Graduate Programs and Research January 28, 1988 Table of Contents 5-1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5-1.1 Charge Of The Committee On Graduate And Research Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5-1.2 An Overview Of The General Environment . . . . . 5-2 5-2.0 Graduate Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 5-2.1 Background On The Graduate Programs . . . . . . 5-4 5-2.2 Role Of Graduate Programs . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 5-2.3 Organization And Administration Of Graduate Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 5-2.3.1 Role of Department and College-Level Units 5-5 5-2.3.2 The Larger University Structure to Guide and Administer Graduate Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7 5-2.3.2.1 Commission on Graduate Studies . . . . . 5-7 5-2.3.2.2 Administrative Organization . . . . . . 5-7 5-2.3.3 The Graduate School . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9 5-2.4 Development And Growth Of Graduate Programs . 5-15 5-2.4.1 Graduate Curricula and Degrees . . . . . 5-15 5-2.4.2 Interdisciplinary Programs . . . . . . . 5-25 5-2.5 Graduate Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-27 5-2.5.1 Enrollments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-27 5-2.5.2 Admissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-28 5-2.5.3 Recruitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-34 5-2.5.4 Impact of University Name Recognition . . 5-36 5-2.5.5 International Graduate Students . . . . . 5-36 5-2.5.6 Maintaining a Balance Between U.S. and International Students, and in the Character of the International Student Population . . . . . . . . . 5-37 5-2.5.7 Women Graduate Students . . . . . . . . . 5-38 5-2.5.8 Minority Graduate Students . . . . . . . 5-38 5-2.6 Undergraduate Student Involvement In Research 5-40 5-2.7 Off-campus Graduate Program . . . . . . . . . 5-40 5-2.7.1 The Off-Campus Program . . . . . . . . . 5-41 5-2.7.2 Enrollments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-42 5-2.7.3 Student Admissions and Status . . . . . . 5-43 5-2.7.4 Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-43 5-2.7.5 Scheduling of Courses . . . . . . . . . . 5-43 5-2.7.6 Advising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-44 5-2.7.7 Northern Virginia Graduate Center . . . . 5-44 5-2.7.8 Promotion and Tenure for Permanent Faculty at Northern Virginia Graduate Center . . . . . . . 5-45 5-2.7.9 Possible Innovations in Off-Campus Programs 5-45 5-3.0 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-46 5-3.1 Background On Research At VPI&SU . . . . . . . 5-46 5-3.2 The Research Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-46 5-3.3 Organization Of The Research Program . . . . . 5-47 5-3.4 Quality Control Measures And Support Services Of The Research Division And Office Of Sponsored Programs 5-49 5-3.4.1 Quality Control Measures . . . . . . . . 5-49 5-3.4.2 Support Services . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-49 5-3.5 Core Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-54 5-3.6 Sponsored Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-61 5-3.6.1 Need For "Program Funding" . . . . . . . 5-63 5-3.6.2 Professional Staff Levels and Development 5-66 5-3.6.3 Integration of Research Mission into University Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-66 5-3.6.4 Need For Flexibility In Use of Research Overhead Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-67 5-3.7 Departmental Research . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-67 5-3.8 Interdisciplinary Research Programs . . . . . 5-68 5-3.9 Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-70 5-3.10 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-72 5-3.11 Support Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-73 5-3.12 Research Within The Academic Context . . . . 5-76 5-4.0 The Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-78 5-4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-78 5-4.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-79 5-4.3 Accreditation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-80 5-4.4 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-82 5-4.5 Educational Program: DVM . . . . . . . . . . . 5-83 5-4.5.1 Admission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-85 5-4.5.2 Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-86 5-4.5.3 Completion Requirements . . . . . . . . . 5-87 5-4.5.4 Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-87 5-4.5.5 Contract Relationships and Off-Campus Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-88 5-4.6 Graduate Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-89 5-4.6.1 Master's and Doctorate Programs . . . . . 5-90 5-4.6.2 Parallel Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-91 5-4.6.3 Residency Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-92 5-4.6.4 Internship Program . . . . . . . . . . . 5-93 5-4.7 Research Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-94 5-4.8 Public Service Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-96 5-4.8.1 Veterinary Teaching Hospital . . . . . . 5-96 5-4.8.2 Continuing Education And Extension . . . 5-96 5-4.9 Faculty And Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-97 5-4.10 Educational Support Services . . . . . . . . 5-100 5-4.10.1 Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-100 5-4.10.2 Instructional Support . . . . . . . . . 5-100 5-4.10.3 Computer Services . . . . . . . . . . . 5-101 5-4.10.4 Student Development Services . . . . . . 5-101 5-4.11 Administrative Processes . . . . . . . . . . 5-102 5-4.11.1 Organization and Administration . . . . 5-102 5-4.11.2 Institutional Advancement . . . . . . . 5-104 5-4.11.3 Financial Resources . . . . . . . . . . 5-105 5-4.11.4 Physical Resources . . . . . . . . . . . 5-107 5-5.0 Reference Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-111 List of Illustrations Figure 5-1. Organizational Structure of the Office of University Provost . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8 Figure 5-2. Responsibilities of the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies . . . . . 5-11 Figure 5-3. Organizational Structure of the Graduate School at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University . . . . . . . . . 5-14 List of Tables Table 5-1. Graduate School Activities and Functions . 5-13 Table 5-2. Approved Graduate Curricula and Degrees . 5-18 Table 5-3. Master's Degrees Awarded By Program, 1977-1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-20 Table 5-4. Doctor's Degrees Awarded By Program, 1977-1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-23 Table 5-5. Master's Degrees Approved, 1976-1986 . . . 5-25 Table 5-6. Doctorate Degrees Approved, 1976-1986 . . 5-25 Table 5-7. Full-Time Equivalent Graduate Students . . 5-30 Table 5-8. Graduate Applications Received, Accepted, and Enrolled, 1977-1986 . . . . . . . . 5-31 Table 5-9. Graduate Admissions By College . . . . . . 5-32 Table 5-10. Average Standardized Test Scores and Grade Point Averages . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-33 Table 5-11. Non-Resident Alien Graduate Students Fall 1976 to Fall 1986, On Campus . . . . . . 5-37 Table 5-12. Graduate Enrollments by Gender, 1976-1986 5-39 Table 5-13. Minority Enrollments in Graduate Programs, 1981-1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-40 Table 5-14. FTE Graduate Student Counts For The Off-campus Program, 1977-1986 . . . . . 5-42 Table 5-15. Total Enrollments in Television Courses . 5-42 Table 5-16. Summary of Policies and Procedures Adopted by the Commission on Research . . . . . 5-52 Table 5-17. Research Expenditures: 1974-75 Through 1984-85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-57 Table 5-18. USDA Formula Fund Expenditures . . . . . 5-60 Table 5-19. Core Research Support: College of Agricul- ture and Life Sciences . . . . . . . . . 5-60 Table 5-20. Number of Principal Investigators with Sponsored Research Projects . . . . . . 5-63 Table 5-21. NSF Data for Virginia Tech -- FY 77 and FY 80 Through FY 86 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-64 Table 5-22. Research Proposals and Awards: 1976-77 Through 1985-86 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-65 Table 5-23. Equipment Expenditures: FY 75-76 Through FY 85-86 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-73 Table 5-24. Student-Faculty Ratios and Student-Staff Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-98 5-1.0 Introduction One of the principal factors that distinguishes research at a university from that performed at a research institute or govern- ment laboratory is the relationship between graduate education and research. Research at a university is integrally linked to education, and the graduate student is typically at the core of this effort. Many problems that affect the improvement of the environment for graduate education and research are similar, but there are specialized issues that require separate consideration. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University is one of two institutions in the Commonwealth designated to conduct research and provide graduate education. VPI&SU also is a land grant school, which tends to shape the research and graduate education efforts of the university and to make them unique within the Commonwealth. The Self-Study Committee concludes that the University and the Commonwealth are at an important juncture in their commitment to graduate education and research. Growth over the past decade in graduate programs and research at this University has been impressive, and the University and the Commonwealth have responded to many changes with positive developments. However, future progress depends on overcoming further obstacles within the University structure, especially the lack of key facilities needed for graduate education, and the increased competition from other academic institutions and private industry. Further, this progress has put VPI&SU in competition with more-sophisticated institutions. This in turn suggests that the policies and proce- dures that enabled earlier progress may need to be modified if they are to be successful in the future. The University must recognize that, at present, it is unable to compete with other major research universities in some areas. Insisting on contin- ued growth in the future without remedial action may lead to serious strains on the faculty and graduate students. Such circumstances could create an environment where quality is not the first objective or could lead to complacency or fear of aspiring to higher goals. The following sections address those aspects common to both research and graduate education. 5-1.1 Charge Of The Committee On Graduate And Research Programs The SACS criteria for accreditation in the graduate and research programs include the following: * Procedures to evaluate effectiveness of graduate programs, * Provisions for adequate resources, libraries, computer and laboratory facilities, and administrative organization, * Proper and well-publicized admissions criteria, * Established procedures for evaluation of admissions by recog- nized professionals, * Established policies for completion requirements, * Well-defined, distinctive curricula for the master's and doctoral levels, * Provisions for frequent and systematic evaluation of graduate curricula and graduate instruction, both on and off campus, * Productivity of faculty involved with graduate education, * Academic integrity of off-campus courses and instruction, * Well-defined policies to ensure that funded grants and research conform with the stated objectives of the institu- tion, * Policies to explain the faculty member's obligation in terms of a division of effort towards research and teaching, * Institutional control of policies regarding research relative to the demands of the sponsoring agency, * Independence of the institution from indirect cost allowances from grants and contracts. The charge of the committee included the specific instructions to consider the SACS criteria and to direct attention to issues related to the development of the University's graduate and research programs over the next decade. 5-1.2 An Overview Of The General Environment As information presented later in this chapter will demonstrate, the graduate and research programs at VPI&SU have multiplied, matured, and diversified over the past decade. Interestingly, this progress evolved within a national context largely unfavora- ble to graduate education and research. National statistics for the past decade indicate a decrease in graduate enrollments and reduction in support for university research.* At the same time, ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Pelczar, M. J., Jr., and L. C. Solmon, eds. Keeping Graduate Programs Responsive to National Needs. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers, 1984. ----------------------------------------------------------------- more universities are gearing up to compete for the shrinking pool of graduate students and research funds. Also, major funding agencies are reorganizing their approaches to research support with new emphases on funding larger centers and a concur- rent de-emphasis on working with individual investigators. Finally, private industry is increasing its resources and capabilities to compete with academia at a time when VPI&SU, like many other universities, faces a struggle to keep its facilities up to date. Accordingly, strategies that once served a growing university well may not do so in the future. Superimposed onto these circumstances are rapid changes in the larger society. Alvin Toffler suggests that we are evolving from a "second wave" culture, built on the thrusts of the industrial revolution, to a "third wave" culture, in which vast increases in information, new methods of communication and computation, more extensive global competition, and problems yet unforeseen will dominate.* In a statement to a recent meeting of the National ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Toffler, Alvin, The Third Wave. New York:Morrow, 1980. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, David Saxon, Chairman of the Board of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, discussed the coming changes to the needs for gradu- ate and research programs to adapt to the future:* ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Pelczar and Solmon. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The pace today is so rapid in so many fields that the requirements for providing students with a truly fundamen- tal base of knowledge on which they can build for the future constantly change. The pressure, in short, is inexorably for flexibility of academic programs and, even more importantly, for flexibility of people - not least in the faculties and staffs of our own institutions. . . .Finding the right mechanism for meaningful new educational arrangements will require time and experimentation, but it is imperative that the process begin. In the present environment in which the competition is getting better organized, the University must be in a position to respond to these changes and challenges. Policies must be adopted; facilities must be built; established programs must be reviewed and new programs must be nurtured; and financial packages must become increasingly more attractive to both the best students and faculty. Additionally, the degree to which the Commonwealth determines that its self-interest would be served by assisting VPI&SU with the next generation of challenges will affect how the University will be able to address the future. If the resource base does not expand, it will be necessary to make difficult choices about which programs to support. Strict accountability also will be necessary to ensure that if only scarce resources are provided, the highest levels of productivity and quality will be maintained. 5-2.0 Graduate Programs 5-2.1 Background On The Graduate Programs Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University has maintained a long commitment to graduate education, granting its first graduate degree, an M.S. in Bacteriology, in 1892. The Board of Visitors established in 1928 a University-wide Committee on Graduate Programs and Degrees and an Office of Director of Graduate Studies. This eventually led to provision for doctoral programs, and in 1943, the first Ph.D. degree was granted in Chemistry. In 1964, the first full-time Dean of the Graduate School was appointed. This coincided with the general move toward a larger university concept with more emphasis on graduate studies and research, a movement that continues to this date. Before this time, the University graduate effort was small. Today, however, the University is dedicated to the development and maintenance of a well-subscribed, high-quality graduate program. As of 1986, VPI&SU had 63 approved master's level programs, 15 percent of which were added during the past decade. At the doctorate level, there are now 50 programs of study, 24 percent of which were approved during the last 10 years. The number of full-time equivalent graduate students on and off campus grew from 2,682 in 1977, to 3,716 in 1986. Also in 1987, the largest number of degrees in University history were awarded both at the master's and doctorate level. While these data indicate the increase in quantity and diversity of the graduate student population, at the same time the quality of the student body has been maintained or increased. In 1977, 66 percent of the 2,700 applications were accepted, while in 1986, only 44 percent of the 5,300 applications were accepted. Also, even as more students are admitted, qualifying grade point averages and standardized test scores remain high. The ratio of master's to doctoral degrees granted is a measure of the maturity of the graduate program. In 1977, the ratio was 6:1, by 1986 the ratio had fallen to 3:1. While the number of master's degrees granted has remained relatively stable over the time period, the number of doctoral degrees has increased. A low ratio reflects greater emphasis on advanced research activities by faculty and students. 5-2.2 Role Of Graduate Programs The graduate programs of a major university fill many roles. For the student, the programs create an opportunity to develop specialized skills, and provide an introduction to the creative process of independent research. The graduate programs also allow the faculty to teach subjects of an advanced nature and produce the young scholars who serve as an extension of the faculty in the research arena. For the university, the graduate programs are the key to a national and international reputation. At the state level and beyond, the graduate programs produce experts to deal with the increasingly complex structures of society. Without superior graduate programs, a state is at a disadvantage in competing for the best of new industry (especially firms that are willing to invest capital and to create jobs in areas of highly technical activity). The impact of the graduate programs goes far beyond the students, however. They affect the nature of the faculty who are willing to teach at VPI&SU and the scope of the research programs that they may conduct. High-quality graduate programs help the university attract scholars of the first rank; these scholars perceive that they can do high-level research and have access to a pool of students willing and able to assist them. Furthermore, the nature of the research programs are directly related to the size, quality, and make-up of the graduate student body. A significant pool of advanced-level graduate students helps fuel the abilities of the faculty to undertake more-sophisticated research. 5-2.3 Organization And Administration Of Graduate Programs Graduate programs are different from undergraduate programs; they are more individually tailored and require more direct faculty involvement. For example, the recruitment of undergraduate students is done largely by the central administration, while the recruitment of graduate students is done by the departments, groups within departments, and even individual faculty. Also, since graduate studies are so specialized, the day-to-day decisions about curricula and research topics are largely the domain of units from the department level down. In the end, faculty expertise and reputation create the vitality of a gradu- ate program. 5-2.3.1 Role of Department and College-Level Units Departments have the administrative control closest to the faculty in the graduate effort. At VPI&SU, the departments maintain a copy of all graduate records, receive graduate appli- cations from the Graduate School and direct them to the appropri- ate persons for evaluation, make recommendations to the Graduate School for admission, advertise individual programs, prepare graduate programs of study, coordinate the design of graduate curricula, choose graduate degree programs within University guidelines, transmit instructions from the Graduate School to the faculty, and establish the requirements for educational background for potential students. The graduate student is informed about continuation and completion requirements through information transmitted by the Graduate School and the depart- ments. The faculty involved in admissions and advising of theses and dissertations must meet certain criteria, spelled out in Presi- dent's Policy Memorandum No. 14 (PM14). The departments define and implement the policies in the memorandum. As the University has increased its graduate role and hired new faculty, a larger percentage of the faculty now meet the criteria of PM14. However, there remains a need to have this type of policy state- ment in place, especially in view of the likelihood of a growing role for adjunct faculty who might serve on thesis and disserta- tion committees for the expanding off-campus effort. The present PM14 is dated and needs to be reviewed to determine whether revision is necessary. Recommendation 5-1: That Policy Memorandum No. 14 be revised to include a statement that calls for the periodical review of departmental plans. For graduate students to continue in the graduate program and receive a degree, they must maintain a 3.0 grade point average. Each quarter, the Graduate School provides the departments with a list of all students with an average below 3.0. The department administration then must decide whether the student will go on probation, continue as is, or be dismissed. Some latitude is provided in this decision because of the possibility that one quarter of performance may not be indicative of the student's overall abilities. Because of the immediacy of their positions to the graduate faculty and students, and the number of areas of direct decision making, the departments and their administrators are important to the process of maintaining quality in the graduate program. However, it is not clear that this role is adequately explained to the departments or is reinforced on a regular basis. It would be useful to have an early orientation of all new department administrators to explain exactly how the system works and to emphasize their role in the process. Matters on curriculum decisions are mainly handled through college-level curriculum committees. Colleges and departments disburse resources, which include assistantships, instructional- fee scholarships, faculty positions, equipment monies, and computer funds. In this way, these units affect the viability and direction of graduate offerings. Recommendation 5-2: That all newly appointed staff members in departmental positions involved with graduate admissions and progress assessment be required to attend an orientation presented by the Graduate School. The orientation should inform people about standards, reviews, and procedures, and emphasize the maintenance of quality. It should take place shortly after the appointment of new personnel. 5-2.3.2 The Larger University Structure to Guide and Administer Graduate Programs The University has a well-defined administrative and faculty governance structure, the final pieces of which were set into place in the past ten years. Many features of this structure were developed as an outgrowth of the 1975-76 Self-Study. The administrative structure reaches from the President of the University, through the Graduate School, and to the colleges and departments. The Commission on Graduate Studies serves as the forum in the governance structure for discussion of policy issues related to the organization and administration of graduate programs. 5-2.3.2.1 Commission on Graduate Studies At the time of the 1975-76 Self-Study, there was a combined Commission on Graduate Studies and Research. However, with the growth of research activities and the graduate program, it became obvious that one group could not focus on all the issues related to these two areas. So in 1982, two separate commissions were created. The constitution for the Commission on Graduate Studies is set forth in the Policies and Procedures Manual of the Univer- sity, dated 1987-1988. The Dean of the Graduate School chairs the Commission ex officio. The Commission is made up of faculty representatives from each of the Colleges and from the Faculty Senate. Members are also drawn from the administrative staffs of the Office of the Provost and the Colleges. Student members are selected by the Graduate Student Assembly. The Commission on Graduate Studies meets regularly during the academic year. It recommends policy and makes decisions on subjects such as procedures for admission, programs, courses, degree requirements, and related issues. Actions of the Commis- sion are subject to approval by the University Council. 5-2.3.2.2 Administrative Organization The organizational structure of the Office of University Provost, of which the Graduate School is an integral part, is shown in Figure 5-1. The responsibility for graduate programs rests ultimately with the President of the University. The direct line of authority for the Graduate School runs from the Provost, who is the senior academic officer, to the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies, then to the Dean of the Graduate School. Figure 5-2 is a detailed view of the responsibilities of the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies. The Provost, chief academic officer of the University, has a role that can have a significant impact on the graduate program. The Provost is involved in the day-to-day decisions about the general allocations of key resources to the colleges and departments, and thus is in a position to support or initiate larger initiatives in the graduate program. The Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies reports to the Provost. This position exists at VPI&SU because of the expecta- tion that the missions of research and graduate studies are intimately linked, and that one office should oversee both activ- ities. 