Institutional and Educational Challenges

Gerhard L Weissler, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Southern California, and founder of this series of International Conferences on Vacuum Ultraviolet Radiation Physics, died of cancer on Sunday 13 June 1989, at his home in Encino, California at the age of 71.Professor Weissler was born in northern Germany in 1918 and, after having earned his BS degree in physics from theInstitute of Technology, Berlin in 1938, he came to the United States as a graduate student in physics at UC Berkeley. He earned his MS and PhD degrees in physics from UC Berkeley in 1941 and 1942, respectively. From 1942 to 1944 Professor Weissler was an instructor of medical physics at the University of California Medical School. In 1944. Professor Weissler joined the Department of Physics of the University of Southern California as an AssistantProfessor, where he was promoted to full professor in 1952. In addition to directing his primary research program in atomic and molecular physics, he also served as the Department Chairman from 1951 to 1956. and directed USC's NuclearAccelerator Laboratory from 1955 to 1965. He retired in 1988.In 1979, USC honored him with an Associates Award for Excellence in Teaching and in March 1989 he received USC'sSpecial Emeritus Award. Professor Weissler was also a fellow of both the American Physical Society and the Optical Society of America.His illustrious career was devoted to the pursuit of excellence, and he succeeded admirably. He was one of the preeminent pioneers in the field of vacuum ultraviolet spectroscopy, carrying out research in all phases of vacuum ultraviolet physics. He invented the condensed spark discharge light sources which were a key to the early investigations of both the structure and absorption cross sections of atoms and molecules. He also used these light sources to study solid state and collective phenomena. The availability of his very bright light sources, together with increasingly improved vacuum systems, made much of this work possible for the first time. The early literature on the absorption spectra of atoms and molecules in the VUV region is dominated by the work of Professor Weissler and his many students. As his research evolved, specific processes involved in the absorption of very short wavelength radiation were identified. Quantifying these processes is the subject of much current research, as is evident from the variety of papers presented in the present proceedings.For almost 30 years, the large and active group of faculty members, students, and research associates assembled byProfessor Weissler made USC one of the world's centers in ultraviolet atomic and molecular spectroscopy. Many membersof this group are well known scientists who have established distinguished careers in major universities and industrial and government laboratories; one of his post-doctoral fellows is at this time President of the University of Munich, one of the leading universities in the world. The highly successful careers of his many graduate and postdoctoral students were surely given a running start by the quality of their research experience under his guidance. His enthusiasm and extraordinary energy level were highly infectious, and he will be sorely missed by all of us who knew him.Professor Weissler is survived by his wife, Claire, and two sons, Roderick and Robert.

Innovative organizations have long recognized the of collaboration between well-matched partners. University and government labs can make particularly appealing partners, as they often have unique capabilities, expertise, and intellectual property (IP) portfolios. Indeed, as Parson describes in a 2013 journal article, a number of large pharmaceutical companies have formed long-term collaborations with universities focused on early-stage research. Other industries are following suit, seeking to access university and government resources to feed innovation.Industry interest in collaborations is matched by interest among universities and government labs in working with industry to enhance technology development and transfer. For many universities, sponsored research agreements are becoming at least as important as licensing revenue. For example, in a 2012 RTM article, Henry Foley describes how Pennsylvania State University, recognizing that the value to Penn State of industry-sponsored research lies in the research itself, in the support of that research and in the relationship with the partner, not in the creation and ownership of IP, instituted a policy allowing research sponsors to license at no cost any IP resulting from sponsored research.The result of this growing interest has been a number of programs and policies intended to facilitate industry collaborations. This shift has significant implications for industry. By leveraging basic research and technology created at federal labs or research universities, companies can reduce sunk costs and risk associated with the early stages of innovation. Maintaining a strong relationship with a noncommercial lab may also provide other benefits, as Dan Sharp notes in a 2013 article for Texas CEO Magazine, including helping a company stay informed about ongoing research. In addition, collaborations with universities may offer a testing ground for future employees and a source of new talent.However, building such collaborations is not always simple, as differences in institutional culture and issues around IP and knowledge sharing must be navigated. Companies would be well served to pursue such collaborations in a methodical and strategic manner. That process begins with understanding the very different perspectives of noncommercial research labs, as J. L. Contreras and C. M. McManis note in a 2011 book chapter.One primary difference between commercial and academic research is the prevalence of intrinsic rather than extrinsic drivers in the absence of overarching business needs. Peter Schuerman lists the primary motivators for university researchers as, in priority order:* Mastery. In academia, mastery is measured by peer recognition. Such recognition is profoundly important in shaping career trajectory; the award of tenure, for instance, is determined by the assessment of the applicant's body of work by a committee of peers.* Autonomy. Academic researchers seek funding to do the research they want to do.* Purpose. Academic researchers look for their work to have an impact.Government researchers share many of these same motivations, although they usually do not operate in the same kind of publish-or-perish environment.Both university and government research organizations may operate at a slower pace than industry may be used to. Government and academic institutions may also share similar attitudes toward the IP resulting from their work. For the most part, these organizations don't bring their innovations to market themselves, relying instead on licensing or other mechanisms to develop and commercialize their technologies. Rather than garnering direct benefit, these organizations are focused on ensuring they are being good stewards of the research and of the taxpayer dollars that support it.Noncommercial research labs' priorities and definitions of success may be fundamentally different from those in the business world, and possibilities for collaboration may also be limited by IRS rules and government policies. …

