In planning an education program, a center's leadership team must take into account the following:

• Center Mission Statement. An ERC is a unique organization that has three mandates from NSF: (a) cutting-edge research, (b) technology transfer of the results of the research, and (c) preparation of the next generation of engineers and scientists. The mission statement should recognize the education component of the center.
• Education Program Goals. Program goals must be specified at the beginning of the planning process. The leadership team, including the center's overall director, must develop them in conjunction with the director of research, the director of technology transfer, and the education coordinator/director. (All of these functions are known by different titles at different centers.) This step will ensure integration of research, technology transfer, and education (a hallmark of the ERC Program) and implementation of the program. These goals should be consistent with the mission statement and must address the scope of the program, the mechanisms for integrating center research and education, and mechanisms for industry-student interactions. The requirements for precollege educational outreach must be taken into account. Because ERCs have a particular mandate to ensure adequate representation of women and minority students, recruiting measures to meet this mandate must be included. The goals will determine the scope and range of the education program.
  
• Organizational Considerations. Initial planning must include the human resources that will be needed. The director of the education program should be a professional at the same level on the organizational chart as the research and technology transfer directors. It is recommended that a full-time professional be engaged at the outset and included in the planning stages of the program. While some centers rely on part-time faculty members to serve in this position, employing an individual with an education programming background will allow the center to implement a complete program.
  
• Strategic Planning. Given the limited lifespan of an ERC, the center's management must give strategic planning a high priority, beginning in the initial stages of a center proposal. Strategic plans are dynamic documents that guide allocation of limited resources. They must be revisited annually to ensure that they are able to react to changes in the research and industrial environment and to allow for the exploitation of opportunities that arise during the year.
  
• Budget. The education program should include resources that match the proposed plan. While supplemental funding (from foundations, NSF, and industry) for particular programs is available, center resources should be earmarked to support the fundamental components that allow the center to meet its core educational goals. A typical ERC directly spends $7 million on education and outreach.
  
• NSF/Center Interface. NSF has an important guidance and support role to play in the development and growth of ERC education programs.
  

4.2.2 Scope and Range of Education Programs

ERCs are perhaps unique in their mission to provide an array of education programs across the learning continuum, from precollegiate through collegiate to lifelong learning for postgraduates. (Figure 1 represents schematically the scope of a typical ERC education program.) It is therefore useful to develop an education program in phases that are implemented over several years. The initial focus must be determined by the education coordinator/director in collaboration with the center director and other members of the leadership team.

A phased approach works best. The initial program components would generally comprise curriculum development activities and programs for undergraduate and graduate students. Phase 1a would include course modules and activities for the local college level and precollege students. Phase 1b might include outreach activities for undergraduate and graduate students at other institutions, such as a Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program. Phase 2 might be continuing education activities for practitioners. Phase 3 would include precollegiate outreach activities. It is important to set priorities for these activities in the initial planning stage and obtain consensus among the center's leadership on the appropriate order of implementation. A mature program, such as the model in Figure 1 that offers programming at all levels, requires significant resources (both human and financial).

4.2.3 Education Program Direction and Management

4.2.3.1 Qualifications of the Education Coordinator/Director

To implement a comprehensive education program, serving a variety of constituents, it is recommended that a full-time administrator be named. Most ERCs have designated a member of the faculty or senior administrative staff to direct education programs; in several centers an associate director holds this position. The title for this function varies, reflecting the different administrative structures of different ERCs. In some centers with small administrative staffs, one or more existing staff members carry out the functions of education coordinator/director along with their other duties at the center or in the university, but this approach limits the ability of the center to offer a wide range of programs. The position should be considered not a support position, but rather a professional position with appropriate professional status.

The choice of education coordinator/director, and the appropriate positioning of this person as a member of the center's leadership team, will determine the success of the center's education program. In some centers, the management believes that this person should have a PhD, to elicit the full respect and cooperation of faculty. This is especially important for curriculum development. This question should be considered and resolved at the outset by the center director and the executive committee. In any case, the primary focus should be on identifying an individual with an appropriate background to be responsible for the education activities of the center. His or her interest in interacting with students should also be a major selection factor.

