Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/dukeuniveVsityseOOduke Duke University. Duke University self study DUKE UNIVERSITY SELF-STUDY Crossing Boundaries: Interdisciplinary Planning For The Nineties 1988 This report was prepared, in part, for purposes of reaffirmation of accreditation by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. ii PREFACE When faculty time and energy are poured out over a lengthy period to describe a university such as Duke, something of a concrete and immediate value to that institution should clearly emerge. That is why I requested that the Southern Association accept a non-traditional self-study for reaccreditation of Duke. Such a study, focusing on a particular problem being addressed by the institution, seemed more appropriate to a long-established research university such as ours, and appeared to afford an opportunity to develop a model that other universities might emulate. With the cooperation and support of Dr. James T. Rogers, Executive Director of the Southern Association's Commission on Colleges, our accreditation review was defined as an examination and assessment of interdisciplinary activities at Duke, with the goal of recommending administrative policies and structures that would effectively address the needs of faculty engaged in new areas of study. The result is a working document that will guide our thinking and decision-making over the next decade of development in interdisciplinary teaching and research. The thoughtful nature of the report's findings; the practicality exhibited in addressing realistic concerns of budgeting, time commitments, space allocation, and appointment; and the very real necessity for a clear evaluation and review process -- all speak firmly and usefully to the problems and the importance of changes under way in the advancement of knowledge. On behalf of the University, I wish to applaud the efforts of the Duke self- study committees under the extraordinary leadership of Professor Leonard Spicer; of the approximately 200 faculty who have been directly involved in assembling and reviewing these findings; and of the students and staff who participated in the process. All involved are to be commended for their generosity and their sincere concern for this academic iii community. Without commitment such as theirs, Duke University would cease to grow and cease to serve with honor the highest ideals of teaching, research and service. H. Keith H. Brodie, M.D. President Duke University September 1, 1988 iv FOREWORD The completion of this focused self-study has brought to a culmination a truly interdisciplinary effort by a large number of faculty. All areas of the University actively participated, and in the process, rediscovered many of the common threads which reinforce this institution. Some for the first time recognized mutual interests and concerns that permeate the various disciplinary and interdisciplinary units at Duke. Much of the information contained in this volume was gathered in one place for the first time at Duke during this self- study. In this regard, it is hoped that the study might serve as a resource for future activities on campus. The recommendations contained herein were developed following extensive deliberations by faculty committees having both student representatives and University administrators. In the process, a constructively critical look at the current profile of interdisciplinary activities at Duke was taken, and the recommendations were honed against the context of how other strong institutions deal with some of the challenges associated with nourishing such activities successfully. During these comparisons with other distinguished universities, one might logically have taken some of the recommendations even further by including a proposal for cross -disciplinary umbrella structures for advanced study and research around which other interdisciplinary activities might be organized. Thus, this document represents both an end and a beginning. If this self-study is to be of value it must be recognized that the task of implementation lies ahead. It is most appropriate to recognize and thank the many individuals who contributed their time, energy, and skills to this process over the past twenty months. Particular acknowledgement to Dr. David Goldstein is warranted. During the course of this study, he functioned as editor and colleague. This document owes much of its content to him. Ms. Sharon Peters-Gerth contributed immensely by orchestrating the multi-faceted study plan and providing secretarial and administrative assistance. Ms. Susan MacDonald served effectively as a resource person from the Provost's office and the administration. Acknowledgement is also sincerely extended to members of the ad hoc committees and particularly their chairs, Professors Roger Barr, Pamela Gann, and Miguel Medina for the time and serious effort they so willingly contributed. Along with the many faculty and students who contributed individually to the surveys and interviews, they represent the real resource in the University upon which successful self study critically depends. Finally, the Academic Priorities Committee members who assumed the additional responsibilities of an active Self-Study Steering Committee during this intensive effort deserve a special note of appreciation and thanks. The initial vision for a non-traditional self-study focusing on interdisciplinary activity at Duke was developed by President H. Keith H. Brodie and Provost Phillip Griffiths. Their support in planning and implementing this campus -wide effort was critical to the successful outcome and their many individual contributions deserve special recognition. Leonard D. Spicer Chair, Academic Priorities Committee Duke Self-Study Steering Committee September 9, 1988 vi Preface Foreword List of Tables DUKE UNIVERSITY SELF- STUDY Table of Contents Page ii iv ix Chapter One Chapter Two Chapter Four History and Purpose of Duke University 1.1 History of Duke University 1.2 Institutional Purpose The Self-Study Process 2.1 Previous Accreditation and Reaccreditation Self-Studies 2.2 Purpose and Goals of the Present Non- Traditional Reaccreditation Self-Study 2.3 Structure and Schedule of the Self-Study Process Chapter Three Institutional Effectiveness 3 .1 The History of Planning and Evaluation at Duke University 17 3 .2 The Context for the Current Planning Process 20 3 .3 Achieving Duke's Objectives 25 3 .4 Enhancing Institutional Effectiveness 31 Educ ational Program 4, .1 Undergraduate Program 33 4.1.1 Arts and Sciences 33 4.1.2 School of Engineering 38 4.1.3 Admissions and Recruitment 39 4.1.4 Curriculum 47 4.1.5 Undergraduate Instruction 57 4 ,2 Graduate & Professional School Program 61 4.2.1 The Graduate School 61 4.2.2 Professional Schools 72 4.2.2.1 Divinity School 72 4.2.2.2 School of Forestry and 76 Environmental Studies 4.2.2.3 Fuqua School of Business 79 4.2.2.4 Law School 84 4.2.2.5 Medical Center 91 4. 3 Continuing Education 96 4. 4 Faculty 98 4.4.1 Appointment and Evaluation 98 4.4.2 Compensa t ion 103 4.4.3 Governance 103 4. 5 Consortial & Contractual Relationships 111 vii Table of Contents (continued) Page Chapter Five Educational Support Services 5.1 Libraries 5.2 Center for Academic Computing 5.3 Instructional Support 5.4 Student Development Services 5.4.1 Advising 5.4.2 Student Government, Activities and Publications 5.4.3 Residential Life 5.4.4 Religious Life 5.4.5 Student Services 5.4.6 Financial Aid 5.5 Intercollegiate Athletics 115 119 122 124 124 128 131 132 133 135 137 Chapter Six Administrative Processes 6.1 Organization and Administration 6.1.1 Academic Organization 6.2 Institutional Advancement 6.2.1 Alumni Affairs 6.2.2 Publications 6.3 Financial Resources 6.3.1 Financial Planning 6.3.2 Financial Resources 6.3.3 Fund Raising 6.4 Physical Resources 6.4.1 Facilities and Properties 6.4.2 Planning 139 142 144 144 145 148 148 153 157 159 159 160 Chapter Seven The Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity at Duke 7.1 Historical Perspective 7.2 Current Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity at Duke 161 169 Chapter Eight Current Interdisciplinary Activity at Duke 8.1 Organization of Committee Activity 8.2 Existing Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes 8.3 A Cross-Section of Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers & Institutes 8.4 Criteria for the Designations Program, Center, and Institute 8 . 5 Results of Faculty and Student Questionnaires 8 . 6 Results of Surveys and Interviews 172 173 178 195 196 202 viii Table of Contents (continued) Page Chapter Nine Future Interdisciplinary Activity at Duke 9.1 Organization of Committee Activity 207 9.2 A Framework for Developing Inter- 208 disciplinary Activities 9.3 Criteria for Selecting Interdisciplinary 209 Programs 9.4 Features of Successful Interdisciplinary 210 Programs 9.5 Suggestions for Interdisciplinary 214 Initiatives and New Efforts Chapter Ten Administering Interdisciplinary Activity at Duke 10.1 Organization of Committee Activity 220 10.2 Types of Interdisciplinary Activity 221 10.2.1 Definition of "Interdisciplinary" 221 10.2.2 Categories of Interdisciplinary 222 Activity 10.3 Administering Interdisciplinary Activity 230 10.4 The Evolution of Interdisciplinary Units 242 Chapter Eleven Summary of Major Findings and Conclusions 246 Appendix Definitions of Terms Tab A Interdisciplinary Studies: Two Views Tab B Interdisciplinary Activity Within Departments: Tab C Example - Department of Romance Languages Faculty Surveys Tab D Computerized File of Interdisciplinary Faculty Tab E Interests Reports of Ad Hoc Committee II Task Forces: Tab F Humanities Social Sciences Natural Sciences School of Business School of Engineering School of Law Medical Center Summary of Other Institutions Proposal for Deane Institute for Advanced Study Tab G Proposal for Program in Brain/Behavior Science Tab H Resolution on Creation of Sections at Duke Tab I ix DUKE UNIVERSITY SELF -STUDY List of Tables Table No. Page 2.1 Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee, 1987-1988 10 2.2a Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee 11 Ad Hoc Committee I - 1987-1988. 2.2b Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee, 12 Ad Hoc Committee II - 1987-1988. 2.2c Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee, 13 Ad Hoc Committee III - 1987-1988. 2.3 Schedule for Self -Study. 16 3.1 Major Planning and Evaluation Documents (1978-1988). 21 3.2 Group of 24 and COFHE Institutions, 1986-76 Data. 24 4.1 Trinity College Degree Students, Fall Semester, 1978-87. 35 4.2 Distribution of Trinity College Majors, 1983 and 1988. 36 4.3 Most Popular Majors - "Group of 24". 37 4.4 School of Engineering Degree Students, Fall Semester, 40 1978-87. 4.5 Distribution of Engineering Majors, 1983 and 1988. 40 4.6 Counts of Applicants/Acceptances/Matriculants 1983-1988. 41 4.7 SAT Averages 1983 to 1988 - Trinity College. 43 4.8 SAT Averages 1983 to 1988 - School of Engineering. 43 4.9 1987 Freshman Merit Scholars - Top 25 Institutions. 45 4.10 Geographic Distribution of Undergraduates. 46 4.11a Relative Importance of Factors Influencing College 48 Choice: Students Enrolling at Duke. 4.11b Relative Importance of Factors Influencing College 49 Choice: Students Enrolling Elsewhere. 4.12 Summary of Programs and Statistics - Duke University 54 Study Abroad Program. 4.13 Duke Departments/Offices Involved in Internships 55 and Employment. 4.14 Characteristics of Selected Major Universities - 1987. 65 4.15 1985 Graduate Student Support - Princeton and Duke. 66 4.16 Distribution of Graduate Students According to 68 Major - Spring 1983. 4.17 Distribution of Graduate Students According to 69 Major - Spring 1988. 4.18 Graduate School Degrees Conferred. 70 4.19 Graduate School Application Activity - 1978-1987. 70 4.20 Graduate School-Mean GRE Scores for New Matriculants 70 1978-1987. 4.21 Divinity School. 74 4.22 School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. 77 4.23 Fuqua School of Business. 81 List of Tables (continued) Table No. Page 4.24 Law School. 85 4.25 Medical Center. 95 4.26 Continuing Education - Individual Enrollments by 97 Program for 1985-86. 4.27 Duke University Faculty 100 4.28 Arts and Sciences Faculty at Regular Ranks - 1987-88 101 4.29 Academic Salaries and Compensation of Full -Time Faculty 104 Members in Arts and Sciences, Engineering, Business, Divinity, Forestry and Law - 1987-88 4.30 University Governance Committees. 106 4.31 Total Sponsored Research Expenditures, Fiscal Years 112 1983 and 1987. 4.32 Federal Research and Development Funds, Fiscal 1986. 113 5.1 Financial Data. 136 6.1 Duke University Alumni - Geographic Distribution. 145 6.2 University Income and Expenditures (excluding 150 Duke hospitals) . 6.3 30 Largest University Endowments. 155 6.4 Voluntary Support to Education, FY 1986-87. 156 6.5 Summary of the Capital Campaign for the Arts and 158 Sciences (1984-85). 6.6 Facilities and Properties. 159 8.1 Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes 174 at Duke University. 8.2 Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Programs. 179 10.1 Categories of Interdisciplinary Activities. 223 List of Figures Fig. 8.1 Survey of Interdisciplinary Activity 197 CHAPTER ONE HISTORY AND PURPOSE OF DUKE UNIVERSITY 1.1 HISTORY OF DUKE UNIVERSITY Duke University has yet to attain its 65th birthday, but the roots of the Institution reach back 150 years. In 1838, a group of Methodist and Quaker citizens from Randolph and adjacent rural counties in North Carolina organized support for the expansion of the one-room Brown's Schoolhouse into a private academy called Union Institute. Under the leadership of Braxton Craven, the Institute grew in size and stature, and in 1851, the North Carolina Legislature chartered the school as Normal College, perhaps the first institution in the South to be chartered especially for the training of teachers. Such recognition did not bring adequate financial support, however, so Craven turned to the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, with a proposal that Normal College should educate future preachers without charge, in return for financial support from the church. In 1856, the Methodist Conference voted to accept the arrangement and three years later, Normal College became Trinity College, a liberal arts school operating under Methodist auspices. Trinity College entered a phase of slow redevelopment following the Civil War. There were some notable accomplishments, however, including the awarding of the first M.A. degrees in 1877 and the granting of degrees to women in 1878. After a succession of subsequent administrative changes, John Franklin Crowell, a graduate of Yale whose twin passions were athletics and high academic standards, was named president in 1887. Crowell undertook a vigorous campaign for academic betterment, including the search for a new site for Trinity College, closer to the state's growing centers of population. In 1892, aided by funds and land donated by tobacco magnates Washington Duke and Julian Carr, Crowell moved Trinity College to Durham. History and Purpose of Duke University Although financial crises followed Trinity College to Durham, John C. Kilgo, who assumed the presidency in 1894, succeeded in obtaining additional financial support from the Duke family, including a gift of $100,000 in 1896 that enabled the College to admit women "on an equal footing with men." Progress under Kilgo was consistent; new buildings were added, enrollment climbed sharply, and the Law School opened in 1904. Trinity College established a reputation for academic excellence and was one of the six charter members of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. This period of college history is notable as well for the famous Bassett affair. John Spencer Bassett, a professor at Trinity College, wrote an article for a scholarly journal in 1903 that questioned the then prevailing views on race relations. The College's board of trustees turned back widespread appeals for Bassett 's dismissal, thereby taking a stand for academic freedom that earned it wide respect and renown. William Preston Few succeeded Kilgo in 1910 and oversaw the transformation of Trinity College into Duke University following the creation of the Duke Endowment in 1924. The next eight years witnessed enormous change. The Divinity School opened in 1926. The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences was inaugurated in 1927 and two years later the University awarded its first Ph.D. degree. In 1930, the new Gothic buildings of the West Campus were occupied as Trinity College (the undergraduate college for men) , while the older East Campus was refurbished as the coordinate Women's College. The School of Medicine was established in 1930, the School of Nursing was established in 1931, and the first M.D. degree was awarded a year later. Other schools were rapidly added: the College of Engineering in 1939 (although the first Department of Engineering was established at Trinity in 1910), the School of Forestry in 1938, and finally, the Graduate School of Business Administration in 1969. Duke University quickly established itself as one of the nation's leading educational and research institutions and in 1938 Duke was selected for membership in the elite Association of American Universities. William Preston Few died in 1940, ending a remarkable 30 -year presidency. History and Purpose of Duke University Under the succeeding administrations of Robert L. Flowers (1940-1948), A. Hollis Edens (1949-1960), J. Deryl Hart (1960-1963), Douglas M. Knight (1963-1969), Terry Sanford (1969-1985) and H. Keith H. Brodie (1985-), Duke University has continued to grow in stature, ever striving to honor James B. Duke's charge that Duke University attain "a place of real leadership in the educational world." Today, as it celebrates its sesquicentennial year, Duke is a complex and vital institution. Its various professional schools and graduate programs consistently rank among the top 10 or 20 in the nation. The undergraduates have academic credentials that are matched at only a handful of other schools. The libraries, laboratories, and other academic support services are among the finest in the world. But the University does not rest upon its laurels. Duke University's goals for the future are described in the next section, Institutional Purpose. 1.2 INSTITUTIONAL PURPOSE Duke University, as Trinity College before it, has always been known for its commitment to academic quality. The fundamental assumption of the academic planning and self- study process is that Duke's overriding purpose is the pursuit of academic quality, as is defined in the following mission statement . MISSION STATEMENT Duke University shall endeavor to accomplish these missions: to educate students for meaningful, ethical and productive lives, to discover and interpret significant new knowledge; to promote the spirit of free inquiry on moral and intellectual issues; to foster the exchange of ideas and information within and across traditional disciplinary boundaries; to enrich the lives of the residents of our region by providing a variety of educational, medical, cultural and recreational services; and to support diversity and mutual tolerance throughout the university. The University will strive to achieve excellence in all these endeavors. In particular, it intends to achieve international distinction as a first-rank research History and Purpose of Duke University institution that also offers an undergraduate program second to none; to enroll the most accomplished and talented students regardless of race, sex, religion, or financial need; to build and support a faculty that achieves the highest standards in teaching, research and scholarship; to train graduate and professional students who will become leaders in their fields; to create and maintain the finest libraries, laboratories, and cultural resources; and to deal fairly with employees, neighbors, and those with whom the University does business. Duke cherishes its historic ties with the United Methodist Church and the religious faith of its founders, while remaining non- sectarian. Above all, Duke University seeks to engage the minds, elevate the spirits and stimulate the best efforts of all who are associated with the University. Thus, a primary objective of the University, based upon the mission statement, is to secure Duke's place in the top echelon of research universities in the United States. This can be accomplished through capitalizing on Duke's current strengths and a strong commitment to the realization of this objective from the faculty, students, administration, and Trustees . To be in the top echelon, however, does not mean that every program must achieve some specified ranking. Rather, it implies an overall strength and balance across the institution. There should be peaks of excellence, and whatever is attempted should be done very well. This is especially true of the major units of the institution. No institution can join the top echelon through excellence in an isolated school or department; strength across the entire range of programs is the distinguishing factor. Duke's opportunity to carve out a distinctive niche among the leading research universities is created by conditions already in existence. First is the strength of the undergraduate program, which has been rated among the top in the nation at a research university. Duke's objective for the future should be nothing less than offering the finest undergraduate program available at a research university. History and Purpose of Duke University Second, Duke must secure its place in the first rank of research universities by continuing to strengthen its research effort, which will be achieved primarily through strengthening the Graduate School. Duke has a distinctive contribution to make through the fostering of interdisciplinary collaboration and inquiry. Duke's relatively small size, the geography of the campus, the strong professional schools, and the existing predisposition of many faculty members all point to an increase in interdisciplinary cooperation. This is timely in light of the external environment as well for many of the most exciting new discoveries are taking place between the boundaries of the traditional disciplines. Moreover, research funding, which is critical for Duke to achieve its goals, is being increasingly directed toward collaborative enterprises. These objectives are realistic, though demanding. They are in harmony with Duke's traditions, strengths, and current momentum. The present self-study is a major vehicle by which Duke can assess and evaluate these goals and purposes. The self-study process at Duke is reviewed in Chapter Two. CHAPTER TWO THE SELF -STUDY PROCESS 2.1 PREVIOUS ACCREDITATION AND REACCREDITATION SELF-STUDIES Since the Inception of the institutional self -study program in 1958, Duke University has produced two self- studies in accordance with the procedures of the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. These documents, the 1965 "Report of the Institutional Self -Study," and the 1976 report "Continuing Self -Evaluation: Developing the Process," have been invaluable components of the planning and evaluation process at Duke. The 1965 Accreditation Self-Study was completed shortly after the beginning of the presidency of Douglas Knight. It was a traditional self-study and included all facets of the University except for the School of Medicine, which was excused from preparing a special report for the Southern Association Self-Study because it had just submitted an accreditation report to the American Medical Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges. The 1976 institutional self- study has had a continuing impact on the planning and evaluation process at Duke. Noting that "the institution is in a continuous process of self-examination," the faculty and administration self-study committees concluded that "what the University needed was a study activity that focused not only on the product of evaluation but on the process itself. From this could emerge a more systematic and continuous evaluation process which would recognize the diversity within the University, and provide the information necessary for decision-making in the immediate as well as the long-term future." To a considerable extent the wish of the self-study authors - "that a truly significant process has begun that will result in an on-going and The Self-Study Process continuing self-examination of Duke University" - has been fulfilled. This process of continued self-examination at Duke is described in detail in Chapter 3. 2.2 PURPOSE AND GOALS OF THE PRESENT NON-TRADITIONAL REACCREDITATION SELF -STUDY In light of the two previous accreditation self -studies and the on-going process of self -evaluation at Duke, the University requested and received permission from the Southern Association to conduct a non- traditional, focused self -study of a pressing campus issue. The topic chosen for the non-traditional, focused reaccreditation self -study was interdisciplinary activity in the areas of teaching and research. The definition of "interdisciplinary" adopted for the purpose of the self- study was a very simple one: interdisciplinary is used to refer to any University activity - teaching, research, or other scholarship - that crosses Duke University departmental or school boundaries. This definition is spelled out in more detail in subsequent chapters of this report (see, in particular, Chapter Ten) and in the Appendix. The topic of interdisciplinary activity was selected because of the conviction at Duke that the coming period is one of special opportunity and challenge for research and teaching in higher education. Major new intellectual activity is occurring not only within traditional academic disciplines, but also at the interstices between the traditional disciplines. The ramifications of emerging interdisciplinary activities for higher education are profound. They impact upon the undergraduate as well as the graduate and professional curricula, on faculty and organizational development, and on the ways in which universities can adapt to accelerating economic, social, and technological change. Despite the growing recognition of the potential that resides in interdisciplinary activity, it remains the case that traditional department or school structures are not always well adapted to respond to this changing intellectual environment. Indeed, progress will come only where The Self-Study Process intellectual and educational goals are not inhibited by administrative structures. Universities are conservative by nature and the traditional academic structures have customarily become entrenched as ways to organize research and teaching activities. By contrast, many emerging disciplines cut across existing departments, divisions, colleges, and schools creating a potential for scholarly as well as administrative obstacles. In a sense, the existing disciplinary structures may be viewed as vertical, while the emerging interdisciplines require structures that are horizontal. As a consequence, there is a strong need for the development of administrative mechanisms that have the potential to interweave existing vertical administrative structures with emerging horizontal administrative structures. The Duke University faculty and administration chose to address these problems by conducting a univer s ity - wide study of existing interdisciplinary activities at Duke and by exploring the potential for additional promising new activities of this type. It was anticipated at the outset that the results of the self- study would have an impact upon the overall guidelines for setting Duke's priorities for the future. Indeed, a self-study of the Graduate School has already revealed the desire of the Duke faculty to seek those new opportunities for excellence in interdisciplinary programs that will place Duke at the forefront of new knowledge and discovery. In addition, the Duke faculty and administration articulated the goal of meeting the challenge of interdisciplinary teaching and research in a fashion that would not only shape the future of this institution, but which would also potentially serve as a model for other institutions aspiring to this same vision. Specifically, the self -study pursued the following broadly-stated objectives: (1) to document and assess existing interdisciplinary programs at Duke in order to devise a plan to evaluate their effectiveness and formulate criteria for their continuation or termination; (2) to assess the need for and potential of future interdisciplinary programs at Duke; and (3) to devise appropriate administrative structures to facilitate the The Self-Study Process creation, maintenance, and periodic review of interdisciplinary programs of research and teaching, both within and among major divisions of the University. 2.3 STRUCTURE AND SCHEDULE OF THE SELF-STUDY PROCESS In accordance with the Manual for Accreditation . the organization of the Duke self- study effort was carried out in the following fashion: Steering Committee . The duties of the Steering Committee in the self -study process as stated in the Manual include: "overall supervision of the self- study and compilation of the results into a meaningful and coherent report." For the Duke self-study, the standing Academic Priorities Committee was selected to serve as the Steering Committee. The Academic Priorities Committee (APC) at Duke is one of the most important faculty committees, serving as the major vehicle for faculty advice and input to the Provost, who serves as committee chairman. Members of the APC are generally among the most senior and distinguished faculty at Duke. Nominated by the Academic Council (Duke's Faculty Senate), APC members serve three -year terms. For purposes of the self- study, most of the APC's usual duties were put aside and a faculty chair was chosen to serve in place of the Provost. The membership roster of the steering committee may be found in Table 2.1. It is important to note that virtually all of the major academic components of Duke have representation on the Academic Priorities Committee. Principal Committees . The Manual states that "the steering committee should arrange for the appointment of principal committees with the broadest possible participation of all members of the college community." Toward this end, the Steering Committee, together with the Academic Council, appointed three principal ad hoc committees to examine various aspects of interdisciplinary activity at Duke. The membership rosters of the Ad Hoc Committees may be found in Tables 2.2a-c. Each Ad Hoc Committee contained at least one member of the Steering Committee as a liaison between the two committees. The Self-Study Process 10 Table 2.1. Members Duke Self-Study Steering Committee 1987 to 1988. Professor Leonard D. Spicer, Chairman Departments of Biochemistry and Radiology Professor Roger Barr Biomedical Engineering Professor Stanley Hauerwas Divinity School Professor George Somjen Department of Physiology Professor Robert Ashton Fuqua School of Business Professor Bruce Nicklas Department of Zoology Professor Allan Kornberg Department of Political Science Professor Francis Newton Department of Classical Studies Professor Lewis Siegel Department of Biochemistry Professor Deborah DeMott School of Law Professor John Staddon Department of Psychology EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Dr. Margaret Bates Vice Provost for Academic Programs Professor Charles Putman Vice Provost for Research and Development Professor Malcolm Gillis Dean of the Graduate School and Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Professor Phillip Stewart Chairman, Academic Council Dr. Phillip A. Griffiths Provost Ms . Susan MacDonald Assistant Provost The Self-Study Process 11 Table 2.2a. Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee Ad Hoc Committee I - 1987 to 1988. Professor Miguel Medina, Chairman Civil Engineering Professor Stanley Hauerwas Divinity School Professor Deborah DeMott School of Law Professor Leigh DeNeef Department of English Professor Francis Newton Department of Classical Studies Professor Jacob J. Blum Department of Physiology Professor Sheila Counce Department of Anatomy Professor Peter Lange Department of Political Science Dr. Jean O'Barr Director, Women's Studies Dr. Margaret Bates Vice Provost for Academic Programs Ms . Lauren Nathan Graduate and Professional Student Council Representative Mr. Peter Aman Associated Students of Duke University Dr. David Goldstein Department of Psychology Professor Leonard D. Spicer Department of Biochemistry The Self-Study Process 12 Table 2.2b. Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee Ad Hoc Committee II - 1987 to 1988 Professor Pamela Gann, Chairman School of Law Professor Allan Romberg Department of Political Science Professor George Somjen Department of Physiology Professor Theo Pilkington Biomedical Engineering Professor Annabel Wharton Department of Art Professor Nicholas Kredich Department of Biochemistry Professor Robert Ashton Fuqua School of Business Professor Daniel Livingstone Department of Zoology Professor Malcolm Gillis Dean of the Graduate School and Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Ms . Lynda Sagrestano Associated Students of Duke University Dr. David Goldstein Department of Psychology Professor Leonard D. Spicer Department of Biochemistry The Self-Study Process 13 Table 2.2c. Members - Duke Self -Study Steering Committee Ad Hoc Committee III - 1987 to 1988. Professor Roger Barr, Chairman Biomedical Engineering Professor Clark Havighurst School of Law Professor Jane Tompkins Department of English Professor Richard M. Burton Fuqua School of Business Professor James Rolleston Department of Germanic Languages and Literature Professor John Westerhoff Divinity School Professor Robert Webster Department of Biochemistry Professor Lewis Siegel Department of Biochemistry Professor Kenneth Knoerr School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Professor Charles Putman Vice Provost for Research and Development Dr. Michael Mezzatesta Director Museum of Art Professor John Staddon Department of Psychology Dr. David Goldstein Department of Psychology Professor Leonard D. Spicer Department of Biochemistry The Self-Study Process 14 The focus of each of the Ad Hoc Committee's deliberations may be summarized as follows : Ad Hoc Committee I - current interdisciplinary activity at Duke Ad Hoc Committee II - future interdisciplinary activity at Duke Ad Hoc Committee III - administering interdisciplinary activity at Duke Organization of the Self -Study Report . Because this self-study is non-traditional in nature, the manner in which the sections of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Criteria were subdivided and assigned to committees differed somewhat from the norm. Responsibility for the five major sections of the SACS Criteria was assigned by the Steering Committee while the three ad hoc committees were assigned the three non-traditional, focused aspects of the self- study summarized above with the charge to report their findings to the Steering Committee for review and debate. The major sections of the SACS Criteria as well as the topics of the ad hoc committees are each discussed in separate chapters of this report, as follows : Major Section of SACS Criteria Self-Study Chapter Institutional Purpose 1 Institutional Effectiveness 3 Educational Program 4 Educational Support Services 5 Administrative Processes 6 Focused Self-Study Topics Significance of Interdisciplinary 7 Activity Current Interdisciplinary Activity 8 (Ad Hoc Committee I) Future Interdisciplinary Activity 9 (Ad Hoc Committee II) Administering Interdisciplinary Activity 10 (Ad Hoc Committee III) The Self-Study Process 15 These chapters, together with the current chapter and the final chapter - a summary of the major findings and conclusions - constitute Volume I of the Self -Study Report. In addition to the main report, there are several appendices, gathered together as Volume II of the Self -Study report. Finally, there are the major documents from the on-going self-study process at Duke (a total of nine volumes). These volumes, described in Chapter 3, will be available for the inspection of the Visiting Committee, along with the numerous annual reports, committee reports, catalogs, and the like. In addition, in lieu of the traditional "Institutional Fact Book" described in the Manua 1 . a two-part resource file was created. This file, which will also be available for inspection by the Visiting Committee, contains: (1) a folder for each interdisciplinary unit at Duke containing descriptive information about the unit, representative publications, news clippings and the like, and (2) a folder for each of 50 major research universities in the United States containing catalogs, reports, and other information about interdisciplinary activities on their respective campuses. Self -Study Editor . A self- study editor was appointed by the Provost and the Steering Committee chairman to take responsibility for preparing and editing the final self -study report. The editor also attended all meetings of the Steering Committee and the Ad Hoc Committees in order to facilitate communication among the committees. Schedule of the Self-Study . The Steering Committee established a schedule for the self-study to carry out the charge established in the SACS Manual "to ensure that the study progresses satisfactorily and to give general direction to the various self -study committees." The schedule is presented in Table 2.3. The Self-Study Process 16 Table 2.3. Schedule for Self -Study. Preliminary meeting First meeting of steering committee Formation of ad hoc committees Preliminary committee reports Progress report to commission Refined committee reports Steering Committee compiles first draft of final report; institution-wide review Visiting Committee appointed by SACS Editor completes draft document Comments received from Council of Deans, Steering Committee, and Academic Council Distribution of final document to Board of Trustees, administration, faculty, students January 1987 February March May July February 1988 April May June July September Visiting Committee on campus October CHAPTER THREE INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS One of the key goals of the self- study process is to focus the attention of the academic community on the problem of evaluating institutional effectiveness. At Duke University, the process of evaluating institutional effectiveness is a serious matter. In this chapter, several aspects of this process are reviewed. First, a summary of the University's past efforts in planning and evaluation are provided, followed by a discussion of some contemporary issues and themes that inform the current planning and evaluation processes. The third section summarizes some of the major themes of Duke's current planning process. The final section describes two important areas where the University intends to focus future planning and evaluation efforts: institutional research and measuring student outcomes. 3.1 THE HISTORY OF PLANNING AND EVALUATION AT DUKE UNIVERSITY Duke University has long recognized that planning serves the critical function of establishing the framework for decision-making and action and thereby ensures that Duke realizes its full potential as a research university. During the past thirty years, numerous planning documents have been produced by the faculty, the administration, and the Board of Trustees in order to guide the University's development. Some of the more notable and influential planning documents have been: o The "Fifth Decade Report," the culmination of a six-year process of self-study initiated by President Hollis Edens in 1958. A faculty-administrative University Committee on Long-Range Planning was charged with preparing for Duke's fifth decade of operation (1965-1975). This self-study Institutional Effectiveness 18 identified institutional needs for capital improvements, academic programs, and increased endowment support. One specific outgrowth of the report was the launching of the "The Fifth Decade Campaign", with the goal of adding more than one hundred million dollars to the Endowment. o "The University Planning Committee Report," commissioned by President Terry Sanford (1970-1985) and completed in 1972. This comprehensive review of almost all areas of university activity resulted in the identification of new goals and priorities. In particular, the focus of planning shifted from buildings and facilities to educational programs, the needs of faculty and students, and to innovative and creative approaches to the learning process. o "Planning for the Eighties," written in 1978 by Chancellor A. Kenneth Pye, outlined Duke's plan for meeting the financial problems that all universities faced at that time as a result of the energy crisis and resultant inflation. This self- study proposed that Duke retain its academic quality by restricting the scope of its educational programs and concentrating its available resources on fewer activities. o "Directions for Progress," written by Mr. Pye and the Faculty Long-Range Planning Committee in 1980, presented the results of the intensive self-study stimulated by "Planning for the Eighties." Many of the recommendations that were made in this planning document had a profound impact on the subsequent development of the University. More recently, and in response to interest expressed by the University's Board of Trustees, a formal and on-going planning initiative has been initiated under the aegis of a newly-created Vice President Institutional Effectiveness 19 position. The Vice President-Planning, together with a small staff of professionals, will be responsible for working with the leadership of each component of the University in the development of a long-range plan for his or her area of responsibility. These plans will not only include the long-range goals and objectives of each planning entity, but will also incorporate specific actions to be undertaken in the realization of the goals and objectives as well as comprehensive long-range financial forecasts to model the viability of the plans. Board of Trustee involvement in the planning process has been facilitated through the establishment of an Ad Hoc Planning Committee which meets regularly with the Vice President-Planning and senior management of the University to discuss these efforts. It is anticipated that as the planning effort expands to encompass all units of the University, a fundamental change in the University's budget process will be accomplished. The objective is to review an annually updated and consolidated version of these plans with the Board of Trustees in the late Fall of each year. This review would establish guidelines and set the stage for the preparation of the actual budget for the next year. As a result, the next year's budget would become the short-range implementation strategy for the realization of the long-range plan and would be measured, not only by whether or not it is balanced and maintains the University's posture of fiscal equilibrium, but also as to how effectively it moves the University towards the realization of its long-range goals and objectives. Within the past year, two major academic plan documents have been produced as part of this long-range planning effort: the "Report on Graduate Education at Duke University" (1987) and the "Academic Plan" (1988) . These documents describe in detail the current status of the University's academic program, academic plans and goals for the future, and the criteria whereby progress towards the realization of these goals will be assessed. These major comprehensive documents have been supplemented in recent years by numerous targeted, specific plans covering a wide range of University activities and operations. Among these have been planning Institutional Effectiveness 20 documents on the undergraduate curriculum, admissions and financial aid, faculty compensation, recruitment of women and minority faculty, reorganization of the Medical School's basic science departments, cooperative programs, continuing education, and policies governing sexual harassment. A list of the reports that will be referred to in this document appears in Table 3.1. All of these reports will be available for inspection by the Visiting Committee. Clearly, self-study is a comprehensive and continuous process at Duke University. Virtually every aspect of this complex institution has received intensive and critical scrutiny since the last reaccreditation self -study in 1976. 