A framework to ensure that Cornell retains its position as a world-class research university into the 21st century has been developed by a faculty task force and forwarded to President Hunter Rawlings for his consideration. The group's recommendations are also being distributed to faculty by the Research and Advanced Studies Office for further campus-wide discussion.
The Report of the Research Futures Task Force I: Physical Sciences and Engineering and Their Relationship with Biological Sciences was sent to Rawlings Sept. 30 by the task force's co-chairs, Norman R. Scott, vice president for research and advanced studies, and John Hopcroft, dean of the College of Engineering. Composed of 15 members -- half selected by the Faculty Senate and half by the co-chairs -- the task force met at least biweekly over the summer. The group also reviewed input from more than 70 Cornell researchers who responded to an electronic survey sent by Scott in July to more than 500 faculty principal investigators.
In their cover letter to Rawlings, Scott and Hopcroft praised the hard work of the task force members in developing the plan. The charge of the Research Futures Task Force was: to outline research goals for Cornell, to suggest research priorities and to suggest a research strategy with models for allocating limited Cornell resources.
"Supporters of the report feel that it does a good job in expressing where to go, but not how to get there," Scott and Hopcroft wrote to Rawlings. Another important follow-up effort, they added, will be attracting outside funding in order to achieve the recommendations of the task force.
"This report tries to set out a rationale for
strategically positioning Cornell in the physical sciences and
engineering," Hopcroft said. "I think that the most important
aspect is the taxonomy of (1) strategic enabling research, (2)in
terdisciplinary research, and (3) basic research
disciplines. Almost as important is the attempt to clarify the roles of
the faculty and the administration. The faculty is responsible
for providing scientific leadership to position the institution.
It is the administration's responsibility to support and
encourage faculty in articulating that leadership."
The next step, Hopcroft said, is "broad faculty discussion."
"We need to, collectively, decide if the following premise is correct: to be a world-class university requires that we be world-class in the strategic enabling disciplines," the dean commented.
"The most important issues facing the research faculty are those of maintaining the highest possible quality of people -- faculty and students," said Robert Richardson, professor of physics who served on the task force. "We have an aging faculty, aging facilities and limited financial resources. Every new appointment is a precious opportunity for renewal. We must be very careful whom we appoint and how we nurture the careers of new faculty."
The text of the document is published in a supplement in this issue of the Cornell Chronicle. Copies are also being distributed to faculty by the Research and Advanced Studies Office. The report may be found online on the Faculty Senate web site at http://www.cornell.edu/UniversityFaculty/forums/main.html