5-2.3.3 The Graduate School The University officer most directly involved with day-to-day decisions for the graduate program is the Dean of the Graduate School. The organization of the staff of the Graduate School is shown in Figure 5-3. The primary function of the Graduate School is to provide leader- ship and to ensure quality of graduate programs across the campus; the specific activities and functions are listed in Table 5-1. At VPI&SU, the Graduate School assumes these responsibil- ities for both the on- and off-campus graduate programs. Since the 1975-76 Self-Study, the decision was made to consolidate all formal off-campus courses, for which credit is earned, in the Graduate School, making it responsible for both the on-campus and off-campus graduate programs. This change, which applies to both admission criteria and retention standards, grew out of a concern that off-campus efforts should meet the same requirements as the on-campus programs. The Graduate School provides each graduate student with a Manual of Policies and Procedures, which explains the portions of the graduate program that are important to the student. The work load of the Graduate School staff has increased steadily over the past decade. Growth has come through larger numbers of applications, student records, additional international students, and the responsibility for off-campus graduate programs. To cope with the increasing load of applications and student records, the Graduate School has placed all pertinent information in a comput- erized data base. The latest information on the status of appli- cations can be sent to departments, and a range of useful comparisons can be made to assess the quality levels of graduate programs. A full-time systems analyst is on the staff of the Graduate School to maintain the computerized system. However, with the projected increased enrollments in the various graduate programs over the next decade, the time is appropriate to re-evaluate the operational and staffing needs of the Graduate School. Recommendation 5-3: That a committee of faculty members and administrators be appointed to determine future operational and staffing needs of the Graduate School. The maturation of the graduate programs has increased the impor- tance of the Graduate School to the University. The significance of the impression conveyed to the University's graduate students by the Graduate School cannot be underestimated. That impression is undoubtedly affected by the physical facilities of the Gradu- ate School. Presently these facilities are lacking; lacking in size, location, and quality. For example, while the Undergradu- ate Admissions is located in Burruss Hall, in well-maintained, air conditioned office suites, the admissions staff of the Gradu- ate School is located in an old, un-air conditioned office suite in Sandy Hall, at the lower end of the Drill Field. Correctly or not, this implies that the Graduate School, and its services to the graduate students, are secondary to the undergraduate effort. This situation must be rectified as the University moves into the new era of graduate program development. Recommendation 5-4: That the physical facilities and location of the Graduate School need to be improved and made commensurate with the growing importance of this unit to the University. 5-2.4 Development And Growth Of Graduate Programs 5-2.4.1 Graduate Curricula and Degrees The University currently offers programs leading to 17 advanced degrees, which are as follows: Master of Accountancy Master of Engineering Administration Master of Architecture Master of Information Systems Master of Architecture in Urban Design of Fine Arts Master of Arts Master of Landscape Architecture Master of Business Adm. Master of Science Master of Arts in Education Master of Urban Affairs Master of Science in Educ. Master of Urban and Regional Planning Master of Engineering Doctor of Philosophy Doctor of Education The University also offers a post-master's Certificate of Advanced Graduate Study (CAGS). There are 86 curricula of gradu- ate study offered by the University (see Table 5-2). The total number of master's degrees awarded from 1977 through 1982 is 9,102, compared to 4,744 for the previous ten-year period. During the last ten years, the number of master's degrees awarded has remained at a relatively constant level, although the demographics of the degree concentrations by area and college have changed considerably (see Table 5-3). Only in the College of Human Resources did the numbers remain constant. In the colleges of Agriculture, Architecture, and Education, the numbers have declined. Master's degrees granted in the Colleges of Business, Engineering, and Arts and Sciences have increased. The total number of doctoral degrees awarded from 1977 through 1986 is 2,244, which is nearly double the 1,176 awarded from 1967 through 1976. The number of degrees awarded increased in the colleges of Agriculture, Arts and Sciences, and Engineering, and remained relatively constant in the other colleges. At both the master's and doctoral levels, the growth trend is continuing; 1,170 master's degrees and 320 doctoral degrees were awarded in 1987, which are record highs for the University. The continued growth of the graduate program is evidenced not only in terms of greater numbers of students, but also in diver- sity of the degree programs. During the past ten years, nine master's degree programs, nine Ph.D. programs, two Ph.D. programs, and the CAGS program in Curriculum and Instruction were authorized (see Table 5-5 and Table 5-6). Recommendation 5-5: Given the competitive nature of the future environment and the changing student interest in the various graduate programs, it is recommended that allocation formulas for graduate resources be assessed carefully and updated to reward quality. 5-2.4.2 Interdisciplinary Programs Interdisciplinary graduate study in an informal setting has always been possible at VPI&SU. There has been nothing to prevent students who have the qualifications from taking courses in departments other than the "home" department or college, as long as it is coordinated with the advisor, and does not inter- fere with proper progress in the designated degree program. There are also a number of programs with formal status that are based on an interdisciplinary concept, such as Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Science and Technology Studies, Materi- als Engineering Science, and Anaerobic Microbiology. In some cases, these programs have degree-granting authority. Nonetheless, there are certain inherent conditions in the Univer- sity structure and the degree authorization system of the Common- wealth that discourage interdisciplinary graduate work. First, University assistantships (as opposed to grant or contract assistantships) and instructional-fee scholarships are largely dispensed through the departments. The departments, not surpris- ingly, tend to support students with a vested interest in their programs. Second, recognized degree programs require a concen- tration of the student's work in the "home" department or area. This is natural and reflects the fact that advanced studies normally relate to an area of specialization. Finally, the process required by the Commonwealth to formalize a new degree option is complex and lengthy. The typical time to authorize a new degree is five to six years. Thus, interdisciplinary programs have a difficult time in obtaining an identity outside the conventional departmental structure. Due to the rapid changes that are occurring in many fields, it is entirely possible that interdisciplinary programs can accommodate the new thrusts better than conventional programs. In addition, a number of major research-funding agencies are predicating support for highly sought-after umbrella grants on the implemen- tation of interdisciplinary graduate programs. A variety of centers and laboratories already have been developed at the University that can accommodate and nurture interdisciplinary studies and research. Recommendation 5-6: That interdisciplinary groups and centers that are formally endorsed by the University be listed in the undergraduate and graduate catalogs to acquaint entering students with their locations and contact persons. Recommendation 5-7: Given the present environment, it is recom- mended that the nature and need of interdisciplinary programs be reassessed, with the goal to formalize University policy on their formation, operation, and termination. 5-2.5 Graduate Students 5-2.5.1 Enrollments There have been significant increases in the resident (on-campus) graduate enrollments from 1977 to 1986 at both the master's and doctorate levels. The on-campus enrollment at both levels increased from 1,988 in 1977 to 3,165 in 1986 (see Table 5-7); the total on-campus and off-campus graduate enrollment increased from 2,682 in 1977 to 3,716 in 1986. The 1986 enrollment is important because it places VPI&SU into the category of a major research university. It is also important because of the exist- ence at the University of a semisacrosanct graduate enrollment goal of 4,000. This target was set many years ago apparently on the basis of what was perceived as a reasonable balance between the undergraduate and graduate enrollments at a research-oriented land-grant university. It is likely that the 4,000-student figure will be exceeded in the near future if present trends continue. This raises many issues, such as how the University will deal with the total enrollment cap that has been imposed by the Commonwealth. To allow for future growth in the graduate enrollment, either the cap will have to increase or the under- graduate enrollment will have to decrease. On the other hand, if 4,000 graduate students is a fixed limit, then distributions of graduate students among programs will have to be set and goals for research activities will have to be adjusted to reflect the stable graduate student population. Clearly, the time has come to reassess the graduate enrollment plans within the larger context of the University. Recommendation 5-8: That the goals for graduate enrollments be studied as to their implications on the character of the University, the requirements for offices and facilities, the growth and development of new programs, and possible limita- tions that might exist at the state level. The larger graduate student enrollment, particularly in the doctoral programs, also has serious implications for laboratory space and facilities, and offices for the advanced graduate students. Efforts have been made by the University and the Commonwealth to provide additional space, but these efforts have simply been unable to keep up with the growth and evolution of the graduate programs. The shortage of space, which is covered in more detail in the next section on Research Programs, has reached a level that will halt the growth and development of the graduate programs. (The space deficit is also discussed in the Financial Resources chapter.) In a number of programs, the space shortage is already having an impact. Several departments are working under self-imposed graduate enrollment limits because of the lack of space for student offices and research facilities. Graduate students in other departments are either entirely without office space or are housed in inferior locations. There is a distinct shortage of research and teaching-laboratory space; much of the space that is available is second class and in need of renovation. The implications of this situation are vitally important to the recruitment of new graduate students and quality faculty. This is an overriding issue relative to the future of the graduate effort, and deserves major emphasis from the Univer- sity administrators and state officials and legislators. Recommendation 5-9: That additional quality space be provided to address the needs of the graduate student body, and to accommodate growth in the graduate programs. 5-2.5.2 Admissions The number of applications to the graduate program has almost doubled from 1977 to 1986 (see Table 5-8). The percentage of applicants accepted has declined from 50.4 percent to 42.4 percent, which indicates a growing selectivity in admissions. The basic criteria for admission to graduate school are a 3.0 grade point average for the last 90 quarter units of college work, supportive recommendation letters, and a logical reason for wanting to attend graduate school. Some colleges and departments also require Graduate Record Exam (GRE) scores, although usually not for all applicants. International students must present scores from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). A TOEFL score of 600 is used as a general basis for admission for international students. Scores below this are acceptable if other qualifications of the student are outstanding and if the student takes a preparatory, intensive English course in the U.S. There are two other routes to graduate school that may be followed by U.S. students, both of which place the student in a probationary status. These exceptions to normal admissions guidelines are usually applied to applicants who have a grade point average lower than 3.0 and who have been out of school and have worked for one or more years, or who need to make up certain background work before entering the graduate program. A promis- ing student who has an undergraduate grade point average between 2.75 and 3.0 may be admitted as a Provisional student. Upon matriculation, a student must earn a 3.0 grade point average on his first 18 units of course work to be moved to Regular status. During the probationary period, a student in the Provisional category is not eligible for an assistantship or other forms of financial aid. For a student who applies to graduate school after some work experience, but with an undergraduate grade point average below 2.75, the chances of admission are low. However, in some cases where the student has otherwise excellent qualifications and work experience, the student may be admitted as a Special student. This category is also used for students who require one or more quarters to make up background deficiencies. The Special student must maintain a 3.0 average while taking 18 units of courses, although the units will not be applied to the number of credits needed to graduate. A quantitative analysis of graduate student admissions data was done for 1981 and 1986, the period of largest growth in graduate enrollments (see Table 5-9 and Table 5-10). Both the data from the Graduate Record Examination and the TOEFL examination were considered. It must be noted, however, that the number of appli- cants who take the GRE varies by college. The mean scores listed in Table 5-10 represents slightly more than half of the students admitted. All international students must take the TOEFL exam; thus the mean scores reflect the total number of international students admitted. The data in Tables 5-9 and 5-10 indicate several positive trends: * The percentage of students admitted with provisional status, and especially Special student status, was small. * The average grade point average of all admitted master's students for 1981 and 1986 was 3.3. * The lowest average TOEFL scores in 1981 for any college was 545; in 1986, the lowest average was 570. The average TOEFL scores in 1986 were near 600. Only the colleges of Education and Agriculture showed a decrease in TOEFL scores over the period 1981-1986; however, these scores still indicate a high level of performance. * GRE scores have generally increased over the period 1981 to 1986. These trends suggest that overall quality is being maintained, even as the number of graduate students increases. At the same time, these data also illustrate that the grade point averages and the standardized test scores for several of the colleges are lower than for others and have declined over the five-year period from 1981 to 1985. Recommendation 5-10: That the Commission on Graduate Studies review the admissions data for graduate students admitted each year to the various colleges and departments. 5-2.5.3 Recruitment Although the admissions qualifications of graduate students have remained high, greater emphasis must be placed on the recruitment and retention of students of the highest quality. The University will be faced with added competition, and efforts must be mounted to enhance the diversity and quality of the graduate student body. To achieve both will require that excellent graduate programs exist in a variety of fields of study. In order to recruit excellent graduate students, VPI&SU must attract them from other institutions through various means, including a competitive financial aid package. Applications for admission to the Graduate School have increased steadily since 1977, but the percentage of accepted applicants who actually enroll has been declining. A survey of applicants accepted for Fall 1983, but who did not enroll, revealed that two-thirds of the respondents had enrolled at other institutions. The offer of a better financial aid package was the most- frequently cited reason for attending another institution. As reported to the Commission on Graduate Studies in February 1986 by an Ad Hoc Committee on Concerns of Graduate Students, the biggest single concern of VPI&SU graduate students is financial, particularly the relatively high fee structure at the University. During the past five years, the University instructional fee per quarter increased 119 percent (from $333 to $729). This dramatic increase is a result of inflation as well as the increasing proportion of the cost of instruction that students are expected to bear. This is a state-wide problem and is not unique to VPI&SU. In 1980-81, students paid 28.7 percent of the cost of instruction; by 1985-86 this had increased to 37.8 percent. In a 1985 survey conducted by the Graduate School, it was discovered that graduate students at peer institutions are typically expected to pay approximately 25 percent of the cost of instruc- tion through tuition. Additionally, many institutions offer fee waivers for graduate students. VPI&SU does offer assistantship stipends to eligible graduate students. In 1980, the stipend for the first step of Level A (beginning rate for many master's students) was $4,860 per academic year. This rate has been raised, so that in 1985, it was $6,165 (a 27 percent increase over five years). Net income for a student at this step in 1980 was $3,753 [$4,860 - (3 x $369)]. In 1985, it was $3,978 [$6,165 - (3 x $729)], a 6 percent increase over the 5-year period; but far below the increase in the cost of living for that period. Clearly, the graduate students are losing ground financially and VPI&SU is thus experiencing an erosion of its ability to compete for the top graduate students. Raising stipends is not in itself a solution to the problem. VPI&SU's current stipend levels are comparable to those paid by many of its peer institutions; but the stipends are not adequate in relation to fees. Furthermore, not all students are paid stipends, and the ever-increasing tuition cost has been especially burdensome to them. Also, when stipends are increased, it places a burden on faculty members to generate sufficient grant and contract monies to support the higher rates. The University must break out of the spiral of ever-increasing costs and the attendant increases in stipends if it is to remain competitive for the best students. The university's costs also must remain in line with those of its competitors in order to maintain its success in securing grants and contracts. Although an effort has been made to provide instructional-fee scholarships (1460 quarters of scholarships were provided through the Graduate School for the 1985-86 academic year), more are needed if top-quality students are to be recruited and retained. On a questionnaire distributed at the Graduate Student Forum in November 1985, the most-frequently cited need at VPI&SU was more instructional-fee scholarships or a reduction in fees. In addition to instructional-fee scholarships, more University- wide scholarships and fellowships should be provided. At present, the Cunningham Dissertation Fellowships and the Presi- dential Fellowships are the only University-wide graduate student awards available. Funds now available provide for only seven or eight Cunningham Fellowships and six Presidential Fellowships annually. By providing additional scholarships/fellowships, the University will be able to better compete for applicants and will generate favorable publicity for its graduate programs. The funds generated by the University's Capital Campaign should provide tuition assistance and scholarships/fellowships. In future campaigns, graduate education needs should be more strongly highlighted. Recommendation 5-11: That the University must offer a better financial aid package, which includes: more instructional- fee scholarships for graduate students (this form of support should be more readily extended to non-Virginia residents); and more University-wide scholarships and fellowships to be awarded on a merit competition basis. In addition to concerns about financial aid, graduate students at VPI&SU have also expressed concern over lack of housing, insuffi- cient medical care and health insurance, space (graduate student office space, laboratories, library space for graduate research), insufficient recognition by the University of the contributions of graduate students, poor definition of assistantship and employment status, and insufficient extracurricular activities targeted specifically at graduate students. Recommendation 5-12: That improvements be made in fringe benefits packages for graduate students (with special atten- tion to housing, medical care and health insurance). Recommendation 5-13: That the contributions and achievements of outstanding graduate students be given increased emphasis at University functions, such as Founder's Day. 5-2.5.4 Impact of University Name Recognition A concern with the name of the institution surfaces repeatedly in the Self-Study. In recent years, the University has promoted itself as Virginia Tech. This name in many circles is itself perceived to narrow the focus of the University to technical programs only, even as the University is working to establish its image as a comprehensive institution with a full range of programs. In many international circles, a "tech" suggests a school of narrow scope. On the other hand, the same circles recognize a "polytechnic" as a school of the highest caliber. As a result, the name Virginia Tech can be detrimental in the recruitment of graduate students. The Committee on Graduate Studies and Research recommends that the name Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University be used in the future, and that Virginia Tech be dropped from official use in actions related to the graduate program. 5-2.5.5 International Graduate Students The overall importance of international involvement in the Commonwealth and in the nation has had a tremendous impact on graduate education at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Programs in agriculture, engineering, urban studies, and business, among others, seem to be of special interest to international students. As a result, international graduate student applications have increased. Only 20 percent of the international applicants are admitted annually; capability in the English language is a crucial admissions factor. Each college has international graduate students enrolled, with the highest proportion with respect to non-foreign students occurring in Engineering and Veterinary Medicine; both have 50 percent. Patterns emerging from the data collected by the committee indicate that VPI&SU has kept pace with the nation with respect to international graduate enrollments. Based on figures for 1985, for example, the national average for graduate schools of engineering is over 50 percent. International students add to the diversity and richness of University life. They fill vital roles in VPI&SU's capability to conduct research, given the shortfall of U.S. students who are going on to graduate study, especially in engineering. Interna- tional students on graduate assistantships are usually supported through research activities as opposed to teaching. At the same time, they also require a number of special services, such as assistance with visas, English language proficiency testing, and in some cases, English language proficiency courses. The inter- national students involved in classroom and laboratory teaching are required to take the Test of Spoken English. If they do not pass, they are required to enroll in the course English 003, Oral Reports. These factors need to be considered in determining staffing levels for the Graduate School. 5-2.5.6 Maintaining a Balance Between U.S. and International Students, and in the Character of the International Student Population For the sake of their mutual benefit, especially in terms of cross-cultural influences, it is in the interest of both the international and U.S. students that a reasonable balance be kept between enrollments of these populations, just as it is also important to develop a diversity in the countries from which the international students are drawn. Attempts should be made to increase the relatively low number of applicants from Britain, countries in Western Europe, Korea and Japan. Attracting more U.S. applicants to VPI&SU might involve the University developing more competitive financial aid packages, improving available facilities, and continuing to enhance the quality and reputation the faculty enjoys. Each of these areas is amplified below with suggestions for improvement. First, the Graduate School could conduct a survey of universities to locate appropriate international graduate student pools. This could in part be achieved through contacts of VPI&SU's faculty. Second, appropriate literature might be produced (in foreign languages if necessary) to inform students of the programs at VPI&SU. Third, encouragement might be provided for cooperative research programs with universities where desirable students are located. This undertaking need not rely entirely on University resources, since the Fulbright programs and the international programs of the National Science Foundation, among others, provides support for such efforts. Recommendation 5-14: That the Graduate School undertake a study of issues involved in achieving the desired balance between U.S. and foreign graduate students, as well as a diversity of countries from which graduate students are drawn. 