3.2 THE CONTEXT FOR THE CURRENT PLANNING PROCESS Research universities stand at the confluence of powerful currents in modern society. Questions concerning the future of human knowledge, and indeed of humanity itself, press constantly upon these complex institutions, and Duke University is no exception. The question for Duke is whether the currents will control the University or the University will take advantage of them in fulfillment of its mission. Through academic planning, the faculty and administration can establish the framework for decision-making and action to ensure that Duke realizes its full potential as a research university. Strategic academic planning acknowledges that while the University seeks to chart its own course from within, it is not immune to external influences. Certain major trends, such as the growing internationalization of the world economy and the pervasive influence of technology, form the background for consideration of the future of the research university. While the economic and technological imperative blurs the distinction between research and enterprise, it also ignores the boundaries of the traditional academic disciplines. New approaches to knowledge, many prompted or enabled by technological advances, are changing our Institutional Effectiveness 21 Table 3.1. Major Planning and Evaluation Documents (1978-1988). Name Date Purpose 1. Academic Plan (draft) Report on Graduate Education at Duke University by the Academic Priorities Committee 1988 1987 3. Report of the Faculty 1987 Coordinating Committee for Development of the Basic Sciences at Duke University Medical Center 4. Structure and Choice in 1986 Liberal Education 5. Report of the Ad Hoc Review 1985 Committee on Appointments, Promotion and Tenure 6. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee 1983 on the Quality of Teaching of the Undergraduate Faculty Council of Arts & Sciences 7. Implementing the Recommendations 1981 of "Directions for Progress" 8. Directions for Progress 1980 9. Planning for the Eighties 1978 Five-year plan for University and each of its major components Evaluation of Graduate School Plan for reorganization of Medical Center basic science departments Evaluation & revision of undergraduate curriculum Evaluation of faculty policy Evaluation of undergraduate instruction Strategic academic planning Strategic academic planning Strategic academic planning Institutional Effectiveness 22 understanding of the world and our ways of investigating it. Developing institutional structures to accommodate the emerging modes of inquiry poses one of the greatest challenges to the research university since its inception in the United States a century ago. The University also operates within a policy environment which can significantly influence planning. Recent changes in tax laws, for example, have affected the University's fund-raising ability. Elimination of mandatory retirement laws could disrupt orderly planning for replacement of faculty. Patterns of federal research funding, based on perceived national priorities, will continue to influence the type and amount of research the University is able to conduct. State and federal student aid policies are integral factors in Duke's ability to attract and retain students. The University must be constantly alert and responsive to these trends and must anticipate rather than merely react. In a more specific context, Duke occupies a prominent place within the world of private higher education, a position which entails particular challenges and opportunities. While a private institution is freer to set its own direction, it has the correspondingly heavier burden of financing its own activities. It is simply not possible for a private university to compete with its public counterparts on the basis of tuition; the only competitive advantage the private institution can rely upon is the quality of its educational and research programs -- that is, its academic quality. In the long run this must be the primary justification for the necessarily higher tuition. Just as the world and national economies are characterized by increasing competition, so is the world of higher education. This increased competition is in part a result of the declining numbers of high school graduates. Cutbacks in graduate education over the last decade discouraged many talented students from pursuing academic careers, reducing the pool of highly-qualified junior faculty. At the other end of the spectrum, the competition has increased for distinguished senior faculty. Reductions in federal research funding have increased competition for Institutional Effectiveness 23 research support. As one views the situation it becomes apparent that there is a growing stratification within the ranks of research universities and that those who do not keep pace are falling further behind. Planning at this moment is all the more important because Duke has never sought to follow established patterns. Duke's history and particular combination of strengths set it apart from other research universities. There is no model for the kind of institution Duke is or seeks to be; Duke's planning model should be based on an orderly systematic approach to the continuing process of self -definition. Duke's distinctiveness is a result of many factors, especially the configuration and relative sizes of the undergraduate, graduate, and professional schools in conjunction with the Medical Center. The geography of the campus makes possible a degree of communication among these various units rare at a research university. The influence of the physical and academic propinquities of the University is readily visible; for example, one of the major emphases of the new undergraduate curriculum is the relatedness of disparate fields of knowledge. This natural impulse towards interdisciplinary communication both distinguishes Duke and places the University in a strong position for the future. While Duke strives to shape its own destiny it nevertheless exists in a competitive environment. To plan with specificity it is necessary to examine Duke's position within the context of higher education. Traditionally, there have been two sets of institutions with whom Duke shares data and compares itself. The first is the "Group of 24", institutions with which Duke exchanges faculty salary data; the other, the Consortium for Financing Higher Education (COFHE), shares data on admissions, financial aid, and other areas. The Group of 24 and the COFHE institutions are shown in Table 3.2. In order to begin to locate Duke within this range of institutions, some illustrative information on Duke and these selected institutions is also shown in the table. It can be seen that Duke is neither particularly Institutional Effectiveness 24 Table 3.2. GROUP OF 24 and COFHE Institutions, 1986-87 Data Full-Time Date of Total Grad/Prof GROUP OF 24 Establishment Enrollment Enrollment * Brown 1764 7294 1440 * Carnegie-Mellon 1900 6752 1508 * Chicago 1891 9971 5525 * Columbia 1754 16332 9073 * Cornell 1865 17904 5259 * Dartmouth 1769 5309 1046 * DUKE 1838/1924 10116 3584 Emory 1836 8791 2777 * Georgetown 1789 11967 4099 * Harvard 1636 17217 9529 * Johns Hopkins 1876 11124 3571 * MIT 1861 9756 4804 * Northwestern 1851 16226 5287 Notre Dame 1842 9484 1264 * Penn 1740 21870 8175 Princeton 1746 6199 1635 Rice 1904 4048 1107 * Rochester 1850 7676 2309 SMU 1911 9019 1624 Southern California 1880 30831 14303 * Stanford 1885 13079 6173 Tulane 1834 10302 3135 Vanderbilt 1873 8968 2960 * Washington U. 1853 10581 3996 * Yale 1701 10799 5162 * also in COFHE COHFE COLLEGES Amherst Barnard Bryn Mawr Carleton Mt. Holyoke Pomona Smith Swarthmore Trinity Wellesley Wesleyan Williams Date of Total Establishment Enrollment* 1821 1550 1889 2200 1885 1794 1866 1853 1837 1906 1887 1350 1875 2875 1864 1310 1823 1908 1875 2200 1831 2800 1793 2084 * In a few cases, includes a small number of graduate students Institutional Effectiveness 25 old nor, for a research institution, particularly large. Nevertheless, Duke has achieved an enviable reputation for academic quality. Reputational ratings, of course, are not scientific; they must be viewed with caution. However, in 1985 a national survey conducted by U.S. News & World Report placed Duke's undergraduate program in Engineering and Trinity College among the top 10 at research universities. In the latest reputational rankings of graduate programs (1982) , 8 Duke programs were in the top 20, and 4 were in the top 10. The Schools of Medicine, Law, and Divinity; the Fuqua School of Business; and the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies enjoy national reputations in their respective professional fields. Duke's challenge, however, is not to maintain the status quo. Indeed, the rapidly changing world does not acknowledge or admit of a status quo. The University must be able to respond to the constantly shifting external environment quickly and creatively. With the competition for students, faculty, and resources intensifying, Duke must be clear about its objectives and how it is going to achieve them. A coordinated, university-wide approach to the future is the only alternative to institutional drift, missed opportunities, or the misapplication of finite institutional resources. 3.3 ACHIEVING DUKE'S OBJECTIVES The planning process described in Section 3.1 is clearly instrumental in increasing the institutional effectiveness of Duke University. In particular, the draft of the Academic Plan has served a valuable function in the present self -study. In the following pages, five of the most important sets of priorities from the draft of the Academic Plan are summarized. These priorities are intended to convey a sense of where the University plans to place some of its emphasis over the next five years, but it is by no means an exhaustive description. In addition, these and related issues are also examined in subsequent chapters of the present self -study document. Institutional Effectiveness 26 1 . Quality of Contact Between Students and Faculty The essence of the educational experience is found in the mutual exchange and discovery that takes place between students and faculty. This contact is structured through the curriculum; the new undergraduate Arts and Sciences curriculum, for example, emphasizes the importance of small group learning experiences and increases the number of courses required for graduation. For a variety of reasons, Duke's faculty in Arts and Sciences and Engineering is currently smaller than would be expected for Duke's eventual undergraduate enrollment goal of 5700. A primary cause in Arts and Sciences was the phasing out of the Management Science major and Nursing degree, which were both taught by faculty in other schools. In 1979, for example, there were 4780 Arts and Sciences majors and pre-majors; in 1987, there were 5936. The number of faculty did not increase commensurately . Pressure on the faculty has led to an increase in the number of graduate students and adjunct faculty in the classroom, especially for freshmen and sophomores: 29.1% and 12.3% of freshmen and sophomores, respectively, were taught by graduate students in Fall 1986. To increase the amount of freshman and sophomore contact with regular rank faculty, the size of the faculty must be increased. There are other reasons pointing to the need for an increase in the size of the faculty. In particular, Duke should increase its disciplinary coverage in certain areas. While Duke will never be able to compete with large state universities in sheer breadth of coverage, certain key areas in the Arts and Sciences and Engineering are now lacking. Moreover, an increase in the size of the faculty affords the opportunity to increase the representation of women and minorities. Additional faculty would also make it possible to involve more undergraduates in research projects. Finally, it appears that Duke is at a competitive disadvantage with respect to peer institutions in the area of student-faculty ratios. Duke's Institutional Effectiveness 27 Fall 1987 ratio of 13:1 is larger than all but five of the Group of 24 universities . The goal of improving the quality of student-faculty contact through increasing the size of the faculty demonstrates the interrelatedness of the objectives identified through the planning process. In order to offer the finest undergraduate program at a research university, Duke needs to continually invigorate its research enterprise as well. This will also require additional faculty in selected areas. Attracting top quality faculty has implications for faculty salaries and for academic space. It must be remembered, however, that the primary rationale for increasing the size of the faculty is to improve the quality of the educational experience for those who come to Duke to study and learn. 2 . Academic Space Duke has been through an extended period in which there was little or no growth as far as academic facilities are concerned. In order to effectively carry out their teaching and research, the faculty must have adequate space for their offices, classrooms, and research facilities. Academic space of every type is at a premium. Fortunately, the state constitutional amendment for tax-exempt financing of university facilities is now in effect, providing a lower-cost means for the debt financing of new construction. The most important priorities are likely to include: 1. laboratory space; 2. classroom and office space; 3. residence hall space; 4. technology center; and 5. Law School addition. 3 . Faculty Salaries It is a truism that to attract and retain the best faculty, salaries must be competitive. Faculty are no different than other professionals in Institutional Effectiveness 28 this respect. Being competitive does not necessarily mean paying the highest salaries because faculty members are also attracted by such factors as location, facilities and support services, collegiality and the opportunity to interact with other scholars, and the possibilities for growth in their fields and professional advancement. Patterns of faculty salaries nationally are undergoing a number of changes, especially with respect to the most sought-after junior and senior faculty members. While there has been for some time a trend towards high salaries for the very best faculty, there is beginning to be more intense competition for extremely talented junior faculty, now that the glut of Ph.D.s has begun to dissipate. These and other factors have begun putting upward pressure on faculty salaries in Duke's peer group. Duke's policy in the past has been to seek to maintain its average faculty salaries at the midpoint of the 24 institutions mentioned earlier. In recent years, Duke has improved faculty salaries substantially, but because other institutions have done the same Duke has remained essentially at the midpoint of the comparison group. All of these institutions are private, but Duke also competes with public universities and to some extent industry for faculty. As a consequence, Duke's objective with respect to faculty salaries is not merely to maintain, but to improve its competitive position. This issue will be taken up again in Chapter Four. 4. Research A renewed commitment to the research effort is essential for the achievement of Duke's goals. The very nature of knowledge and how we acquire it is changing rapidly, pushed on by technology and the new understanding of the world it enables. It is no longer possible, if it ever was, to be at the forefront of knowledge without a vigorous research enterprise. Duke has a particularly able faculty that is well positioned to take advantage of the new currents in research; the University must make it possible for that potential to be realized to the fullest. Institutional Effectiveness 29 In no other area under consideration is Duke at such a critical juncture. There are a number of signs that Duke's competitive position has been slipping, at least in certain critical areas where Duke has been traditionally strong. A recent report from the U.S. General Accounting Office, for example, showed that Duke is one of only four universities to drop out of the top twenty in federal research funding since 1968. This is an indication of the increased competition, but it also suggests that Duke needs to examine its situation with regard to basic research. The research issues requiring attention are faculty, facilities and university policies. Duke's basic scientific infrastructure has deteriorated over the past two decades. Faculty recruitment has become more difficult because of lack of space and equipment; a scientist cannot do his or her work without adequate facilities. Many research faculty in the sciences and engineering are able to provide their own equipment and instrumentation through grants and contracts, but these researchers need space in which to work. Research in the social sciences and humanities has its own requirements, especially in library collections and computing facilities. The use of computers is widespread in all disciplines from languages to sociology. Whether the primary research tool is a personal computer or a sophisticated scientific instrument, the University must be able to respond to the faculty's research needs if it is to achieve its objectives. University policy is also important in encouraging collaboration among disciplines. Federal research funding patterns are shifting in favor of collaboration. Institutions that encourage this type of activity will be well positioned to take advantage of substantial amounts of federal funds that are in the offing. Duke needs to insure that its policies and administrative arrangements encourage interdisciplinary activity, not because funds will be available for it, but because that is the direction in which knowledge is moving. Institutional Effectiveness 30 5 . Organizational Issues For Duke to achieve its objectives, its institutional structures must be responsive to the overall mission of the University. Duke's nature as a complex, decentralized institution does not easily lead to general acceptance of a shared vision for the University. This is not unusual; divergent interests and points of view are to be found in all large institutions. Given Duke's situation with respect to the external environment, it is all the more important to understand that the only long-term future lies in the improvement of academic quality. Academic quality is central not only to Duke's mission, but to Duke's health. What is called for is no less than institutionalizing the academic perspective into the decision-making process. Through careful planning and cooperation among the offices and committees responsible for planning, budgeting, and setting priorities, Duke can bring its academic goals into the clearest possible form. Implementing the Academic Plan will involve difficult decisions and require constant sensitivity. Adding new faculty, for example, will only lead towards the overall goal if it is done carefully, selectively, and in concert with facility planning. Each appointment must be seen as one of the strategies in implementing the plan. Moreover, adding new faculty will not be effective without nurturing the faculty who have already committed themselves to the University. Students, too, must feel a sense of ownership and involvement in the planning process, for it is they who will benefit both during their educational experience and as alumni. Finally, it is hoped that the on-going planning process, together with the current self-study, will ensure discussion of the University's objectives and goals. One of the main functions of the academic planning and self-study process is to coordinate a great many disparate efforts at academic improvement that are already underway. The process thereby provides a means by which goals not only become explicit, but through which they can be measured, reviewed, and revised as the times dictate. Institutional Effectiveness 31 3.4 ENHANCING INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS By now it should be apparent that Duke University is very committed to the processes of planning and evaluation and has expended countless hours and resources toward the improvement of these processes. Nevertheless, the self- study process has uncovered a few areas where some improvements can be made. In this section, the two most important areas for improvement are described. Institutional Research Duke University engages in an enormous amount of institutional data gathering, some of which will be presented in the subsequent chapters. "Know thyself," as it applies to universities, seems to demand a great deal of quantitative comparison, both with other institutions and with other periods of time. At Duke, a good deal of this type of institutional research is conducted by the separate schools and, as a result, a comprehensive view of the Institution is sometimes difficult to obtain. It is becoming increasingly clear that a better university-wide database is needed. Towards this end, representatives of the Planning Office, the Provost, the Computer Center, and other key faculty and administrators are completing plans for a comprehensive "data warehouse" as a first step toward more coordinated and comprehensive planning and evaluation. As this becomes a reality, the complementary need for human resources to interpret and use the database must be met for effective profiling and planning within the University as a whole. Measuring Student Outcomes Higher education of all types has been criticized in recent years, sometimes unfairly, for failing to document the outcomes of formal instruction. Duke does not seek to exempt itself from this criticism. In fact, a major purpose of Duke's planning and evaluation effort is to answer the question: Are we fulfilling our mission? The comparison of institutional performance to institutional purpose is at the heart of any evaluation effort. In the area of undergraduate Institutional Effectiveness 32 student progress, however, the evaluation enterprise becomes enormously complex and controversial. How does a university such as Duke measure the change in the academic achievement of its students, as emphasized by the Southern Association? As will be seen in Chapters Four and Five, student progress is the focus of considerable attention at Duke, but the University can and should do more. The question that has yet to be answered on this campus, however, is precisely what should be done. Duke faculty, during the course of the self-study, have considered this issue and have rejected the use of any type of single standardized examination as the measure of educational effectiveness. After all, Duke students are extremely talented and are highly pre-selected; nearly four of every five applications for admission are rejected. Merely demonstrating competence in writing and quantitative reasoning in Duke seniors would say little of substance about the Duke experience. Instead, multiple criteria should be used, including the numbers of students progressing to graduate and professional schools, the achievements of alumni, and the alumni's own evaluation of their undergraduate experience. All of these measurement efforts are currently in progress. Nevertheless, a focus of faculty and administration attention in the next few years should be upon refining and improving this aspect of the evaluation process. In the next three chapters, the educational programs, the educational support services, and the administrative processes of Duke University are described. The material presented is not exhaustive, although all of the topics in the SACS Criteria are covered. The Visiting Committee is encouraged to consult the many supporting documents, reports, catalogs, and files that are supplements to the self -study report for additional details. CHAPTER FOUR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 4.1 UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM 4.1.1 Arts and Sciences The excellent reputation of old Trinity College, the precursor of Duke University, was based upon good teaching. While Duke has now become famous for its contributions to research and for the scholarship and caliber of its faculty, the undergraduate classroom remains a primary focus for the University. Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, which today includes all men and women undergraduates not in the School of Engineering, is Duke's liberal arts college. All Trinity students must study in the three major divisions of knowledge -- the humanities, the social sciences, and the natural sciences. An education in the liberal arts gives students the capacity for life-long growth of the mind and thereby engenders: o an understanding and appreciation of the arts by which we express our feelings and of the philosophical and religious thoughts by which we live; o knowledge of other peoples and cultures so that, in a world drawing ever closer together, we can understand ourselves in a broader and deeper context; and o an ability to make observations, synthesize data, and solve problems so we can face and understand new situations . Educational Program 34 Trinity College offers a four-year curriculum leading to either a Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science degree. During the Spring 1988 academic semester, 5211 resident degree students were enrolled. This figure compares with a total of 4683 at the time of the last self-study in the Fall of 1975 and a total of 4881 in the Fall of 1983 (see Table 4.1). The Trinity College total enrollment figures reflect the following proportions of men and women students. In 1975 there were 2711 men (57.9%) and 1972 women (42.1%); in 1983 there were 2647 men (51.2%) and 2520 women (48.8%); and in 1988 there were 2873 men (51.5%) and 2710 women (48.5%). Over the past five years, then, total enrollment has grown slightly while preserving essentially equal numbers of male and female students. Trinity students choose from sixteen different humanities majors, nine social science majors, and eight science majors. A list of these majors and the number of students enrolled in each during the Spring 1983 and Spring 1988 semesters is presented in Table 4.2. Social science majors are clearly the most popular with Trinity students accounting for 65.6% of the total majors. Indeed, there are more majors in political science (588) than in all of the humanities combined (526), while psychology (450) and economics (398) are close behind. Just those three social science departments account for 1436 or 43% of the 3313 Trinity College students with declared majors during the Spring 1988 term, while humanities majors represent 15.9% and science majors represent 18.5% of the total. The popularity of these social science majors is not unique to Duke. According to the 14th Edition (1988-89) of the "Insider's Guide to the Colleges," the most popular majors at Duke's peer institutions were: economics (5), government/political science (4), business/management science (3), English (3), psychology (2), history (2), biology (2), and electrical engineering (1) (see Table 4.3). Excluding the three institutions that favor business, which is not a major at Duke, and two for which data were not available, social science majors are preferred at 13 of 19 of Duke's peer institutions. The reasons Educational Program 35 for this preponderance of social science majors at Duke, as well as at the nation's other leading private universities, deserves more attention than it has received to date. Table 4.1. Trinity College Degree Students, Fall Semester, 1978-87. Year Full -Time Part-Time Total 1978 4616 44 4660 1979 4628 40 4668 1980 4647 38 4685 1981 4762 45 4837 1982 4811 56 4867 1983 4881 53 4934 1984 5082 35 5117 1985 5152 59 5211 1986 5209 35 5244 1987 5107 45 5152 Educational Program 36 Table 4.2. Distribution of Trinity College Majors, 1983 and 1988. 1983 1988 76 5 5 2 4 10 20 256 10 5 12 38 30 25 13 14 Humanities Art 28 Art Design 14 Classics : Classical Studies 9 Greek Latin 4 Comparative Literature 11 Drama 7 English 202 German 11 Medieval Studies 7 Music 20 Philosophy 26 Religion 73 Romanc e Langua g e s French 38 Spanish 19 Russian 4 Social Sciences Afro/American Studies Anthropology 36 Comparative Area Studies 37 Economics 558 History 315 Political Science 456 Psychology 401 Public Policy Studies 216 Sociology 32 Total 472 526 49 153 398 278 588 450 223 36 Total 2051 2175 Sciences Biology 205 87 Botany 14 3 Chemistry 229 111 Computer Science 263 82 Geology 61 6 Mathematics 67 91 Physics 47 37 Zoology 195 195 Total 1081 612 ALL MAJORS: 3568 3313 Educational Program 37 Table 4.3. Most Popular Majors - "GROUP OF 24" Institution Ma i or Brown Carnegie Mellon Chicago Columbia Cornell Dartmouth DUKE Emory Harvard Johns Hopkins MIT Northwestern Notre Dame Penn Princeton Rice Rochester SMU Southern California Stanford Tulane Vanderbilt Washington U. Yale English NA Economics English Government Government Political Science Psychology Economics Biology Electrical Engineering Economics Government Economics History Managerial Studies Psychology Business NA Economics Business English Biology History Educational Program 38 Other aspects of these data on Trinity College majors are noteworthy. In particular, there has been a sharp drop in the number of science majors over the past five years. The reasons for this decline need to be examined. The overall decline in majors between 1983 and 1988, on the other hand, simply reflects the fact that students are currently waiting longer to declare a major, a point discussed further in Section 5.4.1. 4.1.2 School of Engineering The undergraduate engineering program at Duke University is designed both for students who intend to become professional engineers and for those who desire a modern, general education based on the problems and the promises of a technological society. The environment in which students are educated is as important in shaping their future as their classroom experiences. In the Duke School of Engineering this environment has two major components: one is modern technology derived from the research and design activities of faculty and students in the school; the other is the liberal arts environment of the total University with its humanist, social, and scientific emphases. Engineering is not a homogeneous discipline; it requires many special talents. Some faculty members in the School of Engineering are designers; they are problem-oriented, concerned with teaching students how to solve problems - how to synthesize relevant information and ideas and apply them in a creative, feasible design. Other engineering faculty members function more typically as scientists; they are method-oriented, using the techniques of their discipline in their teaching and research to investigate various natural and artificial phenomena. The nation is becoming more aware of the need to increase America's technological base if we are to compete with countries such as Japan in a wide range of industries. This gives the nation's 250 engineering schools an opportunity to grow in quality as well as in stature during the next several years. Duke's School of Engineering, in particular, may be in a position to become one of the best. Educational Program 39 The School of Engineering offers a four-year curriculum leading to a Bachelor of Science in Engineering (BSE) degree. During the Spring 1988 semester, 879 resident degree students were enrolled. This figure compares with a total of 894 five years ago and 745 ten years ago (see Table 4.4). Not surprisingly, women students are in the minority - during the Spring 1988 semester, 21% of the engineering students were women. The School of Engineering offers four majors: Biomedical Engineering, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science. Enrollment in these majors may be seen in Table 4.5. As with Trinity College students, there has been a trend toward delaying the declaration of a major on the part of Engineering students at Duke. When majors were declared, fewer current students chose mechanical engineering than was the case five years ago. 4.1.3 Admissions and Recruitment Admissions . Duke currently enjoys an increasingly favorable position with regard to undergraduate recruitment. In 1983, the total number of undergraduate applicants to Duke was 10,296; in 1988, the number was 14,483, a 41% increase over the five-year period. Separate data for the College of Arts and Sciences and for Engineering follow the same impressive pattern. In 1983, there were 8595 Arts and Sciences applicants; in 1988, there were 12,496, a 45% increase. The corresponding numbers for Engineering are 1701 and 1987, a 17% increase (see Table 4.6). The increase in the applicant pool provides an excellent opportunity for Duke to select more of the highest caliber students and to admit a freshmen class whose members will constitute a significant influence on one another and thereby enrich the whole educational experience. One reflection of Duke's ability to be increasingly selective is the decrease in the total percentage of applicants that it accepts. Duke's annual acceptance rate has decreased from 32.8% in 1983 to 21.9% in 1988. Educational Program 40 Table 4.4. School of Engineering Degree Students, Fall Semester, 1978-1987. Year Full -Time Part-Time Total 1978 737 8 745 1979 790 1 791 1980 803 2 805 1981 849 1 850 1982 859 6 865 1983 887 7 894 1984 890 8 898 1985 823 9 832 1986 911 1 912 1987 892 8 900 Table 4.5. Distribution of Engineering Majors, 1983 and 1988. 1983 1988 Biomedical 185 157 Civil 61 58 Electrical 227 228 Mechanical 201 123 TOTAL 674 566 Educational Program 41 Table 4.6. Counts of Applicants/Acceptances/ Matriculants - 1983 - 1988. TRINITY COLLEGE % TRINITY YEAR APP ACC MATRIC ACC YIELD 1983 8595 2890 1199 33 ,62 41 ,49% 1984 9122 2943 1286 32 .26 43 ,70% 1985 10321 2896 1238 28 .06 42 ,75% 1986 10969 2612 1216 23 ,81 46 ,55% 1987 13026 2681 1256 20 ,58 46, ,85% 1988 12496 2512 * 20, ,10 * SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING % ENG YEAR APP ACC MATRIC ACC YIELD 1983 1701 490 204 28 ,81 28 ,81% 1984 1686 530 210 31 ,44 31, ,44% 1985 1617 496 192 30 ,67 30, ,67% 1986 1686 705 327 41 ,81 41, ,81% 1987 2094 594 237 28, ,37 28. ,37% 1988 1987 654 * 32, ,91 * TOTAL - TRINITY AND ENGINEERING YEAR APP ACC MATRIC YIELD 1983 10296 3380 1403 41.51% 1984 10808 3473 1496 43.08% 1985 11938 3392 1430 42.16% 1986 12655 3317 1543 46.52% 1987 15120 3275 1493 45.59% 1988 14483 3166 * * *Not yet available Educational Program 42 The significance of this change is that it impacts directly on the quality and character of the student body. By the 1986 acceptance rates of the COFHE schools, Duke's acceptance rate of 26% ranked eighth out of the seventeen Universities in selectivity. Princeton (16%) and Stanford (16%) rated the lowest, followed by Harvard/Radcliffe (17%), Yale (18%), Brown (20%), Georgetown (21%), and Dartmouth (22%). Duke also had a lower acceptance rate than all but two of the liberal arts colleges in that same study: Amherst (21%) and Williams (25%). Future increases in selectivity will, of course, be a function of additional growth in the size and quality of the applicant pool, which in turn will depend on additional enhancement of Duke's prestige as well as demographic changes. It is a positive sign that there has been an increase in the quality as well as the number of applicants. The caliber of students interested in Duke reflects the perceived quality and prestige of the institution, and obviously affords the opportunity to enhance the quality of the student body. One should be cautious, however, about quantitative measures which tap only a single dimension of student quality. The admissions process at Duke is an individualized one and the qualities of intellectual motivation and personal strengths which are significant in the evaluation of candidates are not easily captured by test scores or other summary statistics. Nonetheless, there are some shorthand measures which provide a baseline for looking at trends. The mean combined SAT score of Trinity College applicants has risen from 1201 in 1983 to 1239 in 1988 (see Table 4.7). As one would expect, the higher SATs of students in the applicant pool have been reflected in similar statistics from those admitted. The mean SAT for accepted students rose from 1282 in 1983 to 1327 in 1988. The mean SAT for matriculating students rose from 1252 in 1983 to 1296 in 1988. The SAT profile of Engineering students is even more impressive. The mean combined SAT score of Engineering applicants has risen from 1239 in 1983 to 1271 in 1988 (see Table 4.8). The mean SAT for accepted students rose from 1343 in 1983 to 1357 in 1988, while for matriculating students the means were 1327 and 1342. These scores are among the highest in the country and comparable to scores of engineering students at MIT, Cal Tech, Rice, Yale, and Princeton. Educational Program 43 Table 4.7. SAT Averages 1983 to 1988 - Trinity College APPLICANTS ACCEPTS MATRICULANTS COM- COM- COM- YEAR VERBAL MATH BINED VERBAL MATH BINED VERBAL MATH BINED 1983 576 625 1201 620 662 1282 604 648 1252 1984 581 634 1215 622 670 1292 601 653 1254 1985 588 635 1223 636 673 1309 619 660 1279 1986 586 642 1228 632 681 1313 616 668 1284 1987 588 647 1235 637 685 1322 623 674 1297 1988 590 649 1239 640 687 1327 624 672 1296 Table 4.8. SAT Averages 1983 to 1988 - School of Engineering. APPLICANTS ACCEPTS MATRICULANTS COM- COM- COM- YEAR VERBAL MATH BINED VERBAL MATH BINED VERBAL MATH BINED 1983 568 671 1239 | 627 716 1343 619 708 1327 1984 575 676 1251 630 718 1348 618 714 1332 1985 581 679 1260 638 720 1358 632 719 1351 1986 575 685 1260 623 725 1348 617 720 1337 1987 580 688 1268 641 732 1373 631 726 1357 1988 580 691 1271 630 727 1357 619 723 1342 Educational Program 44 The SAT scores of Duke students are extremely high and the increase over the last five years or so has been significant. Two points, however, should be noted in order to interpret these data properly. First, SAT scores are rising nationally, though rather modestly. Second, at COFHE institutions the average increase in SATs over the years 1981-86 was essentially the same as the increase at Duke (36 vs 35 points). Therefore, while the test scores of Duke students have been very high and continue to increase, the University is not unique in that respect. Instead, as noted in a variety of recent articles about higher education, Duke is one of a small number of elite institutions that have shown sharp increases in popularity and selectivity, even while the pool of 18 year olds continues to shrink. Among the other indices of applicant quality at Duke are the high numbers of Merit scholars who enroll and the geographic diversity of the students. In 1987, Duke ranked 13th nationally in the number of freshman Merit Scholars enrolled (see Table 4.9). The geographic diversity of the students in Spring 1988 and Spring 1983 is displayed in Table 4.10. Two trends are notable over the past five years: the number of students from North Carolina has increased along with a large increase from the northwestern and southwestern states. The former trend, made possible with financial support from the Duke Endowment, reflects a deliberate University policy to increase the numbers of North Carolinians on campus, while the latter trend reflects Duke's growing national reputation. The only decline of note is in the number of foreign students and U.S. citizens abroad on campus. Since Duke is striving to become an "international" university some attention needs to be paid to the reasons for this decline. It is clear that in the future, as the number of high school graduates continues to drop, Duke will find it increasingly difficult to enroll the very talented students who are offered admission. Given the fact that Duke now typically competes for its students with the most academically prestigious universities in the country, it will be necessary to intensify recruiting efforts to enroll quality students. Educational Program 45 Table 4.9. 1987 Freshman Merit Scholars - Top 25 Institutions. Number of Scholars 1. Harvard and Radcliffe Colleges 329 2. University of Texas at Austin 238 3. Rice University 200 4. Stanford University 187 5. Yale University 157 6. Princeton University 155 7. Georgia Institute of Technology 139 8. University of Chicago 133 9. Carleton College 113 10. Michigan State University 109 11. Texas A & M University 108 12. Massachusetts Institute of Technology 105 13. DUKE UNIVERSITY 91 14. Northwestern University 89 15. University of Florida 78 16. University of Michigan 76 17. University of California at Berkeley 71 18. Washington University (Mo.) 70 19. University of Minnesota - Twin Cities 68 20. Brown University 66 21. Trinity University 61 22. Cornell University 59 23. University of Houston at Univ. Park 57 24. Macalester College 53 25. University of California at Los Angeles 53 Source: Chronicle of Higher Education Educational Program 46 Table 4.10. Geographic Distribution of Undergraduates Region 1983 * 1988 North Carolina 763 935 Other Southeast 1324 1365 Northern Midwest 365 346 Southern Midwest 202 247 New England 471 465 Northeast 2409 2463 Northwest 20 58 Southwest 333 501 Far West 2 4 Foreign Countries & 161 88 U.S. Citizens Abroad *Nursing excluded. TOTAL 6050 6472 Educational Program 47 Recruiting . Duke's popularity is the end product of many factors, including efforts at recruiting. The A. B. Duke Scholars Program represents an important tool for aggressively recruiting the top students. In 1986, Duke offered 45 A. B. Duke Scholarships, the most prestigious undergraduate award. Of these 45 offers, 26 accepted, which amounts to a 58% yield rate. Last year, however, for financial reasons, Duke was able to offer only 41 scholarships. The University anticipated that 25 students would accept the offer, but was favorably surprised when 31 students accepted (a yield rate of 76%). If Duke is to continue to use the A. B. Duke Scholarships as a key means of attracting this caliber of student, it is imperative that the endowment base of this program is enhanced because it is no longer self-supporting and will require increasingly greater contributions from operating funds, or alternatively, a decrease in the number of scholarships which can be provided. Neither of the latter two options is desirable. Another issue that is a key to successful recruiting is the set of factors that influence a prospective student's choice of college. According to the Duke University 1987 accepted student survey, the most important factor was academic quality. This factor was rated as the most important both for accepted students who enrolled at Duke and for accepted students who enrolled elsewhere (see Tables 4.11a and b) . Clearly, maintaining and enhancing Duke's reputation for academic quality is the key to successful recruiting in the future. 