No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Future of Materials Undergraduate Programs: Can we Avoid Extinction?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2011
Abstract
In materials research, the current funding focus has shifted from largely mechanical-properties based aspects of materials to their molecular-level chemical nature, such as biomaterials or nanoscale phenomenon. Along with this shift in emphasis, we have seen many undergraduate materials programs become absorbed by other programs as a concentration in other engineering majors. Many programs have absolved departments in favor of a model where faculty from a variety of departments have adjunct appointments in, say, an interdisciplinary materials science and engineering program. What exactly is the fate of undergraduate materials programs? Is it time for materials science and engineering undergraduate programs to be absorbed into the sea of interdisciplinarity? In this talk, I will present data on the landscape of trends within the undergraduate materials community against the changes in the global arena. What is our role as materials science and engineering educators in the societal state of flux that we face? What are the opportunities? In an attempt to see into the future, we will consider all these questions.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 909: Symposium PP – Forum on Materials Science Education , 2005 , 0909-PP04-02
- Copyright
- Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006
References
1
Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System Completions Survey, conducted by the Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, http://www.ed.gov/NCES.Google Scholar
2
Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System Enrollment Survey, conducted by the Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, http://www.ed.gov/NCES.Google Scholar
3
National Science Board, 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 Two volumes. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (volume 1, NSB 04-1; volume 2, NSB 04-01A), p. 0–11.Google Scholar
4 Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, search by materials and metallurgy programs: http://www.abet.org/schoolareaeac.asp, last accessed 11/21/05.Google Scholar
6
National Science Board, 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 Two volumes. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (volume 1, NSB 04-1; volume 2, NSB 04-01A), Appendix Table 2.1.Google Scholar
8
Collins, T., “Where do we go from here?” Green Chemistry and Engineering Workshop, convened by the Green Chemistry Institute, National Academies, Nov. 7-8, 2005.Google Scholar
9 National Society of Professional Engineers, “Code of Ethics for Engineering: Engineer's Creed,” www.nspe.org/ethics/.Google Scholar
10
Wackernagel, M., Schulz, N.B., Deumling, D., Linares, A. Callejas, Jenkins, M., Kapos, V., Monfreda, C., Loh, J., Myers, N., Nargaard, R., and Randers, J., “Tracking the Ecological Overshoot of the Human Economy,” Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences
99 (2002): 9266–9271.Google Scholar
11
McDonough, W. and Braungart, M., Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (New York: North Point Press, 2002).Google Scholar
12
Anastas, P.T. and Zimmerman, J.B., “Design through the Twelve Principles of Green Engineering,” Environmental Science and Technology
37 (2003): 94A–101A.Google Scholar
13
U.S. Department of Energy, “National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap,” National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap Workshop, Washington, D.C., April 2-3, 2002: available at www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen.Google Scholar