Microelectronics-Photonics (microEP) Graduate Program University of Arkansas Ken Vickers – Director Research Professor, Physics (1998 – present) Eng Management, Texas Instruments (1980 – 1998) microEP Industrial Advisory Committee October 28, 2002Fayetteville, Arkansas

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 2 Agenda: microEP Grad Program  Acknowledgements  Case for Action  Mission, Attributes, and Tactics  Dissemination Efforts  HBCU Partnerships  REU Efforts and Activities  GK-12 Outreach  Survey Results  Lessons Learned  Final Observations

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 3 Acknowledgements  Dr. Len Schaper PI –UA Professor, Electrical Engineering  Dr. Greg SalamoCo-PI –UA University Professor, Physics  National Science Foundation IGERT (DGE )  Department of Education FIPSE (P116B000981A)  National Science Foundation REU Site (EEC )  Other NSF programs Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 4 Interdisciplinary Case for Action Issues Required knowledge content in degree always increasing State-of-the-art advances often appear at degree boundary layers Academic training emphasizes individual achievement Business aspects of technology minimized in technical degrees Industrial success requires individual and team excellence Responses Define flexible interdisciplinary degree for the boundary layer Maintain vigorous technical content of curriculum Add extra course for entrepreneurship of high tech research Hire experienced industrial technical manager Organize graduate program as industrial technical group Hold each student accountable for all students’ academic success

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 5 Comparison of Academic and Industrial Professional Environments PracticeIndustrialAcademic Job goal alignmentManagement defined to support group goals Individual voluntary alignment to departmental efforts Creative workBalanced between management assigned tasks and self defined tasks Self defined, with possible voluntary collaborations on large projects. Work hoursCoordinated to optimize group performance Self scheduled to meet personal goals and institutional assignments Work locationAll work at common location to support ad hoc work groups Independently set hours between home and campus to meet personal needs (and office hours). Compensation system Rewards group performance, then individual contribution Rewards individual accomplishments, not departmental success Problem solvingCollaboration is necessary for success and is strongly coordinated across groups Collaborations are theme based voluntary coordination of individual research projects

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 6 Student Recruitment Method Historical Departmental Approach Department or Program Degrees Courses Career Student Centered Approach Department or Program Degrees Courses Career

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 7 microEP Mission  The educational objective of the microEP program is a graduate fully prepared to drive the advancement of the combination of microelectronics and photonics.  This objective will be accomplished through a rigorous interdisciplinary graduate technical education, including soft skills and entrepreneurial training.

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 8 Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program: Attributes  Created in April 1998 –MS microEP approved July 1999 –PhD microEP approved July 2000  Defined as interdisciplinary between Physics, Chemistry, and all engineering  Focused on electronic and photonic materials, and the devices and systems they can create  Defined as professional development type degree  Based on industry-like Cohort methodology

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 9 The microEP Graduate Program Research Spans: [110] [1-10] 50º 30º (a) 15nm from Nanoscale Quantum Dots and Devices… …to 3-dimensional High Temperature Superconducting Electronic-Photonic Systems

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 10 microEP Enhancements of Traditional Departmental Degree Elements Traditional Departmental Education Technical Knowledge Core classes in undergrad dept Most electives in department Few other technical electives Research Methods Slow student initiated linkage to research prof Professor’s group meetings Team Skills Project teams in classes Supplemental microEP Elements Technical Knowledge Core of interdisciplinary classes Applied technical electives Business classes Research Methods Design of Experiments class during summer Quick assignment to research prof Formal research project plan Team Skills Pseudo-industry engineering group Weekly operations management seminars Invention and innovation Individual mentoring within research group Invention and Innovation Summer inventiveness workshops Personality and learning methods mapping Intro summer camp for all microEP students Results in Sound technical graduate degree Broadened technical knowledge Rapid acclimation to first job Early leadership roles Earlier significant personal success

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 11 microEP PhD Candidacy Exam Traditional University of Arkansas Science/Engineering Process Research proposal presented to committee for review. Written exam based on content of specific undergraduate and graduate course knowledge content. Oral examination by faculty of all subject matter. Experimental microEP approach To provide guidance to student and faculty on likelihood of student’s success in PhD studies. Research proposal in NSF format submitted to committee, and presented in open forum for comments and approval. Written exam is a scenario based complex technology problem One week duration (spring break), answer limited to 15 pages Open written resource, no discussion allowed Includes technical solution, implementation method, etc. Oral presentation may be required by committee if needed