4.1.4 Curriculum In the Fall of 1986, following two years of review and discussion, the Undergraduate Faculty Council of Arts and Sciences brought forward recommendations for a new undergraduate curriculum. While the review committee found that faculty and students were pleased with certain aspects of the current curriculum, such as the small group learning experience, the University Writing courses, innovative interdisciplinary programs and courses, study abroad, and student internships, it found that the present curriculum lacked structure; in short, it failed to articulate coherently Educational Program 48 Table 4.11a. Relative Importance of Factors Influencing College Choice: Students Enrolling at Duke. FACTORS INFLUENCING COLLEGE CHOICE Academic Quality Quality of Faculty Character of Student Body Academic Facilities Academic Face Employment Opportunities Social Atmosphere Size Grad/Prof Sch Acceptance Rate Admissions Literature Quality of Residence Halls Student/Faculty Ratio Outdoor Recreation Climate Library On- Campus Cultural Events Urban/Rural Location Athletic Facilities Admissions Personnel Geographic Location Study Abroad Programs Net Cost Cost Residential Options Scholarship or Grant Offer Locale W/Respect to Major City Academic Calendar Athletic Reputation Financial Aid Offer Distance from Home Racial/Ethnic Diversity Summer Internship Fraternity/Sorority System Amount of Work Offer Amount of Loan Offer MEAN ** MEAN ** IMPORTANCE* RATING RATING FOR OF FACTOR FOR DUKE COMPETITION 4.85 4.88 4.41 4.49 4.65 4.28 4.42 4.46 3.66 4.36 4.58 4.19 4.22 4.44 3.94 4.14 4.58 4.19 4.13 4.35 3.59 3.72 4.29 3.55 3.69 4.46 4.11 3.53 3.89 3.60 3.50 3.70 3.45 3.47 3.93 3.53 3.36 4.23 3.62 3.31 4.26 3.25 3.30 4.26 3.88 3.29 4.04 3.72 3.25 3.74 3.64 3.21 4.21 3.69 3.21 3.41 3.08 3.20 3.88 3.58 3.17 4.15 3.64 3.04 2.89 3.15 3.04 2.53 3.20 2.99 3.67 3.28 2.95 2.96 2.79 2.94 3.21 3.78 2.94 4.02 3.69 2.86 4.48 3.21 2.85 2.89 2.68 2.80 3.48 3.36 2.79 3.41 3.34 2.68 3.72 3.30 2.62 3.77 3.21 2.50 3.15 2.65 2.43 2.81 2.55 * 5 - Crucial; 1 = None ** 5 = Excellent; 1 = Poor SOURCE: DUKE UNIVERSITY 1987 ACCEPTED STUDENT SURVEY 1278 RESPONDENTS Educational Program 49 Table 4.11b, Relative Importance of Factors Influencing College Choice: Students Enrolling Elsewhere. FACTORS INFLUENCING COLLEGE CHOICE Academic Quality Quality of Faculty Academic Facilities Character of Student Body Academic Pace Social Atmosphere Employment Opportunities Size Grad/Prof Sch Acceptance Rate Quality of Residence Halls Admissions Literature Student/Faculty Ratio Cost Urban/Rural Location Net Cost Scholarship or Grant Offer On- Campus Cultural Events Geographic Location Library Locale W/Respect to Major City Outdoor Recreation Climate Financial Aid Offer Admissions Personnel Study Abroad Programs Athletic Facilities Distance from Home Residential Options Racial/Ethnic Diversity Academic Calendar Amount of Loan Offer Amount of Work Offer Summer Internship Athletic Reputation Fraternity/Sorority System MEAN ** MEAN ** IMPORTANCE* RATING RATING FOR OF FACTOR FOR DUKE COMPETITION 4.84 4.59 4.75 4.49 4.39 4.65 4.35 4.38 4.53 4.34 3.77 4.29 4.25 4.20 4.35 4.00 3.81 4.12 3.93 4.29 4.55 3.56 3.91 4.03 3.55 4.21 4.46 3.47 3.62 3.78 3.41 3.72 3.83 3.40 3.74 3.83 3.36 2.36 3.13 3.35 3.43 4.06 3.34 2.22 3.54 3.33 2.02 3.28 3.27 3.78 4.06 3.25 3.49 3.98 3.21 4.00 4.18 3.21 2.98 4.22 3.18 4.08 3.95 3.11 4.15 3.50 3.11 2.18 3.13 3.06 2.88 3.55 2.94 3.83 3.91 2.91 3.99 3.93 2.91 3.17 3.57 2.88 3.45 3.60 2.86 3.14 3.69 2.76 3.77 3.86 2.62 2.22 2.77 2.55 2.65 2.98 2.51 3.48 3.54 2.33 4.24 3.41 2.33 3.31 3.45 * 5 = Crucial, 1 = None ** 5 - Excellent, 1 = Poor SOURCE: DUKE UNIVERSITY 1987 ACCEPTED STUDENT SURVEY 859 RESPONDENTS Educational Program 50 the principles or relationships uniting its various parts. The report, entitled "Structure and Choice in Liberal Education," argued for interdependence between faculty and students, between courses offered by- different departments, and between courses inside and outside the major. It made recommendations concerning a major course of study, a general course of study, and an elective course of study within the framework of six areas of knowledge: arts and literatures, civilizations, foreign languages, natural sciences, quantitative reasoning, and social sciences. The curriculum, however, differs from the current curriculum in that it requires work in five of these six areas: students have the freedom to omit -- but certainly do not have to omit -- work in one of the six areas. The work that is undertaken, however, must be in some depth, and the new curriculum places a particular thrust here on relatedness of courses. That is to say that courses taken beyond the major in the new curriculum must be carefully thought out and be seen as related to each other in some meaningful way. This "relatedness" may be explicit as in prerequisite courses or it may come about because of a similarity of methodological, historical, or topical approaches. What matters, however, is that students take significant work in courses that belong to the same intellectual family and that they come to understand that disciplines do not exist in isolation. The new curriculum reinforces the notion that Duke has long held that much of the excitement in Arts and Sciences subjects is generated in research and teaching involving more than one discipline. Duke faculty have continued to organize a considerable number of programs that have made it possible for students to profit from the vitality of interdisciplinary areas of study. Indeed, one of Duke's major strengths is the unique interest, support, and success in the implementation of interdisciplinary and interdepartmental programs (see Chapter Eight) . This emphasis on interdisciplinary study, indeed, is one of Duke's major comparative advantages in relation to the prestigious schools with which it competes. It was born partly of necessity, since Duke did not have the resources in all areas, but it has proved advantageous as Educational Program 51 institutions with better reputations have moved to follow Duke in adopting several of its programs. Recent exciting developments in interdisciplinary programs include an undergraduate program in Human Development and a new program in the Neurosciences . Other examples of thriving interdisciplinary programs are Comparative Literature, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Genetics, and Women's Studies. To take the latter program as an example, in 1986-87 after only four years of development, 1500 students took Women's Studies courses (of this number 27% male) , 14 departments participated in teaching or cross-listing courses, over 50 faculty across the campus have affiliated with the program, and 21 students graduated with Women's Studies certificates, one of whom with honors. Students actually majoring in interdisciplinary fields have likewise shown a marked increase. In 1988, for example, Comparative Area Studies majors numbered 153, a greater than four-fold increase in majors since 1983 (see Table 4.2). Another feature of the new curriculum is that it maintains and strengthens the expectations that students will have small group learning experiences as a regular and integral part of their undergraduate curriculum. Duke has long held to the tenet that while basic information may be conveyed successfully in large lectures, processes such as how to think analytically and write effectively are best taught in small classes. The new curriculum keeps the requirement that students take at least one full seminar, tutorial, or independent study before reaching the junior year, and at least two similar small group experiences for the junior and senior years. Duke, moreover, has long recognized that the first and second years at a university are critical ones, and it has strived to enhance the freshman experience, now a popular trend. In 1985, for example, it restructured its traditional freshman composition program, replacing the single required course with four different writing courses (Principles and Practice of Writing, Persuasive Writing, Interpretive Writing, and Scholarly and Critical Writing), offered in sections of no more than thirteen students. The highly positive evaluations from students, faculty, and advisors alike have been encouraging and have suggested that the personalized approach to freshman writing instruction has been exceedingly worthwhile. Educational Program 52 A further addition to the freshman year experience which provides significant opportunities for enhanced student-faculty interaction has been the Freshman Seminar Program. This program is designed to have no more than fifteen students in each class and for the classes to be taught by regular rank faculty members chosen for their outstanding undergraduate teaching. The University has significantly expanded the offerings of the program over the past two years. In Spring 1987, in addition to the Twentieth Century America Program, four freshman seminars were offered and in Spring 1988, 34 courses were offered on topics ranging from "The American Character" to "Applications of Mathematics to Physiology and Medicine". The new curriculum also provides a more personalized educational experience in the form of a departmental Honors Project as an alternative path for Latin honors. In addition to the requirements which related specifically to the G.P.A. of the student (3.9 summa, 3.7 magna, and 3.4 cum laude) , with a minimum G.P.A. of 3.3, a student can qualify for Latin Honors through a departmental senior colloquium and essay sequence. Students pursuing this track carry out a program of reading and research in the summer after their junior year, enter a senior colloquium in the fall of their senior year, and write a senior thesis for departmental review the following spring. The critical feature of this program is that students and faculty work on a specific research project one-on-one. This sort of mentorship experience, exemplified in the departmental honors project, is one that the University has long tried to encourage. Students get actively involved in their education and gain practical experience in a field when they learn from a faculty member one -on-one. This type of learning situation, however, is the most expensive form of educational instruction in terms of faculty dollars and faculty time, but it is one that the University has felt made wise use of its investment. Accordingly, in 1986-87 560 sections of independent study, preceptorship, and tutorial were taught, as compared with 477 sections taught in 1981-82. Educational Program 53 Included in the tenets of the new curriculum is an endorsement of alternative learning experiences. One obvious example of how learning may be enhanced is through the alternative of study abroad. Study abroad opportunities have always been available to Duke students. The University has long realized that only an international perspective reflects the world as it is today and that students learn about themselves in the context of other people and cultures. One indication of the importance that Duke places on study abroad is that one key component of the A.B. Duke Scholarships Program is a free summer of study in Oxford; 59 students, in fact, participated in that program in summer 1987. Enrollments in study abroad programs have increased threefold over the past seven years (see Table 4.12). In 1986-87, 260 students participated in the program and in 1987-88, the number was 342, a 32% increase in one year. The ultimate goal for study abroad was expressed by President Brodie in his inaugural address with his hope that every Duke student would take the opportunity to spend a semester abroad. Another alternative learning experience available at Duke involves internship programs. Over the past several years, interest has been growing among the undergraduates for the University to provide "real life" experiences which parallel their academic experiences. Various internship programs have been developed across the curriculum which offer the chance to integrate theory and practice, as well as classroom and work experience (see Table 4.13). In the Department of Public Policy Studies, for example, an internship experience is a required part of the departmental major. This past year some 124 undergraduate majors and 19 graduate students were placed in positions ranging from the United States Agency for International Development to the Whitney Museum of American Art. Programs such as the one in Public Policy, moreover, benefit both the sponsoring organizations and Duke students: students have a chance to apply classroom theory to an actual situation, giving them a sense of accomplishment and self-confidence, while the sponsoring organizations gain from fresh, enthusiastic minds and energetic support of their endeavors. In 1985, in addition to various internships in academic departments, the University established "Duke Futures", a program offering paid internships in Educational Program 54 Table 4.12. Summary of Programs and Statistics - Duke University Study- Abroad Program. Duke -Administered Duke -Associated Austria, Wind Symphony Brazil, History and Politics Canada China England England England England France Germany Germany Greece, Israel Italy - Florence, Art Italy - Rome, Classics Morocco Netherlands, Economics Netherlands, Learning Disabilities Scotland, Public Policy Soviet Union Spain Zimbabwe/Botswana - Cambridge , Law - Durham, Religion - London , Drama - Oxford - Erlangen - Berlin Classics Canada Egypt England - Kent England - Oxford Japan 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 Annual Totals Duke Program Non-Duke Programs All Programs 28 | 91* | 64 | 48 167 | 183 | 210 | 212 195 | 274* | 274 | 260 | 110* | 232 342* *These figures include the Duke in Vienna program, which is offered irregularly. It took 52 students in Fall 1984 and 48 in Fall 1987 Educational Program 55 Table 4.13. Duke Departments/Offices Involved in Internships and Employment. 1. DUKE FUTURES - Scholar- Intern Program; PICS (Prescreen Interview Candidates for Summer); coordinate on-campus recruitment schedule for summer jobs and internships; publish weekly Futures Job Bulletin and monthly Newsline ; student resource room; resume/interviewing workshops; general employment counseling. Most services available to all Duke students; primary student clients are undergraduates. Other activities: coordination of 10-city job development network of alumni volunteers; fund-raising. 2. PLACEMENT OFFICE - Career Apprenticeship Program (unpaid) during academic year; Duke Network, a career counseling network of alumni volunteers. Services available to all Duke students. Substantial resource library. 3. INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND POLICY SCIENCES - Summer internships (students receive $1200 stipend) that fulfill requirement for major. Resource library and services restricted to PPS majors. 4. POLITICAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT - Paid and unpaid, career-related internships listed in a resource area. Any undergraduate may arrange for academic credit from the department for an independent study based on an internship. 5. DUKE IN NEW YORK - Primarily unpaid internships for students participating in the Duke in New York program. Open to students of any major. Operates fall term in New York City. 6. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM - Paid and unpaid internships during academic year or summer, required of students pursuing the certificate program. Students receive academic credit for independent study. 7. WOMEN'S STUDIES PROGRAM - Primarily unpaid internships during academic year or summer arranged for students pursuing the certificate program. 8. LEADERSHIP PROGRAM - Students receive $1200 for internship plus possible additional wages. Restricted to students in the Leadership program. 9. JOURNALISM INTERNSHIPS - Paid internships for undergraduates interested in newswriting careers. Coordinated by the Institute for Policy Sciences and Public Affairs. 10. HEALTH CAREERS /RESEARCH VOLUNTEERS - Volunteer placements for pre-med students using network of Duke Hospital, the VA Hospital, Lenox-Baker Children's Hospital, and Durham County Hospital. Administered by Assistant Dean, Trinity College. If student has CWS funding, position becomes paid. Educational Program 56 Table 4.13 (continued). Duke Departments/Offices Involved in Internships and Employment . 11. UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH ASSISTANT PROGRAM - Provides students with the opportunity to conduct research for a semester with a member of the faculty. $200 stipend and independent study credit. Administered by faculty members in Trinity College. 12. FILM INTERNSHIPS - Some internships to be arranged - new program. Administered by faculty in department. 13. INTERNSHIPS IN CONSCIENCE - New program; internships involving community service. Students raise own funds to support the internship. Administered by the Leadership Program. 14. COUNSELING AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES - Offer career guidance and counseling through workshops, individual sessions, and use of Discovery. 15. PRE -MAJORS ADVISING CENTER - Academic counseling and career guidance. PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS 1. SCHOOL OF FORESTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES - Primarily paid internships restricted to graduate students. 2. FUQUA SCHOOL OF BUSINESS - Paid summer jobs restricted to graduate business students. 3. SCHOOL OF DIVINITY - Paid summer internships in rural churches. Restricted to Divinity students. Educational Program 57 the summer. In the Summer of 1987, 91 students participated in a variety of Futures internships, varying from General Electric Satellite Systems to Family Abuse Services of nearby Alamance County. Internship opportunities provide not only important experience in selected areas, but they also provide the basis on which more realistic decisions can be made with regard to careers and professions. The Arts and Sciences, then, have made good progress with respect to the opportunities for its curriculum and programs. The University is unique in that it has a natural disposition to interdisciplinary teaching and learning, but it will need a significant increase in the number of faculty to expand further creative course development and the personalized instruction endorsed by the new curriculum. 4.1.5 Undergraduate Instruction The general satisfaction and academic success of the undergraduates provides another indicator of Duke's current positive momentum. According to the 1987 "Duke Experience Survey", developed in 1985-86 by a committee with members from the Academic Council, ASDU, and the Alumni Association and conducted among members of the Class of '86, that class rated the overall Duke experience 8.04 on a scale of 1 to 10. That same class rated as the top three results of the Duke experience: 1) the development of the ability to think, question, and express themselves (7.70); 2) their development as informed, active, and responsible people (7.09); and 3) the acquisition of a broad knowledge of the arts and sciences (6.87). One recurring theme, however, questions the level of serious intellectual discussion and debate about academic issues among students at Duke. It is clear that this perception of lack of intellectual atmosphere is one that will be more and more important and that it is an issue that must be addressed if increasingly better students are to continue to be satisfied with the Duke education. Nevertheless, as a whole, undergraduate students now take a wide variety of courses, interact socially throughout a variety of opportunities, and are generally enthusiastic about their Duke experience . Educational Program 58 Students, in general, have become increasingly successful at Duke. It is interesting to note that 85% of the class of '87 successfully completed their college course of study within four years. An additional 8.4%, according to the University Registrar's Office, are likely to graduate within five years. Concomitantly, fewer students withdrew from Duke this past year for academic reasons. In 1987-88, only 34 students withdrew because of academic problems, down from 102 in 1982-83. Voluntary withdrawals over this same period numbered 110, down from 143. Although current students arrive at Duke with more academic advanced credit, they are increasingly taking more coursework for graduation. Not only have these students been taking more Advanced Placement (3,409 exams by 1,080 students in 1987 as opposed to 1,981 exams by 812 students in 1982), but more of those taking the exams have won Advanced Placement credit (60% in 1987 vs 53% in 1982). The mean number of courses passed by class year for graduation has also shown steady growth. The graduating class took an average of 33.79 courses in 1982; 33.83 courses in 1983; 34.11 in 1984, 34.18 in 1985 and 34.20 in 1986. Although not large, these increases in courses taken do reflect a continuing trend. The average grade point distribution over this period for the College as a whole, moreover, has not changed: it remained between 2.95 and 2.98 from 1981 to 1986. While the Trinity students have done well academically at Duke, they have not fared as well with regard to success in prestigious national competitions and overseas fellowships. Duke has had a steady stream of nominees for Rhodes, Truman, Fulbright, and Mellon scholarships. The University would, however, like to have a higher percentage of winners and greater national visibility in all of these areas. Duke had one Rhodes scholar in 1984-85 and another recipient in 1986-87. The University's nominees for Truman Foundation Scholarships have done consistently well each year: no school may have more than two winners a year, and in 1982-83 Duke received two, and was one of only two schools to do so that year. Educational Program 59 This past year Duke had one Truman recipient. The Fulbright awards for 1986-87 demonstrated an improvement and a return to the levels of the past years. Duke has, however, had a fairly poor record with NSF graduate fellowship awards, and few students have received Mellon Fellowships in the Humanities. The University did have one Mellon winner in 1985, and two in 1988, but it has found it difficult to interest qualified students in applying for this award since it is designated solely for those intending to pursue college teaching careers. Whether this modest profile on the national scholarship front is a factor attributed solely to the fact that Duke students are not able to compete as successfully with the top echelon of students nationally, or whether it is influenced partly by the University's lack of aggressiveness in encouraging the best to apply, is an issue that needs close investigation. Success rates in the job market and in professional schools are tangible indicators of quality students and quality programs and ones that, according to the May/June 1985 issue of Change magazine, are being increasingly scrutinized by prospective students. As tuition levels at all colleges and universities increase, students want to make sure that they get a significant return on their college investment, and that return is often seen as success in future careers. Duke has typically fared well in business and law, where students have done well and gained entrance into the top schools after graduation. There is a real need, however, for Duke to work on its success rates for the top medical schools and to improve significantly the number of students that go on to obtain advanced degrees in the arts and sciences. Duke students have had a noteworthy record in gaining acceptance into law schools. Each year approximately 225 Duke seniors and some 25-30 graduates come to the Pre-Law Advising Office, seeking admission to law school. More than 98% of these applicants are accepted by one or more accredited schools. The Pre-Law Advisor reports that Duke has one of the highest percentage of acceptances at the top law schools. For 1986-87, the average LSAT score for Duke students on a 10-48 scale was 38.62, one of the highest averages in the nation, and the average GPA for senior applicants Educational Program 60 was 3.15. Good law schools actively seek Duke students, and in the past three years Duke has had Law Review Editors or members at Chicago, Columbia, Denver, Vanderbilt, and Washington. The profile for pre-business students is also a strong one. Applicants from Duke to business schools do well in the selection process, and the acceptance rates are currently in the 92-97% range. Pre-business acceptance rates, however, are often harder to obtain than for other professional schools because many who enroll do so after several years of real work experience. Business schools also do not rely as much on GPAs and GMAT scores: numerical achievements of an applicant are often balanced by personal attributes, extracurricular activity, work experience, and leadership potential. According to the Pre-business Advisor, however, Duke students apply to and are accepted at the top echelon of business schools. The acceptance rates into medical school, while not as high as those for law, are generally commendable. Percentages of acceptance have shown a recent steady rise: the acceptance rate for seniors for 1984 was 78%, that for 1985 was 80%, and that for 1986 was 82%. In a study reported in The Advisor . the official journal for the health professions advising profession, Duke ranked seventh nationally in the total number of its graduates attending medical school over the last five-year period. According to the Pre-Medical Advisor, Duke undergraduates are perceived to be strong candidates at state-funded medical schools, but are not currently accepted to the most competitive medical schools in equally high numbers. Over the last three-year period, an average of 20% of undergraduate applications were accepted to one or more schools included in a Top 20 national listing of medical schools, and an average of 77% of those accepted to the Top 20 schools actually matriculated. The low rate for the most highly ranked schools is a result of several factors, including state of residency, participation in independent research projects, and national recognition of Duke's program. Although the numbers of students applying to medical schools nationwide has dropped steadily over the last five years, the number of those applying from Duke has held at a steady state. Educational Program 61 The numbers and percentages for Duke undergraduate students pursuing graduate work in the arts and sciences, however, are not so readily available. Professional school data, such as that for medicine and law, are easier to tabulate because it is centralized in the pre-prof essional offices of Trinity College. Graduate school advising, on the other hand, is dispersed across the various disciplines, and even the departments themselves currently receive only sketchy feedback. For example, when departments were canvassed for this information in 1987, they were generally unable to give a complete picture of the numbers of their students applying to graduate schools, the schools to which applications were made, and data on acceptances. The broad sense, however, is that, on the whole Duke students are not generally pursuing advanced work in arts and science disciplines nor are they conducting supervised research in significant enough numbers. The lack of students pursuing this avenue of academic career is perceived as an area of real weakness. As available information shows, then, Duke students pursue a wide variety of interests and professions after graduation. There is strength in the pre-law program and in pre-business , while there is less success in pre-medical and pre-graduate school areas. The University has a real deficiency in its career counseling and placement ability in that it simply does not have adequate information and follow-up on its graduates. One of Duke's goals in the planning process should be to systematically gather more reliable information regarding the subsequent careers of its undergraduates. Despite the lack of solid data, what is generally believed is that about half of each graduating class enters a graduate or professional school immediately, and another 15% or so do so after one or two years . 4.2 Graduate and Professional School Programs 4.2.1 The Graduate School The Graduate School is central to the University's mission to educate new generations of teachers, scholars, researchers, and professional leaders in traditional fields of historical knowledge and to develop such Educational Program 62 new fields of knowledge as the leaders of tomorrow will need. Indeed, the intellectual and academic well-being of the University as a whole is directly dependent upon the strength of its Graduate School and no major research institution in the country today can afford a less than first-rate presence in graduate education. At Duke , the Graduate School is an important force unifying the disparate levels and divisions within the University. Several factors that contribute to this judgment are listed below. o While in many departments the teaching of undergraduates and the demands of professional research and publication can seem far apart, teaching and research, the two fundamental missions of the University, are integrally related in all graduate programs . o The relatively small size of the Graduate School at Duke has encouraged both a sense of communal wholeness and a flexibility in regard to interdisciplinary programs which cut across traditional departmental lines and which foster university-wide cooperation. This cooperative function of the Graduate School has been particularly apparent in its joint degree programs within Arts and Sciences, as well as with the Law School, the Forestry School, the Medical School, the Divinity School, and the Fuqua School of Business. In each instance, the Graduate School has served as a focus of Institutional commitment. o The on-going excellence of Duke's undergraduate programs is fully dependent upon a continual improvement of the Graduate School. Arguably, the quality of the undergraduate program is limited primarily by the failure of the graduate program to keep pace with it. The problem lies in the inability of any institution to provide first-class education to quality Educational Program 63 undergraduates unless there is a superior faculty who can attract excellent graduate students to work with them. The two levels of education simply cannot be separated from one another . o With the rise in the number of undergraduate students entering Duke with advanced placement, progress through the undergraduate curriculum has accelerated. The result is that more undergraduates are now taking advantage of graduate courses in their junior and senior years, so that the traditional lines of distinction between undergraduate and graduate education are becoming less rigid. This flexibility has proved advantageous for both segments of the University. o The 1980s have been crucial years for the Graduate School and have now brought it to a position of great promise: declining enrollments have been reversed while the quality of the applicant pool has continuously risen, as revealed by such quantitative measures as Graduate Record Exam scores; part-time graduate study has been introduced across the graduate curriculum; several important and nationally visible interdisciplinary programs have been established; a new tuition structure has put the Graduate School on a firmer economic base; and Duke's ability to attract internationally prominent faculty has shown a remarkable rise. As a result, there is a sense of optimism and excitement on campus about the prospects for graduate education at Duke. Within this context, the Graduate School was examined in great detail during the 1986-87 academic year by the University's Academic Priorities Committee. The charge to the Committee was as follows: "to determine the current state of the Graduate School, including its present position among the chief research institutions in the country; to identify particular opportunities among our current programs where the Educational Program 64 confluence of external conditions and existing student/faculty interests or strengths give Duke the potential to be a national and international leader; to identify rapidly changing or newly emerging areas of research and study which the University might choose to develop; and to suggest how the administration and the trustees might best make use of University resources to meet the challenges of the future." The resulting "Report on Graduate Education at Duke University by the Academic Priorities Committee" was released in February 1987. This detailed document is one of the supporting documents of the Self- Study Report. In this section of the self -study, data are presented on the following key aspects of the Graduate School's operations: comparative size and scope, financial support, application and enrollment statistics, GPA and GRE scores, and degrees granted. The first set of analyses concerns Duke's relation to selected graduate schools across the country. Table 4.14 suggests that while Duke shares general characteristics with a number of nationally prominent schools, the particular combination and size of its undergraduate, graduate, and professional school programs is rather unique. It is precisely that uniqueness which affords Duke an unprecedented opportunity to develop all aspects of the University by making the improvement of the Graduate School a top priority. In terms of institutional commitments, it is clear that Duke, like Princeton and Brown, has not privileged its Graduate School at the expense of undergraduate education. Yet, if one examines the Graduate School budgets of Duke and Princeton, for example, one finds some startling differences (see Table 4.15). The Princeton budget for graduate support in 1985-86 was $20 million; for 1986-87, it was projected at $24 million. Equivalent figures for Duke for the same periods were roughly $8 million in 1985-86; and $10 million for 1986-87. In effect, these figures suggest that whereas Princeton supports each entering graduate student at a level of close to $11,800 per year throughout his or her course of study, Duke supports its students at about $5,000 per year and normally for only three years. Or, more dramatically, Princeton allocates as much per year for Educational Program 65 Table 4.14. Characteristics of Selected Major Universities - 1987. Enrollments Total Undergrad Graduate % Grad & Prof Brown 7 ,016 Columbia 18 ,485 Cornell 18 ,558 Duke 9 ,781 Harvard 16 ,236 MIT 9 ,787 Princeton 6 ,000 Stanford 13 ,079 UC-Berkeley 31 ,008 Chicago 9, ,493 Michigan 34, ,347 Penn 21, ,870 UT- Austin 47, ,838 Virginia 17, ,417 Washington 34, ,086 Wisconsin 43. ,075 Yale 10, ,808 5,839 9,762 12,716 6,289 6,902 5,007 4,400 6,524 21,855 4,265 24,230 13,761 38,176 12,467 26,770 34,256 5,431 1,777 8,723 5,842 3,492 9,334 4,780 600 555 153 228 10,117 8,109 9,662 4,950 7,316 8,819 5,377 Grad % Grad* Prof in A&S 25.3% 19.5% 47.2% 16.5% 31.5% 9.5% 35.7% 13.6% 57.5% 17.3% 48.8% 17.1% 26.7% 19.2% 50.1% 15.0% 29.5% 10.6% 55.1% 21.5% 29.5% 8.6% 37.1% 11.9% 20.2% 6.9% 28.4% 9.4% 21.5% 8.0% 20.5% 9.6% 49.8% 20.4% *% of total students who are graduate students in Arts and Sciences departments . PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS Arch Bus Dent Eng For Law Med Nur Theol Brown X X Columbia X X X X X X X Cornell X X X X X Duke X X X X X X X Harvard X X X X X X X MIT X X X Princeton X X Stanford X X X X UC-Berkeley X X X X X Chicago X X X X Michigan X X X X X X X X Penn X X X X X X X UT- Austin X X X X X Virginia X X X X X X Washington X X X X X X X X Wisconsin X X X X X X Yale X X X X X X X Source: Peterson's Guide to Graduate Study, 1987 Educational Program 66 Table 4.15. 1985 Graduate Student Support* Princeton and Duke ($000). Actual Univ. External Total Univ. TA RA Fellowships Fellowship/Aid Budget Funds Princeton 4,079 5,037 7,423 3,956 20,676 14,000 Duke 260 2,300 4,234 1,200 8,000 4,000 Comparisons are rough because the specific break-down of funding categories differs between the two schools. Educational Program 67 purely fellowship support (discounting, that is, funds appropriated for teaching and research assistants and for matching awards for external grants) than Duke's graduate budget. In a competitive academic market, where the better students are those who receive full support from their institutions, Duke is clearly at a disadvantage. Assessments of Graduate School quality are harder to make than numerical or budgetary comparisons. The "rating game" has been justly criticized and yet the need for comparison endures, particularly in the self -study process. Certainly, Duke's long-standing membership in the Association of American Universities is one valid index of quality. Duke was elected to this prestigious research group in 1938 as the 33rd member. The 19 6 9 Roose -Anderson survey rated Duke among the top 25 graduate institutions. More recently, the 1982 National Academy of Science rankings had 10 of Duke's 23 graduate departments among the top 20, a percentage comparable to that of Brown (12 of 24) and UNC-Chapel Hill (15 of 28), but well below that of Princeton (23 of 26), Yale (26 of 29), or Stanford (29 of 30). This review of national statistics leads logically to the question of what Duke should aspire to become as a graduate school. In Duke's view, within specific areas it has already become the most distinguished graduate school in the region and its potential to rival such comparable universities as Columbia, Pennsylvania, and Chicago is excellent. Whether it will be able realistically to compete or should attempt to compete with far larger universities like Harvard and Berkeley is less clear. The next set of statistics presented shows the number of enrollments for all graduate programs in 1983 and 1988, the numbers of Masters degrees and Ph.D. degrees awarded in 1983 and 1988, and application and GRE figures for the Graduate School since 1978 (see Tables 4.16-4.20). The cumulative effect of these tables demonstrates that the Graduate School has reversed the declines experienced in recent years (see Graduate Report for details) and is now on the rise. In one of the largest departments (English), applications have nearly doubled for this year; in one of the new programs Educational Program 68 Table 4.16. Distribution of Graduate Students According to Major - Spring 1983 MAJOR WOMEN MEN TOTAL Anatomy 5 11 16 Anthropology 12 6 18 Art Biochemistry 17 43 60 Botany 22 34 56 Business Administration 1 4 5 Chemistry 26 62 88 Classical Studies 7 7 14 Computer Science 9 44 53 Economics 18 46 64 Education 33 31 64 Engineering Biomedical 9 19 28 Civil 8 25 33 Electrical 8 49 57 Mechanical 2 21 23 English 36 41 77 Environmental Studies Forestry 8 31 39 French 2 1 3 Geology 18 9 27 German 2 2 4 Health Administration 45 34 79 History 35 48 83 Humanities 1 1 1 Mathematics 4 22 26 Microbiology 14 32 46 Music 4 5 9 Pathology 5 15 20 Pharmacology 12 17 29 Philosophy 17 17 Physical Therapy 40 8 48 Physics 3 42 45 Physiology 7 17 24 Political Science 14 33 47 Psychology 36 28 64 Public Policy Studies 23 18 41 Religion 16 67 83 Romance Languages 9 2 11 Sociology 22 11 33 Spanish Zoology 27 38 65 Unclassified 12 15 27 TOTAL 571 956 1527 Educational Program 69 Table 4.17. Distribution of Graduate Students According to Major - Spring 1988. MAJOR WOMEN MEN TOTAL Anatomy- 7 12 Anthropology 12 9 Art Biochemistry 28 35 Botany 19 26 Business Administration 11 17 Chemistry 30 65 Classical Studies 4 7 Computer Science 12 49 Economics 23 61 Education 1 2 Engineering Biomedical 11 31 Civil 12 36 Electrical 9 76 Mechanical 2 38 English 53 61 Environmental Studies Forestry 9 33 French 1 1 Geology 7 32 German 2 1 Health Administration 32 30 History 29 67 Humanities 1 1 International Development Policy 4 Liberal Studies 57 37 Literature 13 18 Mathematics 12 31 Microbiology 30 33 Music 15 8 Pathology 4 16 Pharmacology 12 14 Philosophy 7 14 Physical Therapy 38 10 Physics 3 51 Physiology 3 14 Political Science 22 53 Psychology 37 23 Public Policy Studies 36 29 Religion 27 83 Romance Languages 15 10 Sociology 17 16 Spanish Zoology 24 38 Unclassified 15 13 19 21 63 45 28 95 11 61 84 3 42 48 85 40 114 42 2 39 3 62 96 2 4 94 31 43 63 23 20 26 21 48 54 17 75 60 65 110 25 33 62 28 TOTAL 702 1205 1907 Educational Program 70 Table 4.18. Graduate School Degrees Conferred. Mav 1983 Mav 1988 39 32 39 56 52 99 7 1 58 53 Master of Health Administration Master of Science Master of Arts Doctor of Education Doctor of Philosophy Table 4.19. Graduate School Application Activity - 1978-1987. Applications Offer of % of Offers of Year Received Admission 1209 Adm: Lss ion Accepted 1978 3374 37.8 1979 3041 1069 37.6 1980 2746 1042 37.5 1981* 2642 1083 37.9 1982 2675 1072 38.3 1983 2885 1204 39.7 1984 3058 1327 38.0 1985 3190 1327 36.0 1986 3586 1419 38.0 1987 4180 1476 37.0 ♦Department of Education retrenchment begun, Table 4.20. Graduate Matricul, Year Verbal 1978 617 1979 614 1980 615 1981 605 1982 609 1983 611 1984 611 1985 617 1986 630 1987 616 Graduate School - Mean GRE Scores for New s - 1978-1987*. Quantitative GPA 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 ♦Exclusive of American Black and foreign students 632 636 650 634 648 643 650 648 658 653 Educational Program 71 (the Ph.D. in Literature) they have increased as dramatically. That these figures are representative across the disciplines is evident in the fact that the total enrollment in Spring 1988 was 1907. This figure, it should be noted, represents a 25 percent increase in Graduate School matriculants over the last five years, and thus a confirmation of the reversals in graduate education noted earlier. This level of enrollment probably represents the optimum for the Graduate School; any substantial increase would clearly alter the unique character of the University and seriously strain its space limitations. It is important to note that the quality of the incoming graduate class has risen commensurate with its increased size. Perhaps the most dramatic evidence is the fact that five national Mellon Fellows accepted admission to Duke this past year. Duke has never had a Mellon before, and in the three years of this nationally competitive program for the humanities and the social sciences only one school has held more than five. The number of new students holding National Science Foundation fellowships has also risen this year. In addition to these general figures, one should note especially the success the Graduate School has had with new programs instituted in recent years. Ph.D. programs in Cell and Molecular Biology, Genetics, Literature, and Toxicology, and the Master of Arts in Liberal Studies (MALS) have, for the most part, not only proved educationally and financially rewarding, but have brought to the University at large an exciting new dimension of interdisciplinary cooperation. The MALS program, for example, begun just four years ago, has currently 90 students enrolled in part-time or full-time degree work and has attracted to the University an entirely new constituency from area professions and businesses. Joint degree programs with Law, Public Policy, the Fuqua School, the Engineering School and the Medical School have also served to open educational opportunities across the lines of the otherwise separated schools and to foster important interdisciplinary study and research. Educational Program 72 A. 2. 2 Professional Schools The professional schools of Duke University are comprised of the following units: Divinity, Forestry and Environmental Studies, Fuqua School of Business, Law, and the Medical Center, which includes Medicine, Nursing, and various allied health fields. Each of these units has been fully accredited by their respective professional accreditation bodies. Copies of recent accreditation reports will be available for the inspection of the Visiting Committee. In the following section of this report, each of Duke's professional schools is only briefly highlighted. 4.2.2.1 Divinity School The Divinity School is the center of theological inquiry and learning within Duke University. By history and indenture, it stands within the Christian tradition. Its distinctive lineage and continuing obligation are to the United Methodist Church. From its inception, and consistent with Wesleyan tradition, Duke Divinity School has been ecumenical in aspiration, teaching and practice, as well as in its faculty. Duke Divinity School ranks with the premier theological schools of the nation including Yale Divinity School, the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, Harvard Divinity School, Princeton Theological Seminary, and Candler School of Theology at Emory University. The principal purpose of the Divinity School is professional education for the ministry of the church. It is a graduate-professional school organized to prepare persons to practice Christian ministry. It also welcomes students who do not intend ordained ministry, but whose commitment is to education or other lay vocations. Although its chief function is as a professional school, Duke Divinity School is a world center for research and publication in the theological disciplines, functions which strengthen the School as a place to prepare for ministry in the modern world. As a university divinity school, there Educational Program 73 is a commitment to advancing theological scholarship for church and world. Consistent with this purpose, the Ph.D. program prepares men and women as teachers and researchers for colleges, universities and seminaries. There are also two research centers which advance scholarship and support publication. The Divinity School maintains an outstanding library for its own faculty and students and to serve the cause of theological scholarship in the University and the church. Professional theological schools are different from other professional schools in that there is a great deal of self -selection prior to application. Vocation must be dealt with by students before entry. Denominational issues are also a factor. Some traditions will not permit students to be trained for professional service in ecumenical schools or schools of another denomination. In its professional degree program the School is Protestant and a majority of the students are Methodist. The pool of applications is, therefore, different by nature from other university professional schools. Current students hold baccalaureate degrees granted by over 200 undergraduate institutions from all over the country, though a majority come from the Southeast. The Divinity School probably has the closest ties to this region of any constituent part of Duke because of its ties to the church. In evaluation of divinity schools, the Association of Theological Schools and the Association of United Methodist Theological Schools use the following factors to assess faculty: quality of teaching, quality of research and publications (books and journals), church involvement of faculty, inclusiveness (women and ethnic minority faculty), and service to the profession. Duke Divinity School is reviewed every Fall on each of these issues for Ministerial Education Fund allocations. Duke consistently scores high on quality of teaching, quality of publications, church involvement and service (getting 75% to 100% on each index) . It has not done well on gender and ethnic inclusiveness, though there now are two black faculty members and four women. Duke is acknowledged to be among the top theological schools in the country in overall faculty quality. Growing applicant pools to the professional degree programs and the Ph.D. program partly evidence recognition of faculty quality (see Table A. 21). Educational Program 74 Table. 