Education coordinators/directors are responsible for writing up all aspects of their education programs for the ERC annual report and other documents. They also develop and write grant proposals of many types to expand their education programs. Therefore, strong communications skills and an ability to prepare successful proposals are important.

It is recommended that an education advisory committee be established to give center faculty a mechanism to provide input into center education programs and to provide support for them. The composition of this group can include center faculty, external faculty, and industrial partners as is deemed appropriate.

4.2.4 Strategic Planning

4.2.4.1 Strategic Planning Process

The strategic planning process for education is conducted in different ways at different centers, with a variety of participants, including the education coordinator/director, the center director, an education advisory committee and/or the center administration, and possibly industrial or university involvement. Examples of different strategic plans are on the Engineering Research Centers Association website (at http://www.erc-assoc.org/educate/edstrat.htm).

Some ERCs involve faculty from all departments of engineering or representatives from industry in the strategic planning process. Knowing the state of the art in your ERC research areas provides a base from which to modify and develop courses. Several ERCs use the activities of annual report planning and preparation as the time to review education program strategy and make changes. Some ERCs give the education coordinator/director and staff leeway to make initial plans and decide on strategies, which are then reviewed by the center director and/or appropriate committee. Other ERCs form teams consisting of the education coordinator/director, center director, some faculty members, and sometimes a graduate student representative. Another means of student input is a student advisory committee. Often the membership of such a committee is drawn from the center's Student Leadership Council (see Chapter 8 of the Best Practices Manual).

ERC education coordinators/directors can consult their counterparts at other ERCs for ideas in constructing the initial plan, and they can meet with their center directors, industrial liaison specialists, and senior center faculty to gather input on ERC education. In addition, the education coordinator/director must become familiar with the curricula at his or her particular school of engineering and other relevant departments within the university. Multi-university ERCs also must accommodate requirements of their affiliated universities' curricula.

In developing the strategic plan, one should begin by defining the issues of relevance to the particular ERC's vision, mission, and goals.

4.2.4.2 Initial Planning Issues

Among the issues to be considered in developing and implementing the education plan for an ERC are:

• development of an education vision and goals (both short-term and long-term) consistent with the center's strategic plan and objectives
• identification of the particular populations and student groups to be impacted
• assessment of resources, both personnel and financial ?
• development of guidelines for undergraduate and graduate student participation
• development of a recruitment strategy for undergraduate and graduate students, recognizing that different strategies are required
• design of an outreach strategy to include K-12, undergraduate, graduate, industry, community, etc., short-term and long-term, which meets NSF and center goals
• development of a plan to recruit and retain underrepresented populations in engineering (women, underrepresented minorities, persons with disabilities) in the center's education and research areas
• development of a strategy to infuse ERC research findings into the curriculum
• development of mechanisms to integrate students into all aspects of the center
• development of mechanisms for industrial interaction at all student levels, graduate and undergraduate
• development of a schedule of ERC courses, seminars, and other academic requirements so students can commit to them early in their careers.

Once the strategic plan is developed, it can be used to help write the annual report each year and to plan budget requests and revisions; the plan can be easily reviewed and updated to reflect future progress in the center.

Following is one model of the process of developing a strategic plan:

• Overall Goals/Objectives. The first step is to develop a statement of the overall goals/objectives of the education program, keeping in mind the center's vision (what you want it to be) and mission statement (what you do to implement the vision). Such a statement should include what do you want to do; whom you want to affect, and how you intend to accomplish it. For example, an educational goal/objective might be "to develop and deliver innovative educational initiatives to prepare scientists and engineers for the challenges of the emerging biology based industries, in order to produce a generation of engineers and scientists with a cross-disciplinary team perspective." The strategy to accomplish this goal could include "a major outreach to middle and high school students and teachers."
• Initiatives and Actions. Next, one must develop specific initiatives (specific, focused activities) and the actions for carrying them out. (Actions should be stated in measurable terms.) Initiatives might be planned in the areas of precollege outreach, undergraduates, graduate students, lifelong learning, and curriculum development. For example, "K-12 initiatives will provide opportunities for elementary, middle, and high school students and teachers to understand the center's research field and goals." This initiative might be supported by actions such as "Maintain a program of yearly demonstrations to X number of schools" and "Develop a web module."

