College of Engineering

Compact Plan

March 20, 2007

1. CONTEXT FOR PLANNING

1.1 Description of the College

The College of Engineering (COE) comprises nine departments administered within the College.

These are: Biomedical Engineering; Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering; Civil, Construction,

and Environmental Engineering; Computer Science; Electrical and Computer Engineering;

Industrial and Systems Engineering; Materials Science and Engineering; Mechanical and Aerospace

Engineering; and Nuclear Engineering. The Biomedical Engineering department is jointly

administered with the UNC-Chapel Hill College of Medicine. In addition there are three

engineering programs that are administered in other colleges: Textile Engineering in the College of

Textiles, Biological and Agricultural Engineering in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

(CALS), and Paper Science and Engineering in the College of Natural Resources.

With over 5,500 undergraduates and 1,800 graduate students, the COE is the largest college at NC

State and one of the biggest engineering colleges in the nation. In 2005-06 it ranked 4th

in the

number of BS degrees awarded and 6th

in the total number of degrees among all US engineering

colleges. It also ranked 4th

in BS degrees awarded to women and 5th

in BS degrees awarded to

African Americans during this same year. The COE offers 18 bachelor’s, 17 master’s and 13

doctoral degree programs and awards more than 1200 undergraduate and 500 graduate degrees

annually. Annual research expenditures exceed $103 million placing the college 17th

in research

expenditures and 14th

in industry support among all engineering colleges in the US. The college

houses 930 faculty and staff, including 246 tenured/tenure-track faculty members. Eleven faculty

are members of the National Academy of Engineering and 77 have received Presidential and

National Science Foundation recognitions for achievement, including 52 NSF Career Awards. The

College’s Industrial Extension Service (IES) is the first industrial extension service established in

the nation (1955). Over the past five years, companies assisted by IES reported $500 million in

direct economic impact from IES services, and in 2005-06 alone helped retain or create 1,237 jobs

across the state.

1.2 External Reviews

Sixteen of the College’s on-campus undergraduate degree programs underwent the periodic 6-year

accreditation review process conducted by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

(ABET) during 2005. Two of the programs, Biomedical Engineering and Paper Science &

Engineering, were evaluated for their initial accreditation. This accreditation visit was the single

largest visit conducted by ABET during that calendar year. The outcome of this review cycle was a

completely positive review for each program so that no action is required prior to the next general

review in 2011.

During 2006 the College’s Bachelor of Science in Engineering (Mechatronics Concentration)

Degree Program, delivered via distance education technology to students at the UNC-Asheville

2

campus, also received its initial ABET accreditation. This is one of the very first such distance

education undergraduate engineering programs to receive ABET accreditation.

A graduate program review of the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department has recently

been conducted. Several strengths were cited in the review, including the recent establishment of 4

interdisciplinary research areas, growth in research funding, and development efforts by

departmental leadership. Areas of concern that were identified in the review included heavy

teaching loads and the inadequate quality and quantity of space for growth of the graduate program.

1.3 Student Assessment

Over the past several years the College has been carrying out an extensive assessment of the

performance of our engineering students as they pursue their academic degree programs. Appendix

A is a detailed presentation of the findings that surfaced from that assessment. Some of the key

findings are as follows for the categories of all students, underrepresented minorities, and female

students:

1.3.1 All Students: Since 1998, entering freshman cohort enrollment in engineering has ranged

from 1102 to 1398. For the most part, students enter the College without having declared their

major curriculum. By the time they finish their required first-year courses with a “C-“ or better

grade in each of these courses, they can matriculate into their preferred engineering program. The

percentage of students who enrolled and matriculated into a COE degree program as of the census

date in the fall of their second year has increased since 1994. In 1994, the percentage was 30%; as

of the 2005 cohort, the percentage was 42%. Since 1994 the highest year-2 matriculation

percentage was the 49% achieved by the 2001 cohort. Since then there has been a decline in the

matriculation rate, causing concern and prompting a more detailed analysis of factors that might be

responsible for the decline. The College encourages the students to take courses so that they can

matriculate by the fall of their sophomore year (year 2). As can be seen by Table 1 in Appendix A,

another 16% of the students have matriculated by fall of their junior year.

Using the most recent data for cohort 2000, of those who matriculate by the fall of their second

year, approximately 93% graduate from NCSU (approximately 85% with an engineering degree).

Of those who matriculate by the fall of their third year, approximately 91% graduate from NCSU,

with approximately 83% of them receiving a degree in engineering.

Another way to assess retention is to examine the cohort’s six-year graduation rate. Data is

available about those who graduated within six years for the 1994 to the 2000 cohorts. The six-year

graduation rate with any degree from NCSU was 61% for 1994 cohort, 64% for 1995 cohort, 68%

for the 1996 cohort, 67% for the 1997 cohort, 69% for the 1998 cohort, 75% for the 1999 cohort,

and 73% for the 2000 cohort. The graduation rates for all students who started in the cohort and

graduated with at least one degree in engineering within six years are as follows: 40% for the 1994

cohort to 55% for the 2000 cohort. On average, it takes approximately 51 months to graduate

(approximately 4 years and 1 semester).

1.3.2 Female Students: Since 1994, the percentage of entering females enrolled in engineering has

decreased: from 23% in 1994 to 21% in 1998 to 18% in 2004 to 13.4% in 2005, but increased in

2006 to 17%. The number has also decreased from 260 in 1994 to 233 in 1998 to 222 in 2004 to

157 in 2005, but increased again in fall 2006 to 235. Analyses were performed for the matriculation

rates of male and female students. Both groups show an increase in percentage matriculated. Of the

3

females who started, the percentage that has matriculated by census date of year 2 has increased

from 33% in 1994 cohort to 51% for the 2002 cohort, declined to 43% for the 2004 cohort, but

increased slightly for the 2005 cohort to 47%. Examination of the actual number of female students

who matriculated also shows an increase from 101 in cohort 1996 to 137 in cohort 2001, and 132

for the 2005 cohort.

Of the female students who started in cohort 2000 and who matriculated by the fall of their third

year, 93% graduated from NCSU; 78% with an engineering degree. In contrast, the male students

who started in cohort 2000 and who matriculated by the fall of their third year, 91% graduated at

NCSU; 84% with an engineering degree. Thus, although a higher percentage of females graduate

from NCSU than males do, a higher percentage of the males graduate with an engineering degree.

1.3.3 Underrepresented Minorities: The percentage of entering URM students enrolled in

engineering decreased from 13.8% in 2004 to 10.2% in 2005 and to 9.5% in 2006. The number of

URM students enrolled has decreased from 170 in 2004 to 120 in 2005, with a slight increase in

2006 to 132 students. Of the URM students who enrolled, the percentage that matriculated into a

COE degree program as of the census date in the fall of their second year has decreased from the

highest value observed in 2001. In 1994, the percentage was 12.7%; as of the 2001 cohort, the

percentage was 41%, but has declined since then with the percentage for the 2004 cohort having

dropped to 19.4%. For the 2005 cohort, there was an increase in matriculation rate at year two

census date to 31%.

Of the African American students who started in the 2000 cohort and matriculated by the fall of

their third year, 91% graduated with a degree from NCSU within six years, 80% of them with a

degree in engineering. This can be compared with the 90% rate of graduation with a degree from

NC State for white students who started in the 2000 cohort and matriculated by the fall of their third

year. 82% of these students graduated with a degree in engineering. Of the 26 Hispanic students

who started in the 2000 cohort, 64% matriculated by the fall of their third year; of these, 93%

graduated with a degree from NCSU, 86% graduating with a degree in engineering. Of the Native

American students who started in the 2000 cohort, 83% graduated with an engineering degree from

NCSU.

Examining the graduation rate by ethnicity shows that of the 931 white students who started in

1994, 62% graduated with a degree from NCSU within six years, 42% with at least one degree in

engineering. Of the 130 African American students who started in 1994, 43% graduated within six

years, 22% of them with at least one degree in engineering. This rate increased for the 2000 cohort:

of the students who started in 2000, 73% of the white students graduated within six years, 54% with

a degree in engineering; 69% of the African American students graduated within six years, 52% of

them with a degree in engineering

1.4 Recent Academic Initiatives

Over the past several years, the College has implemented a number of initiatives that have expanded

its educational impact across the state. These include extending our 2+2 Distance Education

Engineering Program to UNC Wilmington, Lenoir Community College (LCC), Craven Community

College, Johnston Community College, and Wake Tech. They also include our Distance Education

BSE degree programs being delivered to western North Carolina in collaboration with UNC

Asheville and, most recently, to eastern North Carolina in collaboration with Craven Community

College. These programs serve as models for addressing similar needs for full time residency at

4

other locations around the state and to expand the delivery of undergraduate engineering education.

In addition the College has expanded our Distance Education masters level programs across our

core disciplines. All of these initiatives depend critically on strong cross-disciplinary collaborations

between departments, colleges, other universities, and industry. The College has worked hard to

create such an environment, and we are committed to further enhancement of such interactions in

both education and research.

New academic programs are highlighted by the establishment of a joint department of Biomedical

Engineering between our College and the College of Medicine at UNC-Chapel Hill. Other programs

include new combined BS/MS degree programs by many departments, establishment of the

Computer Networking degree program and an MS program in Analytics in collaboration with the

College of Management, establishment of the multi-institutional NSF Science and Technology

Center (STC) on Environmentally Responsible Solvents and Processes, and establishment of the

NASA National Institute of Aerospace (NIA) with NC State as one of the six founding universities.

1.5 Forecast

Ongoing assessments of the Unites States’ need for an expanded technical workforce continue to be

present in the news. Organizations such as the National Science Foundation, the National Academy

of Engineering, and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), as well as numerous

professional disciplinary organizations, describe a consistent and challenging situation. The

changing demographics of the nation’s workforce, coupled with recent enrollment patterns across

the country, clearly indicate that engineering enrollment and graduation rates are not keeping pace

with the increasing demand for engineering talent. As pointed out in a recent ASEE publication,

although there has been a modest increase in the number of engineering degrees awarded over the

last five years, enrollments are down for the second year in a row. This will surely lead to a

decrease in degreed graduates soon. It is alarming that less that 5% of all undergraduate degrees

nationally are awarded to engineers today, compared with 8% in 1985.

The College of Engineering at NC State is poised to expand its role in meeting this national need.

By virtue of the growth in population in North Carolina, together with a shift to a more technical-

based economy, we continue to see expanded demand for engineering education. Freshman

applications to the College are up by 55% from 10 years ago – for fall 2007 we have received over

4,100 applications. There is continued interest in expanding engineering education to other parts of

the state, including Rocky Mount and Wilmington. In addition, the College is actively seeking to

expand its interactions with community colleges as a means to allow more students to explore the

opportunities in engineering education before engaging the programs at the University. This process

will provide gains in efficiency, and will also increase the campus graduation rates, as more mature

and better-prepared students enroll.

2. COLLEGE GOALS:

2.1 Mission, Vision and Goals

The mission of the College of Engineering at NC State is to provide a premier educational

experience for our students and a world-class environment for our faculty that will make them

global leaders in discovery, learning and innovation across the broad, exciting and diverse world of

engineering and computer science challenges and opportunities that await them in this 21st century.

In so doing, it is our expectation that they will become leaders in converting ideas to reality,

5

providing solutions to societal needs and enhancing the economic development and quality of life of

the citizens of North Carolina, our nation and humankind.

The vision underlying this mission is to assure that the College of Engineering at NC State is

continuously engaged and invested in vital areas of research growth and educational need. It

involves making strategic investments in faculty and facilities in interdisciplinary thrust areas that

provide the greatest potential for attracting external funding and best serving the needs of our

country and state. These thrust areas include both transcendental enabling technologies

(bioengineering, nanotechnology, and information and communications technology) and areas of

significant societal need and concern. The common thread running through this vision is a

commitment to the integration of research and education, the development of an outstanding faculty

and student body and the provision of opportunities for multidisciplinary research at both graduate

and undergraduate levels. This vision also includes the establishment of new academic programs

with cutting-edge interdisciplinary focus and systems orientation, the development of industrially

relevant and internationally oriented internship and immersion experiences and the concurrent

investment in people and infrastructure required for the success of these programs.

The long-term goal of the College of Engineering at NC State is straightforward and bold:

“To become and be perceived as the leading public college of engineering in the country and one of

the foremost colleges of engineering in the U.S. and the world”.

In adopting this goal, we are not naïve regarding its implications nor the challenges and investments

associated with such an ambitious endeavor. Current rankings of colleges of engineering in the U.S.

place NC State’s College of Engineering 15th

among undergraduate engineering programs, 20th

among public research colleges of engineering, and 33rd

among both public and private research

colleges of engineering. While NCSU’s College of Engineering has made significant progress in

many areas of research and education, it faces increased competition from institutions that were

once its peers in the number of research active faculty, infrastructure and facility investment and

investments made to increase graduate enrollment. The reality is that colleges of engineering like

Georgia Tech that were comparable peers 10-15 years ago are now ranked among the “top 5” in the

country. We feel that with adequate resources the College is well positioned and poised to strive for

this level of recognition and while there are many factors that go into the achievement of such a

goal, the steps that need to be taken both in terms of vision and investments are well defined.

North Carolina needs an ample supply of highly trained engineers and computer scientists to

compete in today’s global knowledge-based economy. To be globally competitive, the state must

have a great engineering school---and that takes significant investment. At a time when engineering

research and education have become globally competitive, it is imperative to invest in the College

of Engineering at NCSU. Investments are critical not only for the College to regain the national and

international stature it once had, but also to fuel the level of technological activity required for

North Carolina to be a world-class leader in research and economic development. We also feel that

such an achievement is essential to NC State University in its quest to become a global leader

among its peer universities.

6

3. ACTION ITEMS

3.1 ENROLLMENT GROWTH and INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS

The campus enrollment projections that were conducted during the spring and early summer of

2006 asked colleges to identify ‘base’ enrollment targets that could be met with existing levels of

resource support, and expanded ‘base-plus’ enrollment targets that could be achieved if there were

an investment of additional resources. The College of Engineering forwarded these two sets of

enrollment targets as requested. Based on subsequent campus analysis of the cumulative enrollment

targets and their impact on campus funding, the College of Engineering was asked to commit to

achieving its ‘base-plus’ enrollment targets at the undergraduate level for both fall 2007 and fall

2008, and to enhance its doctoral level enrollment targets for the next two years as well. The

College agreed to pursue these targets and reiterated the additional resources needed to support the

academic success of the undergraduate students and to provide the necessary graduate program

support.

3.1.1 First-Year Undergraduate Teaching and Advising: In order to support the University’s

enrollment growth plans, a record-sized class of 1,398 new first-year engineering students enrolled

in fall 2006. This is an increase of nearly 250 students over the entering class in 2005. The College

has committed to bring in 1,350 new freshmen in the fall of 2007 and 2008 as well, and to expand

transfer student intake each year by 25 additional students. These significantly expanded

enrollments will place considerable demands on the First-Year Engineering Program, delivered

through the Office of Academic Affairs, in two explicit ways. First, this creates an increased

teaching load to be handled by the office. The College offers two orientation courses – one that is

taken by all entering first-year students and another that is directed toward support of our minority

students. The estimated annual impact of the expanded enrollment targets is:

a) 4 additional sections of E 101 Introduction to Engineering and Problem Solving

b) 4 additional sections of E115 Introduction to Computing Environment

c) additional load on E 144 & 145, Academic and Professional Preparation I & II

While this additional teaching load will be borne primarily by Academic Affairs staff within the

College, this increase in student numbers will ripple through all the departments, some more than

others, causing significant challenges in teaching and advising, particularly in lab-oriented courses.

The costs will not be insignificant at the department level. In addition to this teaching load, entering

freshmen who do not declare an intended disciplinary major (approximately 35% of the incoming

class) are advised by the staff in Academic Affairs. Thus, there will be a significant increase in the

advising load that began in fall 2006 and will continue into the next two years. Compact plan

funding is again being requested to support this enrollment growth, and the associated increase in

teaching and advising responsibilities. This funding is critical if the College is to provide a

meaningful experience for our first-year students.

3.1.2 Student Success – Retention and Graduation : The goals of this initiative are to increase

the retention and success of undergraduate engineering students and to reduce time-to-degree.

Ongoing cohort analysis shows that prompt matriculation into engineering degree programs by

census date of year 2 correlates with higher graduation rates and shorter time-to-degree. Students

who matriculate by census date of year 3 have lower graduation rates and longer time-to-degree. In

addition, on a percentage basis, more students leave engineering between years 2 and 3 than

between years 1 and 2. With this background, the recent declines in year-2 matriculation rates are

7

alarming and they are at the lowest point in the last 10 years. These deceased matriculation rates are

observed in all student populations, but most dramatically so in males and under-represented

minorities. A further observation that is positively correlated with the decreased matriculation rates

is the significant decrease in cohort-wide GPA at the end of the second semester. After five years of

increasing first year GPA’s, the last two years have been consistently trending down.

The COE Tutorial Program was shut down in 2003 as a result of budget cuts to the College, and this

timing coincides with the onset of the noted declines in student success. The tutorial program

provided for training and support of student mentors to assist engineering students in 18 engineering

courses, and it served as a referral service to connect students with the resources available through

the University Tutorial Center. Permanent support is needed so that this program can be reliably

offered on an annual basis. The recent decline in student success indicators, together with the

record-size incoming classes of first-year engineering students for the next two years, makes a

compelling case for an expanded support structure. Compact plan continuing funding is requested to

support these activities.

