Andrew Hibel, HigherEdJobs: With a strong endorsement from President Obama, the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness (PCJC) have launched a partnership to “measure, evaluate, and celebrate excellence in retention, graduation, and diversity in engineering education.” Why is this partnership important?
Dr. Gary S. May, Georgia Institute of Technology: Over the past several years, we have learned that it is clear that we have to think differently as we showcase engineering to our nation’s young people. The partnership between industry, academia, and government lends a variety of expertise as we develop appropriate and relevant metrics to recognize excellence in education. Together we are working on identifying and recognizing best practices in recruiting, retaining, and graduating a workforce that is equipped to succeed in a global economy that is tied to technology and innovation.
Hibel: You have a strong connection to this initiative as you provided direction to the PCJC regarding the creation of a national recognition system for universities that excel at retention and graduation criteria. You were also a speaker at the PCJC reception in 2012 hosted by President Obama. In your speech you mentioned, “We have to think differently as we showcase engineering to our nation’s young.” How do colleges and universities do this?
May: Engineering is a poorly understood profession. Thirty-five percent of Americans have no idea how engineers spend their time or think we work in boiler rooms or run trains. Colleges and universities must contribute to a more accurate and heightened awareness of engineering and its role in society. Our appeal must tap into societal impact and the hopes and dreams of prospective students and the public. We have to find some way to make engineering part of the popular culture in order to have a large and steady supply of engineers. If we want our profession to grow and flourish, engineering must be widely understood and appreciated.
Hibel: Congratulations on Georgia Tech’s impressive 80 percent six-year graduation rate. However, it is shown that the national trend for graduation rates is significantly less, with an ASEE survey showing a 22 percent rate at public institutions and 45 percent at private institutions. What are possible reasons that the graduation rates are lower across the nation?
May: Much of it comes back to inadequate pre-collegiate academic preparation, stagnant and less-than-engaging pedagogy, and a curriculum that is not clearly connected to engineering providing solutions to the nation’s challenges.
Hibel: What are some best practices that colleges can implement to improve retention and graduation rates and does advice or implementation differ for private versus public institutions?
May: I do not think there is a significant difference for private and public institutions, except perhaps private institutions tend to have greater resources to implement some programmatic interventions. Examples of such proven interventions include summer bridge programs to smoothen the high school to college transition, tutoring, peer mentoring, and course clustering for underrepresented students. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, we need to find ways to adopt and adapt these techniques using a more systemic approach. We need to focus on encouraging students to “stay with it” and provide mentoring and role models. While majoring in the STEM field is rigorous, it is extremely rewarding. Having exciting, hands-on, real world applications to problems as the focus of the classroom can inspire students to persist in their studies. Active learning and engagement are key factors.
Hibel: What are the various impacts that may be felt if colleges and universities don’t raise this number?
May: Half of the technical workforce is over 40, and almost one-third of technical workers are over 50. It is projected that in 2020, the U.S. workforce will be 50 percent female and 31 percent minority. Unfortunately those numbers are at odds with the changing composition of both the population and the total workforce. They are sharply at odds with a predominantly white, male, and able bodied STEM workforce.
Hibel: Where do U.S. colleges and universities stand in terms of the quality and quantity of engineering graduates compared to our global competitors and why?
May: The U.S. is still the location of choice for students wanting a first-rate engineering education. I do not see that changing in the foreseeable future. All data that I have seen still indicates that the standards found in many other countries are not the same as the academic rigor found in U.S. engineering programs. You have to look closely to see if programs are producing technicians as opposed to real engineers. Also, some of the graduates of these programs lack the capacity for creativity and innovation that is found in U.S. engineering graduates.
Hibel: At the same PCJC reception, Energy Secretary Chu encouraged the deans to “concentrate on research and education that will bolster a renaissance in manufacturing,” and said funding from the DOE can help. He went on to say “We will help get faculty excited.” What are your ideas of how to get faculty involved and excited?
May: If you want faculty to be involved and excited, you need to provide the proper environment for scholarship. Research funding is a critical issue. The decline in federal support for research has significantly hampered the ability of faculty to innovate and contribute to solving grand challenges. Ignoring the need for resources, equipment, and facilities for fundamental discovery is not only a threat to our long-term economic growth, but a threat to attracting and retaining the best and brightest faculty.
Hibel: In your current role as the Dean of the College of Engineering and Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, you provide leadership to over 400 faculty members and 13,000 students. What are three tactics you employ in order to be the most effective leader to faculty?
May: Two of the most important things to learn in life are learning how to listen and learning how to wait. The third tactic I would say is to be accessible. Each semester I go out into our schools and hold “office hours” where anyone can drop in to talk, sort of like a live suggestion box. I have regular meetings with graduate and undergraduate students and try to meet with parents, prospective students, and alumni frequently. Although fictional, one visionary leader that I admire is Captain James T. Kirk of Star Trek. Some of his leadership lessons include: “don’t believe in no-win scenarios,” “sometimes rules are meant to broken,” and “accept advice but make your own decisions.”
Hibel: Kirk seems like an appropriate role model for an engineering professor! Turning to the role of mentor–what advice do you give to engineering students as they enter the job search/interviewing process in the professional world? Would you offer different advice for professionals going through the same job search/interviewing process who desire to work at colleges and universities?
May: My advice to both students and professionals is to be competitive and start planning for the next position on day one (or even sooner). Networking, staying flexible about career options, and gaining experience beyond the bench or classroom makes young scientists marketable. Play to your strengths, cultivate a specialty, and have a mentor. A mentor’s support is crucial to moving on to a successful career whether it’s in academia, industry, a government lab, or science education. These rules apply to both engineering students and those seeking to work in a college or university.
I do tell graduate students seeking academic positions to develop a comprehensive strategy for their teaching, research, and service activities. They need to make sure that they have teaching experience, mentor undergrad students, and have their own mentors.
Hibel: One final question to end the interview–what aspect of working in academia are you most passionate about and why?
May: I am passionate about enhancing the participation of underrepresented minorities in STEM fields, especially those who want to go on to academic careers. I strongly believe that a diverse faculty can carry out the mission of a university better than a homogenous faculty. The more diverse the talent pool is the more access universities will have to creativity, ingenuity, and innovative ideas. I had the opportunity to start a program at Georgia Tech called FACES – an acronym for Facilitating Academic Careers in Engineering and Science. In partnership with three other Atlanta institutions – Emory University, Morehouse College, and Spelman College – we have helped produce more than 400 underrepresented minority Ph.D. graduates in STEM fields.