From lam@cs.amherst.edu Mon Mar 30 22:17:04 2009
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:16:54 -0400
From: Lyle McGeoch <lam@cs.amherst.edu>
To: Viggo Kann <viggo@nada.kth.se>
Cc: Anna Höglund Rehn <annahr@admin.kth.se>
Subject: comments on KTH CS proposal

Hi Viggo,

   Thanks for the opportunity to comment on your application to the Centres
of Excellence program.  Your department sounds quite remarkable and I expect
that you'll be a strong candidate.  My comments will be very brief, mostly
because of my relative inexperience with "measuring excellence."  Amherst's
small size means that statistical comparisons from one semester to another
don't always mean much.  Our much smaller classes give us great freedom to
adapt our classes as a semester proceeds, and it is much less important to
have a formal process for updating the curriculum of individual courses.

   I haven't seen the documents submitted by Chalmers when it applied for
recognition of its Mechanical Engineering program, but it might be worth
taking another look at them, if they are available to you.  There is a
warmth and enthusiasm in the reviewer's report that may reflect things said
in the original proposal.  Particularly notable in the reviewers' report are
lines such as "The thoughtful manner in which teaching is approached is
inspiring,"  "[Management and teachers] share high aspirations, a strong
commitment to relevance..., and a clear vision of the kind of graduates they
want to produce," and "The leadership of the programme embodies an infection
enthusiasm."  Obviously you hope the reviewers will say similar things about
you.  Your proposal is very well written, but it lacks an element of passion
that might be helpful.  (Passion can, of course, be overdone, and fake
passion is easy to spot.  It might be appropriate to make no changes along
these lines and let faculty and students speak for themselves during the
site visit.)

   It would be worthwhile to have a native English speaker do a careful
reading of your submission.  The English in the main document is very good,
but there are occasional word choices or constructions that can be fixed.
The English in the page with the organization chart contains a number of
errors.  I'd also recommend avoiding the use of a sans-serif font.  Such
fonts are never used in formal writing in the US, although perhaps that's
different in Europe.

   I have only a very few other comments.  
   On page 7, in the first paragraph, you say that you strive to hire
faculty who excel both in research and teaching.  Can you say more about the
hiring process?  How do you judge teaching?  Do students have a chance to
give feedback on the teaching or communication skills of prospective hires?
I'm not sure about the role of the "special pedagogical expert teacher."

   Also on page 7, it may be unclear to reviewers how significant
performance is in determining salaries.  Obviously there can be
disadvantages in using language that is any more precise, but I expect that
the reviewers will ask questions about this.

   On page 8, I like the paragraph that begins "The educational
environment..."  It is a partial answer to the question "Are the students
enthusiastic about being in this department and about the education that
they are receiving?"

   On pages 10-11, I assume that students are satisfied with their role in
shaping courses and the department.  Can reviewers be convinced of this?
Maybe that something best left to the time when the committee does its site
visit.

   On page 17, you mention the possibility of sabbaticals at 75% salary.
How easy would it be for faculty to get funding to take them to 100%?  (This
isn't really a comment on your proposal and is more about sabbaticals in
general.)  Amherst College has just moved from 80% to 100% sabbaticals, on
the theory that faculty members are expected to be working on research or
professional development, and so why should that mean a change in personal
financial circumstances?  The 100% policy may not be sustainable in today's
economic climate, but the Trustees have decided to use it for 2009-10.
      As I mentioned earlier, I think that this is a very strong proposal.
The quality of education that you are providing to large numbers of students
is remarkable.  Good luck with your application; you deserve to be
recognized as a Centre of Excellence.

Best regards,

Lyle