3.1.3 Graduate TA Support: At present, the total annual TA expenditures by the various

engineering programs in 2003-04 was more than $2.8M, far surpassing the total TA funds

($1,165,705) available in departmental budgets. Because of the serious inadequacy of TA funding,

the College in its initial 2003 Compact Plan proposal, requested $1,100,000 in TA support over a

two-year period ($500,000 in 2003-04, $600,000 in 2004-05). In addition, the College also

requested $300,000 to be allocated to departments as additional permanent operating funds in 2003-

04 to help address the significant shortfall in that category. It should be noted that the original

Compact Plan funds committed to Engineering in 2000 by former Provost Kermit Hall included

such TA and operating funds, but only a fraction of those resources has actually been provided to

the College. As a temporary help in addressing this problem, the College received $300,000 of one-

time TA funds in 2004-05. This provided some temporary relief but does not resolve the ongoing

problem of lack of adequate continuing funding to meet COE departmental TA needs. The

continuing lack of adequate TA support remains as one of the Colleges most serious ongoing

budgetary challenges. Accordingly, the College is requesting Compact Plan continuing funding for

TA support in 2007-08.

3.1.4 Graduate Infrastructure Support: It is critically important that additional funding be

identified over the next several years to assist the college and its departments in adding personnel to

manage the increasingly complex education and research enterprise. This includes

technical/computer personnel as well as staff to effectively monitor and implement the day-to-day

operations. In order to meet the increased research and academic needs of the various departments,

the College is requesting Compact Plan funding for new continuing personnel and general

infrastructure support.

3.2 INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH INITIATIVES

In order to achieve its long-term goal the College of Engineering needs to make strategic

investments in faculty, graduate students and facilities in interdisciplinary thrust areas that provide

the greatest potential for attracting external funding and best serving the needs of our country and

state. This section describes the interdisciplinary thrust areas currently being considered by the

College of Engineering at NC State for investment along with a set of research initiatives that have

been developed by our departments and faculty in pursuit of this goal. Achievement of our goal will

require increasing our faculty size by 150 new faculty over the next three years in order to attain

8

sufficient critical mass to significantly increase our ability to compete for large federal, state and

private sector funding opportunities in these areas. It also requires a comparable increase in PhD

student support and infrastructure support. While the major part of this support is being requested as

part of the NC State BOG request, Compact Plan funding is also requested to complement these

efforts and initiatives.

3.2.1 BIOENGINEERING: Bioengineering integrates engineering and the life sciences to

contribute to the understanding of living systems and the development of new and improved devices

and products for human health care. Research and educational efforts in bio-informatics, bio-

materials, rehabilitation engineering, bio-manufacturing and other areas of biotechnology will be

supported by the recruitment of faculty across all departments in the College. Areas of research

include:

Bio-Computational Analytics: includes research in bioinformatics, biometrics, multiscale

modelling, systems & molecular biology, and functional genomics and the application of computer

science and electrical and computer engineering methods to the field of bio-related applications,

devices and services. This will build on well developed and recognized genomics and

bioinformatics programs and pave the way for increased funding from NIH in the domain of

computational sciences, biometrics and bioinformatics.

Bioproduction Systems Engineering: includes research in dry medical products, surgical

machining, haptic modeling for surgery, quality control and pharmaceutical production.

Collaboration between Industrial and Systems Engineering, Chemical and Biomoloecular

Engineering and the Integrated Manufacturing Systems Engineering Institute to establish a

professional master’s degree in pharmaceutical manufacturing is also part of this effort.

Tiny Biosystems : Everything from medical devices to biotechnology products will depend

on the development of novel micro and nano fabrication technology for solving problems at the

interface of engineering and the life sciences. Examples of research areas include lab-on-a-chip,

micro-total-analysis systems, and microfabricated implantable medical devices. The goal is to

miniaturize technology which will directly impact the health of people. The successful development

of Tiny Biosystems would require the involvement of virtually every department in the COE,

PAMS, and CALS. NC State has the necessary ingredients to be a major player in this field and we

already have modest BME cleanroom facilities to support this initiative. Further investments will position NCSU for future funding opportunities from NIH (point-of-care diagnostics as well as

early interventions to improve health) and the DoD (chemical and biological warfare monitoring as

well as monitoring the status of the warfighter).

Tissue Engineering: There is global interest in tissue engineering and a global need for

resulting technologies associated with tissue engineering. Work at NC State on functional tissue

engineering of ligament, tendon, muscle, bone and cartilage have gained us prominence in the field.

Interest in the use of adult stem cells for tissue engineering is high. Strong collaborations between

the COE and the COT have also put NCSU in a solid position to perform groundbreaking research

in tissue engineering scaffold and bioreactor development. Extensive collaborations have been

established between BME and UNC-Chapel Hill as well as other departments and colleges at NCSU

(CVM, MAE, ECE, BIT, IE, NE, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Wood and Paper

Science, Mathematics). Increasing research strength in tissue engineering will attract nationally

recognized graduate students to NCSU, promote extensive interdisciplinary research, add value

within the state of North Carolina by creating jobs and new technologies and elevate NCSU’s

national and international rankings.

9

Metabolic Engineering: This field utilizes the tools of molecular genetics, often in

conjunction with whole-genome profiling of gene expression patterns and quantitative mathematical

models, to optimize the output of specific products synthesized by bacteria, yeast, fungi, or plant

and animal cells. In this approach, the flows of molecular intermediates through so-called

metabolic pathways are manipulated to yield the greatest amount of the desired product. Cell

metabolism involves many hundreds of chemical reactions, and maximizing the flow through the

desired pathway(s) is very often at odds with the growth of the organism, making this a complicated

task. As such, it has strong connections to the emerging field of systems biology. The metabolic

engineering approach is a fixture in the biotechnology industry and has had a dramatic impact on

processes for the production of recombinant proteins, antibiotics, and value-added chemicals such

as 1,3-propanediol and polymers. Recently, interest in this field has heightened in response to the

search for alternative energy sources such as ethanol and hydrogen.

Molecular Cell Engineering: This field involves analysis and manipulation of the

molecular mechanisms and pathways that control functional responses in human or other

mammalian cells (cell signaling). It incorporates elements of cell and developmental biology but

approaches the problem with a distinct, quantitative approach. The applications of molecular cell

engineering are many, but given the intimate relationship between defects in cell signaling and

diseases such as cancer, immune deficiencies, and autoimmune diseases, most of the promise of this

field is in the medical arena. This field has had strong connections to systems biology, biomaterials,

and tissue engineering. More recently, many researchers in this field have turned their attention to

stem cells, cells that have the potential to become, through a process called differentiation, many

different cell types. Stem cell engineering promises to control this process in a manner that could

be used to produce large quantities of specialized cells outside the body, which could be used in cell

replacement therapies needed for the treatment of immune deficiencies and other diseases.

Noninvasive Imaging: The objective of this initiative is to act as a focal point for research

in tomographic and multidimensional imaging technologies and their applications. This initiative

would take a unique approach to imaging, integrating noninvasive imaging technologies from

biomedical, industrial, security, and other applications into a cohesive effort. The primary goal is to

catalyze new collaborative funded research projects and, ultimately, the formation of a Center for

Noninvasive Imaging at NC State. This center will be unique in the country, possibly the world, for

its broad approach to address the interrelated issues of hardware, software, “wetware” (chemical

and biological technologies), systems integration, and application development across multiple

industries. The initiative would attract participating faculty from BME, NE, ECE, ISE, CBE, CS,

Physics, and the COV. The initial leadership for the initiative will be from Biomedical Engineering

and Nuclear Engineering. We can envision collaborations and new faculty extending beyond this

group, to programs in PAMS and CALS. Equipment required includes a commercial high-

resolution microCT obtaining 10 micron and below resolution on small material and tissue samples.

Bioelectronics: The vision behind this area is to develop microelectronic, electromagnetic,

and biomimetic systems, as well as pertinent electronic and biomechatronic instrumentation, that

are either based on the fundamental principles of biology or address specific needs in the diagnosis

and treatment of diseases. This goal provides the opportunity to make fundamental contributions

ranging from the creation of systems that could change the life of the physically disabled to the

development of electronic systems that interface with the neural system seamlessly in a way to

mimic the natural behavior of the human neural processing and interactions. A number of NC State

faculty are already leading internationally recognized efforts in bioelectronics that can have an

enormous impact on many lives, such as an artificial retina to restore partial vision to the blind,

microrobotic solutions for minimally invasive surgery, and electronic olfaction. Support has been

10

received by numerous agencies, such as NSF, DOE, NIH, and the Whitaker Foundation. If

successful, our efforts will have a direct impact on a large number of disabled for which there is no

cure and whose lives are affected for example by blindness, neural disorders, and muscular

disorders.

Environmental Biotechnology: The objective of this initiative is to develop improved and

novel biotechnology processes for the protection of human and environmental health. One

important goal is to improve the quality of water, air, and land in North Carolina, the US, and

around the world, and particular emphasis will be placed on global problems in water and

sanitation. Today, more than one billion people do not have access to safe drinking water, and even

more people lack adequate sanitation services. Engineers can help face this global challenge by

applying leading edge techniques to develop appropriate and new sustainable technologies.

Another focus area will be the application of biomolecular approaches to develop technologies for

waste minimization, reuse, and transformation to value-added products. Emphasis will be placed on

new waste-to-energy technologies, such as microbial fuel cells (e.g., generation of electricity as a

“by-product” of wastewater treatment), biohydrogen, and methane bioreactors. Projects would

involve collaborations across COE departments (CCEE, CHE), CALS (BAE), PAMS

(microbiology, biochemistry) and MEAS.

3.2.2 NANOTECHNOLOGY: Although one-millionth the size of a pinhead, the measurement

nano and the technology that it implies has ushered our world into a technological revolution. On

the national level, nanotechnology has been identified as one of the key future technologies and

extensive governmental resources are being committed to this area. This was formalized with the

establishment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in 2000, which was a six agency program

to increase federal research support for nanotechnology. This initiative is being further strengthened

with the Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, which is currently being debated in the

U.S. Congress and has wide bi-partisan support. All major government agencies are providing

support for establishment of nanotechnology centers. Agencies such as NSF, NASA, and DoD have

already established large university based centers to work in nanotechnology. Other center

opportunities are in the planning stage and will be soon announced.

North Carolina Nanotechnology Institute: The COE supports the efforts of faculty from

multiple COE departments, PAMS and other colleges to develop the NC Nanotechnology Institute

at NC State. Currently, a significant number of our very strongest faculty are actively engaged in

nanotechnology-related research. A recent external assessment by Dr. Clayton Teague, director of

the National Nanotechnology Initiative confirms that the breadth and depth of the level of activity

carried out in this area at NC State is comparable to that of the leading nanotechnology programs in

the country. The objective of this effort is to coalesce the nanotechnology-related activities of the

entire University into an Institute that would provide NC State with a cohesive identity in this area

and position the university to be even more competitive in attracting external support to advance

research, education, and outreach activity in this transcendental and highly interdisciplinary area.

Research themes will be built around nanobiotechnology, nanotechnology for energy and the

environment, and nanomaterials and nanomanufacturing. Specific projects driven by these research

themes are now presented in greater detail:

Nanobiotechnology: The academic study of biomaterials has demonstrated rapid growth

over the past thirty years, and now truly combines the areas of engineering, biology, and medicine.

Recent advances in nanostructured biomaterials, which contain structural elements with dimensions

in the 1 to 100 nm range, have resulted from two complementary forces. First, there is a natural

evolution from the microscale to the nanoscale as self assembly, direct writing, lithography, laser

11

processing, atomic force microscopy, and other novel processing and characterization techniques

become available. Second, nanostructured materials provide the unique capabilities for interactions

with DNA, proteins, viruses, and other nanoscale structures. As a result, nanostructured materials

can provide unique biological functionalities that are not possible with conventional microstructured

materials. The next several years will likely see commercialization of implantable devices that

provide closed-loop control of glucose in diabetics; nanoscale “lab-on-a-chip” sensors that provide

in vivo analysis of single cells to elucidate disease mechanisms; nanoscale materials for drug and

gene delivery; three-dimensional heterogeneous tissue constructs and other technologies that

prevent microbial fouling of medical and environmental surfaces; and devices for neural repair and

blood vessel growth. The objective is to develop a comprehensive research, education, and outreach

program in nanobiotechnology to raise the University’s profile in this very important area . We

envision the active participation of faculty members within several departments within the College

of Engineering, the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, and the College of Veterinary

Medicine in the proposed program. This program development should include the development of a

cohesive community in nanobiotechnology, the development of undergraduate-level and graduate-

level courses in nanobiotechnology, the development of outreach programs in nanobiotechnology,

and the development of core facilities in nanobiotechnology. Funding these efforts will also be

sought from the NIH, NSF, and DoD.

Semiconductor Processing Laboratory: In past years the clean room in MRC was the

center piece of several large research activities (and numerous individual investigators) that spanned

the departments of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Material Science and Engineering,

Chemical Engineering and Physics. The facility was initially supported by money and resources

from the Microelectronic Center of North Carolina and then by the NSF Center for Advanced

Electronic Materials Processing and the Front End Processing Center. These large multidisciplinary

activities made it possible to maintain state of the art equipment in a modern clean room facility.

This in turn attracted numerous individual faculty projects and significant overall funding and user

fees for the clean room. For many years this facility was a hotbed of semiconductor research and a

significant recruiting tool for new faculty. In recent years, the absence of a central funding

mechanism has stifled the evolution necessary for the facility to address changes in national funding

priorities. Consequently, there has been a significant migration of faculty away from using the

central facility and a significant increase in faculty setting up their own specialty equipment. We

have lost our edge in leveraging large new programs (and the best new faculty) because we can no

longer point to a state of the art facility capable of addressing new research directions. We are at a

critical juncture where the infusion of college/university resources would make it possible to

successfully compete for the large multidisciplinary research programs that would again make the

facility a magnet for new faculty and well funded external research programs. A mechanism to

provide internal funding to maintain the laboratory is critical to the continued success of the

semiconductor program, as well as proposed nanotechnology research.

Nanotechnology for Energy Systems: North Carolina National Center for Nanophase

Characterization (NC)3 Initiative : This initiative presents a plan to establish a state-of-the-art

center at North Carolina State University (NCSU) aimed at performing cutting edge research in the

area of nanophase characterization of matter using nuclear techniques. The center would be based

on combining various modalities of nuclear (nanophase) analysis techniques such as positron

spectrometry and neutron diffraction to provide a unique nanoscopic picture of matter. These

capabilities are currently being established and tested at the NCSU PULSTAR reactor. Moreover,

when combined with existing and complimentary capabilities at NCSU (e.g., electron and X-ray

analysis techniques), this initiative will result in establishing NCSU as a national leader in

nanotechnology research and education.

12

The establishment of (NC)3 will require providing infrastructural support for the PULSTAR reactor

to ensure its development as a world-class research and education facility. This includes supporting

the necessary modifications to uprate the reactor power from 1-MW to 5-MW, which would result

in a dramatic enhancement of the performance of its facilities. It also includes funding the

development of an on-campus pulsed neutron source that would extend the capabilities of the

PULSTAR center to perform studies of time-dependent and dynamic phenomena at the nanoscale.

This facility is envisioned to have valuable applications in energy, nuclear data and homeland

security research. Other activities include the development of campus-wide crosscutting research

and educational initiatives such as collaborations between Nuclear Engineering, Physics and

Materials Science that have successfully supported the work on ultra-cold neutrons and positrons at

the PULSTAR. An important objective is to integrate (NC)3 into the national laboratory research

structure. As part of the MUSIC conosrtium, partnerships were established with the appropriate

divisions at ORNL, SNS and NIST. In addition, further collaborative opportunities are currently

being explored with other national laboratories that have activities that relate to nanophase research.

However, a more integrated relationship will be sought. These efforts include the hiring of joint

faculty members between the COE and DOE national laboratories.

Nanoscale Materials and Manufacturing : Nanoelectronics: While there is much basic

information to be learned in the science of nanoscale structures, the real economic payoff will come

with the engineered applications of nanoscale technology. It is also clear that one of the major

applications of nanoscale structures will be in the achievement of ever smaller and more energy

efficient electronic structures and devices. The field of nanotechnology is being driven significantly

by the materials and fabrication techniques developed in the microelectronics industry and some of

the smallest engineered structures are already on the verge of being employed in the electronics

industry. Thus nanoelectronics – or the application of nanotechnology to electronics – is an

essential component of any future efforts in nanoscale materials and manufacturing.

The promise of nanoelectronics is for devices so small that 109 to 10

12 of these can be

integrated into a single chip providing memory or information processing power 100 to 1000 times

that available today. NC State is well positioned to be one of the leading universities in this new

nanoelectronics era. We have been a leader over the past two decades in developing CMOS

microelectronics technology, compound semiconductor materials growth technology, and modeling

and simulation needed for nanotechnology research. We have established strong research programs

with support from NSF, DoD, and the semiconductor industries. The newly established NCSU-

UNC/CH Center for Lithography, with its 157 nm laser source, will provide a unique facility for

forming electronic based structures at the nanoscale dimensions. This state-of-the-art capability

does not exist on any other U.S. academic institution and provides the basis for novel research on

nanoscale structures. Our current efforts need to be strengthened with additional faculty and

resources to work in areas such as nanoscale devices and systems, molecular electronics, spin-based

electronics, bio-inspired device and circuit approaches, and bioelectronic/electronic interfaces.

