Michelle Nahmad | Student Life

Perhaps the most revealing sign of the University’s attitude towards the system is how horribly outdated it is. The system was originally introduced with the promise that every class would be part of some cluster or another. While that may well have been the case in 2001, it has yet to be fully updated since then, and several interesting classes get passed up because they contribute nothing to one’s distributions. Contemporary Chinese Culture and Society; Cold War Culture: Aesthetics and Politics 1945-2005; Infectious Diseases: Past, Present and Future…If any of these classes gets you excited, sit back and relax, because none of them is offered in a cluster. Granted, this would be a minor concern if students could create their own clusters, but seniors simply can’t, and underclassmen must individually petition for up to one created cluster. In practice, this leads to several frustrated students who must relegate their last year to filling out clusters that have little relevance to them. If someone happens to be interested in all of the classes in a given cluster, fulfilling these distribution requirements is a breeze. But most students simply don’t find the arbitrary listing of clustered classes to be classes they are truly interested and engaged in, and, for many, they end up a pointless chore.

But perhaps I’m being unfair—surely Wash. U. gives enough time for students to take elective credits in addition to their distribution requirements. This is admittedly true for some students, but it depends heavily on one’s major. While a literature major requires only 30 credits for completion, a biology major requires virtually as many credits in the first year alone. This is the biggest failure of the cluster system: It disproportionately hurts some students more than others. Most students with lenient majors will have plenty of time and space to easily fill out their cluster requirements and still have room for elective classes. Yet an equally large number of students with more intensive majors are left struggling to meet the minimums by their last semester, and the cluster system makes no distinction between the latter and the former.

Of course, plenty of loopholes exist to make this process slightly more tolerable. For example, under the Shared Attribute Principle, whichever distribution area applies to the cluster can also apply to one class within the cluster. This means that a cluster with two NS courses and one TH course can have the TH count as an NS. Problems in Philosophy suddenly counts as a natural science class as much as Physical Chemistry I and II do, which begs the question: If clusters can be so easily defeated by loopholes, why have them at all?

Wash. U. is slated to remove the cluster system starting next year, so most of my worries are moot. Beginning in the fall of 2012, incoming students will be spared having to deal with the obtuse, convoluted cluster system. Hopefully the University will have the foresight to pick a simpler, less-confusing system or ideally do away with distributions altogether. Because, at the end of the day, we just don’t need a regimented system to help us balance our coursework. We don’t need a Shared Attribute Principle, or eight required “Language & the Arts” credits. We are all capable as students to determine what intellectual territories we want to explore outside of the boundaries our major. We’re smart kids; we can figure it out ourselves.

Thirteen students applied last week for the one open spot in SU Treasury, and 12 applied for the two open Arts & Sciences seats in SU Senate.

Speaker of the Senate Dan Robinson, a senior, hopes the high level of interest will create momentum going into the fall SU elections.

He hopes to extend student interest in SU through to the fall election cycle.

“If we can translate this interest to fall elections, we’ll have fall elections that are much more competitive than usual,” Robinson said. “The election commission is working to get the word out…to make sure those are as competitive as possible.”

This is the third year in a row that SU Senate has begun the year with six empty Senate seats, despite continued focus on retention and recruitment.

Robinson said that two of the senate seats opened up when former senators took on SU leadership roles; three were due to members’ time constraints; one—one of the two business school seats—was never actually filled in the first place.

“The final one was an administrative mistake on our part. We didn’t fill enough business seats. There wasn’t a second person running, but one should have been appointed immediately,” he said.

According to Robinson, the applicants are primarily freshmen, but a number of sophomores also applied for the vacated seats.

Most of the seats being appointed, including all of the Arts & Sciences seats, will be put to a vote in the SU elections this November.

Senators are typically voted into office in general student body elections, and school councils appoint students to fill spots that become vacant throughout the year. But between spring and fall, when school councils are transitioning, spots are often left open.

While the Business and Engineering School Councils are conducting their own interviewing process, Robinson said that the Arts & Sciences School Council asked him to fill their two seats.

Robinson will be filling the seats after interviews. He says his decisions will be based on the applicants’ interests and interpersonal skills.

“I’m looking for someone that comes in with the right mindset—who comes in really ready to make changes, but someone who’s also willing to work as part of a larger group,” he said.

Robinson also said that at least five of the six open Senate seats should be filled within the next two weeks. The art school and architecture school, he said, may take a few more weeks to fill seats.

Architecture School Council President Sean Dula, a sophomore, is looking for anyone interested in the position.

“The school is just so small,” Robinson said. “I’m confident they’ll find someone; it just may take a little longer.”

While Robinson could potentially fill the architecture seat with one of the numerous applicants from Arts & Sciences, he said that it would undermine the Senate’s balance.

