“The goal is that every student will have an entrepreneurial experience, be a part of an Undergraduate Research Project, and have an in-depth research experience, similar to a design class in the Engineering School ” said Dr. Jackson.

The Institute core curriculum constitutes core-body of knowledge required in all undergraduate degree programs.

“As part of the Performance Plan for Undergraduate Education, [the Provost’s Office] has undertaken a review of the Institute core curriculum,” said Gary Gabriele, vice provost and dean of undergraduate education.

The School of Engineering has already begun to look into revisions of its core curriculum which would be required of all incoming students.

The core engineering program, under director Professor Kevin Craig, has recently formed an advisory council to examine current course content and requirements.

“We are trying to redefine what we feel is going to be a fundamental body of knowledge that we feel all engineering students should have that will support them in their departments,” said Donald Bunk, professor of mechanical engineering and council member.

Acknowledging that decisions passed onto faculty without input are not usually fully implemented, Craig is working to gather feedback early in the process from both faculty and students.

Initial steps in this process included distributing a questionnaire to each department through council members to identify what core engineering topics are important for each program.

“[The Council] agrees that the core engineering curriculum needs a review. I like what I’ve heard so far from Kevin Craig, and look forward to the opportunity to provide input to the process,” said Matt Rudary, a member of the Student Advisory Council for Engineering.

“We must have the enthusiastic support of every engineering department,” Craig says.

The group began meeting early last month and plans to submit a preliminary paper to the advisory committee on April 29 for distribution to the Engineering School in time for its May meeting.

Craig hopes the paper will generate a significant amount of feedback from administrators.

Currently professors teaching core engineering courses are given only a textbook and a course syllabus. Bunk is currently working on creating a common format for a more detailed course description and syllabi.

The council is “looking in catalogs and planning on visiting [other colleges and universities] to see how they view this core body of knowledge,” Craig said. This research could result in anything from more clearly defined course outcomes to a complete restructuring of a course, including its removal or a change in the number of assigned credit hours.

Organizers hope to build more interdisciplinary bridges by standardizing the curriculum. They believe that topics covered in one week of a course should be applicable to topics taught the next week in another course.

Although no definite changes have been made, there are plans to separate the chemistry and materials portions of Chemistry of Materials I and II. This change, along with a completed syllabus for Introduction to Engineering Analysis will be in place for next fall.

Professor Christoph Stein-bruchel, associate professor of materials science and engineering, had much to say about the changes that are being considered to the chemistry of materials sequence. “At the present time, the two subjects are intermingled in both semesters.  This obscures the fact that chemistry is probably the most basic science for understanding the behavior of materials, and it makes it more difficult for students to appreciate the wide range of materials properties and their impact on other engineering disciplines,” he stated.