Graduate Program Review
Texas Tech University
Program Reviewed: Mechanical Engineering
Onsite Review Dates: January 30, 2015
Name of Reviewers
Internal:
Please include name, title, and Department
Mohamed Soliman, Professor, Petroleum Engineering
Richard Stevens, Associate Professor, Natural Resources Management
Brock Williams, Professor, Mathematics and Statistics
External:
Please include name, title, and Department
Feng Lai, Anadarko Presidential Professor, Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of Oklahoma
Yu-Lin Shen, Professor, Mechanical Engineering, University of New Mexico
I.
Academic Unit Description and Strategic Plan
Please evaluate the following:
Vision, Mission and Goals
Very Good
Strategic Plan
Very Good
Please comment on the positive components and suggested areas of improvement.
Vision and Plan: Overall Ranking Very Good
The department has excellent potential for growth in enrollment and research reputation, and has the outline of a good plan to achieve it.
The department has a long-term goal of expanding the faculty with 25 new faculty positions. This will be impractical until significant improvement
is made to departmental facilities. The department should develop smaller short-term plans for faculty expansion which can be implemented as
critical space needs are met.
II.
Program Curriculum
The institution
a preliminary
exam for PhD students is a component of the department's response to assessment and is the primary structural
Please of
evaluate
the following:
response from the department to the Graduate Program Review six years ago. However, there is still disagreement about the details of the exam
which has led to a delay in implementation and confusion among the students. Reaching agreement about the exam and beginning implementation
of whatever
is decided
an important
nextstated
step inprogram
realizing their
plan. goals and purposes
Alignment
ofisprogram
with
andstrategic
institutional
Very Good
Curriculum development coordination and delivery
Needs Improvement
Program learning outcomes assessment
Very Good
Page 1 of 4
Program curriculum compared to peer programs
Very Good
Please comment on the positive components and suggested areas of improvement.
The curriculum is highly effective and and has produced a number of outstanding alumni that have been placed in prestigious positions, many in
academia. Faculty seem happy with their current teaching load and the structured system based on rank and amount of extramural support. There
was wide agreement among faculty and departmental administration that additional faculty would be necessary to enhance enrollment and for
continued growth. Adding in the the areas of Biotechnology and Nanotechnology would help to recruit more female students into the program.
Despite a few suggested modifications (see below), the Raytheon program is a very effective means of increasing graduate student enrollment,
involving experienced engineers into the student ranks, enhancing research productivity and ultimately improving the profile of the department. In
addition, although the 150 hour plan suffers from the same problems as stated below regarding the curriculum, in general, it is another positive
means
enrollment.
III. of increasing
Facultygraduate
Productivity
evaluate
thethe
following:
DespitePlease
these positive
points,
curriculum is perhaps the area that needs the most improvement. There appears to be much miscommunication
among students, departmental graduate coordinators, the Graduate School and the information that is publicly available that makes it confusing for
students when trying to make decisions regarding their curriculum. All of this information should be streamlined into a single conduit that is
Qualifications
internally consistent and of use to all constituents. Underlying this is disagreement within the department regarding fundamental issues such as
whether there should be a preliminary exam, and if there should be, how that exam should be formulated. Whether or not to administer a
Very Good
preliminary exam needs to be implemented immediately. Moreover, this decision needs to be relayed to the entire faculty and grad student
population. There is uncertainty and trepidation by the current students as to whether this decision will affect them or not and the decision to
Publications
"grandfather"
all or a portion of the grad population needs to be made and this information needs to be conveyed quickly.
Good program as a very effective and successful means of increasing graduate enrollment. This program appears to be winding
We see Very
the Raytheon
down and it seems as if there is potential for another program (Transdisciplinary Engineering) to be initiated. We have some specific
recommendation
this:
TeachingforLoad
• in light of the goal of expanding graduate enrollment for the time to come, this is a very effective means of increasing the number of graduate
studentsExcellent
and should be pursued.
• the upper administration should embrace this initiative and strive to move faster in terms of making decisions and making resources available to the
program.
External Grants
• one limitation to the current Raytheon program is that it involves (and benefits) only a limited number of faculty members. Future programs such
as this should
strive to be more inclusive so that they can be embraced by the entire department and have a more equitable positive impact on the
Very Good
entire faculty.
Teaching Evaluations
Very Good
Professional Service
Very Good
Community Service
Very Good
Please comment on the positive components and suggested areas of improvement.
Faculty: Overall Ranking Very Good
Addition of several young enthusiastic faculty is a positive improvement to the department that balances the presence of existing senior faculty.
However it appears that there is some rift between younger and senior faculty regarding views on the preliminary exam, some existing projects and
how to proceed further. The qualifications of the professors, number of publications, and faculty involvement is very high. The teaching load is
excellent and gives professors time to direct research.
Laboratories
are cramped,
andGraduates
we do not see how the department could expand without serious increase in laboratory and office space. We have the
IV.
Students
and
following recommendations:
Please
evaluate
theThe
following:
• Hiring
minority
professors.
addition of new female professors should help the departmental image. It would also help recruiting female
students.
• Enhance communication between administration and Faculty and between faculty members. We found faculty unaware of issues discussed by
Time to degree
administration.
• Encourage the Raytheon Project enrollment. This is an excellent interdisciplinary approach, however young faculty appear to be hesitant to get
Excellent
involved
in as it is not apparent how the project would impact the pursuit of tenure.
• Teaching load seems to be clear and consistent.
• Focus new hiring of faculty on areas of future high impact such bioengineering and nanotechnology. This would help in the area of obtaining more
funding and in recruiting female students.