Research experiences for undergraduates have increased in availability at universities and government laboratories throughout the nation. Government agencies, universities and private donors support these activities with a variety of expectations, including providing a more skilled workforce, creating a greater emphasis on graduate education and increased retention of students in highly technical fields. While the value of these programs has been well-established, there is a paucity of empirically-based research on the various models and practices of these experiences that have the greatest impact on the students. The focus of this study was a National Science Foundation funded Research Experience for Undergraduate (REU) program at a 4-year college in the Midwest funded for over 7 years. In a previous study we found that REU students interacted more frequently with graduate students than their faculty advisor while in the program. In this study we examined more closely the role of the graduate student mentors and how it directly influenced the REU student experience. Two data sources analyzed in this study were preand post-program surveys and semi-structured interviews, both administered to the REU students. Three main themes emerged from the data, including: 1) Academics and Careers, 2) Teaching and Learning, and 3) Building Relationships. When examining the nature of these interactions, 75% of REU students reported having influential experience with their graduate student mentors related to Academic Programs and Careers and 100% reported influential experiences related to Teaching and Learning and Building Relationships. In exploring Academic Programs and Careers further, many of the experiences were related directly to the undergraduates’ academic and career paths and exposure to graduate school and laboratory careers. In Teaching and Learning, REU students described various methods and strategies (i.e., demonstration, questioning, and discussion) the graduate students used to teach them about their research project. In regards to Building Relationships, the graduate students were described as mentors, collaborators, and supervisors. In summary, this research provides insight into role of the graduate student mentors in an REU program and how they directly influence undergraduate students experiences with engineering research, graduate school and careers while in the program.

Faculty members of higher education institutions mainly have three major elements in their job description, i.e. teaching, administrative duties and research. Keeping a sound balance of distribution among all the three elements over an academic year, either in a semester-based system or in a yearly based system, is of utmost importance for the job satisfaction of a faculty member. All these three components need time, devotion, dedication, skills and expertise. Teaching the courses which are relevant to the expert area or the domain of the faculty members need to be considered. i.e., subjects that consume less time for preparation. This study is done with the objectives of identifying the factors affecting the faculty supply in Academic Institutions and to understand the key drivers of post graduate (Management) students towards taking the Teaching profession. Retaining the so-called "faculty members" at these "knowledge centers" has become a critical challenge in higher education. This study aims to examine the effect on teacher retention in private higher education institutions of "pay satisfaction" and "opportunities of learning and development" based on prior research. Faculty and administrators alike are not happy with the current state of affairs. In the absence of a transparent framework, stakeholders have plenty of reasons to point fingers at one another.

Government by Algorithm: Artificial Intelligence in Federal Administrative Agencies

Among graduate public health students, Black, Indigenous, and other people of color (BIPOC; including Latinx, Asian, Middle Eastern and North African, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and multiracial) experience educational and personal challenges that require institutional support and reform. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of an antiracist mentorship program on the sense of belonging and overall experience among BIPOC and first-generation students at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health in New York City. We used 2 data sources to retrospectively evaluate experiences of BIPOC and first-generation graduate students: the 2021 Mentoring of Students and Igniting Community (MOSAIC) Student Survey (n = 39), which collected data on experiences of students who participated in the MOSAIC program, and the 2016-2020 Graduate Exit Surveys (n = 1222), which collected data on graduating students' experiences, satisfaction, and perspectives on diversity, equity, and inclusion. A difference-in-difference analysis compared overall experience, public health career preparedness, quality of life, and department satisfaction among all students before (2016-2018) and after (2019-2020) implementation of the MOSAIC program. Satisfaction among graduate students attributable to the MOSAIC program introduced in 2019 increased by about 25%. Compared with students who had not been exposed to MOSAIC, students exposed to MOSAIC had a 25% positive difference (P = .003) in overall graduate school experience, a 28% difference (P < .001) in quality of life, and a 10% difference (P = .001) in satisfaction with their departments. Mentorship for BIPOC and first-generation public health graduate students offers an effective strategy to improve student experiences and satisfaction with graduate departments and, ultimately, may help students meet educational and professional goals.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created urgent demand around the world for knowledge generation about a novel coronavirus, its transmission, and control, putting academic institutions at the frontline of politics. While many academic institutions are well poised to conduct research, there are well-documented barriers for these institutions, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to further conduct strategic synthesis and dissemination to promote knowledge utilization among policy-makers. These systemic barriers to knowledge translation (KT) pose significant challenges for academic institutions seeking to take advantage of unprecedented policy windows to inform evidence-based decision-making. Global health funding organizations should prioritize the support of academic institutions’ activities along the KT pathway, including both knowledge generation and strategic dissemination, to improve knowledge uptake for decision-making to improve health. Institutional capacity-building initiatives for KT have the potential to profoundly impact responses to this and future pandemics.