5-2.5.7 Women Graduate Students Women constituted approximately one-third of the graduate enroll- ment from 1976 to 1986 (see Table 5-12). An increasing number of women graduate students enrolled each year from 1976 through 1982; there was a slight decline from 1982 to 1984, but the number increased again in 1985 and 1986. In the coming years, efforts to attract highly qualified women graduate students should continued. 5-2.5.8 Minority Graduate Students VPI&SU encourages participation in graduate programs by qualified minority students, which include blacks, Alaskan Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. The number of minority students enrolled in graduate school has increased from 85 to 145 over the period 1981 to 1986 (see Table 5-13). There are a number of opportunities for special support for highly qualified minority students through the University. These include: * Graduate Deans Fellowships for Black Doctoral Students * State Council of Higher Education Graduate Fellowship Program * Graduate School Instructional-Fee Scholarships The University recently joined the National Consortium for Access to Education, an organization of universities with direct affil- iations with primarily black institutions of higher education. The consortium facilitates the flow of information among the schools on graduate programs and qualified students. There is also a fund for fellowships. Although the enrollment of minority graduate students has under- gone recent growth, and although the University is making an effort to provide attractive support for them, much remains to be done. The long-term state goals for the University call for a minority enrollment that reflects the larger context of the Commonwealth's demography. Additional fellowships and financial support packages may be needed to achieve this balance. The colleges should set goals for minority enrollments and college administrators must be made aware of the need to meet them. This is particularly true for colleges with minority enrollments below the University average. Recommendation 5-15: That the University and the colleges work to increase minority representation in the graduate program. 5-2.6 Undergraduate Student Involvement In Research Most departments provide opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in research activities. Undergraduate research courses (4990) are an established vehicle to grant academic credit for undergraduate research. For this mechanism to be activated, the student must have the consent of a faculty member who is willing to supervise the work along with approval from the faculty member's department. A student can earn up to six units of 4990-type work for credit toward graduation. Although gradu- ate research typically receives more attention, the University should encourage its undergraduates to become more involved in research. 5-2.7 Off-campus Graduate Program The nature of the off-campus program has changed much during the 10 years since the 1975-76 Self-Study. In 1980, the off-campus program was put under the exclusive control of the Graduate School, a change that was intended to bring the off-campus program in line with the standards and regulations applied to the on-campus graduate program. In 1983, a television network was established to teach graduate courses in engineering; thus off-campus teaching could reach many more locations than the fixed, "live" facilities. At the same time, the network intro- duced a new set of variables to be dealt with by the Graduate School and the faculty. The end result of the changes has been a rapid growth in certain segments of the off-campus program, and an increase in the standards required for students who wish to take courses. Additional pressures and opportunities exist to expand the off-campus effort through both live and television offerings. Recommendation 5-16: That a clear, concise, and direct mission statement for the off-campus program be developed by a repre- sentative faculty committee. 5-2.7.1 The Off-Campus Program Besides the television network system, the off-campus program offers courses in three major locations: Northern Virginia, NSWC-Dahlgren, and Richmond, with the Northern Virginia Graduate Center having by far the largest number of students. Most of the courses are supported through tuition payments by the students, although some courses are of the contract form, where an entity (or entities) pays to have the course offered for a body of students drawn primarily from the sponsor. Courses at the other locations are primarily of the contract-type, and in most cases are sponsored by government agencies. The television network began in the Fall of 1983 as a joint effort of VPI&SU and the University of Virginia to provide engineering courses to the Richmond area via a microwave link. In this effort, Virginia Commonwealth University provided the local support in Richmond. In 1983, six courses were offered by VPI&SU and four by the University of Virginia. In 1984, the system capability was expanded to include the Northern Virginia and Tidewater areas. In that year, 18 courses were offered by VPI&SU, and 12 courses offered by the University of Virginia, George Mason University and Old Dominion University. In 1986, the television transmission was switched from microwave to satel- lite. Use of the satellite allows for many options for reception centers, and the network now includes over 25 locations, three of which are outside the Commonwealth. In all cases, the classroom site must have not only video capability, but provisions for two-way audio, so that students in remote locations are able to ask questions of the teacher in the TV broadcast classroom. Television courses presently originate from two specially equipped classrooms in Whittemore Hall. It is required that a television course have both an on-campus and off-campus enrollment. 5-2.7.2 Enrollments The largest FTE graduate student enrollment for the off-campus program, as of 1986, was in the College of Education, followed by Engineering and Business (see Table 5-14). Engineering has shown the largest recent growth, most of which can be attributed to the television network (see Table 5-15). Primarily because of the television courses, the Engineering FTE increased from 59 in 1982 to 197 in 1986. 5-2.7.3 Student Admissions and Status Students are admitted to the VPI&SU off-campus program under normal graduate school procedures. The same rules for initial student status generally apply as for on-campus students. However, the one exception in the television program and some of the contract programs allows a student to take up to 15 units in a non-degree status, while elsewhere, this option is extended for 3 units only. Should a student ask for degree status after taking 15 units, his application is subjected to a second evalu- ation by the degree-granting unit. Students in the television network courses are admitted through four state institutions, and may take up to 50 percent of their courses outside the host institution. Thus, because students of uneven abilities may be enrolled in the same course, the content and level of teaching of the course may vary significantly. Recommendation 5-17: That the program of televised courses be assessed with input from instructors actively involved with television instruction. 5-2.7.4 Instruction At least 50 percent of the faculty used in an off-campus program are required to be either permanent VPI&SU faculty or resident faculty. Permanent faculty may be on-campus faculty who commute to the off-campus location, or in a few cases, tenure-track faculty with a permanent station at the off-campus location. Resident faculty are adjunct professors who teach in the program on a regular basis. Regular evaluations are obtained from the students in both live and television courses to assess the quality of instruction. 5-2.7.5 Scheduling of Courses The growth of the off-campus program has led to an expansion of course offerings in some areas, particularly engineering. Additionally, students taking courses through the television network may choose from course offerings from both VPI&SU and the University of Virginia. In spite of the expansion of courses available to students, some problems remain for off-campus students who are serious about earning degrees. Because only a broad base of courses is typically offered, it is difficult to provide enough depth for the student to focus in a single area. As more students advance in degree options, course offerings must be better coordinated. At locations such as the Northern Virginia Graduate Center, television courses should be compatible with those offered live. 5-2.7.6 Advising Inevitably, off-campus students have less access to faculty that their on-campus counterparts, and this puts the students at a serious disadvantage. This situation might be improved by providing the off-campus student with an advisor as he advances towards a degree. Providing effective faculty advising to the off-campus student is more difficult than for the on-campus student. This is particularly true for students working towards degrees through the television network, where direct contact with faculty members is rare. The Graduate School should require each department that participates in the television network to advise students taking television courses and who have expressed an interest in working to earn a degree. 5-2.7.7 Northern Virginia Graduate Center The Northern Virginia Graduate Center is unique in the Common- wealth. The fact that it is an extension of the Graduate School (and not extension or continuing edcuation, which is typical of most such programs) and houses a resident faculty with the associated academic resources and services (such as computing, library, full degree programs, GA's, etc) clearly defines the differences between VPI&SU and others. This model won praise from the State Council of Higher Education in its report to the Commonwealth's Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) on off-campus programs in 1982 as the "way to conduct off-campus programs." The general perception of the quality of the programs offered at the Center is quite good from students, employers, and other institutions in the immediate area, although this view may not be shared by all on the Blacksburg campus. Yet the potential of this Center and VPI&SU's entire off-campus programming is far greater than has been realized. Where do we go from here? How far to we want to go? When do we want to go? The answers will not be easy and the debate must begin immediately. The following is a short list of issues to consider in the planning for the off-campus programs: * Organizational relationship of the Center to the Graduate School; * The role and place of the Center in long-range planning; * Targets for growth (how big does the University want the Center to become -- the potential is unlimited with an adequate resource base); * Additional resources (faculty, staff, library, equipment, etc.) for the Center * Research links with industry in the greater Washington, D.C. area; * Technology (primarily telecommunications). 5-2.7.8 Promotion and Tenure for Permanent Faculty at Northern Virginia Graduate Center As enrollments at the Northern Virginia Graduate Center have increased, a number of permanent faculty have been added. These faculty are evaluated by the same rules and regulations as the on-campus faculty with regard to promotion and tenure. At the same time, they do not have the same opportunities as their on-campus colleagues for research and publication activities. If departments hire certain faculty to serve specifically their off-campus options, they should provide all possible support for these faculty to attain tenure and promotion. 5-2.7.9 Possible Innovations in Off-Campus Programs Many faculty feel that the off-campus program contributes little to the main campus. Although there is in fact little interaction between the programs, it is possible that the situation could be improved by encouraging off-campus students, particularly those in the television program, to arrange with their employers a "sabbatical" semester on campus. The student could accelerate progress toward a degree, and could undertake some supervised research on campus. This option would also add to the diversity of the graduate student body and could provide beneficial contacts between faculty and industrial interests. The Univer- sity could facilitate this type of program by maintaining leases on apartments for the students. A precedent for this sort of arrangement exists in support for faculty visitors. Recommendation 5-18: That the University develop a formal on-campus semester program for off-campus students. 5-3.0 Research 5-3.1 Background On Research At VPI&SU The implementation of policies that encourage research, the growth of the graduate student enrollment, and faculty dedication to research have produced a tremendous increase in the research component of the University. University research expenditures in 1966-1967 totaled about 5 million dollars. In 1985-1986, this figure was over 65 million dollars and the University was ranked 49th in the country. Clearly the climate for research has changed substantially over the past decade. During this time, the University has emphasized hiring young faculty capable and willing to undertake research activities. Furthermore, one of the criteria for promotion and tenure is the degree to which a faculty member is involved in research and is able to attract funds for research. A faculty member who contributes equally in the areas of teaching, professional service, publications, and research is considered well-rounded. The increased involvement of larger numbers of faculty has led to diversification of the research efforts at the University. The research program is vigorous, and serves an ever-increasing constituency at the state and national levels. 5-3.2 The Research Mission The land-grant tradition embraces both basic and applied research which are essential ingredients in the development of an accom- plished and intellectually curious faculty and student body. It is expected that the research will help to establish new technol- ogies, will lead to the creation of new companies and jobs, and will increase the standard of living in the Commonwealth. Research programs also serve to finance many aspects of instruc- tion, particularly in graduate programs by providing some of the means to acquire state-of-the-art equipment for laboratories. The University Faculty Handbook identifies three categories of research, as follows: 1. "Core Research," which is supported by biennial state appro- priations to match federal formula funds under the Hatch and McIntire-Stennis Acts, the Water Resources Research Act, and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamations Act; 2. "Sponsored Programs" funded by numerous external sources and organized in over 2,000 projects, each with specific research objectives; 3. "Departmental Research," which includes an array of activ- ities undertaken at the initiative of the faculty and is often tied to their academic assignments. These categories are often used for the sake of convenience, since many research projects may fall into two or all three of these categories. In the land-grant tradition, Core Research activities are concerned with areas vital to the overall well-being of the economy of the State, and to the quality of the lives of its citizens. It focuses on agriculture and forest productivity, food safety and quality and related consumer problems, conserva- tion of environmental and water resources, utilization of coal and other energy resources, and industrial and economic develop- ment concerns. Sponsored Research is less focused than Core Research, since it represents whatever the Principal Investigator and the sponsor mutually agree to, as long as this conforms to guidelines for viable and reasonable research within the University. Such research may fall into the category of basic or applied research. Sponsors may be from private industry, state and local govern- ment, or the federal government. Funding can be arranged by the sponsor contacting the University or a specific principal inves- tigator, by a principal investigator submitting a solicited or unsolicited proposal. Departmental Research, a key element in the University, does not necessarily have a direct sponsor, but relies on the resources normally available in the University. These resources may consist only of the ideas of a scholar and the library of the University. Sometimes the research may attract funding, but just as often, the research is undertaken without outside sponsorship. The outcomes of investigations under core, sponsored, or depart- mental research are ultimately judged through the process of peer review in the form of publications, presentations, awards, judged shows, and letters from respected peers. The University has set into place a system where all faculty are required to bring their research results to a variety of public forums. Inadequate levels of publication and recognition result in negative impacts in the promotion and tenure process and on salary levels. 5-3.3 Organization Of The Research Program The Research Division was established at VPI&SU in 1966 by action of the Virginia General Assembly, to encompass the research missions of the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station and the Virginia Engineering Experiment Station. The Research Division was authorized to: Conduct researches and investigations and to establish, publish and distribute results in such forms as will tend to increase the economy, efficiency, and safety of the various enterprises and activities of interest to the State and the Nation, and to promote the conservation and economic utilization of its natural and human resources. (Code of Virginia, 23-135.2) The appointment of Randall Robertson as the first Dean of the Research Division in 1970 was an attempt to help the faculty develop more sponsored research. Dr. Robertson brought experi- ence from the national level through service at both the Office of Naval Research and the National Science Foundation. His tenure was characterized by a rapid expansion of the faculty involvement in sponsored research. At the time of the 1975-76 Self-Study, the Research Division had the responsibilities of providing institutional-level program and policy administration for research, as well as fostering efforts to earn sponsored grants. Working closely with the Research Division, but separate from the office, was the office of Grant and Contract Administration. That office handled budgetary matters connected with sponsored research. In 1981, the Research Division and Graduate School were reorgan- ized under the Dean of Research and Graduate Studies. While changes in the direct operations of each unit were minimal, this merger enhanced the symbiotic relationship between scholarly research and graduate studies at VPI&SU. This reorganization reinforced the necessity of having sponsored research projects to attract good graduate students in many areas, and to have good graduate students to complete sponsored projects. The appointment of a Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies in 1984 further emphasized the integrated responsibil- ities of these units in the University. The position of Dean of the Graduate School was re-established and a position of Associ- ate Provost for Research was created. Both these administrators report to the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies. The current arrangement has increased the attention given to policy questions and planning issues as they relate to the research and graduate missions of the University. In 1982, certain functions and responsibilities of the Research Division and the Office of Contract and Grant Administration were merged and consolidated into an Office of Sponsored Programs to provide integrated support for faculty pursuing external funding. The Office of Sponsored Programs now provides pre- and post-award support for all extramurally funded programs in research, instruction, and extension/public service. This support includes help where needed with proposal preparation, budgeting, contract negotiations, and financial management of project awards. The Associate Provost for Research also serves as the Director of Sponsored Programs. The Research Council was elevated in 1982 to commission status within the University governance system (see the General Catalog for Commission membership). The Commission on Research serves as the primary policy advisory body for the research enterprise of the University and has been instrumental in the formulation of many of the new policies and procedures outlined in this section (see Table 5-16). The College Administrators for Research (CARs) meet on a monthly basis to discuss problems and opportunities associated with the administration of the University's research enterprise. This group serves as the primary conduit for information and feedback to the faculty on matters that relate to research administration. An information series was initiated in 1978 to provide a more- detailed examination of certain aspects of research adminis- tration, such as the basis for indirect cost calculations, the establishment of specialized service centers, procedures for subcontracting, and so forth. In 1985, this series was expanded to include a quarterly newsletter, Insight. 5-3.4 Quality Control Measures And Support Services Of The Research Division And Office Of Sponsored Programs 5-3.4.1 Quality Control Measures While mechanisms to encourage research are well established, the University must maintain an oversight capability to ensure that the nature of the research is consonant with the purposes and goals of the University. Guidelines guard against the assumption of work not suited to an academic environment: 1. The research results of a thesis or dissertation must be subject to public scrutiny and made available for publication no later than one year after the work is completed. 2. The research should possess academic merit. These policies are further described in the University's Manual of Procedures. The first policy is designed to protect the student engaged in research activities; in many cases, the future livelihood of the student may depend on an ability to present the research to the public. The second policy is directed toward the conduct of unsuitable work under the guise of research. To enforce these policies, the Research Division is responsible for checking each proposal to determine that the intent of the work is acceptable. 5-3.4.2 Support Services The University's Manual of Procedures for sponsored programs has been computerized and can be updated to ensure that all federal, state, University, and sponsor policies and procedures are current. The Manual provides comprehensive guidelines for the preparation and management of sponsored activities. The thoroughness of coverage of this compendium has been recognized by the adoption of its format by other universities in Virginia and elsewhere. The University Proposal Monitoring System (UPMS) was developed to provide a computerized data base to track sponsored program activities. Data on over 3,000 currently funded projects and over 11,000 proposals submitted over the past 5 years are maintained in the UPMS. It can be searched for information by sponsor, department/college, principal investigator, funding categories (e.g., federal, state, and local government; commer- cial; foundations, etc.), size of awards, duration of awards, and so forth. Monthly reports are provided to the colleges and departments and special reports are generated for University administrators on an almost daily basis. The Project Authorization Notice (PAN) has been computerized to provide quicker turnaround in the establishment and updating of sponsored project information in the University Accounting System. The PAN provides faculty and administrators with a budget breakdown for each project account and identifies cost- sharing expectations. All funding adjustments are recorded through the distribution of an up-dated PAN. A "flagging system" was developed to minimize project overruns in which charges to sponsored accounts exceed available funds. This system provides principal investigators with timely notice of potential financial management problems so that these can be averted or dealt with before the project deadline. An Accounts Receivable system is under development and will be in place before the end of 1987 to expedite the tracking of billable charges under sponsored projects. This system is designed to ensure an adequate cash flow to prevent interruptions in sponsor funding. A Faculty Expertise system has been developed to provide informa- tion about the research and academic interests of faculty members. This system is available on-line through the mainframe computer to all faculty and administrators on campus. In January 1987, a connection to this data base was provided in the Office of the Governor. Similar linkages will be provided to the offices of the Center for Innovative Technology (CIT) and the State Council for Higher Education. A Research Facilities Direc- tory has also been developed to provide a compendium of research support facilities available on campus. These data will be available electronically by the end of 1987. An Opportunities Officer was appointed in 1985 to provide researchers and graduate students with information and special- ized services regarding funding opportunities. A number of workshops and conferences with representatives of federal agencies have been organized and conducted through this office. The Opportunities Officer has also been instrumental in the preparation of major funding solicitations to the National Endowment for the Humanities, American Telephone and Telegraph, and other public and private funding sources. This office is responsible for the operation of the SPIN (Sponsored Program Information Network) System, a computer-based data system on sponsored program opportunities maintained by the State Univer- sity of New York in Albany. The University Council adopted a new "Policy on Intellectual Property" in 1986 to consolidate and update earlier policies and procedures on patents and copyrights. An Intellectual Properties Officer has been appointed within the Research Division to facil- itate the opportunities of faculty and staff to develop, protect, and market inventions and copyrightable materials. This officer will work closely with Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties, Inc., a corporate entity established by the Board of Visitors in 1985 to develop and market discoveries made by the University's faculty and staff. A number of "early alert" notations have been included on the Proposal Internal Approval Form to provide pre-award information about space needs, the use of human subjects, equipment acquisi- tions, security issues, and hazardous materials. These notations are intended to enable various administrative support units to be more responsive to the needs of sponsored research projects. 