4.21. Divinity School DEGREES CONFERRED - MAY 1983 AND MAY 1988 1983 1988 Master of Religious Education 6 1 Master of Divinity 83 67 Master of Theology 4 11 Master of Theological Studies* 4 *Program started Fall 1987, designed for persons not seeking ordination. ENROLLMENT BY SEX AND ETHNICITY - 1986 % of Number Student Body Men 247 65 Women 133 35 Black 36 9 TOTAL 380 ENROLLMENT BY PROGRAM - 1986 Masters of Religious Education 18 Masters of Divinity 319 Master of Theology 18 Special 25 Educational Program 75 In recent years the quality of the student body has improved consistently. This is partly the result of some decline in quality at schools which have been Duke's competitors, especially Yale and Union (New York) . Divinity School faculty are noticing an increase in applications from the Northeast and the Midwest. They are also noticing an increase in older students, many of whom are pursuing a second career. Duke's standards for admission, which place heavy emphasis on vocation and readiness to undertake ministerial education, are as strong or stronger than any of the major university-related theological schools. The Graduate Program in Religion is a joint project of the Divinity School and the Department of Religion. The Divinity School faculty carries most of the teaching and dissertation advising. The recent study of the Duke University Graduate School indicated that the Ph.D. students in Religion are among the strongest at Duke and are comparable to those of Yale, Chicago, and Harvard. The Duke Endowment is of great significance to the Divinity School in that its provision for the Rural Church Section, and its funding of the School's programs in Field Education and Continuing Education, means that Duke is inevitably responsive to, and responsible for, the special needs of North Carolina Methodism. Most theological schools are dependent on individual churches to provide funding for supervised ministry training. Duke is unique in having the kind of funding The Duke Endowment provides . This allows the faculty to place students in supervised internships without regard to questions of funding. Finally, one can see increased notice of Duke Divinity School across the nation. The program of publications, the active faculty, and the strong student body are resulting in a perception that Duke is a major center for theological studies. Educational Program 76 4.2.2.2 School of Forestry and Environmental Studies As one of only two private, graduate -level schools for the study of natural resources in the nation, the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies (SFES) at Duke is directly comparable only to the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University. In terms of reputation, Duke is also comparable to the School of Natural Resources at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor and the Department of Forestry and Resource Management at the University of California-Berkeley. Teaching and research in the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies are focused within the following four curricula: Forest Resource Management, Resource Ecology, Water and Air Resources, and Resource Economics and Policy. The first of these programs is offered under the Master of Forestry degree; the remaining three, under the Master of Environmental Management degree. All four form the basis of study for the A.M., M.S. and Ph.D. degrees offered through the Graduate School (see Table 4.22). Few other universities attempt precisely this combination or have the emphasis on quantitative analysis that is common across all four programs of study. Additionally, few other universities have the benefit of a major outdoor research laboratory almost literally at their doorstep. The Duke Forest -- in terms of its size, diversity, proximity, and wealth of accumulated resource data -- is a natural resource that is unavailable at any other school of natural resources . Additional enrichment is available through agencies and institutions at the Research Triangle Park and through relevant departments at neighboring universities. These opportunities for interdisciplinary study and professional interaction place Duke in an enviable position among schools of natural resources and greatly enhance the quality of teaching and research in support of the School's mission. Educational Program 77 Table 4.22. School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. DEGREES CONFERRED May 1983 May 1988 Master of Forestry 15 10 Master of Environmental Management 16 18 ENROLLMENT (FTE Professional) 1980/81 107.5 1987/88 97.5 ADMISSIONS 1980/81 1987/88 Applications 137 153 Accepted 116 118 Enrolled 54 50 0UALITY OF MATRICULANTS 1985/86 1987/88 GRE (V+Q+A) 1731 1739 GPA 3 . 15 3.17 Educational Program 78 Placement of SFES graduates is excellent. A majority (74 percent) of graduates find degree-related employment within three months after graduation; 10 percent within six months; and 6 percent, within twelve months. Natural resources is not a field known for high salaries, but Duke graduates are competitive in the forestry employment market and are unparalleled in the environmental consulting field. There is a growing market for graduates of the School's concurrent degree programs with the Fuqua School of Business and the Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs, particularly in the areas of forestry investments and resource economics and policy. While the content of the School's four programs is adequate at present, the curricula could be improved by the addition of faculty -- and new courses -- in specialized areas. Additional faculty members would also ease current teaching and advising loads, enabling faculty members to devote more time to advising individual students as well as to their own research. In the early 1980s economic conditions and federal budget cuts created a soft job market for forestry and environmental studies graduates, many of whom seek employment with forest products industries, government agencies, and consulting firms working under federal contracts. Because of the perceived scarcity of jobs as well as the decline in the national applicant pool for graduate study in general, most natural resource schools have seen a sharp drop in enrollment. Recruiting efforts, including campus visits, begun in 1980 by the School have enabled it to maintain an acceptable enrollment and to attain a moderate increase. Employment opportunities for graduates in forestry and environmental studies have now taken an upturn as industry experiences some economic recovery and state and local governments become more concerned about environmental quality. Further work is needed, however, to increase enrollment to an optimum level. With the broadening dimensions of environmental issues, the need is greater than ever before for environmental education in all segments of society. Greater understanding is necessary if the public is to play a Educational Program 79 role in finding solutions to these important problems. An educational institution of the quality of Duke University should offer its students some exposure to the environmental sciences and instill in them the importance of wise resource management . The School is therefore working toward establishment of an undergraduate curriculum in environmental and resource management. The School of Forestry and Environmental Studies is just now recovering from the negative effects of the threat of discontinuance in the early 1980s. The public image of the school at the present time is generally positive and the appointment of the new dean is widely approved. Alumni support of the school reached a record high this year as evidenced by membership in the SFES Alumni Association and contributions to the School's Annual Fund. Plans are being put in place to maintain this level of support by means of alumni meetings around the country and increased alumni involvement in recruitment, career counseling, placement and fund raising. In connection with the School's fiftieth anniversary to be celebrated this year, a number of events, special publications, and news releases are expected to increase the visibility and enhance the external image of the School. 4.2.2.3 Fuqua School of Business The Fuqua School of Business (FSB) has undergone tremendous change over the last 17 years to reach the point at which it finds itself today. Beginning with its "start-up" years between 1969 and 1974, and moving through the 1974-82 phase characterized by redirection, expansion and developing credibility, the School is now in an era marked by the achievement and reinforcement of excellence and prestige. The Fuqua School achieved recognition in 1985 as a Top 10 business school according to a survey of corporations who hire MBA graduates as published in the Wall Street Journal . Since that time, there has been notice of the ranking by a wider audience, as evidenced in comments from Educational Program 80 prospective students, faculty at competitive institutions, and recruiting firms who hire Duke's MBAs . Perhaps the most visible signal is the fact that Fuqua is being included in round-up and special interest reports by the national media, and its faculty are regularly approached by the media as authorities on a variety of business issues. The Fuqua School's student body is a high quality one and the School now can compete with other top echelon schools for the very best students. Comparative data suggest that in terms of undergraduate GPA, GMAT scores, years of work experience, and percent of class with work experience, the School has admitted one of the top eight to ten classes in the nation in both 1986 and 1987. The drawing power of the Fuqua School against other top ranked schools is good and improving. 1986-87 data show that at least 50% of the students accepted at Fuqua and one of these schools chose to attend Fuqua: Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, Dartmouth, Emory, Indiana, New York University, the University of California at Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, UNC-Chapel Hill, the University of Virginia, Vanderbilt, and Yale. Fuqua fares less well in matches against Columbia, Harvard, Northwestern, Stanford, Chicago, and the University of Pennsylvania, but it is improving. Growth of the daytime MBA program is essentially complete at 250 students per class, although any reduction in the School's role in the MHA or MS programs could allow for some growth. The evening executive MBA program is stabilizing at approximately 65 students per class, and modest expansion of the weekend executive MBA program, now at 45 per class, is expected (see Table 4.23). Fuqua 's outreach efforts have gone beyond the marketing of its MBA, Ph.D., and executive education programs. The School has enlisted the counsel and support of top-level executives throughout the state and has created the North Carolina Advisory Board. This regional board complements the Board of Visitors, which is composed of 49 corporate leaders from across the nation. Every attempt also is made to utilize the international pool of alumni of all FSB programs . Educational Program 81 Table 4.23. Fuqua School of Business DEGREES CONFERRED May 1983 May 1988 Master of Business Administration 175 239 ENROLLMENT MBA (daytime) Executive MBA Weekend MBA TOTAL - MBA Programs 1986/87 500 120 73 713 MBA (daytime 86/87) Executive MBA (1986) Weekend MBA (1986) ADMISSIONS Applications Accepted Enrolled 1498/2008 117 49 561/550 73 39 250/258 66 40 MBA (daytime 86/87) Executive MBA (1986) Weekend MBA (1986) QUALITY OF MATRICULANTS Average GMAT Score 620/625 566 545 GPA 3.31/3.30 Educational Program 82 The School's facility, now five years old, is used to capacity on a regular basis. There is excess demand for classroom space and faculty offices. The construction of the R. David Thomas Center designed to house the executive education administrative staff and programs, as well as school-wide social and dining functions, is nearing completion. The added space, plus the remodeling of existing administrative and dining areas, will increase the availability of classrooms and offices for other programs . The faculty is growing in both number and quality. There is a need to continue to develop both the size of the faculty and the core strengths that currently exist. The urgency of increasing faculty numbers is made clear by the demands already made on the faculty to teach in three MBA programs and an expanding executive education program, while pursuing research as well. Specific measurements of "quality" of faculty are difficult to define, but clear indications can be had from a variety of sources. One is the caliber of other business schools who are "courting" Duke's faculty. Last year alone, several "stars", both junior and senior, were heavily recruited by Wharton, Columbia, and Dartmouth. Potential faculty interviewed by Duke over the last several years have been cross -recruited by Michigan, Dartmouth, Columbia, Berkeley, Northwestern, UCLA, and Wharton. Duke has successfully hired a senior operations "star" from UCLA and several outstanding junior faculty from, among others, UCLA, Northwestern, Columbia, Stanford, Chicago, NYU, Wharton, Michigan, and Berkeley. The growth in the number of students seeking MBA degrees has been rapid. As MBA graduates have flooded the market, new importance has been attached to the prestige of the programs granting the degrees. It is also likely that the number of college graduates seeking the MBA degree will decline or at least level off in the years ahead. Competition among schools for students and faculty will become even more intense than it is today. Quality is expensive, and the success Duke has achieved to date is extremely costly. The tuition level, while at the bottom among other Educational Program 83 top-tier private schools, has been and continues to be the highest at Duke. At the same time, the costs of recruiting and maintaining a quality faculty are extremely high and escalating. Winning the best students requires more competitive aid and award packages. The costs for maintaining the facility are constantly on the rise. Keeping pace with technological advances is costly. Funding -raising efforts, with particular focus on raising much needed endowment, are at an all-time high. A very real obstacle to achieving Fuqua's future goals may be a major shortage of quality faculty. The challenges of attracting and maintaining quality faculty puts the School in a very vulnerable position. The yearly loss of even one or two outstanding faculty members, who are in high demand and constantly courted by other schools, could prove devastating to Fuqua's programs. Other potential barriers include a decline in the number of students seeking admission to MBA programs, a loss of confidence in the value of the MBA as an important training ground for entry level managers , a loss of confidence in the value added to managerial ability via executive education programs, and increased competition among graduate business schools for a place at the top. On the other hand, there are a number of factors pointing to Fuqua's success in achieving its goals. These include the momentum the School has developed, its reputation as a school committed to excellence and on the move toward achieving excellence, the present popularity of Duke in all areas of study, the existence of a first-class facility with a new residence center on the horizon, the current level of excellence in the faculty and the strides made over the last several years in faculty development, and the growing level of corporate support for the School and all its programs. As a result of these factors, the Fuqua School has achieved a certain distinction among the nation's business schools. Fuqua has been tagged "The Electronic Business School" and the School aims to maintain its facilities at state-of-the-art levels. Fuqua can boast of a young, energetic faculty that can bring flexibility and cutting-edge, modern ideas Educational Program 84 to the curriculum. The faculty also provides students with the opportunity to learn in a teamwork-oriented atmosphere not found at many other schools. Finally, the desire to be a leader among the nation's business schools in providing outstanding management education has molded a faculty and administrative staff with a fresh outlook and a willingness to pursue new ideas . 4.2.2.4 Law School The Law School opened in 1904 and was reorganized as a graduate professional school in 1930, although its roots can be traced to lectures on law conducted in Trinity College as early as 1864 by the then president of the College. After 1930, the Law School quickly acquired a distinguished law faculty and began competing for the finest law students in the United States. World War II interrupted this progress, and the Law School did not regain its impetus until the late '50s, when, under the leadership of a dynamic dean and the inspiration of a new building (occupied in 1962) , the Law School again made dynamic strides in attracting strong faculty and capable students. The aims of the Law School at Duke are not distinctive among university law schools . The School strives to serve its students and the law by providing a place where professors and students share an effort to explore, to master, and to illuminate law. Some of the means by which Duke seeks to make such a contribution are, however, distinctive. Duke law students are persons who have known substantial academic success as the data in Table 4.24 suggest. Most have attended competitive undergraduate schools. In the most recent year for which statistics are available, 61% graduated from undergraduate schools whose students' median LSAT scores were in the upper quartile. The School aims at an entering class of about 170. Some of the schools with which Duke competes for the best students - notably, Harvard, Yale, Chicago, Michigan, Stanford, Cornell, Pennsylvania, Northwestern, Virginia Educational Program 85 Table 4.24. Law School. DEGREES CONFERRED Mav 1983 Mav 1988 Juris Doctor 181 169 Master of Laws 6 24 Applications Admitted Enrolled Yield ADMISSIONS 1983 1987 2176 2024 527 647 178 196 34% 30% QUALITY OF MATRICULANTS 1983 1987 Median LSAT Median GPA 727 3.58 41 (92nd percentile) 3.55 Educational Program 86 and Georgetown - are twice that size (e.g., Virginia, Michigan), and others are three or more times as large (e.g., Harvard, Georgetown). While size may offer advantages, it also depersonalizes relationships among students and between faculty and students . Despite the small size of the school, there is an unusually large number of opportunities for upperclass students to participate in shared professional activities that are significant. Thus, the Law School publishes three widely-circulated journals which print student scholarship and which are edited by students with varying degrees of faculty involvement . It is significant that the Duke law faculty is more accessible than most. This reflects a curricular design which brings each first-year student into a tutorial relationship with a faculty member and also reflects the ethic of the faculty that their profession is teaching and scholarship, not the practice of law. As a result, the majority of professors are in their offices on most days throughout the calendar year. The law faculty has striven to maintain a wide range of scholarly interests in fields of law which are also of interest to students with professional aspirations. Although a relatively small faculty, Duke is particularly well-represented among the leading national scholars in such fields as business associations, commercial law, taxation, property and real estate finance, oil and gas, intellectual property, torts, civil procedures, criminal procedure, and economic regulation. There may be cost in this in that the Duke law faculty is less deep in scholars devoted to the study of Constitutional law and legal theory, but the members of the faculty that concentrate in these areas have national reputations. The Law School has emphasized in its entry- level recruiting of faculty the importance of significant professional experience as a lawyer. A judicial clerkship, for example, is regarded by the Duke faculty as an excellent beginning of a professional career in law, and such an appointment is one that is sought by many of the better Duke law graduates, Educational Program 87 but it is not regarded as a sufficient qualification for faculty appointment. The last five professors tenured at Duke had significant additional professional experience, one as a public defender, one as a lawyer in a program of legal services for the poor, one in a small firm specializing in environmental litigation, one as an appellate advocate for the United States Department of Justice, and one as a tax lawyer in a major private firm. Such persons can perhaps be expected to identify more readily with the career aims of students than can faculty who quickly rejected the practice of law as a career for themselves. Duke has also developed a distinctive clinical program. For the most part, its program of clinical training depends on simulation; only in the areas of child advocacy and criminal prosecution and defense are there opportunities for direct experience, although an effort is now being made to develop a hands-on opportunity in the area of commercial arbitration and dispute resolution. While in some ways limiting, the emphasis on simulation has enabled the School to draw into its clinical program a very distinctive adjunct faculty teaching a varied array of clinical courses. Duke warmly encourages joint studies which link the study of law to other insights into the human condition. The Law School early established the first and leading journal of interdisciplinary legal studies, Law and Contemporary Problems . The Duke law faculty has more joint appointments than any other law faculty, regardless of size. More Duke law students are pursuing joint degrees (JD/MA, JD/MD, JD/MBA) than are doing so at any other law school, again regardless of size. In these respects, Duke is very much a university law school. Among the Duke professors holding secondary appointments in the Law School are persons whose primary intellectual attainments and interests are in Economics, English, History, Philosophy, Political Science, Psychology, and Psychiatry. The group includes several senior persons of extraordinary attainment. Educational Program 88 The Law School has also tapped distinguished lawyers and judges as adjunct faculty to teach specialized and practice-oriented courses. Included in this group during the 1987-88 academic year were six United States Circuit Court judges and a judge of the North Carolina Court of Appeals . Duke Law School is an institution of considerable international proportion. In part, this simply reflects the interests of the present regular law faculty, who are highly international. Among the twenty-nine persons holding full-time professional appointments in law are scholars whose primary interests include the international law of the sea, taxation of international trade, comparative administrative law, comparative public law of ethnic group relations, and comparative and international insurance law. Several others regularly study the comparative dimensions of such fields as constitutional law, securities regulation, and intellectual property. Still others maintain international careers as experts in fields of American law; thus Duke law faculty have taught or lectured in as many as forty countries in the most recent five years. These diverse international interests of the faculty have attracted a distinguished array of foreign faculty visitors to the Law School, either to teach a part or full term or to spend a period as a visiting scholar. A further international feature of the Law School is its Master of Laws (LLM) program for foreign students. The students in this program are foreign lawyers, usually with two to five years of post-law school experience, who come to Duke for one year's instruction in American Law. Their presence at the Law School provides an extra dimension to both American and international students, since the two curricula and communities are fully integrated. The Law School has initiated two international programs that are unique among law schools. The first is the joint JD/LLM program established in 1985 in which law students may, by entering law school for a summer term just prior to the regular first-year fall term, acquire the JD and LLM Educational Program 89 (Foreign and International Law) degrees during the regular three -year curriculum plus the entering summer. The second is the Duke in Denmark program established in 1986. This is a four-week summer program conducted in collaboration with the University of Copenhagen, the purpose of which is to mix a group of young European lawyers and upper- level law students with a roughly equal number of upper- level American law students (primarily from Duke) in a curriculum of international studies. Like the student body, the faculty is also a mix of American and European professors, the Americans being drawn from the Duke law faculty and the Europeans from distinguished European universities. Another distinctive feature of the Law School which unites it with other fields is the Private Adjudication Center. The Center is a private corporation established in 1983 and controlled by members of the Law School faculty. It provides dispute-resolution services to litigants in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina and for commercial disputants throughout the United States. In its service activity, the Center establishes a tie to business leadership and to faculty in the Fuqua School of Business. The Center is also a research center of growing importance; it has received a number of substantial research grants, including a recent one to study dispute resolution techniques for claims of medical malpractice. In its research role, the Center maintains ties to social scientists of all stripes, and also engages the talents of law students skilled or interested in social science methodology. While Duke, like other law schools, cannot warrant the professional competence of all its graduates , it has not forgotten the immediate aims of its professional law students and affords them ample opportunities to enhance the basic skills and to develop the appropriate values needed for effective professional work in law. It is for these reasons, and because of the very high quality of the students attracted to Duke, that the placement opportunities are so strong. During the past year, for example, more than 450 private law firms and other legal institutions visited the Law School seeking to employ the 350 or so second- and third-year students Educational Program 90 desiring placement. Typically, by the time of graduation, at least 90% of the graduating students have obtained employment in law-related careers. The negative factor that must be mentioned in this overview is the inadequacy of the Law School building. It is perhaps pertinent that the Law building was built for functional use, not as a monument. The building is less handsome than most at Duke, and while adequate in size when built, it is now too small for the level of activity that it houses. Several of its components are housed in rented space about four miles off campus . Student study and lounge space are totally inadequate; the admissions process is considerably hampered by having its personnel split between the Law building and the off -campus office; placement interviews can only be accommodated by displacing adjunct and emeritus faculty and locating interviewers in make-shift and inadequately ventilated rooms; the administration of the Alumni and Major Projects offices as well as the Private Adjudication Center is seriously hampered by being separated from the main administration of the Law School; the library has had to utilize bulk storage space without adequate provision for temperature and humidity control; sufficient faculty offices have been obtained only by converting administrative or student space to this use. Although an intangible factor and difficult to substantiate empirically, it may be that the School's ability to attract the ablest students is being adversely affected by the unattractiveness and perceived inadequacy of the physical facilities. Thus, in any long-range plan for Law School development, first priority must be given to the addition of approximately 60,000 square feet of space. Plans for the building's renovation and enlargement have been made and funds are now being raised for that purpose. It is not intended, however, to enlarge the size of the student body and faculty, nor to change the perhaps understated ambience of the public and study spaces within the building. The aim is to provide adequate space for activities now housed in the Law School building and elsewhere that are currently carried out in cramped and inadequate space - to provide additional student amenities, to provide more efficient arrangement of faculty and administrative space, to Educational Program 91 expand library shelving, storage, and study space, to return functions now performed elsewhere to the Law School building, and to provide adequate facilities for placement interviewing. In 1986, the Law School was reviewed by a distinguished committee serving the University Board of Trustees, and also by an eminent team appointed by the American Bar Association and the Association of American Law Schools . All of these inspectors of the school commented adversely on the plant as being too modest in appearance and too small for the volume of activity hosted within. On the other hand, all also commented positively on the three secondary faculties of the Law School: the adjunct clinical faculty of lawyers and judges, the joint faculty of scholars primarily working in other disciplines, and the international visiting faculty. The shared comment was that each of these groups was extraordinary in what it was able to bring to Duke law students, and each was wisely balanced by the presence of the others. At least one observer noted the synergistic effects; the Law School is more than the sum of its parts. The assembly of these secondary faculties is itself a distinctive attainment of the regular faculty. What their collective presence manifests is the self-confidence of an institution, reaching out to the legal profession, to the academic professional, and to the international legal community for the best that these constituencies have to offer to those engaged in the study and illumination of law. Together with the distinctive student environment, and a talented and dedicated regular faculty willing to innovate, they enhance the opportunity for the sophisticated study of law. 4.2.2.5 Medical Center By establishing the Duke Endowment, James Buchanan Duke expressed his hope that adequate and convenient hospital care would become available to all Americans. His further bequests provided for the opening, in 1930, of the School of Medicine, School of Nursing, and hospital which today are the core institutions of the Duke University Medical Center. By opening the Educational Program 92 first major outpatient clinics in the region in 1930, Duke recognized its responsibility for providing quality care to the people of the Carolinas. The Private Diagnostic Clinic, organized in 1932, not only provided coordinated medical and surgical care to private patients with moderate incomes, but also allowed members of the medical faculty to contribute a portion of their earnings toward the continued excellence of medicine at Duke. In less than five years Duke was ranked among the top 25 percent of medical schools in the country by the Association of American Medical Colleges . Building on this heritage, the Duke University Medical Center ranks today among the outstanding health care centers of the world. Its pioneering medical curriculum, instituted in 1966, features a generous measure of elective course selection in the belief that all health professionals must be prepared for a lifetime of self -education. The scientific grounding for that education is provided through participation in a wide variety of on-going research programs. The opening of Duke Hospital North in 1980 makes the Duke Hospital, with 1,008 beds, one of the most modern patient care facilities anywhere available. The combined strength of its teaching, research, and hospital care programs represents the continuing fulfillment of the dream of James Buchanan Duke. School of Medicine The Medical School is comprised of both basic science and clinical departments. Basic Medical Science departments primarily fulfill three roles: 1) research into fundamental areas of biological science with potential impact on medicine; 2) teaching of medical students in areas of fundamental life processes to provide a base of knowledge for medical practice and an understanding of new developments in medical research; and 3) training graduate students, medical students, and post-doctoral fellows in the art and discipline of biological research. The faculty in Basic Medical Sciences serve as a bridge in the University between the Medical Center as a professional school and the Arts and Sciences, and in many cases, the School of Engineering. They are involved with clinicians and clinical research scientists who share a Educational Program 93 common interest in understanding the basis for causation and course of disease and for rational therapeutic approaches to treatment. They interact with engineering researchers in developing devices and methods for clinical application and biological research. Through graduate research efforts, seminars, informal consultation and collaboration, and occasional undergraduate instruction, they share a common interest with faculty in Arts and Sciences in understanding the biological and clinical foundations of living organisms as we know them. The Clinical Departments take primary responsibility for health care in the Duke Hospital and clinics. They also provide clinical instruction and training for medical students, residents, and fellows, often on a one-to-one basis. The success of the clinical program in the Medical Center is dependent on close interaction among the various departments and units and, indeed, Duke prides itself on its multidisciplinary approach to the individual health care services it provides . The overall three-fold integrated mission in the Medical Center can thus be described as follows : Clinical care . Duke University Hospital is the major private tertiary care center of the Southeast. It is the hospital to which patients from all over the Southeast and, in some subspecialties, from all over the world, are referred for the treatment of complex, hard- to- treat diseases. It is also a primary care facility for the people of Durham and the surrounding counties. More than 33,000 patients are admitted annually. Surgical facilities include thirty-two operating rooms in which surgeons perform more than 20,000 operative procedures annually. Approximately 1900 babies are born each year in the delivery suite. There are major programs in cardiovascular disease, cancer, childhood diseases, eye diseases, organ transplantation, mental illness, aging, genetics, immunology - as well as the specialists and facilities to care for the full range of human illnesses. Educational Program 94 Education . The Duke University School of Medicine has frequently been cited as one of the finest in the country. Admission to the program is highly sought and therefore highly selective: in 1987, there were 4,087 applicants for 104 openings. Duke also has large residency programs in the clinical specialties, doctoral and post-doctoral programs in the basic sciences as well as training programs in a variety of allied health professions (see Table 4.25). Several health-services educational programs are offered at the Duke University Medical Center. These programs, which enroll approximately 300 students, are of four types: (1) a Bachelor of Health Science degree program; (2) a Physician Assistant program; (3) graduate degree programs in biometry, health administration, and physical therapy, and (4) certificate programs in clinical psychology internship, cy tot echnology , electrophysiology technology, hospital and clinical pharmacy residency, medical technology, opthalmic medical technician, pastoral care and counseling, physician assistant, and specialist in blood bank technology. Research . The research programs at Duke span the clinical and basic sciences: biochemistry, microbiology and immunology, pharmacology, cell biology, genetics, neurosciences , physical anthropology and anatomy, surgery, psychiatry, opthamology, radiology, obstetr ics/gynecology , medicine, anesthesiology, family medicine, pathology and pediatrics. Working alone, together, and at times collaborating with faculty outside the Medical Center, Duke scientists have created an extremely productive research environment. Many are doctors who are fully accredited "attending" physicians at Duke and also contribute to teaching and research. The 15 Medical Center buildings contain approximately three million square feet and cover roughly 140 acres on the northern edge of the Duke University campus. The Medical Center also maintains close collaborative relationships in teaching, research, and clinical care activities with several affiliated or subsidiary institutions, including the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Sea Level Hospital in Carteret County, NC, and Lenox Baker Children's Hospital. Educational Program 95 Table 4.25. Medical Center DEGREES CONFERRED 1982-83 1987-88 School of Medicine Bachelor of Health Science Doctor of Medicine 48 78 31 98 School of Nursing Master of Science in Nursing Bachelor of Science in Nursing* 16 62 11 ♦Discontinued. ENROLLMENT (1986/87) Medicine 464 Nursing 51 Allied Health* 211 Residents and Fellows 818 *Nine fields offering either a certificate or a degree Educational Program 96 The Medical Center maintains a vast array of resources, including a library/communications center that boasts of the finest history of medicine collection in the Southeast, a Comprehensive Cancer Center (see Chapter Eight), a Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and many nationally -known clinics and laboratories. Recently, the Medical Center started the Life Flight helicopter missions, which in 1986/87 logged 1432 life-saving flights from distant locales to the Duke Hospital. School of Nursing Duke University School of Nursing currently offers a graduate program leading to a Master of Science in Nursing degree which educates professional nurses for advanced practice. The three areas of specialization and role development for this program include: (a) critical care nursing (adult and child), (b) oncological nursing (adult and child), and (c) administration of nursing services. These areas utilize particular strengths of the Medical Center and respond to current needs for nurses with advanced preparation, clinical nurse specialists and nursing administrators. Since the initiation of this curriculum in 1985, 22 students have received their degrees. The School of Nursing also offers continuing education to the nursing community through its affiliation with the Fayetteville Area Health Education Center. In 1986-87, the School completed a self-study and had a site visit from the National League for Nursing which accredits schools of nursing. The School was approved for the maximum eight-year term with no recommendations in March of 1988. 4.3 CONTINUING EDUCATION The Office of Continuing Education at Duke University is the division through which adults participate in university life, as credit students, as non-credit learners, and as conference participants. The programs offered by the Office of Continuing Education are as diverse as the needs of adult learners themselves (see Table 4.26). The common theme in that diversity is the University's commitment to the concept of life-long learning, and to making knowledge and resources available to the larger community. Educational Program 97 Table 4.26. Continuing Education - Individual Enrollments by Program for 1985-86. PROGRAM TOTALS Academic Study 147 Summer 1985 9 Fall undergraduate 51 Fall graduate 19 Spring undergraduate 45 Spring graduate 23 Short Courses 2,791 Summer 1985 457 Fall 1985 870 Winter 1986 858 Spring 1986 606 Counseling Service 505 (Workshops now part of Short Course program) Program for Older Adults 922 Institute for Learning 412 in Retirement Carolina Consulting Scientists 297 and Engineers Summer 1985 short courses 154 Miscellaneous trips 59 (Beaufort, Richmond, etc.) Residential Conferences and Camps 552 Duke University Writers' 38 Conference (June '86) Young Writers' Camp 234 (June- July 1986, 2 sessions) Young Writers' Fall Workshop 21 (Oct. '85) Campus Alcohol Policies (Aug. '85) 13 Dynamic Cheerleaders (Aug. '85) 246 Humanities Projects 785 Other Programs 825 TOTAL 6,527 Educational Program 98 The Office also offers educational programs geared toward young adults, including The Young Writer's Camp and pre-college counseling. Additionally, exceptional high school seniors may, with the permission of their guidance counselors, take a Duke undergraduate course for college credit. Duke University has achieved two general goals through its Continuing Education program: at the level of the individual, it attracts excellent students and offers them in turn high quality instruction in both credit and non-credit streams; at the level of the institution, it builds good public relations as well as utilizing institutional facilities more effectively. The Office of Continuing Education is budgeted on a cost-recovery basis, and generally returns a profit to the University; the academic study division generates additional revenue for the general fund. Continuing Education Programs . The Office of Continuing Education offers the following programs : o academic advising for returning adult students; o non-credit short courses and workshops; o programs for older adults ; o career and personal counseling; o local and state-wide humanities programs; o educational programs sponsored by academic and administrative departments ; and o training and development programs for business and industry. 4 . 