Point-of-care ultrasound training in infectious diseases: Educational models, challenges, and multi-sectoral roles.

Learning while Black: racial and educational challenges of Black students, is based on a qualitative study focused on the educational experiences of high school seniors, undergraduate and graduate students. Focus groups with students from the three targeted groups revealed that Black students experience several challenges: (1) inadequate student, faculty and teacher representation, (2) inadequate mentoring, (3) isolation, (4) overt racism/microaggressions, (5) inadequate information regarding resources, and (6) mental health issues. This study operationalizes these barriers using students’ lived experiences and quotes. Students also provide insight on possible solutions for addressing racial and educational challenges including hiring Black faculty, and mental health counselors, increasing diversity, racial and cultural training for students, staff, and faculty, and providing mentoring, financial and other resources for Black students. Predominately White institutions can create safer, more inclusive environments for Black students by utilizing these strategies. Students’ resiliency and strengths can also play an important role in implementing these strategies to reduce educational disparities.

Many academic institutions are tasked with trying to improve the usability of their online educational support technologies such as ePortfolios, intelligent websites, and other interface technology to make them as efficient as possible to meet the requirements of their end users. This is particularly important for the academic institutions during times and situations when they may not have a live human presence available to respond to various inquiries from their end users about the technology. The challenges of an academic institution in making its ePortfolios viable can cost itself, its end users, as well as its other stakeholders, money, time, and confidence in the technology. This study is about usability testing for improving the user-interface for ePortfolios. This is a qualitative study using the think-aloud protocol (TAP) for data collection and failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for data analysis.

Book Reviews

In 2015, the Graduate Program in Acoustics at Penn State will be celebrating 50 years as the only program in the United States offering the Ph.D. in Acoustics as well as M.S. and M.Eng. degrees in Acoustics. An interdisciplinary program with faculty from a variety of academic disciplines, the Acoustics Program is administratively aligned with the College of Engineering and closely affiliated with the Applied Research Laboratory. The research areas include: ocean acoustics, structural acoustics, signal processing, aeroacoustics, thermoacoustics, architectural acoustics, transducers, computational acoustics, nonlinear acoustics, marine bioacoustics, noise and vibration control, and psychoacoustics. The course offerings include fundamentals of acoustics and vibration, electroacoustic transducers, signal processing, acoustics in fluid media, sound-structure interaction, digital signal processing, experimental techniques, acoustic measurements and data analysis, ocean acoustics, architectural acoustics, noise control engineering, nonlinear acoustics, ultrasonic NDE, outdoor sound propagation, computational acoustics, flow induced noise, spatial sound and 3D audio, marine bioacoustics, and the acoustics of musical instruments. Penn State Acoustics graduates serve widely throughout military and government labs, academic institutions, consulting firms, and industry. This poster will summarize faculty, research areas, facilities, student demographics, successful graduates, and recent enrollment and employment trends.

I was fortunate to join a group that was at the forefront of GaAs MMIC technology in the early 1980s, at the Raytheon Research Division. At that time, there were a number of organizations leading the development of the technology. We had a friendly competition with research and advanced technology groups and a number of companies, including Texas Instruments, Hughes Aircraft, TRW, Westinghouse, HP, and GE in the United States. NEC in Japan, Plessey in the United Kingdom, and LEP in France also had groups working on the technology. I’m sure I’m forgetting some companies that were working in this area, to say nothing of the many government labs, academic institutions, and other organizations that made important contributions.

The Graduate Program in Acoustics at Penn State is the only program in the U.S. offering the Ph.D. in Acoustics as well as M.S. and M.Eng. degrees in Acoustics. An interdisciplinary program with faculty from a variety of academic disciplines, the Graduate Program in Acoustics is administratively aligned with the College of Engineering and closely affiliates with the Applied Research Laboratory. Research areas include: structural acoustics, nonlinear acoustics, architectural acoustics, signal processing, aeroacoustics, biomedical ultrasound, transducers, computational acoustics, noise and vibration control, psychoacoustics, and underwater acoustics. Course offerings include fundamentals of acoustics and vibration, electroacoustic transducers, signal processing, acoustics in fluid media, sound and structure interaction, digital signal processing, experimental techniques, acoustic measurements and data analysis, ocean acoustics, architectural acoustics, noise control engineering, nonlinear acoustics, outdoor sound propagation, computational acoustics, biomedical ultrasound, flow induced noise, spatial sound and three-dimensional audio, acoustics of musical instruments. More than 700 Penn State Acoustics graduates serve widely throughout military and government labs, academic institutions, consulting firms and industry. This poster describes faculty research areas, laboratory facilities, student demographics, successful graduates, and recent enrollment and employment trends.

A REPORT ON AN INDEPENDENT STANDARDIZATION PROGRAM