5-3.5 Core Research The Core Research Program at VPI&SU has existed for nearly 100 years. The Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station received its first research allotment under the Hatch Act in 1887. The focus of these activities became more explicit under subsequent amend- ments to the Act, culminating in the 1955 mission statement, which states: It shall be the object and duty of the State agricultural experiment stations.....to conduct original and other researches, investigations and experiments bearing directly on and contributing to the establishment and maintenance of a permanent and effective agricultural industry in the United States, including the researches basic to the problems of agriculture and its broadest aspects and such investigations as have for their purpose the development and improvement of the rural home and rural life and the maximum contributions by agriculture to the welfare of the consumer..... Congress passed the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Research Act in 1962 to encourage and assist in the conduct of forestry research, including reforestation, land and watershed management, wildlife habitat improvement, outdoor recreation, and harvesting and marketing of forest products. Thus, a second major formula-funded program was added to the research mission of land-grant institutions. The concept of Core Research was first articulated in 1976 as part of the first Program Budget Exhibit submitted to the Gover- nor and General Assembly by the Research Division. The program focus included research efforts in agriculture and forestry research, rural development, family resources, coal and energy, environmental and water resources, industrial and economic devel- opment, and supporting areas. A subprogram in veterinary medical research was added in 1984-85. In 1975-76, funding for the Core Research Program (state appro- priations and federal formula funds) accounted for 51.6 percent of the total research expenditures at VPI&SU (see Table 5-17). In 1985-86, however, funding for Core Research represented 45.4 percent of the University's total research expenditures. During this 10-year period, total research expenditures at VPI&SU increased by 220 percent--from $20,476,368 to $65,535,344. Sponsored Research expenditures increased by 261 percent--from $9,915,948 in 1975-76 to $35,779,619 in 1985-86--while funding for the Core Research Program increased by 192 percent. The aggregate expenditure data in Table 5-17 belie a major problem that has emerged in the 1980s concerning the foundations of the Core Research Program. In the land-grant tradition, the research agenda of this Program has been supported jointly by federal funds from the Department of Agriculture, allocated on a fairly complex formula basis, and state matching funds. While the matching commitment varies from state to state, there has been some consistency over the years in the relative balance between the state and federal funds supporting these activities. From 1975-76 to 1980-81, federal formula funds increased by 65 percent, closely paralleling the 71 percent increase in state appropriations. Since that time, however, support from the federal formula programs has remained relatively unchanged, while state appropriations have increased by 84 percent in an effort to keep pace with rising costs and new program initiatives. This problem has been exacerbated by recent cutbacks in federal funds brought on by the deficit reduction provisions of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act. However, for the past several years, USDA formula funds have not kept pace with increases in costs incurred by the research activities that these formula funds are intended to support. For the past five years, the increment in USDA funds has been either negative or well-below inflation (see Table 5-18). The cumulative increase in USDA funds since 1979-80 is only 21 percent, which averages out to an annual increase of only 3.2 percent over this period. During this same period, faculty salaries (to which these funds are largely applied) have averaged annual increases of 7.6 percent. In short, an increasing segment of activities, once funded by these USDA programs, has been shifted to state- appropriated funds. Put another way, the "buying power" of the $3.676 million in USDA formula funds expended in 1985-86 is about 60 percent of the equivalent value of these funds in 1979-80. To keep pace with the increases that have occurred in salaries and related employee benefits, the level of support from these USDA funds for the current year should be around $6 million. Core Research activities in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences are most directly impacted by this change in USDA funds, as illustrated by a 10-year comparison (see Table 5-19). Total funds in support of Core Research activities in the College have increased by 154 percent from 1976-77 to 1985-86. The increase in USDA funds during this same period, however, was only 51 percent. At the beginning of the period, USDA funds accounted for 30.5 percent of the total Core expenditures in the College. In 1985-86, however, these funds contributed only 18 percent toward the Core Research Program in the College. The consequence of this situation is not difficult to predict. By 1995-96, the funding requirements for Core Research in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (assuming a modest annual increase of 7 percent) will be approximately $36.5 million. Assuming the current "no increase" trend, the USDA share of this funding requirement will be less than 10 percent. At that point, the USDA funds in all likelihood will be insuffi- cient to pay the utility bills of the outlying research stations. To sustain the land-grant mission of the University--as envisioned in the last Self-Study Report--the Commonwealth of Virginia must assume an increased share of the fiscal obligations for the support of the Core Research program. This expanded commitment has several related components: * Operating Funds: The Core Research Program has experienced "level funding" for operations over the past three biennia. However, since the University has no mechanisms to increase the Nongeneral Fund portion of the Core Research and budget (i.e., tuition cannot be increased, as has been done in the academic budget), the impact of "level funding" has been an absolute and significant decline in operating support. * Additional Core Research Positions: No new positions have been authorized for the Core Research Program in the past 10 years, except for positions allocated in support of the new Veterinary Medical Research (VMR) subprogram. In fact, 17 classified positions were eliminated in the early 1980s as a result of the state's Manpower Utilization Plan. In this 10-year period, however, new and expanded research expecta- tions have been identified as appropriate to the overall Core Research mission, while other research concerns have contin- ued. If VPI&SU is to provide the research support envisioned by the new land-grant mission espoused by its leadership and its supporters throughout the Commonwealth, additional staff resources must be provided. * Greater Flexibility in Position Assignments: The Core Research Program must be responsive to emerging problems that face the Commonwealth and the nation. The policy of "fixed allocations" of faculty and classified positions to colleges and departments needs to be re-examined. The goals and objectives of the Core Research Program are subject to review each biennium as part of the state budget process. The overall mission of the program, however, has not been examined in detail since 1980. Continued efforts must be made to examine and make recommendations as to the appropriateness, flexibility, and responsiveness of the current subprograms within Core Research with respect to the changing/emerging problems facing the Common- wealth and the nation. These efforts must involve both adminis- trators and faculty representatives in the identification of potential areas of new development. Recommendation 5-19: That the Core Research Program be reviewed by a committee of administrators and faculty to determine whether the subprograms are still appropriate and whether the staff and operating resources are sufficient to meet the research programs envisioned under the University's contempo- rary land-grant mission. 5-3.6 Sponsored Research Sponsored Research plays a significant role in the academic mission of the University. In addition to strengthening the education and training of future researchers through graduate programs, research on the "leading edge" provides an exposure for all students to knowledge in the making--a vital function of a university. A mutually beneficial relationship exists between the Core and Sponsored Research Programs: each adds to the knowledge base of the other and refines the other's objectives and strategies. Sponsored Research often defines emerging or high-priority problem areas that need to be addressed through the Core Research Program. Sponsored Research also extends the research endeavors of the Core Program to broader applications. Such a relationship focuses resources and promotes the achievement of the overall research mission of the University, as set forth in the Code of Virginia (Section 23-135.2). Sponsored research at VPI&SU is the product of the broad schol- arly interests of faculty and their students, acting individually and collectively, tempered by the interests of potential sponsors. The data in Table 5-20 illustrate the extent of faculty involvement as principal investigators in sponsored research. Ensuring that these research activities enhance the scholarly climate at the graduate level is also an important component of this process. VPI&SU has achieved national recognition in a number of fields. According to a recent survey of the National Science Foundation, the University ranked: * 22nd nationally in terms of expenditures for engineering research; * 19th in terms of research support from the U.S. Department of Agriculture; * 15th in terms of research expenditures from state and local government sources; and * 6th in percent of research expenditures from industry. Overall, the University ranked 49th in the nation in terms of research expenditures, according to the latest NSF survey. Further detail is given on expenditures by funding agency and college in Table 5-21. The vitality and perseverance of the faculty have further built upon the research capacity. In FY 85-86, some 1,600 new research awards were received for total funding in excess of $41 million (see Table 5-22). Sponsored Research expenditures increased from $11.2 million in 1976-77 to $35.8 million in 1985-86 (see Table 5-17), for the equivalent of an annual increase of 13.8 percent. During this same period, research awards increased by 324 percent, from $9.68 million to $41 million. This significant growth in awards trans- lates to the equivalent of an annual increase of 17.4 percent. Both these annual rates of increase are above the national averages for the period. In spite of these positive trends, some important issues must be addressed for VPI&SU to achieve the next important threshold in its development and maturation as a comprehensive research university. Issues relating to interdisciplinary research, space and equipment, and support services are outlined in further detail in subsequent sections. These issues -- applicable to Core Research as well as Sponsored Research -- are of paramount concern. 5-3.6.1 Need For "Program Funding" With over 1,500 new sponsored research awards received in each of the past three years, the University's research agenda has been characterized by a multiplicity of relatively small projects, averaging less than $30,000 per award. In some cases, these awards represent continued support from a single sponsor over several years. If VPI&SU is to achieve a place among the top 40 universities in terms of research funding, some of the present activities need to be redirected toward larger "blocks" of support -- in terms of both dollars and time. In several sectors of the University, it will be necessary to move from a pattern of individual faculty members (each with several small projects), to teams of faculty, professional staff, and students funded on a sustained basis over a three- to four-year period. The block or umbrella grant concept is being encouraged through a number of funding agencies, including the National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, and Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology. While the first phases of this trend have focused on large centers, it is also possible that "mini-centers" may also receive support in the future. This will allow smaller groupings of faculty to compete for funding--a situation that is positive for VPI&SU where the research strengths are only begin- ning to emerge in many areas. In all these endeavors, cooper- ation is needed among faculty groups. This may require faculty members to give up some of the independence they once enjoyed while working on individual-funding, but the opportunities are significant. The faculty should be alerted to the possibilities, and encouraged to consider working towards center concepts where appropriate. The preparation of block grant proposals requires more work than individual grants or contracts. The concept also often may involve more than one university, and may call for development of industry matching funds or other contributions. Thus, consider- able travel may be required, and significant coordination may be involved. To assist faculty who apply for such support, the University must assist with proposal preparation by supplying financial support and staff assistance. This support may be predicated on contributions from the faculty members' colleges and departments. Recommendation 5-20: That the Commission on Research and the Faculty Senate address the issue of block grants and how the University can be positioned to deal with this development. Recommendation 5-21: That the University establish a mechanism to assist faculty groups and support the preparation of large block-grant proposals. 5-3.6.2 Professional Staff Levels and Development Many major research universities, the company of which VPI&SU aspires to achieve, have the capacity to engage professional staff members to participate in sponsored research activities. Such professional staff members function both in technical and administrative capacities and require salary and related fringe benefit considerations competitive with the scales available in industry and business. Measures have been taken to provide this capacity at VPI&SU through the expanded definition of the category of Research Associate and the additional appointment categories of Research Scientist and Senior Research Scientist. However, these efforts must be extended to include parallel opportunities to employ first-level professional personnel in positions that currently are unavailable in the State Classified Personnel System. Recommendation 5-22: That the University establish better mechanisms for scholars at the staff level to be recognized and compensated for their efforts. 5-3.6.3 Integration of Research Mission into University Systems It has been said that university research is "big business." With Sponsored and Core Research expenditures of over $75 million in 1985-86, this assertion is certainly true at VPI&SU. Many of the University's support systems, however, are not geared to the "business cycles" of Sponsored Research. For example, the close- out of University accounts involving General Fund appropriations at the end of the state fiscal year comes at a time (June) when Sponsored Research activities are beginning to expand to accommo- date the availability of academic-year faculty and graduate students in the summer months. The year-end financial reporting requirements of the state must take precedence over the account- ing and management information requirements of sponsored projects (under current procedures). In so doing, however, the "business of research" often is left with incomplete or inaccurate informa- tion regarding the status of available funds. Similarly, the purchase of equipment or other critical items in support of research projects may come into conflict with the procurement time-table required to meet year-end close-out requirements of the state. In short, many policies and procedures are enacted and/or maintained without full cognizance of their detrimental impact on the research enterprise of the University. Recommendation 5-23: That the University re-assess its general financial administrative procedures relative to the research mission and eliminate or modify those that are a detriment to the conduct of research. 5-3.6.4 Need For Flexibility In Use of Research Overhead Funds The Commonwealth of Virginia in theory has an enlightened policy involving return of overhead funds generated through sponsored research. The state allows 70 percent of the overhead to be used to fund "research and related activities." Such funds can provide an invaluable tool to help research programs grow and respond quickly to changing environments. For example, the funds may be applied to help write new proposals, replace obsolete equipment, renovate areas for new research tasks, or construct entirely new facilities. For the last three biennial budgets, however, the University has had a fixed operating budget. This has come in the face of rapidly growing research activities and graduate student enrollments. To handle the larger workload engendered by this situation, administrative units have gradually become dependent on the research overhead monies to fund a range of support activities. This situation defeats the purpose of the original policy, and flexibility in application of the overhead funds has significantly diminished. It has a negative effect on faculty morale and, in the long run, will become a roadblock in the development of research at the University. Recommendation 5-24: That the Commonwealth and the University bring operating budgets to levels that will allow overhead return monies to be used for research-related activity, and serve to enhance research facilities and encourage faculty to do high-level research. 5-3.7 Departmental Research While the research expenditures for core and sponsored research are indicative of increased activities in these programs, there is no similar simple measure that would show that more depart- mental research is being done than in previous years (see the section in the Faculty Chapter on productivity.) However, there are ample reasons to believe that this is true. First, depart- mental research often is part of the development of material that will ultimately serve as the basis of a proposal for funded research. Second, graduate students who are not supported as graduate assistants work with faculty in departmental research activities to complete degree requirements for independent studies, theses and dissertations. Given that funded research has increased, and the number of graduate students has also increased, it stands to reason that more departmental research is being done than in the past. Departmental research is a key element in the University. In some disciplines, it may be the primary type of research that is possible, given that research funding tends to be more attracted to technological areas. Departmental research is highly depend- ent on the availability of quality resources through facilities such as the library, the computing center, and basic laboratories and supplies. The problems associated with level operating budgets mentioned in the preceding section on sponsored research also apply to the performance of departmental research, and perhaps more so, since there is no recourse to returned overhead funds in this case. This situation particularly affects the ability of the faculty to publish the findings of department research and travel to meetings to present the information. Thus, with constrained operating budgets, departmental research tends to be squeezed hardest, and a valuable resource in the University is diminished. Recommendation 5-25: That the University continue and, whenever possible, expand the support for non-funded departmental research. 5-3.8 Interdisciplinary Research Programs In the chapter on Graduate Programs, the issues associated with the conduct of interdisciplinary graduate studies are presented. Many of these issues are also applicable to the subject of inter- disciplinary research. At the same time, many of the opportu- nities discussed previously for interdisciplinary graduate studies are also applicable to interdisciplinary research. Thus, these points will not be repeated here, and instead focus is placed on some unique aspects of the research picture. The University largely has been served well, as have universities across the country, by strong department units arranged along traditional lines. However, research problems do not always align themselves conveniently along traditional disciplinary lines, and the departmental structure is not always adaptable to this situation. There are strong forces in the present sponsored research environment that support interdisciplinary research efforts. As mentioned previously, many government agencies are in essence setting as a requirement that center or block-grant funding be based on interdisciplinary research and teaching programs. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, the General Assembly in 1984 enacted legislation to create the Center for Innovative Technology (CIT). While the CIT is headquartered in Northern Virginia, research coordination is provided by four institutes, two of which are located at VPI&SU. The CIT typically encourages interdisciplinary research through its funding of centers of excellence. Because of the opportunities offered in the present environment, the University should ensure that unnecessary roadblocks do not exist for interdisciplinary research, and, in fact, that such efforts are encouraged. Interdisciplinary research is done through the activities of individual faculty members, and via more formal organizations. A study in 1986 by the Commission on Research identified 51 separate centers, laboratories, institutes, and groups at VPI&SU that espouse interdisciplinary research and/or educational goals. Two of these, the Virginia Water Resources Research Center and the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research, were estab- lished by action of the Virginia General Assembly. Eight centers have been formally recognized by the Board of Visitors as Univer- sity Centers. The remainder are either college or departmental in nature. The funding for these groups is largely from external sources through research grants and contracts. The accumulated grant funds of these centers and groups represents more than half of the total external funding for the University. Only minimal support is provided by general University funds. Most of the centers and laboratories have served, and continue to serve, as positive agencies for research at VPI&SU, and are essential to maintain the University's competitive edge. However, in some cases, the original purpose of the group may have been outlived, and their activities have fallen off drastically. Recommendation 5-26: That the Commission on Research be given oversight responsibilities for dissolving centers, insti- tutes, and interdisciplinary groups when their activities are completed. Special problems can develop when faculty take it on themselves to become involved in interdisciplinary research. They may be "disfranchised" from receiving resources if the departments are not in complete agreement with the directions of the work. Also, the faculty may find it difficult to receive full endorsement for promotion, tenure, and merit pay increases. Given the likelihood of increased attention to interdisciplinary research efforts by major funding agencies, it is reasonable that careful attention be given to the circumstances for interdisciplinary research at the University. Recommendation 5-27: That the University establish a position with broad authority and responsibility to assist, help organize, manage, and coordinate interdisciplinary research and to assist in developing proposals for block grants that might support interdisciplinary research. 