[Proflist] Re: Fwd: Draft Bachelor's Degree Statement
Alan Robock
robock at envsci.rutgers.edu
Thu Oct 28 11:44:41 MDT 2004
Dear Richard,
Thanks for your reply. Your example is appropriate for a program where
the teaching load is 5 courses per year and you only have an
undergraduate program. In a research univ. with a teaching load of 2
courses per year, and a responsibility for both an undergraduate and
graduate program, it is easy to see that 10 faculty members would be
needed for a robust program, and 6 would be a minimum, assuming some of
the courses could be taught by faculty from related departments. I
would like the statement to reflect these situations, too, while
including ones like yours.
Alan
Professor Alan Robock
Editor, JGR - Atmospheres
Director, Center for Environmental Prediction
Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-732-932-9478
Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644
14 College Farm Road E-mail: robock at envsci.rutgers.edu
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Mower, Richard N wrote:
> I thought that the recommendation for a minimum of 3 faculty was
> intended to ensure a program will have faculty with the expertise to
> cover the three important areas in a typical major; synoptic, dynamic,
> physical (incl instrumentation). We at Central Michigan Univ are in the
> process of changing our concentration to a major which has a core of 34
> hours. Over the course of one year each of our three faculty will teach
> the following courses:
>
> Faculty #1 (16 credit hours)
>
> MET 330 Dynamics I
> MET 335 Dynamics II
> MET 320 Cloud Physics
> MET 201 Weather (for non-majors)
> MET 240 Meteorology (intro course for majors)
>
>
> Faculty #2 (17 credit hours)
>
> MET 250 Physical Properties of atmos
> MET 490 NWP (Considered to be our capstone)
> MET 310 Radiation and thermo
> MET 450 Mesoscale
> MET 210 Weather (for non-majors)
>
>
> Faculty #3 (16 credit hours)
>
> MET 240 Meteorology
> MET 460 Synoptic I
> MET 470 Synoptic II
> MET 302 Remote sensing of atmos
> MET 201 Weather (for non-majors)
>
> It is clear that you can have a very robust major that exceeds the
> minimum course recommendations with 3 faculty. Obviously if teaching
> loads differ from this 3-2 model the # would need to be adjusted
> accordingly.
>
> Neil Mower.
>
>
> Before we start imposing minimum and recommended numbers of faculties, I
> think there needs to be some rationale for the numbers rather than just
> pulling a number out of a hat. How do you arrive at 5 vs 2 or 7 or 20.
> Clearly, the required number depends on the number of courses to be
> taught in the program and the number of students that are serviced by
> the program. A program with 25 students will have a completely
> different recommended number of faculty memebers than a program with
> 150. Also, the scope of the courses taught will influence the
> recommended number. I suspect that the absolute minimum number is easy
> to determine based on a single section of X number of courses required
> to complete the program divided by the standard teaching load. I
> understand where Alan is coming from, I just don't think there is a
> simple answer to the recommended number of faculty. Also, be careful
> for what you ask, if the number is too large, the program could be
> vulnerable to being eliminated.
>
> I am not trying to be totaly negative on this issue, I just
> think we need to be able to justify our position.
>
> David
>
>>>> Alan Robock <robock at envsci.rutgers.edu> 10/20/04 03:06PM >>>
> Dear Mohan,
>
> 1. As you know, I have already made the following suggestion:
>
> I think we need to specify recommended numbers of faculty and not just
>
> the minimum. This would be very valuable for all departments seeking
> to
> hire more faculty. In other disciplines, national accredidation panels
>
> specify the number of faculty needed, and AMS can do a similar service
>
> for us. In the second paragraph from the bottom on page 4, I recommend
>
> the following change:
>
> "At undergraduate colleges with full-time teaching faculty, there
> should
> be a minimum of three faculty members, but the recommended level is
> five
> or more. At research universities, where faculty devote a substantial
>
> amount of time to graduate teaching and research as well as
> undergraduate teaching, there should be a minimum of six faculty
> members, but the recommended level is ten or more to be able to cover
> all the necessary disciplinary areas. The faculty members should have
>
> the expertise ..."
>
> ----
>
> 2. In addition, a resolution was passed quickly at the end of the
> Heads
> and Chairs meeting in Boulder last week that recommended changes in the
>
> statement that would require 27 credits rather than 24 credits in the
> program. I have not yet received a copy of it, but would like to
> recommend against it on a basic philosophical ground.
>
> An undergraduate liberal arts education is the last chance a student
> will have to take courses in literature, fine arts, humanities, and
> social "science." Students can specialize as graduate students or go
> on
> learning about meteorology in their jobs, but I would not like to
> require that they take additional courses as part of their
> undergraduate
> major. This will allow them to take other elective courses in subjects
>
> that will broaden them as people and citizens, which I think is more
> valuable than one more meteorology or related course.
>
> Thanks for considering my views. I feel more strongly about the first
>
> one than the second one.
>
> Alan
>
> Professor Alan Robock
> Editor, JGR - Atmospheres
> Director, Center for Environmental Prediction
> Department of Environmental Sciences Phone:
> +1-732-932-9478
> Rutgers University Fax:
> +1-732-932-8644
> 14 College Farm Road E-mail:
> robock at envsci.rutgers.edu
> New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA
> http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Brenda Ward wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> Dear Colleague,
>>>
>>> On behalf of the Board on Higher Education of the American
> Meteorological
>>> Society, I seek your comments on the revised draft statement on the
>
>>> Bachelor's Degree in Atmospheric Science. The draft statement is
> available
>>> at:
>>>
>>>
> http://my.unidata.ucar.edu/content/publications/Bachelors_degree_stateme
> nt_2004.pdf
>
>>>
>>> For your background, the current AMS statement on this subject is
> available
>>> at:
>>>
>>>
> <http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/bachelor99.html>http://www.ametsoc.org/po
> licy/bachelor99.html
>
>>>
>>> Also, please share this draft statement with colleagues in your
> department.
>>> Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. It
> would
>>> be most helpful if you can send me (mohan at ucar.edu) your comments by
> 15
>>> November.
>>>
>>> Thank you in anticipation,
>>>
>>> Mohan Ramamurthy
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ProfList mailing list
> ProfList at ucar.edu
> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/proflist
>
More information about the ProfList
mailing list