Analytical Instrumentation Facility (AIF): Technology advances are intimately tied to

our ability to view and analyze the structures and chemistries of advanced materials down to the

atomic level. Examples range from microelectronics (which now have nanoscale features) to

biomaterials. The present capabilities for materials structural and chemical characterization at

NCSU, which largely resides in AIF, are incapable of adequately supporting future nanomaterials

research at NCSU. Our nearby peer institutions (Georgia Tech, U. South Carolina, Clemson, U. of

Virginia and Virginia Tech) all have superior nanomaterials research instrumentation, which

translates directly into superior capabilities for proposing and winning major research competitions.

This is a university-level infrastructure problem that impacts materials-related researchers across

13

COE as well as in PAMS, COT and beyond. This problem must be addressed and solved or we will

not be competitive in future major nanomaterials and nanomanufacturing research proposals. The

extent of this problem was highlighted by Dr. Mike Rigsbee, Head of our Materials Science and

Engineering department, when he recently reviewed the graduate program in materials science and

engineering at Virginia Tech. Just as Georgia Tech passed us by with new resources and added

faculty, Virginia Tech is poised to do likewise. Virginia Tech is completing construction of their

Institute for Critical Technologies and Applied Sciences building III, which has 16,000 sq ft of

specialized space for their Advanced Materials Characterization Laboratory. The AMCL will be a

central university resource with ~20$M of new instrumentation critical to nanomaterials and

nanomanufacturing research. In addition, four new permanent staff will be hired, plus a Director.

NC State must have capabilities at least equal and preferably superior to those of Virginia Tech if

we are to hire new faculty and build nationally competitive major research programs.

Nano-Scale Science and Technology for Energy and Environment North Carolina State

University has a vibrant collection of ongoing efforts in the development, utilization, and

management of alternative energy sources and energy storage. This includes novel nanostructured

materials and synthesis, characterization methods, and computational modeling with specific

applications towards thermionic, photovoltaic, thermoelectric, thermophotovoltaic, and non-

equilibrium thermodynamic effects. Mutual interests exist across multiple disciplinary and field

boundaries. Key areas of expertise available at NC State University include molecular and

biomimetic photovoltaic materials and devices, nanoscale materials for fuel cells, biofuel

production and other energy-related systems, biological toxicity of advanced functional nanoscale

materials and structures, and novel analytic techniques combined with first-principles calculations

to understand atomic scale function of nano-energy transduction.

3.2.3 INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY: Defining how we

process, store, retrieve, and distribute information via the computer and the Internet has forever

altered the science of information. Advances in communications technologies allow us to transmit

almost limitless amounts of information anywhere in the world. Efforts will be made to stress the

pervasiveness of information technology across the whole spectrum of engineering applications.

CHiPS: Center and Related Molecular Computation: The Center for High Performance

Simulations (CHiPS) has existed for over three years and several of our faculty participate in this

Center. The Center faculty in the COE alone generate over $6 M per year in grants and contracts,

and well in excess of $1 M in indirect costs. The College of Engineering and the Departments of

Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Materials Science and Engineering, and Computer

Science have all contributed overhead return to the funding of administrative support, an invited

lecture series, and infrastructure support to encourage continued collaborative efforts at seeking

Center level funding from external funding agencies. We continue to support this initiative and

believe that, with the UNC System funding going to RENCI each year (well in excess of $5 M a

year and in the budget this year for another significant increase), this initiative is meritorious of

legislative funding at a significant level.

CHESS: Center for High-End Systems Software: CHESS is a center that is being

proposed to consolidate both research and educational efforts in the domain of software-based

systems. The scope of the center includes: high-performance systems and cluster computing;

parallel systems; distributed systems and algorithms; highly scalable middleware and runtime

systems; fault-tolerant systems; highly reliable, available and serviceable (RAS) systems; power-

aware and heat-aware systems; parallel I/O and storage systems; scientific data management;

performance analysis and tuning; code optimization for parallelization. Center objectives include

14

seeking funding from federal agencies such as NSF, DOE; industry, such as IBM, Intel, AMD, SG,

and fostering collaborations and joint appointments with research labs, such as ORNL, LLNL, IBM

T.J Watson/ARL. It also seeks to create new opportunities for collaborations / joint appointments,

such as RENCI, increase the visibility of the excellence in HPC research activities at NCSU, create

a critical mass to seek large-scale funding (NSF CISE CRI, IGERT etc.); and promote state-of-the-

art education to students by advising them on research topics and teaching classes using the latest

hardware and software technology.

CISE: Center for Industrial Software Engineering: For more than 20 years, the

Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon has established itself as a world-class

research organization and a resource and authority for software engineering. However, the SEI is

primarily funded by the US Department of Defense. As a result, their focus is principally on the

development of software for the defense industry rather than the commercial industry. In many

cases, industrial organizations use the research and processes generated by the SEI despite the fact

that commercial and defense-grade software are very different. There is a need for a world-class

center in software engineering that is focused on the needs of industry. The COE is unique in that we have both a core group of software engineering faculty and that we are situated in the Research

Triangle Park, amidst a myriad of companies producing software-intensive systems. As a result, we

are in a prime position to establish a world-class center in software engineering that is focused on

the needs of industry. This covers topics that are specific to open source engineering, that are

specific to closed source engineering, and those that represent common issues. In such a center, we

can work synergistically with industrial organizations to improve the practice of software

engineering as well as the education we give our students in that domain.

Person-Centric Technology : Computing technology has a deservedly bad reputation as a

taskmaster that demands people change the way they do things in unreasonable ways to fit the

changing limitations of information technology. The objective of this effort is to lead in replacing

the present environment of technology-centric computing with human-centric technology. In this

vision, the power, flexibility, and miniaturizability of computing and communications technology is

combined with knowledge and data about human capabilities to shape the technology to fit around

the person without making unnatural demands. This includes centering computing systems to

persons (human or corporate) who use them, and to the social, medical, legal, and economic

environments in which these persons act. It involves pervasive embedding of computation,

knowledge, and data collection and analysis into all facets of the human environment. This area will likely involve much collaboration within the College of Engineering, including electrical and

computer engineering, biomedical engineering, industrial and systems engineering, and

environmental engineering, as well as numerous collaborations across the university, including

PAMS, CALS, Textiles, CHASS, and the College of Management.

Embedded Radios and Wireless Sensor Networks: Over the next two decades, tiny

sensors, radio tags and microprocessors will be increasingly installed in ordinary objects such as

credit cards, washing machines, landmines, heart monitors and even livestock. Since these devices

must communicate to be useful, a new class of ultra-low-power, low-cost, short-range “embedded

radios” must be developed. The extreme power and range limitations of these radios will require

new communication paradigms, in which sensors must collaborate and network to an unprecedented

degree. NCSU researchers have pioneered some of the emerging technologies in this field, with

strong support from NSF, DoD, NASA and the local communications industry. As research

transitions to the systems level in the next decade, however, further investments in faculty and

infrastructure are needed in the areas of cross-layer communications, adaptive radios and distributed

processing in order to build sufficiently diverse research teams to remain competitive for new and

15

emerging federal and private sector funding opportunities, and in order to build the new curricula

needed to educate the next generation of wireless communications engineers.

The Wireless Information Age: The Wireless Information Age will be a much more

pervasive technology than present applications. The coming revolution is based upon the growing

ability to put very low-cost transmitters and receivers into all electronic systems and to even

integrate wireless techniques at the individual IC component level. A hint at the features this will

make possible can be obtained from the wireless mouse and wireless keyboards now becoming

available for desktop computers. In a broader sense what is in the future is the ability at low cost to

communicate, if desired, with almost all electronic systems, all computers embedded in home

appliances and automobiles and even with individual subcomponents of electronic systems over

wireless channels. This Wireless Age will represent a revolutionary ability, not only for people to

share information, but for all electronic-based systems in the office and home to share information.

It is likely to have dramatic effects in such areas as office, home and national security and in health

care monitoring and delivery for everyone, especially the elderly. Much engineering research and

development is needed to achieve this Wireless Information Age. Research areas covered by the

technology include (a) Microwaves and Millimeterwaves, (b) Transmitters and receivers, (c)

Embedded computer hardware, (d) Computer software, (e) Equipment monitoring and control and

(f) Networking software and protocols. Not only must research be done in all these inter-related

areas, but the knowledge base generated must eventually be incorporated into the education of our

students.

Gigascale Engineered Systems: The technology for electronic based systems in the future

will be driven by advances in nanoscale materials and devices. At present electronic and computer

systems can be built with over 100 million devices or components. It is now certain that within the

next few decades economical electronic systems will be possible with 1 to 1000 Billion devices.

We are thus entering the Gigascale Engineered Systems era where systems will be characterized by

1 to 1000 Giga devices or components, 1 to 1000 Giga Hertz operating frequencies, 1 to 100 Giga

operations per second. > 1 Giga bytes of memory, and 1 Giga bits/sec of data. To effectively design

systems in the era of Gigascale Systems will require many research advances and changes to our

educational process. The challenges of this task at the Gigascale Systems level are enormous and

include hierarchical design methodology, interconnecting 109 to 10

12 components, data

management, simulating and modeling of designs, testing of such complex systems, and reliably

manufacturing such complex systems.

The Gigascale Engineered Systems Era brings with it many research and education challenges. We

must first learn how, from research, to effectively design such large systems and then this

knowledge must eventually be translated into an already overcrowded educational process for both

undergraduate and graduate students. The COE is in a very good position to be at the forefront of

these research and education areas. We are a leader in many of the new nanotechnology areas and

we have continued to be a leading institution in the past in VLSI (Very Large Scale Integration)

design (both research and education). However, given the enormously increased complexity of the

Gigascale Systems Era (100 to 1000 times more complex) additional resources are needed to meet

both the research challenges and to educate the ever increasing numbers of students interested in

addressing the challenges of this theme.

3.2.4 ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS: Discovering new ways to generate

power while keeping our environmental systems healthy is an example of the delicate balance

associated with research and education in this area. The interdisciplinary nature of the design,

provision and maintenance of energy and environmental systems makes this truly a college and

16

university-wide opportunity. NC State’s COE has played a major role in enhancing the capabilities

of our state and nation in both traditional and non-renewable energy sources and environmental in

concert with many industrial and government partners. Continuing investments will allow the COE

to build upon these relationships to develop nationally prominent research and educational

programs in this area.

Energy Initiatives:

Renewable Energy Technologies Innovation Institute (RETI2): This initiative proposes

the development of a world-class research, education and outreach institute focused on the myriad,

multidisciplinary aspects of energy technologies. The COE supports the efforts of faculty from

multiple COE departments, the NC Solar Energy Center, PAMS, COT and other colleges to

develop the Renewable Energy Technologies Innovation Institute (RETI2) at NC State. Currently, a

significant number of our very strongest faculty are actively engaged in research in this area. The

objective is to coalesce the renewable energy related activities of the University into an Institute that

would provide NC State with a cohesive identity in this area and position the university to be even

more competitive in attracting external support to advance research, education, and outreach

activity in this critical area of societal need. The major research themes and outreach programs

proposed by RETI2 are:

Biomass processing: Includes research in enzymology, reactor design and operation,

metabolic analysis, fermentation technology, process analytical technology, chemical catalysis,

combustion/thermal processing and process control. Projects would involve collaboration of faculty

across chemical, electrical and mechanical engineering as well as biological and agricultural

engineering, chemistry, and wood and paper sciences. BTEC would provide a support base for

complementary facilities and expertise. Implementation of a Center for Integrated Biomass Refining

(CIBR) would include a pilot facility for the thermal and chemical conversion of biomass to fuels,

chemicals and power that would act as a springboard for the commercialization of relevant

technologies developed at NC State. The activities of this center would complement those of the

Center for Plant Breeding and Applied Plant Genomics currently in the planning stages in CALS.

Renewable Energy Technologies: Involves nanotechnology, microelectronic processing,

nanostructured materials, batteries, fuel cells, photovoltaic devices, and signal processing. Projects

would involve collaboration of faculty across chemical, electrical, materials science, and

mechanical engineering as well PAMS and COT. Close association with SPEC, and well as with

energy-related research in the Nanotechnology Institute, is anticipated. A Solar Energy Test

Laboratory, with capabilities for performance testing of solar thermal and photovoltaic panels, will

be established in partnership with industrial collaborators.

Nuclear Power is on the verge of a renaissance as indicated by the (1) likelihood of a

number of nuclear power reactors of advanced designs being sold, (2) increased research funding

opportunities, and (3) strong recovery of student enrollments in undergraduate and graduate nuclear

engineering programs. This renaissance is also driven by favorable economics, energy growth based

upon non-fossil energy sources to minimize environmental impact, security of energy fuel sources

in an unstable world, and career opportunities for our graduates. Research and career opportunities

are now very strong and are expected to remain so for the foreseeable future in nuclear energy

related activities such as advanced reactor design along with associated fuel cycles & nuclear

materials/waste management, and homeland security & non-proliferation safeguards.

17

Energy and Power Electronics: Power electronics is the engineering study of converting

electrical power from one form to another. At a world-wide consumption rate of 12 billion kilowatts

every hour of every day of every year, more than 40% of the power generated is being reprocessed

or recycled through some form of power electronic systems. A lot of energy is wasted during this

power conversion process due to low power conversion efficiency. It is estimated that the power

wasted in desktop PCs sold in one year is equivalent to seventeen 500MW power plants. It is

therefore very important to improve the efficiency of these power electronics systems. Appling

power electronics directly to our transmission and distribution electric power system, energy

electronics is an emerging multidisciplinary engineering field emphasizing energy sources

(including renewable energy) integration, energy storage and energy management. The energy and

power electronics research area at NCSU attempts to provide leading edge solutions to meet the

ever increasing need for secure, efficient and affordable electric energy. NCSU has established itself

as the leader in the area of solid state power semiconductor devices that improve energy conversion

efficiency, and in the area of large scale power electronics systems. Because of our existing

expertise, NCSU’s vision is to become the world leader in developing advanced energy and power

electronics technologies to transform our nation’s aging electric grid from a passive network to an

active and intelligent grid.

Sustainability and the Environment Initiatives:

Sustainability of human existence will be a major theme in the next half century. Already,

schools like ASU have created schools of sustainability. The COE needs to mainstream this concept

into its research and educational portfolio. In the U.S., residential and commercial buildings account

for ~ 40% and the transportation sector for about 25% of energy usage. Engineers of all types are

intimately involved in the planning, design, construction and management of the nation’s

infrastructure, but design paradigms need to change to make the nation’s infrastructure more

sustainable and resilient. Critical sustainability and environmental systems areas for research and

educational opportunities include prevention or management of emissions of criteria pollutants,

hazardous air pollutants, and greenhouse gases; emission inventories; environmental impact

assessment (including energy-efficiency, environmental impact of building materials); effects of

climate change (including impact of rising sea level on coastal regions, impact of climate change on

water resources, impact of climate change on air quality, transportation, and emissions); green

building design and construction; and recycling or beneficial use of by-products of energy

generation systems based on life-cycle assessment and industrial ecology principles.

Sustainability of human existence will be a major theme in the next half century. Already,

schools like ASU have created schools of sustainability. The COE needs to mainstream this concept

into its research and educational portfolio. In the U.S., residential and commercial buildings account

for approximately 40% and the transportation sector for about 25% of energy usage. Critical

sustainability and environmental systems areas for research and educational opportunities include

prevention or management of emissions of criteria pollutants, hazardous air pollutants, and

greenhouse gases; emission inventories; environmental impact assessment; climate change; green

building design and construction; and recycling of beneficial use of by-products of energy

generation systems based on life-cycle assessment and industrial ecology principles.

18

Sustainable Built Environments: Our energy supplies are being rapidly depleted and

global warming is proceeding at an alarming rate. The economic and environmental consequences

of our current patterns of operating are going to be catastrophic within this century, unless we take

radical actions to change our patterns of operating. Buildings account for 40 to 50% of our national

energy consumption and they cause between 40 and 50% of the carbon dioxide emissions.

Improving the energy performance of buildings through better design represents one of the most

promising opportunities to make radical near-term reductions in energy consumption and carbon

emissions. This represents both a huge challenge and a huge opportunity for the University. The

potential collaborations between the College of Engineering and the College of Design are rich and

varied. This effort will also draw on faculty from the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering

Departments, as well as new faculty in the Wood and Paper Science Department in CNR who are

focused on supply chain issues and sustainable materials manufacturing processes and affiliated

with the American Home project.

Coastal Resilience and Hazard Mitigation: The coastal zone is by nature an ever changing

environment. Landforms and ecosystems change from time scales of seconds to days to geologic

eras. Such systems presents unique problems to the engineering design window of 50 to 100 years.

In addition, impact from coastal development is experienced at multiple geospatial scales. Coastal

engineering embraces this complexity and seeks to find sustainable and resilient engineered

solutions for managing development and providing a safe and healthy environment within the

coastal zone.

Post Katrina, post Asian Tsunami visions of coastal engineering have evolved into a woven

alliance between the nano (sensor technology), info (Geospatial Information Sciences and

Technology GIST), bio (biotechnology) worlds inside the College of Engineering and the marine,

geospatial and social sciences outside of the COE. The renewed focus on the coastal zone is driven

by the tremendous imminent changes in the geomorphologic and eco-hydrodynamic coastal

environments resulting from global climate change. The associated projected sea level rise and

increased frequency and intensity of coastal storms will have all encompassing impact on the 40%

of the world’s population that live within 100 km of the coast. For example, the Department of

Homeland Security recently issued a call for proposals for a Center of Excellence for the Study of

Natural Disasters, Coastal Infrastructure and Emergency Management. In addition, in May 2006,

UNC President Erskine Bowles convened the Marine Sciences Task Force to explore educational

partnerships throughout the UNC system to promote and sustain the economic and environmental

health of the coastal zone. Opportunities exist to partner with the NCSU Center for Marine Science

and Technology (CMAST) and the UNC Institute for Marine Sciences (UNC-IMS) in Morehead

City as well as with the UNC Coastal Studies Institute (CSI) in Manteo creating multi-disciplinary,

multi-university teams to deliver research and education programs for the State.

