Highlight
Annual Meeting Provides Networking Opportunities and Feedback
Achievement/Results
The National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program in Indoor Environmental Science and Engineering at The University of Texas (UT) includes a 1.5 day annual meeting that provides program feedback and trainees with networking opportunities. The annual meeting occurs every June and includes an evaluation of program activities by an External Advisory Board (EAB) composed of international experts in the field of indoor environmental science and engineering.
Seven of eight EAB members attended the annual meeting, including Dr. Charles Weschler (Chair – Rutgers University and Technical University of Denmark), Dr. James Axley (Yale University), Dr. Cynthia Howard-Reed (National Institute of Standards and Technology), Dr. William Nazaroff (University of California, Berkeley), Dr. Linda Sheldon (USEPA National Exposure Research Laboratory), Dr. Jack Spengler (Harvard University), and Dr. Michael Strommen (3M Corporation).
On the first afternoon of the annual meeting, Program Director Dr. Richard Corsi provided the EAB with a one-hour assessment of the first year of the program, including successes, obstacles, and a detailed review of IGERT trainees/affiliates and their activities. The EAB was then introduced to IGERT trainees and affiliates, before taking a tour of relevant laboratory facilities guided by trainees and affiliates who described their respective research efforts. On the first evening of the annual meeting a dinner was held at a local restaurant (using no NSF funds), with attendees including all EAB members, core faculty participants (approximately 10), all IGERT trainees and affiliates (approximately 15 the first year), program coordinator Dori Eubank, and four invited students who were being recruited to apply for the IGERT program (three of whom did). The dinner offered a casual atmosphere that led to continuing discussions between EAB members and IGERT trainees and affiliates. After dinner, the EAB and IGERT trainees/affiliates continued to socialize at the Congress Street Bridge, where one million Mexican Free Tail bats emerge every evening.
The entire second day of the annual meeting was focused on trainee and affiliate research and outreach activities. Every trainee and affiliate was given 15 minutes to discuss their research efforts and to obtain feedback/suggestions from EAB members. Teams of trainees/affiliates also presented examples of demonstrations they use during public outreach events. IGERT trainees and affiliates had a special lunch session with EAB members (no IGERT faculty participants allowed), before student research presentations continued. By mid-afternoon the EAB was allowed an hour to gather its thoughts on their evaluation. During that one hour period IGERT trainees and affiliates met with Sherry Woods, an external evaluator in the Cockrell School of Engineering at the University of Texas. Woods questioned students on what they perceive as the successes and failures of the IGERT program to date, and gathered student suggestions for improvement.
The annual meeting was concluded with a 90 minute meeting between the EAB, members of the IGERT Executive Committee (six faculty participants + Program Coordinator Dori Eubank), and Sherry Woods. The EAB reported its findings on the program. The EAB gave a very strong endorsement and first-year evaluation. They did provide suggestions for future areas of research (environmental justice, developing countries, building/climate change links, and exposure to nano-particles), suggested longer internships, and methods for recruitment that more clearly link indoor environmental science to more visible topics such as sustainability.
Address Goals
The first annual meeting of our program provided significant opportunity for trainees and affiliates to network, for trainees and affiliates to obtain feedback from experts, and for our faculty Executive Committee to obtain valuable feedback related to possible improvements to the program. The goal most associated with this activity is that of learning, but there is also certainly relevance in our trainees and affiliates describing their research discoveries, and getting feedback from experts on how best to utilize these discoveries, and pathways to take toward more discovery.
