Dean Halperin appointed the CMPS Graduate Education Task Force and charged it to set up a process of facilitation through which the graduate programs in CMPS would develop objectives for improving the quality of their products, as well as action plans for implementing those objectives. Dean Halperin's charge is reproduced on Page 2 below. After an initial period of deliberation, the Task Force developed its own charge to the graduate programs. That document is reproduced on Page 3. The bulk of this report is comprised of the plans developed by the CMPS graduate programs in response to those charges. We note that at the outset of this process, Vice President Destler challenged the campus graduate programs to produce plans for improving the quality of their students and programs. We view the plans in this report as a response to the challenges posed by both Dean Halperin and Vice President Destler. We also note that as part of the FY01 APAC enhancement process, CMPS submitted a proposal in October 1999 to the Provost's Office for enhanced financial support of graduate education. (That proposal is attached to this report as an Appendix.)

The Task Force began by meeting with Dean Halperin and Vice President Destler. It then formulated a concrete charge to the graduate programs (see Page 3 below). In response, the units submitted preliminary plans for improving the quality of their graduate programs and students. The Task Force then engaged in a frank discussion of those plans, trying to identify those features that we thought would be highly effective, and those that would be less so. One of our primary goals was "cross-fertilization" in the sense that we encouraged each unit to copy those features of other unit's plans that would also be effective for its own programs. We also listened to testimony from department chairs describing how they felt the plans would advance their department's academic goals. At the same time, the members of the Task Force were soliciting opinions from faculty and graduate students in their units about the plans. With all of that input, the Task Force then engaged in a final round of evaluation. We will elaborate on the following points below, but we identified:

• those features of the various plans that we thought were most novel, and that would be highly effective;
• those features that had originated in one unit's plan, and that had wound up as an integral part of at least one other plan;
• those aspects of our programs that we were already doing, and which, although they are crucial to our success, we felt should be done routinely by all our units, and so did not qualify as a novel feature that merited additional support;
• the specific objectives in each plan against which progress could be measured in several years time;
• a concrete budget that would function as a proposal if the CMPS enhancement proposal for support of graduate education is funded by APAC.

We conveyed these points to the units, and the final reports included below were then written.

This narrative continues on Page 4.

TO: Administrative Council

FROM: Steve Halperin

DATE: October 14, 1999

The campus has set a goal to increase the overall quality of campus graduate students and our graduate programs and, in particular, to raise the entering average GRE score by 20 points each year over the next five years. The charge of the Task Force is to provide a forum for our departments to work together as they develop specific objectives and ways of achieving them. These should deal with questions such as quality of entering students, methods of recruitment, quality of academic experience (new programs, streamlining of process, mentoring…,), teaching training, career development, and financial and infrastructure support. This process should be completed by February 15, 2000, by which time each department should have identified its own specific objectives and action plan. Together these should constitute the Task Force report.

Graduate education is the responsibility of our individual units. The expectation is that, working together and trading ideas, we will achieve a set of ambitious, achievable expectations and mechanisms for accomplishing them.

SH/ao

The plans that comprise this report stand by themselves as testimony to the determination manifested by CMPS units to offer the highest quality graduate programs. Before presenting those plans, we delineate here several critical issues that must be understood by the campus if it is to advance the cause of graduate education, and then we elaborate on some of the bulleted comments on Page 1.

• The paramount issue in all of our CMPS graduate programs is graduate student financial support. It is an indisputable fact that College Park's TA/GRA stipends are not competitive in relation to the schools and programs with which we compete. Most of our units have begun to deal with this severe problem by substantially augmenting stipends out of their internal budgets. The decision to do so is not arrived at lightly, as it constricts resources available for the other critical aspects of their programs (faculty salaries, experimental labs, and undergraduate education, just to name a few). This problem must eventually be dealt with at the campus level, as it is too expensive for local units to handle on a permanent basis.
• The next most important issue is graduate student quality of life—in particular, quality of office and lab space, access to high level computing, research support, and benefits. It is widely acknowledged that College Park's benefit package for graduate students is quite good. Would that the same could be said of the other three. Again, our units are striving to deal with these quality of life issues locally, but campus attention would be helpful.
• Our graduate directors feel that the most crucial contribution they can make to the decision of a potential graduate student considering enrollment at College Park is made during a visit to the campus. Our departments have, and are proposing more, bold and imaginative visiting programs for applicants. Campus support, either logistical or financial, for this crucial aspect of recruiting should be under consideration.
• Vice President Destler has challenged the graduate programs to raise the average GRE scores of entering students by 100 points. That would be difficult for CMPS programs as they already enjoy the highest GRE scores on campus, well within 100 points of the maximum in some cases. Nevertheless, we do not intend to rest on our laurels. We believe the plans in this report represent an aggressive and creative approach to improving the quality and quantity of our graduate student body, and we are committed to their implementation.
• Finally, we wish to distinguish between our qualitative and quantitative goals. Our large programs (Applied Math, Computer Science, Math, Physics, and Statistics) are determined to improve the (already fine) quality of their student bodies and programs. Our small programs (Astronomy, Chemical Physics, Geology, and Meteorology) seek to increase quantity as well as to enhance quality. Incidentally, the reader will note that Geology and Meteorology have combined forces with ESSIC (the Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center), whose graduate program will begin operation next year, to write a combined Earth Science graduate program plan.

• Novel features of the plans

1. Undergraduate Parallel Sessions: This is an idea from the Math program. Every year the Math Department runs several national and international research conferences. The plan is to hold parallel sessions addressed to undergraduates and invite talented juniors and seniors to attend (supported). The goal is to entice them to eventually apply and enroll in our Math graduate programs.
2. Undergraduate Lecture Service: The idea is to develop a cadre of faculty who would be prepared to address undergraduates at institutions to which they travel (for their own professional reasons). This is another Math plan, and the basic goal is the same as in the first item.
3. Student Showcase weekend: This program is already under way in the Physics Department. An elaborate weekend of activities is planned and graduate applicants are invited to attend and participate. The observation is that when groups of potential enrollees visit us at the same time, they form partnerships that result in groups of students deciding simultaneously to enroll.
4. Summer School Research Internship Program: This program, to be run jointly by ESSIC, Geology and Meteorology, will piggy-back on a successful summer program run by NASA/Goddard. It should be possible to attract truly outstanding students to participate, some of whom will be likely to apply and enroll.
5. Signing Bonuses: Developed by Astronomy, this program will provide "signing bonuses" that could be used by new enrollees for computing equipment, books or travel.

• Cross-Fertilization

1. The showcase weekend idea.
2. The idea of faculty visits to smaller schools, especially to attract minority students.
3. The idea of running a special colloquium, with attendant social features, intended primarily for new students.
4. The notion of addressing quality of life issues.

• Everyday Aspects

1. Orientation
2. TA Training
3. Graduate Student Mentoring
4. Advising
5. RA Support
6. Production of promotional materials
7. Promoting partnerships—with other college units, campus units, government labs and the private sector.

One final note: The Task Force membership was expanded in December 1999 from its original contingent of seven (see the roster on Page 3) to include two graduate students and the director of the Chemical Physics program. The director of the Math program represented the Applied Math and Statistics programs.

The plans presented below appear in the following order:

Math (including Applied Math and Statistics)

Physics

Computer Science

Astronomy

Earth Science

Chemical Physics