5-3.9 Space Space to conduct research and support graduate programs is one of the most critical issues the University faces. This situation was highlighted as a problem in the last self-study, and despite some modest progress, the growth of research and graduate programs has far outstripped the gains. In addition to the problems of a simple lack of space, there is a desperate need for laboratories that can provide the special facilities that are needed for many of today's research activities - high head room, clean environments with humidity and temperature control, and hazardous-materials-handling capabilities to name only a few. Finally, much of the space that is available is not suited for research and graduate student purposes because of a lack of air conditioning, proper electrical power, and lighting. This situation is illustrated by the following data: * A recent study identified a research space deficit of 230,000 square feet in the College of Engineering and showed that relative to 44 engineering programs at comparable universi- ties, VPI&SU ranks last in space, even considering the new Architecture-Engineering infill building. * Based on data obtained from the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, VPI&SU's Architecture program ranks 81st out of 87 programs in the country in terms of studio space per student. * Space needs for already funded research in the College of Arts and Sciences are 100,000 square feet. * Space needs for research in Agriculture and Life Sciences, including biotechnology, are in excess of 100,000 square feet. * Other Colleges, including Veterinary Medicine, report needs in excess of 50,000 square feet. The lack of space has already had an impact. Recently, the University missed several excellent research opportunities because of space deficiencies. For example, projects valued in excess of $81 million were proposed by VPI&SU in response to the University Research Initiative of the Department of Defense. Only one project, valued at $2 million, was funded, however. Others were declined with specific reviewer comments about the inadequacy of facilities and space at the University. A grant from the Department of Energy for over $1.2 million was delayed, and potentially could have been reassigned to another university, while emergency provisions were made to meet the special space requirements of the project. The space available for research at VPI&SU is simply not consist- ent with the level of research activity at the University and the research mission assigned to it. Faculty morale is suffering as a result. In the self-study questionnaire to the faculty, space was identified as one of the top issues of concern. The University has attempted to provide a range of conventional and unconventional stop-gap solutions to the space problem. For example, dormitories have been converted into offices for gradu- ate students. This process is only partially satisfactory however, since the graduate students are housed in a building not associated with their departments, and not in proximity to the laboratories and departmental facilities. Another approach has been to move administrative support groups off-campus, often to facilities that must be rented by the University. The vacated space has then been made available to research groups. This too, has a negative side in that the space may not be well adapted to the research purpose, and the monies for needed renovations are often not available. Finally, inexpensive buildings of one type or another have been built at locations off-campus. While this is a useful solution to short-term needs, the buildings often leave much to be desired, and their locations lead to problems in moving personnel and equipment from the main campus. Facilities often have to be duplicated on the main campus and in the off-campus location. The research park being developed by the University will have some positive impact on space needs. However, the space has to be leased by the research investigators, a circumstance that most research sponsors will not accept. Also, the space costs in the research park are expensive relative to that available in other areas that can be used by researchers. Research space requirements at VPI&SU can be categorized in several ways: * Research activities that require controlled environments - e.g., clean rooms for electronic circuit studies, computing rooms, biotechnology labs. * Research activities that require isolation because of consid- erable noise, heat, or safety hazards that may require unique physical structures. These requirements are often incompat- ible with existing older buildings or are extremely costly to provide in such buildings. Extensive remodeling or new buildings are required. * Research projects suitable for existing, standard laborato- ries. Space needs are less demanding than above and may be met with less extensive renovation of existing facilities in older buildings. * Research emphasizing personnel rather than instruments. May be carried out in standard office or slightly modified space. There are no viable alternatives to the construction of new space specifically dedicated to research activities. While it is possible to convert classrooms into laboratories, classrooms are also in short supply, and the conversion would not be cost effec- tive. Laboratories usually require the availability of hoods, water and gas supplies, heavy-duty electrical service, environ- mental control systems, and other utilities which are costly to install on a retrofit basis. Recommendation 5-28: That the University and the Commonwealth determine realistic goals for the research mission of the University, and develop long-range plans for new and renovated research space consistent with these goals. Recommendation 5-29: That the University continue to explore every avenue to provide additional short-term space, on and off campus, to relieve the present urgent needs. Recommendation 5-30: That the University plan to allocate some of the new research space to the Research Division which can be shifted, from time to time, to uses other than the initial ones. 5-3.10 Equipment The University has committed over $32.9 million in research funds during the past 11 years to the acquisition of research equipment (see Table 5-23). The $4.66 million spent in 1985-86, for example, represents about $1 million more than was recently allocated to VPI&SU as part of the Equipment Trust Fund. Over half of these equipment acquisitions ($17.9 million) were funded from Sponsored Research projects. And over 20 percent ($6.87 million) were funded from the indirect cost recoveries generated by Sponsored Research projects. In short, a major segment of the University's research capacity has been the direct consequence of faculty efforts to garner externally funded research opportu- nities. According to the inventory maintained by the University Control- ler's Office, 30 percent of the equipment currently available on-campus (in terms of acquisition value) was acquired with research funds. A complete compendium is provided in the Research Facilities Index maintained by the Research Division. Maintenance of research equipment, especially computing equip- ment, is a continuing concern for researchers and departments. With experience, people will learn what maintenance contracts are necessary and where risks can be taken. Furthermore, expertise will develop on campus to handle some of the maintenance. However, the reality that maintenance is expensive, but neces- sary, must be faced. It is unrealistic to think that departments can cover maintenance costs from current levels of operating money. Recommendation 5-31: That the Commission on Research study the issue of maintenance costs for equipment to determine how costs can be controlled, and what can be done to distribute the impact of the costs between various administrative units. 5-3.11 Support Services Support services are essential to the performance of research activities. In addition to the services provided within the departments, colleges, and the Research Division/Office of Sponsored Programs, many other units within the University are involved. These include: Accounting, Purchasing, Physical Plant (Buildings and Grounds), Employee Relations, the Computing Center, Library, Learning Resources Center, Laboratory Support Services, Central Stores, Information Services, the Controller's Office, and the Department of Health and Safety. All of these organizations are important, but, with the possible exception of the Computing Center, the growth of research activities has outstripped the resource capacity of these units to serve in some cases, even the most critical needs. There is particular concern about the need for more efficient procurement practices, and more responsive assistance from Physical Plant. Research is driven by needs that more often than not require purchases of equipment and materials, and small to large building renovations to accommodate new facilities. It is important that purchases and renovations be handled in a reason- able time with a minimum of hassle to the researcher and any assistants. The more time spent on these aspects by researchers, the less time they will be able to spend on research and the development of new research resources. Also, problems with purchasing and renovations lead to frustration and loss of morale. The state personnel system is designed to accommodate the staff- ing needs of the many governmental agencies that provide vital public services to the citizens of the Commonwealth. The classi- fied personnel system is very responsive to these public needs. However, beyond the classifications of office support personnel, the system fails to recognize adequately the unique requirements of the research enterprise, which must compete with business and industry for qualified individuals with technical skills and experiences. There is a demonstrated need for greater flexibil- ity in the recruitment of qualified professional support person- nel. Recommendation 5-32: That the University work to expand the classified staff system to meet the new challenges and oppor- tunities of the research efforts. The current accounting system of the University is outdated and unresponsive to the management information and control require- ments of the highly complex organization that VPI&SU has become. These shortcomings have been recognized and a new accounting system is under development. Unfortunately, at this stage it is unclear whether this new system, which is geared to the annual cycle of the University's financial reporting needs, will serve the more diverse cycles of sponsored research. Sponsored activ- ities start and end at different times of the year and/or may overlap several fiscal cycles. With over 3,000 project accounts- -each of which is unique accounting entity--the management information/control needs of the faculty engaged in research are quite different from those of academic departments or administra- tive units that are tied to the state's annual appropriation cycle. Recommendation 5-33: That the new accounting system be re-assessed annually to determine how well the research community is being served by it. University research offers a number of unique challenges in terms of procurement of materials, supplies, equipment, services. On the one hand, the time lines of individual research projects require greater flexibility in purchasing, much as businesses need flexibility to remain competitive. On the other hand, university research is supported, in large measure, with public funds, and therefore, the stewardship of these funds must adhere to practices and procedures applicable to all government agencies. Procedures must be devised to operate within these dual and often contradictory parameters. Recommendation 5-34: That a study be made of the resources and responsibilities allocated to all of the support groups to ensure that these allocations are appropriate to meet the changing needs of the University's expanding research programs. Recommendation 5-35: That a unified and concerted plan for administrative support services be developed in addition to the plans developed developed by the individual support units. Recommendation 5-36: That administrative procedures be updated and improved to address the relative short turnaround needs of contemporary research endeavors. In recent years, a number of safety and regulatory-related issues have begun to have a significant impact on research activities: For example, disposal of hazardous wastes and removal of asbestos in renovation projects. In the current fiscal year, the cost to dispose of waste chemicals and radioactive materials will be between $150,000 and $200,000. Although a surcharge of 10 percent has recently been added to the purchase price of all hazardous chemicals to help pay for the increased cost, the surcharge does not recover all of the cost, and to attempt to get these monies from individual researchers will adversely affect the competitive position of the University in some research areas. In the coming years, this issue will require careful examination, since changes are likely to come and they may worsen the problem. In addition to the costs associated with this issue, it is now necessary to obtain a review and approval from several safety and regulatory groups in some areas before research can be done. Among these committees are: Animal Care, Institutional Biosafety, Institutional Review Board for Research Involving Human Subjects, and Radiation Safety. In addition, several oversight units (e.g., University Legal Counsel, Insur- ance Office, Office of Risk Management, the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Office, and the Vivarium) now affect the costs and boundaries of research. Requiring a check- list for sponsored proposals and applying other methods help to inform researchers and the committees of the need to maintain communications on research matters. 5-3.12 Research Within The Academic Context Outstanding research endeavors are no easier to start and stop than other complex, intense operations of the University. Well- functioning research operations need continuous funds to keep groups together. The continual pressure for money, coupled with the desire of potential sponsors to attract researchers to study their problems, can place researchers in awkward positions. As noted by Derek Bok, ". . . one senses an unease an many scien- tific circles, a fear that sheer size, complexity, and expense of modern science may have a corrupting effect on quality. . . . Whatever the reason, the concerns do exist, and must be watched with the greatest care because the maintenance of standards is essential to the quality of the scientific enterprise." Researchers must guard against accepting contracts for work that has little or no academic merit. They must also guard against accepting grants that will restrict the research of graduate students or use them as menial assistants. While these basic guidelines seem appropriate and fairly easy to observe, when a short-term grant allows a research team to remain together long enough to earn another "good" grant, the principles may be lost in the face of the reality of the situation. These conflicts are addressed by the policies of the University that state that grants that do not contain academic merit are improper for a University. However, all the offices that endorse proposals must check to see that the policies are followed. Another issue is the dilemma of faculty members in professional programs. On the one hand, their graduate-level involvement is in applications of their disciplines. On the other hand, they must feel that they are expected to maintain research that pursues new knowledge and principles. The University needs to receive advice from the full disciplines in these areas. Internal reviews of professional accomplishments of individuals need to apply the criteria of their disciplines in the evalu- ations. A proper goal for evaluations is appropriate levels of attainment within disciplines, not the application of uniform criteria to all disciplines. Recommendation 5-37: That the University re-assess the role of professional programs and how (and if) they can or should contribute to the research effort. As the University strives to remain competitive in the research environment, there is a tendency to over-emphasize those areas capable of generating large sums of funded research. It remains in the University's best interest to maintain a balance with recognition of all programs that contribute to the larger goal of maintaining a comprehensive environment. Endeavors of scholarly merit and teaching should be publicized and given recognition in all appropriate forums (for further discussion, see the produc- tivity section of the Faculty Chapter). Recommendation 5-38: That the University continue to recognize all meritorious scholarship and professional activities. The outlook for research is very positive. Faculty members in increasing numbers are becoming involved in research efforts and these efforts, in turn, have a very positive impact on the quality of the academic programs. Students who can witness first-hand the intellectual breakthroughs such research efforts can produce are far ahead of their contemporaries who may read about these findings several years hence in journals or textbooks. To capitalize fully on this potential, however, will require increased flexibility and the best efforts of the Univer- sity's administration. As one researcher observed, "Tech has the horses to get the job done, but now we have to make sure they are hitched up in the right team and the reins are held correctly." 5-4.0 The Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine 5-4.1 Introduction The Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine (VMRCVM) is unique in both national and local terms. It is truly a regional Veterinary School with physical resources, faculty, state funding and students originating from both the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland. Facilities are located at the Blacksburg campus of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, the Marion duPont Scott Equine Medical Center in Leesburg, Virginia, and the College Park campus of the University of Maryland. The VMRCVM is one of the newest of 26 veterinary schools in the United States and is the newest college at VPI&SU. It has a highly structured course of professional study and operates a Veterinary Teaching Hospital that serves both instruc- tional and patient care functions. The College is still growing with significant funding and capital construction required to meet original needs projected almost 10 years ago. The Veterinary College at VPI&SU, located on the edge of the main campus, is an integral part of the University. Interaction with the rest of the University occurs through teaching programs at the undergraduate, graduate, and professional student levels; collaborative research; veterinary school and University commit- tees; shared extension activities; and the provision of animal health services to University flocks, herds and laboratory animals. Such interactions must be considered in light of the operational integration of the three widely-separate parts of the VMRCVM and to the necessity of accreditation by the American Veterinary Medical Association. For the purpose of this Univer- sity Self-Study, major emphasis is given to that part of the VMRCVM located at VPI&SU. This report, prepared by a subcommittee of the Graduate Program and Research Committee of the University Self-Study, deals specifically with a single college within the University. Precise wording of statements in accreditation criteria do not, in all cases, apply directly to the VMRCVM. The curriculum of the VMRCVM is highly structured with courses that are unique within the University in content and audience, and lead to the professional degree of Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM). Considerable influence is necessitated by a professional accred- iting agency and national and state graduate licensing authori- ties. However, all courses offered by the College are approved by the Graduate Course Criteria Committee of the University. In addition, the College is now developing a separate graduate program (master's & doctoral degrees). Most of the information, conclusions and recommendations included in this report are presented in general terms in the hope that specific plans will be formulated after these have been consid- ered. The report is based largely on a more extensive study referenced at the end of this document. Because time and space limitations precluded detailed analysis and presentation of all options, the committee has distilled the most essential and pertinent information from the large report. 5-4.2 History Establishment of the VMRCVM was a collaborative effort that evolved over several years. It was based on an agreement between the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland to create a college of veterinary medicine to serve the region. The first Dean of the College was appointed in September 1974, and the College utilized, as its base, the Departments of Veterinary Science of VPI&SU and the University of Maryland. The plan to establish a regional college that would offer a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) degree program was formally approved by the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia in November 1978. However, it was not until February 1980, that the Gover- nors of Virginia and Maryland formally ratified the agreement by signing the Agreement of Regional Cooperation. The College admitted its first class of students in September 1980, and currently admits 80 students each year. Based on the agreement between the states, each entering class is composed of 50 students from Virginia and 30 students from Maryland. The College has graduated four classes of 62, 73, 79 and 80 students each year respectively since 1984. When the first class of veterinary students was admitted, the College was given the old buildings which had been the Department of Veterinary Science of the College of Agriculture. The College was allocated some space for teaching and research on a temporary basis in several other buildings on campus. The lack of a dedicated physical facility of appropriate scale, design and construction at the outset was an unusual situation for estab- lishment of a new veterinary school and has necessitated funding, design and construction in several phases. This situation has also created numerous operational difficulties throughout the entire period of existence of the College. Phase I, the interim clinic, was the first new veterinary facil- ity constructed on the VPI&SU campus and was occupied in Septem- ber 1981. This facility provided limited small and large animal clinic space but did not provide a convenient or full service hospital for faculty or patients. Phase II was opened in July 1983, and included space for offices, didactic instruction, research, and support services. Phase III construction should be completed in 1988 and provides expanded hospital facilities, diagnostic labs and student space as well as relief of general overcrowding that has developed in Phase II. Phase IV, the next step in construction, will provide nonclient animal housing, research laboratory space, a clinical isolation facility, and expanded instructional facilities. At this time, funding for the complex has not been appropriated. The Marion duPont Scott Equine Medical Center (EMC) was officially opened in October 1984. This complex is located in Leesburg, Virginia, and resulted from a donation of $4.0 million by the late Mrs. Marion duPont Scott and a gift of 200 acres of the Morven Park estate by the Westmoreland Davis Memorial Founda- tion. The EMC is a hospital solely for horses. Although it is primarily a referral hospital, it is also used for teaching and conducting research. The Department of Veterinary Preventive Medicine of the VMRCVM is located at the campus of the University of Maryland at College Park. It is also an administrative unit of the College of Agriculture of the University of Maryland. The department has been accommodated with limited facilities, but the Maryland legislature has recently made an $11.5 million appropriation for the Avrum Gudelsky Veterinary Center at the University of Maryland. Ground has been broken for this center, which will provide research facilities for the Department of Preventive Medicine and will house the Maryland State Department of Agricul- ture Animal Health Diagnostic Laboratory. Following the appointment of the present Dean in the fall of 1985, the VMRCVM undertook an extensive self-study aimed at assessing its administrative structure, programs and resources. The most significant initial result from this study was a change from what had been a matrix system of organization and adminis- trative structure to a more traditional, departmental, discipline-oriented system. 