The Scholarship Landscape in Civil Engineering: A Bridge Between Rhetoric and Reality, The 98 Draft Report, by The American Society of Civil Engineers Task Force on Redefining Scholarly Work (Amir W. Al-Khafaji, et al.), 24 April 1998 (http://ce.www.ecn.purdue.edu/~drnevich/FacWork.html)

Summarized by J. T. P. Yao, 9/6/98

"The ASCE Task Force report is in response to the Syracuse University initiatives led by its Center for Instructional Development. … The Task Force proposed a ‘wheel’ model, which provides complete flexibility through interfaces that allow for scholarly work to be integrated into research, teaching, service, and professional development activities. … The main objective of the present ASCE Task Force, which commenced its work in May, 1997, was to raise fundamental issues for Civil Engineering educators by offering a broader definition and understanding of the professional work of the Civil Engineering faculty."

"Syracuse University initiated a project in 1989 to enhance the importance and quality of teaching at the University. The project’s main focus was academic deans and department chairs because of their pivotal role in shaping the campus culture and reward system. … The Redefinition and Assessment of Scholarship was funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc. with support from Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE). The main thrust behind this project was to expand the range of activities that qualify as scholarly or creative faculty work. An expanded range of scholarly activities affects the priorities at educational institutions and would

1. Improve teaching quality.
2. Improve the quality of graduates.
3. Improve the quality of curricula and courses.
4. Increase faculty participation in service oriented activities.

… (Collaborative Professional) Associations … included

(Phase I)

Association of American Geographers

American Philosophical Association

American Political Science Association

American Chemical Society

American Sociological Association

National Council of Administrators of Home Economics

American Academy of Religion

Modern Language Association

American Historical Association

American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business

Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications

National Architecture Accrediting Board

Geological Society of America

Joint Policy Board for Mathematics

National Office for Arts Accreditation in Higher Education

(Phase II)

American Society of Civil Engineers

American Anthropological Association

American Astronomical Association

American Educational Research Association

APA Society for the Teaching of Psychology

American Physical Society

American Society for Microbiology

Association of College and Research Libraries

Council on Social Work Education

Society for College Science Teachers

… For further information (concerning the Syracuse program), please contact

Robert M. Diamond, Director

Center for Instructional Development

111 Waverly Avenue, Suite 220

Syracuse, NY 13244

… E-mail: rdiamond@cid.syr.edu"

"We selected the wheel because it symbolizes movement, action, and dynamism. … The hub of the wheel gives direction and power to the wheel in most vehicles. So too, the mission, resources, and goals of the academic community must provide the direction and vitality to the work of the faculty. The body of the first model is composed of three sectors representing the tripartite work of the faculty: teaching, scholarship, and service/professional development. The tire provides contact with the roadway and defines the quality of faculty work."

"Ultimately, it is Excellence that drives institutions and faculty and not the mere definition of scholarship. It is Excellence in all that we do and envision that contributes to society’s progress and evolution. In this context, we must not confuse excellence, which is possible, with perfection, which is impossible. A fundamental leadership objective is to foster an environment in which people are encouraged to give their best. Developing people is one of the most exciting and rewarding aspects of leadership. It is also one of the most challenging. Faculty are apt to pursue excellence if they believe they can succeed. It is our responsibility as leaders to encourage and nurture change by clearly and adequately defining faculty expectations and rewards. … Furthermore, Integrity is the basis of trust, which is a product of leadership. Trust is the one quality that can not be acquired, but must be earned. Finally Ethics cannot be learned or taught from textbooks. Good character comes from living in communities where virtue is encouraged and rewarded. …"

"… scholarly work must be broadened to include the four types of scholarship suggested by Ernest Boyer: Discovery, Integration, Application, and Transmission. … the academic community must broaden its thinking, examine the changes taking place in the world, define its mission, and establish a vision. Once these components are in place, the community must describe its objectives and set action items to achieve the objectives. …"

"Borrowing from the work of Robert Diamond, we propose that the work of the faculty is considered scholarly when it satisfies most of the following six conditions:

1. Require a high level of discipline-related expertise
2. Break new ground or is innovative
3. Can be replicated
4. Can be documented
5. Can be peer reviewed
6. Has significance or impact

… Dr. Boyer emphasized that scholarship should be related ‘not to a catalog of accomplishments but to qualities of character.’ He named the following ‘six dimensions of good scholarship to judge teaching, research, and service:’

1. Knowledge it reflects.
2. Clearly defined objectives.
3. Appropriate methods and procedures.
4. Creative use of resources (money and intellectual resources).
5. Effective communication.
6. Significant results.

