I recieved by bachelors and masters degrees from RPI and am a Professional Engineer in the States of New York and Massachusetts. While I don’t throw the RPI name around professionally, I am proud of the education I received, even if it was outrageously and unnecessarily expensive. The reason for stating my qualifications and experience is not to brag but rather to support my thoughts which are noted below. Such ideas may be considered radical to some people, however at this point in my career, I think I have earned the right to speak my mind.
As a former graduate, I have been the recipient of the various forms of propaganda that RPI produces for mass consumption. I normally flip through the documents, laugh or cringe, and then toss them in the garbage.
However, I recently received the Spring 2004 School of Engineering news and it forced me to realize how truly disappointed I have become with my alma mater. While I myself am not a fan or suits and ties, I realize that such apparel is commonplace in business. However, the section “Dean’s Message” showed Dr. William Baeslack dressed like the CEO of a major multinational corporation rather than a dean or college professor. Such an impression may be perceived on my part but it certainly sets the tone. However, the jacket and tie are but a mere warmup for the corporate jargon that permeates his message.
The dean proudly boasts that “we will call even more on the resources of our corporate partners” and that students “live entrepreneurship every business day.” He speaks of students who haven’t even graduated yet! Has RPI’s mission been solely reduced to being the farm team for Corporate America? What happened to the notion of teaching engineering students how to be problem solvers and the process of learning, regardless of the topic? This concept of training the next wave of engineering robots for Corporate America is further stated in the newsletter.
Apparently RPI engineers are not considered good by the outside world unless the Institute submits proposals to large companies for equipment and funding. In other words, RPI must be publically and directly connected to large companies in order for the proper visibility to occur. That is a difficult concept for me to accept on a number of levels. The obvious issue is that of money. Those of us who have paid the astronomically high tuition at RPI have to wonder why the Institute cannot afford new equipment on their own? More importantly, it seems that RPI is having trouble balancing the presence of professional mentors without saturating young minds with the concept of big business. The President’s presence on a number of corporate boards does not help with this image or help to bring some much needed balance.
The issues of funding and gaining the spotlight have been problematic for the department of environmental engineering, where I received my masters degree. The department of environmental engineering, due in part to their black sheep status have been shuffled from the departments of civil engineering, chemical engineering, and even nuclear engineering in the last ten years. Funding for equipment or materials has historically been scant and the issue of the environment has been neglected at RPI since time immemorial. The department of environmental engineering, the professors, and their accomplishments are rarely, if ever, presented in the glossy magazines or mentioned by the President to the press.
Many other leading technical institutes understand the importance of the environment and are leading the way on research in topics such as global warming, acid rain, global water supply and wastewater treatment, solid waste management, and many others. These problems are global in nature and are directly related to human consumption, technology, and lifestyles. I’m sorry but I don’t think that redesigning the Saturn automobile to “appeal to Generation Y buyers” meets the definition of a true societal concern or cause for inclusion in the engineering newletter. I also hate to break the news to RPI, but technology will not likely solve the day when dealing with the environment. We need the environment for survival but it does not need us.
I will close by requesting that RPI provide a more objective perspective in the items sent to alumni. Also, please highlight any associated research being performed in the department of environmental engineering and the dedicated professors who have inspired many of us to pursue careers in environmental science and engineering.
James Malcolm
Alumnus
