Integrating the Sciences, Mathematics and Technology
Task Force Meeting Notes
December 15, 1999

Present: Dick Roberds, Chair. Bob Able, Roddy Amenta, Steve Frysinger, Bob Kolvoord, Gina MacDonald, Bob McKown, Dick Rice, Jim Steele, Cheryl Talley, Gerry Taylor, Tom Wood. Paul Henriksen, note taker.

1. Preliminary Items/Announcements

a. An offsite meeting will be held at the Sheraton Hotel on Tuesday, January 4, 2000. Begin at 8:30 a.m. End at 2:00 p.m. Bring all the recommendations and ideas that you have collected (downloaded from the web) to this point. The focus will be to begin identifying viable recommendations.

b. The meeting time for next semester will be decided by an email vote. The candidate times are Thursday at 10:30 and 4:30, Friday at 10:30, and a Monday or Wednesday time to accommodate Bob Able or others.

c. The University forum will be held on January 13th (Thursday) at 4:00 p.m. It will be in Taylor, Showker, or CISAT in that order of preference as we seek a suitable room.

2. Discussion of "Center" Concept

We need to offer a name. Possible names are Faculty Support Center, Faculty Resource Center, Center for Research and Scholarship, others?

This will be an administrative entity with an associated physical facility. The initial thought was that it may have only limited centralized facilities (e.g. a faculty lounge, seminar room), but will have a full-time "Coordinator". We decided, however, to think big and propose an entire center facility.

The Center will cut across the colleges and disciplines. Its purpose will principally be to facilitate, draw together, and enable faculty and disparate activities. The CENTER will have a set of agendas that will include involvement in activities such as:

· Interdisciplinary academic program development (A process outside the tradition C&I/college support will be needed for program development, support, and approval.)
· Undergraduate research, with activities such as: NCUR, Science Fair, JETS, etc.
· Grant-acquisition assistance and grant management
· Business, industry, and government interface. Assists in memoranda of agreements, intellectual property, agreements of nondisclosure, entrepreneurial activity, etc.
· K-12 outreach. Examples:
Science and Mathematics Education Center
Virginia Science Resource Network
Digital Earth
· Knowledge exchange (seminar development and presentation)
· Research equipment management

3. Discussion of Centers of Excellence

In addition to the "global" center described above, the University will seek to develop centers of excellence in the future. (These areas will be recommended on the basis of the criteria that were developed by the Task Force -- below.) To this point, certain areas are emerging that show particular promise:

· Materials Science Center
· Center for the Environment
· Biotechnology
· Neuroscience
· Industrial Design
· Center for Visualization, Computation, and Data Analysis
· Science and Math Education (K-16)
· Manufacturing operations

4. Discussion of Criteria

The criteria will be used to assist the Task Force in developing its recommendations from the many ideas and proposals we receive up until January 1st.. The previous list of criteria was blended and reduced to nine. These are:

1. Building on existing strengths.
Does the program take advantage of existing strengths?

2. Innovativeness and timeliness.
What is the degree of innovation of the proposed program?
Is it timely for the program to begin now?

3. Breadth of support (number of faculty, or number of departments, or number of colleges involved).
Will it encourage collaboration?
Is it of a seriously interdisciplinary nature?

4. Positive impact on undergraduate students (education).
Does it focus on students and their employability?
Does it have academic rigor?
Does the proposed program have flexibility?
Will it result in the students' development?
Is there no negative effect on undergraduate program(s)?

5. Sustainability
Does it have potential for continuous improvement?
Is the program of a long-term, lasting nature?
If research, will it eventually be self-supporting?

6. Positive impact on General Education
Does it have value for the non-science major?

7. It brings distinction to University
Does it represent a distinctive JMU niche?

8. It addresses the quality of impact on society
Does it add value to the region, state, or nation?
Does it add quality of life to the stakeholders?

9. The program is sufficiently focused.
Are the program goals and objectives clear?
Is the program too broad?