“The reason why we have the school seats is to give the smaller schools a voice,” Robinson said.

Speaker of the Treasury Julian Nicks, a junior, said the increased student interest in SU Treasury is a pleasant change.

“It was nice to see such interest,” Nicks said. “It made it a difficult decision, but I’d much rather have it be a difficult decision than be self-selecting.”

Students outside of SU are ambivalent about the process.

“I feel like it should be a democratic process,” sophomore Elizabeth Crowell said. “I’m sure there are many pros and cons to the situation.”

Others are comfortable with the measure as long as it’s only temporary.

“I think that’s fine as long as there’s still elections,” junior Amy Cole said.

Still, Robinson said that the empty seats have not had a significant effect on the body’s ability to carry out its function.

“As speaker for a number of weeks now, I wouldn’t say that our ability to do our work has been hampered by this at all,” he said. “It’s definitely not unprecedented.”

Ralph Quatrano, former interim dean of the College of Arts & Sciences and former chair of the biology department, was selected as the new dean of the engineering school. (Christopher Lo | Student Life)

He was a seemingly unlikely choice. A professor with no formal engineering background, Ralph Quatrano was selected as the new dean of the engineering school—a school with five distinct departments.

But Quatrano—former interim dean of the College of Arts & Sciences and former chair of the biology department—said that his unique background would help integrate interdisciplinary studies within the engineering school.

“I am a strong believer in interdisciplinary kind of work, so for me, I want to go over barriers,” Quatrano said. “I want to be able to facilitate and encourage and nurture interaction at the interfaces of what appears to be diverse disciplines, diverse cultures.”

Quatrano, a biologist, admitted that he is unfamiliar with many aspects of the engineering school, but said he faced similar challenges when he became dean of Arts & Sciences.

Arts & Sciences houses 20 departments, 21 programs and 380 faculty. In comparison, the engineering school has five departments and 80 faculty members.

“I will be the first to say that I am not an engineer,” Quatrano said. “I have a big steep learning curve [in regards to] mechanical, civil and electrical engineering.”

Quatrano’s appointment

Quatrano begins his tenure as dean designate starting March 1, 2010, serving a four-month transition period. His tenure will officially begin in July. He succeeds Senior Professor of Biomedical Engineering Salvatore Sutera, who has served as the interim dean of the School of Engineering & Applied Science since July 1, 2008.

The appointment comes two years after the former dean of the engineering school, Mary Sansalone, resigned from her post amid controversy. Throughout her less than two years as dean, Sansalone came under fire for several significant changes, including the merging of several departments and budget cuts in response to the school’s financial situation.

The search for a permanent engineering dean started in December 2009 when Provost Edward Macias encouraged faculty members to submit applications and nominations.

The University only conducted an internal search for the new dean.

Macias said that hiring a non-engineer to head up the school is not unprecedented, and that Quatrano’s diverse experience brings a lot to the engineering school.

“He’s an outstanding scientist and is very familiar with broad areas of science,” Macias said. “He’s been an excellent leader as a department chair both here and before he came here.”

Quatrano said he is no stranger to the field of engineering despite never holding a position in the engineering school. As a biologist, he has conducted many cross-discipline studies with the engineering school.

“One of the reasons why I was approached is because I was already interacting with so many people in engineering,” he said.

A University agenda?

Given Quatrano’s biology background, some have speculated that his appointment signifies an increasing emphasis on biomedical engineering.

Ranked 10th in the nation, biomedical engineering is the highest-ranked department in the engineering school, according to the U.S. News & World Report rankings.

Quatrano said his appointment is not indicative of any University agenda. He plans to be upfront and learn about disciplines he is less familiar with such as mechanical and electrical engineering.

Quatrano has also committed to carrying out the engineering school’s strategic plan– the “Plan for Excellence” that Sansalone set forth in 2007 under the direction of the administration. The plan is part of the University-wide strategic plan.

The plan seeks to develop cross-school initiatives and modernize the engineering school by reorganizing departments. Most notably, the plan eliminated the aerospace and civil engineering majors. The plan also includes the construction of three new buildings for a combined total space of 500,000 square feet. The first phase of consutrction will be completed in the fall of 2010 with the opening of Brauer Hall.

Sansalone came under fire for inadequate communication as she implemented the plan.

Faculty reactions

Faculty members within various departments noted the multi-disciplinary nature of the engineering school and viewed Quatrano’s leadership and professional background as an opportunity to build new bridges within the school.

Pratim Biswas, chair of the Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering Department, said Quatrano has worked on environmental initiatives with the department in the past.

“He’s very interested in areas such as bio-energy and is concerned with environmental issues, and wants to see it thrive here at Washington University,” Biswas said. “He will be quite knowledgeable and will help us move ahead at full speed.”

Biomedical engineering professor Larry Taber said that there could not have been a better choice than Quatrano at this time.

