No abstract

No abstract

Life in engineering colleges and schools will be different in 2010 and beyond. While we have been responsive to, and the subject of, events and forces requiring change in the past, it appears that now a variety of factors will truly change the way that engineering education is carried in the United States in the future (cf. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century and Retooling.) The key questions for us then become "How will the faculty, staff, and students of the College of Engineering (COE) of the University of Wisconsin-Madison respond to current challenges such as changes in demographics, scarce resources and globalization?" and "Will the college make the optimum use of the available people, skills, and resources to not only meet these challenges, but at the same time, become an even more exciting and welcoming place to work and learn? Will the COE become an environment where not just students, but faculty and staff also are inspired to keep learning? Or alternatively, will the people in the college be subject to events apparently outside of their own control?" Our taskforce has been engaged in both thought and action on how to assist the UW-Madison COE in meeting these challenges, AND, as importantly, in improving as a university-based engineering community. Our approach to (re)design of the COE for 2010 and beyond is and has been centered on two realities: First, while the administration of the college sees many forces on the horizon that will affect the activities of everyone in the college, individuals in the college may not be convinced or aware of the urgency or need for response. Second, without everyone's participation and contribution, no change to the institution, particularly of the magnitude required, will be successful. The purpose of this paper is to share what we have learned to date and our plan to move forward from here. For example, the initial college-wide forum illustrated that the faculty and staff were very concerned about the future of the college and the possible changes that would occur. At the same time, however, they did not articulate how they perceived that the college would actually change. In response, we are providing opportunities for study and discussion of the forces driving change, assuming that this will move the conversation to ideas that are helpful when thinking about how to redesign the college.

The Centre for Biomedical Engineering is a postgraduate facility which is unique within Australia in terms of the breadth of its research activities. The postgraduate training of biomedical engineering professionals is a major objective of the Centre's programme; training and research is provided not only for graduates with engineering backgrounds, but also for those with medical, biological, and physical sciences background. The output of Masters and PhD graduates is approximately 15 per annum. Predominant research areas are in the mathematical modelling of medical treatment such as optimization of artificial kidney and plasma exchange therapies, application of microprocessors and computers to medical problems, investigation of respiratory and cardiovascular dynamics, and improvement of orthopaedic implants. Studies in rehabilitation engineering, biomechanics, hormonal control systems, and neurophysiological modelling are conducted in associated departments.

A common model for faculty development in higher education is what we refer to as the "visiting scholar" model. We have participated in this model for a number of years, and find it has some serious drawbacks, and is quite limited in its ability to help faculty reconsider and change what they do on a continuing basis. That is, unless a campus has an underlying structure to stimulate and support ongoing faculty growth, visiting scholars are unlikely to affect deep and lasting change in the way faculty think about learning and teaching. We describe our experiences as visiting scholars and in hiring visiting scholars for our own campus and compare our own faculty development program that provides an underlying structure for these ongoing discussions. We will then propose a model that would expand the visiting scholar model, so that innovations and organizational learning could more effectively move across and within institutions.