Partnering with other campuses (CSI, Manteo and NCSU CMAST, Morehead City) provides

access to the coastal environment in ways that are attractive to students and provide the opportunity

to expand the NCSU COE engineering faculty presence in the coastal region of NC through new

hires. Initiatives such as the Georgia Tech Savannah Campus provide models for this growth.

(http://www.gtrep.gatech.edu/welcome/index.html)

19

3.2.5 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY: Infrastructure can be seen as a

framework of interdependent networks and systems that provide for the reliable and secure

functioning of society as a whole. This thrust area encompasses physical infrastructure and

information infrastructure. This includes building upon well-established COE research and

educational programs in transportation and structures to develop even broader programs that

address issues of both physical and information infrastructure. It also includes expansion into issues

related to logistics and distribution. Research related to the design and development of

infrastructure systems that support homeland defense and homeland security will also be

emphasized under this thrust.

Security: Current computing and communications technology has been built on

foundations laid during an earlier era of non-hostile users and environments. This effort seeks to

reset information technology on more secure foundations that do not rely on the kindness of

strangers. This involves major efforts in software engineering, networking, systems, and theory that

aim to produce robust software, protocols, and environments reliably and efficiently. This effort

will build on the outstanding reputation our security researchers already have, and will leverage

existing Cyber Defense Laboratory efforts, those of CACC, as well as the new CISE, efforts.

Construction Program Partnerships: Partner with others on campus, such as the College

of Design) who share an interest in construction (academic and research programs such as

mechanical engineering, architecture, business and the American Home initiative; and

administrative units such as Design and Construction Services, Construction Management, and

Facilities Operations ). Find purposeful relationships with North Carolina government agencies that

are the largest owners of constructed facilities in the state (e.g., the UNC System, and departments of Corrections, Administration, Cultural Resources, DEHNR) and those that are regulators of the

design and construction process (Labor, Insurance, and various licensing boards) to help respond to

their needs. Partner with other engineering and construction programs where common interests

exist. Boost CCEE research activities in construction. Identify areas to stress – such as error-free

design, reduction in cost of changes, evaluation and refinement of contract procedures, evaluation

of new materials, systems and fabrication processes, use of environmentally friendly technologies,

information technology, project management, production scheduling – that resonate with the

construction industry, partner programs, and the department’s faculty, staff, and students.

Infrastructure Health Monitoring and Improvement: The objective of this program is to

develop a world-class expertise in health monitoring and improvement of critical physical

infrastructures at NC State that will advance the state-of-the-art in health monitoring, advance the

analysis of system performance, and develop new technologies. It will also provide a unifying

context for various technological research activities within the COE in this area. Specific activities

include rehabilitation of deteriorating and aging civil infrastructure components, including bridges,

roadways, buildings, water distribution pipe networks, sewer systems, waste disposal systems,

power generation systems, etc.; monitoring and condition assessment of aging as well as new civil

infrastructure systems for efficient retrofit, management, and operation (e.g., minimizing energy

and natural resources consumption) to enhance sustainability; and use of contemporary technologies

in informatics for effective information assessment for sustainable engineering.

3.2.6 ADVANCED MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING: Advanced materials research is

achieving new levels of complexity as researchers develop ways to blend existing materials into

new materials with very strong, unique, previously non-existent properties. Research in advanced

manufacturing includes better monitoring and advanced diagnostic tools and state of the art

automated systems and industrial processes. An underlying objective is the development of the

20

next-generation manufacturing base for North Carolina and the translation of this research and

development into viable future workforce opportunities.

Energy Related Materials Initiative: This initiative is directed at developing an energy-

related Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC). Preliminary efforts and

planning for development of a MRSEC proposal have begun. This initiative would provide the

opportunity to focus new hires on faculty with expertise in structural materials and with a research

focus in the growing and technologically important area of energy related materials. New

developments in energy related materials include smart materials that change their properties in

direct response to stress and environment and nanocrystalline materials. This topic even has an

environmental angle with corrosion and oxidation being in the mix of problems faced by newly

evolving technologies. The College and University will need to assist this effort with resources for

faculty lines, start-up funds, space and cost sharing funds.

NCSU “Center” for Atomic Resolution Electron Microscopy: NSF and University funds

were used to purchase a JEM 2010F field emission atomic resolution transmission electron

microscope with a value substantially in excess of $1,000,000. This microscope is a University-

wide resource and is used both for graduate-level research and teaching. State-of-the-art electron

microscopy is an essential tool for nationally competitive materials researchers. Substantial levels

of current and future research funding, including indirect costs, is made possible by these facilities.

In spite of a commitment in the proposal for the university to cover the costs for the annual service

contract, for the past ~5 years the MSE department has borne the entire cost for the operation and

maintenance, including the service contract, of this microscope. The annual expenses for operation

and maintenance of the atomic resolution facility are approximately $140,000 including personnel,

supplies, and service contracts. It is not possible to recover all of these costs by direct charges to

externally funded research contracts since the facilities are also used for teaching and training. It is

necessary to maintain this facility to underpin nanoscale materials research capabilities and

programs at NCSU.

Mechatronic Systems: Mechatronics is a term describing engineered systems that require

relatively equal contributions to the conception and design and development from (a) Electronics,

(b) Computer engineering and (c) Mechanical engineering. There are many examples of

commercial products that are mechatronic systems including modern cameras (analog and digital),

VCR players/recorders, DVD players/recorders, hard disks for computers, robots and many

manufacturing lines. Japanese companies who were the first to recognize the critical importance of

the Mechanics concept and to properly integrate the required disciplines needed for work on such

products dominate the majority of these product areas.

At NCSU, Mechatronics has been identified as an important area in Electrical and Computer

Engineering and in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and an initial step has been taken to

establish an MS degree in Mechatronics jointly between the two departments. In fact NCSU is one

of the first US universities to establish a graduate Mechatronics degree program. Mechatronics has

been identified as especially important to the MAE department because the electronics and

computer revolutions have drastically changed the nature of many traditional mechanical systems.

More and more purely mechanical systems are being replaced by mechanical input and output

components with electronics and computer technologies taking over the remainder of a system.

This is driven by the low cost and programmable nature of such an approach. Also in ECE more

systems are requiring an interfacing to mechanical components, especially in such important areas

as robotics and process control. NCSU is in a position to become a major leader in the Mechatronics

research and education area, however, additional resources are required to make this a reality.

21

Advanced Manufacturing Research, Education and Outreach: These initiatives include

efforts in precision metrology, smart materials and auto-adaptive materials. They also include

activities to support manufacturing engineering education and manufacturing extension activities.

3.2.7 ROBOTICS AND SENSORS TECHNOLOGIES: Robotics has captivated society for

decades. Today, intelligent, human-engineered robots carry the latest in sensor technology and

artificial intelligence. Research in the broader area of sensors technologies impacts a broad range of

application areas from biomedical to energy and environmental systems, advanced manufacturing,

and national security. Specific areas with significant potential for the COE include:

Rehabilitation Engineering and Biorobotics (REBioRob): Rehabilitation Engineering and

Biorobotics (REBioRob) are areas where biomedical and robotic systems blend seamlessly, with the

ultimate goal of developing devices and systems that address the ever increasing needs of robotic

technology and systems in biomedicine and medical surgery. This effort will build on an established

Center for Robotics and Intelligent Machines that has strong links to the UNC-School of Medicine

as well as internationally recognized efforts in applications such as automated cell in vitro

fertilization, robotic-based stroke rehabilitation, microrobotic solutions for minimally invasive

surgery, and, biomimetically-inspired robot designs. Support for the growth of this effort is

envisioned from DARPA, NTC, NIH, and the Naval Research Laboratory. These efforts will have

a direct impact on a large number of disabled for which there is no cure and whose lives are affected

by medical disorders, neural disorders, and muscular disorders. These efforts could be truly

inspiring for the citizens of North Carolina as our faculty will have the opportunity to perform

research on topics that directly affect many of them

Ubiquitous Sensing and Imaging in Health, Environment and Homeland Security:

Meeting the multitude of health, environmental and homeland security challenges facing our state

and nation in the current century entails an unprecedented demand for multidisciplinary technical

advances and daunting engineering feats. Cross-disciplinary activities between mathematics,

physical sciences and engineering indeed promise breakthroughs never imagined possible before.

With the growing high computing power and the never ceasing challenges encountered in

applications, a rich data-driven research is emerging, and the pace for the demand of solutions in the

field has never been greater. It is becoming imperative for researchers to not only innovate at the

methodological and conceptual levels, but to also demonstrate the viability of the research in a

practical setting.

At NCSU, we have been at the forefront of this research paradigm shift, by successfully securing

funding for a Sensor Laboratory from the US Air Force, which in turn allows us to experiment

with the power of the individual sensors (such as Infra-red (IR) and Laser Sensors) as well as with

their untapped combined power. While the science of deploying an intelligent and exhaustive

system for information acquisition remains an open problem, the processing and the exploitation of

this data is key to the success in the challenges we are facing. Our success in securing funding from

a variety of sources is only testimony to the far greater potential activity which would take place

with additional resources. This, however, hinges on the institutional support to satisfy the student

demand in both of the curricular as well as the research area, as well as to establish a sufficiently

critical mass which in turn, affords a leveled field competition with other university research teams.

Sensing and Imaging research cuts across many disciplines which are also of vital interest to North

Carolina industry and economy. The opportunities afforded by the newly established Medical

Imaging Center at Chapel Hill are of tremendous long term importance to NC and yet may go

unexplored as the demands at a national level from DOD are ever more increasing. The extent of

22

possible collaborations is well illustrated by the recent joint effort between the Department of

Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences and the ECE Department to initiate an experimental

terrain modeling platform to not only investigate the environmental factors on NC terrains but also

construct useful models for robotics space exploration of interest to NASA. The demands in this

growing area of Signaling and Imaging, as well documented by the latest report of the National

Academy of Sciences, are great, the opportunities to have an impact are tremendous, and the timing

is critical. We are in need of new, able and enthusiastic faculty, to not only form the future

generations of engineers and scientists, but to also attend to the nation’s critical needs in this area.

Related Technologies: This includes research and educational investments in opto-

mechanical systems, micro-electrical-mechanical systems (MEMS), geomatics, power supply

harvesting, package embedment and integration, and human centric & bio-inspired autonomous

intelligence

3.2.8 ENGINEERING THE SERVICES: The objective is to support the expansion of

engineering research and education into areas such as transportation systems, health systems, and

financial systems and develop information technology based cross-departmental collaborations and

education efforts that enable engineering of services (or service sciences).

Health Systems/Logistics Systems/Financial Systems :

Health Systems Engineering: Includes research and educational initiatives in health care

delivery, treatment, prevention, safety and biomedicine.

Logistics Systems Engineering: Includes research initiatives in operational and supply

chain logistics for the private and public sector, security and military operations. Includes

educational and outreach initiatives in supply chain modeling, analysis and management.

Financial Systems Engineering: Includes research and educational initiatives in

quantitative finance and operations research with a particular emphasis on the modeling, analysis

and design of financial products and systems. Collaboration with the COM and the new MS

program in Analytics is part of this effort.

The development of these areas has been significantly enhanced through an endowment provided by

Mr. Edward P. Fitts to name the department of Industrial and Systems Engineering and to establish

endowed professorships in these areas. Two of these positions, a senior Fitts professorship in

Logistics and a junior Fitts professor in Health Systems have been recruited. While the individual

hired to go into the senior professorship will assume a position previously occupied by an ISyE

faculty member there is a difference in the salaries of the two individuals. The junior position also

has a salary differential. Continuing funding is requested to make up the salary differential for these

two ISyE Fitts professorships.

Transportation Systems: Includes discovery and development of innovative means of

transportation on the Earth, in the Planetary System, and beyond. This includes: land, sea, air, and

space vehicles; propulsion systems and fuels; energy systems; guidance, navigation and control

including autonomous operation; structures, materials and mechanisms; real-time transportation

management; and mode transition technologies such as atmospheric entry to landing.

Transportation is a major driving force of the US economic engine, accounting for more

than 10.5% of the US-GDP and employing nearly 9% of the US labor force. It is also a large

23

consumer of energy, both domestic and exported, consuming over 28% of all primary energy

sources. The transportation sector is extremely vulnerable to disruptions in energy supply as 98% of

that sector’s energy demand comes from petroleum, by far the largest of all sectors in the economy.

In addition, greenhouse gas emissions are closely tied to current energy consumption patterns.

Faculty members in the COE are actively responding to these challenges. The Institute for

Transportation Research and Education (ITRE), headquartered at NC State, spends $10M per year

on these problems and issues, of which $4M reflects activity at NC State. This activity includes a

multi-pronged research program on the use of advanced sensor networks that can sense and then

provide real-time, large scale system operation optimization. The optimization feedback loop

includes recommended routes, modes or departure times for commuters and commercial users,

congestion pricing strategies for passenger and commodity flows, and overriding autonomous

vehicle control in the event of an emergency. High-end computing protocols support the diverse and

computing-intensive real-time transportation operations. NC State is also a national leader and has

received significant funding for developing methods for mitigating vehicle emissions through

optimal design and control of the transportation infrastructure, and in the study of alternative fuel

and vehicle propulsion technologies. Endorsement and expanded support of these initiatives will

place NC State among a handful of universities at the forefront of these investigations.

Parallel efforts focus on the physical infrastructure side, designing a flexible and sustainable

transportation infrastructure. Roadway materials are one part of this effort, where NC State is

among the top five in the US. Provision of flexible capacity is another, through lane control

systems, time or event-dependent control schemes and intelligent transfer point designs (e.g.

continuous flow intersections; nano-interchanges; just-in time modal transfers). These areas will

continue to be hallmarks of the NC State program and would benefit from both university

endorsement and financial support.

Ubiquitous Information Systems: Future networks will connect humans, sensors, actuators

and embedded processors by a combination of wired and wireless networks, including ad hoc and

cell-based systems, in a seamless, ubiquitous manner. The value derived from and the efficient

operation of such networks hinges upon their instant availability and their agility to deliver a wide

range of information-based services, under varying conditions, and at guaranteed levels of quality.

Such requirements ask for a very flexible networking infrastructure fundamentally different from

the traditional wired Internet. Consequently, the underlying network algorithms have to be

distributed, scalable, efficient and robust. We propose to continue and increase our emphasis on

solving engineering problems related to wireless systems, wireless mesh networks, mobile ad hoc

networks, ubiquitous systems access, system availability and reliability, and very large scale

ubiquitous system modeling, design and evaluation.

Services Science and Management Engineering (SSME): We are living in a service

oriented world. Already in the US, well over 60% of the economic output comes from services,

similar to all advanced economies. The industrial and technological landscape is changing, with

components becoming increasingly commoditized while outsourcing and off-shoring are on the rise.

Closer to our domain, information and networking technology companies, as exemplified by IBM,

EMC, Nortel, and other similar companies, are all shifting towards providing “systems” and

“services”, as opposed to merely selling “equipment”. Academia is slowly beginning to introduce

service related courses and initiatives. In the College of Engineering (CSC and ECE departments),

we have been pursuing this strategic interdisciplinary area since 2005, by investigating educational

and research opportunities, in collaboration with the College of Management. With advice and

$155K in financial support from IBM, we have initiated research, co-organized international events,

24

and launched a new concentration in our Master of Science degree on Computer Networks

(MSCN). Our vision for the short and long term includes:

a. Development of services related courses for the undergraduate programs in CSC and ECE,

and service-related concentrations for all the graduate programs in CSC and ECE.

b. Development of a “Center of Excellence on Services Engineering”. This center will provide

synergistic opportunities among various constituents in the College and foster new research

areas in services.

c. Collaboration with the College of Management on our SSME master’s concentration track.

Serious Games Research and Education Center (SGREC): While computer games have

traditionally been associated with recreation, they are now moving to become major vehicles for

training, education, fitness and service evaluation and delivery, as well as for design and

understanding of complex systems. The Triangle area represents the third or fourth largest hub of

the US game industry. We seek to capitalize on this presence by research and development on

games and game-inspired technology as a means for delivering computing services to people. This

area already involves important collaborations with the College of Design, College of Education,

and CHASS, and offers other multidisciplinary collaborations as well, especially when focused on educational purposes. The center will serve as a multidisciplinary focus for research and educational

efforts in serious games, the application of advanced game and simulation technology to problem

areas such as complex systems visualization, education and training, collaboration and

entertainment. The center’s research will extend our understanding of both scientific, engineering

societal and educational challenges. The center will serve as the focal point for the new

undergraduate computer science concentration in games and game-based analytics.

3.3 INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

3.3.1 Expanding Interdisciplinary Research

For the COE to advance into the top-10 of public colleges of engineering, the COE will need to grow

research expenditures by at least 50%. Areas of research that offer large growth potential need to be

identified so that new programs can be developed that will make NC State unique among its peer

institutions. This will be a challenge that will require bold action and investing in new opportunities that

offer high rewards.

The COE is focused on expanding interdisciplinary research activities.. As described elsewhere in

this Plan, the COE is developing new strategic initiatives that will lead to large well-coordinated

research programs. Funds are required to seed new interdisciplinary research activities. Successful

partnerships both within NC State and with external groups are an absolute requirement for the COE

to achieve significant increases in research funding. Examples of successful centers include the

CACC, AEMP, and the Precision Engineering Center. Most recently, activities of the Institute for

Maintenance Science and Technology have led to the development of partnerships with the Naval

Air Depot at Cherry Point and the US Coast Guard Station in Elizabeth City. Partnerships provide

an opportunity for faculty to work across departmental lines and capitalize on their collective

strength for a common purpose to solve challenging problems that are not unique to one discipline.