An education strategic plan also should provide for developments over time. A plan appropriate for an ERC in its early years must change as the center matures, and will change even more as the center works towards self?sufficiency.

4.2.5 Graduating Centers: Planning and Preparation

An important issue in strategic planning is the impact of the ERC's 10-year life cycle. Some program components are amenable to institutionalization, but others depend on supplemental funding that is not likely to be continued after funding ends. Courses that have been added to the curriculum by the center and any associated certificates, minors, and/or majors should be integrated in the university curriculum prior to the end of the center, thereby becoming part of the continuing programming of the university.

As a center approaches the end of the cycle, these concerns come into sharper focus. NSF hopes and intends that the culture of ERC education will continue in the center; but without continuing support from the university and industry, it is likely that most of the ERC's education programs will end. The center's education coordinator/director should work with the center leadership to develop a self-sufficiency plan from the outset. This plan can include soliciting education funding from the university, foundations, and the private sector (notably industry).

When a center "graduates," or reaches its full term, NSF supplemental funding for educational activities may continue on a competitive basis, provided the center still operates as an ERC. Depending on the financial strength of the graduated center, some education programs may be cut back or ended. Areas that may be affected include the extensive involvement of undergraduates and underrepresented populations in the education and research activities, as well as outreach programs. The continuation of a graduated center in some ERC-like form is essential to maintaining support for the associated education programs.

Preliminary data from earlier graduated centers suggest that:

• Research becomes focused on applied, short-term projects that may not be suitable for dissertation level work.
• Undergraduate research and outreach program components (including programming for minorities and women students) decline.
• Student involvement, interdisciplinary focus, and team-based research decline.
• In most universities with graduated centers, the main lasting effect of the NSF ERC funding to date has been the development of multidisciplinary degrees, minors, and certificates that have helped shift engineering education away from the traditional disciplinary compartmentalization towards the interdisciplinary focus that is required to solve today's engineering challenges.

Studies and a recent survey of graduated centers have shown that successful continuation of education programming depends on several factors:

• A full time (hard money) person to coordinate activities, who is prepared to seek funding from grants and other sources
• Strong institutional support, including support for the ERC education culture as well as significant cash or other direct financial assistance; finding champions of the education and preparation of students, both in industry and at the university level, is critical
• Faculty motivated to continue and institutional incentives that further this motivation
• A strong, continuing commitment on the part of center leadership to the goals of an ERC education program
• Successful securing of funding from governmental agencies and foundations
• Creative ways of packaging program elements that fit the type of activities industry is able and willing to support (i.e., lab training internships, design course support, graduate fellowships).
• a strong, evolving research program.

Attention must be paid to all these characteristics from the outset. They must be nurtured and maintained throughout the life of the center, to provide a platform for successful implementation of the strategic plan.

4.2.6 Developing a Budget

The budget of an education program depends on many factors, including the education plans of the center, the expected industrial involvement, the number and type of NSF supplemental funds granted, and the initiative of the education coordinator/director. The size and complexity of the program will depend on the commitment of the center's leadership to the education program and the priorities set during the initial planning stages.

4.2.6.1 Establishing Appropriate Budget Levels

Items that should be in the education budget include:

• administrative costs (such as the education coordinator/director's time, support staff, printing, and data management)
• graduate student support
• funding to support the undergraduate research program
• funding for precollege outreach
• travel (for recruiting, dissemination, and so on).

The initial budget for education should include funding for start-up, advertising and recruiting, and other efforts to ensure a successful beginning for the program in addition to stipends for undergraduate students (for center research fellows, summer research programs, and other activities), research assistantships for graduate students, and appropriate staff support. Because ERC education programs must make extensive reports to NSF, data management capabilities must be planned for at the outset.

The initial budget may include some costs (such as travel) that support the development of relationships with other undergraduate and minority institutions. Once these relationships have been developed, budgets may be partially reallocated to other purposes. Some centers use education budgets only for stipends and student support, with staff and travel budgeted in other center funds.

Dissemination is an important part of an education program. There are many opportunities for engineering educators to learn from each other, such as Frontiers in Education (FIE), the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), Women in Engineering Programs and Advocates Network (WEPAN), and the National Association of Minority Engineering Program Administrators (NAMEPA). Travel funds should be provided to allow them to participate in these meetings and organizations.

