As readers of this column know, I believe strongly that we should examine periodically everything that we do at Union. With the January announcement that Achilles Rink faced up to $2.5 million of renovations, I stated that we had an opportunity and an obligation to explore other options. Although that exploration resulted in the conclusion that Achilles would be renovated, the
process seemed to concern many on campus.
Recently, we put together review teams to examine engineering at Union and the Graduate Management Institute. Those teams, too, seemed to cause some unease on campus.
The engineering task force-Steve Ciesinski '70, president and CEO of Resumix, Inc. (chair); Hermann Haus '49, institute professor at MIT; Charles Hutchinson, professor for emerging technologies and former dean at the Thayer School at Dartmouth; Bill Wallace '47, former chairman and CEO of Ebasco Services; and Linda Cool, dean of the faculty-concluded that a ten-year strategic plan needed to be developed. Such a plan, stated the report, “would emphasize the unique place that engineering has in the traditional liberal arts college.”
Specifically, the task force recommended:
- that the current department structure in engineering be maintained;
- that a process be developed to assess regularly the performance of Union's engineering program relative to engineering programs at other institutions;
- that Union needs to find better ways to integrate engineering with the rest of the College (aside from enhancing communication with and involving the general arts and sciences faculty in the planning and implementing of the engineering curriculum, it was stressed that engineering faculty be involved fully in the general education component of Union's curriculum and that academic advisors in engineering be knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the general education requirements at the College);
- that ways be found to encourage and/or require engineering students to participate in terms abroad;
- that the upper level offerings in each of the disciplines be restructured;
- that ways to collaborate either physically or virtually with neighboring institutions be explored;
- that ways be found “to encourage and/or require engineering students to participate in a hands-on internship experience before graduation”; and
- that the process of strengthening the engineering faculty be continued.
The report of the task force on the Graduate Management Institute (GMI) -written by Norton Reamer '58, president and CEO of United Asset Management Corp. (chair); Sheridan Biggs, executive in residence at GMI and former vice chairman
of Price Waterhouse; Larry Matteson '61, professor at the William E. Simon Graduate School of Business of the University of Rochester; and Christina Sorum, dean of arts and sciences-concluded that the “quality of the students, faculty, and programs at the Graduate Management Institute is comparable to that of the undergraduate college.”
Saying that GMI is an appropriate program to offer because Union has a unique identity, namely, that it not only is a liberal arts college but also has engineering, the task force concluded that the institute should be continued. The task force also said:
- the institute should not move to Albany to be in proximity with Albany Law School, Albany Medical College, and the Albany School of Pharmacy, but ways should be found to cooperate more fully with these three entities to provide appropriate courses in the correct sequences and at convenient times;
- GMI should continue to develop programs with the undergraduate college so that both students and faculty would benefit from the linked programs, such as the five-year MBA and the MBAs in international management and health systems administration;
- a position in marketing/ strategic management should be added; and
- a full-time director of the institute should be hired. Following a nation-wide search, Joe Zolner '76 has become the director with a mandate to promote the program aggressively and develop with the faculty a long-term strategic plan that makes clear the vision and the strategies that they will employ to achieve them.
The task force said, “If in two years the recommended changes have not begun to show the desired effect, or even if with these changes, GMI does not receive AACSB [American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business] accreditation or is asked to add further personnel to obtain accreditation,” then the issue of GMI should be revisited.
What I find interesting-and perplexing-is that the examination of the feasibility of playing hockey at another facility and the re-examination of engineering and the graduate management programs should produce unease. At a time of such rapid change in society, we must continue to take a hard look at everything that we do. After all, isn't a college like Union a perfect place to thought
fully and carefully examine options?