5-4.3 Accreditation Status Professional accreditation status of a college of veterinary medicine is granted by The American Veterinary Medical Associ- ation (AVMA) following evaluation by its Council on Education (COE). AVMA accreditation of a college is required for graduates to be eligible for licensure examination. Following initial evaluation, the VMRCVM was granted a status of "Reasonable Assur- ance" in 1977. This led to an implication that the VMRCVM appeared capable of meeting criteria essential for the foundation of a veterinary school. The College was again evaluated in 1982 and was granted a status of "Provisional Accreditation." At the time of that evaluation, specific concerns of the AVMA were expressed "regarding adequate funding, completion of planned construction, development of a budget for the veterinary library, admission requirements, increased faculty, and plans for the fourth year of the curriculum." Adequate funding, completion of planned construction, and increased numbers of faculty continue to be difficulties faced by the VMRCVM. Admission requirements and the library will be addressed later in this report. In 1982, the College did not yet have a fourth year class. However, the complete curriculum is currently in place and is in the process of continued evolution and review. The College was again evaluated by the AVMA in 1984. This evalu- ation led to a status of "Limited Accreditation" which has a maximum 5-year term. The evaluation report stated the following: (1) the organizational structure was complex but met present needs, (2) library and learning resources appeared adequate at that stage of development, (3) the curriculum appeared to be progressing satisfactorily, and (4) continuing education met essential requirements. The College's accreditation status has been limited based on marginal compliance with essential require- ments of finances, physical facilities and equipment, clinical resources, and faculty. Components at the Blacksburg campus of the College were felt to be underfunded, and funding of the College had not kept pace with enrollment. Physical facilities of the hospital were felt to be inadequate for the number of professional students enrolled. Deficiencies were also noted in didactic laboratories and in housing for farm animals used in teaching and research. Clinical resources were felt to be limited by inadequate numbers of hospital patients. Faculty numbers were felt to be insufficient based on slower than expected filling of faculty positions. Additional areas of concern were noted relative to specifics of admissions prerequi- sites, lack of elective opportunities in the curriculum, and lack of a graduate program (post-DVM) at the Blacksburg campus. Student enrollment had increased at a faster pace than had facil- ities, faculty, and clinical accessions. It is anticipated that the accreditation visit in 1989 will be an evaluation for "Full Accreditation." Due to the AVMA 5-year time limit on "Limited Accreditation," failure to achieve "Full Accreditation" would lead to serious consequences for the College, its students and its faculty. Of the concerns noted above, many have been rectified. Others are being addressed, with resolution identifiable. Specifics will be noted in appropriate sections in this report. Some concerns cannot be immediately controlled by the VMRCVM, but require a concerted joint effort on the part of the College, the University and the legislatures of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland. Of the goals noted later in this report, full accreditation status should be of the highest prior- ity, since failure to achieve this status would render College programs inoperable and bar graduates from licensure within the United States and Canada. Concerned parties must recognize that this is an inescapable process and must coordinate all efforts toward the College's full, professional accreditation status. Recommendation 5-39: That funding, physical facilities, educa- tional resources and personnel be brought to acceptable standards by 1989 to meet "Full Accreditation" by the Council on Education of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 5-4.4 Purpose Missions of the VMRCVM are defined in accordance with the tradi- tional missions of land-grant universities--instruction, research, and service. In this light, goals were described as follows: "(1) improvement of animal health and welfare through increasing the level and quality of veterinary medical care both directly and also by providing referral, diagnostic and continu- ing education services for private practitioners in the two states, (2) the development of basic and applied research programs to serve the region, and (3) the provision of educa- tional opportunities for . . . Virginia and Maryland students seeking careers in veterinary medicine." Specific goals have been listed as follows: * To increase and improve the health and welfare of the region by improving the level and quality of veterinary medical services available to the public and its agencies, and by conducting relevant biomedical research. * To provide consultative referral and diagnostic back-up assistance to the private veterinary practitioners in the region so that they may better serve their clients. * To provide educational opportunities for the many excellent young people who wish to study this important health profes- sion. * To provide continuing education and the upgrading of techniques for the private practitioners in the region. * To provide access for the public, veterinary practitioners, and state agencies in the region to modern, sophisticated, and excellent veterinary medical facilities." The purposes of the VMRCVM appear appropriate to collegiate education and specifically to the educational roles of the College; these are described in various promotional and informa- tional brochures. However, the current goal statement and objec- tives need to be reviewed and updated, although the mission statement represents the official posture and practice of the College. However, faculty are not generally aware of these stated goals. A review of collegiate objectives has begun as noted below. Educational programs and support services appear to be designed to accomplish appropriate goals, but limitations on financial and physical resources have hampered these efforts and are likely to continue to do so. The VMRCVM recently began to readdress its specific missions by creating a more detailed statement of goals and objectives. This detailed statement of goals is currently in its initial draft stage. At this point, initial goal statements are relatively broad and still do not include all activities desired in a college of veterinary medicine. These initial goals must be stated more specifically and concisely, and must address the following: (1) the relationship of the VMRCVM with the rest of the University communities and their missions; (2) the roles and relationships of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital and the Equine Medical Center; (3) post-graduate programs including intern, resident, master's and doctorate programs; and (4) extension activities. Care should be exercised in differentiating general missions from specific goals of the College. 5-4.5 Educational Program: DVM Broad, introductory statements about the educational program are listed below. * The principal focus of the professional instructional program of the VMRCVM is the education of students through a specific course of study leading to the DVM degree and preparing the student for a professional career in the field of veterinary medicine. Although this statement sounds relatively straightforward, the breadth and future scope of the veterinary field place pressures on the students, curriculum and College and will be further discussed later in this report. * New, continuous or expanded programs are supported by suffi- cient student enrollment, curriculum and resources. This statement appears to be true, but limitations are necessary and will be discussed later. * Students admitted to the veterinary program must meet stated entry requirements. As expected, current entry requirements continue to undergo evaluation. * Policies and procedures for admission, requirements for graduation, instructional methods and procedures, and quality of student work required are generally consistent with the purpose of the College. * The VMRCVM does provide its veterinary program with a compe- tent and productive faculty, with library, computer and laboratory facilities, and with an administrative organiza- tion adequate to support its needs. However, limited resources restrict support in certain areas. A general understanding of the veterinary program and societal pressures exerted on it are essential to a discussion of admis- sion, completion requirements, curriculum and instruction. Traditionally, veterinarians have been trained as general practicing veterinarians with broad-based knowledge with which they might diagnose and treat diseases of all domesticated animals. Veterinarians have generally been perceived by society as medical-surgical practitioners for pets and livestock. However, three significant factors now place additional burdens on veterinary educational programs. The first and most widely recognized of these factors is the growth of knowledge taking place in all scientific fields. The second factor is the increasing tendency towards specialized rather than general practice. The third factor is the expanding growth and need for veterinarians in non-traditional (non-private practice) fields. The usual requirements for admission to most veterinary schools have been two to three years of undergraduate study with various specific prerequisite courses. The veterinary curriculum is a four-year program of study providing a broad base of knowledge to meet general needs. Graduates from an accredited school must then pass a national board examination and individual state board examinations to meet licensure requirements necessary for the private practice of veterinary medicine. Graduates who wish to specialize in various disciplines must then enter additional training programs and undergo examination to obtain discipline- oriented certification or graduate degrees. This may then neces- sitate a total of eight to eleven years of collegiate education. National and state licensing authorities have not yet recognized limited licensure with discipline- or species-restricted licens- ing. National and state board examinations have considerable influence on the structure of the curriculum and on course content. Thus, pressures on the veterinary curriculum relate primarily to the knowledge that must be taught in a limited time frame and the need to train veterinarians capable of entering non-traditional fields, while still meeting the general knowledge base imposed by licensing authorities for private veterinary practice. Veterinary curricula throughout the U.S. continue to undergo self-study and revision to meet needs noted above. Expansion of scientific knowledge continues to exert pressure on programs and faculty to teach and modify what is appropriate and necessary in ever more efficient ways. Material must still be presented in a four-year format and delivered in a manner that students can manage. Introduction of non-traditional disciplines will compete with time needed for traditional disciplines. Potential routes for relief of some of this expanding pressure are being discussed and will alter the curriculum of the VMRCVM over the next ten years. By altering prerequisites for admission, the VMRCVM may be able to alter the veterinary curriculum to better meet its curricular needs. However, the converse argument is to avoid prerequisites that are too stringent, that limit the applicant pool, and that would cause applicants to limit their field of study in a narrow path that may be counterproductive should they not gain admission to veterinary school. Compromise solutions exist and are being discussed at present. English, social studies, and humanities requirements have recently been added as prerequisites and are felt to contribute to a broad and balanced liberal education and a broad cultural perspective needed to complement the professional curriculum. Many faculty and students feel that these areas are very important and should not be sacrificed at the expense of additional science prerequisites. Students with strong liberal arts or without extensive animal/biological science backgrounds appear to adjust and perform well in the veterinary curriculum. However, it has also been suggested that basic science and some animal science should be prerequisites for entry into the veterinary program, since this would allow corresponding adjustments in the veterinary curriculum. The training of veterinarians for non-traditional fields also poses perplexing problems. Applicants appear to be unaware of many of these fields and most enter the program with traditional goals in mind. Since licensing authorities still emphasize traditional roles, it is difficult to minimize traditional fields in the curriculum in order to expand non-traditional areas. Further attention is also being directed at defining those areas that should comprise a core curriculum and those areas that should be considered as electives. Competing factors will continue to shape the curriculum and admission policies of the VMRCVM as they evolve over the next ten years. 5-4.5.1 Admission Admission of students to the VMRCVM is the responsibility of the Dean. Administration of the admission process is delegated to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the Admissions and Standards Committee. This standing committee is composed of faculty members from both VPI&SU and the University of Maryland and is appointed by the Dean. Additional faculty members help evaluate applications, and a few non-College veterinarians and private citizens also participate in the interview process. The major goal of the admission process is to select "students with appropriate intellectual, personal, moral, and ethical qualities to meet the demands of the profession, and who have the dedication to become responsible professionals capable of responding to the needs of the society they will serve." Admission is limited by formal agreement to 50 Virginia and 30 Maryland residents. The review process includes evaluation of academic achievement and aptitude; experiences, knowledge and achievements relating to animals and to the veterinary profes- sion; experiences and achievements not directly related to veterinary medicine; and personal qualities such as determi- nation, maturity, integrity, and interpersonal and communication skills. Specific prerequisite academic courses and achievements are necessary. Applicants are scored quantitatively on the following: academic record; Graduate Record Exam; background, achievements and work activities; applicant's written statement of purpose; and the interview. Consideration is given to disad- vantaged or minority students. Admission decisions are based on collaborative evaluations by individuals representing both Virginia and Maryland. Minimum entry requirements include 2 years of collegiate education. However, students entering the program have an average over 3 years and most have 4 years of collegiate education. 5-4.5.2 Curriculum The curriculum will always offer opportunities for continued debate. The professional veterinary program has a specific, unique, highly structured curriculum with a well-defined course sequence and content leading to the DVM degree. Contemporary veterinary curricula usually have the following general objec- tives: * Acquisition of a "core curriculum" or a fundamental general knowledge base. * Development of clinical competency and skills. * Development of a professional code of behavior. Curricular goals of the VMRCVM are as follows: * Presentation of basic fundamental biomedical concepts as the knowledge base on which to structure future problem-solving activities, using an interdisciplinary-body systems-approach, to facilitate integration of this information and to empha- size its relevance to veterinary problem-solving activities. * Provision of effective core and elective clerkship experi- ences to introduce students to the practice of veterinary medicine and the attendant professional responsibilities. * Provision of opportunities to acquire and develop study skills, work habits, and attitudes that will be of lasting value to the student in terms of professional growth after graduation. The Curriculum Board of the VMRCVM, which has both faculty and student representation, is chaired by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and is responsible to the Dean for establishment and review of the curriculum. Administration of each course in the curriculum is the responsibility of a particular department and is assigned to a faculty member. However, coordination, space, supplies, and equipment for preclinical courses is the responsibility of the Multidisciplinary Laboratory section under the authority of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. The curriculum of the VMRCVM is divided into preclinical courses and clinical clerkship courses. Preclinical courses occupy the first three years of the program and consist of didactic lecture and laboratory instruction. Most preclinical courses are designed on a body system approach, with integration of various disciplines in the study of each. Thus a single-system block course may be team taught by numerous faculty members. A few courses are discipline oriented. Courses are presented in a block format, with only one or two courses presented each block, which lasts approximately four weeks. The clinical curriculum is presented throughout the last 12 months of the program and consists of various clerkship rotations, both within and outside the Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Clerkships vary from 3 to 4 weeks in length. Clerkship offerings include a sequence of required clerkships common to all students (core) and a few elective clerkships chosen at the student's discretion. In clerkships, students are in groups of no more than six and receive close supervision and instruction. The curriculum is currently undergoing extensive review and revision and will be modified over the next few years. The first step must be to define what material needs to be taught to all students as part of a core education for all veterinarians. This must be undertaken in light of general requirements imposed by licensing authorities as noted previously, as well as societal needs. Next, the College must decide on the best approach to deliver this material to students in a format or with methods that will enhance both immediate and long-term learning. With these factors determined, and assuming adequate resources, the College can then look to elective materials to allow students to track toward various fields of special interest. 5-4.5.3 Completion Requirements Requirements for degree completion are clearly described in materials distributed to all incoming students. Courses, grade point averages, and time sequences are also specified in the student handbook. Completion requirements are related to the purpose of the College. However, as noted previously, emphasis of material and disciplines will continue to be questioned and probably modified as the College evolves its curriculum to meet student and societal needs over the next ten years. 5-4.5.4 Instruction Instructional techniques and policies are generally felt to be in accordance with purposes of the College as well as specific goals of individual courses. Some variation may exist between individ- ual instructors. Specific criteria for successful academic progress exist and are distributed to all entering students. The College has provisions to monitor students' academic progress, which is coordinated through course leaders but is also monitored by, and is the ultimate responsibility of, the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Student progress generally appears to be well monitored. However, some concern has been expressed that more attention could be devoted to identifying and aiding individual students having academic difficulties. Instructional evaluations are of high priority within the VMRCVM. Thus, attempts are made to evaluate instruction regularly, and evidence is collected to demonstrate that efforts are being made to improve it. The principal focus of such evaluation is feedback to instructors generated by students at the end of each course. Numerical scores in various categories are collated for the individual instructor, the Department Head and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Additional comments on the question- naires are for the benefit of the individual instructor. Evalu- ations are also used during annual evaluation of faculty and in promotion and tenure deliberations. The College is currently discussing the possibility of instituting a peer-review system for evaluation of instruction. Although many concerns exist about such a system, it is likely to be instituted in the very near future. Such a system would initially be aimed at providing constructive critique for instructors and hopefully overcome criticisms of bias sometimes expressed relative to student evalu- ations. The VMRCVM annually evaluates the effectiveness of its instruc- tional program by performance of its students on national and state licensing board examinations. Graduates must pass a national examination to be eligible to take individual state licensing examinations. They must then pass the specific state licensing examination to be licensed to practice in that state. These results are of obvious importance, but questions exist about the validity of using these results as a specific indicator of instructional effectiveness. Placement of graduates in advanced training programs is also evaluated, but is more depend- ent on a long-term reputation of the individual school rather than on true instructional effectiveness. Assessment of perform- ance of graduates by employers and sampling of opinions of former students are also done. However, the process is informal and inconsistent. This latter area of assessment offers great promise and should be developed more systematically in the future. The VMRCVM should make specific efforts to develop techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of its instructional program, since this information and documentation may become a critical factor in accreditation of veterinary colleges. Questions about collegiate support for the educational program draw varied responses. Faculty are generally felt to be compe- tent but too few in number. The library appears adequate but limitations are noted. Computer resources are available but are limited. Adequate didactic instructional materials and equipment are provided. Physical facilities continue to be a significant concern in the instructional program. This limitation will continue to be a concern in the medium-term, but long-term solutions may be available. 5-4.5.5 Contract Relationships and Off-Campus Classes The VMRCVM utilizes external rotations of veterinary students as part of clinical training in the fourth year of the curriculum. External clerkships are required in some private and public practice preceptorships and may be elected in a variety of other external choices. Contracts for these educational services and programs appear to be consistent with the purposes, policies, and procedures of the College. Although courses offered under contract are ultimately controlled by the College, day-to-day control is questioned. The College recognizes the need for and the importance of these external classes. However, concerns exist about the effectiveness and costs of some of these programs. These concerns are being addressed by the Curriculum Board and resolution will be a part of the projected curricular revision. In addition, the College has recently created and filled a position at the College Park campus to establish and oversee a variety of external clerkships in both public and private fields. Courses taught in off-campus locations are integrated as fully as possible with the on-campus curriculum. Variance predominantly relates to efficacy of instruction which is difficult to control. There is also the question of whether similar material could be more completely and efficiently taught on-campus rather than off-campus. Off-campus courses appear to be regularly and systematically evaluated, although some concerns have been expressed. Recommendation 5-40: That the College continue review of the DVM program to reassess admission criteria, curriculum, methods of instruction, and evaluation of instruction. 5-4.6 Graduate Program The entire graduate program within the College at VPI&SU is administered as a single department. Thus all graduate program affairs are the responsibility of the Dean and are delegated to the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies. The College offers six programs to veterinarians interested in post-DVM training. The master's and doctorate degrees are offered in Veterinary Medical Sciences at the VPI&SU campus. These are college-wide interdisciplinary programs. A residency program is offered at the VPI&SU campus and at the Equine Medical Center leading to board eligibility in a variety of veterinary disciplines. Residents will eventually pursue a master's degree in conjunction with this program. A rotating internship program is offered in the Veterinary Teaching Hospital (VTH) at VPI&SU. Students pursuing a veterinary degree who already possess a four-year bachelor's or a master's degree may pursue a master's or doctorate degree in the Parallel Program. Lastly, the Depart- ment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine at the University of Maryland campus of the College offers master's and doctorate degrees through a combined program with the Department of Animal Sciences there. This program is presently not related to the graduate program administered by VPI&SU. It is a major challenge to the College to organize and integrate these programs into a cohesive whole to avoid confusion, redundancy and inequity. 