Boyer also mentioned ‘credibility of the process’ by revealing that we ‘must have clear standards and good documentation, but what counts the most is the degree to which professors have confidence in the arrangements, feel the process to be fair, and believe that those who make the critical decisions can be trusted.’"

"Unquestionably, the criteria and procedures used in assessing civil engineering faculty work vary from institution to institution depending on the mission, goals, and characteristics of the faculty. … Promotion and/or tenure is normally earned by a positive demonstration of effective performance in the traditional areas of Teaching, Research, and Service. In some Civil Engineering departments, mentoring and scholarship are listed as separate categories. … The three Interfaces of the Wheel may include several activities that may be critical to a department but may not be classified as teaching, scholarship, or service. … Some universities may consider mentoring of graduate students as part of teaching while others may consider it part of research and yet in some cases it may be hard to categorize. The Interface concept permits a department to focus on setting and achieving goals rather than worrying about defining a suitable category for a useful and needed activity by its faculty. … For example

Mentoring of graduate students with thesis work …

Passing the FE and PE exams …

Reviewing journal articles, …"

"Civil Engineering education in the future will require more than policy manuals and clearly defined and applied procedures, it must embody leadership throughout the ranks of the professoriate. Leadership development is key to the future of faculty development and the success of the profession. Hence, guidelines and support programs need to be put into place to foster the development of leadership among faculty in Civil Engineering. Furthermore, suitable instruments are needed to evaluate leadership systematically. … Faculty members who demonstrate leadership in one or another, or all three, must be evaluated and rewarded accordingly.

1. … The new concept of the Wheel and Interfaces provide significant flexibility for assessing faculty performance while keeping pace with ever changing demands on the Civil Engineering faculty.
2. … The ASCE Task Force recommends the adoption of the Ernest Boyer definition of scholarship. That is, scholarship includes discovery, integration, application, and transmission.
3. The ASCE Task Force recognizes that faculty assessment may be weighted heavily toward teaching or research depending on the mission of the institution.
4. … unrealistic expectation tend to pull faculty in many different directions. The Task Force recommend that Chairs, Deans, and Provosts communicate effectively so that a rational policy is developed to better serve the institution, its faculty, and students.
5. A department may elect to use one or more Wheel models for developing appropriate faculty assessment policies and definitions of scholarship with a faculty reward system depending on its mission. …
6. The report may help Civil Engineering departments focus on appropriate areas of activities for its faculty and provide a model for categorizing and weighting faculty performance consistent with its mission.
7. The report provides useful information and guidelines for departments wishing to develop new policies and procedures for faculty assessment.
8. The ASCE Task Force recognizes that certain departments may be faced with institutional and/or external constraints dictating their faculty reward systems. …
9. The ASCE Task Force recommends that higher education must address the need for flexibility in faculty roles and rewards so as to support faculty as teachers and researchers. We believe that teaching and research cannot be separated. Both need to be supported and valued.
10. … The institution should give each faculty member that opportunity to bring out his/her talents in teaching, research, service, professional development, and outreach programs. …
11. Multiple roles and responsibilities, and changing institutional priorities appears especially troublesome for faculty awaiting tenure. …
12. The worst part of being a faculty member without tenure is the changing standards for acceptable performance. … The ASCE Task Force recommend that institutions place more emphasis on soliciting faculty input relative to appropriate standards for assessment.
13. The ASCE Task Force concluded that most institutions have a high degree of agreement on the importance of teaching but not the instruments used to assess the quality and effectiveness of teaching. Clearly technical articles and grants are easier to count, but it is harder to measure good teaching as opposed to popularity of the instructor.

…"

Return to the Lohman homepage