Cal Poly Pomona

P&R Responses for recommendation 107

Recommendation 107
Department Biological Sciences
Consensus Opinion 26 out of 38 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation Recommendation 107. Academic Centers.

By consensus the members of the Biological Sciences Department support this recommendation, in particular the portion that reads:
The committee believes the following centers are doing an excellent job of meeting these criteria (Centrality to Mission, Quality, Efficiency, Opportunity) at present. Each is a candidate for additional investment, which may be generated by redistributing resources currently devoted to less central efforts in other centers or programs.
Arabian Horse Center and BioTrek
As noted in the recommendation, the Arabian Horse Center and BioTrek have great impact on visitors to campus and both have important educational roles for our students. The BioTrek mission is to teach conservation to students and the public and to improve science literacy by reaching out to teachers and students of the K-12 community. Using our on-line virtual tours through BioTrek, teachers can inspire their students to become involved in current environmental issues and prepare them for the trip to BioTrek. With more than 6000 visitors each year, BioTrek makes a substantial outreach contribution to our community.
BioTrek also offers a unique community service-learning course (BIO 488S) for Cal Poly Pomona students. This capstone course incorporates our learn-by-doing philosophy, teaching students how to best communicate the information they have learned in the class about biodiversity and conservation to the many visitors of BioTrek. Climate neutrality, habitat loss, and other current conservation topics have always been at the core of our teaching mission at BioTrek.
BioTrek fulfills another role as a facility for student/faculty research collaboration. Measurements of CO2 uptake by plants in the rainforest greenhouse and the influence of rainfall on photosynthesis and productivity rates in plants of the Ethnobotany Garden are just two of the projects underway. Nine courses perform 18 lab exercises and regularly collect data at BioTrek.
We agree that the Arabian Horse Center and BioTrek are central to the Cal Poly Pomona mission and that they are worthy of additional investment. We also agree that future investment should be designed to strengthen the connection with Cal Poly Pomona student learning and faculty scholarship.
Center for Macromolecular Modeling and Material Design (CM3D)
As noted in the recommendation, this new center has a good balance between curricular impact and economic development. CM3D provides key support for teaching, student research and industrial collaborations in the areas of protein (and other macromolecular structures) modeling and the design of materials. The center houses computational and experimental equipment and fosters interdisciplinary collaborations. Faculty from engineering, chemistry, biology, and physics are involved in the CM3D initiative, and their synergy is likely to increase. In addition, industrial support to CM3D opens new opportunities for faculty and students. We strongly support the recommendation for additional investment in this center.
We also support the recommendation for bringing into the center other programs as long as they share not only the commitment to education and industrial support, but also the center’s mission to promote interdisciplinary collaborations in molecular modeling, surface science, and engineered materials.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department Chemistry
Consensus Opinion 25 out of 25 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation The Faculty of the Chemistry Department unanimously agree that the current P&R process lacks sufficient justification, is based upon faulty or incomplete data, promotes a highly personal administrative agenda, and summarily disregards the university community's duty of shared governance