5-4.6.1 Master's and Doctorate Programs Prior to the founding of the College, selected veterinarians received graduate training at VPI&SU in various disciplines through the former Department of Veterinary Sciences in the College of Agriculture. This continued through initial planning stages of the College. The original College administration proposed, with University support, initiation of a doctorate program to begin in the fall of 1982. However, the State Council for Higher Education in Virginia recommended initiating the program in the fall of 1984, after the first class of veterinary students had graduated. This program would lead to a doctorate degree in Veterinary Medical Sciences and would be comprehensive, integrating various academic disciplines of the College. In line with this, initial plans were formulated to develop 20 graduate level courses between 1983 and 1986. However, courses were not developed as anticipated. Lack of an adequate number of faculty, research space, and research funding plagued the College during these formative years, and initiation of the doctorate program was delayed until July 1, 1986. On September 1, 1987, the master's degree in Veterinary Medical Sciences was added to complement the doctorate program and the residency program. The major objective of the master's and doctorate programs is to enable graduates to develop research capabilities so they can conduct independent research aimed at solving biomedical problems related to veterinary medicine. This reflects the College's recognition of the integral role of research in expanding basic and clinical knowledge, and the College's commitment to provide appropriate postgraduate training for careers in both basic sciences and clinical sciences. It is anticipated that graduates will find employment in educational institutions, the industrial sector, and various federal, state, and local agencies, among others. This graduate program is focused clearly on the educa- tion of students and is related directly to missions of the College. Presently, there are 22 students enrolled in the master's and doctoral programs at the College, and plans have been formulated to expand that number to between 30 and 40 over the next several years. Graduate stipends are determined by the Graduate School of VPI&SU. Graduate stipends have been included in the 1986-1988 biennial budget and should continue to be included in the future. However, the majority of graduate stipends are provided from sponsored research grants and contracts. As stated, the program is an interdisciplinary program designed to take advantage of various academic disciplines within the College and to capitalize on the strengths of existing complementary programs in various other academic departments at VPI&SU. Graduate course develop- ment is presently integrated with graduate course offerings already available. Ten new courses were available starting in the summer of 1987, and many additional courses are being devel- oped. Organizationally, the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies chairs the Research and Graduate Studies Board and its subcommittee, the Graduate Studies Committee. These committees are composed of representative, elected faculty whose responsi- bilities include the development of graduate admission policies, oversight of admissions to the graduate program, evaluation of the appropriateness of departmental graduate programs, assurance that departmental programs comply with all necessary rules and regulations of the University, and evaluation of the effective- ness of graduate instruction. Additional responsibilities include oversight of graduate curricular development and develop- ment of long-range goals and objectives for the program. Follow- ing the advice and approval of these committees, the Associate Dean coordinates graduate programs, while actual day-to-day management of specific student programs should rest with individ- ual department heads and student advisory committees. Facilities available for graduate students are inadequate and are of significant concern. Research facilities within the College will be discussed in the following section. However, an overall shortage of research space continues to have a negative impact on the graduate program. Classroom facilities are also limited, and what is available is primarily dedicated to instruction of veterinary students. Office accommodations for graduate students have been makeshift and temporary. In addition, faculty numbers are low for a college of veterinary medicine. It is questionable whether adequate manpower exists to support the fully developed graduate program as it has been envisioned. An additional graduate program exists at the University of Maryland, College Park campus of the College. This program offers master's and doctorate degrees in a variety of veterinary related disciplines, and degrees are offered in a combined program with the Department of Animal Sciences. Faculty from veterinary medicine and animal sciences participate in the program. This program has no formal relationship at present with programs at the VPI&SU campus of the College. However, prelimi- nary discussions have begun to develop some integration of programs of the two campuses. This may become particularly important as graduate programs develop at the Equine Medical Center, which is situated in northern Virginia and is close to the College Park campus. 5-4.6.2 Parallel Program The Parallel Program, introduced in early 1986, was developed for exceptional veterinary students admitted into the College who already possess a four-year baccalaureate degree in a biomedical discipline or a master's degree in an appropriate subject. These students pursue both the veterinary degree and either the master's or doctorate degrees in parallel. They take veterinary medical courses during the "regular" academic year (September through May) and master's or doctorate courses and research during summer semesters. In order to complete the master's or doctorate degree, students in the parallel program must attend graduate school for one to one-and-one-half years following completion of their veterinary medical program. Students enter- ing the parallel program are carefully screened for aptitude and must maintain a 3.3 QCA in professional and graduate studies. Four students are presently enrolled in this program. It is anticipated that two or three new students will enroll annually, providing a "steady state" of 10 to 12 students by 1990. 5-4.6.3 Residency Program Developmental plans for clinical residency programs began in 1984. These programs are structured around requirements of veterinary specialty boards and under direct supervision of a diplomat of that specialty. In July 1986, five residents were admitted to the College, three in Blacksburg and two at the Equine Medical Center. Four additional residents (two in Blacksburg and two at the EMC) were admitted in July 1987. Residents entering in 1986 and 1987 were not required to pursue a master's degree but will be expected to meet clinical training, research and publication requirements of their respective discipline-oriented residency programs. Residents admitted in 1988 and after will be required to enter the graduate program and to concurrently pursue a master's degree or, in certain cases, the doctorate degree. Resident recruitment is competitive on a national basis and is managed through a national recruitment- matching program sponsored by the American Association of Veterinary Clinicians. Objectives of residency programs are to provide veterinarians with advanced clinical education, training, and research experi- ence needed to meet requirements of specialty boards. Specialty board certification is traditionally the terminal requirement of clinical veterinary disciplines. The master's degree is desira- ble and complementary. Examples of certifying Colleges or Boards include the American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists, the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine, the American College of Veterinary Surgeons, the American College of Veterinary Radiology, and the American College of Veterinary Pathologists. Within the VMRCVM, residency programs are presently limited to anesthesiology, small animal internal medicine, small animal surgery, equine internal medicine and equine surgery, and veterinary pathology. Residencies in food- animal medicine and surgery will be developed in the near future. Funding for residencies has been included in the 1986-1988 biennial budget. To fully execute residency programs, positions must be filled sequentially so that residents are staggered in three-year programs. To accomplish this in several disciplines will necessitate significant additional state funding. Immediate needs are present for seven more positions for 1988 to complement and maintain already established programs and to initiate projected new residencies. An additional ten positions would be required for 1989. Oversight of the residency program rests with the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies, the Research and Graduate Studies Board, and the Graduate Studies Committee. The Associate Dean and these committees review and approve residency programs. However, day-to-day planning, organization, and execution of the program rests with the departments, department heads, and specialty diplomats who serve as resident advisors. 5-4.6.4 Internship Program Four internship positions are currently available, two each in small and large animal clinical sciences. Internships typically consist of one year of advanced clinical training and experience following completion of the DVM degree. Interns typically rotate primarily through medicine and surgery sections and spend minor rotations in other sections of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Intern recruitment is competitive and needs to be conducted through the national recruitment-matching program executed by The American Association of Veterinary Clinicians. Interns are an integral part of the VTH and completion of an internship is usually a necessity prior to a candidate entering a residency program. The current number of interns is minimal but adequate. An increasing hospital case load will probably necessitate additional intern positions in the future. Internships have been funded by faculty salary savings and are not identified as specifically funded positions. Thus, funding is not stable and availability of positions is not known until after the national matching program is completed. Stable funding of internships should be established so that nationally competitive candidates can be sought. The College has two modern training facilities available for residency and internship training. The Veterinary Teaching Hospital at the VPI&SU campus is the main clinical teaching facility for the College. When completed, this facility will allow for adequate resident and intern training in most, although not all, disciplines. The second facility is the Equine Medical Center at Leesburg. This facility is a state-of-the-art equine hospital with complete medical, surgical, radiologic, and labora- tory support areas and is physically excellent for comprehensive training of veterinary residents and interns in equine medicine and surgery. Recommendation 5-41: That the College continue to develop the graduate program in Veterinary Medical Sciences by comple- menting and completing programs initiated, and that these graduate efforts be collaborative and integrated with other graduate educational programs throughout the University. 5-4.7 Research Program VPI&SU has been involved in veterinary research since the incep- tion of the Department of Veterinary Sciences in 1891. The objective of the research mission of the College is to perform basic biomedical and applied clinical research to help solve problems facing the animal and human populations of the region. Faculty are encouraged to be original, to use state-of-the-art technology and to be aggressive and wide-ranging in seeking financial support. Researchers have established a significant record, particularly in the area of infectious diseases, especially of poultry. With incorporation of the Department of Veterinary Sciences into the new College in 1974, the research effort became a College responsibility. Initially the College declared four research areas as major areas of emphasis in which the College wished to establish significant research efforts. These included gastrointestinal, respiratory/cardiovascular, nervous, and reproductive systems. Faculty recruitment was to some degree centered on these areas in order to recruit anatomists, physiologists, pathologists, internists, and surgeons that had common areas of research interest. Currently, the College has re-defined the areas of emphasis, which now include gastrointestinal and nervous systems, food- animal diseases, poultry disease, and equine diseases. These appear to more adequately reflect the needs of agricultural communities of the region. It is still the intent of the College to recruit faculty to establish a critical mass of three to five researchers in each declared area of emphasis. Three to five faculty are considered a reasonable minimum number necessary for good professional interaction. Faculty are encouraged to become involved in these areas, but are by no means channeled into them or prevented from pursuing additional directions of inquiry as their professional curiosity and interests dictate. The Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies, with advice and approval of department heads and the Research and Graduate Studies Board, develops and coordinates implementation of the overall research budget for the College, manages state research resources that need to be accessible to all faculty on a College- wide basis, assigns research laboratory space according to need and funding, and develops long-range goals and objectives for the research program. Additionally, the Associate Dean and the Research and Graduate Studies Board manage a peer review system for grant proposals, set equitable policies for utilization of federal formula research funds and indirect cost funds, and provide advice and assistance to faculty in preparing grant applications. Funding for research programs and individual research projects comes from state and federal formula funds, federal competitive grants and contracts, and private grants and contracts from foundations, associations and the commercial sector. For the fiscal year 1985-1986, total College research funding approached $3 million, with $1.6 million coming from federal grants and contracts, $158,000 from private grants and contracts, and $1.18 million from Agriculture Experiment Station monies. The College, as part of the University, has well-established policies related to external funding and rigorously maintains control of these policies when accepting funding from outside agencies. All College faculty members are expected to actively pursue an independent research effort. This effort can vary from fundamen- tal biomedical research to applied clinical research, including case studies, as long as it is truly creative activity. Success- ful publishing is considered an indispensable requirement. When new faculty are recruited, the ability to be successful in research is an important criterion. As the instructional load is accentuated within the clinically oriented departments, the research load within the College is accentuated within the basic science and paraclinical departments. The department at the University of Maryland has a well-developed and highly successful research program, particularly in the areas of viral and poultry disease research. Researchers there have developed collaborative efforts with a number of federal agencies, including USDA, NIH, AFIP, Walter Reed Army Hospital, and others. To date, little collaborative effort has been estab- lished between the University of Maryland and VPI&SU campuses of the College. However, discussions aimed at achieving effectively integrated research activities at the two campuses have been initiated. Two persistent and significant problems have a major negative impact on the research program. The first, and perhaps foremost, is the lack of available research space. This has prevented the College from meeting commitments originally made at the inception of the College to support veterinary medical research, especially for food-animal sectors of the state and region. This lack of facilities has also hampered the College's ability to use advanced biotechnology in research of infectious agents. The additions of Phase IV and the Gudelsky Center would greatly enhance research capabilities of the College. The second signif- icant problem is related to the first, the lack of a well- coordinated College-wide research effort. Because there are three widely separated campuses of the College and resources have been limited, it has been difficult to develop a well-integrated effort to tie all three together. Effort should be directed toward interdisciplinary research team programs among the three campuses. Modern electronic and biomedical technology should also be used optimally to assure coordinated, complementary research activity that takes maximum advantage of expertise disbursed among the three locations. Recommendation 5-42: That renovation and modification of exist- ing facilities progress as rapidly as possible to provide needed animal holding facilities and research laboratory space, and that continued effort be directed at developing collaborative, integrated research efforts among the three campuses of the College and the University at large. 5-4.8 Public Service Program 5-4.8.1 Veterinary Teaching Hospital The Veterinary Teaching Hospital is a full-service veterinary hospital that provides patient care for both local and referral clients. The VTH is essentially a teaching laboratory for professional students, interns, residents, and graduate students. Instruction is provided through the diagnosis and treatment of patients presented to the hospital under the direction of faculty within the College. The VTH also provides service to the local community, to referring and consulting veterinarians throughout Virginia and Maryland, and to the university community of VPI&SU. Activity of faculty within the VTH is thus directed at both instruction and public service missions, and the distinction between these missions is often difficult to make. The College currently perceives this Hospital activity as approximately two-thirds instructional and one-third service-oriented activity. However, since most activity, even indirectly, promotes instruc- tion, the College should re-evaluate this activity distribution. The VTH wishes to provide full veterinary services with state-of- the-art veterinary medical technology to enhance its capabilities as a regional resource for its constituencies in the states of Virginia and Maryland. Difficulties are encountered in meeting these goals due to equipment and manpower shortages. Additional equipment is required to provide newer medical technologies. However, finances have not been available to meet desired goals. The problem is further compounded by the need to distribute equipment funds to also provide for replacement of worn and outdated equipment. Both faculty and classified staff shortages create staffing difficulties. To adequately provide year-round coverage of needed medical disciplines, additional faculty will be needed. Current clinical, instructional, and service respon- sibilities of some faculty leave inadequate time to meet research needs. Conversely, limiting the former creates conflicts with service expectations of communities served. 5-4.8.2 Continuing Education And Extension Continuing education and extension activities of the VMRCVM are organized and managed by the Director for Continuing Education and Extension. Clear and specific goals have been formulated for these programs. However, initial financial expectations of continuing education programs have not been realized and were probably not practical. Principles and execution of Extension activities are in accordance with those set forth by the Common- wealth. Non-credit continuing education programs appear to be appropriately identified and recorded by means of Continuing Education Units (CEU), and the number of CEU's is determined in advance for each activity. Administrative responsibility is usually well defined for each activity, but exceptions occur. Difficulties exist in financing, arranging, and executing local efforts that are not specifically programmed through the Continu- ing Education Center. Recommendation 5-43: That public service missions of the College be re-evaluated and funded to adequately meet clinical, extension, and continuing education expectations. 5-4.9 Faculty And Staff General criteria for AVMA accreditation of a veterinary college include the following: "The faculty must provide competence in all subject areas of the curriculum . . . There shall be evidence of a balanced program of teaching, research and public service . . . Faculty time must be scheduled to provide for professional development of the individual." There were 85 faculty and 119 classified staff state-funded positions allocated to VPI&SU when the VMRCVM was established. Of the 85 positions, 80 were designated for instruction, research, and public service and five were for administrative faculty. These faculty are expected to cover all essential disciplines comprising a professional academic program of veterinary medicine. The College has not yet filled all faculty positions. Difficulties in recruitment have been encountered in the past, due primarily to limited physical facilities, financial uncertainties of a new school, and a negative impact created by a previous hiring freeze. The AVMA has called for the College to complete recruitment as soon as possible. With progressive completion of physical facilities and stability following admin- istrative reorganization, the VMRCVM appears well on the way to completing its faculty recruitment. Six open positions are designated, and searches have been initiated. However, new financial uncertainties may again temporarily prevent completion of full recruitment. It is also felt that initial allocations of faculty and staff numbers are probably inadequate for the College to realize its potential and accomplish all of its goals. To provide adequate academic programs, the AVMA uses a general working guideline of a student-faculty FTE ratio of 4:1 as a minimum. However, absolute numbers of faculty and staff may be as, or more critical than student-faculty and student-staff ratios since adequate manpower must be available to cover all necessary disciplines for teach- ing, research, and service in the veterinary programs. See Table 5-24 for comparisons. It is felt that even though the full allotted manpower will meet minimum criteria for AVMA accreditation, the College will still be below the national average and comparable colleges noted above. What has been accomplished to date has been done with less than the full manpower allotment, and faculty deserve praise for these accomplishments. Additional difficulties have been created by distribution of faculty effort and funding for the College. During establishment of the VMRCVM, rough guidelines projected total veterinary college distribution of effort as follows: 50 percent Instruc- tion, 30 percent Research and 20 percent Public Service. A similar classification for faculty funding was adopted, and the total College budget is disbursed to the same three divisions in order to proportionately conform to the accounting structure of VPI&SU. However, these figures were not intended to represent a programmatic declaration and should be reassessed. Based on experience of the VMRCVM and on recent comparative data from the AVMA, academic faculty paid with state funds actually have a distribution of effort as follows: 78 percent Instruction, 16 percent Research, and 6 percent Extension. Differences between the initial forecasted distribution of effort and current figures are probably due to many reasons. One difference may lie in interpretation of categories. Most colleges of veterinary medicine, like most other academic disciplines, include scholarly research effort within the instructional category, and sponsored research is therefore not specifically identified in the calcu- lation. Thus misinterpretation may have revolved around the inclusion of faculty funded from sponsored research as part of the 85 faculty positions allotted. It is felt that additional faculty positions required to conduct sponsored programs should be incremental to the base of 85, and should be allocated and managed in a manner similar to other colleges. Additional differences also exist in interpretation of instructional and service components of effort in veterinary teaching hospitals as noted previously. To realize the full potential of the VMRCVM, provisions should be made to assign additional state supported faculty and staff positions to the College. This will allow for a more complete fulfillment of instructional, research, and service commitments, as well as for the full range of clinical and paraclinical specialties expected in a major, fully operational veterinary college. Projections have included the need for 15 additional faculty and 30 additional staff positions for the VPI&SU campus of the VMRCVM over the next few years in order to accommodate necessary growth and expansion of clinical programs and to support anticipated growth in clinical residency and graduate programs. A total of 16 faculty and 32 staff positions are felt to be needed at the Equine Medical Center of the VMRCVM to meet fully operational needs over the next few years. There is concern within the faculty of the VMRCVM that faculty size is inadequate to support the instructional program and still provide faculty with adequate time for research endeavors. The instructional load is disproportionate within the College, and teaching and service loads are accentuated within the clinically oriented departments. Conversely, the needs and desires for research growth are hampered by the necessity to include sponsored research efforts within the original 85 faculty positions. Due to a shortage of faculty members in the past, and due to the matrix organization, faculty responsibilities were not always equitably distributed, and faculty members were not adequately protected from excessive responsibilities. However, as the College approaches full recruitment, and as departments become better organized, there should be a shift toward more equitable assignments and better oversight for faculty protection. Calculation of instructional loads has not always taken into account factors such as number of preparations, nature of the subject, and resources available. This in turn has occasionally led to perceptions of inequity. Again, however, with a new departmental organization and with a new annual evalu- ation process, many of these concerns will soon be resolved. Recommendation 5-44: That provisions be made to assign additional state-supported faculty and staff positions to the VMRCVM to allow more complete fulfillment of instructional, research, and service commitments, and that distribution of effort be reassessed within the VMRCVM to more closely approach past experience of the College and comparative data from the American Veterinary Medical Association. 5-4.10 Educational Support Services The VMRCVM and VPI&SU provide a wide variety of services that support educational programs. However, curricular and faculty limitations noted previously and physical and financial limita- tions noted later in this report necessitate some restrictions. Support services include library facilities, instructional support services, and services that attempt to compliment educa- tional, social, moral, and physical development of students. However, social, moral, and physical development of students is not directly addressed within the College. Students can and do avail themselves of University programs. However, the relative physical isolation of the College and the intensity of the program of study make it difficult for students to participate in many University activities common to the student body at large. Instead, veterinary students and the College promote veterinary student organizations that in turn add to professional develop- ment of students. Staffing, programs, and services are generally felt to reflect the nature of the student population and the general educational goals of the College. However, limited resources should be noted. Financial burdens on students are compounded by requirements to purchase certain instructional aids. Additional concern has been expressed that there may be inadequate support for students who feel stressed in an intense, demanding program. 