“I think he brings much needed fresh blood,” Taber said. “It will help us strengthen our ties with the Department of Biology.”

Diversity

The engineering school has come under criticism in the past for not having tenured and tenure-track faculty from any underrepresented minority.

According to the “Report on Trends in Faculty Diversity: Washington University Danforth Campus,” underrepresented minorities include blacks, Native Americans and Hispanics.

Quatrano said that he will follow the lead of the provost and make diversifying the faculty a priority in his agenda.

“I think that [diversifying the faculty] is probably the number one awareness that I have in searching for any position—diversity and competence,” Quatrano said. “I feel strongly that we must pay attention to diversity, and diversity at all levels, from age to race to everything.”

Hiring new faculty

Quatrano said it will be hard to hire new faculty amid the tough economic climate, but added that the engineering school will continue to hire new people and must look for new faculty members to better the school’s reputation.

Even though the school is under a staff freeze, the school can still hire new faculty as long as it maintains the same net number of faculty members. When a faculty member retires or leaves the school, another person can be hired in his or her place.

“Every school has economic problems now, and I think it is really important to show that we are moving ahead,” Quatrano said. “I think its important to let everyone in the country know that we are searching, we are active, whereas other universities are not only not searching but pulling back on offers already made.”

Rankings

Quatrano cited the engineering school’s ranking as one of the school’s greatest weaknesses.

The School of Engineering & Applied Science is ranked 46th on the U.S. News & World Report list—the lowest of any of the schools at the University.

The key to improving the rankings in each school, Quatrano said, is research.

“If you look across the board in engineering, the infrastructure is there, there are really good people, but you need to really push ahead on the research,” Quatrano said.

Since grants are so competitive, receiving funding would help the University gain higher national recognition.

Quatrano said he would also emphasize peer review and would work to ensure that each faculty member can conduct research effectively.

“It’s not just a question of getting money, it’s peer review of your science—recognition by your peers in a scientific community about how good your science is, Quatrano said. “You need to make sure your top researches are happy, because you don’t want discourage them.”

Clean coal and alternative energy

Over the past year, the undergraduate student body has criticized the engineering school for accepting the term “clean coal” and receiving funding for further research into its viability as a form of energy production.

Quatrano noted that the engineering school would continue research clean coal and its uses, but that the research would not overshadow other forms of energy.

“We are not excluding other measures to enhance our energy production,” Quatrano said. “This [clean coal research] was an opportunity. We had expertise in house, and it was an opportunity to get the kind of research funding that would allow some of our faculty to develop this.”

Nevertheless, Quatrano emphasized that information on the University’s clean coal research must be transparent.

“As dean, I would say that since we have an opportunity to do clean coal, let’s make sure we do it right and that we state everything clearly and accurately by what we mean by ‘clean coal,’” he said.

Harry Alper, a junior who has been outspoken about the University’s use of the term ‘clean’ in reference to coal, said that as dean, Quatrano should listen to students’ concerns.

“He should listen closely to what the students are saying about the consortium, and should try to step back from the political ties if he can,” Alper said.

Working with undergraduates

Senior Dan Brewster, president of EnCouncil—the student government for the engineering school—said that the members of EnCouncil have no qualms about Quatrano’s background and that the council looks forward to woking with him.

“If the [University] is confident that he is the right person for the job, then we stand behind him,” Brewster said. “We are excited to have Quatrano with us. We are looking for someone who is a big proponent of engineering, someone who thinks engineers can do big things, and someone who will work with us.”

Quatrano echoed EnCouncil’s enthuasiasm.

“Students are obviously a big part of the school and I want to hear what they have to say,” Quatrano said. “I like people who are vocal, and I look forward to hearing [from them] in the future.”

Biology professor Ralph Quatrano was named the dean of the School of Engineering on Friday afternoon.

Quatrano comes to the post as the immediate past dean of the faculty of Arts & Sciences and the Spencer T. Olin Professor of Biology in Arts & Sciences. He served as interim dean of Arts & Sciences from July 1, 2008, until June 30, 2009, when Gary Wihl took over the position.

Quatrano succeeds Salvatore Sutera, senior professor of biomedical engineering, who has served as the interim dean of the School of Engineering & Applied Science since July 1, 2008. Quatrano will serve as dean designate starting March 1, 2010, serving a four-month transition period. His tenure will officially begin in July.

“Ralph Quatrano has been an outstanding academic leader at Washington University for over a decade,” Chancellor Mark Wrighton said in a news release.

Although Quatrano has held no official positions in the engineering school, he said that biology and the field of engineering are closely intertwined and he hopes to build strong interdisciplinary relationships within the school.