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 12 Courses Developed under microEP Influence  MGMTIntra/Entrepreneurship of Technology (Mgmt/Physics)  MEPHOrganizational Management (Physics - 1 hour)  PHYSResearch Management (Physics - 1 hour)  MEPHProposal Writing and Management (Physics/ME - 1 hour)  MEPHEthics for Scientists and Engineers (Physics - 1 hour – NSF REU financial)  MEPHNanotech I (materials - Chemistry)  MEPHNanotech II (devices – Physics)  MEPHNanotech III (manufacturing – ME)  MEPHIntroduction to MEMS (ME)  MEPHAdvanced MEMS (ME)  PHYSAdvanced Device Design (Physics – FIPSE financial)  PHYSAdvanced Device Prototype and Characterization (Physics – Dept of Education FIPSE)  MEPHIntegrated Passives (ChE)  MEPHModeling for Scientists and Engineers (Civil Eng)

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 13 Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program: Students  Fifty-seven students accepted into program to date –Thirteen women students –Nine African-American students  Twenty students have completed MS degrees –Twelve working in industry –Two self employed –Six pursuing PhD degrees (three African- American) –Twenty-five total PhD students on campus

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 14 microEP Student/Faculty Alignment (Fellows/Total) Faculty Student PhysicsMEChEEEChemOpen Physics/ Applied Physics 2/121/233 Mechanical Eng3/41/111 Chemical Eng111/41 Electrical Eng1/211/4 Material Science 21/1 Optical Eng3 Math1/21/1

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 15 Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program: History microEP Student Group Fall 2001

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 16 Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program: Funding History  Winner of nationally competitive grants –1998: NWA BEST Formed (local funds) –1999: NSF IGERT ($2.5 M Total) –2000: NSF MRSEC ($3.4 M Total) –2000: NSF Partnership for Innovation ($850 K Total) –2000: Dept of Education FIPSE ($500 K Total) –2001: NSF RET Supplements (3 teachers) –2001: NSF REU Site ($385 K Total) –2002: NSF GK-12 ($2.7 M Total) –2002: NSF RET Supplements (4 teachers) –2002: NSF EEP (July submission - $500k Total)

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 17 Microelectronics-Photonics Graduate Program: Dissemination  Implemented Cohort methodology for Physics Graduate program Fall 2001 –Department of Education funded proposal under FIPSE –Funded (with NSF PFI) hiring of 2nd engineering manager from industry for cohort training and management  UA Cellular and Molecular interdisciplinary MS/PhD approved summer 2001  UA/OSU Planetary and Space Sciences interdisciplinary MS/PhD (Fall 2002 submission) –Modeled after microEP structures and procedures –Finalist in IGERT 2002 competition

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 18 Research Institution – HBCU Partnerships: A Case for Action  Research institutions must attract students from all population groups for success  HBCUs must prepare students for transition  Sustainable partnerships must support –Institutional rather than faculty centered knowledge –Matching students’ careers to research opportunities  Research institutions must recognize the change of culture for HBCU students –Undergraduate versus graduate expectations –Black majority versus white majority society –Faculty versus research group daily interactions

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 19 George Washington Carver Project  Originated in 1996 as a UA funded REU style partnership –Southern University at Baton Rouge, University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, Alcorn State University, Tougaloo College, Jackson State University, Xavier University  HBCU Administrators identify students matching research opportunities  Initiated by Colleges of Agriculture, Business, and Education  Now also supported by College of Engineering and NSF REU sites  Typically twenty-five students in program each summer

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 20 microEP Partnership Tactics: HBCU Administrators’ Visit  Institutional partnerships require detailed knowledge  IGERT funded two-day meeting on campus for administrators from partner HBCUs –January 2001 –Eleven attended –Introduced entire UA campus, not just the microEP graduate program

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 21 microEP Partnership Tactics: Visits to HBCU sites  Institutional partnerships require detailed knowledge  Won FIPSE supplemental grant for $25K –Regional meeting at HBCU host (Jan/Feb 2003) –Funds support meeting and student travel –Other HBCU research institution partners invited –Primary purpose: Advance dissemination of Physics cohort methodology –Secondary purpose: Gain knowledge of HBCU faculty, administration, and facilities

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 22 microEP NSF REU Site: Attributes  Submitted proposal and was funded for summers  Based on microEP research areas, with focus on nanotechnology  Included funding for REU students to take summer graduate ethics class  Included microEP Cohort methodology approach  Viewed as a prime recruiting tool  Dedicated three of twelve positions to Carver

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 23 microEP NSF REU Site: Students  Twelve students attending 2001 REU  Five African- American  Three women  Five/seven eligible applied and accepted by UA grad school  Two others have expressed interest in UA after BS completion

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 24 microEP NSF REU Site: Students  Fourteen students attending 2002 REU  Four African- American  One Hispanic  Five Women

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 25 microEP Partnership Tactics: Merged REU/Carver Activities Kickoff Dinner

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 26 microEP Partnership Tactics: Merged REU/Carver Activities Summer Camp and common dormitory facilities Camp concepts by Dr. Ed Sobey (