The education program will include contributions from others, including editors, publications coordinators, and staff engineers. The center's education budget should allocate a portion of the time of these personnel to the education budget.

As the center matures, NSF supplemental funding and leveraged support from other sources, as well as industrial funding, should increase.

As the center approaches graduation, the most likely scenario for continuation of the education programs is through leveraged support via additional funds from the university, foundations, industry, or state programs as well as NSF/ERC education programs.

Education budget decisions allocating overall resources should be made by the center leadership-including the director, education coordinator/director, research director, and industrial program director-serving as an executive committee. In some ERCs, education coordinators/directors submit proposals for funding along with research proposals of the thrust area and project directors, and all proposals are considered by an ERC funding committee. Some ERCs have a budget for program development, which includes scholarship/fellowship stipends and seminar and travel expenses.

Faculty attitudes toward center education programs differ with respect to funding. A research faculty member who is also coordinating an education program commented, "It is clear that faculty respond to rewards (primarily funding). If money is allocated primarily on the basis of research, then there is little incentive for faculty to devote significant effort to developing new or innovative educational activities." At many ERCs, however, faculty are enthusiastic about the education programs and even offer to support additional students from their research funds.

4.2.6.2 Sources of Education Funds

Funding for educational activities may be derived from a number of sources. Ideally, after the first few years, it should not depend entirely on internal ERC funds. Specifically, there are opportunities for competitive supplemental funding from the ERC Program, education/outreach awards from other divisions and directorates of NSF, special grants from industry members of the center, funds from the university for diversity-promoting activities, education grants from philanthropic organizations, and possibly state sources. Opportunities should be pursued to leverage the funding received, using non-federal ERC funds for matching. Some centers have been quite successful in leveraging their education budgets with university, state, and other federal resources. Foundation funds may be used for matching funds with NSF-supported activities.

ERC Program supplemental funds are provided for special initiatives, such as the Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU), outreach to historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), technology schools, and international programs, as well as other special supplemental funds. Such programs significantly strengthen ERC education programs. (See Section 4.3, "Education Programs.") They provide a focus for center education activities and serve as a fulcrum for leveraging support from other sources, including industry. The programs go considerably beyond the traditional research-focused mandate of university research centers. Indeed, they place a substantial demand on the administrative and financial resources of ERCs. However, they are part and parcel of the broader mandate of these centers to develop a new and more industry-focused, product-focused culture for academic engineering and to spread that culture through education. In that sense, then, "outreach" is simply extended ERC education.

In addition to the ERC Program's REU funding are NSF-wide REU and Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) programs. It should be noted that many ERCs have found it important to supplement the NSF REU funding by various means, to develop strong REU programs.

Adequate baseline funding must be provided to the program, however. A collection of supplemental grants alone does not make a coherent program, as not all funding opportunities will fit in the education strategic plan and only those that do fit should be pursued.

4.2.6.3 Strategies for Funding Education Programs

ERCs have taken many creative routes in leveraging educational and outreach activities, including the following:

Contacts with industrial partners or other corporate sponsors have been used as a means of providing additional funding for educational programs.

• The ERC for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing sponsors a three-week Teacher Institute for which teams of teachers (a math and a science teacher) from the same school are recruited. The teachers spend time in the center laboratories and local industry and also develop curriculum enhancement activities. The local industries participating in the program pay part of its expenses. RET funding from NSF also supports this effort.

Collaborations with other institutions has also proved a source for leveraging funding.

• The Packaging Research Center has partnered with the International Microelectronics Packaging Society and NSF to provide undergraduate research fellowships to undergraduates at non-PRC institutions in an outreach educational program to promote packaging research at other undergraduate schools.
• The Center for Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems at the University of Michigan has a Museum Project in collaboration with the Ann Arbor Hands On Museum. The Museum provides in-kind support in the form of expert advice, contacts, and space. The exhibit educates participants about manufacturing and increases awareness of the progress in manufacturing.

State governments and other governmental agencies have also provided a source of support.