Requested funds would allow for establishing an interdisciplinary infrastructure of people, facilities

and equipment to enable faculty to respond quickly to RFP’s in a timely way, as well as to promote

the economic development of the State. Interdisciplinary research activities also provide a learning

25

experience for students to experience how an interdisciplinary group can function successfully as a

team.

3.3.2 Faculty Research Resource Center

Resources are needed to establish a Faculty Research Resource Center enable faculty to develop

large complex proposals and to manage large grants. The center would provide assistance to faculty

by identifying funding opportunities, facilitating team-building, and providing proposal writing

assistance and editing. Multidisciplinary proposals are complex and they involve multiple partners

across department, college and university lines. They also require multi-institutional budgets and

associated non-standard terms and conditions. Funds are also needed for identifying and preparing

proposals for opportunities in research related to teaching, curriculum development, and other

student-related activities. Examples include NSF IGERT’s, REU’s, and RET’s. These opportunities

can provide significant enhancement of our students’ educational experience outside of the

classroom.

3.3.3 Undergraduate Research

The College is committed to dramatically expanding opportunities for our undergraduate students to

participate in meaningful research experiences with our faculty. Our students are eager to learn and

we need to provide them with exciting real-world learning opportunities outside the classroom. By

integrating our students in our research programs, we can broaden our students’ learning experience

and provide them with the tools they will need to be successful in their careers. These experiences

not only have a positive effect on student retention, but they are also excellent recruiting

experiences to interest undergraduate students in pursuing graduate degrees and the accelerated

completion of a MS degree. Since one of the College’s long term goals is to double its graduate

enrollment, this growth of undergraduate research engagement is of strategic importance. It is

critically important for these experiences to be meaningful both to the students and to the faculty

members as well. In order to foster this sense of mutual investment, the College will cost-share with

externally-funded research grants of faculty to support the research experience of undergraduate

students.

3.3.4 Recruitment of high-quality graduate students

The ability of the COE to improve its national ranking is directly linked to the quality of our

graduate students. Funds are needed to enable the COE to become more proactive in recruiting

graduate students to our research programs. This includes encouraging our own undergraduates to

consider NC State first for graduate school through the undergraduate research experience and other

programs.

NC State has much to be proud of – a new campus, integrated co-op work experience, opportunities

for students to work directly in research labs, an engaging and nationally-recognized faculty, high

quality of life, and unique research programs. Unfortunately, our story is not being told at the

national level. Funds are needed to publicize the COE by participating in recruiting events at

national society meetings, providing recruiting grants, and providing travel funds for student campus

visits. Funds are also needed to provide support resources for our students for internships and

practical experience, and for study both in the US and abroad, and research and travel opportunities,

and to successfully compete for fellowships and scholarships at the national level, such as the NSF

Graduate Research Fellowships.

26

To achieve enrollment growth at the graduate level, resources are needed to cover the costs

associated with recruiting activities. These include development of recruiting publications and

brochures, advertising fees, registration and other fees associated with booths at national society

meetings, recruiting trips of potential graduate students for campus visits, and other operational costs

(part-time personnel support, travel, supplies,etc).

3.3.5 Increasing the number of PhD students

The USNWR national ranking of engineering colleges depends heavily on the enrollment of PhD

students. PhD enrollment per faculty is 3 in the COE, as compared with 4.1 for top-10 colleges of

engineering. The COE currently grants 0.35 PhDs per faculty per year. Top-10 colleges of

engineering graduate on average 0.58 PhDs per faculty per year. To achieve the College’s goal of

becoming a preeminent public College of Engineering, about 50 more PhD degrees would need to

be produced per year, which translates into an enrollment increase of about 250 full-time PhD

students. In order to attract larger numbers of high quality PhD students, University support is

needed to supplement externally-funded RA’s so that competitive awards of approximately $30k can

be offered to cover the stipend, tuition and health insurance.

Another example of the poor competitive position of the COE relative to top-ten colleges of

engineering is the number of undergraduate students to PhD students. Based on recent ASEE data,

the average ratio of UG to PhD enrollment among the top-ten engineering colleges is 3.9. Ga Tech,

the top college of engineering, has a ratio of 3.1. NC State’s COE ratio is a dismal 6.1. In order to

achieve a ratio of 3.9, the COE would need to increase PhD enrollment by approximately 500

students. Competition is fierce among the top ranked colleges of engineering and to attract the best

and brightest of graduate students, competitive stipends are needed. In order to attract high quality

PhD students, support is needed to be able to offer $30k to cover stipend and the costs of tuition and

health insurance. The COE proposes that 16 TA/RA positions be funded at $30k ($360k/year) as

permanent funding for the next 3 years.

3.4 EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

3.4.1 K-12 Outreach

The College of Engineering K-12 Outreach Program, in partnership with the College of Education,

has received two grants directed to fostering mathematics achievement in grades 3-12. Grants of

$500,000 from the GE Foundation for Mathematics Excellence and $2,000,000 from the National

Science Foundation Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education allow COE faculty and students

to work with schools to change the way potential high achieving mathematics students are identified

and supported and to teach mathematics through application-based inquiry, many times directly

related to engineering. The overall goal is to diversify the pool of students who take algebra by 8th

grade and calculus by 12th grade. The GE Foundation grant application was by invitation only, and

the invitation was offered to NC State University because of the extensive experience accumulated

by the College of Engineering in K-12 outreach. Success in the highly competitive NSF grant

program relied heavily on the background and reputation that the College had achieved in recent

years. These grant efforts align with the goals of the outreach program to increase exposure of K-

12 students and teachers to engineering and to support effective teaching methods for science,

technology and mathematics at the K-12 level.

27

The “Engineering on the Road” outreach activity served over 5,000 students statewide. The

outreach program was also the recipient of a Student Science Enrichment Program grant from the

Burroughs Wellcome Foundation. The middle school engineering camp (one week for teachers,

one week for students) continues to be a great success. In summer 2006 seventy-five students from

around the state, and even a few from out of state, attended our weeklong camp. Fifteen students

from a Native American tribal school attended for the week as well. The goals of this program are

to increase the percentage of freshman women and minorities entering engineering, to increase

awareness and understanding of engineering in K-12, and to increase the amount of engineering

taught in the K-12 curricula.

When the WISE Program was originally conceived, one-half of the Director’s position was intended

to coordinate the activities between this program and COE K-12 outreach efforts. This half of the

position support was not funded through the WISE allocation, but rather has been borne by the

College. Compact plan funding is requested to support the outreach portion of the WISE Director

position.

3.4.2 Undergraduate Distance Education

The College is experiencing significant growth in its offerings of distance education undergraduate

courses and degrees. There is one current program of this type in the Bachelor of Science

(Mechatronics Concentration) being offered on the UNC-Asheville campus. There are

approximately 50 students in this program at this time. A new Bachelor of Science (Mechanical &

Aerospace Concentration) program is in the final stages of approval at the Craven Community

College in support of the NAVAIR facility. Over 15 students are preparing to enter this degree

program upon its approval.

Our 2+2 engineering programs and pre-engineering partnerships with community colleges have also

expanded during the past three years. In addition to the historical programs at UNC Asheville, UNC

Wilmington, and Lenoir Community College, we have established new programs at Craven

Community College, Johnston Community College, Wake Technical Community College, and three

community colleges in the Rocky Mount area. These are all pipelines for transfer students where

students may begin their engineering education at local institutions and then complete their degrees

at NC State. Because of these developing programs, we have experienced increased need for

academic advising and direction provided to prospective students, industrial partners, and

community colleges. While this need has been met in the past by the transfer advisors within the

Office of Academic Affairs, the current staff is not able to meet these growing demands. Compact

plan support is requested to meet staffing needs of this developing component of College distance

education activities.

3.4.3 International Engagement

The College continues its commitment to developing highly qualified engineering professionals

who will be competitive and successful in the global economy. Evidence of this includes the

continuation of the highly successful Summer in Segovia (Spain) program, the two-semester

program in Brazil (for ISE and MAE students), continued partnership with Monterrey Tec (Mexico)

via the UNC-Exchange Programs, active participation on the NC State International Operations

Council (IOC), and an increase in scholarship funds. In partnership with IAESTE United States,

Rice University, and the University of Pittsburgh the College sent six students to China and Japan

over spring break to participate in the INNOVATE Technology & Leadership Conference where

28

students had an opportunity to visit world-class companies such as Toyota, Sanmina-SCI, and

Matsushita Electric (Panasonic). The college has established connections for international internship

opportunities with the IBM India Research Lab and the IBM China Development Lab.

The International Certificate was approved in January 2006 and provides students in the College

with an opportunity to expand their global awareness through a combination of coursework and

international experiences. This certificate will provide an academic credential for the students and

will be noted on the students’ transcript. Plans to expand the Colleges international engagements

also include the development of collaborative research with overseas universities and the

development of exchange programs for faculty, scholars and students. The newly-formed university

partnerships in China and Prague are natural places to begin such partnerships.

3.5 EXTENSION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:

3.5.1 Extension and Engagement Programs: These efforts would be led by the Center for Energy

Innovation (CEI); an expanded and renamed NC Solar Center with additional industrial energy

programs formerly housed in IES. The CEI serves as the focal point for extension, engagement and

technology deployment activities for NCSU in the renewable energy area. The development of

RETI2 is an opportunity for the COE and NCSU to maintain and expand its leadership position

within the UNC system and the state regarding public education and technology transfer activities

in renewable energy, energy efficiency, green building technology, and alternative transportation

technology including biofuels. Students in the College of Engineering have the opportunity to gain

practical experience through the cooperative education program. To further enrich our student’s

educational experience, RETI2 will establish a program for student involvement in extension

projects in the renewable resources and energy technology arena. To support this effort, the college

is seeking additional graduate and undergraduate research assistantship support funds from the

provost for CEI-sponsored projects with faculty collaboration.

3.5.2 North Carolina Solar Center: The North Carolina Solar Center is experiencing serious

challenges in being able to access resources that will allow it to pay for administrative staff and

other support personnel. These individuals are critical to the NCSC’s ability to interface with the

public and to provide services to the citizens and corporations of North Carolina that come to it for

assistance. In order to avoid the loss of critical personnel from the NCSC operation, we are

requesting Compact Plan continuing funding to support key staff needs in that operation. We

propose that this commitment be equally shared between the Office of the Provost and the Vice

Chancellor for Extension, Engagement and Economic Development.

3.5.3 Minerals Research Laboratory: The Minerals Research Laboratory (MRL), located in

Asheville, NC, is focused on research in the beneficiation of industrial minerals. MRL’s experience

in industrial minerals is unmatched by any university laboratory in the United States and is unique

in that it exemplifies the much sought after partnership between industry, government, and

academia in conducting effective research. Much of MRL’s research efforts are conducted for

corporate sponsors; however, MRL undertakes public service projects as well. MRL’s state-of-the-

art facility is equipped with mineral processing equipment and an analytical facility for mineral

characterization.

MRL has an educational outreach program known as ‘Down to Earth’ which provides technical

assistance and service to the public; aligned with the University’s mission to enrich the educational

29

opportunities and lives of students, faculty, industry, and the general public of the state. In addition,

MRL sponsors professional seminars that count toward continuing professional competency

requirements for Professional Engineers. In addition, the MRL library contains one of the best

reference sources for mineral processing information in the southeastern United States and is

available for public use.

3.5.4 Industrial Extension Service: The vision for the Industrial Extension Service (IES) is to be

the recognized leader and change agent for the sustainability and advancement of North Carolina

industry. The 90 IES employees accomplish this by working as the state-wide arm of North

Carolina State University and supporting North Carolina business in the workplace – in the office,

on the factory floor, or in the hospital. This is accomplished by helping businesses transfer

knowledge and technology that lowers costs, improves quality, and shortens lead times. By

transforming knowledge into economic value, IES stimulates financial impact for the companies we

serve, impact that radiates from those organizations to their communities and ultimately to all of

North Carolina. Projects led by IES specialists often result in savings of $15 for every dollar spent.

The value of IES to North Carolina taxpayers exceeds $45 for every tax dollar spent. In the past

year, IES served more than 850 companies in North Carolina. In May 2006, NIST MEP (National

Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership) reviewed IES for its

11th

year of participation in the program and the findings were very positive, indicating that IES is a

high-performing center.

IES contributes to the University Investment Priority “Foster innovation-driven economic

development” and engage business leaders as partners in developing well-defined strategies for

sustainable growth through the products and services offered. Because IES receives funding from

NIST MEP, IES clients are regularly surveyed to assess the impact of and satisfaction with the

services they received, as well as the economic impact. Over the past year, IES has realigned

service territories to reflect the Economic Development Partnership Regions, requiring an increase

to 15 account managers across the state.

In 2006, IES implemented the 1B4NC program with the mission to help create one billion dollars in

economic impact for North Carolina by 2010. This translates into $200 million each year for five

years in economic value provided by the IES sales and delivery staff via industry knowledge and

technology transfers. Included in this calculation are things such as number of jobs saved and

created, cost savings, and increased and retained sales. This impact is measured and verified by the

US Department of Commerce through surveys that our clients complete and is based on a projected

growth of Gross State Product of $15 billion annually. In January 2006, a survey conducted by a

national third-party market research firm reported that in calendar year 2005, IES provided

$98,799,434 in direct economic impact from delivered services. In addition, IES clients reported

1,237 jobs created or retained and $68,495,000 in new and retained sales.

Since 2004, IES has also helped start-up companies grow at the Technology Incubator located on

Centennial Campus. The Incubator currently has 30 tenant companies working on IT applications,

life sciences, web development, and a variety of other technologies. Economic development

organizations nationwide continue to emphasize the importance of start-up companies to future job

growth in our economy. The IES goal is to ‘graduate’ these ‘hatchlings’ into the mainstream of NC

business where they will continue to grow, add jobs, and produce positive economic impact for our

state.

30

In May 2005, IES hired a consulting firm to conduct a marketing study and assist the organization

in the development of a strategic marketing plan. The consultant gathered data from over 80

interviews with current clients, past clients, and prospects; reviewed data from public sources such

as the US Department of Commerce, the US Census Bureau; analyzed data from the seven

Economic Development Regions (EDRs) in NC; and interviewed IES directors. The study

uncovered four strategic imperatives: 1) IES should remain dedicated to the primary mission of

creating jobs, growth, and capital investment in North Carolina, 2) IES needs to become a bigger

factor in the fastest growing segments of the North Carolina economy, 3) IES must increase the

average size of its projects by delivering value-added, problem-solving projects to top decision-

makers, and 4) IES needs to change the clients’ perception from trainers to problem-solvers.

Goals for 2007 – 2010

Strategic Planning for 2007 – 2010 will include focusing on key areas that address the strategic

imperatives identified by the IES marketing team and third party consultant. The IES leadership

team has identified five focus areas: 1) Economic Impact, 2) Personnel, 3) Funding, 4) New

Products, and 5) Internal Operations.

Economic Impact

Economic impact efforts need to be standardized throughout the organization and measured for all

products and services that IES offers. The 1B4NC goal will provide IES with metrics to track

quarterly ($50 million EI) and yearly ($200 million) with the ultimate goal of achieving $1 billion

in economic impact for NC by 2010. In addition, processes will be developed for helping clients

identify their EI and preparing them for the measurement survey.

Personnel

IES has experienced turnover rates ranging from 7% to as high as 28% in the past four years. Focus

will be on enhancing employee orientation to better prepare employees, cross-training to increase

internal expertise in multiple disciplines to enable employees to be problem-solvers for clients,

improving scheduling processes to reduce on-the-road time, creating a Progress Impeding Team to

remove impediments for employees getting their work done, and aligning employee satisfaction

improvement efforts. The goal will be to have improved employee satisfaction scores and a

turnover rate of less than 10%.

Funding

Roughly two-thirds of IES funding currently comes from public sources and, therefore, funding is

only secure as state and federal budgets allow. IES needs to actively identify, seek out and secure

funding from additional sources. Efforts have been and will continue to be focusing on increasing

revenue from products and services with a goal of reaching $6.2 million a year in revenues with

$5.3 million per year retained as Internal Operating Dollars (IOD). In addition, IES will be

improving the processes for acquiring, measuring, and managing grant monies.

New Products

New product development is a new metric for IES. Successful product development strategies

aligned with the strategic imperatives of focusing on the fastest growing segments of the NC

economy and transformation enterprise products and services will enable IES to be perceived as

problem-solvers to top decision makers. The goal is for new product development and new

customers to be greater than 20%.

Internal Operations

31

The use of the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence as a business model and performance

improvement foundation for IES will focus the organization on internal processes, the continuous

improvement of those processes, and results. In addition, IES has begun the implementation of

Strategy Deployment methodologies that aid in the deployment of strategic initiatives throughout

the organization and align work group activities to the strategic plan while maintaining focus on

creating value for the customer.

