|
opinion
Letters
to the Editor
Defending chemical
engineering
Dear Editor:
I am disappointed
that your newspaper was duped into assisting the smear campaign
recently launched by Uduak-Joe Ntuk against the chemical engineering
department (May 16, "Decline Stifles Access, Success").
If Ntuk is so concerned about the issues he raises, why has
he never discussed them with the chemical engineering faculty?
The fact that he has chosen to use the campus newspaper as
his forum rather than bring issues to his own department makes
it clear that his goal is not to resolve problems, but to
create them. Ntuk distorts some facts and makes baseless claims
in that article.
He may be expressing some views of a tiny group of malcontents,
but not of the vast majority of our students. If he is representing
"students who must take a failing grade," this constitutes
less than 1 percent of our majors. Most of our seniors have
never even spoken with Ntuk and he himself has taken only
three of the 14 required courses in our department.
The article suggests that "enrollment decline" is
a root cause of some of his complaints. However, enrollment
normally fluctuates from year to year and our department has
been very stable over the past five years (46 full-time equivalent
students with a standard deviation of five).
After last year's enrollment spike, enrollment returned to
historic levels. The number of majors actually increased 20
percent over the last five years. In fact, we graduate more
chemical engineering students than many other programs in
the area. Does Ntuk think that by spreading malicious rumors
he will increase student enrollment?
In any event, faculty resources are allocated based on enrollment,
which ensures that enough classes are offered to satisfy demand.
Hence, it is baseless to claim there is a "need for more
instruction" or "a lack of course offerings."
To keep within its budget limits, the policy of the College
of Engineering requires that undergraduate lecture classes
have an enrollment of at least 15.
This annual cycle, in fact, is the practice at the majority
of chemical engineering programs in the United States. Why?
Because chemical engineering is one of the smallest engineering
professions, constituting less than 10 percent of all engineers.
And yet our profession commands the highest starting salary
of any undergraduate degree and was recently ranked among
the top 10 majors sought by employers. Contrary to the Forty-Niner
article headline, our graduates will enjoy great success.
Ntuk's claim that "students have faced repeated difficulty
in gaining access to certain professors for additional, out-of-class
instruction" is hard to fathom. Professors have posted
office hours and students needing help are never turned away.
His statement that we "don't promote an environment of
learning" seems odd considering that several of our faculty
have received excellence-in-teaching awards from our college
and university in the past few years.
While Ntuk himself has never even entered my office, he was
present at a recent discussion session between students and
faculty. When he was asked to identify specific problems so
they could be addressed, he refused to make any statement.
Don't be fooled by this ridiculous smear campaign.
Lloyd Hile,
-- chair, chemical engineering department
Dear Editor:
As I await the final moment upon which I will graduate, I
happily reflect on the long road that I had journeyed upon.
My various experiences as a soon-to-be chemical engineering
graduate have definitely shaped me into the optimistic and
confident person that I am today, which is why I was so disgusted
about all of the negativity that the chemical engineering
department has recently received.
At first I was upset, but now I am rather amused. The various
complaints are ridiculous, untrue and furthermore, they claim
to come from an "overwhelming response" from the
students, when neither myself nor any of my classmates from
my four chemical engineering courses were ever consulted.
I was first introduced to chemical engineering three years
ago when, as a freshman with no direction, I found myself
in undergraduate adviser Larry Jang's office, hoping to find
some inspiration. By the end of our advising session he not
only convinced me how amazing chemical engineering was, he
also somehow convinced me that I had the ability to make and
impact as both a student and role model.
At first I was confused about how I was to make an impact,
but two months ago I definitely saw how. After being on a
speaking panel about engineering to female high school students,
five students approached me afterwards to tell me I had inspired
them to become engineers because of what I said.
During my four years as a student, I have never had any trouble
accessing any of my professors for material supplements, direction
or advice. Not only do all of my professors maintain specific
office hours, they have been known to stay later with a student
and are open to appointments.
They have also provided students access to various chemical
engineering-related software, both on a compact disc to take
home and in the lab (which all students have access to). Though
my department is small, the hard work that the faculty puts
in more than makes up for it. In fact their dedication led
to a 30 percent increase in enrollment last year.
Last night at 9 p.m. during my last chemical engineering lecture
as an undergraduate student, I found myself and my classmates
asking for more homework problems for further exposure to
the material ... and if that isn't proof of a positive environment
of learning then I don't know what is.
Annie Duong
-- chemical engineering senior
|
|
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Search our site
DEPARTMENT
OF
JOURNALISM
ONLINE 49ER
DEPARTMENTS
ADVERTISING
ADMINISTRATION
DAILY
49ER ALUMNI
SUBSCRIPTION
SERVICE
GIVE
FEEDBACK
|