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 27 microEP Partnership Tactics: Merged REU/Carver Activities Summer Camp Graduation

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 28 microEP Partnership Tactics: Merged REU/Carver Activities Research, Presentations, and Industry

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 29 microEP Partnership Tactics: Merged REU/Carver Activities Fun in the Ozarks Buffalo River Hawks Bill Crag Lost Valley Eden Falls

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 30 microEP Partnership Results:  Undergraduate research programs are leveraging each other for greater benefits to students  Cohort methodology is effective in emulating the highly supportive HBCU community  Institutional linkages are developing, but are not yet sustainable beyond individual faculty contacts  HBCU students are making the transition to grad school, but stronger mentoring may be necessary for some students (especially class load)  On campus collaborations among UA faculty are increasing  A 3/2 partnership with Xavier is being formed

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 31 microEP HBCU Partnership Future:  FIPSE conferences on Carver partner institution campuses in Jan/Feb 2003  Development of more 3/2 programs with Carver partner institutions  Development of NSF program/student database for enhanced matching of NSF supported undergrads with NSF graduate programs  Second Carver partner institution administrators’ meeting at UA campus

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 32 GK-12 Outreach Efforts C-SPIN ( Center for Semiconductor Physics in Nanoscience, a NSF funded Materials Research Science and Engineering Center Salaried K-12 Outreach Director fully funded Fayetteville, Springdale, and Winslow School Systems Partners in microEP NSF GK-12 grant awarded April 2002 BEST Robotics, Inc. ( 24 hubs across the country with over 10,000 students participating NSF STEP proposal submitted May 2002 with BRI NSF Engineering Education Proposal planned for July 2002 submission with BRI

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 33 GK-12 Outreach: BEST Robotics Inc ( Boosting Engineering, Science, and Technology A sports-like contest between remote controlled robots Emulates product “design to market” life cycle Resources are limited to those components issued at kickoff Teachers serve as coaches Members of the technical community serve as mentors Community provides financial and administrative support Students do all the work with adult mentoring

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 34 Interpersonal Work Styles Inventory: On Campus Students Cohort Program Traditional Program N M SD Developing Commitment Inspiring Accomplishment Valuing Communication Modeling Team Building There were no significant differences in the valuing communication and developing commitment scales. There were significant differences on the inspiring accomplishments and modeling team-building characteristics subscales

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 35 Absolute Rating of Knowledge and Skills by Graduates and Supervisors Graduates Supervisors n M SD n M SD Communication Problem Solving Team-working Business Skills Broad Range of Expertise Specialization in One Program Knowledge Level in Area Internship in Graduate Program Supervisors and the graduates considered least important specialization in one program area. As a whole, both rated the soft skills higher in level of importance in completing their job than the academic characteristics.

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 36 Relative Rating of Knowledge and Skills by Graduates and Supervisors Graduates’ Ratings Supervisors’ Ratings n M SD n M SD Communication Problem Solving Team-working Business Skills Broad Range of Expertise Specialization in One Program Area Knowledge Level in Area Internship in Graduate Program Both supervisors and graduates perceive microEP training as being more effective than the average program in facilitating students’ abilities in being effective communicators, problem solvers, and workers in a team environment. Graduates perceive their academic training in terms of knowledge level in an area of expertise and range of expertise as being approximately average, but supervisors perceive their training to be substantially above average.

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 37 Industry Response to microEP Graduate Program Dennis Andrucyk, Chief Technologist, NASA Goddard “If all graduate programs were like microEP, I could eliminate my first year new hire mentoring program.” Mike Fox, Center for Studies in Creativity, Buffalo State College “I think that the cohort-based workgroup concept has been a significant contributing factor to the creative behaviors I have observed in the Microelectronics-Photonics students.” Barry Dill, Motorola, Device Engineering Manager “I had no idea that an educational program like this existed that was so well matched to our technical and teamwork needs for device and process integration engineers.”

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 38 Lessons Learned: IGERT Program Implementation Barriers to success Student academic metrics based on individual performance Graduate research required to be individual effort Faculty reward and recognition based on individual performance Resources required for “extra” industrial experience are high Requirements to overcome barriers University-level administrators support general concepts Program manager’s passionate belief in the program need Program manager assigned only to program during startup phase Program manager practiced in industrial teamwork atmosphere Financial seed money support is critical Customer feedback (industry) must be continuous

October 28, 2002microEP Industrial Advisory BoardSlide Number 39 Final Observations Observations of students in microEP program on campus show strong workgroup identity Feedback from graduates and their supervisors show positive assessments against students from standard graduate programs The small number of students leaving the program have not utilized the personnel skills taught to manage stressful situations (a disappointment to program management) The small number of surveys returned, and short span of longitudinal data, demands that these early results be interpreted with high levels of caution The Cohort method will be continued in both microEP and Physics graduate programs