Action Items

The Piedmont Triad Region WIRED Project

In February of 2006, the United States Department of Labor announced that the Piedmont Triad

Region will receive a major grant to support a comprehensive economic development and

workforce development strategy. The WIRED (Workforce Innovations in Regional Economic

Development) grant will provide up to $5 million per year for three years to develop a model

national economic development demonstration project in the Piedmont Triad. In March 2006, IES

began discussions with the WIRED management team regarding support from the account

managers in the region. In June, IES Executive Director Terri Helmlinger Ratcliff accepted an

invitation to join the Operations Team of the WIRED Project. Phil Halstead, the Piedmont Triad

Partnership (PTP) Senior WIRED Project Manager, and Terri proposed to the US Department of

Labor and NIST MEP that the PTP Region become the model for integrating the local MEP center

into the WIRED initiatives. Terri with representatives from IES and the College of Textiles

traveled to Washington, DC, to meet with project managers from the Department of Labor WIRED

Project, executives from the Piedmont Triad Partnership, and senior leaders from NIST MEP to

determine how the PTP Region and the NC MEP will be positioned as the national model or

demonstration template for tying the two federal programs together effectively. To further this

initiative, IES and PTP plan to have a shared position called a Manufacturing Technology Specialist

who will focus on technology transfer from research labs to manufacturing entities. The primary

objective of this position will be to pull new and advanced technology out of the University and

Oak Ridge National Laboratory into the region.

The Cluster Strategy

In response to the marketing study strategic imperative that IES needs to become a bigger factor in

the fastest growing segments in NC, an IES marketing team with assistance from the marketing

study consultant studied 18 clustered industries in which IES has something to contribute. A cluster

includes all businesses that are part of the supply chain for that industry. The team evaluated the

attractiveness of each of the 18 clusters on a number of criteria: Is there potential for economic

impact? For IES revenue growth? Does IES have knowledge of the industry? Of its problems?

Can IES reach top executives? After analysis, the team decided that IES will focus on four clusters:

1) metalworking and industrial machinery and automotive transportation equipment; 2)

Healthcare/Pharma; 3) IT, computers, and communications; and 4) food processing.

The cluster strategy will be a phased approach over the next five years with a pilot project in one or

two targeted cluster industries formed around cluster teams with a focus on reaching C-level (CEO,

CFO, COO) clients in growing companies of various sizes in different geographic locations – both

rural and metropolitan with growth strategy proposals of high economic value to the economy, to

the industry, and to the client. Partners in the seven Economic Regions will be enlisted to assist in

client selection and partnered resources for an even higher level of service. With the phased

approach over five years, IES anticipates that eventually the cluster strategy can build revenues to

over $8 million for the four targeted clusters. Implementation includes collaboration with focus

groups and organizations for information leading to increased sales in target clusters, to increased

32

strategic growth in North Carolina’s targeted business and industry, and to assist in positioning IES

as an industry strategist. Metrics will include the NIST MEP third-party evaluation process;

percentage increased sales in targeted clusters; percentage increase of companies engaged in

strategic growth projects vs. point solutions.

4. RESOURCES

4.1 Progress Report on 2000-2007 Compact Plan Initiatives

The attached Spreadsheets 4.a describe how the compact plan allocations made during the academic

years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007 were used.

The majority of the allocations went to the recently-formed Biomedical Engineering Department.

Funds were used for building renovations, educational supplies, equipment, SPA and faculty

positions, and other personnel support.

The permanent and one-time TA allocations were used College-wide to support twenty graduate

teaching assistants in various departments.

ECE faculty positions monies were used to support four new faculty positions and to acquire

associated educational supplies.

The one-time F&A allocations received in 2004-2005, made because on-campus rather than off-

campus rates were used in several research projects, were applied to College rent obligations.

4.2 Budget review

The FY 2005-2006 College expenditures provided in Spreadsheet 4.b are acknowledged without

comment.

4.3 Summary of Efficiency Improvements

There are two recent efficiency improvements within the College of Engineering that are reported in

Spreadsheet 4.c. The first was to covert the Engineering Publications Office to state salaries at

100% support rather than partial support via revenue. This led to distributed savings across

numerous departments totaling $35,934. In addition, recent centralization of personnel actions for

HR and the elimination of the lapsed salary report have resulted in savings of $58,528.

4.4 Future Efficiency Improvements

Future efficiency improvements are shown in the attached Spreadsheet 4.d. The Engineering

Machine Shop is currently being reviewed for cost effectiveness. If closed, College savings

available for redistribution would total $121,718. The ongoing growth of the College’s graduate

and research programs is being focused in areas that are interdisciplinary in nature and that cut

across departmental boundaries. Thus, future investments in personnel, equipment and

infrastructure will be shared among departments and will therefore minimize duplication, leading to

enhanced efficiency.

4.5 Summary of Action Items Requiring New Resources

33

The actions items requiring new resources are listed in Spreadsheet 4.e. These are shown in two

categories:

Category 1 – Previous Commitments: Listed at the bottom of Spreadsheet 4.e are three items that

represent prior commitment to the College. These include the resources that were identified in order

for the College to achieve its requested enrollment growth at both the undergraduate and graduate

levels, and the growth in faculty positions committed to Dean Martin-Vega as part of his hiring

agreement.

Category 2 – New Initiatives: These action items, representing new initiatives for the College and

areas of expanded focus and impact, are listed in priority order in the upper part of Spreadsheet 4.e.

34

APPENDIX A. ASSESSMENT OF COHORT DATA

February 2007

Dianne Raubenheimer

(based on February 2004 report by Joni E. Spurlin, Sarah A. Rajala, Jerome P. Lavelle, Dick Keltie)

Questions to be considered:

1. What is our definition of cohort and freshmen?

2. Who matriculates, by ethnicity and gender, GPA?

3. Who graduates, by ethnicity and gender, GPA?

4. Who is retained at the University and within COE?

5. What are the percentages of suspended students?

1. What Is Our Definition Of Cohort And Freshmen?

Cohort – A cohort includes each newly enrolled student into the College for the first time during a fall semester and is

still enrolled as of the census date (10 days after classes begin). These include students who are enrolled at NC State for

the first time and did not transfer from another college or university.

On the University Planning and Analysis (UPA) website, the number of

students in each cohort is reported in Enrollment Report B1: College Totals by

Degree Level, Residence and Status, under NEW and Total Undergraduate. The

cohort numbers do include the students who, in the summer before that fall, have

participated in special programs such as the Summer Transition Program (STP).

The cohort does include students with AP credit and those who have taken NCSU

college courses through their high school.

Freshmen – Freshmen are students who have completed 0-29 hours. They may have earned these credits at any time.

The following analyses were conducted using students enrollment data for each cohort from 1995 through 2004. Data

were obtained from University Planning and Analysis

2. Who matriculates, by ethnicity and gender, GPA?

Data were analyzed by examining the enrollment status of students as of the census date in the fall of the year (10 days

after classes begin). The percentage of those who are matriculated was based on the beginning cohort number.

(Matriculation means those who have been accepted into an engineering degree program. Prior to matriculation,

students are considered undesignated). Those who had matriculated into an engineering program (including biological

engineering, textile engineering, and computer science programs) were examined as a total group and by ethnicity and

gender subgroups.

Matriculation as of the Second Fall’s Census Date

Overall Findings:

The percentage of students who matriculated into a COE degree program as of the census date in the fall of their second

year increased steadily from 1995 to 2002. In 1995 the percentage was 39% and in 2002 it was 48%. There was a

decrease in students matriculating into their respective programs in 2003 (38%) and 2004 (37%), but this increased to

42% for the 2005 cohort. For the 2003 cohort, this was up to 62% by the census date of their third year, comparable to

recent preceding years; and up to 58% for the 2004 cohort by census date at the start of the third year.

35

By census date of year 4, the percentage of students who matriculated (regardless of whether the student was later

suspended, withdrawn, graduated or went into a non-engineering program) was 60% for the 1995 cohort, and 64% for

2003 cohort. The maximum was 67% for the 1999 cohort. The College encourages the students to take courses so that

they can matriculate by the fall of their sophomore year (year 2). As can be seen by Table 1, typically another 20% of

the students have matriculated by fall of their junior year (fall yr 4).

Table 1: Percentage of students matriculated by census date each year.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 39.3 41.65 42.35 43.7 48.3 39.1 48.6 47.7 37.7 37.1 41.5

Fall yr3 58.65 59.0 55.3 58.1 64.1 62.7 64.3 62.2 61.55 57.81

Fall yr4 60.2 61.2 58.7 60.6 67.1 65.6 65.8 65 63.73

Fall yr5 60.7 62.3 60.0 61.4 68.7 66.5 66.6 65.97

Fall yr6 61.15 62.8 61.4 62.05 69.3 66.7 66.78

Percentage of Cohort Who Matriculated By Fall of Year 3

59

55.3

64.3

61.5562.7

58.6558.1

62.2

57.81

64.1

50

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

%

Fall yr3

Figure 1: Percentage of cohort who matriculated by fall of year 3.

36

Of those students who matriculated by census date of year 2 for cohort 1995, 88% graduated within six years (80% with

engineering degree). Of those matriculated by census date of year 2 for cohort 1996, 90% graduated within six years

(84% with engineering degree). Of those matriculated by census date of year 2 for cohort 1997, 91% graduated within

six years (82% with engineering degree). Of those matriculated by census date of year 2 for cohort 1998, 90%

graduated within six years (83% with engineering degree), and of those matriculated by census date of year 2 for cohort

1999, 94% graduated within six years (89% with engineering degree). Of those matriculated by census date of year 2 for

cohort 2000, 93% graduated within six years (85% with engineering degree).

The assumption is that once matriculated, a student is always considered matriculated. Therefore, if students matriculate

by the fall of their sophomore year, they are likely to graduate within six years from NCSU, the majority with an

engineering degree. For rates of those who matriculate by fall of year 3, see section 3 below.

Results by Ethnicity on Matriculation:

Two groups of students were examined separately: one group, identified as underrepresented minorities (URM),

included African American, Native American and Hispanic American students; the other group consisted of white and

Asian students.

Of the white/Asian students who started in the cohort, the percentage of these who matriculated into a COE degree

program as of the census date in the fall of their second year increased from 1995 to 2002. In 1995, the percentage was

43% and in 2002 it was 54%. There was a decrease in 2003 and 2004 to 39% and 40% respectively, and a slight

increase again in 2005 to 43% (see table 4).

Of the number of underrepresented minority (URM) students who started in a cohort, the percentage who matriculated

into a COE degree program as of the census date in the fall of their second year has generally increased. In 1995, the

percentage was 21%, while it was 37% for the 2002 cohort. In 2003 and 2004 there is a decrease to 30% and 19%

respectively, a trend also seen in the white/Asian students, but this is back to 31% for the 2005 cohort. The percentage

for this period is slightly misleading as the overall number of underrepresented minorities accepted into a cohort

decreased from 1995 to 2003. In contrast, the actual number of underrepresented minorities who matriculated by their

second year increased during that period (See table 2, 3 and 4). For the 2004 cohort, there was an increase in the actual

number of URM students (170), but a large decrease in the percentage who had matriculated by the fall of year 2. In

2005 there were fewer URM students (121) but an increase in the percentage who had matriculated by the fall of year 2

Results by Gender:

The same analyses were performed for the matriculation rates of male and female students. Between 1995 and 2001,

both groups show an increase in percentage matriculation rate. Of the females who started, the percentage who

matriculated increased from 34% in 1995 to 55 % in 2001. Examination of the actual number of female students who

matriculated also shows a slight rise in the numbers. For the period 1995 to 1999 females matriculated at a lower rate

than males, but from 2000 – 2005 the females students have consistently matriculated at a higher rate than the male

students. In 2003 to 2005 there was an overall decline in matriculation rates, although females matriculated at a higher

rate than all other groups.

The cohort analyses show an overall increase for all students in matriculation after the first year

until 2002, with both the underrepresented minorities and female student percentages increasing

significantly over that period. In 2003 and 2004 the numbers decreased, although not to the 1995

levels, except for the male students where the percentage matriculated actually went below the 1995

figures. The recent cohorts (2000 – 2003) also show that the percentage of underrepresented

minority students that matriculated is around 9% below that of White and Asian students, but in

2004 this dipped to 21% (table 4) which is comparable to earlier trends for URM students seen in

1995 – 1998. For the 2005 cohort the difference was about 11%.

Table 2: Ethnic and gender breakdown of each cohort from 1995-2005.

37

Cohort

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Totals (n) 960 946 1038 1133 1102 1178 1150 1105 1147 1235 1176 1397

White/Asian 84.9 84.9 85.1 87.4 91.1 89.7 91.9 89.0 90.2 85.7 87.7 86.3

URM 15.1 15.1 14.9 12.6 8.9 10.3 9.1 11.0 9.8 13.5 10.2 9.5

Males 75.3 78.8 77.0 79.4 80.7 80.9 81.8 82.3 83.9 81.9 86.6 83.2

Females 24.7 21.2 23.0 20.6 19.3 19.1 18.2 17.7 16.1 18.1 13.3 16.8

Cohort

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Totals (n) 960 946 1038 1133 1102 1178 1150 1105 1147 1235 1176 1397

White/Asian 815 803 883 990 1005 1057 1045 983 1034 1055 1030 1205

URM 145 143 155 143 98 121 105 122 113 170 121 132

Males 723 745 799 900 890 953 941 909 962 1011 1019 1162

Females 237 201 239 233 213 225 209 196 185 224 157 235

Table 3: Year two matriculation totals by ethnicity and gender.

Number Who Are Matriculated By Ethnic And Gender Groups

Cohort 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

All 377 394 440 495 532 461 559 527 432 458 488

White/Asi

an 347 357 403 462 500 423 516 482 398 420 441

URM 30 37 37 33 32 38 43 45 34 33 38

Males 296 330 348 407 433 368 445 427 355 362 415

Females 81 64 92 88 99 93 114 100 77 96 73

38

Table 4: Year two matriculation percentages by ethnicity and gender.

Percentage Who Are Matriculated By Census Date Year Two

– Based On Number Of Students In Ethnic And Gender Group In Cohort

Cohort

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

All 39.3 41.6 42.3 43.7 48.4 39.1 48.6 47.7 37.7 37.1 41.5

White/

Asian 42.6 44.5 45.6 46.7 49.8 40.0 49.4 53.6 38.5 39.8 42.8

URM 20.7 25.9 23.9 23.1 32.7 31.4 41.0 36.9 30.1 19.4 31.4

Males 40.9 44.3 43.5 45.2 48.7 38.6 47.3 47.0 36.9 35.8 40.7

Females 34.2 31.8 38.5 37.8 46.5 41.3 54.5 51.0 41.6 42.9 46.5

Table 5a: Year three matriculation totals by ethnicity and gender.

Number Who Are Matriculated By Ethnic And Gender Groups

By Fall Of Year 3

Cohort 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

All 563 558 575 658 706 739 739 687 706 714

White/Asi

an 497 497 514 596 651 674 678 620 644 643

URM 66 61 61 62 56 65 61 67 62 66

Males 443 457 452 529 578 600 602 566 592 582

Females 120 101 123 129 128 139 137 121 114 132

Table 5b: Year three matriculation percentages by ethnicity and gender.

Percentage Who Are Matriculated By Census Date Year Three

– Based On Number Of Students In Ethnic And Gender Group In Cohort

Cohort

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

All 58.6 59.0 55.3 58.1 64.1 62.7 64.3 62.2 61.6 57.8

White/

Asian 61.0 61.9 58.1 60.2 60.3 63.8 64.9 63.1 62.3 60.9

URM 45.5 42.7 39.4 43.4 57.1 53.7 58.1 54.9 54.9 38.5

Males 61.3 61.3 56.5 58.8 65.0 63.0 64.0 62.3 61.5 57.6

Females 50.6 50.2 51.5 52.8 60.1 61.8 65.6 61.2 61.6 58.9

The matriculation rates by fall of year three show that there has been a constant increase for underrepresented minority

students from 1995 when it was 45.5% to 55% in 2003. The figures for the 2004 cohort were, however, at an all time

low of 38.5%. For female students year 3 matriculation rates increase from 51% in 1995 to 62% in 2003, with a slight

dip to 59% for the 2004 cohort. The other groups (male, white/Asian) remained fairly consistent over time.

Matriculation Tables by each Ethnic Group:

The following tables present the percentage of students within each ethnicity group, in each cohort, who matriculated by

census date in the fall semester.

