The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology report in 2010 stated that there is a large interest in the achievement gap among underrepresented groups, especially women, in STEM fields. To alleviate these shortcomings, the National Science Foundation has been leading the efforts to increase the enrollment of minorities in these fields and reduce these gaps. Other federal agencies have also joined the efforts, since the National Academy of Science in 2007 warned that the eroding scientific base of the nation puts the United States at a disadvantage with regards to other nations. This paper deals with reflections on how to successfully implement a university STEM scholarship program to attain the simultaneous goals of increasing STEM enrollment and increasing diversity in the STEM fields. In particular, this paper highlights the necessity of strong and broad-based (peers, faculty, and industrial) mentors. Initial results are encouraging with regards to STEM scholarship student retention.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Statistical quality assurance specifications containing pay adjustment provisions for quality let the contractor decide what levels of quality to target during construction. A procedure and accompanying computer program have been developed to address the optimization of target quality levels. This dual-purpose procedure will help contractors intelligently set target quality levels and help highway agencies validate their quality assurance specifications and pay adjustment provisions. By using the proposed procedure, a contractor can answer the question, “What target quality levels will lead to maximum profit in my specific situation?” The informal procedure contractors currently use does not consider probability and risk. Also, by following the same proposed procedure by using its own data, an agency can answer the question, “What quality levels are the specifications forcing our contractors to deliver?” This important question must be properly answered for the agency to determine the impact of its pay adjustment provisions on contractors. An exercise is presented to compare the current and proposed procedures. The two procedures may identify different optimal target values, leading to sizeable differences in a contractor's profit.