4 FACULTY 4.4.1 Appointment and Evaluation Over the past five years, Duke has achieved considerable momentum with its success in faculty appointments. These outstanding new appointments, at both the senior and junior levels, together with the fine faculty Educational Program 99 already at Duke, have raised Duke to a new level of national prominence. Furthermore, Duke's success in faculty appointment fuels itself; it becomes easier and easier to make additional exceptional appointments as Duke gains the reputation of a premier institution at which the highest caliber faculty come to teach and conduct their research. In 1987-88, the total Duke faculty at regular rank numbered 1399. The Arts and Sciences faculty numbered 412, of whom 120 (29%) were in the Humanities, 154 (37%) in the Social Sciences, and 137 (33%) in the Natural Sciences. The percentage of Arts and Sciences faculty with tenure was 78.6%. There were 213 full professors, 117 associate professors, 80 assistant professors, and one instructor in a tenure track slot. Of this number 6 6 were women, 13 were black, and 14 were other minorities, primarily Asians. The faculty is by age distribution a relatively medium-aged faculty: there were 11 faculty members between the ages 20 and 30; 100 between ages 30 and 40; 132 between the ages of 40 and 50; 95 between the ages 50 and 60; and 74 between ages 60 and 70. Data on the total Duke faculty, including those in Engineering and the professional schools, may be seen in Tables 4.27 and 4.28. The faculty is much easier to describe in terms of gross numbers, percentage tenured, and age distribution than it is in quality. Describing the "quality of the faculty" is much like describing a fine work of art: difficult to define in concrete terms but unmistakable when seen. Still, the quality of the faculty cannot be ignored, for that quality is at the heart of an institution and defines it. Furthermore, in a university such as Duke where the faculty is smaller than at other major universities, the issue of faculty quality becomes critical. Each appointment from the outside and each review for tenure from the inside becomes all the more important because the University cannot afford a margin for error. Moreover, the quality of the faculty is of vital concern to the students at Duke. As noted earlier, the "quality of the faculty" was listed in the 1986 Accepted Student Survey as a key factor in students' decisions to matriculate here. Only the more general "academic quality" was higher in influence. Educational Program 100 Table 4.27. Duke University Faculty. Faculty - By School Arts and Sciences Engineering Divinity Forestry Fuqua Law Medicine Nursing General Adminis trat ion 412 58 26 13 46 27 756 46 9 6 TOTAL 1399* Faculty - By Rank Full Professors Associate Professors Assistant Professors Instructors & Associates 551 336 399 113 TOTAL 1399 *0f this number, 859 are also members of the Graduate Faculty. Educational Program 101 Table 4.28. Arts and Sciences Faculty at Regular Ranks TOTAL TOT % ASSOC ASST TOTAL TENURED TOT TEN TEN PROFS PROFS PROFS FACULTY FACULTY FAC FAC FAC M F M F M F M F M F ANTHRO 3 2 2 3 1 8 3 5 2 11 7 63.6 ART 1 1 2 1 1 3 4 5 2 2 9 4 44.4 BOTANY 9 3 3 15 12 15 12 80.0 CHEM 16 2 1 2 20 1 18 1 21 19 90.5 CLASSICS 4 4 1 8 1 8 1 9 9 100.0 COMP LIT 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 3 100.0 COMP SCI 9 4 1 4 1 17 2 10 19 10 52.6 DANCE 1 1 1 1 1 100.0 ECON 15 3 2 6 23 3 17 3 26 20 76.9 EDUCATN 1 5 1 6 1 6 1 7 7 100.0 ENGLISH 17 2 7 2 2 1 26 5 24 4 31 28 90.3 GEOLOGY 3 4 3 10 5 10 5 50.0 GERMAN 3 1 1 4 1 3 1 5 4 80.0 HISTORY 15 1 8 5 3 28 4 23 1 32 24 75.0 INTERNAT 1 4 1 4 5 0.0 MATH 8 11 5 1 24 1 19 25 19 76.0 MUSIC 6 2 5 2 13 2 9 15 9 60.0 PHILOS 4 2 2 1 8 1 6 9 6 66.7 PHYSICS 15 4 2 21 19 21 19 90.5 POLISCI 13 3 1 8 1 24 2 16 1 26 17 65.4 PSYCH 15 1 2 3 2 1 19 5 18 4 24 22 91.7 PPS 4 1 4 1 3 1 11 3 8 2 14 10 71.4 RELIG 8 1 5 1 1 13 3 12 2 16 14 87.5 ROMANCE 6 5 3 1 4 12 7 11 2 19 13 68.4 SLAVIC 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 33.3 SOCIO 8 1 3 1 11 2 11 1 13 12 92.3 ZOOLOGY 13 5 3 1 1 19 4 18 3 23 21 91.3 TOTALS 196 12 92 22 61 29 349 63 283 33 412 316 76.7 Educational Program 102 Excellent faculty have some key characteristics in common. They are filled with ideas and are effective in discussing, explaining, and dissecting these ideas, whether they be understanding the past or advancing learning into the future. The best faculty share a fascination with their fields and a dedication to sharing both the substance of their knowledge and their enthusiasm for their subject. Quality in faculty is not restricted to chronological age, years at Duke, or tenure status. In assessing the quality of Duke's faculty, one must address the question of how a research university measures the quality of its faculty. This question is central to the issue of assessing Duke's strength as an institution of higher learning. One measure commonly used is the amount and sources of research funding brought in by the faculty. Of course, institutional resources influence this criterion to the extent that infrastructure support, equipment, and space are made available. Similarly, institutional emphases, such as upon basic or applied research, can also affect a university's totals. Nevertheless, in the area of research support, the faculty have been increasingly productive. Current available data indicate that the total sponsored research expenditures for the Arts and Sciences faculty alone have grown from $8,789,894 in 1983 to $14,426,762 in 1987, a 64% increase. Particular categories within these totals, moreover, have risen at an even greater rate. Funds from industry, for example, have grown from $158,194 in 1983 to $2,176,284 in 1987, and Federal dollars have grown from $7,377,503 in 1983 to $11,294,279 in 1987. The Engineering and professional school faculties have also had striking increases in sponsored program revenues over this time period: a 215% increase for Business, an 75% increase for Engineering, a 45% increase for Forestry, and a 50% increase for the Medical Center to a University leading figure of $62,721,372. Only Law, where the amount of sponsored research is very limited, failed to show an increase. The issue of total research funding is a critical one to Duke because, overall, the University fell out of the top 20 universities ranking in federal obligations for research funding from 1968-84, and barriers such as facilities, access to instrumentation, and lack of creative use of overhead dollars still impede research productivity. Educational Program 103 Another indicator of faculty quality is national scholarly reputation. Scholarly reputation, like research funding, is based largely on peer review and the degree and scope of peer recognition. In this category, Duke faculty members have achieved standing on both national and international levels. For example, the Duke faculty include 12 members of the National Academy of Sciences, 22 fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and 4 members of the Royal Society. Duke faculty are also frequent recipients of major national fellowships including Fulbrights, Guggenheims, and Humbolts . 4.4.2. Compensation Duke has traditionally attempted to maintain faculty salaries at a level at or near the median of its 24 peer institutions. Salary and benefit data for the 1987-88 academic year for all faculty outside the Medical Center are presented in Table 4.29. According to 1987-88 AAUP data, the average nine-month salaries at private doctoral institutions are as follows: Professor 59,850 Associate 41,060 Assistant 34,080 All Ranks 46,960. As may be seen, with the exception of assistant professors, Duke faculty earn salaries that are above average relative to their peers on the best paid faculties, namely those at the private doctoral institutions. 4.4.3 Governance The bylaws of Duke University state that "the university faculty may organize and exercise its functions through appropriate councils, committees, or other bodies". These councils and committees of the faculty are described in the following pages . Educational Program 104 Table 4.29. Academic Salaries and Compensation of Full-Time Faculty Members in Arts and Sciences, Engineering, Business, Divinity, Forestry and Law - 1987-88. Measure Prof Rank Assoc Asst All Ranks Prof Prof Instr* Combined Number in Rank Salary (9 -mo. basis) Minimum Maximum Median Average 294 154 120 35,200 28,200 24, ,300 105,700 75,000 60, ,000 59,000 41,400 31, ,850 61,782 43,005 34, ,850 570 48,100 51,001 Avg. Fringe Benefits TOTAL 14,073 10,150 5,697 11,240 Compensation (9-mo. basis) Average Minimum 75,808 42,199 53,155 34,500 40,547 27,084 62,241 Increase over 1986-87 ($) Average Salary 7 . 6 Avg. Compensation 7.9 7.1 7.6 8.9 7.7 8.0 8.4 *Inasmuch as there are only two instructors in tenure-track slots, salary and benefits data are not provided in the interest of confidentiality. Educational Program 105 Academic Council . Faculty members at Duke participate in the affairs of the University through the Academic Council. The Academic Council consists of the President, the Provost, and the chairman of the council, ex-officio; and approximately seventy-five members elected for two-year terms by their respective divisions and schools. The size of the body varies slightly with the size of the faculty as outlined in the bylaws of the university faculty. The Academic Council elects its own chairperson. Responsibility for planning the work of the council is vested in an Executive Committee consisting of the chairman and six additional members elected from the membership of the Council. The Executive Committee chooses a vice-chairman and nominates a faculty secretary for election by the Council. In addition, the Executive Committee serves as a committee on committees for both the university faculty and the Academic Council. In that capacity, it nominates faculty representatives to serve on four broad types of committees: standing committees of the university, standing committees of the trustees with faculty participation, committees of the Academic Council, and ad hoc committees appointed to undertake and complete a specific task, after which they are discharged. The latter may be Council committees or university committees. A current list of committees is included in Table 4.30. Except in emergencies, all major decisions and plans of the administration that significantly affect academic affairs are submitted to the Academic Council for an expression of its views at some time before implementation or submission to the Board of Trustees. The Council's views are transmitted, along with the administration's proposals, to the trustees when the board considers the University plans and decisions. Undergraduate Faculty Council of Arts and Sciences . This faculty council legislates on curricular programs and academic regulations for Trinity College. It recommends admissions policies for, and advises on, financial aid to students in the college, and considers all other matters affecting their academic life and learning environment. It seeks to Educational Program 106 Table 4.30. University Governance Committees UNIVERSITY STANDING COMMITTEES Academic Computing Advisory Committee Academic Priorities Committee Administrative Oversight Committee Advisory Committee on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Advisory Committee for University Bookstore Commencement Committee Committee on Facilities and Environment Committee on Sexual Harassment of Students Council on Black Affairs Duke University Athletic Council Duke University Union Board Founders ' Day Committee Library Council Patent Committee Research Policy Committee Social Implications of Duke Investment Policies Committee University Committee on Radiological Safety University Committee on Undergraduate Admissions & Financial Aid University Judicial Board University Research Council University Review Committee on the Use of Human Subjects in Non-Medical Research University Schedule Committee UNIVERSITY AD HOC COMMITTEES Ad Hoc Committees for Reaffirmation of Accreditation Self-Study Ad Hoc Faculty Advisory Committee for Futures Institute Advisory Committee to Study Retirement Investment Options Committee on the University Scholar/Teacher-of -the-Year Award Faculty Membership Committee Homes ites Committee Search Committee for Dean of the Medical Center Search Committee for Dean of the Law School Search Committee for Dean of the School of Nursing Policy Implementation Committee Provost Review Committee Salary Equity Task Force Steering Committee of the Capital Campaign for the Arts and Sciences Technology Center Advisory Committee Educational Program 107 Table 4.30 (continued). University Governance Committees ACADEMIC COUNCIL COMMITTEES Academic Council Executive Committee Committee on Black Faculty Committee on Faculty Emeriti Committee on Women Faculty Faculty Commons Committee Faculty Compensation Committee Faculty Hearing Committee Faculty Scholars Committee Advisory Committee to Personal Assistance Service STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Trustee Committee on Academic Affairs Trustee/Faculty Committee on Honorary Degrees Trustee Committee on Building and Grounds Trustee Committee on Business and Finance Trustee Committee on Institutional Advancement Trustee/Faculty Liaison Committee Trustee Medical Center Affairs Committee Trustee Student Affairs Committee Trustee Screening Committee AD HOC COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Land Use Committee Committee on Duke Forest Educational Program 108 develop appropriate means of encouraging and recognizing academic achievement among students and high standards of undergraduate teaching. Members of the Council are elected by the faculty members in the departments of Arts and Sciences. The Council normally meets each month, September through April, and at other times at the call of the dean of Trinity College or of the Council's Executive Committee, or upon written request to the dean by ten of the Council's members. The dean of Trinity College of Arts and Sciences presides at the Council's meetings and votes in the event of a tie. Summaries of the actions of the Council are distributed to the faculty of Arts and Sciences. The preliminary work of the Council is done largely by committees, most of which are composed of faculty members, deans, and undergraduates nominated by the Executive Committee of the Council and appointed by the dean. Engineering Faculty Council . The Engineering Faculty Council (EFC) of the School of Engineering is composed of two representatives of each of the departments of the School of Engineering, with the dean of the School of Engineering as an ex-officio member. The EFC normally meets monthly during the academic year. It elects its own chairman and secretary, the latter serving also as secretary of the faculty of the school. The EFC functions as a steering committee for the faculty; its responsibilities include the establishment of ad hoc committees to consider and report on matters of concern to the faculty. In addition, the EFC has the authority to approve new courses and course changes , except those at the doctoral (300) level, for which no action beyond departmental faculty recommendation and Graduate School approval is needed. The Graduate School Executive Committee . The Executive Committee of the graduate faculty, composed of elected members of the graduate faculty, advises the dean of the Graduate School on various matters. Educational Program 109 The Executive Committee consists of the dean and four representatives each from the humanities, biological sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences. Division members are elected by their respective divisions for staggered two-year terms. The faculty of the Graduate School, which meets on call, depends upon the Executive Committee for the formation of policy with respect to graduate education, and for the performance of certain delegated duties. The Divinity School Educational Affairs Council . The governance of the Divinity School is the shared responsibility of the dean, the faculty, and the Educational Affairs Council. The Educational Affairs Council, composed of ten members of the faculty of the Divinity School and five Divinity School students, is a consulting body to the dean on the general administrative life of the school. Faculty members serve in an advisory capacity to the dean on all matters concerning appointment, promotion, tenure, continuation, and termination. Further, the faculty is responsible for determining the requirements for graduation. Adjunct faculty members are given voice but not vote. The School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Faculty Council . The Faculty Council of the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies is appointed by the dean and meets with him or her in an advisory capacity to consider administrative concerns and procedures within the school. The Faculty Council is charged with developing and monitoring all academic programs in the school; it also serves as a liaison for faculty and students. All matters relating to courses and curriculum are considered by the Faculty Council. The Admission and Awards Committee considers all candidates for admission and recommends to the dean the distribution of awards . The Fuqua School of Business Dean's Advisory Council . The governance of the Fuqua School of Business is the shared responsibility of the dean and the faculty. The Dean's Advisory Council is composed of five elected faculty representatives, the elected secretary of the faculty, and the associate dean. The Council advises the dean on all matters of policy Educational Program 110 governing the school. Faculty members serve in an advisory capacity to the dean on all matters concerning appointment, promotion, tenure, continuation and termination. Further, the faculty is responsible for determining graduation requirements. The School of Lav Committees . The governing body of the School of Law is the faculty. Faculty committees, typically composed of four faculty members and three students, are appointed by the dean. In some cases, such as admissions, the faculty delegates its responsibilities to a committee. While students are represented on some committees , they do not attend faculty meetings. Medical Center Policy Advisory Committee . The Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President is the executive officer responsible for the operation of Duke University Medical Center. The administrative procedures of medical and allied health education are influenced by the accreditation requirements of the Medical Center, in particular Duke University Hospital. The Medical School Policy Advisory Committee (MedPAC) plays an important role in the governance of the Medical Center. This committee is composed of the Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President, the Provost, the Dean of Medical Education, the Chief Executive Officer of Duke Hospital, the department chairs, the Head of the Comprenhensive Cancer Center, and a medical student (usually the president of the Davison Society) who is a participant/observer. It meets regularly and when called for special purposes. Basic Sciences Faculty Steering Committee of the Medical Center . The Basic Science Faculty Steering Committee is the representative body of the basic science faculty participating in major decisions and plans of the Medical Center and University. The Basic Science Steering Committee serves as a committee on committees for the basic science faculty, nominating faculty representatives to serve on committees of special interest to the basic science faculty, such as the Appointment, Promotions, and Tenure Educational Program 111 Committee, or search committees for department chairs and section heads. The Basic Science Faculty Steering Committee does not usurp the function of the Academic Council Executive Committee when broad university concerns are to be met, but may transmit views from the basic science faculty to the Academic Council. The Basic Science Faculty Steering Committee is elected at large and must contain one faculty member from each of the basic science departments or sections and an additional three at-large faculty members, but not more than two from any single unit. Members are elected for two-year terms. This committee meets regularly and when necessary for special purposes. The School of Nursing Committees . The faculty members of the School of Nursing meet regularly to consider issues relating to the academic affairs of the school. Recommendations on policies concerning admissions, standards, the curriculum, academic progression, graduation, and other matters affecting the academic environment are presented by committees on which faculty members, students, and administrative staff serve. The dean serves an an ex-officio member of all committees. He or she presides at the meetings of the faculty and votes in the event of a tie. 4.5 CONSORTIAL AND CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS Total sponsored research expenditures for the 1983 and 1987 fiscal years, by school, are presented in Table 4.31. During this four-year period, total University expenditures increased by 53%. In terms of total Federal obligations for research and development, Duke ranked 26th among all colleges and universities in fiscal 1986 (see Table 4.32). Educational Program 112 Table 4.31. Total Sponsored Research Expenditures, Fiscal Years 1983 and 1987. SCHOOL FY-1983 FY-1987 Arts and Sciences 8,789,894 14,426,762 Engineering 1,405,633 2,464,592 Business 180,918 569,490 Forestry 513,280 745,879 Marine Lab 1,227,321 1,805,114 Law 94,039 48,465 Medicine 41.876.218 62.721.372 TOTAL 54,087,304 82,781,674 Educational Program 113 Table 4.32. Federal Research and Development Funds, Fiscal 1986. Amount Rank Johns Hopkins U. $445,718,000 1 Massachusetts Inst, of Technology 188,120,000 2 Stanford U. 180,186,000 3 U. of Washington 146,718,000 4 U. of California, San Diego 133,243,000 5 Columbia U., Main Division 127,131,000 6 U. of California, Los Angeles 125,483,000 7 U. of Wisconsin, Madison 120,626,000 8 Cornell U. 112,707,000 9 Yale U. 111,687,000 10 U. of Michigan 111,232,000 11 Harvard U. 110,356,000 12 U. of California, San Francisco 104,453,000 13 U. of Pennsylvania 103,487,000 14 U. of Minnesota 100,898,000 15 U. of California, Berkeley 96,834,000 16 U. of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign 88,986,000 17 Pennsylvania State U. 87,041,000 18 U. of Southern California 77,533,000 19 U. of Texas, Austin 74,028,000 20 U. of Colorado 73,630,000 21 Washington U. 72,750,000 22 U. of Chicago 71,535,000 23 U. of Rochester 71,521,000 24 U. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 70,526,000 25 DUKE U. 70,034,000 26 New York U. 68,372,000 27 Carnegie Mellon U. 59,854,000 28 California Institute of Technology 59,707,000 29 U. of Pittsburgh 59,373,000 30 Source: Chronicle of Higher Education CHAPTER FIVE EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES The University Library and the Center for Academic Computing are the critical support services for research and study within the University. As support services, their mission is to fulfill the knowledge and information needs of the faculty, students and staff of the University. Recent technological developments have drawn these complementary services closer together. New concerns shared by the Library and Information Systems include : o Achievement of the capability to exchange information electronically throughout the campus . o Management of access to commercially available information and databases. o Maintenance of equipment viability in times of rapid technological change. These concerns have come about because, as a society, we have begun the transition from a paper-based culture to the "information age," and the computer is the vehicle for this transition. Over the next five years, these concerns will have a major impact on enhancing Duke's research capabilities while carrying significant financial implications for the University. For instance, the Library must increasingly offer its information by electronic means while Academic Computing must enhance and upgrade its program to respond to the ubiquitous use of computing on campus . The character and strength of these support services must be wholly determined by the needs and aspirations of the University and its schools. In order to maintain the highest academic quality, the highest quality Educational Support Services 115 support must be maintained. These support services must be carefully tailored to the University's curricular and research needs and be adequately funded. Currently, these support services are not able fully to meet the University's research and information needs. 5 . 1 LIBRARIES The libraries of the University consist of the William R. Perkins Library and its eight branches: Biology-Forestry, Chemistry, Divinity, East Campus, Engineering, Music, Mathematics-Physics, and the Pearse Memorial Library at the Duke Marine Laboratory in Beaufort; the Fuqua School of Business Library; the Law Library; and the Medical Center Library. In June 1987, these libraries contained approximately 3,627,000 volumes and ranked 19th in size among academic libraries in the United States. The library staff numbered 268 and total expenditures exceeded eleven million dollars. More than 10,000 periodicals, 14,000 serials, and 200 newspapers are received regularly. The collection includes about 7,500,000 manuscripts, 90,000 maps, 42,500 music scores, 575,000 microforms, and over 1,000,000 public documents. The William R. Perkins Library . The William R. Perkins Library, the main library of the University, houses most of the books and journals in the humanities and social sciences, large files of United States federal and state documents, public documents of many European and Latin American countries, publications of European academies and learned societies, and special collections from South Asian, Far Eastern, and Slavic countries. The newspaper collection, with nearly 110,000 reels of microfilm, has several long e ighteenth - century files; strong holdings of nineteenth- century New England papers; and antebellum and Civil War papers from North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia; as well as many European and Latin American papers. The manuscript collection of approximately seven and a half million items is particularly strong in all phases of the history, politics, and social and economic life of the South Atlantic region; it also includes a sizable advertising collection and significant papers in English and American literature. The rare books Educational Support Services 116 collection contains many scarce and valuable materials covering a broad range of fields, and the Latin and Greek manuscripts constitute one of the outstanding collections of its kind in the United States. The collection of Confederate imprints is one of the largest in the country. The Reserves and Media Department houses the required reading materials placed on reserve for most graduate and undergraduate courses as well as the library's audiovisual collection of films, audio and disk recordings, and video cassettes. The branch libraries serve the academic disciplines whose names they bear. The East Campus Library is primarily for undergraduate use, but it also contains the principal collections for graduate and undergraduate study in art and the performing arts . Within the Perkins Library and its branches the seating capacity is 3400. The Fuqua School of Business Library . Since being established in 1983, the FSB library provides the principal business collections and services for the University. The collection includes journals and working papers in accounting, entrepreneurship , finance, human resources management, industry studies, information science, international business, managerial economics, marketing, organizational behavior, and operations management. As of June 1988, the library houses over 14,000 volumes of books, 300 periodical subscriptions, 200,000 microforms, and a comprehensive business reference collection. The library also houses several special collections, including annual and 10K reports on microfiche, computer software, and career placement materials. The FSB library searches all major computerized databases, such as Dow- Jones News/Retrieval and over 200 databases on Dialog, BRS and NEXIS systems, which cover the spectrum of business research. The library also provides specialized services to faculty members in the Fuqua School of Business, including a journal contents alerting service and an extensive document delivery service. The library affords seating for 150 readers. Educational Support Services 117 The Medical Center Library . The Medical Center Library, located in the Seeley G. Mudd Communications Center and Library Building, provides the services and collections necessary to further educational, research, and clinical activities in the medical field. Seating is available for 576 readers. Over 234,000 volumes are available, including the Trent Collection in the History of Medicine. Approximately 2900 journal subscriptions are received currently, in addition to extensive back files of older materials. The library has several types of audiovisual materials and equipment. With the exception of certain items shelved on reserve, these materials have been integrated into the general book and journal collections and are listed in the card or journal catalogs. The Frank Engel Memorial Collection consists of a small group of books on non-medical subjects for general reading, together with several newspapers and popular magazines. Traditional reference services are supplemented by extensive use of on-line bibliographic systems and computer-produced specialized indexes . The School of Law Library . The School of Law Library, with over 370,000 volumes, serves both the University and the local legal community. It features comprehensive coverage of basic Anglo-American primary source materials, including nearly all reported decisions of federal and state courts, as well as current and retrospective collections of federal and state codes and session laws. Digests, legal encyclopedias, and other indexing devices provide access to the primary documents. A large section of the library collection is devoted to treatises on all phases of law and legal sciences, as well as history, economics, government, and other social and behavioral sciences relevant to legal research. The treatises are organized in the Library of Congress classification system and are accessible through a public catalog. Special treatise collections are maintained in several subject areas, including the George C. Christie collection in jurisprudence and the Floyd S. Riddick collection of autographed senatorial material. The library is a selective depository for United States government publications, with concentration on congressional Educational Support Services 118 and administrative law materials. The library receives the records and briefs from the United States Supreme Court, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the North Carolina Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. In addition to its Anglo-American holdings, the library holds substantial research collections in foreign and international law. The foreign law collection is extensive in coverage, with concentrations in European law and business law materials. The international law collection is strong in primary source and treatise material on both private and public international law topics. The library actively encourages computer applications in the law school curriculum. The library is a member of the CALI (Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction) Center. Law- trained reference librarians are available to assist with the location and use of legal materials and suggest research strategies . The staff now provides access to a variety of computerized information sources which complement the resources of the vast research collection. The library has over 400 spaces in carrel and table seating for library users. Record Library . The Department of Music has a record library separate from the university libraries with facilities for listening to records and tapes. All materials may be used in the listening room and any member of the community may borrow from the Arts Council Collection of more than 2,600 records for a nominal fee. University Archives . The Duke University Archives, the official archival agency of the University, collects, preserves, and administers the records of the University having continuing administrative or historical value. The institutional archives, which also include published material, photographs, papers of student groups and faculty, and selected memorabilia, are available for research under controlled conditions. As of June 30, 1987, the Archives had 6671 linear feet of records. There is seating for ten people in the reading room. During 1987-88, 1766 researchers were served in person, by phone, or by mail. Educational Support Services 119 While the Library has a superb historical research collection, its capacity to continue building the collection has declined over the last decade. During the 1970s, the Library's budget was cut even as the inflation rate for books and journals outstripped the high increase in the cost of living. The impact of this underfunding was manifested clearly in the number of books purchased. The number dropped from 109,060 volumes in 1976/77 to 78,227 in 1977/78. After ten years, the 1976/77 rate of growth has never fully recovered. The libraries have been able to forestall this decline; currently, acquisitions are holding at a steady state. Nevertheless, a recent study of the adequacy of the Library's collection growth across the broad spectrum of University programs demonstrated the need for significantly greater Library support for almost every continuing academic program. At the same time, the creation of new academic programs and interdisciplinary emphases and the recruitment of scholars of international reputation are placing new and immediate demands upon the library without corresponding supplements to the base of the Library's budget. The academic programs of the University have outgrown the capacity of the Library to support them. The Library also faces new agendas as it attempts to preserve the intellectual content of its increasingly brittle paper collection and as it automates new components of its operations. 5.2 CENTER FOR ACADEMIC COMPUTING For a contemporary university, extensive computing resources are essential. At Duke, the Center for Academic Computing is the organization that works in partnership with members of the University community to enable them to achieve their goals through computing. The Center for Academic Computing provides access to a variety of computing facilities and services. Through Duke's connection to the National Science Foundation data network, faculty and students can get access to an IBM 3090- 600S at the Cornell National Supercomputer Facility, a Cray X-MP/48 at the Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center, and in 1989, to the Cray Y-MP at the North Carolina Super computing Center. Mainframe service for the Duke academic community is provided on an IBM 3081 computer at the Triangle Universities Computation Center (TUCC) located in the Research Educational Support Services 120 Triangle Park. TUCC is a regional computer center formed and operated jointly by North Carolina State University at Raleigh, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Duke University. Minicomputer service is provided by departmentally-owned systems, including Digital and Sun equipment, and by three AT&T 3B-15's operated by the Center for Academic Comput ing . Access to these supercomputer, mainframe, and minicomputer systems is provided by campus facilities connected by telecommunications links. These include public clusters of AT&T 4425 terminals located on the West, East, and North campuses. In addition, anyone with a personal computer, modem, and telephone line can connect to these computers by dialing into a central dataswitch. Printing services are available through four medium speed printers located on East and West campuses, and TUCC printing can use the high speed Xerox 9700 laser printer located in the North Building. The Center for Academic Computing also supports extensive personal computer services located throughout the campus. There are three laboratories of MS-DOS based personal computers housed in the North, Engineering, and Carr buildings, and nine public clusters of both MS-DOS and Apple Macintosh personal computer systems spread throughout the University. All laboratories and clusters are equipped with either dot matrix or laser printing facilities, and several are connected to the campus telecommunications network. While there is a nominal charge for the use of the laser printers, there is no charge for the use of the personal computers . Funds for using TUCC come from outside grants and contracts and from University funds. Several schools within the University, such as the Arts and Sciences and Engineering may apply for funding designated for use at TUCC. Faculty within these schools automatically have access to a TUCC account. Graduate students in these schools may apply for a TUCC account. Any student may request a free account for electronic mail services. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that as a major private institution for instruction and research, Duke University is behind the Educational Support Services 121 times with regard to campus -wide use of information technology. The University has yet to make a strong institutional commitment to modernizing and networking its computing resources. Anecdotal information indicates that a number of prospective students in the sciences and engineering have already begun to favor other universities over Duke due to minimal access to automated tools and computer-aided instruction. Faculty have begun to realize the handicaps which limited computing environments can impose on research activities. There is an urgent need for increased staffing, funding, and equipment in computing at Duke University. In addition, an institutional commitment which provides an atmosphere of support and cooperation for computing endeavors among the campus community is crucial. Historically, the Library has been fully funded through the academic budget. Academic Computing, however, was established as a cost recovery operation, charging various University constituents for computing services. This cost recovery system was effective in the 1960s and 1970s when most of the data processing activities centered around large mainframe machines and computing was used by a select group of scientists with grant money. Now that most faculty and students are dependent on computing for their scholarly work, it is time to review the appropriateness of this policy. In response to these concerns, plans are currently being drafted In support of the following objectives: increasing undergraduate student access to computing, providing more widely-available computing for faculty, establishing a campus-wide data network, and developing basic principles for on-going funding of academic computing. A campus-wide data network is particularly critical if Duke is to achieve its goals in the areas of interdisciplinary teaching and research. Such a network would create an entirely new medium for intellectual exchange, involving students, faculty, and administration. Timely action to establish a campus -wide network will enable Duke to take advantage of the latest developments in research and to regain its position in the forefront of computing technology. It will create new possibilities for collaboration between faculty in disparate disciplines, for communication Educational Support Services 122 between students and faculty, and for better internal communications among all sectors of the campus . Electronic information will change the way in which one does research. In 20 years, desk-top computers or scholar workstations will be fundamental tools for gathering and communicating information in electronic form within universities. To remain a leading research and instructional university over the next twenty years, Duke must soon establish and fund a plan for information technology. Introduction of such learning and teaching technology as the scholar's workstation in the coming years at Duke is important to ensure that the faculty and students have access to this powerful research tool. Failure to manage and offer this new technology would have dire results. Students would not attain access to up-to-date methods of instruction and communication. Faculty would not be able to compete for research funding effectively. Ultimately, Duke's ability to attract and keep the best students and faculty would be put in jeopardy. 5.3 INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT Great libraries and comprehensive computer facilities may be the backbone of a modern university, but a bit of the heart and soul can also come from smaller and less well-known sources. At Duke a variety of instructional supports adds a richness to the educational experience that cannot be overlooked. These include the Art Museum, the Duke Press, Duke Forest, the Greenhouse, a rich array of cultural events and offices, and the Gothic Bookshop. Duke University Museum of Art , located on East Campus, contains extensive collections of Medieval sculpture and stained glass, pre-Columbian exhibits including textiles, and African art. Western galleries are devoted to American and European paintings and sculpture, drawings and prints, and Greek and Roman antiquities. The Far Eastern gallery includes Chinese jade and porcelain. The museum, which sponsors a full schedule of special exhibits and programs, is open six days a week. There is no charge for admission. Educational Support Services 123 The new museum director is attempting to increase the museum's visibility, particularly among alumni. Current plans include increasing the current annual acquisition budget of $160,000 and opening new galleries. Also in the planning stage is a new museum building, possibly to be located on the Central Campus . Duke University Press , founded in 1921 and located on East Campus, publishes scholarly books in the humanities and social sciences, as well as policy studies, regional and trade books and textbooks. The Press published 62 books during 1987-88. It also publishes 14 journals, including the South Atlantic Quarterly , which was first published in 1902 and is the second oldest humanities journal in the nation. Recently, a challenge grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities has enabled the Press to begin its own endowment. The Duke Forest , established in 1931, covers 8300 acres in the north central Piedmont. It serves as a natural outdoor laboratory for Duke and neighboring universities. The forest is managed by the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies for multiple uses, including education, research, timber production and the protection of wildlife and rare plant species. Roads and fire trails are open to visitors for hiking, running, and horseback riding. The Botany Greenhouse facilities cover more than 12,500 square feet, and house the most diverse collection of plants under glass in the Southeast, comprising more than 2500 different species from many environments . Cultural Affairs at Duke are characterized by a broad scope of the performing, visual, and literary arts with more than 500 events presented each year by students, faculty, and community talent as well as professional artists and touring companies. World -renowned artists such as Isaac Stern, Kiri te Kanawa and Mstislav Rostropovich give the Duke Artists Series star quality, as do the dramatic offerings brought by the Broadway at Duke Series, including "I'm Not Rappaport" and David Brenner. Pre -Broadway tryouts such as Neil Simon's premiere of "Broadway Bound" have Educational Support Services 124 caused great excitement on campus, as the actors participate in workshops and classes during the run of the production. Chamber music is highlighted by Duke's own resident Ciompi String Quartet and augmented by such touring groups as the Tokyo and Julliard String Quartets. The film program is extensive. Campus groups offer a broad opportunity for student participation with the Duke Symphony, Wind Symphony, Collegium Musicum, Collegium Vocale, Jazz Ensemble, Chorale, Chapel Choir and Modern Black Mass Choir. A varied dramatic fare is provided by the Duke Players, Hoof'n' Horn, and Karamu. Dance is covered by the Dance Program and Dan Black. Cable 13, a student -funded closed circuit TV station, transmits events across campus . The Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture , established in 1983, strengthens Duke's commitment to foster an appreciation of the heritage of black Americans. The Center features an art gallery, library, and lounge. The Center sponsors speakers on diverse topics such as feminism, hunger, and poverty in an effort to bring black and white students together to talk and learn. Jazz great May Lou Williams was an Artist- in-Residence at Duke. The Gothic Bookshop . While all universities offer textbooks, supplies, and souvenirs, Duke recently make a large-scale commitment to the scholarly side of campus life by greatly increasing the size and scope of the Gothic Bookshop, which stocks an impressive collection of quality books and journals. The bookshop also has a lounge with cooking facilities for receptions . 