39

Table 6: Percentage of African American students who matriculated

by the Fall census date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 19.7 26.0 22.05 19.5 26.9 34.9 44.1 32.1 21.9 17.2 25.8

Fall yr3 46.15 41.5 37.8 40.7 55.2 52.3 63.2 51.9 45.2 34.4

Fall yr4 50.4 48.0 43.3 43.2 58.2 59.3 64.7 53.1 46.6

Fall yr5 50.4 50.4 46.5 44.9 61.2 62.8 64.7 53.1

Fall yr6 51.3 52.0 48.8 44.9 61.2 62.8 64.7

Table 7: Percentage of Native American students who matriculated by the Fall

census date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 0 28.6 14.3 16.7 60 15.4 18.2 30 33.3 16.7 25.0

Fall yr3 11.1 57.1 28.6 16.7 60 46.2 45.5 40 83.3 41.7

Fall yr4 11.1 57.1 28.6 33.3 60 53.8 45.5 60 83.3

Fall yr5 11.1 57.1 28.6 33.3 60 53.8 45.5 60.0

Fall yr6 11.1 57.1 28.6 33.3 60 53.8 45.5

40

Table 8: Percentage of Hispanic American students who matriculated by the

Fall census date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 36.8 23.1 38.1 47.4 42.3 27.3 42.3 51.6 47.0 27.8 54.2

Fall yr3 57.9 46.15 52.4 68.4 61.5 63.6 50 67.7 70.5 52.8

Fall yr4 57.9 61.5 57.1 78.95 61.5 63.6 53.85 71.0 73.5

Fall yr5 57.9 61.5 57.1 78.95 61.5 63.6 53.85 71.0

Fall yr6 57.9 61.5 66.7 78.95 61.5 63.6 53.85

Table 9: Percentage of Asian American students who matriculated by the Fall

census date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 37.8 43.5 62.5 50 51.5 47.9 53.7 49.3 48 56.25 52.2

Fall yr3 64.9 63.0 67.9 64.5 63.2 74 73.2 60.9 66.7 70.3

Fall yr4 64.9 63.0 67.9 65.8 66.2 77.1 74.4 60.9 68.0

Fall yr5 64.9 63.0 67.9 65.8 70.6 77.1 74.4 62.3

Fall yr6 64.9 63.0 67.9 68.4 72.1 77.1 74.4

Table 10: Percentage of White Students who matriculated by the Fall census

date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 42.8 44.5 44.4 46.4 49.7 39.2 49 49.1 37.75 38.75 42.1

Fall yr3 60.8 61.8 57.5 59.85 64.85 62.75 64.2 63.2 61.9 60.3

Fall yr4 62.1 63.3 60.75 62.25 67.95 65.2 65.7 66.3 64.2

Fall yr5 62.7 64.2 61.8 63.0 69.3 66.0 66.7 67.25

Fall yr6 63.1 64.6 63.0 63.6 70.0 66.3 66.9

41

Matriculation Tables by Gender Groups:

Table 11: Percentage of Male students who matriculated by the Fall census date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 40.9 44.3 43.5 45.2 48.7 38.6 47.3 47 36.9 35.8 40.7

Fall yr3 61.3 61.3 56.5 58.8 65.0 63 64 62.3 61.5 57.6

Fall yr4 63.1 63.4 59.9 61.3 68.3 65.7 65.8 65.2 63.9

Fall yr5 63.8 64.6 60.9 62.1 70.1 66.5 66.7 66.3

Fall yr6 64.3 65.1 62.4 62.9 70.9 66.8 66.95

Table 12: Percentage of female students who matriculated by the Fall census

date.

Cohort

Year

Census

Date

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fall yr2 34.2 31.8 38.5 37.8 46.5 41.3 54.55 51.0 41.6 42.9 46.5

Fall yr3 50.6 50.25 51.5 55.4 60.1 61.8 65.55 61.7 61.6 58.9

Fall yr4 51.5 53.2 54.8 57.9 62 65.3 66.0 64.3 62.7

Fall yr5 51.5 53.7 56.9 58.8 62.9 66.2 66.0 64.3

Fall yr6 51.5 54.2 58.2 58.8 62.9 66.2 66.0

42

3. Who graduates, by ethnicity and gender, GPA?

Table 17 shows the overall graduation rates, for different cohorts, for students who graduate with a degree from NCSU,

regardless of the degree.

Table 17: Percentage of Cohort who graduated from NCSU, regardless of degree curriculum.

Percentage Graduated at NCSU

Year After 4 Years After 5 Years After 6 Years

1994 18 50.8 60.8

1995 19.4 57.4 64.7

1996 23.7 59.8 68.4

1997 24 57.9 67.1

1998 24.2 61.6 69.3

1999 30.8 67.8 75.3

2000 31.7 66.2 72.8

2001 32.1 63.7

2002 28.7

Table 18 shows the overall graduation rates, for different cohorts, for students who graduate with at least one

engineering degree.

Table 18: Percentage of Cohort who graduated with engineering degree.

Percentage Graduated with Engineering Degree

Cohort year After 4 Years After 5 Years After 6 Years

1994 10.7 33.3 40.4

1995 12.7 41.15 46.0

1996 18.4 45.35 50.3

1997 18.4 42.1 48.2

1998 17.9 45.4 50.0

1999 24.5 52.4 58.3

2000 25.5 51.1 55.4

2001 24.7 46.1

2002 20.7

43

Figure 2 graphically represents graduation rates for those graduating with a degree from NCSU, and those graduating

with an engineering degree.

Figure 2: (a) Cohort graduation rates at NC State University. (b) Cohort graduate rates within Engineering.

Cohort graduation rates from NC State University

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Year

%

After 6 Years

After 5 Years

After 4 Years

Cohort graduate rates within Engineering

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Year

%

After 6 Years

After 5 Years

After 4 Years

44

Graduation Rates After Four Years

Data is available for those who graduated within four years (those who graduate by May of the end of the fourth year

divided by total number who started in the cohort) for students who started in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001

and 2002.

Graduation from NCSU

The graduation rates within for years with any degree from NCSU range from 19% for the cohort who started in 1995 to

32% for those who started in 2001. There is an increase in total graduation rate for this period, but with an overall

decrease for the 2002 cohort. Graduation rates for White, Asian, male and female students show a general upward trend,

particularly for female students where it was 25% in 1995 and 44% in 2002. The rates for the URM students fluctuate

over time.

Table 19: Percentage of students in the 1994-1999 cohorts who graduated with a

degree from NC State University within four years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage Who Graduated

Within Four Years At The University.

Cohort White Hispanic

African

American Asian

American

Native All

1995 20.7 15.8 8.5 29.7 11.1 19.4

1996 24.7 15.4 17.9 23.9 28.6 23.7

1997 25.4 33.3 7.9 35.7 28.6 24

1998 26 36.8 11 21.1 0 24.2

1999 31.4 34.6 17.9 32.4 40 30.8

2000 32 13.6 22.1 43.8 15.4 31.7

2001 32.7 15.4 22.1 41.5 9.1 32.1

2002 29.8 9.7 18.5 37.7 20.0 28.7

Cohort Males Females All

1995 17.4 25.3 19.4

1996 22.7 27.4 23.7

1997 21.8 31.4 24

1998 23 28.8 24.2

1999 27.9 42.7 30.8

2000 30.7 36 31.7

2001 29.5 43.5 32.1

2002 25.4 43.9 28.7

45

Graduation from Engineering

The graduation rates for those who started in the cohort and graduated with at least one degree in engineering within

four years are as follows:

Table 20: Percentage of students in the 1994-1999 cohorts who graduated with an engineering degree within four

years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage Who Graduated

Within Four Years With An Engineering Degree.

Cohort White Hispanic

African

American Asian

American

Native All

1995 13.9 10.5 3.4 21.6 0 12.7

1996 18.9 15.4 14.6 19.6 28.6 18.4

1997 19.4 19.05 6.3 30.4 14.3 18.4

1998 19.15 21.05 7.6 19.7 0.0 17.9

1999 24.4 30.8 14.9 32.35 40.0 24.5

2000 25.1 13.6 16.3 41.7 15.4 25.5

2001 25.0 11.5 20.6 30.5 9.1 24.7

2002 21.8 9.7 9.9 26.1 10.0 20.7

Cohort Males Females All

1995 12.7 12.7 12.7

1996 18.3 18.9 18.4

1997 17.3 22.2 18.4

1998 17.8 18.45 17.9

1999 23.5 28.6 24.5

2000 25.7 24.4 25.5

2001 23.0 32.5 24.7

2002 19.0 28.6 20.7

46

Graduation Rates After Five Years

Data is available about those who graduated within five years for students who started in 1995 through 2001 cohorts.

Graduation from NCSU

The graduation rates for those who graduated with any degree from NCSU range from 57% for the 1995 cohort to 68%

for the 1999 cohort, with a dip down to 64% for the 2001 cohort. For all groups there is a general trend towards

increasing graduation rates over time, although the rates for the URM students are more variable than other groups.

Table 21: Percentage of students in the 1994-1996 cohorts who graduated with a degree from NC State

University within five years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage Who Graduated

Within Five Years At The University.

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 59.3 63.2 47 56.8 22.2 57.4

1996 63.5 53.8 40.7 54.3 42.9 59.8

1997 60.8 61.9 34.6 67.9 42.9 57.9

1998 64.4 68.4 39 63.2 33.3 61.6

1999 69.3 61.5 53.7 63.2 60 67.8

2000 66.6 63.6 57 76 30.8 66.2

2001 65.1 34.6 52.9 69.5 36.4 63.7

Cohort Males Females All

1995 56.2 61.2 57.4

1996 60.1 58.7 59.8

1997 57.2 60.3 57.9

1998 60.6 65.7 61.6

1999 65.4 77.9 67.8

2000 64.2 74.7 66.2

2001 62.1 71.3 63.7

47

Graduation from Engineering

The graduation rates, for those who started in the cohort and graduated with at least one degree in engineering, show an

increase from 41% in 1995 to 52% in 1999. This has dipped down to 46% for the 2001 cohort. For all groups there is a

general trend towards increasing graduation rates over time, although the rates for the URM students are more variable

than other groups.

Table 22: Percentage of students in the 1994-1998 cohorts who graduated with an engineering degree within five

years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage Who Graduated Within Five Years With An Engineering Degree.

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 43.3 31.6 30.8 43.2 0.0 41.15

1996 47.8 38.5 30.1 47.8 42.9 45.35

1997 44.25 42.9 22.8 57.1 14.3 42.1

1998 47.4 47.4 26.3 51.3 33.3 45.4

1999 52.7 50.0 41.8 58.8 60.0 52.4

2000 50.8 50.0 39.5 68.8 23.1 51.1

2001 47.0 23.1 38.2 52.4 18.2 46.1

Cohort Males Females All

1995 42.9 35.9 41.15

1996 46.7 40.3 45.35

1997 43.25 38.1 42.1

1998 45.3 45.5 45.4

1999 53.2 48.8 52.4

2000 51.5 49.3 51.1

2001 46.1 45.9 46.1

48

Graduation Rates After Six Years

Data is available about those who graduated within six years for the 1995 to the 2000 cohorts.

Graduation from NCSU

The six-year graduation rate was 65% for 1995 cohort, 68% for the 1996

cohort, 67% for the 1997 cohort, 69% for the 1998 cohort, 75% for the 1999 cohort,

and 73% for the 2000 cohort..

Examining the graduation rate by ethnicity for the 1995 cohort shows that of the white students that started in 1995,

66% graduated within six years. Of the African American students who started in 1995, 56% graduated within six

years. This rate increased for the 1999 cohort. Of the students who started in 1999, 76.5% of the white students

graduated within six years, and 67% of the African American students graduated within six years.

Examining the graduation rate by gender shows that of the male students who

started in 1995, 64% graduated within six years. Of the female students who started

in 1995, 66% graduated within six years. The rates increased for Hispanic American,

African American and Asian American students in the 2000 cohort, but decreased for

White and Native American students.

By the 1999 cohort: 85% of the female students and 73% of the male students

graduated from the university within six years, although this decreased to 79% of

female and 72% of male students for the 2000 cohort. .

Table 23: Percentage of students in the 1994-1995 cohorts who

graduated with a degree from NC State University within six years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage Who Graduated

Within Six Years At The University.

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 66.3 68.4 55.6 67.6 22.2 64.7

1996 70.8 76.9 53.7 69.6 42.9 68.4

1997 69.6 66.7 49.6 71.4 42.9 67.1

1998 71.4 78.9 50.8 72.4 33.3 69.3

1999 76.5 65.4 67.2 70.6 80 75.3

2000 72.8 72.7 68.6 80.2 46.15 72.8

Cohort Males Females All

1995 64.3 65.8 64.7

1996 68.6 67.7 68.4

1997 66.2 69.9 67.1

1998 68.8 71.2 69.3

1999 73 85 75.3

2000 71.5 78.7 72.8

49

Graduation from Engineering

The graduation rates for all students who started in the cohort and graduated

with at least one degree in engineering within six years have increased over time:

46% for 1995 cohort to 58% for 1999 cohort, dipping down to 55% for the 2000

cohort.

Examining the graduation rate by ethnicity shows that of the white students

who started in 1995, 48% graduated with at least one degree in engineering within

six years. Of the African American students who started in 1995, 36% graduated

with at least one degree in engineering within six years. For both the white and

African American students, the percentage that graduate in engineering increased by

at least 10 percentage points by the 1999 cohort (see the table 24), although it did dip

back down again for the 2000 cohort.

Examining the graduation rate by gender shows that of the male students who

started in 1995, 49% graduated with at least one degree in engineering within six

years. Of the female students who started in 1995, 38% graduated with at least one

degree in engineering within six years. By the 1999 cohort; 60% of the male students

and 53% of the female students are graduating with an engineering degree. This

remained constant for females in the 2000 cohort, but decreased for males to 56%.

Overall, it can be seen that, of those who start in the College of Engineering, more

females graduate at the university than males, but that more males graduate with an

engineering degree than females, although this gap is narrowing.

Table 24: Percentage of students in the 1994-1997 cohorts who graduated

with an engineering degree within six years.

Of Those Who Start In The Cohort, Percentage That Graduated Within Six Years With An

Engineering Degree.

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 48.2 36.8 35.9 51.4 0.0 46.0

1996 51.9 53.85 39.0 54.35 42.9 50.3

1997 50.4 42.9 32.3 58.9 14.3 48.2

1998 51.75 47.4 31.4 59.2 33.3 50.0

1999 58.4 50.0 53.7 63.2 60.0 58.3

2000 54.2 54.5 52.3 72.9 38.5 55.4

Cohort Males Females All

1995 48.6 38.4 46.0

1996 51.7 45.3 50.3

1997 49.4 44.35 48.2

50

1998 50.4 48.1 50.0

1999 59.6 52.6 58.3

2000 56.2 52.4 55.4

51

Cognitive Variables

The chart below (table 25 a) indicates that cognitive variables such as SAT, High School GPA, GPA at the end of the

second semester and graduation GPA differ depending on time to graduation. (Because the SATs were re-centered

beginning with cohort 1995, the following table averages together cohort 1995 through 1999).

Table 25a: Graduation rates as a function of cognitive variables for the 1995

though 1999 Cohorts.

N

Average SAT of

those who

graduated

within

Average High

School GPA of

those who

graduated

within

Average

cumulative

GPA at the end

of the second

semester at

NCSU

Average

cumulative

GPA at

Graduation

Four Years 1272 1268.70 4.11 3.23 3.41

S.D. 163.27 0.42 0.65 0.52

Five Years* 4994 1239.07 4.04 3.01 3.28

161.16 0.41 0.73 0.58

Six Years** 3579 1233.09 4.02 2.95 3.24

160.40 0.41 0.75 0.85

Five Years*** 1891 1219.12 4.00 2.86 3.21

156.60 0.39 0.75 0.59

Six Years**** 416 1187.61 3.88 2.50 2.88

146.96 0.40 0.77 0.84

* Includes those who graduated within four years

** Includes those who graduated within four year or five years

*** Does NOT includes those who graduated within four years

**** Does NOT includes those who graduated within four year or five years

Table 25a shows that students who graduate in four years have higher average SAT and HSGPA scores than those who

take five or more years to graduate. Also, those graduating in four years have a higher average GPA at the end of the

second semester and a high average GPA at graduation than those who take longer to graduate. This data is irrespective

of the degree with which they graduate.

52

The following table shows the HSGPA, SATT and second semester GPA for students who matriculated by the fall of

year two, and those who do not matriculate by that time. Students who matriculated by the fall of their second year

have a higher average SAT and HSGPA than students who do not matriculate by this time.

Table 25b: Cognitive variables for matriculated and non-matriculated students

by census date of year two in various cohorts

Date N % HSGPA SATT GPA at end of

second semester

1995 Matriculated 377 39.2 3.95 118.28 3.19

1995 Non-matriculated 460 47.9 3.64 1099.41 2.28

All 1995 960 3.78 1138.21 2.72

1996 Matriculated 394 41.6 4.06 1268.55 3.21

1996 Non-matriculated 461 48.7 3.8 1179.84 2.29

All 1996 946 3.91 1213.58 2.7

1997 Matriculated 440 42.3 4.12 1271.75 3.19

1997 Non-matriculated 490 47.2 3.78 1172.9 2.15

All 1997 1039 3.93 1220.37 2.67

1998 Matriculated 496 43.8 4.17 1276.44 3.23

1998 Non-matriculated 522 46.1 3.90 1190.46 2.18

All 1998 1133 4.02 1231.08 2.70

1999 Matriculated 533 48.4 4.19 1317.09 3.27

1999 Non-matriculated 478 43.4 3.95 1256.52 2.16

All 1999 1102 4.06 1283.94 2.77

2000 Matriculated 461 39.1 4.22 1320.59 3.35

2000 Non-matriculated 606 51.4 4.05 1261.26 2.36

All 2000 1178 4.12 1287.98 2.80

2001 Matriculated 559 48.6 4.27 1291.00 3.33

2001 Non-matriculated 483 42.0 3.99 1235.43 2.20

All 2001 1150 4.14 1262.91 2.82

2002 Matriculated 527 47.7 4.32 1331.29 3.34

2002 Non-matriculated 468 42.35 4.06 1272.99 2.26

All 2002 1105 4.19 1300.62 2.86

2003 Matriculated 432 37.7 4.37 1363.95 3.4

2003 Non-matriculated 639 55.7 4.12 1273.36 2.39

All 2003 1147 4.22 1308.46 2.80

2004 Matriculated 458 37.1 4.38 1331.87 3.38

2004 Non-matriculated 671 54.3 4.14 1261.00 2.25

All 2004 1235 4.24 1295.13 2.72

2005 Matriculated 488 41.5 4.38 1302.5 3.43

2005 Non-matriculated 602 51.2 4.11 1222.1 2.14

All 2005 1176 4.23 1256.41 2.73 (Note – ‘non-matriculated’ includes only students who remained non-matriculated but are still in engineering and ‘all’

includes matriculated, non-matriculated and those who changed college, withdrew or were suspended, [excepting for

GPA at the end of semester which does not include withdrawals and suspensions]).

