Engineering Studies at Tribal Colleges and Universities (2006)

DEVELOPING, IMPLEMENTING, AND SUSTAINING ENGINEERING STUDIES AT THE TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES (TCUs)

How We Got Here—Where We’re Going

Washington, D.C.

December 2004

Presented on Behalf of the Working Group on Engineering Studies at the Tribal Colleges and Universities

• In March 2004, 11 tribal colleges formed the Working Group on Engineering Studies at the Tribal Colleges and Universities and approved a Management Plan.

Blackfeet Community College, MT

Chief Dull Knife College, MT

College of Menominee Nation, WI

Crownpoint Institute of Technology, NM

Fort Berthold Community College, ND

Haskell Indian Nations University, KS

Salish Kootenai College, MT

Sitting Bull College, ND

Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, NM

United Tribes Technical College, ND

White Earth Tribal and Community College, MN

• Overall Goal: Develop culturally relevant programs that will enable a Native American student to proceed from pre-curriculum preparation through a fully-accredited bachelor of science degree in engineering entirely within the tribal college system.

• The partners attended a workshop sponsored by ABET, Inc., in June 2004.

Common Admin Needs (Working Group, Advisory Cttee, NAE Workshop)

Blackfeet Community College—AS, Pre-engineering

Chief Dull Knife College

Pending

College of Menominee Nation—AS, Materials Science and Engineering

Crownpoint Institute of Technology—AS, Engineering

Fort Berthold Community College—AAS, Electrical Engineering Technology*

Haskell Indian Nations University—AS, Natural Sciences with Pre-Engineering Concentration Budget allocated by BIA

Salish Kootenai College—BS, Computer Engineering*

Sitting Bull College—AS, Engineering

Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute—AS, Civil, Electrical, Mechanical Engineering*

Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute—Distance Education for the Partners

United Tribes Technical College—AAS, Engineering

White Earth Tribal and Community College—AS, Bioengineering

Preliminary Program Total: $10,682K

• The model described in the Management Plan was very well received by the Washington, D.C., community.

• The Working Group has been awarded $150K in grants since March 2004.

• Four of the eleven partners are currently represented on the Working Group by their presidents or acting presidents.

• At its October 2004 meeting, the group set general funding criteria.

  • Degreed engineers, not development of coursework, is the measure of success or failure.

  • Fund the critical programs first (i.e., those requiring immediate development of mathematics courses), but fund the whole program, not just the math courses.

  • Fund the partners in such an order that, as the students progress, they have somewhere to go next.

  • Include the capability to recruit, motivate, mentor, tutor, and retain students.

  • Include funds for preparatory class work and for laboratories and equipment.

  • Work together to leverage opportunities.

  • Treat distance education as its own enterprise.

  • Ensure adequate administrative support.

• Request a budget update from the partners (December 2004).

• Work with interested Executive/Legislative Branch organizations to obtain initial five-year funding.

• Seek long-term sustainability via private foundations and corporations.

• Conduct National Academy of Engineering Workshop (January 2005).

• Plan and assign Working Group implementation tasks (April 2005).

  • Development of Working Group subgroups.

  • Develop common standards to permit seamless transfer of students among partners.

  • Curriculum development.

  • Distance education.