Page 2 of 4
• Hiring 25 new faculty may be a very long term plan that should be accompanied a road map for laboratory and office space plan for expansion.
Retention
Excellent
Graduate rates
Excellent
Enrollment
Very Good
Demographics
Very Good
Number of degrees conferred annually
Very Good
Support Services
Good
Job Placement
Very Good
Student/ Faculty Ratio
Very Good
Please comment on the positive components and suggested areas of improvement
Graduate Students: Overall Ranking Very Good
The committee met with a significant number the graduate student population. The overall impression is that technically the program is progressing
very well. There were issues with organization, communication and a sense of community.
• Communication. Several issues and student complaints were discussed. In the opinion of the committee, all the issues stemmed from lack of
communication with students. An example was travel outside the country where students did not realize that as a state school, Texas Tech requires a
more rigorous approval process than private universities. Most of all issues would be resolved by periodic communication and openness about the
process.
• Community
feeling. The
design
of the facility in mechanical engineering is not conducive to communication between labs and ultimately students.
V.
Facilities
and
Resources
It would help to hold a meeting once a semester or have students present their work during a monthly seminar.
the following:
• ClassPlease
offering.evaluate
Offered graduate
classes are not announced in advance and there is much confusion of when or whether an advanced graduate class
would be offered. This leaves the student without a concrete degree plan. We suggest publishing the schedule a semester in advance
• Student quality. Students’ quality is very good.
Facilities
• Number of degrees, job placement and student faculty ratio was very good
• Retention and time to graduation is excellent.
Good was impressed with the demographics and the presence of minority students and females. The department recruiting of students is
• The committee
very good.
Facility Support Resources
Good
Financial Resources
Very Good
Staff Resources
Good
Page 3 of 4
Please comment on the positive components and suggested areas of improvement
It is apparent that the department, college and university have invested heavily in the future productivity of its new hires. Renovations of
laboratories for new hires were impressive with attractive and bright working areas with new furniture and state-of-the-art equipment and facilities.
Older laboratory facilities were dated but adequate. Additional space for graduate student offices is of critical importance. Conditions seemed fairly
dire in many situations. Many offices that were likely designed for 2-3 students hold 6-8 and this is not conducive to the productivity levels that are
necessary to be successful in coursework, proposal writing, data analysis and manuscript preparation. The department needs to establish not only a
long term plan but one on the short term as well. Currently there is a long-term plan to expand into other buildings in the college such as the old
Industrial Engineering building. Nonetheless this plan is predicated on obtaining funds for renovation of these anticipated facilities. Funds are
currently
there is no clear plan to obtain them or any clear time line as to the renovation of these facilities. The time required to
VI. unavailable
Overall and
Ranking
obtain these funds and make the renovations could likely and easily span two entire cohorts of Ph.D. students. We feel that even one cohort faced
with the current space issue is unacceptable.
Please provide summative conclusions based on the overall review.
A number of additional needs in the area of Facilities are necessary to improve graduate recruitment, retention and success. Sufficient
office/accounting/travel
are lacking
to facilitatemaking
this aspect
of the departments
mission,
especially
as to how
it appliesproduction.
to graduate education.
Mechanical Engineeringstaff
is a very
good department
significant
progress in both
graduate
enrollment
and research
Currently, only three staff members serve the current 35 Faculty and 144 graduate students and these personnel are overloaded. The scope of the
machine
impressive,
however
much
ofbest
the equipment
was of
World
War II eraThey
and is
needattracting
of renovation.
Much international
of the facultyand
andUS
Their 150shop
hourwas
program
is working
to turn
their
undergraduates
into
MS students.
areinalso
good quality
graduate
students
are from foreign
countries
professional
writing
in English
presents
particular
WeMS
propose
the creation
of a that
students and
are sufficiently
selective
in theirand
admission
policies.
Their
publishing
requirements
forchallenges.
both PhD and
graduates
help ensure
technical
writing
editor either
at the departmental
college
level that could
facilitateDepartment.
the publication process.
their graduates
continue
to raise
profile of TTUorand
the Mechanical
Engineering
The faculty
graduate
of the
website
should are
be reconfigured.
Many graduate students indicated that they found navigating this portion
The
is portion
productive
anddepartmental
their teaching
load policies
excellent.
of the website challenging. In particular, there are a number of cases of conflicting information regarding requirements and procedures. The
graduate handbook should be updated to include an explicit road map to completion of a graduate degree. This handbook should be a single,
stand-alone document that is easy to find on the ME graduate studies web page.
Please provide summative recommendations based on the overall review.
The department has a serious need for more space. The lack of space for labs and offices is a primary impediment preventing the program from
reaching its potential as a world-class research leader. There is a plan to move into the current Industrial Engineering spaces, and this needs to be
given high priority at the college and university level.
We see the Raytheon transdisciplinary PhD program as a great model for expanding enrollment. Mechanical Engineering should consider ways for
the entire department to embrace this model and attempt to bing in additional cohorts from other companies. This would be greatly facilitated by
greater college support and by incentives for faculty involvement. Approval for the department's proposal for rotating international chairs in
transdisciplinary engineering would also advance this goal.
Every effort should be made to develop consensus among the faculty concerning the implementation of the PhD preliminary exams, and these details
about program requirements should be communicated clearly and frequently to the graduate students.
Given the department's potential for graduate growth and its current high undergraduate enrollment, new faculty positions should be created,
especially in the bio and nano areas. The department would also benefit from the hiring of an additional technician and an additional office staff
member.
Page 4 of 4