We strongly agree that The Center for Macro-Molecular Modeling and Materials Design (CM3D) should receive additional funds. CM3D has proven that its model for interdisciplinary student-centric research and curriculum development works very well at CPP. CM3D has already impacted over a dozen courses in five departments across two colleges with its two newly inaugurated interdisciplinary laboratories for computational and experimental sciences. CM3D’s approach of creating an academic version of “habitat for humanities” has allowed new professors to access state-of-the-art equipment in order to achieve results that enabled them to submit competitive proposals for external funding and to maximize the effectiveness of their start-up funding. Additional funding will be used to provide support for outreach to industry, other academic institutions, and K-12 schools in the local area. In addition, CM3D will be able to continue renovation and expansion of its experimental facilities, including the imaging laboratory that will be inaugurated early in the Winter quarter of 2008 and an adjacent optics and spectroscopy laboratory. CM3D will also use increased University support to implement projects that address critical challenges in science and engineering education: the cost (in both dollars and faculty time) of supporting relevant and exciting hands-on upper-division courses in science and engineering, and especially in new, interdisciplinary fields. For lecture courses, CM3D is developing plans for a demonstration course in a cutting-edge interdisciplinary topic related to our core competencies that would not be affordable for any single department, but which would have broad support from students and faculty across departments and colleges. Our initiative for laboratory courses is to create a “library” of experiment modules to be used in multiple departments and colleges, with each module supported by an interdisciplinary team of faculty who maintain and renew the equipment and content.
Please provide CM3D with increased resources to advance these and other goals in pursuit of our mission to “develop collaborative interdisciplinary educational and research opportunities in molecular modeling, surface science, and engineered materials that will graduate students with the agility to adapt in a world that is seeing the traditional separation between science and engineering disappear.”
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department Computer Science
Consensus Opinion 11 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation The computer science department supports the following centers because they foster faculty scholarship, outreach, and/or education not otherwise possible within departments or college boundaries: Center for Macromolecular Modeling and Material Design (CM3D), Science Educational Enhancement Services (SEES), the Center for Education and Equity in Mathematics, Science & Technology (CEEMaST) and BioTrek.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department ENV Dean's Office
Consensus Opinion 2 out of 2 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation ENV Dean’s Office Response to proposal #107:
Academic Centers: The Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies

Quoting from the report:
“John T. Lyle Center. The Lyle Center is redeveloping its central role on campus. The committee recommends it be designated as a leader in campus efforts at sustainability and green practice. This center may be a candidate for additional investment as its role evolves.”

The College of Environmental Design is pleased that one of the “affinities” noted by the P & R Committee among all departments on campus is that of environmental awareness. ENV has long felt that our disciplines have a major role to play in addressing many of the issues that contribute to global degradation including: global warming and climate change, declining water quality, loss of natural species, desertification and massive soil erosion, and all the conditions that compromise a healthy planet. ENV also recognizes that its role includes collaboration with other disciplines on and off campus.

ENV proposes that instead of splitting its programs among four colleges, that it take the lead in a Center that is a clearinghouse for environmental education resources. This may expand the current role of the Lyle Center (with enhanced funding), or it may be a new stand-alone Center. The mission of this center would be to collect and disseminate an ever-expanding body of knowledge on the environment and the various applications of this research. The activities of the Center may include the following:
1. Actively engaging faculty and students in learning about environmental issues and positive action:
a. Offering and/or supporting GE classes on the environment.
b. Presenting campus workshops on the latest environmental findings.
c. Identifying experts to speak in classrooms.
d. Organizing symposia on environmental issues as they affect design, science, and the humanities.

2. Providing easily accessible information on the environment
a. Assembling and updating an online database of websites, “pod-casts”, publications and other information on environmental issues
b. Providing consultation to CPP Facilities about ways to reduce the carbon footprint of the campus, reduce waste, reduce water usage, etc.
c. Hosting workshops or providing consultation to local communities as they face issues of carbon emissions, etc. (This could become a revenue stream.)

The College of Environmental Design is prepared to take the lead in infusing the campus with environmental awareness. The task is not just to advocate for environmental responsibility and ethics, but also to provide students and faculty with the knowledge that will lead to a positive change in our practices, on campus and in our communities.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department Learning Resource Center
Consensus Opinion 17 out of 17 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation ACADEMIC CENTERS

The Upward Bound (UB) Programs are in agreement that the Downtown Center is doing an excellent job of meeting the criteria listed in recommendation 107, which recommends that the center “expand its role as an integrating-point of university and city programs and initiatives and that future investments link programs from other units to its efforts.” The UB programs would welcome the opportunity to link their efforts with the Downtown Center to meet the University Value of Leadership, Social Responsibility, and Community Involvement as well as the University Goal of increasing community involvement. The UB programs are cognizant of the University’s Shared Vision of being “an institution that addresses societal needs through its educational research and community service activities.”

New synergies: The Downtown Center can develop new synergy by entering into collaboration with the Cal Poly Pomona UB programs. Upward Bound's constituencies reside in the Pomona Valley and could benefit from the Downtown Center's geographical location, easy access, and the use of resources including the computer lab, meeting room spaces, and the theater.

