Engineering students are still concerned about the future of the School of Engineering & Applied Science under the leadership of Dean Mary Sansalone. Although she has shown an increased effort to connect with the students and explain her plans for the engineering school, many questions remain.

“I think that she a great plan for the future of the School of Engineering in general, but the lack of short term plans are worrying me. The students currently here and the students that will be here in the next few transition years will fall through the cracks. There’s not a system set up for them right now,” said Elaine Cheng, a student of the dual degree engineering program. Sansalone sought to improve the communication between students and the administration last week when she hosted a second forum.

The students feared that recent changes indicated an end to the current dual degree program. Most notably, one of the two dual degree program advisors, Judy Sawyer, had her position eliminated earlier this month with no warning to the dual degree students.

“A lot of students pointed out that it was very poor timing, and it was extremely sudden and that we would like to be more informed about these processes that directly affect us,” said Cheng. “Dean Sansalone said they would make an effort to do so in the future.”

Additionally, the January intensive term was removed from the dual degree program. The program allowed potential dual degree students to come to the University for two weeks in January and finish necessary liberal arts requirements before actually enrolling in the University.

Sansalone noted that she had not seen enough student participation in the program and she was not convinced that the January intensive term could effectively teach the material to students.

“She seemed incredibly surprised that the program was for prospective students and not students already enrolled in the program here,” said Cheng. “There was a lot of discussion as to why it was cut and what students would be able to use to fulfill that requirement.”

There is currently no plan to replace the January intensive term. Sansalone, however, discussed what could be done with students and assured them that their suggestions would be taken into consideration.

In spite of the forum with Sansalone, many regular engineering students still have concerns for the future. The School of Engineering & Applied Science administration has yet to explain to students why various faculty members were removed from the University outside of purely budgetary concerns. Furthermore, little has been said as to how students will be served during Sansalone’s restructuring. Many of these fears are unfounded, however, notes computer science Professor Jon Turner.

“There was an impression that Dean Sansalone was making decisions without faculty input, but that’s not true,” said Turner. “She’s actually met individually with every faculty in the School of Engineering, something that hasn’t happened in 20 years. I think there’s a great deal of sharing in her vision of where the school will go, and what people’s concerns are.”

Turner mentioned that her extensive changes, while seemingly detrimental to students, are meant to improve the long-term teaching capability of the school.

“I think that any time there are changes it makes people uncomfortable. While change is unsettling, it’s something we need to do to keep the school moving forward. The fact that the dean is making changes and working toward institutional changes shouldn’t.be a cause for alarm,” said Turner.

History of faculty concerns

Concerns over faculty involvement have marked Sansalone’s academic career. During her time at Cornell University, Sansalone spearheaded an administration initiative to create eCornell in 2000, a program that sought to essentially sell classes through an online venue.

“The Cornell faculty senate was very unhappy with the process by which the administration went about proposing eCornell,” said Risa Lieberwitz, one of the major actors of the Cornell faculty senate at that time. “The faculty senate felt that the administration did not respect the faculty governance.[the administration did not] seek consultation with the faculty about an issue that was at the core of academic concerns.”

Lieberwitz hoped that this less than stellar communication sent a strong message to Sansalone about the importance of an open dialogue.

“We always hope that if there are conflicts that occur, that people come out of conflicts learning more about the situation,” said Lieberwitz. “[We] can shape our conduct better to avoid conflicts on similar issues.”

Popularity: 1% [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, October 27th, 2006 at 12:00 pm and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.