Faculty Reward System Reform: Beginning Phase Ii Setting Criteria For Professionally Oriented Faculty In Engineering And Technology
- Conference
- Location
-
Chicago, Illinois
- Publication Date
-
June 18, 2006
- Start Date
-
June 18, 2006
- End Date
-
June 21, 2006
- ISSN
-
2153-5965
- Conference Session
- Page Count
-
17
- Page Numbers
-
11.636.1 - 11.636.17
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--217
- Permanent URL
-
https://peer.asee.org/217
- Download Count
-
496
Paper Authors
Donald Keating University of South Carolina
DONALD A. KEATING is associate professor of mechanical engineering, University of South Carolina, and chair Graduate Studies Division, ex-officio member of the Corporate Members Council, and a director of the College Industry Partnership Division of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Thomas Stanford University of South Carolina
THOMAS G. STANFORD is assistant professor of chemical engineering, University of South Carolina.
John Bardo Western Carolina University
Duane Dunlap Western Carolina University
DUANE D. DUNLAP is professor, director, Kimmel School of Construction Management, Engineering and Technology, and associate dean for the college of applied sciences at Western Carolina University, and program chair of the Graduate Studies Division of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Dennis Depew Purdue University
DENNIS R. DEPEW is dean of the college of technology, Purdue University.
Niaz Latif Purdue University
NIAZ LATIF is professor and department head, department of industrial technology, college of technology at Purdue University.
Gary Bertoline Purdue University
GARY. R. BERTOLINE is professor and associate vice president of information technology, Purdue University.
Stephen Tricamo New Jersey Institute of Technology
STEPHEN J. TRICAMO is professor of industrial and manufacturing engineering, and former dean of engineering and technology, New Jersey Institute of Technology.
Harvey Palmer Rochester Institute of Technology
HARVEY PALMER is dean of the Kate Gleason college of engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology.
Albert McHenry Arizona State University
ALBERT L. McHENRY is dean of the college of technology and applied sciences at Arizona State University Polytechnic, and vice president of public affairs of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Eugene DeLoatch Morgan State University
EUGENE M. DeLOATCH is dean, school of engineering, Morgan State University, and a past president of the American Society of Engineering Education.
Mohammad Noori California State Polytechnic
MOHAMMAD NOORI is dean of the college of engineering, California State Polytechnic University.
Ronald Bennett University of St. Thomas
RONALD J. BENNETT is dean of the school of engineering, University of St. Thomas, and immediate past chair and director of the Graduate Studies Division of the American Society for Engineering Education
Jay Snellenberger Rolls-Royce
JAY M. SNELLENBERGER is senior manager, aftermarket support, control systems, Rolls-Royce Corporation, and past vice chair, Corporate Members Council and past chair College Industry Partnership Division of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Samuel Truesdale Rolls-Royce
SAMUEL L. TRUESDALE is manager of employee development, engineering business improvement organization, Rolls-Royce Corporation
Abstract
NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract
Faculty Reward System Reform: Beginning Phase II – Setting Criteria for Professionally Oriented Faculty in Engineering and Technology
1. Introduction
This is the second of two papers prepared for a special panel session of the National Collaborative Task Force on Engineering Graduate Education Reform that is focusing one of its primary tasks on faculty reward system reform. Founded in 2000, the National Collaborative Task Force is an initiative of the ASEE-Graduate Studies Division, Corporate Members Council, and College Industry Partnership Division. The National Collaborative is comprised of leaders from industry, academia, and government all coming together to advance professional engineering graduate education for the advancement of engineering practice in the national interest to enhance U.S. competitiveness.
Using the findings of the 2005 Task Force panel, 1,2,3 which investigated the commonality of faculty reward systems in other professions such as law, this paper suggests parallel criteria for professionally oriented faculty reward systems in engineering and technology education that complement scientific research and that better support the professional scholarship, teaching, and engagement functions of engineering practice for technology development & innovation.
2. Professional Education for Engineers – The New Challenge for Industrial Innovation
While the U.S. system of graduate education in Science and Engineering (S&E) continues to set the world standard and sustains the preeminence of the U.S. scientific workforce for basic research at the nation’s research universities, a balanced emphasis has not been placed on the advancement of professional education for the U.S. engineering workforce in industry to sustain preeminence in engineering practice for creative technology development & innovation.
2.1 Professional Context of Engineering Practice for Innovation
To meet the challenge, the National Collaborative Task Force on Engineering Graduate Education reform is leading a major reform in professionally oriented engineering graduate education to enhance the innovative capacity of the U.S. engineering workforce in industry to sustain U.S. preeminence in engineering practice for technology development & innovation to enhance competitiveness.
A major component of this educational reform for U.S. engineering workforce development is the development of professional master’s and professional doctoral degrees in engineering that are aimed at increasing the creativeness, innovative capacity, and engineering leadership skills of engineering practitioners in industry. As broad-based technological innovations pervade every aspect of our daily lives, the need for America to invest in the growth of its engineering workforce for innovation and leadership though a new model of professional engineering graduate education rises to a national priority.
Keating, D., & Stanford, T., & Bardo, J., & Dunlap, D., & Depew, D., & Latif, N., & Bertoline, G., & Tricamo, S., & Palmer, H., & McHenry, A., & DeLoatch, E., & Noori, M., & Bennett, R., & Snellenberger, J., & Truesdale, S. (2006, June), Faculty Reward System Reform: Beginning Phase Ii Setting Criteria For Professionally Oriented Faculty In Engineering And Technology Paper presented at 2006 Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois. 10.18260/1-2--217
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2006 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015