5.4 STUDENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 5.4.1 Advising The academic quality of a university is not only a function of the quality of its faculty, students, and learning experience, but it is also a function of the academic advising and support available to its students. Duke's long-recognized commitment to advising recognizes the fact that the curriculum of individual students is more than just a shopping list. While faculty give great care to structuring the general requirements of a Educational Support Services 125 curriculum, the final product is the result of the selection of individual students . Advising offers students the opportunity to discuss their choices with an informed "educational consultant." Without advising, many students are not able to make informed choices and take advantage of the best a university has to offer. Without structure and professional support, programs such as study skills and career development resources, many students are not able to develop to their full potential. Advising is the cornerstone of the Arts and Sciences academic support system. The current Pre -Major Advising Center for freshmen and sophomores and its closely related activities are recognized by national standards as being one of the most successful in the nation. Staffed with more than 100 pre-major advisors, the Center guided more than 2500 students this past year through the crucial formative years of their Duke education. In 1985, the Undergraduate Faculty Council of Arts and Sciences endorsed the concept of the "Long Range Plan," a device to encourage students to consider the whole range of programs offered by Duke and to think about their undergraduate careers as a whole; this process now begins in the Pre-Major Center with the first freshman semester. The success of the entire Pre-Major program may be seen clearly by the fact that the number of General (undecided) majors has increased from 1695 in Spring 1982 to 2568 in Spring 1987. As noted in Chapter Four, students are simply choosing to stay in the Pre-Major system longer, and, interestingly, are sampling more courses and disciplines before declaring a major. Advising following the declaration of a major is provided by the academic department. The quality of that advising, while high, is nonetheless the single most frequently cited criticism of advising at Duke. At present, for example, there are departments which, because of exceptionally high numbers of majors, cannot provide adequate faculty advising to every major. Moreover, in departments where there is adequate advising, it is often done at extreme cost in faculty time. Currently, this problem seems most acute in some of the social science departments with the larger numbers of majors, such as Psychology. Even with an advising system that has been copied by excellent schools throughout the Educational Support Services 126 country, there is still a need to increase the number of faculty advisors so that better and more personalized counseling can be provided. Many Duke students want assistance in improving their already substantial learning skills. A student arriving on campus with SAT scores ranking among the nation's highest may still lack critical skills in areas such as time and stress management, reading and note- taking, and effective writing. The freshman year at a university such as Duke can also represent the first time a student has encountered a large group of intellectual peers. In 1981, the University addressed these needs by establishing the Academic Skills Program. Operating with a modest budget and a small instructional staff, this program has enhanced students' learning abilities through a series of non-credit courses and workshops as well as individual conferences . The Academic Skills Center has a steady clientele of between 80-90 students who use its services at least once a week. The Duke program, unlike programs at many other universities, is closely linked with academic courses, providing students with highly individualized assistance. As a result, not only have the grades of the students who have participated in the program improved, but there is evidence to suggest that the skills program contributes to the University's unusually high retention and low failure rate. Even with the already substantial academic support services provided them, an increasing number of students want and need real academic support in particular courses. Institutions with which Duke compares itself, such as Stanford and Pennsylvania, offer university-based and university- funded tutoring programs to all undergraduates. At Duke, however, until 1986, tutoring was provided, for the most part, only by selected departments and for a fee paid by the student. There has been a modest tutoring program for athletes and minority students, but its services were available to less than 5% of the undergraduate student population. In 1986, with the endorsement of ASDU and a grant from the Duke Endowment, a pilot peer tutoring program was launched to provide Educational Support Services 127 supplemental academic assistance in specified courses at no cost. The disciplines of chemistry, computer science, economics, mathematics, and physics were targeted because of high student demand. At the end of the program, the tutors speculated that only 12% of their students were in serious danger of failing the course in which they were receiving tutoring, fewer than half the number earlier in the semester. In addition, some 28% of the students estimated that they had improved one grade level, and 14% reported that they had advanced two grade levels . Reviewing the results of this exploratory effort, an advisory committee has now recommended that Duke attempt to provide such tutoring opportunities for all students, and this peer tutoring program was expanded into a University program for 1987-88. Through the years, there has been active at Duke a Placement Service as a liaison between the University community and potential employers in business, education, non-profit organizations, and government. Reportedly, 90 percent of the students using the Placement Office are successful in finding employment. Appropriate advice for career selection or information on the numbers of students who select educational options such as graduate school has, however, remained relatively dispersed among the academic departments and the several offices which provide career and placement services (see Chapter Four). The University currently recognizes the real need for a well- coordinated career development effort and one well integrated with the academic sector. Such an interest in this whole arena of career development reflects the philosophy that what students pursue in their future life may well be considered and planned for, through advising and alternative paths of learning, from the earliest days of their college careers . Duke, then, sees advising as an integral part of the academic life of the University. It has great strength in its Pre -Major Center and has made significant strides with the introduction of the student Long Range Plan, the Academic Skills Center, and the University Tutoring Program. Problems remain to be addressed in the area of upperclass advising and of central concern to the University and students alike is the coordination and enhancement of career development services . Educational Support Services 128 5.4.2 Student Government. Activities and Publications Associated Students of Duke University . The Associated Students of Duke University (ASDU) is responsible for articulating undergraduate student thought on issues relevant to the University and for working to improve the educational process and University environment. The working philosophy of ASDU is that students have the right to participate in the University's decision-making process on matters that directly affect the student body. The Executive Committee is responsible for the implementation of all legislative action and for the coordination of the organization. It consists of the President, four Vice-Presidents (Executive, Student Affairs, Academic Affairs, and Engineering), an Executive Secretary, an Administrative Secretary, and additional members appointed by the President. The ASDU legislature is composed of representatives from each undergraduate living group on campus, representatives of students living off campus and on Central Campus, and representatives selected from the entire student body. Within the legislative branch, there are four committees (Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, External Affairs, and Buildings and Grounds) which initiate legislation and projects to benefit the student body. Another legislative committee, the Student Organizations Committee, is responsible for allocating the student activities fee paid by each undergraduate to various chartered clubs and organizations. ASDU provides several services that directly benefit the student body. They include a legal assistance program, voter-registration drives, a file of typists, a maternity and abortion loan fund, a ride/rider board, a student check cashing service, and a peer course counseling night. Cultural and Social Organizations . The scope of the more than three hundred student organizations is suggested by a partial listing of their names: Alpha Phi Omega service fraternity, Black Student Alliance, Baptist Educational Support Services 129 Student Union, Cheerleaders, International Association, Duke Ice Hockey, Outing Club, Sailing Club, Model United Nations Club, Photography Group, and the N.C. Public Interest Research Group. Twenty-one national social fraternities and thirteen national sororities are represented on campus. They are governed by the Interfraternity and Panhellenic Councils, respectively. Many opportunities are provided on campus in the areas of music and drama. The Chorale, Modern Black Mass Choir, Chapel Choir, Wind Symphony, Marching Band, Symphony Orchestra, and Collegium Musicum are examples of musical organizations. Duke players perform established and experimental drama; Hoof 'n' Horn presents musical comedy; Karamu performs drama related to the black experience. Several academic departments sponsor organizations and programs for students with special academic or professional interests. There are over twenty academic department majors unions on campus. There are also academic and leadership honorary societies. Media . The Duke Chronicle , the campus newspaper, publishes five issues weekly and is governed by the Chronicle Board. A humor magazine ( Jabberwocky ) . a literary magazine (Archive), a topical magazine ( The Missing Link ) . a feature magazine ( Tobacco Road ) . a humanities review (Eruditio) , a science magazine ( Vertices ) . and the Duke Journal of Politics are published on a regular basis by students. In addition, a Teacher-Course Evaluation Book and a comprehensive yearbook, the Chanticleer , are produced each year. The DukEngineer . the official student magazine of the School of Engineering, appears twice each year and contains articles on technical and semi-technical topics as well as other matters of interest to the school. These publications are under the direction of the Publication Board, which chooses the editors and business managers and reviews and approves the financial budgets of all such franchised publications . Educational Support Services 130 WXDU 88.7 FM is the student -managed and programmed radio station, broadcasting to the Duke and Durham communities. Duke Union Community Television (Cable 13) is operated by students and produces color television programs broadcast throughout the campus on the University cable system. Physical Education . The physical educational program at Duke is the backbone of the school's recreational activities. Although no major is available, over 40 theory and activity courses are offered to develop a high level of fitness and proficiency in sports that can be played throughout a person's lifetime. Students can take advantage of two gymnasiums, three pools, thirty- seven tennis courts, dance studios, a large recreation building for basketball and other sports, a golf course, a pro-turf track, an indoor track, modern weight rooms, a demanding cross-country course, and acres of athletic and recreation fields. Each campus has its own tennis courts, gym, studios, and pool. A near-constant stream of joggers flows along the tree-lined Campus Drive linking East and West Campus, and many runners take to Duke Forest. Committed to providing quality facilties for its varsity athletes as well as the entire student body, Duke has spent nearly $10 million on facility improvements in the last decade. The most recent additions are a revolutionary athletics complex that houses the football program, a weight room and a training center for all athletes, an addition to the East Campus gym, and two artificially-surfaced athletic fields for use by varsity, club, and intramural sports. Intramurals and Club Sports . Intramurals play a significant role in Duke life, bringing together groups from a variety of living situations, organizations, and other interest groups. Duke sports clubs are an increasingly popular part of the athletic scene, too. Inspired and operated by students, club sports provide avenues for athletic competition both inside and beyond the University. Graduate students, faculty members, Educational Support Services 131 and University staff may join one of Duke's 34 clubs, which run the gamut from badminton to rugby, frisbee to sky diving, karate to swimming. 5.4.3 Residential Life Every undergraduate admitted to Duke as a freshman is guaranteed, under published regulations, four years of university housing. The University provides this unusual opportunity in order to foster personal and cultural growth through the development of small communities in which living and learning are integrated. Duke recognizes that a student's life away from the classroom can be a vital part of the educational process; the very nature of the Duke student body, one of the most diverse in the nation, enriches the residential experience. The University strives to provide a full range of alternative living situations. Approximately 77% of Duke students live in residence halls located on the main campuses. An additional 12% reside in the University's Central Campus Apartments, a modern complex located between East and Vest campus. The apartments accommodate approximately 750 undergraduates along with 250 graduate students. This facility is part of the undergraduate lottery space, and an assignment to the apartment complex satisfies the University's guarantee to provide eight semesters of housing. A brief walk from Central Campus Apartments brings one to any campus area. There are free University buses that link the entire campus area, including the apartments . Freshmen are required to live on campus and may choose co-educational or single-sex dormitories clustered in several residential areas. Vithin co-educational dormitories, individual wings or floors are divided by sex in order to allow for privacy. Following the freshman year, students are free to seek housing in co-educational or single-sex residence halls on East or Vest campus or to move to the Central Campus Apartments. The upperclass housing is assigned in one of three ways. Independent living groups have their spaces filled Educational Support Services 132 by a general housing lottery. Selective living groups such as fraternities choose their members (sororities are not residential) . Commitment houses select a third of their new members from among those who have made application to enter, with the remaining two- thirds assigned through a lottery of all remaining applicants (students who apply make a commitment to the stated and approved goals of the living group) . Within all residence halls, students are assigned single, double, or triple rooms . Room selection in upperclass residences is based on seniority. Students may also choose to live off -campus. Duke is flanked on several sides by residential neighborhoods which attract a large student population. Dining . Duke offers undergraduates five meal plans and eighteen different places to eat. Among the options are full -service restaurants, all -you- can- eat cafeterias, snack bars, a soup and salad bar, a pizza delivery service and a convenience store. Students need not carry cash, paying instead with a "Duke Card" deduction from a prepaid plan. On-campus students must participate in at least the minimum plan. 5.4.4 Religious Life Duke is a pr ivately- supported university, though United Methodist-related. The importance of the spiritual dimension is expressed in the University motto, "Eruditio et Religio", and in the prominent position given the Duke Chapel at the center of the main campus. Interdenominational services are held each Sunday morning in the Chapel which seats up to 1700 people. The services are open to all members of the Duke and Durham communities and offer excellence in preaching, music (the choir is made up of 150 vocalists, most of whom are students), and liturgy. Among those who have led worship in the Duke Chapel are Paul Tillich, Reinhold Niebuhr, Billy Graham, and Bishop Desmond Tutu. Educational Support Services 133 The Chapel is open seven days a week. A large number of students meet regularly in the building for fellowship, Bible study, and prayer. The Chapel is also the scene of varied programs of music and other arts. Responsive to Duke's plurality of religious interests, University ministers work with Roman Catholic, Jewish and Protestant denominational campus chaplains. Students seeking to attend services in their particular faith can do so either on or off campus. No form of religious participation is required of Duke undergraduates. 5.4.5 Student Services The University provides undergraduates with numerous outlets for counseling and support. All freshman residence halls are staffed by trained resident advisors who offer personal, social, and administrative assistance. Additional advising is available to all students through the pre-professional advising system. Student Life . The Office of Student Life is responsible for advising individual students regarding personal and judicial problems. It develops the orientation programs for freshmen and transfer students and serves as advisor to the Interfraternity and Panhellenic Councils. The office works with the Freshman Advisory Council (FAC) , which is composed of upperclass men and women who are assigned to a small group of freshmen and who, during orientation prior to fall and spring classes, welcome their groups and help acquaint them with the University. The Office of Student Life also works with the Transfer Committee, is responsible for scheduling all parties or events on campus, assists handicapped students, and coordinates the student health and student insurance policies. Educational Support Services 134 Counseling and Psychological Services . The multidisciplinary professional staff of Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) gives students a comprehensive, coordinated range of options designed to help them cope and grow. The clinical social workers, psychiatrists, and psychologists of CAPS are experienced in working with young adults . A policy of strict confidentiality is maintained. CAPS services include: brief individual counseling/psychotherapy, career and educational planning, and couples and group counseling. CAPS Career Library contains a wide selection of vocational and educational resource materials to assist students in choosing a career or graduate or professional program. Services are covered by the student health fee. Office of Minority Affairs . Minority students, who comprise approximately 15% of the student body, may secure assistance through the Office of Minority Affairs . Services include tutoring through the Tutorial Program in mathematics, chemistry, and physics as well as individual and/or group counseling through the Counseling in Academics and Social Affairs (CASA) program. Placement Services . Duke undergraduates interested in exploring career options prior to the senior year can turn for help to the Office of Placement Services. The liaison between the University and potential employers, Placement Services assists seniors looking for challenging permanent employment and coordinates on-campus recruitment by employers and graduate or professional schools. About 75% of Duke seniors establish placement files and utilize the office's services which include seminars given throughout the year in resume writing and interviewing skills. The vast majority of students willing to invest an appropriate amount of time and effort secure career-related positions by commencement. Educational Support Services 135 Medical Care . The Student Health Service dispenses medical care and advice to Duke students who visit the Student Health Services Clinic in the Pickens Building on West Campus and the University Infirmary on East Campus. Emergency transportation can be obtained through the Duke campus police. Students are provided outpatient services and routine laboratory and x-ray examinations in the clinic for the treatment of acute illness or injury. Students may be sent to the University infirmary to convalesce. In cases requiring further medical assistance, the resources of the Duke University Medical Center are available. A separate mandatory fee is assessed for the Student Health Service. Students or their insurance plan must pay for treatment received elsewhere in the Medical Center. 5.4.6 Financial Aid It is no secret that tuitions at the most prestigious private colleges and universities have risen steeply in recent years. Less well publicized, however, has been the equally steep increase in financial aid offered by these institutions. At Duke, where tuition is still below the level of the Ivy League schools, there has been a 56% increase in tuition since 1983 (based on the rate for continuing Arts and Sciences students; see Table 5.1). Financial aid during this period has risen by 44% and the percentage of undergraduates receiving aid has increased from 33% to 39%. Even more notable, perhaps, has been the shift in the sources of financial aid. As Table 5.1 shows, in 1983 44% of financial aid monies came from Duke while 47% came from the federal government. In 1988, the picture is dramatically different with Duke contributing 54% and the federal government only 33%. Clearly, the burden of financial aid has been placed upon the University. It will be a major challenge for Duke to continue to meet the financial needs of all the students that it admits. Educational Support Services 136 Table 5.1. Financial Data. 1983 Tuition Undergraduate Graduate $ 6,700 6,700 1988 Tuition Undergraduate : Arts & Sciences continuing $ 10 ,600 new 11 ,950 Engineering continuing 11 485 new 12 570 Graduate 7 800 Expenses Room and Board Books, personal expenses, fees 2,768-3,872 1,316 Expenses Room and Board Books, personal expenses, fees 4,081 1,712 Undergraduate Financial Aid Undergrads receiving 33% aid Freshmen receiving 37% aid College work- study 22% students Total Under- $11,355,478 graduate aid Undergraduate Financial Aid Undergrads receiving 39% aid Freshmen receiving 40% aid College work- study 19% students Total Under- $16,320,085 graduate aid Financial Aid Sources University $ 3,831,987 34% Gifts 1,303,000 11% & Endowment State 400,000 4% Scholarships U.S. Govt. 986,000 9% Grants Govt. Loan & 4,327,581 38% Work- Study Other 507,000 4% Total $11,355,478 Financial Aid Sources University $ 6,402,507 39% Gifts 2,488,000 15% & Endowment State 868,983 5% Scholarships U.S. Govt. 1,040,836 6% Grants Govt. Loan & 4,392,511 27% Work- Study Other 1,126,752 7% Total $16,320,085 Educational Support Services 137 5.5 INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS Duke is a member of the Atlantic Coast Conference, an organization of eight universities from Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, which is widely recognized as the nation's top league in basketball and soccer and among the best in many other sports. Appropriately, the Duke Blue Devils frequently rank among the college elite in basketball and soccer. All of the University's men's and women's varsity sports strive for athletic excellence without compromising the integrity of a Duke education. During the last decade over 85 percent of Duke scholarship athletes in football and basketball have graduated on time, a rare accomplishment among universities striving to remain competitive at the highest levels of intercollegiate sports. In fact, Duke has for several years running been either first or second among members of the College Football Association in graduation rates. The majority of Duke's varsity sports remain open to non- scholarship athletes, providing athletically-talented students an opportunity to participate on an intercollegiate level. Even the men's basketball and football teams welcome "walk-ons"; a defensive back who came to Duke recently on an academic scholarship wound up as a starter and a member of the ACC's all-academic squad. Many Duke teams and individuals qualify for competition at the national and international levels. A number of Olympians, All -Americans , and a host of conference champions have emerged from men's teams in baseball, basketball, fencing, football, golf, lacrosse, soccer, swimming, tennis, track, and wrestling; and from women's teams in basketball, fencing, field hockey, golf, swimming, soccer, tennis, track, and volleyball. The football stadium, named after Wallace Wade, a former Duke coach and member of the Football Hall of Fame, was recently renovated, as was the baseball stadium. A combination soccer-lacrosse stadium seating 9000 has been added within the last few years. Educational Support Services 138 Cameron Indoor Stadium seats 8564 for basketball and plays a special part in campus life. "There's no other place like Cameron Indoor Stadium because the intensity that's developed between the students and the team is unbelievable," notes Duke men's basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski. As a result of the basketball team's appearance in the 1988 NCAA Final Four, the University received more than $800,000. One quarter of that amount will go into a recently-established endowment for women's athletic scholarships, while the remainder will be used, in conjunction with private gifts, to fund on-going renovations at Cameron. CHAPTER SIX ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES 6.1 ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION The Board of Trustees . The Board consists of 37 members and has vested in it as a group the final authority for the operation of the University. It regularly meets four times a year, but may call special meetings. Its Executive Committee acts for the Board between meetings and normally convenes six times each year. The Board elects from its membership a chairman and vice-chairman and organizes itself into both standing and ad hoc committees. The former include the Executive Committee, the Academic Affairs Committee, the Medical Center Affairs Committee, the Business and Finance Committee, the Building and Grounds Committee, the Student Affairs Committee, and the Committee for Institutional Advancement. Both standing committees and ad hoc committees may undertake other such functions as are delegated to them by the trustees. However, in all cases the powers and duties of committees are subject to the direction and approval of the Board. President . As chief educational and administrative officer of the University, the President is responsible to the Board of Trustees for the supervision, management, and government of the University, and for interpreting and carrying out the policies of the Board. The President, or someone designated by him or her, presides at meetings of the University faculty. Under the bylaws, the President, after giving his or her reasons, may overrule the decisions of the faculty. He or she is also responsible for recommending to the trustees persons to hold the other offices of the University. Administrative Processes 140 Provost . The Provost is an executive officer of the University, responsible for all educational affairs and activities, including research. His or her powers and duties are assigned by the President, and he or she reports to the President. The Provost is a member of the faculty of each college and school, and ex-officio a member of each committee (other than committees of the Board of Trustees) or other body concerned with matters for which he or she is responsible. The Provost also receives recommendations developed by the faculty and educational officers for consideration by and recommendation to the President. Executive Vice-President and University Counsel . The Executive Vice-President and University Counsel is responsible for all business and finance, including accounting and auditing, preparation of budgets, fiscal planning, and operating of services of the University, as well as all legal matters which pertain to the University or Medical Center. Chancellor . The position of Chancellor had been vacant since H. Keith H. Brodie became president of Duke in 1985. As of July 1, 1988, the position has been reactivated in order to fill two important roles: oversight of external and international affairs and fund-raising and development. Chancellor for Health Affairs and Dean of the Medical School . As chief executive officer in the area of health affairs under the President and Provost, the Chancellor for Health Affairs and Dean of the Medical School is responsible for the operation of the Medical Center. Reporting to him or her are the Deans of Medical Education and the School of Nursing; the Vice-President for Health Affairs; the Assistant Vice-President for Health Affairs-Development and Alumni; and the department chairs. Vice-President . The Vice President directs the Capital Campaign for Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering, and augments institutional development and related fund-raising activities on behalf of the University. Administrative Processes 141 Vice-President. Planning and Treasurer . The Vice-President for Planning and Treasurer is responsible for overseeing the University's long-range planning, as well as several treasury functions such as bond financing, banking relationships, loans, insurance, real estate administration, and the bursar's office. Vice-President for Student Affairs . This vice-president is responsible for the various non-academic aspects of student activity and welfare together with such other powers and duties as are assigned by the President. He or she reports to the President. Vice-President for Alumni Affairs and Development . This vice-president has responsibility for university development and alumni affairs and reports to the President. Vice-President for Information Systems . The Vice President for Information Systems is responsible for the full spectrum of computing activities at the University, including instructional computing, research computing, health care systems, administrative data processing, advanced office systems, and local area networking. Vice-President for Health Affairs . The Vice President for Health Affairs is responsible for the operation of the Duke Hospital, including provision for personnel policies and practices, written plans for the implementation of financial policies and practices, and sufficient and timely data for use in program planning and evaluation. Vice-President and Corporate Controller . The Vice-President and Corporate Controller is in charge of all accounting for the University. Reporting to him or her are the university controller, the hospital controller, and the director of sponsored programs. Vice-President and Director of Athletics . The Vice-President and Director of Athletics is responsible for oversight of all intercollegiate athletic and physical education programs within the University. Administrative Processes 142 Secretary . Under the direction of the President, the Secretary maintains the official records of the University. He or she is also Secretary of the Board of Trustees and of the general faculty. 6.1.1 Academic Organization Each college and school of the University has its own faculty, which in each case includes the President, the Provost, and the Secretary. Undergraduate Education . Almost all undergraduate education is contained in Trinity College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering. The only exception is a baccalaureate degree program in health sciences. Each college and school is administered by the dean who is responsible for the academic affairs of her or her area. Faculty of Arts and Sciences . This body is composed of the Dean of Arts and Sciences and Trinity College and of the members of the faculty whose Academic Council constituencies are the humanities, social sciences, or natural sciences. Faculty of the School of Engineering . The School of Engineering faculty is composed of all members of the University faculty who hold a primary or secondary appointment in the school. Faculty of the School of Nursing . This group is composed of the Vice-President for Health Affairs and the Dean of the School of Nursing, and faculty members holding ranked appointments in the School of Nursing. Graduate Education . The Graduate School is administered by the Dean who, with the advice of the Executive Committee of the graduate faculty, is responsible for coordinating the graduate offerings of the various departments of Arts and Sciences, the non-professional degree programs of the professional schools, the basic science departments in medical and allied health education, and certain professionally oriented graduate programs as well. The faculty of the Graduate School, which is represented Administrative Processes 143 by the Executive Committee, consists of those members of the general faculty who have been designated by their departments and approved by the Dean. In departments, schools, and programs where graduate degrees are offered, the Dean of the Graduate School appoints a director of graduate studies who works closely with the Graduate School and the graduate students in his or her area. Professional Education . Each of the seven professional schools at Duke University has a separate faculty and academic administration, and is administered by a dean who is the chief administrative officer of the school . The Divinity School . The Divinity School is administered by the Dean. The faculty is composed of the Dean and all full-time members of the faculty. The School of Engineering . The Dean and four department chairs are responsible for the administration of the Engineering School. The academic programs offered in the School are determined by its faculty. The School of Forestry and Environmental Studies . The Faculty Council of the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, consisting of the Dean and four other faculty members, develops recommendations in the areas of planning and long-range policy. The School of Law . The policies affecting the admission of students, curriculum, and academic standards in the School of Law are vested in its faculty. The Dean appoints faculty members to the standing and ad hoc Law School committees. Medical and Allied Health Education . The faculty is composed of the Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President, the Dean of Medical Education, and the Chief Executive Officer of Duke University Hospital, in addition to the faculty members in constituent instructional groups including health administration, physical therapy, physicians' assistants. Administrative Processes 144 and other allied health programs. All medical and allied health programs are administered by the Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President with the advice from the appropriate department committees. The Dean of Medical Education is jointly responsible to the Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President and the Provost for all academic activities associated with education exclusive of the School of Nursing. He or she is charged with deciding on medical student admission policies and procedures, curriculum content, and the educational activities and teaching facilities of the Medical School. The Dean is also concerned with maintaining consistency between University and Medical School academic policy. The School of Nursing . The faculty of the School of Nursing is composed of the Dean of the Medical School/Executive Vice-President, the Vice-President and Chief Executive Officer of Duke Hospital, the Dean of the School, and all members of the faculty holding academic appointment. 6.2 INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT 6.2.1 Alumni Affairs Alumni affairs at Duke are coordinated by the Office of Alumni Affairs. Among its many activities is the bi-monthly publication of the Duke magazine. For the fourth year in a row, the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education named Duke magazine one of the nation's top 10 university magazines. The University supports a General Alumni Association as well as individual alumni associations for Divinity, Engineering, Fuqua School of Business, Forestry and Environmental Studies, Health Administration, Law, Medicine, Nursing, Physical Therapy, and the Physician Assistant Program. Duke Alumni clubs may be found across the United States (see Table 6.1 for the geographic distribution of Duke alumni) . Number Percent 16,365 22.2 14,397 19.4 4,354 5.9 20,817 28.2 6,837 9.2 9,766 13.1 1,465 2.0 Administrative Processes 145 Table 6.1. Duke University Alumni - Geographic Distribution, Region North Carolina South & Southeast New England Northeast & Middle Atlantic Midwest West & Southwest Foreign TOTAL 74,001 100.0 In the area of fund-raising, the Duke Annual Fund is currently marking its 40th anniversary. Contributions to the Annual Fund in 1987-88 exceeded $6.5 million and came from more than 26,000 alumni. 6.2.2 Publications Bulletins of Duke University . The bulletins of Duke University series consists of eleven distinct titles, each describing a separate academic program or set of programs. Editorial and production responsibilities for the bulletins lie in the Bulletins Office which reports to the Office of the Provost, although the separate schools are responsible for revisions and distribution. Undergraduate Instruction (annual) . Includes undergraduate course descriptions, financial aid information, and other University policies of interest to undergraduates as well as information pertaining to summer educational programs. Marine Laboratory (annual) . Describes programs and courses available to upperclass and graduate students, admissions requirements, and general information about facilities in Beaufort, North Carolina. Information for Prospective Students (annual). Provides basic information about the various undergraduate schools in the University, their admissions requirements, financial aid policies, and general characteristics of residential life. Information and Regulations - Undergraduate Colleges and Schools (annual). Identifies people, offices, and services at Duke University. It also includes University policies and judicial codes. Of particular interest to members of the faculty are the sections on student records and plagiarism. Administrative Processes 146 Bulletins of the Graduate School and each professional school are issued annually. Each describes course offerings and requirements for graduation. The titles of these bulletins are as follows: Graduate School Graduate School -- (short form) The Divinity School The School of Forestry and Environmental Studies The School of Law The Medical School Fuqua School of Business. General Publications . Among the more notable general publications are the following: Duke Dialogue . The Duke Dialogue is a newspaper published by the Office of University Relations for Duke faculty and staff, which provides information about current Duke research, scholarship, university news, and calendar. It is published weekly during the academic year and biweekly during the summer. Duke University Faculty Handbook . This handbook, revised in February 1988, contains vital information for faculty such as policies of appointment, promotion, and tenure; professional affairs of the faculty; research grants and consulting policies, University organization and bylaws, ethical standards; and statistical and organizational charts. Duke University Policy Manual . This publication, updated periodically, includes policies that encompass all areas of the University. Faculty Benefits Handbook . This handbook is revised periodically by the Faculty Compensation Committee, which is appointed by the President. It contains a description of faculty benefits pertaining to such items as hospital care, life insurance, social security, and retirement. Also included are checklists of procedures for new faculty members and for faculty members going on leave. Staff Benefits and Policy Handbook . This handbook describes benefits for professional employees in the University who are neither members of the faculty nor covered by the Federal Wage and Hour Law. Administrative Processes 147 Personnel Policy Manual . This is a comprehensive listing of University policies and regulations that govern employees under the Federal Wage and Hour Law. Supervisor's Handbook . This handbook alerts the supervisor to the essential policies and procedures he or she should know in order to work effectively as a supervisor at Duke University. The Financial Report . A summary of revenues by source and expenditures by type is contained in the report. Copies of these and other publications are available for the inspection of the Visiting Committee. Journals published by the Duke University Press include American Literature , quarterly. Published in cooperation with the American Literature Section of the Modern Language Association of America. It is regarded as the leading periodical in its field. Duke Mathematical Journal , quarterly. An international journal dealing with all aspects of mathematics. Ethnohistory . quarterly. The official journal of the American Society for Ethnohistory. Emphasizes the joint use of documentary materials and ethnographic data, as well as the combination of historiographic and anthropological approaches, in the study of social and cultural processes and history. Hispanic American Historical Review , quarterly. Published in cooperation with the Conference on Latin American History of the American Historical Association. History of Political Economy , quarterly. Deals with the development of economic analysis and its relation to intellectual and social history. Journal of Health Politics. Policy and Law , quarterly. Focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy. Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies , semi-annual. An interdisciplinary journal discussing the transition from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. Journal of Personality , quarterly. Deals with scientific investigations in the field of personality. Social Science History , quarterly. Presents innovative research by historians, sociologists, anthropologists, political Administrative Processes 148 scientists, and demographers, providing an interdisciplinary forum for longitudinal analyses and studies with consciously theoretical orientations. Social Science Computer Review , quarterly. Established in 1982 to meet the needs of social scientists interested in acquiring and sharing research and teaching applications of microcomputing. South Atlantic Quarterly , quarterly. A humanities review, publishing essays of current interest in literature, history, politics, and the arts. Other journals published by Duke University are: Duke Law Journal , six times a year. The Duke Law Journal follows the American law school tradition of student -managed legal publications, forming an integral part of the storehouse of scholarly writing in the profession. Each issue includes articles by law teachers and practitioners, as well as writings by selected students, on matters of current interest in the field. Greek. Roman, and Byzantine Studies , quarterly. An international journal devoted to the Hellenic tradition from antiquity to the end of the Byzantine Empire, GRBS publishes scholarly articles on every aspect of the Greek world; its literature and language, philosophy and religion both classical and Christian, art, archaeology, and history. The staff also publishes two supplementary series: Greek. Roman, and Byzantine Monographs and Greek. Roman, and Byzantine Scholarly Aids . Law and Contemporary Problems . quarterly. Each issue is devoted to a particular topic of current interest explored from legal and other relevant disciplinary perspectives. 