The Effect of Matriculation on Graduation Rates

Examining the student’s matriculation status as of the census date in the fall of the second year, the following results

were found.

For 1995 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 88.3% graduated within six

years with any degree, 80.4% with a degree in engineering.

53

For 1996 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 90.4% graduated within six

years with any degree, 83.8% with a degree in engineering.

For 1997 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 90.8% graduated within six

years with any degree, 82.4% with a degree in engineering.

For 1998 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 90.1% graduated within six

years with any degree, 83.2% with a degree in engineering.

For 1999 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 94.0% graduated within six

years with any degree, 88.9% with a degree in engineering.

For 2000 cohort, of those who matriculated by census date of the second year, 92.6% graduated within six

years with any degree, 85.2% with a degree in engineering.

54

The following charts show the differences in graduation rates in (a) engineering and (b) at NCSU, by ethnic and

gender groups of those who matriculate by fall of year three.

Table 26: Six-year graduation rates of matriculated students with an engineering degree.

Of Those Who Start In Cohort And Who Have Matriculated By Fall Of Year Three Percentage That

Graduated Within Six Years With An Engineering Degree

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 77.0 63.6 75.9 79.2 0.0 76.6

1996 80.8 100.0 82.35 86.2 75.0 81.4

1997 80.9 72.7 66.7 86.8 50.0 79.8

1998 82.8 61.5 72.9 87.8 100.0 82.1

1999 84.7 81.25 86.5 90.7 100.0 85.1

2000 81.9 85.7 80.0 94.4 83.3 83.1

Cohort Males Females All

1995 77.0 75.8 76.6

1996 80.5 85.15 81.4

1997 81.0 75.6 79.8

1998 82.0 82.2 82.1

1999 85.6 82.8 85.1

2000 84.2 78.4 83.1

The effect of matriculation on graduation was already discussed in section 2. Overall, the rate at which students that

matriculated by fall of year three and then went on to graduate with a degree in engineering has increased from 77% in

1995 to 85% in 1999.

55

Table 27: Six-year graduation rates of matriculated students with a degree from NC State University.

Of Those Who Start In Cohort And Who Have Matriculated By Fall Of Year Three Percentage

That Graduated Within Six Years At The University

Cohort White

Hispanic

American

African

American

Asian

American

Native

American All

1995 84.8 81.8 83.3 83.3 100.0 84.6

1996 87.8 100.0 88.2 96.6 75.0 88.35

1997 89.7 81.8 75.0 94.7 50.0 88.5

1998 90.5 84.6 75.0 93.9 100.0 89.5

1999 91.8 81.25 89.2 95.35 100.0 91.6

2000 90.1 92.9 91.1 98.6 83.3 90.9

Cohort Males Females All

1995 83.3 89.2 84.6

1996 87.5 92.1 88.35

1997 88.5 88.6 88.5

1998 89.4 89.9 89.5

1999 90.5 96.9 91.6

2000 90.5 92.8 90.9

The rate at which students that matriculated by year 3 and subsequently graduated with a degree from NCSU increased

from 85% in 1995 to 92% in 1999.

56

Time to Graduation

Table 28 shows that the percentage of student graduating in 4 years increased, from 19% in 1995 to 32% in 2001, but

dipped down again in 2002 to 28.7%. The number who had not graduated after 6 years decreased from 31% in 1995 to

25% in 1999, but rose again to 27% in 2000. The average time to graduation decreased by four months between 1995

and 1999.

Table 28: Time to Graduation with a degree from NCSU

1995

cohort

1996

cohort

1997

cohort

1998

cohort

1999

cohort

2000

cohort

2001

cohort

2002

cohort

Cohort N

960 946 1039 1133 1102 1178 1150 1105

% graduating

in 4 years

19.38 23.68 23.97 24.18 30.76 31.75 32.09 28.69

% graduating

in 5 years 38.13 36.15 33.88 37.42 37.02 34.46 31.65

% graduating

in 6 years 7.29 8.56 9.14 7.68 7.53 6.625

% not

graduated

after 6 years

30.73

26.32 30.22 28.86 24.68 27.16

Average time

to graduation 4.58

years

(4 yrs 7

months)

4.57

years

(4 yrs 7

months)

4.46

years

(4 yrs

5 ½

months)

4.38

years

(4 yrs

4 ½

months)

4.26

years

(4 yrs 3

months)

4.23

years

(4 yrs 3

months)

57

4. Who Is Retained At The University And Within COE?

The following tables show the rates at which students continue to be enrolled and or graduated at the University by

census dates of each year. At least 89% of students continue to their sophomore year across all cohorts. The highest

percentage was seen in 2003 (93%).

Students persisting at NCSU (Analysis supplied by Lewis Carson)

Table 29: Percentage of ALL COE students who started in a cohort and who are still enrolled or who graduated

at NCSU at the census date each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 89.3 90.6 89.4 90.6 90.6 90.8 90.4 91.3 93.0 90.6 90.7

Fall Yr. 3 80.4 83.2 81.1 82.5 86.5 85.6 84.6 83.3 86.7 82.5

Fall Yr. 4 74.7 79.1 76.2 77.6 82.9 82.0 79.7 78.3 82.9

Fall Yr. 5 72.7 75.6 74.0 75.5 80.1 79.7 76.9 77.3

Fall Yr. 6 70.3 74.5 72.7 75.0 79.0 78.1 75.7

Fall Yr.

7 69.4 74.4 72.1 73.3 78.9 76.9

Table 30: Percentage of COE African American students who started in a cohort

and who are still enrolled or who graduated at NCSU at the census date each

year. 1

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 92.3 91.1 89.8 89 91 90.7 94.1 95.1 94.5 86.1 91.0

Fall Yr. 3 83.8 82.1 75.6 76.3 85.1 81.4 88.2 80.2 87.7 73.0

Fall Yr. 4 73.5 74 64.6 64.4 79.1 77.9 76.5 72.8 79.5

Fall Yr. 5 72.6 69.9 58.3 64.4 73.1 74.4 77.91

67.0

Fall Yr. 6 66.7 66.7 56.7 61.9 73.1 73.3 73.5

Fall Yr.

7

65 65 57.5 59.3 68.7 68.6

1 Percentages increase slightly due to students reentering the program. The reentry of students has more of an impact in

these two tables because the overall populations are small.

58

Table 31: Percentage of COE Native American students who started in a cohort and who are still enrolled or

who graduated at NCSU at the census date each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.00

Fall Yr. 2 77.8 100.0 100.0 83.3 100.0 76.9 63.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 62.5

Fall Yr. 3 44.4 100.0 100.0 66.7 100.0 76.9 54.5 80 100.0 91.7

Fall Yr. 4 22.2 85.7 71.4 66.7 80 69.2 63.6 90 100.0

Fall Yr. 5 11.1 71.4 57.1 33.3 80 53.8 54.5 70

Fall Yr. 6 33.31

57.2

57.1 33.3 80 46.2 54.5

Fall Yr.

7 22.2 71.41 42.9 33.3 80 53.8

1

Table 32: Percentage of COE Hispanic American students who started in a

cohort and who are still enrolled or who graduated at NCSU at the census date

each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 84.2 76.9 90.5 89.5 92.3 86.4 80.8 83.9 97.1 88.9 91.7

Fall Yr. 3 73.7 76.9 90.5 89.5 80.8 86.4 65.4 77.4 91.2 72.2

Fall Yr. 4 57.9 84.6 90.5 89.5 65.4 72.7 57.7 74.2 85.3 .

Fall Yr. 5 68.4 84.6 81 89.5 69.2 77.31 57.7 74.2 . .

Fall Yr. 6 73.71 69.2 76.2 89.5 69.2 77.3 53.9 . . .

Fall Yr.

7

68.4 76.91 66.7 84.2 65.4 72.7 . . . .

Table 33: Percentage of COE Asian American students who started in a cohort

and who are still enrolled or who graduated at NCSU at the census date each

year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 97.3 76.1 89.3 89.5 86.8 94.8 90.2 89.9 90.7 93.8 95.7

Fall Yr. 3 89.2 71.7 82.1 82.9 77.9 90.6 87.8 85.5 88.0 89.1

Fall Yr. 4 83.8 73.9 80.4 76.3 82.4 89.6 82.9 84.1 84.0 .

Fall Yr. 5 78.4 69.6 75 78.9 77.9 87.5 86.61 79.7 . .

Fall Yr. 6 75.7 69.6 76.81 81.6

1 79.4

1 85.4 85.4 . . .

Fall Yr.

7

73 69.6 75 76.3 79.4 83.3 . . . .

59

Table 34: Percentage of COE white students who started in a cohort and who

are still enrolled or who graduated at NCSU at the census date each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 88.7 91.5 89.2 90.9 90.7 90.7 90.8 91.4 92.9 90.8 90.8

Fall Yr. 3 80.1 84 81.5 83.3 87.3 85.5 84.9 83.8 86.2 83.5

Fall Yr. 4 75.4 80.1 77.4 79.2 83.8 82 80.5 79.5 82.9. .

Fall Yr. 5 73.3 76.8 76.3 76.6 81.1 79.8 76.7 78.3. . .

Fall Yr. 6 71 76.4 75 76.1 79.7 78.3 76.4. . . .

Fall Yr.

7

70.4 76.2 74.5 74.9 801 77.4. . . . .

Table 35: Percentage of COE male students who started in a cohort and who are

still enrolled or who graduated at NCSU at the census date each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 89.6 91.5 88.9 90.2 90.3 90.9 89.9 91.4 93.2 89.8 90.6

Fall Yr. 3 80.7 83.6 81 82.7 85.6 85.3 84.1 82.4 86.1 81.1

Fall Yr. 4 75.3 80.1 76 77.5 82 81.5 79.2 78.2 81.7

Fall Yr. 5 72.6 76 73.9 75.2 78.7 79 75.8 75.7

Fall Yr. 6 70.8 74.2 72.5 75.2 77.3 77.4 74.7

Fall Yr.

7 69.7 74.61 71.5 72.9 77.2 75.8

Table 36: Percentage of COE female students who started in a cohort and who are still enrolled or who

graduated at NCSU at the census date each year.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 88.2 87.1 91.2 91.8 91.5 90.7 92.8 90.8 91.9 94.2 91.7

Fall Yr. 3 79.7 81.6 81.6 82 90.1 86.7 87.1 87.8 89.7 88.8

Fall Yr. 4 73 75.1 77 77.7 86.9 84.5 82.3 81.6 89.2

Fall Yr. 5 73 74.2 74.5 76.4 85.9 82.7 81.8 84.71

Fall Yr. 6 68.8 75.61 73.6 74.7 86.4

1 80.9 79.9

Fall Yr.

7 68.3 73.6 74.1 75.11 86.4 81.8

1

60

Students persisting in Engineering

The percentage of students who persist into their second year in engineering has increased from 83% in 1995 to a peak

of 88% in 2003. This dipped down in 2004 to 85%, although this was still above the 1995 level, and increase in 2005 to

86%.

Table 37: Percentage of ALL COE students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 83.3 85.4 84.0 85.9 85.9 85.6 85.9 85.6 88.1 84.7 85.9

Fall Yr. 3 67.6 71.1 69.9 70.8 73.8 73.1 73.0 70.4 73.1 67.2

Fall Yr. 4 58.2 63.2 60.15 60.1 67.15 64.2 63.1 61.1 62.9

Fall Yr. 5 53.3 57.1 54.9 55.8 62.8 60.4 58.3 57.6

Fall Yr. 6 50.3 55.0 52.3 54.6 61.25 58.7 55.5

Fall Yr.

7 49.3 54.8 51.1 52.7 60.7 57.9

Table 38: Percentage of COE African American students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 88.0 88.6 88.2 84.75 88.1 86.0 92.65 92.6 91.8 82.8 87.6

Fall Yr. 3 76.1 71.5 69.3 66.95 74.6 66.3 79.4 67.9 68.5 59.0

Fall Yr. 4 59.8 61.0 55.9 50.85 67.2 60.5 63.2 51.9 49.3

Fall Yr. 5 51.3 54.5 41.7 44.9 59.7 55.8 58.8 45.7

Fall Yr. 6 46.15 46.3 39.4 44.1 58.2 54.7 50.0

Fall Yr.

7 43.6 44.7 37.0 39.0 55.2 53.5

Table 39: Percentage of COE Native American students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 77.8 100.0 100.0 66.7 100.0 76.9 63.6 90.0 83.3 100.0 62.5

Fall Yr. 3 33.3 100.0 71.4 50.0 100.0 76.9 45.45 70.0 83.3 83.3

Fall Yr. 4 0.0 85.7 28.6 50.0 80.0 61.5 45.45 70.0 83.3

Fall Yr. 5 0.0 71.4 28.6 33.3 80.0 46.2 36.4 50.00

Fall Yr. 6 11.1 57.1 14.3 33.3 60.0 38.5 36.4

Fall Yr.

7 0.0 71.4

1 14.3 33.3 60.0 38.5

61

Table 40: Percentage of COE Hispanic American students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 78.95 69.2 85.7 84.2 88.5 77.3 76.9 83.9 91.2 83.3 91.7

Fall Yr. 3 57.9 61.5 76.2 73.7 73.1 72.7 57.7 71.0 73.5 61.1

Fall Yr. 4 36.8 69.2 71.4 68.4 50.0 54.5 53.85 64.5 59.7

Fall Yr. 5 36.8 69.2 57.1 57.9 53.851 59.1

1 50.0 64.5

Fall Yr. 6 36.8 46.15 52.4 52.6 53.85 59.1 46.2

Fall Yr.

7 36.8 53.9

1 42.9 52.6 50.0 54.6

Table 41: Percentage of COE Asian American students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 89.2 73.9 85.7 86.8 85.3 93.8 87.8 79.7 88.0 89.1 88.4

Fall Yr. 3 73.0 69.6 78.6 75.0 73.5 84.4 78.0 65.2 76.0 71.9

Fall Yr. 4 64.9 69.6 69.6 63.2 73.5 79.2 65.85 58.0 68.7

Fall Yr. 5 59.5 54.35 64.3 64.51

69.1 77.1 68.31 56.5

Fall Yr. 6 56.8 54.35 62.5 67.11 69.1 74.0 64.6

Fall Yr.

7 56.8

54.35 60.7 61.8 69.1 74.0

Table 42: Percentage of COE white students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 82.5 85.7 83.1 86.1 85.7 85.0 85.8 85.6 87.8 84.5 85.7

Fall Yr. 3 66.7 71.1 69.2 71.0 73.6 72.5 72.8 71.1 73.1 68.1

Fall Yr. 4 58.9 62.9 60.1 60.9 67.1 63.3 63.3 62.9 63.6

Fall Yr. 5 54.2 57.3 56.4 56.6 62.7 59.3 57.8 58.6

Fall Yr. 6 51.3 56.5 53.9 55.1 61.1 57.8 55.6

Fall Yr.

7 50.6 56.3 53.1 53.8 60.8 57.0

62

Table 43: Percentage of COE male students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 84.8 87.0 84.5 86.6 86.7 86.1 86.1 87.0 89.2 84.8 86.4

Fall Yr. 3 69.85 73.0 71.0 71.9 75.25 74.1 73.65 71.3 73.7 68.7

Fall Yr. 4 61.55 65.9 61.75 60.7 69.4 65.5 63.9 62.4 63.4

Fall Yr. 5 56.4 58.8 56.9 56.7 64.9 61.4 58.5 57.8

Fall Yr. 6 53.7 56.4 54.0 55.7 63.1 59.8 55.8

Fall Yr.

7 52.4 56.5 52.5 53.2 62.5 59.8

Table 44: Percentage of COE female students who persist in engineering.

Census 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Enter Yr 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Fall Yr. 2 78.9 79.6 82.4 83.3 82.6 83.1 85.2 79.1 82.7 84.4 82.7

Fall Yr. 3 60.8 64.2 66.1 66.5 67.6 68.9 69.9 66.8 69.7 60.3

Fall Yr. 4 48.1 53.2 54.8 57.9 57.75 58.7 59.8 59.7 60.0

Fall Yr. 5 43.9 50.75 48.1 52.4 54.0 56.0 57.4 57.2

Fall Yr. 6 40.1 49.75 46.4 51.1 53.5 53.8 53.3

Fall Yr.

7 39.7 48.3 46.4 50.6 53.05 53.8

5. What percentages of suspended students; total, curricula and cohort?

Cohorts 1995 through 2003

The percentage of students in the cohort who were suspended at the census date of year 4 and at census data year 5

decreased from 1995 to 2000 but increased in the two years after that.

Of those who matriculated by census date of year 2, between one to six students were suspended at census date of year 4

in the 1995 – 2003 cohorts, the highest being 6 in the 1998 group. Of those who matriculated by census date of year 2,

between two to eight students were suspended at census date of year 5 in the 1995 – 2003 cohorts, the highest being 8 in

the 2002 group. Of 8 matriculated students suspended at census date year 4 in the 1995 – 2000 cohorts, none went on to

graduate within six years.

63

Table 45: Students who were suspended at census date of year 4.

Cohort year Number of suspensions by census date

year 4

Percentage suspended at census date

year 4

1995 87 9.1

1996 64 6.8

1997 74 7.1

1998 66 5.8

1999 56 5.1

2000 54 4.6

2001 73 6.35

2002 75 6.8

2003 64 5.6

Table 45: Students who were suspended at census date of year 5.

Cohort year Number of suspensions at census date

year 5

Percentage suspended at census date

year 5

1995 87 9.06

1996 78 8.25

1997 89 8.57

1998 82 7.24

1999 63 5.72

2000 59 5.01

2001 86 7.48

2002 81 7.33