Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science

1. Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science Review and Planning Process Fall 1998

2. SEAS Review • Review and planning process • Integral part of achieving SEAS 1997-2002 strategic plan • Serves as preparation for ABET 2000 • Covers academic and administrative departments

3. Purpose • Assess overall SEAS performance • Foster planning and improvement • Provide guidance for academic and administrative decisions

4. Process Overview • Designate Review Committees • Conduct departmental level self study & generate draft report • Hold External Visiting Team review • Incorporate external review into self study and send draft to Academic Review Committee (ACR) • ACR reviews and provides feedback to departments • Departments complete final report and send back to ACR • ACR writes summary report on findings and recommendations and submits to Dean • Progress based on plans reviewed annually

5. Designate Review Committees • Academic Review Committee • Department Chairs • Chaired by Vice Dean • Internal Review Committee • Department Chair & two faculty members • External Reviewers • Industrial and academic representatives

6. Conduct Self Study • Departmental level self study • Broad involvement of all members • Comprehensive review of past and current performance • Intensive dialogue on future plans (5 years) • Generate organized self study report

7. Self Study Topic Areas • Departmental overview and mission • Description and evaluation of academic or administrative programs • Faculty and resources • Strengths and opportunities • Five year plan • Appendices

8. Overview and Mission • Brief history of department • Organization (internal structure) • Outline major academic responsibilities • Department’s mission and major educational objectives

9. Academic Programs • Undergraduate • Masters (including CVN) • Doctoral • How do these programs support department’s mission and objectives? • Discuss enrollment, student performance, quality, and innovation • For programs seeking ABET accreditation, describe how program achieves “a-k” learning outcomes.

10. Enrollment/Performance degrees offered and requirements (D) number of majors (DO) degrees conferred (DO) service to non-SEAS students (DO) course enrollment (DO) ABET matrix where applicable (D) Quality/Innovation curricular innovations (D) interdisciplinary instructional efforts (D) student perceptions (course evaluations, senior exit interviews, alumni survey, etc.) (DO) national rankings (D) Evaluating Academic Programs Data Sources: D=Department and DO = Dean’s Office

11. Faculty and Resources • Research • Teaching • Facilities and support services • External relations and linkages

12. Research • Description of major research initiatives (D) • Contracts and Grants: under review (D), granted past 5 years (DO), to be submitted (D) • Average grant and ICR per faculty member (DO) • Faculty stature: publications, citations, awards, etc. (D) • Average GRA’s supported by external funding (D) • What plans do you have to support School’s Goal of 50% grant volume increase 5 years? (D) Data Sources: D=Department and DO = Dean’s Office

13. Teaching • Average number of students per course taught during each of the past five years (DO) • Review of course evaluation and other relevant data (D) • Plans to improve quality of teaching and increase curricular innovations (D) Data Sources: D=Department and DO = Dean’s Office

14. Facilities/Support/Linkages • Summarize space, personnel and other special facilities and resources used to support academic programs (D) • Describe linkages within Columbia University, Barnard, Teachers College (D) • Identify external linkages that support program, including industrial relationships and alumni initiatives (D) Data Sources: D=Department and DO = Dean’s Office

15. Strengths and Opportunities • Provide an accurate and comprehensive description of strengths and opportunities within each of the key review areas • Academic programs • Faculty and resources • Identify improvement opportunities based on existing resources versus those requiring additional resources. • Describe major barriers that diminish department’s ability to capitalize on strengths or opportunities

16. Five Year Plan • Identify major departmental objectives, addressing how they support SEAS strategic plan and capitalize on department’s strengths and opportunities • For each objective, describe specific strategies and actions to be implemented • For each strategy/action, identify expected outcomes* (quantify when possible) • Clearly state timetables for each strategy • Describe how outcomes will be measured and strategies evaluated. *For programs seeking ABET accreditation, incorporate “a-k” criteria

17. Appendices • External Visitors’ Report • Data tables • Samples of any departmental specific surveys used • Other supporting materials, such as extended descriptions of major research programs, major faculty awards, interdisciplinary and external collaborations, etc.

18. External Visiting Team • At least two individuals selected by Internal Review Committee in consultation with Dean • Visiting team provided with self study report and review guidelines prior to visit. • Department sets agenda and schedule in consultation with Vice Dean • Visiting writes report within two weeks of visit and sends copies to departmentand Dean.

19. Report to Academic Committee • Once self study is complete: • draft report is sent to Academic Review Committee (department chairs and Vice Dean) • Academic Review Committee reviews self study reports and provides feedback to departments • Departments make changes based on feedback and submits final report to Academic Review Committee

20. Findings and Recommendations • Academic Review Committee prepares a final report that reflects their thinking regarding department assessments and plans. • This Report, along with departmental self studies, is submitted to Dean • Each department chair receives a copy of the Academic Review Committee’s Report which is put on reserve for faculty review.

21. On-Going Progress • Departmental five year plans will be reviewed annually by Executive Committee • Departments will be asked to submit progress reports based on their plans prior to the annual review

22. Key Milestones