5-4.10.1 Library The VMRCVM has access to the main University library as well as a veterinary medical library within the College. As a medically oriented facility, the library within the College is also avail- able to individuals outside the VMRCVM. Physical distance limits the value of the main campus library. Space limitations have adversely affected the library within the College until the recent move into the Phase III building. Although library space has now been expanded in the College, limitations still exist and are being addressed in future building plans. Facilities are very limited at The Equine Medical Center in northern Virginia. 5-4.10.2 Instructional Support The VMRCVM provides a variety of facilities and instructional support services to complement its curriculum. These include educational equipment, laboratories, audiovisual and duplicating services, and learning skill centers. These services are felt to be appropriately organized and administered. Exceptions relate primarily to limitations of physical facilities. 5-4.10.3 Computer Services VPI&SU has a great deal of computing resources power and exper- tise; these resources are beginning to play a significant role within the VMRCVM as equipment becomes more available. Plans appear to be available for allocation of these resources and assignment of priorities. The College administration has estab- lished these priorities for computer usage and balance of services and keeps records to determine profiles of computer resource use. However, specific policies are not yet available in the VMRCVM and plans are not widely known. Many faculty and departments desire individual computing work stations, but finan- cial resources have not been available. Students are not suffi- ciently encouraged as a whole to make practical use of these resources, but individuals have been so encouraged. Some students have recently formed an interest group and are receiving administrative encouragement. Administrators of the VMRCVM recognize the need for improved computing resources and instruc- tion. This problem has recently been addressed and will hopefully be rectified in future plans of the College. Recommendation 5-45: That computing resources be expanded to meet faculty and department needs and to encourage student use. 5-4.10.4 Student Development Services Student development services are available within the University, but with a time-demanding curriculum and physical isolation at the edge of campus, veterinary students have little opportunity to avail themselves of these services. Students felt that these services are limited in the VMRCVM. Such services generally fall under the auspices of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and attempts are made to allocate resources appropriately. Academic advising is perceived by students to have not been given high priority within the College. Each class of students is assigned a group of faculty advisors, but roles and interre- lationships are not clearly defined and may be too broad and general. Students feel that they receive little individual or personal advising. An important fact in the VMRCVM is that students have no choice in course offerings until the fourth year of the curriculum, and most courses are team taught by several faculty each month in a block format. Thus rapport is difficult to establish, and faculty may have difficulty identifying individual students. Students with academic or personal diffi- culties may not be recognized and thus may not receive appropri- ate help. Students do receive an effective orientation program. The University is thought to have a competent counseling staff that is available to veterinary students, but the students may not be adequately aware of these services. Students within the VMRCVM essentially do not participate in university-wide student government activities, and they feel that their extracurricular needs are not completely met by the Univer- sity at large. This is probably due to the relatively small number of veterinary students, their physical isolation, their different needs, and their discretionary time. They are concerned that a significant portion of their activity fees do not promote activities for their benefit. Within the VMRCVM, students have access to a variety of profes- sionally oriented organizations. The Student Chapter of the American Veterinary Medical Association (SCAVMA) serves informally as their student government, and each of the four classes elects a slate of class officers. However, roles and relationships of these organizations within the College are not always clear. Activities and programs within the College are felt to be appropriate to their purposes and do encompass a wide range of student interests. Student publications exist, but neither their role nor their control is clearly defined. Recommendation 5-46: That the VMRCVM more formally address, define, and attempt to meet student development service needs. 5-4.11 Administrative Processes 5-4.11.1 Organization and Administration The College is one of eight colleges of VPI&SU and has autonomy and recognition comparable to other colleges within the Univer- sity. The College is headed by a Dean who reports to the Univer- sity Provost and thus indirectly to the President and the Board of Visitors. The College has representation on the University Council, Faculty Senate, Commission for Graduate Studies, Commis- sion on Research, Graduate Course Criteria Committee, and Univer- sity Promotion and Tenure Committee. Individual faculty also serve on a variety of other University committees. In April 1986, the VMRCVM underwent a complete reorganization of its administrative structure. In the initial modified matrix system, faculty were interspersed in four heterogeneous academic divisions: three at VPI&SU and one at the University of Maryland. Programs were directed by various boards and were managed by administrators (associate deans) who functioned as program managers. The College Cabinet served to review and coordinate activities of the College. The system appeared to serve a useful role in the early development of the College, but it was felt that the matrix system resulted in diffusion of authority and accountability, led to slow decision-making and implementation of programs, and was labor-intensive for faculty. Thus the current organizational structure was implemented. At VPI&SU, veterinary faculty numbers are aligned in four tradi- tional, discipline-oriented departments, which include the departments of Veterinary Biosciences, Pathobiology, Large Animal Clinical Sciences (LAS) and Small Animal Clinical Sciences (SACS). Faculty members at the Equine Medical Center are included in the Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences. A fifth department, is that of Veterinary Preventive Medicine and is located at the University of Maryland. Each department is headed by a department head. Associate deans at VPI&SU include those for Academic Affairs; Research and Graduate Studies; and Facilities, Development and Information Systems. Program areas of responsibility are as traditionally noted by their titles. The Council of the VMRCVM is composed of the Dean, three associate deans, four department heads, Director of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Director of the Equine Medical Center, and the Administrative Assistant to the Dean. The associate dean/department head from the University of Maryland campus also serves on the Council. Major boards that oversee program areas are the Curriculum Board, Hospital Board, Research and Graduate Studies Board, and Facilities Board. The Curriculum Board is chaired by the Associate Dean of Academic Affairs and has departmental faculty and student representation. The Hospital Board is chaired by the Director of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital and is composed of section chiefs within the hospital, as well as the pharmacist and the Hospital Administra- tor. The Research and Graduate Studies Board is chaired by the Associate Dean of Research and Graduate Studies and has depart- mental faculty and graduate student representation. The Facili- ties Board is chaired by the respective associate dean and is further divided into subcommittees. Representation is by various administrators and faculty. Additional committees and various support and resource sections exist within the College. The VMRCVM is a regional school with financial, administrative, and academic affiliations with both VPI&SU and the University of Maryland. The physical, administrative, and legislative separation of the two schools has led to some difficulties in collaboration in the past. Recent developments have been initi- ated to further enhance the regional concept and promote collab- oration in programs. The Dean of the VMRCVM has recently received a joint appointment at the University of Maryland, and the Associate Dean of the Veterinary Faculty at the University of Maryland has received a joint appointment at VPI&SU. VMRCVM faculty within Maryland's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences have been reorganized into a Department of Preventative Medicine. The head of this department also serves as an associ- ate dean within the College and on the Council of the VMRCVM. In addition, the College has recently created and filled a new position at the College Park campus to establish and oversee a variety of external clerkships in both public and private practice fields. It is hoped that these changes will be positive steps to enhance programmatic collaboration between the faculties of these two universities. With physical, administrative, and legislative separation between the schools, dedicated effort should be directed at enhancing programmatic collaboration. With a limited, narrow objective of training professional students in veterinary medicine, the State of Maryland has begun to study the cost-effectiveness of the bi-state, regional school concept. Maryland has recently reaffirmed its commitment to the VA-MD regional school, and the two universities are working together to develop a more integrated, regional program. Analysis will inevitably continue in the future. It will be important for the VMRCVM not to merely develop collaborative programs but to also document the benefits of these collaborative efforts to both states. Recommendation 5-47: That VPI&SU and the University of Maryland continue to develop collaborative efforts in instruction, research, and service to the benefit of both institutions and both states, and that efforts be continued to define the most appropriate and sound relationships between the universities. 5-4.11.2 Institutional Advancement The VMRCVM has a program of institutional advancement as part of the program of VPI&SU. Most efforts to date have been concen- trated on fund raising. Success of fund-raising efforts has been essential to development of the College. Roughly 40 percent of all capital construction to date has been generated from private support. This approaches $9 million. Additional significant private support has been made available for land at the EMC, some equipment purchases, and small research projects. However, significant needs still exist. Completion of capital construction allocated in the master plan of the VMRCVM still requires building an additional 65,000 gross square feet (gsf) (Phase IV). A request for this building has been submitted to the University, but the request has not progressed to the legis- lature of the Commonwealth. If approved by the Virginia General Assembly, there would probably remain a significant need for continued fund-raising efforts on the part of the College and the University. With efforts so directed toward fund raising, other aspects of institutional advancement may have been neglected in the past. Collegiate efforts and relationships are enhanced by a Citizen's Advisory Board, and both the Veterinary Teaching Hospital in Blacksburg and the Equine Medical Center in Leesburg utilize liaison committees, which are becoming more active and valuable. Additional efforts are necessary in alumni affairs. Based on the essential needs of the College to continue fund-raising efforts and to develop an alumni affairs program, a development officer has been appointed for the College. Recommendation 5-48: That the VMRCVM continue to develop a systematic approach to alumni affairs and a collaborative relationship with its alumni. 5-4.11.3 Financial Resources The initial plans for the VMRCVM led to an estimated distribution of activities that is probably inaccurate for the College at the present time. Budgetary accounting by the University in conjunc- tion with initial activity estimates led to what is felt to be a disproportionate allocation of money and faculty time to research and extension missions. The result is perceived to have led to a relatively low commitment of support by general funds of the Commonwealth. It has been recommended as noted previously that positions and funding be reallocated to the three missions based on the average distribution at other colleges of veterinary medicine in the United States and that the budget be viewed as a total college resource with appropriate review of the distrib- ution of general and nongeneral funding. Comparative data are available. For 1985-86, veterinary schools at public institutions received an average of 74.3 percent of their operating budget from state-collected revenues. During 1986-87, general funds from Virginia supported 61.9 percent of the total budget of the VMRCVM. Considering the Maryland contribution, total general fund support would approximate 75 percent. However, the 61.9 percent figure from Virginia included a $1.0 million special equipment trust fund allotment and the State of Maryland has not contributed it's full proportionate share of funding. It is felt that state funding with "hard money" should exclude patient care revenue, sponsored research and continuing education revenue, and special physical plant assessments. Excluding these sources, the VMRCVM has received limited "hard money" for educational programs compared to other veterinary schools of similar student body size, benchmark comparative schools for VPI&SU and the seven veterinary schools of the southeastern United States. In light of inflationary, developmental, and accounting changes, the VMRCVM has revised budgetary projections for coming years with the goals of not including sponsored research and continuing education revenues in base support of core programs and allowing support for growth of clinical and research programs. Additional financial concerns have involved the Veterinary Teach- ing Hospital. Veterinary teaching hospitals are essentially teaching laboratories for professional students, interns, residents, and graduate students. Such hospitals provide quality patient-care services, as well as referral and consulting services that support veterinary practitioners. However, the very nature of a teaching hospital is to provide a clinical setting for all levels of veterinary education. Such academic veterinary hospitals are generally not expected to be financially profitable due to instructional goals and necessities, limits on caseload, the nature of the cases, hours of operation, the avoid- ance of competition with local private practices, and the facili- ties and equipment expected of a large, modern referral center. For these reasons, many veterinary teaching hospitals receive a separate appropriation of state funds to supplement revenue generated from client fees. The VTH does receive supplemental financial input from the VMRCVM, and the VMRCVM is beginning to reassess instructional costs as part of the budget of the VTH. The two significant areas of concern involve budgeting for instructional fees incurred in the VTH and budgeting for "instructional overhead." The former is recognized and accounted for as a Clinical Instruction budget account based on clerkship courses. Difficulties persist with limited funds. The latter category must be recognized and take into account supplies, expendables, and equipment necessitated by the instructional nature of the VTH but not recoverable from clients. A major financial concern within the VMRCVM concerns the stabil- ity of funding support provided by the State of Maryland. In the initial plans for the College, the State of Maryland was to provide full instructional costs for students from the state of Maryland and thus share proportionately in financial responsibil- ities of the College. For the past two years, the State of Maryland has provided less than the full proportion of educa- tional costs, which has led to financial difficulties for the College. This problem has been noted previously in this report and will continue to require collaborative efforts on the parts of faculty, administrators, and legislatures of both states. Of final financial concern is funding for Phase IV of the central complex at VPI&SU and needed physical facilities at the EMC as noted previously. Based on information presented above, it is felt that the VMRCVM does not possess sufficient financial resources to adequately support all of its programs and that recent history does not demonstrate financial stability. Although adequate financial resources are theoretically judged in relation to basic purposes, scope of programs and number of students, comparative national data suggest that this may not yet be happening at this institu- tion. Business and financial functions of the College are under the control of the University. Within the College, budgeting and personnel functions are under the direction of the Dean, are managed by the Executive Assistant to the Dean, and receive collaborative input from the College Council. Accounts payable and purchasing functions of the College are under the supervision of the College Business Officer. Accounts receivable and hospi- tal business functions are under the supervision of the hospital administrator with oversight authority by the College Business Officer. Preparation and execution of an annual budget is not yet felt to be preceded by appropriate planning in that detailed goals of the College may not be translated into specific budgetary requests presented to appropriate officials. The College budget distrib- ution from the University does not occur until well into the fiscal year. This creates a good deal of uncertainty and makes smooth execution of programs difficult. Budgeting of available funds is primarily developed by the Dean, Executive Assistant to the Dean, and associate deans. With the new administrative organization described previously, department heads should have appropriate input, the College will develop prospective program- based budgets, and the College Council will have review of the budget. Broad financial control of the VMRCVM is exercised by general University policies, procedures and allocations; policies of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State Council on Higher Educa- tion; and the guidelines of the Agreement of Cooperation between the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia. Once funds are appropriated, budget making, establishment of priori- ties and control of expenditures are the responsibility of the College operating under policies and jurisdiction of the Univer- sity with recognition of audit and budgetary laws. Established educational functions of the College are not controlled by finan- cial officials outside the University. However, establishment of new programs that require additional funding are dependent on politics and economics of state agencies and legislatures. Recommendation 5-49: That state funding for VMRCVM educational programs be similar to that received by other comparable veterinary schools, that financial stability be established, and that funds be distributed in a timely manner. 5-4.11.4 Physical Resources The VMRCVM has buildings in three locations in the Commonwealth of Virginia. These include the central veterinary complex and the Veterinary Research Center in Blacksburg and the Marion duPont Scott Equine Medical Center in Leesburg, Virginia. The 1978 plan for the College called for a total physical plant of 350,000 gsf, of which 250,000 gsf was to be new space. To avoid possible duplication of specialized equine facilities, the total was reduced to 225,000 gsf following the gift of the Equine Medical Center in 1980. Total new construction to date on the Blacksburg campus has provided 160,000 gsf. Thus 65,000 gsf are still needed to complete the physical plant of the College as approved by the Commonwealth in the initial plan. The Veterinary Research Center is adjacent to the VPI&SU Depart- ment of Anaerobic Microbiology and is essentially the former VPI&SU Department of Veterinary Science building. The Center consists of several research and service laboratories, a series of small outbuildings and limited animal holding facilities. The central complex of the College is located on the southwestern edge of the main campus of VPI&SU and consists of Phase I, II, and III buildings. Phase I was 27,500 gsf and served as the interim clinic for the teaching hospital since its completion in 1981. Phase II is 64,500 gsf, is the main administrative/teaching/research building in the complex, and was completed in 1983. Although the building serves multiple functions, limitations are recognized in teaching facilities, offices, and research space. Phase III was scheduled for completion in August-October 1986 and has been mostly occupied, but is still unfinished. This building is 66,000 gsf and will greatly enhance the capabilities and space of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital. The building also houses the veterinary medical library, the media center, a college center, and a central supplies and storage area. This in turn relieves some space problems in Phase II created by full faculty recruitment and a growing graduate program. Significant concerns must still be addressed to meet accredi- tation standards of the AVMA and collegiate needs. Many of these needs are addressed in a current plan to develop the fourth Phase of the complex, which will complete the remaining 65,000 gsf allotted in the initial plans. Limited funding is available for a small segment of Phase IV, and planning money has been made available to develop initial plans for the majority of Phase IV. A request has been submitted to the University for approval with matchup funding. This phase of the College is perceived as essential for accreditation by the AVMA as well as for continued growth and development of the College. However, even the approval and completion of Phase IV will not solve all space needs of the College. Additional space is currently recognized as needed for large animal hospital and field services mainte- nance. Open land and complimentary barns are needed for animal grazing and herd maintenance. Continued growth and development of the College will undoubtedly continue to create pressures for continued growth and development of physical facilities. Diffi- culties have been compounded by the staged development of the College's physical plant over the years which in turn has neces- sitated significant renovation and relocation and made planning, coordination and development difficult. The Marion duPont Scott Equine Medical Center was built entirely with private donations and is generally accepted as a well designed and equipped facility. However, major physical plant concerns exist. Physical plant development will also occur at the University of Maryland. The Maryland legislature has appropriated $12 million for the Avrum Gudelsky Veterinary Center on the College Park campus with construction started in October 1987. This facility will provide research facilities for the Department of Preventa- tive Medicine of the VMRCVM and will also house the Maryland State Department of Agriculture, Animal Health Diagnostic Labora- tory. In summary, physical resources of the VMRCVM, including buildings and equipment, are not felt to be adequate to serve the needs of the College in relation to its stated purpose, programs and activities. Limitations have existed and continue to exist in physical facilities of all program areas that affect instruction, research and service. Although improvement has been realized, limitations must be quickly resolved. Instructional efforts of faculty and students and research and service accomplishments are noteworthy in light of these limitations. Recommendation 5-50: That Phase IV be approved, funded and built as soon as possible to meet physical plant needs that were called for in the initial plans of the College, and that the VMRCVM and the University develop long-range plans to meet current and future physical resource needs in addition to Phase IV. 5-5.0 Reference Sources Admissions. Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, 1986-87/1987-88. Faculty Handbook. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1983. Interim Report to the AVMA Council on Education. Virginia- Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. April 1986. Memorandum: Plans for the College of Veterinary Medicine. Roselle D, McGovern P. January 14, 1985. Report of Evaluation: Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. American Veterinary Medical Association: Council on Education. 1984. Report of Evaluation: Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. American Veterinary Medical Association: Council on Education. 1982. Review of Accreditation. Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. February 1984. Self-Study Report of the Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. Fall 1985. Student Handbook. Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. 1986-87. The Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine (VMRCVM): Current Status and Future Development II. Report to the State Council on Higher Education of Virginia. September 1986. University Self-Study: In-Depth Report of the Subcommittee for Study of the Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine. November 1987.