There is currently a focus within the Department to specialise in certain areas including: biosciences, microelectronics, polymers and colloids: these subject areas also provide a focus for course electives. There are 20 faculty. The Department were recently ranked 25th Chemical Engineering Department in the US; based on a survey by CRC. There are 100 undergraduate per year and currently 82 post graduates students; the number of graduate students per faculty member varies from 0 - 12. Two members of faculty act as administrators / teachers and have no research. 80 - 90% of graduate students are US citizens (only 15 % students are from outside the State of North Carolina) The University sees its function as primarily education of students from within State. US citizens are preferred by industry because of the difficulties associated with getting visas for overseas graduate students; tuition levels are higher for non US citizens. The funding to the department is provided as follows: 12% from the State, 48% from research contracts and the remainder from the University (allocated by the Dean). Approx. 25-30% of the funds, which go to the Department from the University, is based on performance. Much of the funding provided by the University so on a matching funds basis i.e. if the Department puts up some money, the University would match it. The majority of research funds to the Department comes from agencies including NSF and DOE etc. with about 33% coming from industry.

The University is quite active in trying to facilitate the setting up of research in new areas, e.g. 1000 acres on campus are being developed (central campus) for industry / academic partnerships (if a Department decides to take advantage of this opportunity, there are associated indirect costs). A Biotechnology Centre has recently been set up on this new campus. The Department tries to facilitate seed money for new research areas; example being provision of funds to set up in a new area of bioseparations. On average $30,000 per faculty every 6 years might be available for getting started in a new area. A centre was also set up for CO2 research in 1987, based on the Presidents Green Chemistry award; this was set up jointly with faculty from the Chemistry Department. There have been associated joint appointments between the Chemistry and Chemical Engineering Department (including one chemist from another campus). The centre supports 30 graduate students (some also associated with other Departments) and 5 post docs. There are 16 companies involved, each company giving $35,000 per year for 3 years. The research is task orientated, and will hopefully have a long lifetime. IPR can be a difficult issue on some projects. Members of the centre are now applying for a basic science grant from NSF for $18 million to continue their research in this area.

A norm of 2 courses per semester (it is possible for faculty to teach up to a maximum of 6 courses per semester, if not research active).

The Department is trying to raise the PhD production per faculty. The Department is also trying to raise its research profile by e.g. taking more active participation / leadership in the AIChE; applying for more competitive awards etc. Recently the Department considers that it has been taking on very good facility (although there was a period of 6 years of not recruiting any new staff), however, there is currently only 1 assistant professor (with 33% associate professors and the rest full professors). As a mechanism for increasing equipment available for research, equipment for teaching is generally only bought if it is also of value for research. At every faculty meeting, staff are encouraged to engage in multi disciplinary research which is perceived to be of increasing importance.

• "shift towards funding / incentives for multidisciplinary work politically driven to try to develop more products tying Universities to industry."
• "to be effective a multidisciplinary project requires a strong leader.."

The Head of Department tries to motivate members of faculty to move into new areas through a number of measures including (i) provision of small amounts of seed money for those wanting to move into new areas (see above) and (ii) start up packages. There is personal financial motivation for faculty as, although the State mandates levels of pay rises, a lump sum is provided to the Department for salary rises and the Head of Department then has considerable discretion as to how to allocate this money to individual faculty.

NSF find it hard to get academics from community to serve time at NSF. Although research is becoming more focused on applied science and related to pharmaceutical companies etc., undergraduate teaching remains process orientated.

Some examples are ;$125 000 equipment and 4 years of graduate student support (funds came from University, College of Engineering and the Department); 2/3 years of 2 months summer salary, 2 grad students for 2 years and $50 000 of equipment money; $160,0001 year graduate student support and 2 years of 1 month salary support; None for older entrants, no NSF starter, cut in salary; summer salary and a graduate student for 2 years

• "mentor was very helpful.. "
• "NSF start up award for new faculty (for 3 years); success rate in 1978 was probably 1in 4 (now would be 1 in 8). gave him 1 graduate student and money for supplies, equipment and travel. "
• "PYI from NSF in 1989, which initially enabled him to keep his work from his PhD work going."

• "opportunities are not as great as they used to be;"
• "there is now much more emphasis on ‘hot topics’ such as, currently, biotechnology and materials "

Others commented about specifics

• industry had taught him to be good at identifying research problems worth solving, found it hard to adjust to the much longer time scales of academic research as compared to those of industry (which takes a much more short term view)
• .He felt that he spent about 1 man month preparing each proposal and that his success rate was about 20% (as opposed to an average for most academics of 33
• His first proposal to NSF had been given 3 excellent and 3 poor ratings. The Program Director had used his discretion to give Bob 1 years money to get started on the project. Subsequently his proposals have received a much better reception.
• NSF only started funding research in this area after Congress became interested in pollution prevention in 1992. There has since then been targeted money in this area including joint NSF/EPA programs. life cycle analysis which are an important part of his research.

Yet another used the NSF Engineering Research Centre situated on campus (a Centre for Advanced Electronic Material Processing, which ran for 11 years). He was able to ask for funding from the centre by writing mini proposals.

These got started n different ways. The preliminary role exam in which the students presented results / future work could promote heated discussion, critical analysis and ideas etc. for the project. One staff member had collaborations with faculty in other Departments including Material Science, Physics and Electrical Engineering. Such collaborations/interactions arising from participation with University Centres over the years it had been getting easier to collaborate. Another used the EPA Centre on Waste Minimisation on campus, which again he was able to take advantage of by beginning work aimed at reducing the water needed in semi-conductor processes (effectively developing dry cleaning process).

One staff member is using genetic engineering, but doesn’t see the need for collaboration with molecular biologists i.e. it is possible as a chemical engineer to learn techniques required. He had found it easy to interact with members of other Departments, he has formed contacts through teaching/taking biotech related courses. Another was initially in coal business, but as it has been declining moved to extremophiles and taught himself molecular biology.

They teach 1 course per semester. A post tenure review system is likely to be introduced soon. Full professors may be reviewed every 5 years, associate professors every 3 years. The idea of the review is to ensure that individuals are reaching specified targets.

• "Experienced considerable resistance to my presence in another Department of Chem Eng in early 80s, because (iI am a physicist and (ii) I am a woman with 2 children."

• There is a perception that UK research is process orientated. In the US research changed from being process orientated to being more applied science based about 10 years ago.
• There are very few centrally funded technicians at North Carolina, in fact only 2 in the Department. Demonstrating of practicals etc. being done by graduate students.
• The nature of UK Research Council Grants, i.e. perceived need to set and meet objectives, must be very constraining in terms of allowing innovative research to develop.

Ruben Carbonell Head of Department, Peter Fedkiw, Henry Lamb, Christine Grant, Carol Hall, Steve Peretti, Keith Gubbens, George Roberts, Bob Kelly, Michael Overcash.