Reduction in redundancies: One way of reducing redundancies is to provide access to the Downtown Center’s computer space on the weekends instead of creating an UB computer lab, which is not cost-effective. The UB staff has investigated other options and none is as viable as this option.

Savings in resources: Access to the Downtown Center’s resources can save the UB programs and its participants the unnecessary cost of transporting the students onto campus. UB participants have greater facility of getting to the Downtown Center because they can walk, use public transportation, or more feasibly park without paying the $5 Cal Poly parking fee.

Increased opportunities for research: The proposed collaboration provides an opportunity to study the effectiveness of creating new synergies between community serving programs and Cal Poly Pomona. It also provides the opportunity to research the specific needs of low-income students in the local community.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies
Consensus Opinion 13 out of 13 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation Majority Opinion: Support Recommendation #107

Building Bridges not Mergers. LCRS faculty and staff are pleased that the P&R recommendation highlighted the potential of its programs, and more broadly the potential of the environmental concerns/applications as an affinity of CPP. We agree that this area of emphasis holds great potential as a campus-wide identity and that the Center should play a central role in such efforts. However, we do not believe the proposed re-organization that dissolves ENV and distributes Architecture, LA, URP and LCRS into other colleges will be effective in infusing this campus-wide identity. Building bridges from the holistic, multi-disciplinary and action-oriented approach inherent in ENV to other colleges provides the best opportunity for developing true campus-wide identity in our opinion.

LCRS has been successful in building bridges across colleges in recent years, facilitating formal teaching, research and outreach programs with faculty and students in ENV, Science, CLASS, Engineering and Agriculture, as well as informal activities with every College on campus. However, ENV has been foundational in establishing the approach of LCRS, and we believe this identity continues to be in the best interest of LCRS and the University, particularly in terms of distinguishing itself from other competing programs/institutions as a program concerned with directly impacting actions that affect communities and the environment.

LCRS as a Locus of Environmental Efforts. With enhanced funding, LCRS could serve as a locus for the establishment of a greatly expanded network of faculty, students and staff examining environmental issues across all disciplines. Recommendations #58, 59 allude to this potential, and we believe it offers far more promise in advancing the interests of the University than proposed mergers.

Benefits to All Colleges. Additional resources would allow LCRS to expand substantial connections to all colleges, offering support for students and release time for more faculty to pursue interdisciplinary teaching, research and outreach programs. Facilitating such a network would not only enhance the Center, but would also offer substantial benefits to all colleges involved. The approach empowers faculty to develop specialized knowledge, often drawing from other disciplines, to enhance their teaching and scholarship within their own department. Community outreach opportunities for all colleges would be increased. LCRS would serve as a resource for all programs, facilitating connections across campus, offering expertise, and resources in the form of space, specialized equipment, and staff support.

Build on What Works Well. The LCRS model has been effective in building truly interdisciplinary programs at the Center, thanks to the contributions of many colleges and the leadership of ENV. The alternative we are proposing would build on this approach, enhancing the flow of resources and expertise back to the Colleges involved in order to strengthen their own programs and enhance this environmental identity across campus. This approach is essential to the continued success of LCRS since the strength of our programs rests on the continued strength and enhancement of our faculty’s home departments.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 107
Department Undergraduate Studies
Consensus Opinion 10 out of 10 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation Recommendation 107 – Academic Centers

This recommendation did not define an “academic center”, so it is not clear what falls under this recommendation. The recommendation also does not justify its suggestion that those programs receiving general funding should be put under a college. If a program “supports the mission . . . in ways that transcend what is possible by a single . . . college”, why would it be appropriate for the program to sit financially under a college? Won’t that lead college inevitably have an influence over that center? We ask that this portion of the recommendation be rethought. Also, it would appear that the Support Programs Committee made the connection that external constituents must be funded by external funds, but this was not explained either.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : With modifications
Minority Explanation

Recommendations not submitted through the forms are available in this folder. They mainly consist of Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat documents. If none were submitted for this recommendation, the folder will be empty.