• The Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems at Northeastern University has over the past several years conducted the CenSSIS Challenge "Hidden Worlds" project for high school students and their teachers at the annual Massachusetts Pre-Engineering Program, Inc., competition. The "challenge" project has been funded through a grant from the Massachusetts Department of Education.
• The Biotechnology Process Engineering Center at MIT has had over the years several training grants from the National Institutes of Health to help fund the training of graduate students.
• The Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research has made the most of funding from several sources (FEMA headquarters, FEMA Region II, New York State Emergency Management Agency) to coordinate a program to develop an accurate earthquake-loss estimation model for the greater NYC area. With funding from these sources, augmented by MCEER educational funding, several outcomes were achieved: an effective website for outreach (especially important in reaching those in the low- to moderate earthquake hazard areas) was established, undergraduates were involved in the research, and a number of reports and papers were produced. Additional knowledge and information was contributed by those supported by other sources in New York and New Jersey. At the project's conclusion, an impressive amount of regional data on seismic hazard and building inventory and distribution will be made publicly available.

The NSF Engineering Education and Centers Division also provides special supplemental funding for some programs. REU supplements are used by most centers, and RET supplements are also available. Other supplements become available periodically. For example:

• The Center for Power Electronics Systems at Virginia Tech received NSF supplemental funding through the PER (Partnership for Education and Research) solicitation program for CPES's Lego Robotics Challenge project. This program is concentrated in Southwest Virginia, a region that has historically lacked such a program. Its intention is to introduce elementary and middle school children to science and technology concepts at an early age.

Other NSF engineering divisions and other directorates also have been sources of support. For example:

• The three earthquake engineering research centers (EERCS) served as a catalyst to develop the University Consortium on Instructional Shake Tables (UCIST), currently a consortium of over 40 institutions. The three centers cooperated in the design of a bench-scale shake table to encourage interest in structural dynamics and earthquake hazard mitigation at the undergraduate level. The cooperation among the centers inspired the investigators to go after an NSF grant from the Education and Human Resources Directorate's Division of Undergraduate Education, which provided 1:1 matching of funds for the acquisition of the hardware for the first 25 universities.
• The NSF-wide Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program funds activities that are organized around an interdisciplinary research theme and involve a diverse group of faculty members and other investigators. An IGERT project is expected to provide students with experience relevant to both academic and nonacademic careers by linking graduate research and education through such activities as internships and mentoring in industrial, national laboratory, academic, or other settings. As such, ERC students and programs could easily qualify for IGERT funding, although at present no ERCs have an IGERT award.

One of the best ways to leverage funding and improve the efficient use of a center's resources is to join with others in setting up and implementing projects. Once the fixed costs have been met, additional participants bring down the cost per participant and provide cross-fertilization of expertise.

• Since their inception, the three EERCs have had many such tri-center projects. While each center has an REU on its diversified campuses, there is a combined REU symposium at which all participants gather. The three centers take turns in putting this on. The centers develop and then share graduate teaching modules on specialized subjects. Also, the centers are undertaking organizing student field missions to visit sites of recent earthquakes; these include 2-6 students from each earthquake center as well as students from other universities. This past year the students were able to visit Taiwan.

Another way to extend the reach of education dollars is to take advantage of programs that are already in place. Thus the centers don't have to reinvent the wheel or fund the final activity events.

• CPES' Lego Robotics Challenge culminates in FIRST Lego League (FLL) competition opportunities. FLL is an established joint endeavor between FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology) and LEGO Mindstorms.
• CenSSIS' "Hidden Worlds" challenge is a component of the annual Massachusetts Pre-Engineering Program, Inc., competition.
  
  Some further tips:
  
  Be aware of the financial environment of your industrial partners. Check with them to see if their budgets are based on the "use it or lose it" system. If so, they may be able to donate funds during the last quarter of the company's fiscal year. Continuing education programs for industry can be self-supporting and/or generate funds by pricing short courses properly. Surveying the center's industrial partners will help determine if this is an option for a given center. Written educational materials developed for either practitioners or students can also be sold at cost to cover the production for the materials.