6.3 FINANCIAL RESOURCES 6.3.1 Financial Planning A fundamental premise of the planning process at Duke is that maintaining the status quo is not an option. An institution not seeking to improve will inevitably decline. Certainly other premier universities are not standing still. Most importantly, a status quo approach would not be in keeping with Duke's history or character. Administrative Processes 149 Although not every item in Duke's future plans requires additional funding, it is clear that implementation of a prioritized version of the plan will create pressure on the University's resources. The plan may well require economies, consolidations, and reallocations among current activities in order to enable Duke to sustain its momentum towards improving the quality of the educational and research programs. A general discussion of Duke's financial options is in order to consider how the University might coordinate its financial strategy with its academic strategy. The University has four basic sources of revenue: tuition, endowment income, research grants and contracts, and gifts (see Table 6.2). While each source plays a somewhat different role within the overall picture, the four are intimately interrelated. Changes in one area necessarily have implications for the others. Duke needs to consider what possibilities are afforded by each source, and what latitude might be available at different times. An examination will reveal that there is latitude in certain areas and, at least for the present, constraint in others. A strategy is needed that will produce the revenue to start implementing the essential core of the plan while preserving the long-term balance among the University's sources of revenue. One area where significant revenue growth is constrained in the short term is endowment. Because of the erosion caused by inflation and other factors in the 1970s and early 1980s, it is both necessary and prudent for the University to rebuild the endowment for the future (see Section 6.3.2). The financial equilibrium policy adopted by the Board of Trustees in September 1985 is intended to accomplish that aim. The policy means essentially that the spending rate applicable to permanent endowment funds is to be reduced gradually from the 9.7% rate that was utilized in 1984-85 to an equilibrium point of 5.5% of the permanent endowment's market value. The spending rate in 1986-87, for example, was reduced to 7.7% and the anticipated spending rate for 1987-88 will be 7.5%. Once the spending rate is brought down to 5.5%, the annual change in permanent endowment revenue will parallel changes in the permanent endowment's market value as Administrative Processes 150 influenced by new gifts and market conditions. For the time being, however, endowment income is constrained. Fund-raising activities do influence the overall size of the endowment. Because the Capital Campaign (see below) funds are going into the endowment, and because there is both a time lag for the payment of pledges and for the use of endowment income once received, again their effect on current operating funds will primarily be felt over time. Other gift income, such as foundation grants and Annual Giving, is already increasing at a favorable rate; these constitute an important, although not large, percentage of the overall University budget. Table 6.2. University Income and Expenditures (excluding Duke hospitals) Income Tuition and Fees University Endowment Gifts, Grants and Contracts Auxiliary Enterprises Other % 1 of Total 1982 1987 22 24 6 8 54 43 14 13 4 12 Expenditures Instruction Student Services General Administration Libraries Plant Operation and Maintenance Scholarships, Fellowships and Grants -in- Aid Sponsored and Separately 17 17 Budgeted Research Auxiliary Services 15 14 Other 11 13 30 31 2 2 4 4 4 3 8 6 9 10 Administrative Processes 151 The University's research enterprise has the potential to become a highly significant source of increased revenue for a number of reasons. As described in Chapter Four, the faculty already has momentum in this direction. While there should be some natural growth in research revenue, significant change can only be brought about through investment in the research infrastructure. Selective addition of faculty is also necessary, because in certain key areas Duke lacks the critical mass of faculty to be competitive. Duke is at a point where large dividends from research can be expected in a relatively short period if action is taken now. This will position Duke to increase revenues in the future. It should be emphasized that for the most part steps taken to invigorate the research enterprise -- new facilities and equipment and additional faculty -- are entirely consistent with the steps that need to be taken to meet Duke's objective of providing the best undergraduate program at a research university. Duke has two sources of funding that provide some latitude to meet the academic plan objectives. The first source is tax-exempt financing of equipment and facilities, an alternative only made available last year by the voters of North Carolina. Tax-exempt financing should enable Duke to move quickly to take advantage of the changing currents of research funding as well as to enhance the overall academic and social life of the campus with improved facilities, while deferring payment to match revenues achieved through this incremental improvement. The plans for financing facilities and instrumentation are already under way. Tax-exempt bonds provide a lower cost alternative for debt financing that comes at a critical juncture for Duke. Pressure on Duke's physical facilities is great, and outdated equipment and instrumentation must be replaced. Bonds, then, provide one part of the two-part strategy. The final source of revenue, tuition, is another area where Duke appears to retain some flexibility in the short term. A careful strategy has been developed to take advantage of that flexibility in order to allow Duke to accomplish the objectives identified through the academic planning process. Administrative Processes 152 First, it is necessary to consider Duke's standing vis-a-vis the external environment. Within the world of private research universities, Duke's tuition charges are relatively modest, as noted in Chapter Four. Of course, comparisons with other institutions should not be the major factor in deciding where Duke's tuition should be. Duke must set its tuition based on its own objectives and in light of other revenues available while maintaining a competitive market position. Nevertheless, the foregoing examination of revenue sources shows that tuition is a source with some degree of flexibility for Duke at this particular point. The challenge is to develop a strategy to take advantage of this flexibility in a careful, reasoned manner that will sustain Duke's momentum and that is coordinated with expectations for other revenue sources . For Duke's long-term viability, the priorities should be rebuilding both the endowment and the research infrastructure. Tuition should be used to improve academic quality and help Duke become more competitive for research dollars. A short-term tuition strategy, then, can be used as a bridge to a longer term future where endowment and research investment dividends will be realized. One appropriate tuition strategy is to be found in a mechanism already well understood at Duke: differential pricing. Students in Engineering, for example, pay higher tuition than students in Trinity College to reflect the higher costs of engineering education. Each professional school has its own tuition rate. In the current situation, the concept of differential pricing means that for a short period each successive entering undergraduate class will pay higher tuition than the class preceding it. Once enrolled, tuition increases for that particular class would be held to the amount necessary to sustain the level of service for which that class enrolled. One difficulty with tuition increases beyond those required to keep pace with inflation is the question of fairness to students already Administrative Processes 153 enrolled. The differential pricing method now in place addresses this problem. Only the tuition increase required to keep pace with the increase in general university costs is applied to rising sophomores, juniors, and seniors. Incoming freshmen, however, pay a higher amount and will only be subject to inflationary increases during their stay at Duke. This approach has also been used successfully by the Medical, Business, and Law schools. It is a way of adjusting tuition without forcing burdensome increases on students already enrolled. It is fair to students applying, because they will reap the greatest direct benefits from the enhancements and will be apprised of the tuition without being subjected to unpredictable increases. It is beneficial to all students because the increased funds will be used to enhance their educational experience and the overall academic quality of the University. Under this plan, after an appropriate phase- in period the differential tuition policy will be phased out and a unified tuition across classes could be reinstituted. The limit on the level of overall tuition increase will be set to retain a competitive market position. A period of five years could be suggested because the endowment spending policy will then be closer to the projected 5.5%; greater annual increases in endowment income could then be expected. It is also reasonable to expect that in five years substantial dividends from the investment in research should be realized. Finally, the major impact of the Capital Campaign should be felt by then. As these other revenue sources begin to increase in this fashion, pressure on tuition will decrease accordingly. 6.3.2 Financial Resources In this section, three major financial resources of Duke University are briefly summarized - the University Endowment, the Duke Endowment, and private gifts and contracts. Administrative Processes 154 Endowment. The Duke University Endowment, as of 30 June 1987, was $363,706,000. This figure represents the market value excluding life income funds. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education . Duke ranks 27th in size of endowment. As Table 6.3 makes clear, however, Duke's endowment is relatively small in comparison to most of its peers - 19 of the "Group of 24" have endowments that are larger, 12 by a factor of two or more. Duke's low rank among private universities may be attributed to several factors, including modest size and relative youth, but it is also a function of relatively slow growth over the past ten years, a time when some university endowments grew rapidly. Since 1978, Duke's endowment has grown by 200%, while the endowments of schools such as Rice (236%), Notre Dame (293%), Southern Methodist University (327%), Washington University (421%), and Princeton (431%) have grown much faster. The Duke Endowment . The Duke Endowment is a perpetual trust established by James B. Duke in 1924. The Endowment provides assistance to not-for-profit hospitals and child-care institutions in North and South Carolina; rural United Methodist churches and retired ministers in North Carolina; and four educational institutions: Duke, Furman, and Johnson C. Smith universities, and Davidson College. The assets of the Duke Endowment in 1987 were $771,871,787, making it one of the nation's largest foundations, and 1987 grant payments totaled $40,905,415, the 11th largest sum of any foundation. Duke University receives a minimum of 32% of the distributions of income from the Duke Endowment (which, despite the popular misconception, is not generated by tobacco, but by hydroelectric power). Private Gifts and Contracts . A third major financial resource for Duke is private gifts and contracts. For 1986-87, the total cash flow (excluding pledges) was $73,563,708, a substantial increase over the 1982-83 total of $36,099,454 (see Table 6.4). Administrative Processes 155 Table 6.3. 30 Largest University Endowments 1978 1987 1. Harvard University $1,392,600,000 $4,018,270,000 2. University of Texas System NA 2,828,000,000 3. Princeton University 431,800,000 2,291,110,000 4. Yale University 544,900,000 2,098,400,000 5. Stanford University 527,500,000 1,676,950,000 6. Columbia University 294,800,000 1,387,060,000 7. Texas A&M University System NA 1,214,220,000 8. Washington University 230,500,000 1,199,930,000 9. Mass. Institute of Technology 447,600,000 1,169,740,000 10. University of California NA 1,122,160,000 11. University of Chicago 278,500,000 913,600,000 12. Rice University 255,400,000 857,155,000 13. Northwestern University 303,600,000 802,670,000 14. Emory University 175,900,000 798,549,000 15. Cornell University 265,500,000 725,096,000 16. University of Pennsylvania 160,000,000 648,528,000 17. University of Rochester 321,700,000 556,908,000 18. Rockerfeller University NA 542,765,000 19. Dartmouth College 158,600,000 537,272,000 20. Johns Hopkins University 186,100,000 534,809,000 21. Vanderbilt University 119,400,000 508,522,000 22. New York University NA 503,957,000 23. University of Notre Dame 116,000,000 456,099,000 24. Calif. Instit. of Technology NA 408,946,000 25. Univ. of Southern California 114,500,000 401,171,000 26. University of Virginia NA 396,329,000 27. DUKE UNIVERSITY 121,000,000 363,706,000 28. Brown University 96,700,000 347,520,000 29. Case Western Reserve Univ. NA 341,160,000 30. Southern Methodist Univ. 70,500,000 301,732,000 Administrative Processes 156 Table 6.4. Voluntary Support to Education, FY 1986-87. Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18* 19 20 Institution Total f$M) Stanford $198.5 Harvard 177.9 Cornell 149.7 Yale 120.6 Univ. Minnesota 116.3 Washington Univ. 110.4 Columbia 104.6 MIT 101.4 Johns Hopkins 92.6 Southern California 91.2 Princeton 90.8 Univ. Wisconsin-Madison 88.1 Univ. Pennsylvania 87.2 Univ. Illinois 84.0 California Instit. Tech. 80.3 Univ. Washington 77.6 Univ. Chicago 74.9 DUKE 73.5 Ohio State Univ. 64.7 Univ. Michigan 61.2 Source: Council for Financing Aid to Education Administrative Processes 157 Summary of University Income and Expenditures . The sources of income and categories of expenditure may be seen in Table 6.2 for the years 1982 and 1987. Because many of the categories used to report University Income and expenditures have changed from 1982, current comparisons are approximate. Nevertheless, it is notable that in two constant categories, library and plant operation and maintenance, expenditures have declined at a time when the need for increased expenditures is great, a point already made in Chapter Three. 6.3.3 Fund Raising In addition to the Annual Fund described earlier, Duke University is in the midst of a major long-term, fund-raising effort: the Capital Campaign for the Arts and Sciences (see Table 6.5). The Capital Campaign, launched in 1985, has been a remarkable success almost to the same degree as the Annual Giving effort. However, the campaign, now at $118M toward its initial $200M goal, has not been widely perceived as successful, at least when superficially compared with similar campaigns elsewhere. The reasons for this misconception are basically two. The Arts and Sciences Campaign has been frequently and erroneously compared with campaigns at other universities which have not been restricted solely to endowment for the Arts and Sciences. For example, data published in the Chronicle of Higher Education compare Duke's Arts and Sciences endowment campaign with those of other universities with all-inclusive campaigns at the same stage. But in this entire group of university campaigns, only one is confined to Arts and Sciences and none restricted entirely to endowment. Should Duke have taken the traditional route of an all-inclusive campaign, cash totals would now exceed $317 million. Pledges would bring the total to nearly $400 million. Administrative Processes 158 Table 6.5. Summary of the Capital Campaign for the Arts and Sciences (1984-1988) Objective New Endowment Funding for Increased Faculty Support New Endowment Funding for Graduate Fellows New Endowment Funding for Undergraduate Scholarships New Endowment Funding for Enrichment of Teaching & Research in the Arts and Sciences - For the Library $20,000,000 - For Departmental & 12,000,000 Program Support - For Centers & Institutes 8,000,000 - For Student Life 10.000.000 Amount Required $ 60,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 GRAND TOTAL $200,000,000 Administrative Processes 159 6.4 PHYSICAL RESOURCES 6.4.1 Facilities and Properties A summary of Duke's facilities and properties is presented in Table 6.6. Currently under construction are the following facilities: 1. The Washington Duke Hotel, a 172 -room facility on the site of the golf course; cost: $16 million. 2. A 126 -bed dormitory for Edens Quadrangle, West Campus; cost: $6.5 million. 3. Joseph and Kathleen Bryan Research Building to house neuroscience programs; cost: $22 million. 4. R. David Thomas Executive Residence, a 112-guest room facility with classrooms, offices, and dining rooms for the executive education programs of the Fuqua School of Business; cost: $12 million. Table 6.6. Facilities and Properties Land/Area East Campus West Campus Central Campus and other locations in Durham and Orange Counties Duke Forest Sea Level Hospital Marine Laboratory, Beaufort Acreage 108 467 1,060 8,300 2,980 15 Buildings - Main Campus Number Academic and Research Residential Administration Libraries Other: Duke Chapel, Cameron Indoor Stadium, Card Gymnasium, Memorial Gymnasium, Aquatic Center, Wallace Wade Stadium, Duke Museum of Art, Bryan Center. 51 79 19 12 Administrative Processes 160 6.4.2 Planning In 1986, the Duke Board of Trustees commissioned a study by Dober and Associates, Inc., a Massachusetts-based campus planning consultant group. The plan proposes several renovations of existing campus buildings, most notably to Old Chemistry on West Campus, as well as the construction of new buildings, including the new dormitory for Edens Quadrangle currently under way. A copy of the Dober Report is available for inspection by the Visiting Committee. The University also commissioned the Urban Land Institute to study and recommend long-term use strategies for Duke's 8,300 acres of non-campus lands. These recommendations are currently under review by the University's Land Resources Committee and the Board of Trustees. CHAPTER SEVEN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY ACTIVITY AT DUKE As the preceding three chapters have made clear, Duke is a complex and dynamic institution with a proud past and a bright future. As Duke plans for the coming decade, certain key themes seem to emerge again and again, none more so than that the traditional boundaries between academic disciplines are rapidly breaking down, creating exciting scholarly opportunities and presenting formidable administrative challenges. In this chapter the significance of the new interdisciplinary climate is described, followed by the findings and recommendations of the University committees charged with tackling this urgent problem. 7.1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE The issue of interdisciplinary teaching and research has had a long history at Duke. In fact, the occasion of this self -study of interdisciplinary activity marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the first formal interdepartmental, interdisciplinary research unit at Duke - the Marine Laboratory at Beaufort, founded in 1938. In 1955, a grant from the Carnegie Corporation established the Commonwealth Studies Center. A Center for the Study of Aging (1957), the World Rule of Law Center (1958), and the Program for Comparative Studies in Southern Asia (1961) followed. In 1965, a grant from the Ford Foundation provided additional support for programs in international studies, including the Hispanic Council, African Studies, Comparative Study of Social and Political Institutions and Systems, Professional Training, and History and Comparative Study of Ideas. Another grant from the Ford Foundation in 1965 established the Education Improvement Program, a massive research and demonstration attack on "cultural deprivation" among pre-school children in the Durham area . Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 162 The Education Improvement Program was terminated in 1970 following the expiration of its grant. Some of the international studies programs no longer exist in their original form (most of them were supported by soft money) , but the current Center for International Studies is quite vigorous to this day as is the Center for the Study of Aging, and the Marine Laboratory. As far back as the "Report of the Institutional Self -Study" in 1965, there has been considerable thought at Duke given to the unique benefits and problems of interdisciplinary activity. The Self-Study Steering Committee stated that interdisciplinary research programs such as the ones just cited "make a distinct contribution to the University's educational program." The Committee observed that individually they attracted and supported highly competent scholars, who in addition to conducting interdisciplinary research, almost always taught in their respective disciplines. Because research and teaching are so intimately related and interdependent, the Committee noted, these programs were perceived as having a positive effect on the academic program, particularly on the graduate program. Graduate students were able to secure financial aid, research supervision, and course instruction in the Marine Laboratory program, the Commonwealth-Studies Center, and the Southern Asia Program. The World Rule of Law Center regularly employed several law students as assistants. The Committee then concluded that, "In large measure, financial support for these programs has come from the federal government and private foundations. Nevertheless, the University's commitment to these and other less formally structured interdisciplinary programs continues to be heavy. "A growing federal interest in certain research areas has been noted; consequently it may be anticipated that outside support for such programs will continue to Increase. Also, it is contemplated that the Research Triangle will become increasingly important in the attraction of both funds and programs to this area." Many of these observations have been supported over the past twenty years. Several precient observations about interdisciplinary programs were also contained in the 1972 "Report of the Planning Committee." One section Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 163 of the report called for more interdisciplinary programs and courses and suggested that one promising area was comparative literature - a suggestion that has been quite successfully implemented. On a more negative note, the authors of the report also observed that an interdisciplinary course in the humanities "died even though the week-by-week syllabus had been agreed upon, because the two leaders left Duke to teach at other universities and departments showed some reluctance at releasing 'their' faculty for interdepartmental courses." This type of concern is still being articulated (see Chapter Eight) . The Planning Committee then offered the following analysis of the difficulty with interdisciplinary activity at Duke: "Interdisciplinary study is not encouraged by the existing departmental structure. There are few interdisciplinary courses offered because of a system which leaves the development of new courses almost entirely to individual departments. Faculty members rarely receive encouragement from their departments in expanding their horizons as teachers into areas beyond the disciplines in which they took their Ph.D. degrees, and the student is left to Integrate his knowledge from his selection of specific courses. "As long as faculty retention, promotion, and mobility rest largely upon research and teaching in narrow disciplines, some counterweight must be found to encourage those faculty who desire to do so to expand their knowledge and teaching into broader areas . This may well require alterations in the procedure for granting promotion and tenure, additional authority for the deans charged with undergraduate instruction, and budgets to allow goals to be carried out. " Despite these problems, interdisciplinary activity flourished, although by present standards, the number of interdisciplinary programs in existence at Duke in 1972 was rather small: Marine Sciences Aging and Human Development Demographic Studies Policy Sciences and Public Affairs History of Thought in the Social Sciences Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 164 Southern Studies Social Systems Simulation Program Medieval and Renaissance Studies Comparative Literature Genetics Black Studies Commonwealth Studies The South Asia Program Hispanic American Studies East Asian Studies African Studies Soviet-East European Studies. The Planning Committee report also contained two additional sections of interest. First, they offered several principles governing the conduct of interdisciplinary programs at Duke, which deserve to be quoted at length: "The Committee feels several principles should govern the conduct of interdisciplinary programs at Duke University. Some of these considerations are already explicit and others are implicit and might well be set forth in writing. "1. No interdisciplinary program should be undertaken unless it will clearly strengthen the academic standing of the University. This implies that it should contain a clearly identifiable program of instruction, training, and research. These programs may well have components of service to the surrounding locality, the region, the nation or the world. This is, of course, all to the good, providing that the instruction and research components are clearly visible. "2. All such programs should be under the direction of a person who is both interested and competent in the interdisciplinary area and an established scholar in at least one of the relevant disciplines. "3. Such programs should be conducted with the assistance of an advisory committee representing the disciplines which are relevant to the program under consideration. "4. No person should be named to the staff of an interdisciplinary program unless he is competent in one of the relevant disciplines and has been appointed in consultation with the department or school in which that discipline is principally represented on the campus. Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 165 "5. Programs of instruction for students in interdisciplinary concerns should assure that each student is thoroughly grounded in at least one of the participating disciplines in addition to work which may be relevant to the interdisciplinary program. "6. Such programs should generally be supported with external funds. In some cases it may be appropriate to have a small core of University support. This support should be committed for a limited term -- say, five years and then carefully reviewed before the program is extended. " Second, the Planning Committee offered a plan for review of interdisciplinary programs. Again, these passages are quoted at length: "All of the programs enumerated above are attractive and deserving of support. They must, of course, be reviewed from time to time to ensure that they are still addressing relevant problems and to assure that departments and schools give them adequate attention in the appointment, retention, and promotion of members of the faculty. It may not be possible to continue work in all of these areas, given the relatively small size of most of our departmental and school faculties. In view of the limited time and attention which the Committee has been able to devote to interdisciplinary programs, the following suggestion is made: "That the ongoing planning committee, in cooperation with the divisional council and the academic administration should review each existing interdisciplinary program. They should examine the implication of each program for the limited number of faculty positions in each Department or School, and make recommendations as to which activities will contribute most to the academic strengths of the University. As to new interdisciplinary programs, the ongoing planning committee should be involved at the appropriate time in the process of deliberation so the proposed program can be integrated with the overall plans of the University." It is not clear to what extent these recommendations were implemented. It is apparent, however, that very few interdisciplinary activities were phased out as a result of these review procedures. In fact, with the exception of the History of Thought in the Social Sciences, Southern Studies, and the Social Systems Simulation Program, all of the interdisciplinary units in existence in 1972 still exist, although some have been modified and expanded over the years. In fact, the three Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 166 programs just noted, along with two noted earlier (the Education Improvement Program and the World Rule of Law Center) , are the only formal interdisciplinary units at Duke ever to have been terminated. A search of Duke University Archive records and conversations with some of the units' participants revealed that the reason for termination in each case was loss of outside funding. Presumably Duke was unwilling or unable to continue the unit with University funds. The problems and prospects of interdisciplinary programs were raised again in the 1976 Self -Study Report. Most of the attention of the Self- Study Committee was focused upon the rationale for such programs and the factors which contribute to program success. The first passage describes the reasons for the success of the major interdisciplinary units in existence at that time. It should be noted that these units still exist, presumably a testament to the accuracy of the observations of the Self -Study committee: "As an institution Duke University has been generally conservative in the development of interdepartmental and interdisciplinary programs. The departmental structure based on traditional disciplines has been especially strong in the arts and sciences. Where significant interdisciplinary interests have emerged within the faculty, we have tended to follow the flexible approach of an interdepartmental faculty committee to guide curricular development and encourage faculty and graduate student research. The few exceptions made to this general approach have tended to occur when there were conditions of strong faculty leadership, substantial intellectual rigor, the prospects of major external funding, and vigorous support from the University administration. Four instances in which these conditions were all present have resulted in the development of new structural units within the University: two are research centers --the Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development and the Center for Demographic Studies --and two are separately organized components with both instructional and research responsibilities — the Duke University Marine Laboratory (DUML) and the Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs." Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 167 The second passage from the 1976 self-study articulates a perspective on the value of interdisciplinary activities that reflects the views of Duke faculty and administration at the present time as well: "Duke University considers these kinds of interdepartmental and interdisciplinary programs a source of creative enrichment to the regular curriculum. Over time some of these programs will survive and point the way to organizational changes in the structure of departments and schools. Others will prove to have reflected more fleeting interests and fads and again over time be absorbed into an existing department or school, though it still may have its lasting impact in helping to reorient that field of study. As the pressures for specialization in contemporary life continue to mount, we are likely to see specialization become more acute in undergraduate and graduate and professional study. The interdepartmental or interdisciplinary thrust may be a useful antidote to over-specialization for it may provide a way for some faculty and some students to knit together out of specialisms a somewhat more coherent whole. For both these reasons, then, -- enrichment and the opportunity to consider some phenomena as coherent whole units -- Duke University will continue to encourage sound approaches to interdepartmental and interdisciplinary study." This somewhat optimistic view of the state of interdisciplinary activity on the Duke campus was tempered somewhat by the following observation of the Visiting Committee: "It is suggested that the University critically examine the subject of interdepartmental programs and joint academic appointments with the view in mind of determining whether present policy inhibits the development of worthwhile interdepartment programs and joint appointments and more importantly unduly penalizes the faculty member whose academic talent and interests lie in this direction. Several academic units, both in their written self study evaluations and in interviews with the Committee consider this to be a serious problem. From the viewpoint of the Committee the most disturbing finding is that the concerned administrators feel that nothing can be done under a policy wherein academic departments are the sole judges of whether a faculty member is recommended for promotion and tenure." As will be seen in subsequent chapters of this report, such concerns are still germane. Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 168 The final "historical" document that addressed interdisciplinary issues was "Planning for the Eighties," produced in 1978. The following points were made: 1. "We need to look into the future when considering how our disciplines are organized. Traditionally, each discipline is organized within a department, although in fact some of our departments resemble a confederacy more than a single unified discipline. In the long range, we must ask ourselves whether It is necessary to have as many departments as we have disciplines or whether it may be better to combine several disciplines within a single department. Such an approach might encourage greater interdisciplinary effort, which is sadly lacking at present, as well as greater managerial effectiveness. Likewise, we should ask whether we should not have some specialists whose scholarship does not legitimately fit into any existing department. We might also inquire whether the organization of departments under divisional deans would be desirable. "Most departments are basically structured as they were when the University came into existence. We should be examining how they should be organized for the twenty-first century. We may very well conclude that we need units with a less narrow focus; that new areas of knowledge need to be explored through interdisciplinary effort and that such effort should be organized on a departmental basis; that some fields of knowledge which we have been exploring, while still valuable, are less critical to the anticipated problems of the twenty- first century than are areas which we have not yet begun to explore. 2. "We must also concern ourselves with the potential that each new appointee has for interdisciplinary involvement in the major issues likely to require investigation in the immediate future. More joint appointments across disciplines or between Duke and the University of North Carolina might be particularly useful. In short, many new appointees should have a University potential greater than that required to meet the more parochial needs of their departments if we are to develop the capacity for genuine, significant interdisciplinary efforts . " To a considerable extent, many of the themes taken up in detail by the current self-study ad hoc committees echo themes first articulated in these historical documents. The rich potential of inter-departmental collaboration, the problems of overcoming traditional departmental barriers, the need for vigorous faculty initiative and strong administrative support, are all contemporary issues as well as historical Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 169 ones. In a sense, such continuity of concerns reflects the difficult nature of these problems, but it also reflects the fact that for fifty years interdisciplinary activity has played an important role in the intellectual life of Duke University. 7.2 CURRENT SIGNIFICANCE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY ACTIVITY AT DUKE As Duke University enters the final decade of this century, the place of interdisciplinary activity in the intellectual life of students, faculty, and administrators grows ever larger. As the previous discussion has indicated, Interdisciplinary activity has been an established aspect of Duke teaching and research for a half -century . In the next half -century, however, interdisciplinary activity may well become the hallmark of Duke teaching and research. Why has the issue of interdisciplinary activity become such a prominent one at Duke? It is necessary to point out, initially, that a healthy skepticism about the ultimate value and benefits of an interdisciplinary approach exists on the Duke campus. It is not an axiom or an article of faith that interdisciplinary approaches are necessarily superior. Rather, there is an interest in fostering both traditional departments as well as interdisciplinary programs at Duke, and an appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches. A recent article from the alumni magazine of one of the nation's better colleges that captures some of this sentiment is included in the Appendix. Such cautions aside, however, interdisciplinary teaching and research presents unique opportunities for Duke University. One feature which sets Duke apart from most research universities, for example, is geography. The Duke campus is remarkable in its compactness. The Medical Center is part of the main quadrangle of Arts and Sciences buildings, the other professional schools are all on the main campus as well, and the entire campus can be crossed in an easy and quite pleasant walk. By contrast, Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 170 most other major research universities are rather spread out and many have medical schools or other major units in distant parts of town or even in other cities. Such factors are not trivial. The very nature of interdisciplinary activity necessitates interaction among people in different disciplines, an interaction that may well be impossible when colleagues are three or three hundred miles away. The physical proximity of campus buildings also allows faculty from the professional schools to be involved in the teaching of undergraduates, a most fertile source of interdisciplinary ideas. Another feature of Duke that is conducive to interdisciplinary work is the relative youth of the institution. Duke does not have the wealth or tradition that can sometimes stifle innovation. As part of a rapidly growing and changing region, Duke benefits from the constant infusion of new arrivals with new ideas about how things could be done. These ideas are rarely rejected because they clash with "the Duke Way." Duke has been a fertile ground for interdisciplinary ideas out of necessity as well. Because the University is rather small for a major research institution, it does not have the resources of faculty or equipment to achieve distinction in all areas of scholarly inquiry. Rather, Duke has been able to offer some strong programs through the development of unique interdisciplinary collaborations and joint faculty appointments. To use a pugilistic analogy, Duke can usually not stand toe-to- toe with the heavyweights and slug it out. Rather, the University has often been successful by being light on its feet. Interdisciplinary approaches have been a major reason for this success. The next three chapters of this report contain the major findings of the Self -Study Ad Hoc committees. Chapter Eight contains the findings of Ad Hoc Committee I, which describe and characterize the current state of interdisciplinary activities at Duke. Chapter Nine contains the findings of Ad Hoc Committee II, which provide a framework and some examples of future interdisciplinary initiatives. Chapter Ten contains the findings of Ad Hoc Committee III, which lays out a set of administrative structures and Significance of Interdisciplinary Activity 171 procedures for interdisciplinary activities at Duke. Finally, a summary and some conclusions about the findings of the Self-Study are contained in Chapter Eleven. CHAPTER EIGHT CURRENT INTERDISCIPLINARY ACTIVITY AT DUKE This chapter describes the activities and findings of Ad Hoc Committee I, whose mission was to characterize existing interdisciplinary activity on the Duke campus. When the Committee began its deliberations during the spring of 1987, the state of interdisciplinary activity on the Duke campus had not been examined in detail for nearly a decade. There was a general perception that interdisciplinary teaching, research, and scholarship was widespread and beneficial to both students and faculty. There was also an awareness that obstacles to interdisciplinary work existed, but the nature of these obstacles was, in general, not clearly understood. 8.1 ORGANIZATION OF COMMITTEE ACTIVITY The Committee set about the tasks of assembling information about existing Programs, Centers, and Institutes at Duke, determining whether these interdisciplinary designations were used in an appropriate and consistent fashion, and obtaining the opinions and suggestions of students and faculty through the use of surveys and interviews. As information and insights were gathered, they were passed along to Ad Hoc Committee III, which was attempting to devise the appropriate administrative structures for existing and potential interdisciplinary activities. The Committee's work proceeded through the Spring of 1988 and ultimately incorporated the efforts of nearly a score of investigators and hundreds of respondents, representing the full spectrum of activity and opinion at Duke. The work of the Committee was organized around six specific tasks. In most cases committee members were assigned to working groups or task forces, which then reported to the Committee as a whole. Ad Hoc Committee I, in turn, reported to the Steering Committee through periodic briefings by the Committee liaison and through a final presentation by the committee chair and a subsequent written report. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 173 In summary, Ad Hoc Committee I completed the following six tasks: 1. Assembled a definitive list of existing inter- disciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes at Duke. 2. Examined the rationale and the criteria for the existing use of the designations Program, Center, and Institute. 3. Conducted a survey of the entire 1744 member Duke faculty in order to determine the scope of interdisciplinary activity on campus and to assess current problems and future possibilities. 4. Conducted surveys of both undergraduate and graduate/professional students to assess their perceptions of interdisciplinary courses and research possibilities. 5. Conducted a detailed survey of all Programs, Centers, and Institutes identified by task No. 1 to gather data on history, teaching and research mission, faculty, funding sources, and so on. 6. Conducted fifteen in-depth interviews with a cross-section of Directors and other key personnel to obtain information about specific problems, challenges, and opportunities confronting interdisciplinary units at Duke. The details of how these tasks were carried out and summaries of the major findings follow in subsequent sections of this chapter. 8.2 EXISTING INTERDISCIPLINARY PROGRAMS, CENTERS AND INSTITUTES One of the first problems confronted by Committee members was the absence of any definitive list of existing interdisciplinary units at Duke. Quite literally, no one knew how many such units were on campus. A subsequent detailed search of university bulletins, catalogs, reports, and news accounts, plus the personal knowledge of numerous faculty and administrators, led to the evolution of a list of over 100 formal interdisciplinary units at Duke. This list is presented in Table 8.1. Eight basic categories more or less characterize interdisciplinary activities at Duke; three types of teaching-oriented units: undergraduate programs, graduate programs, and joint-degree programs; centers and Current Interdisciplinary Activity 174 Table 8.1. Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes at Duke University. Undergraduate Programs Film and Video Science, Technology, and Human Values Women ' s S tud ie s Twentieth- Century America Perspectives on Marxism and Society Neurosciences Afro-American Studies Medieval and Renaissance Studies Graduate (University) Programs Genetics Neurobiology Cell and Molecular Biology Toxicology Ph.D. Program in Literature a. Center for Critical Theory b. Comparative Literature Program Master of Arts in Liberal Studies Program in Pastoral Psychology Special Interdisciplinary Course (Seminar in Medical-Legal- Ethical Issues) Special Interdisciplinary Training Programs: a. Biometry and Medical Informatics Study Program b. Biophysics/Bioengineering Study Program c. Biobehavioral Study Program d. Cardiovascular-Respiratory Sciences Study Program e. Endocrinology and Reproductive Biology Study Program f. Epidemiology Study Program g. Immunology Study Program h. Infectious Diseases Study Program i. Molecular and Cellular Basis of Differentiation Study Program j . Molecular Development Study Program k. Neurosciences Study Program 1. Pathology Study Program m. Sensory Physiology and Visual Sciences Study Program Current Interdisciplinary Activity 175 Table 8.1 (continued). Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes. Joint Degree Programs Duke-UNC Program in the History of Science, Medicine, and Technology a. Medical Historian Training Program Medical Scientist Training Program (M.D.-Ph.D.) M.D.-J.D. Program M.D.-M.P.H. Program M.A. in Health Administration J.D.-M.A. Program a. Master of Arts Program in Humanities J.D.-M.B.A. Program Bachelor of Science in Engineering/Master of Science Program Centers and Research Programs Center for Judaic Studies a. Cooperative Program in Judaic Studies (Duke-UNC) Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development a. Program in Human Development Primate Center a. Program in Primatology Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture Center for Studies in the Wesleyan Tradition Program in International Political Economy Center for Resource and Environmental Policy Research Duke-UNC Women's Studies Research Center Center for Demographic Studies The Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines Indian Ocean Studies Program Center for Biochemical Engineering Center for Nonlinear Studies Center for Biotechnology Center for the Study of Depression in Later Life Affective Disorders Program Behavioral Medicine Research Center Center for Health Policy Research and Education Comprehensive Sickle Cell Center Lymphocyte Technology Center Comprehensive Cancer Center F.G. Hall Hypo-Hyperbaric Center Center for Mathematics and Computation in the Life Sciences and Medicine Center for Resource and Environmental Policy Research Center for Forestry Investment Center for the Study of Business Regulation Private Adjudication Center Center on East-West Trade, Investment, and Communication Center for Environmental Engineering Engineering Research Center for Emerging Cardiovascular Technologies Sarah W. Stedman Center for Nutritional Studies Current Interdisciplinary Activity 176 Table 8.1 (continued). Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes. Institutes Institute of the Arts Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences Summer Institute of Languages and Cultural Studies "Umbrella" Units Center for International Studies a. African Studies b. Asian/Pacific Studies Institute c. Canadian Studies d. South Asian Studies e. Center for Islamic and Arabian Development Studies f . Council on Latin American Studies g. Caribbean Studies h. Western Europe and the Advanced Industrial Democracies i. Russian and East European Studies j . Comparative Area Studies k. Hemispheric Studies Institute for Policy Studies and Public Affairs a . Center for Documentary Photography b. Center for the Study of Family and the State c. Center for International Development Research d. Center for the Study of Communications Policy e. Governor's Center f . Washington Center for Public Policy Research g. Center for the Study of Philanthropy and Voluntarism h. Leadership Program i. Program in International Development Policy j . Living History Program k. Medicine and Public Policy Program 1. Law and Public Policy Program m. Engineering and Public Policy Program Marine Laboratory (Beaufort) a. Cooperative Undergraduate Program in the Marine Sciences b. Graduate Program in Marine Sciences c. Marine Biomedical Center d. Duke/UNC Oceanographic Consortium e. Marine Sciences Education Consortium Current Interdisciplinary Activity 177 Table 8.1 (continued) Interdisciplinary Programs, Centers, and Institutes. Equipment -based Centers Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Center Cooperative Units Organization for Tropical Studies Triangle Research Libraries Network Microelectronics Institute of North Carolina Triangle Universities Computation Center Oak Ridge Associated Universities Current Interdisciplinary Activity 178 research programs (primarily research oriented); institutes; "umbrella" units that incorporate a variety of interdisciplinary teaching and research units, equipment-based centers, and cooperative units that have a large, usually shared physical resource as their focus. This categorization scheme is presented solely for heuristic purposes. No doubt a variety of other schemes could be devised. In fact, because this categorization scheme obscures the status of undergraduate programs - some are "freestanding," while others are parts of larger efforts - a separate listing of undergraduate programs is presented in Table 8.2. It would be impractical to include in this chapter a detailed description of each of the interdisciplinary work units at Duke. A separate "fact file", providing basic information about each unit, will be available to members of the Visiting Committee. What follows, instead, is a brief description of a representative cross-section of interdisciplinary units at Duke. The fifteen units described represent at least one from each of the eight basic categories described above as well as units that range from the very modest to the very complex. It is intended to provide the reader with a sense of the range and scope of such efforts and provide a context for the discussion of the Committee's five other tasks. 8.3 A CROSS -SECTION OF INTERDISCIPLINARY PROGRAMS, CENTERS, AND INSTITUTES Program in Science. Technology, and Human Values . This program is designed to lower the barriers between the "two cultures" of the physical sciences and engineering on one side and the humanities on the other. Students and faculty from these disparate fields can join together in a wide variety of interdisciplinary activities, all intended to foster communication, stimulate thought, and reduce the philosophical and Intellectual distance between the two camps. The Program, which began in 1977, is currently directed by a faculty member from the School of Engineering. Faculty are invited to participate by the Director, at the suggestion of the Program's Executive Steering Current Interdisciplinary Activity 179 Table 8.2. Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Programs Programs Offering Majors Afro-American Studies Canadian Studies Comparative Area Studies Comparative Literature Medieval and Renaissance Studies II. Programs Offering Certificates Institute of the Arts, to begin in 1989-90 Film and Video Genetics Human Development Judaic Studies Neurosciences Perspectives on Marxism and Society Science, Technology, and Human Values Women's Studies III. Programs Offering Neither Majors Nor Certificates Marine Sciences (University Program; Beaufort) Primatology Twentieth-Century America (Freshman First Semester Only) Current Interdisciplinary Activity 180 Committee. There are no formal appointments made in the Program. Trinity College provides the funds for the Program; there is no allocation of space or secretarial- technical staff. At the heart of the Program is a matrix of courses from which undergraduates can make selections to qualify for an endorsement on their transcripts certifying participation in the Program. More than 50 professors in 18 departments offer over 50 courses related to the themes and purposes of the Program. These range from Aesthetics, Design, and Culture to Philosophical Issues in Medical Ethics. To qualify, undergraduates take any five of the courses (four for engineering majors), in addition to a senior seminar taken during their last two semesters. The seminars are taught jointly by two or more faculty members on topics ranging from health care technology to preserving natural resources. The Program also sponsors special events. Summer courses are offered on topics like history of nuclear energy and themes in contemporary science and technology. Symposia and conferences are sponsored or supported by the Program: for example, STEP '82, a three-day conference on science, technology, ethics, and policy focused on genetic engineering, population control, and health care. Seminars explore socially responsive careers in the sciences, engineering, public policy, and medicine. Guest speakers are brought to campus for formal presentations, less formal meetings and discussions with faculty and students. Similarly, faculty and students attend outside meetings and conferences to represent the Program and bring back new ideas and information. The goal of all program activities is the greatest possible cooperation among disciplines and exposure to new perspectives . Center for Judaic Studies . The Center for Judaic Studies offers a full range of courses in Judaic civilization. Participating departments and programs include religion, Germanic languages, comparative literature, political science, international studies, anthropology, and women's studies. In addition, courses may be taken at UNC-Chapel Hill where additional courses are offered under the rubric of the Cooperative Program in Judaic Studies. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 181 The Program in Judaic studies is largely focused on undergraduates who may earn a certificate in Judaic studies after taking any four courses, or who may major in Judaic studies under Program II, an optional course of study in which students design their own majors. Some students may also choose to concentrate on Judaic studies within the context of a religion major; such students are also eligible to receive a certificate. A full range of courses is available in classical and modern Hebrew as well as in Yiddish. Students desirous of further language training or specialization may elect to pursue their studies in Israel during their junior year at a Duke -approved program. Duke regularly sponsors its own summer program in Israel and over 600 students have participated in it to date . There are approximately six full-time faculty members who teach courses in Judaic studies. Several others teach related courses in Hebrew Bible, Hebrew language and literature, and Yiddish language and literature. In addition, Duke's library has one of the finest collections of Judaica in the South. Both the Center and the Program are currently directed by a member of the Religion Department faculty. Institute of the Arts . The Institute of the Arts offers interdisciplinary courses in the arts, drawing together faculty and students from the several arts departments and programs, and bringing in guest artists to supplement university faculty. Activities of the Duke Dance program are also coordinated by the Institute, although a separate major in dance has been developed. The Institute has a Director whose appointment is as an Artist- in-Residence at the Institute. Nearly 40 faculty have appointments as Fellows. These faculty have their primary appointments in a wide range of university departments, including English, Art and Art History, Music and Psychology. These faculty appointments are awarded by the Director with the advice of a personnel committee. Members of the Ciompi Quartet and the American Dance Festival faculty have appointments as Current Interdisciplinary Activity 182 Artists-in-Residence , which are not tenure track appointments at Duke. Most of the Institute's funds come from grants and corporate gifts, although the University provides funds for the salaries of the Director and a secretary. The Institute is committed to defining a broader role for the professional artist as a resource for the entire university community. Artists-in-residence are brought to campus to participate in classes, to give workshops, to perform and create, and to work with students individually and In groups. An undergraduate certificate program in the arts is currently being developed. In addition, each Fall the Institute offers a one-semester residency program in New York City for selected undergraduates with a particular interest in the arts. The Duke in New York Arts Program combines study at New York University with a seminar taught by the resident Duke faculty adviser, an independent study project designed by the student, and an internship with a professional artist or arts organization. The Institute is particularly interested in encouraging inter-arts activities involving collaboration among the various art forms. A graduate program with this emphasis is now being developed, and opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in inter-arts activities are available in special classes and workshops, as well as during the Inter-Arts Festival each Spring. In addition to its instructional activities, the Institute sponsors festivals, events, and symposia designed to enrich campus cultural life. Each Winter, the Institute produces the Winterfest of Contemporary Arts, a month- long period of exhibitions, concerts, readings, and other programs showcasing the new creative work of university artists and guest performers. The goal of Winterfest is to bring Duke students into contact with the art of their own time, and with the creators and performers of that art . Current Interdisciplinary Activity 183 The Institute coordinates an annual Arts Festival designed to focus attention on a different theme each year. Past festivals have focused on abstract expressionism and the art of the Fifties, the arts of the Indian Ocean region, modernism in art and thought, and women in the arts. The topic in 1987-88 was science, technology, and the arts. Women's Studies Program . Women's studies brings together faculty and students from many disciplines who share an interest in studying women's experiences and who incorporate ideas and information about these experiences into research, teaching, and learning. Women's studies encourages students to question and reinterpret existing literature and to include women and women's perspectives in the new interpretation. Women's studies at Duke offers courses that are cross-listed in numerous departments, including anthropology, English, history, political science, psychology, public policy, religion, and sociology. Over 70 courses are offered through women's studies, many of which also fulfill other curricular requirements. The Program offers a certificate in women's studies that represents an area of concentration. To earn a certificate, students take five women's studies courses: "An Introduction to Women's Studies," one course on gender roles, two courses that focus on women, and one course on women in relation to other aspects of culture and society. Students who earn the certificate can also earn honors at graduation in women's studies by writing an honors thesis with the supervision of a women's studies faculty member. In addition to courses and the certificate, The Women's Studies Program sponsors other co-curricular programs on campus, including lectures, films and discussion groups. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society , one of the foremost journals in women's studies, is currently edited at Duke; the Signs editorial staff and the Women's Studies Program staff share office facilities, thereby providing additional resources for women's studies students and faculty members . Current Interdisciplinary Activity 184 Women's Studies is an extremely active program, with 56 affiliated faculty and many students and visitors involved regularly. The affiliated faculty have their primary appointments in the various University departments; the Program itself cannot grant primary appointments. The Director of the Program has an adjunct appointment in the Department of Political Science. Participation by all groups has grown steadily throughout the first three years of the program. The Women's Studies Advisory Committee, composed of faculty members, administrators, and students, addresses policy issues. The newly formed National Council for Women's Studies, composed of 22 Duke alumnae, including Juanita Kreps , Secretary of Commerce under the Carter administration; Eleanor Smeal, president of the National Organization for Women; and Judy Woodruff, chief Washington correspondent for the MacNeil-Lehrer Newshour, works toward the development of resources and increased visibility of the program on the Duke campus and nationwide. Master of Arts in Liberal Studies . The Master of Arts in Liberal Studies (MALS) Program is designed to provide adults in the Research Triangle community who may have had a narrowly focused undergraduate program or who have been away from an academic setting for a number of years, the opportunity to return to a master's program to study the liberal arts. The part-time program is designed specifically for this population and is interdisciplinary in nature, intellectually rigorous, and flexible enough to meeting scheduling demands of professional adults. The MALS program began in 1984 with a group of 24 students. Funds for course development, staff, and promotion were provided by grants from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education and the Duke Endowment. The only other source of funding has been tuition revenue. The program has had increasing enrollments every term with current enrollment at 88. Medical Historian Training Program . Conducted under the auspices of the School of Medicine and the Graduate School, this program requires a minimum of six years of graduate study for the M.D.-Ph.D., and four or five years for the M.D.-A.M. The M.D.-Ph.D. program is intended for those Current Interdisciplinary Activity 185 students who know that their major career effort will be in teaching and other scholarly activities in the history of medicine (not necessarily to the total exclusion of clinical medicine). The M.D.-A.M. on the other hand, is appropriate for those who are undecided, but who wish to acquire a firm foundation for future study, or for those who are seriously interested in pursuing an avocation in the history of medicine. Applicants must meet both the requirements for admission to the School of Medicine and to the Graduate School in the Department of History. The Director of the Program holds both the M.D. and Ph.D. degrees and has faculty appointments in the Departments of History and Pediatrics. University Program in Genetics . The University Program in Genetics serves as a focus for faculty members and students from a number of departments in which the study of genetics is pursued at Duke University. The program coordinates courses, conducts a seminar series, and gives support and counsel to students working toward the Ph.D. degree under program faculty in any of the several departments represented. From courses, research, and seminar experiences, the student acquires competence both in genetics and in another particular field of interest. There is a strong emphasis on laboratory research. The faculty currently includes members of the Departments of Physical Anthropology and Anatomy, Botany, Biochemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, and Zoology. Collectively they have expertise in developmental genetics, immunogenetics , population genetics, organelle genetics, human genetic diseases, and many areas of biochemical, bacterial, viral, and molecular genetics. A strong background of related disciplines is represented in the various departments, and students have many opportunities to acquire both breadth and depth. Admission to one of the biological sciences departments is a prerequisite to participation in the Genetics Program. The Program itself does not admit students. In 1988 a new Department of Genetics was established at Duke as a focus for what has become a discipline in biological sciences. Nevertheless, the Genetics Program will remain a healthy interdisciplinary graduate program crossing departmental lines, including that of the new Genetics Department. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 186 The Graduate Program in Literature. The doctoral Program in Literature has as its goals the education of men and women who will be fully qualified to teach in departments of national literatures as well as in Humanities and other interdisciplinary programs. The Program is not comparatist in the traditional sense but theoretical in focus, dedicated to the understanding of cultural history and the reshaping of literary studies in the context of contemporary thought. Given the immense social and geopolitical changes that have occurred in the last few decades, affecting the organization of the traditional disciplines, and challenging Western aesthetic values by global concerns, what has been traditionally called "literature" is no longer a stable concept. Not only the canons of approved works but the very nature of the literary text as an isolatable or aesthetic object has been seriously brought into question. Readers of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal , and other national publications have no doubt seen numerous articles recently about these controversial issues, with prominent references to Duke's faculty in the Literature Program and the participating Department of English. The Duke Program acknowledges the challenges posed by the emergence of non-Western literatures and also by the increasing importance of non-canonical, "marginal" or oppositional cultures within the West. Courses also register the increasing significance of new media such as film and their accompanying theories, as well as the need to reconceive the relationship between verbal and the non-verbal arts such as painting and music. Students are also able to explore the connections between literary study and innovations in other disciplines - anthropology, psychoanalysis, linguistics, sociology, and law. Four members of the Program faculty, including the Director, have a primary appointment in the Program, as well as a joint appointment in either English or Romance Languages. Nearly 20 other Duke faculty have secondary appointments in the Program or are otherwise affiliated with it, representing the Departments of English, Romance Languages, Germanic Languages and Literature, and Classical Studies. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 187 To ensure the visibility of its students in the profession, the Duke Program aims to provide each student with teaching experience in the literature or language of concentration. The Program aims above all to provide stimuli for critical and independent thought in a flexible instructional environment. Its academic goals are supplemented and enhanced by the recently-founded Duke Center for Critical Theory, which offers annual conferences, special brief seminars and lectures by international scholars and thinkers. Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences . The Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences, inaugurated in 1986, coordinates teaching and research in statistics and decision theory at Duke. It offers various courses in basic statistics and advanced mathematical statistics. The research emphasis on statistical decision theory in the Institute leads to its offering a variety of courses, at various levels, in applied game theory, applied decision theory, and Bayesian analysis. There is no undergraduate major in statistics. The Institute maintains and runs a Statistical Consulting Center which provides help on statistics problems and projects for members of the Duke community. The Institute has four faculty members with primary appointments in the Institute. Approximately 60% of Its funds are obtained from outside sources . Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development . Long before "aging" became a topic of conversation and a national concern, far-sighted academic and administrative leaders at Duke documented and understood the implications of an aging population. These leaders sponsored a University Council on Aging in 1955 to promote and coordinate interdisciplinary research, training, and service throughout the University. In 1957, the United States Public Health Service designated Duke as one of five regional resource centers on aging. Today, the Duke Center is the only survivor of the original five and continues to serve as a national resource for information and as a training ground for future generations of research investigators, teachers, practitioners, and planners. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 188 The Center supports a large number of internationally-recognized research efforts, including the landmark longitudinal studies completed in 1980. Basic and applied geriatrics research coordinated by the Division of Geriatrics utilizes a consortium of clinical sites, including hospitals, outpatient clinics, long-term care facilities, and clinical research and evaluation units. The Division also collaborates with the Durham Veterans Administration's Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, one of 10 such centers in the United States. The Center does not offer degree programs, but does offer a broad range of educational and training opportunities, including post-doctoral work in adult development and aging, which attracts 12-15 Ph.D.s and M.D.s each year, and an undergraduate certificate program in human development in cooperation with the Department of Psychology. The Center supports a wide range of service programs as well, including the Geriatric Evaluation and Treatment Clinic, the Older Americans Resources and Services Program, and a family support program for the victims of Alzheimer's disease. The Center collaborated with the Duke Office of Continuing Education to develop the Institute for Learning in Retirement. In this innovative, self -financing program, older adults are both teachers and students in programs they design. In the domain of outreach programs, the University Council on Aging and Human Development, which serves as an advisory group for the Center, presents an annual seminar series open to the public on current issues in research and public policy of relevance for aging. More than thirty years after its founding, the Duke Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development has emerged as an international leader in its field and a tribute to the vitality of interdisciplinary work at Duke University. Comprehensive Cancer Center . All of the diseases that bear the name cancer have one feature in common: one cell goes awry, proliferates destructively and if it is not controlled, ultimately kills. The Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center (DCCC) is dedicated to finding out why the cell goes awry, how to control it, and how to bring it back to a state of order. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 189 The DCCC was begun in 1971 when the U.S. government started the "war on cancer". It was one of the first group of Cancer Centers chartered by the National Cancer Institute and remains one of just 20 federally-recognized comprehensive cancer centers and is the only center between Washington, D.C. and Birmingham, Alabama. The faculty of the DCCC is comprised of nearly 200 physicians and research scientists. Each faculty member also has a primary appointment in one of the Medical Center basic sciences or clinical departments. In addition, the newly-created Section of Cell Growth Regulation and Oncogenesis will enable the Cancer Center to make up to seven tenure -track, primary appointments. The concept of a Section, a newly- instituted administrative mechanism at Duke, is described in Chapter Ten. The faculty have at their disposal excellent facilities, including the Edwin A. Morris Clinical Cancer Research building, a four-story building specifically for the treatment of cancer patients, and the Edwin L. Jones Cancer Research Building, which has 74 laboratories for basic cancer research. The Cancer Center Isolation Facility is a special containment lab where scientists work with potentially dangerous bacteria, viruses, and chemicals without risk to themselves or their environment. It is the largest facility of its kind in the world. More than 3000 new patients are seen annually at the DCCC. About 80 percent come from North Carolina, the rest from the Southeast, and, in some specialities, from all over the nation. Marine Laboratory . The Marine Laboratory, Duke's first major interdisciplinary unit, was founded in 1938 by Arthur S. Pearse. The lab is situated on fifteen acres of Pivers Island, within the Outer Banks of North Carolina and adjacent to the historic town of Beaufort. The Marine Laboratory has experienced considerable growth since 1938 and today operates year-round to provide training and research opportunities to about 3000 persons annually, including undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in the Laboratory's academic programs, visiting Current Interdisciplinary Activity 190 student groups who utilize the laboratory's facilities, as well as scientists who come from North America and abroad to conduct their own research. The Marine Laboratory is an interdepartmental training and research facility of Duke University, and as such, operates under the policies, procedures, and regulations of the University. The 15 resident faculty represent the fields of biochemistry, ecology, developmental biology, geology, oceanography, physiology, and systematics. Most of the faculty members, including the Director, have their primary appointments in one of the Duke departments; others have appointments as Research Professors. The modern physical plant consists of twenty-three buildings, including four dormitories and six research buildings. The Marine Lab is also the home of the Oceanographic Consortium, which operates a 135-foot oceanographic research vessel, the R/V Cape Hatteras . Designed as a coastal zone research vessel, the ship operates both on the Continental Shelf and in the deep sea between Nova Scotia and the Caribbean. The ship is a member of the academic research fleet supported by the National Science Foundation for the purpose of providing oceanographic research opportunities to investigators. This consortium consists of Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, North Carolina State University, UNC- Wilmington, and East Carolina University. The Lab also incorporates the Marine and Freshwater Biomedical Center, supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, with the objective of promoting research in the marine sciences relevant to problems of environmental health. This past June, a two-day celebration marked the 50th anniversary of the Marine Laboratory. Scientists from across the country gathered to discuss marine research and pay tribute to this pioneering interdisciplinary effort. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 191 The Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs . In 1971, Duke University pledged its resources to the study and improvement of public policy by creating the Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs. This commitment was made in direct response to a growing, nationwide concern regarding the inadequacies of governmental decision-making and the inability of American higher education to respond to public policy problems . Today, the Institute has become one of Duke's most comprehensive and successful interdisciplinary units. Within the Institute, the Department of Public Policy Studies offers a rigorous interdisciplinary, liberal arts major for undergraduates. The professional graduate degree program concentrates on policy analysis and public management. The graduate curriculum contains course sequences on economics, politics, evaluation methods, budgeting, and management. The program includes workshops and internships to integrate the various course sequences and to provide students with practical experience. A number of research centers devoted to the study of particular policy areas foster greater faculty involvement in and student awareness of a broad range of policy issues. The Center for the Study of Communications Policy regularly brings outstanding journalists from around the world to Duke University to study and teach. The distinctive Leadership Program examines models of leadership and allows students leadership experiences under the tutelage and monitoring of professionals. With the recent addition of several international policy scholars, the Institute is taking the lead on yet another front. The new Center for International Development Research brings an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the policy concerns of less developed countries. The public policy movement began with an emphasis on domestic issues and the Institute's Governors Center continues that tradition. This center hosts several governors each semester and develops case studies on the management problems governors face. The Governors Center also sponsors Current Interdisciplinary Activity 192 executive education programs for mid-level managers from southeastern states and an annual seminar for chiefs of staff from throughout the country . The diversity of the research centers reflects the variety of academic disciplines and policy issues represented by the faculty. Through its faculty research and its alumni contributions, the Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs has a positive influence on current and future policy formulation and implementation. Center for International Studies . The University's Center for International Studies coordinates and supports a wide array of research and teaching activities on international issues in Arts and Sciences and the professional schools. Faculty associated with the Center come from diverse disciplines and reflect a wide range of intellectual interests. Their primary bond is a concern with peoples, events, movements, and institutions outside the United States; relations among nations; and activities and institutions in the United States that affect the rest of the world. The functions of the Center are to provide focus, structure, and support to the research efforts of associated scholars and to serve as a catalyst for the coordination of varied research undertakings. It also exists to provide a conduit for the dissemination of these undertakings and to foster international activities in educational, research, and governmental Institutions in the southeastern United States. The Center for International Studies is involved in monitoring and initiating change in the international curricula of the undergraduate, graduate, and professional schools of the University. It has a special interest in undergraduate education and, through a variety of programs and activities, makes a contribution to the undergraduate academic experience. It seeks to attract students to the wide range of international and comparative courses available and administers the major of the Program in Comparative Area Studies, where students can concentrate on Africa, East Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, Russia and Eastern Europe, South Current Interdisciplinary Activity 193 Asia, Canada, or Western Europe. Courses in languages and literatures are offered under the Center's auspice as well. The Center currently administers ten area faculty committees. These area studies units have a variety of designations, such as Program, Center, Council, and Institute, and differ In terms of size, extent of outside funding, and level of student involvement. Some, such as Canadian Studies, an outgrowth of Commonwealth Studies , have been at Duke for decades . Others, such as Caribbean Studies, are only a few years old. They share many features in common, however, including support for symposia, undergraduate courses, summer programs, study abroad opportunities, and foci for research and scholarly efforts. Center faculty have their primary appointments In one of the Duke departments, with the exception of the faculty who teach Asian and African Languages and Literature courses. These faculty have their primary appointments in the Center. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Center . The Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Spectroscopy Center was conceptualized on the well-recognized premise that shared instrumentation is the only realistic way to satisfy the needs of individual research programs for state-of-the-art instruments which cost considerably more to purchase and maintain than any one academic investigator or even a small group of investigators can afford via the normal funding procedures. In addition, such a center, if established as a university unit, could serve as a focus for teaching, training and research activities unconstrained by traditional disciplinary prerogatives. Thus, the opportunities for interdisciplinary activities involving a variety of investigators with differing perspectives would be more readily available than they might otherwise be in a research group or strictly departmental setting. Following its discovery in physics, NMR rapidly developed into an important tool in the chemical sciences, and by some has been described as the single most important technique in the explosive growth of chemistry and new chemicals in science and technology over the decades of the '60s and '70s. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 194 With financial support from NSF, NIH, the North Carolina Biotechnology Center, and Duke University, equipment was purchased and the NMR Spectroscopy Center began to fulfill its mission in November 1986 as a resource for research across campus and a research link to RTP and industry in the region. The Center functions both in an advisory capacity and as a collaborator when that is desirable for the successful implementation of research. It also serves as a clearinghouse for information on existing and proposed projects so that the opportunities for joint research of an interdisciplinary nature among investigators is not overlooked. Finally, the policy for operation of the Center is guided by a steering committee made up of senior scientists on campus and a representative from the RTP users. In the short time since the installation of the instruments there are already a diverse mix of scientific problems being investigated on the three major spectrometers in the Center. Heavy use primarily by the Chemistry Department for relatively routine analyses takes place on one of the instruments conveniently located in the Gross Chemistry Building. The other two instruments serve the evolving, more exotic needs of chemistry, as well as research in botany, zoology, biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, pathology, pharmacology, and radiology. The Center has had some 35 research groups use the instruments, including scientists from Glaxo and Burroughs -Wellcome pharmaceutical companies, Rhone-Poulenc and Roche Biomedical Companies, and the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences. The projects studied range from investigations of the structure and function of DNA and proteins, the templates and building blocks of nature, to understanding the metabolic processes used by plants in their development and growth. The interdisciplinary units just described represent just a fraction of all the interdisciplinary teaching, research, and scholarly efforts at Duke University. This rich tapestry inevitably presents the University with a variety of opportunities as well as challenges. One of these challenges -- to devise consistent and meaningful criteria for the usage of terms such as Center --is taken up in the next section. Current Interdisciplinary Activity 195 8.4 CRITERIA FOR THE DESIGNATIONS PROGRAM, CENTER, AND INSTITUTE In order to determine the criteria and the rationale for the present use of the interdisciplinary designations Program, Center, and Institute on campus, a task force was organized in the Spring of 1987 to explore this matter. The task force reported that although there were some exceptions to the norm, a fairly standardized set of assumptions and definitions guided the use of these designations at Duke. The conclusions of the task force may be summarized as follows: Programs are generally groups of existing faculty and students who have organized around a particular curriculum concentration which may or may not lead to a degree. Even where there Is no degree (but, say, a certificate of graduate or undergraduate study), a curriculum core seems to be the minimum requirement. Centers are generally administrative umbrellas, either inter- or intra-departments , of non-degree fields of research specialization. Organizations seem to have chosen the term for one of two reasons: either because of external necessities imposed by the requirement to meet funding conditions (for example, NIMH for the Center for Research on Women, whose name is historically determined by other such centers across the country) , or because of an internal desire to carve out a semi-autonomous administrative unit (Center for Islamic Studies). In all instances, however, centers may be distinguished from programs by the absence of a degree and in their being largely faculty research directed rather than curriculum directed. Institutes are generally free-standing entities, often between schools, that may or may not involve curricula, but certainly involve shared research concentrations as well as external consulting. In both the sources of funding and the appointment of personnel, Institutes seem more committed to various kinds of outreach beyond Duke itself and/or beyond Arts and Sciences. It seems also fair to generalize that most Institutes report directly to the Provost, which would suggest they are broader-based organizations than programs or centers. Finally, to most of the people interviewed, "Institute" implied a physical building, whether or not such a thing actually existed at the moment. Finally, the task force reported that many interdisciplinary units made use of another level of organization, variously designated Council, Current Interdisciplinary Activity 196 Committee, or Board of Visitors, that typically served as an outside advisory group, a vehicle for fund-raising efforts, and a sponsor of outreach programs and other means of contact with the general public. Some representative groups of this type are affiliated with Women's Studies, the Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development, and the Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs. 8.5 RESULTS OF FACULTY AND STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES Committee members attempted to make the self- study process as broad based as possible. Towards this end, questionnaires were devised to obtain the opinions of faculty, undergraduate students, and graduate/professional students on various aspects of interdisciplinary activities at Duke. Separate questionnaires were written for each of these three groups, since their concerns and needs are often quite different. A survey research expert on campus was consulted in order to assure the validity of the measures. Copies of these questionnaires may be found in the Appendix. Faculty Questionnaire. A copy of the questionnaire was sent to each member of the Duke faculty, including those with clinical appointments in the Medical Center (total = 1744). There were 293 responses (16.8% of the total) , a rate that included at least one member of every department or other major unit on campus. The Committee concluded that the sample of opinion obtained was sufficiently representative to warrant valid generalizations, particularly with respect to areas needing further attention in developing this self- study effort, although not necessarily large enough to thoroughly reflect faculty opinion. Figure 8.1 shows the number of respondents in each of the three major faculty categories. "Arts and Sciences" includes faculty in all of the professional schools outside the Medical Center; namely. Law, Engineering, Forestry, Business, and Divinity. The miscellaneous category contained the nine respondents whose affiliations were unclear or unknown. This figure shows that 76% of the faculty responding from the clinical divisions, 90% Current Interdisciplinary Activity 197 Figure 8.1 Survey of Interdisciplinary Activity 200 c _ *-> 03 •*- O L 0) E 100 - /7^m\mmv> 3 None 13 Interdisciplinary Jww //