Departments at the University of Washington (and at most other major institutions) are reviewed every ten years. CSE's formal review takes place April 18-19 2000. The members of the review commmittee are:
Materials related to the review:
Self-study prepared by the department as background for the review.
Charge letter prepared by The Graduate School following review of the Self-Study.
The Graduate and Professional Student Senate (GPSS) asked our two senators (Stefan Berg and Daniel Wood) to survey graduate student opinion regarding the department. This report is the result of their effort, to which Zack Ives (our graduate student coordinator) also contributed.
Schedule for the April 18-19 site visit, as established by the review committee.
The report of the review committee, as submitted to The Graduate School in June 2000.
The department is required to respond in writing to the report of the Review Committee.
The Graduate School Council analyzes the report and the departmental response, discusses various issues at a meeting with the review committee chair and the department chair, and provides a summary to the Provost.
To be honest, we never received one. But on June 6 2001, 13 months after the report was filed, we had occasion to inquire. The Provost's reply: "Your 10-Year Review Report is not credible. It's nothing but a propaganda piece." Y'know, you spend your entire 24-year professional career working your butt off to help build a great program ... you spend 8 years leading that program ... you get an "A" grade from a blue-ribbon review committee selected by the University that includes the President of the National Academy of Engineering and is chaired by a MacArthur ("genius") Award-winning zoologist ... and this is the institutional response. Better luck next decade, I guess.