Survey reveals interdisciplinarity of MSE faculty
- PDF / 548,881 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 585 x 783 pts Page_size
- 100 Downloads / 160 Views
300
150 100 50 0
Materials
Physics
Engineering
2.8% 0.7%
200
Undergrad Degree
12.8%
20.4% 16%
0.6% 0.4%
Materials
18%
49.8%
250
Physics
b
Engineering
28.5% 26.7% 23.3%
Chemistry
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Sciences
a
Chemistry
to make more informed decisions about MSE education in this country. We first look at the UG degree of faculty members in the 23 MSE departments surveyed. This is shown in Figure 1a. The percentage of faculty members who have a UG degree in MSE is only 28.5%. However, an almost equal number of faculty have a UG in physics (26.7%) while other branches of engineering and chemistry contribute 23.3% and 18%, respectively, to this list. These results are surprising and demonstrate that about 71% of MSE faculty members have UG degrees either in the pure sciences or in other branches of engineering. When the current faculty are analyzed for their PhD degrees, the trends follow a similar pattern, except now a doctoral degree in MSE accounts for half of the degrees. This is shown in Figure 1b. Physics, chemistry, and engineering follow next and together account for the other half of doctoral degrees for MSE faculty. The combined trends from Fig-
Humanities
or well over 100 years, the current field of materials science and engineering (MSE) has undergone a transformation in its name, content, and character to keep up with the changing needs of our society. From mining to metallurgical engineering to MSE, university departments have constantly faced the challenge of adapting a curriculum that encompasses the past, present, and future of materials. It can be claimed that MSE is more diverse, interdisciplinary, and fickle than any other engineering discipline. This fact helps further the cause of MSE education while complicating it at the same time. One of the often neglected areas of policy planning and research in MSE is understanding and quantifying the academic background and preparedness of the faculty. Faculty members strongly influence the course design and content within a department. They influence the nature and quality of research, both within their own laboratories and as multidisciplinary, collaborative units within larger organizations. Thus, it is useful for the MSE community to analyze faculty backgrounds and the skill sets they bring to a department in order to meet the challenges of MSE. This article addresses this need. We looked at 23 large MSE programs within the United States and performed a statistical analysis of 546 faculty members in these institutions. Parameters such as undergraduate (UG) and doctoral degree specializations and institutions were analyzed. Even though no standardized database exists, we used the departmental web pages to extract this information. Some aspects of the analysis results were surprising and some results were as expected. Either way, the report draws a line in the sand for educators and administrators in MSE
N(Undergrad Degree Revised)
F
Sciences
Parag Banerjee and Robert M. Briber
ure 1 point to an outflux of people from
Data Loading...