“Engineering and the physical sciences are intimately related to the future of the life sciences,” Quatrano said in a University-issued news release. “It is going to be very important in the next decade that the biological and medical sciences integrate with engineering, and I feel that this position, looking back from engineering into the life sciences, will be exciting and challenging for me.”

The appointment comes two years after the former dean of the engineering school, Mary Sansalone, resigned from her post amid controversy. Throughout her less than two years as dean, Sansalone had come under fire for several controversial changes, including the merging of several departments and budget cuts in response to the school’s financial situation.

Tenured faculty within the school submitted a petition to Wrighton calling for Sansalone’s removal. She announced that she would step down in February 2008.

The search for a new permanent engineering dean started in December 2009 when Provost Edward Macias encouraged faculty members to submit applications and nominations for the position.

The applications were reviewed by the Advisory Committee on the Appointment of the Dean of Engineering, co-chaired by Macias; Joseph Ackerman, chair of the chemistry department; and Shelly Sakiyama-Elbert, associate professor of biomedical engineering. Other members of the committee include professors; department chairs; Evan Kharasch, interim vice chancellor for research; and Chris Kroeger, associate dean for engineering and applied science.

Senior Dan Brewster, president of EnCouncil—the student government for the engineering school—said that EnCouncil is looking forward to working with Quatrano.

“I think it’s great that we have a new dean and someone who has experience with Wash. U,” Brewster said. “We are all excited to have him. We haven’t heard of any changes that he will be implementing, but EnCouncil will look forward to working with him,” Brewster said.

Quatrano joined the University faculty in 1998 as the chair of the department of biology.

In his professional life, Quatrano’s research focuses on understanding the mechanisms behind molecular and cellular mechanisms controlling seed development.

Quatrano earned his bachelor’s degree in botany with honors from Colgate University in 1962; his master’s degree in botany from Ohio University, Athens, in 1964; and his doctorate in biology from Yale University in 1968.

“We are starting this year to develop a plan of implementation,” McLeod said. “There will be a group of students, administrators and faculty to plan to develop it and put it in place.”

The changes will not affect current students, but if fully implemented, could apply to the Class of 2014 at the earliest.

“It is always the custom to have the curriculum apply to classes entering only after the plan is put in place,” McLeod said. “It is unfair to make students change their curriculum.”

Some notable changes to the curriculum include replacing the clusters system with an Integrated Learning Model (ILM), replacing the Quantitative Analysis (QA) requirement with a new Numerical Applications (NA) requirement and adding a Language and Culture (LC) requirement. The Implementation and Curriculum Review Committees will work on specific changes for the curriculum throughout the year.

According to the New Curriculum Review Committee Report, presented on April 13, 2009, the current cluster system is “inadequate, unwieldy, sometimes unnecessary, and too demanding.” The report also states “there is little collaboration between instructors in clustered courses that might help further the ends of coordination and integration. In general, clusters do not provide the added value that the Bowen Commission said was a necessary condition for having them.”
The Curriculum Review Committee notes that, among other things, “students can use various options more easily to achieve the goals of integration and coherence.”
In addition to the ILM, the NA requirement is intended to encourage more real-world applications than the QA requirement previously had. While the Curriculum Review Committee will add more specifics to the plan, students eventually “must satisfy the NA requirement within their first three years and should be encouraged to complete it within the first two years.”

The Curriculum Review Committee will also perform a review of Writing 1. The report says “the committee should define the larger goals of Writing 1 and address, in relation to them, issues of format, content, placement, and administrative structure. The possibility of coordinating Writing 1 with the freshman book program and other aspects of the curriculum should also be considered.”

According to McLeod, such changes to curriculum are typical of the University. While Arts & Sciences faculty and students regularly review curriculum in majors and specific courses, larger-scale review, such as the current changes, are done less frequently. When the current curriculum took effect, the Curriculum Review Committee recommended that it be reevaluated after a certain number of years.

A main reason for the changes was the applicability of the new curriculum to real-world uses. According to McLeod, the Curriculum Review Committee always takes real-world preparation into account when it makes these changes.

Though some students do not have a problem with the current system, they would be interested in seeing how the changes will affect future students.
“I think the cluster system is a good system,” senior Hannah Clements said. “For the most part, it forces you to take classes that you wouldn’t normally take and usually end up finding it pretty interesting, and for the most part it’s usually only one or two classes that you weren’t that interested in taking.”

Senior Sarah Brehm said, “Reducing requirements would probably be a good thing, because I’d probably take more classes related to my major, which is what I came to study.”

Despite liking the cluster system as it currently is, Clements would be interested in seeing the changes in practice before making judgments about the new system.

“You come to college to get a liberal arts education, so if they feel like the new system is better able to help students to learn how to think and ask the right questions and be able to go off into the world, fine,” Clements said. “But if it’s going to be an easy way for students to avoid taking classes in the majority of departments, then I wouldn’t necessarily agree with it.”