Flexibility in budgeting is extremely important. The ability to fund an opportunity when it arises is essential if the center is to benefit from such opportunities. It is useful if there is a discretionary pool of funds in the center for capitalizing on education as well as research opportunities. It is also important to know what educational expenses the departments and universities can help defray. Tuition remission, possible use of non-overhead accounts for educational programs, university scholarships or fellowships, existing education programs that might provide matching funds, appointments as a TeachingAssistant for a semester-all these can help augment the education budget. Check with the Student Affairs or Minority Affairs Offices for possible Fellowship Programs. Not only will the students gain prestige and invaluable contacts if awarded such fellowships but the center's budget will benefit as well. Centers should work with campus and college foundation offices to identify sources of potential funding and to coordinate their efforts. Also check your other funding sources to see if there is supplemental funding available under their programs. An example is the possibility for funding for minority students on NIH individual investigator grants.

Be sure to market your successful educational programs to your universities, your industrial stakeholders, and others outside. The resulting positive publicity may attract volunteers and other support or help recruit students. Publicity of center programs also promotes the concept of the ERC.

While it is understood that a portion of the center budget should be devoted to educational activities, there appears to be a tendency across the ERCs to make the direct education allocation (i.e., exclusive of graduate student support) relatively small. Such an approach leads to difficulties in developing a strong education program and meeting NSF's goals for ERCs. It is helpful to understand that there are more demands for programs but usually there aren't additional funds allocated. Therefore, attention must be given to developing strategies to fund these programs and increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the use of resources for the educational area.

4.2.6.4 Education Staff Funding

Funding and staffing for the education program should be consistent with its high priority among NSF's goals for the ERC Program. Some centers have found that administering a truly comprehensive program requires two professional staff, with an education coordinator in addition to an education director. Support staff must be provided to the education programs as required, depending on the overall size of the center's administrative support staff and the breadth of the education programs. Part-time support for specific activities can usually be arranged using existing staff or student workers. The staff requirements should be a function of the programs being offered and the associated resources.

It is difficult to specify the amount of staff time required and the level of funding, because these are dependent upon the education goals and objectives of the center as well as the level and breadth of programs offered, the age of the center, and other factors; however, an under-funded program will have difficulty meeting the ERC education mandate.

4.2.7 Role of NSF

Personnel of the NSF Engineering Education and Centers Division are very obliging in helping the ERC education coordinators/directors develop and enhance their education programs. They have the experience to provide guidance and identify others who might serve as resources to assist in strengthening the education programs. NSF also provides publicity to industry and works through other NSF programs to support the centers.

As noted earlier, one of the key ways that NSF has helped, and will continue to help, is in the area of supplemental funding based on competitive proposals. The funding provided serves as a nucleus for developing strong education programs. More recognition of the importance of ERC education programs in the ERC annual meetings and during site reviews will help education coordinators/directors to strengthen their respective education programs. NSF support is philosophical as well as financial and is critical for developing strong ERC education programs and ensuring that education is an important aspect of the centers.

Some examples of NSF's aid to ERC education programs are these:

• By continually stressing the importance of education and educational programs in the ERC, NSF program directors and officials emphasize to the leadership and faculty of the ERC the significance of these programs. This greatly helps the education endeavors at the centers.
  
• NSF provides opportunities for additional sources of funding and publicizes these funding options to the centers.
  
• NSF provides the supporting framework for coordination between centers.
  
• NSF realizes the significance of collaboration between centers and encourages these collaborations verbally and through funding sources.
  
• NSF provides critical insight to our centers through the annual site visits that help improve center programming.
  
• NSF provides guidelines that define the programs from the inception of the center to the reporting guidelines that document annual progress.
  
• By mandating an industrial component to the center's architecture, NSF has laid the groundwork for the development of education programs with a strong industrial element, benefiting undergraduate and graduate students.
  
• By funding the ERC centers, NSF is promoting innovative programs that allow cutting-edge technology to be developed to the point where it can be utilized by industry and benefit the general population. Center education programs are an essential vehicle for disseminating these new technologies into industry, by means of the center graduates and outreach.

A strong relationship with the NSF ERC Program Leadership, and especially the center's NSF Program Director, will enhance the development and implementation of an ERC education program.

If you have specific comments and questions on the contents of this site and/or its use, please contact webmaster@erc-assoc.org. To report technical problems, contact techhelp@erc-assoc.org.