friendly, and cheerful.

About my Sabbatical Project

• Again I'm reinforced in my belief that the face-to-face meetings bring to light relationships that I would never understand strictly from the survey results.