Excerpt from Annual Report by Ron Lipsman to Steve Halperin on Graduate Education

March 15, 2002

Graduate Education

As you know the Graduate Education Task Force has morphed into the Graduate Education Working Group (GEWG), which consists of the directors of the nine graduate programs in the College as well as two student representatives. I communicate with these folks on a regular basis, but our most intense interaction is through once-per-semester sessions of GEWG. I already reported to you on various consequences of the fall session—in particular, my memo of October 26, 2001 containing the Fall 01 data and some conclusions, as well as two memos (October 30, 2001 and November 6, 2001) detailing the discussions surrounding the NAGPS survey. In the spring session held recently, we discussed several items (agenda attached) and I subsequently asked the graduate directors to prepare brief reports highlighting what they had reported. Those reports are also attached. What follows is a series of bullets summarizing what I see as the most important points raised, and a few personal conclusions.

Program-specific comments:

• Math.

1. The inauguration of the RITs (Research Interaction Teams), despite the lack of VIGRE funding, is an important development. This has the potential to change the whole research cooperation paradigm in the department.
2. The renewed emphasis on teacher training is a welcome development.
3. The decision to re-enter the VIGRE race, yet again, and the IGERT proposal reveal an unwillingness to give up in this regard. I applaud their stamina.
• AMSC. The new emphasis on improving "communication skills" is a great idea.
• STAT. Stat graduate students have more access to internship programs than do other math students.
• Geology. I think their reluctance to apply for a Block grant is a mistake. Other small programs have done so successfully.
• Astronomy.
1. An example of a small department with a Block grant program.
2. I am very impressed with the quality of their graduate student placements.
• CHPH. Given their small size, the amount they have extracted from the Block grant program is impressive.
• Meteorology.
1. Like Geology, they should apply for a Block grant. Maybe they should do so together.
2. The recent self-organization of their graduate students, especially with a research emphasis, is wonderful.
• Physics.
1. Their Block grant program is viewed as the most successful by the Graduate School. Actually, Math may be doing just as well.
2. I am impressed by the fact that virtually all graduate students attend multiple conferences.
• CS.
1. The Graduate School was critical of the administration of their Block grant program. I'm not sure it's warranted.
2. The $500 slush fund they provide to all students is unique in the College, and very helpful to their students.

General comments and conclusions

· The perceived and real inadequacy of the size of GA stipends continues to be the problem of greatest concern for our graduate directors

· The rate of graduate applications continues to rise, but yield rates are not improved. One speculates that the previous bullet speaks to this issue.

· There is great opposition to the idea of imposing a requirement that all graduate students publish a paper before they can receive their degree. The graduate directors feel that this should be strongly encouraged, but not mandated.

· The Block grant program plays an increasingly important role in our recruitment efforts. There is some dissatisfaction at Graduate School with our management of our programs. Some of it is sour grapes, but some is legitimate in that we don't document clearly enough how we are using the money. A major concern of our people is that there is no faculty member from CMPS currently serving on the Fellowship Committee. I intend to investigate that.

· I am impressed by the many ways that our departments elevate the graduate experience. Of the various items we discussed—conference participation, journal publication, job placement, for example—we are doing well at a substantial number of these

· Everyone, including the students in GEWG—one of whom participated in the NAGPS survey—believes that the whole thing was at best a waste of time and at worst misleading. Nevertheless, they promised to pay it more heed next year.

· Important: I am still impressed by Destler's observation a couple years ago that the campus has paid great attention to improving many aspects of its operation, but not graduate education. It may be that we could mimic some of the things done at the undergraduate level in an appropriate way. This might involve special recognition at commencement, a prize for the best thesis, identification of a small cadre of graduate students who are distinguishing themselves during their progress toward degree. I would like to explore this idea with GEWG next fall.