INTERNATIONAL MATERIALS INSTITUTE

FOR NEW FUNCTIONALITY IN GLASS

LehighUniversity, Bethlehem, PA

The PennsylvaniaStateUniversity, University Park, PA

EVALUATOR’S REPORT

Carla Conrad Johnson

New YorkStateCollege of Ceramics at AlfredUniversity

Alfred, NY14802

July 2007

The first Evaluator’s Report in October, 2005 surveyed the attendees of the inaugural meeting of the IMI/NFG at PennState in June, 2005. A second report submitted in May of 2007 summarized the results of a Research Exchange survey. This report provides the results of a third survey administered to a populationinformally called “The International Glass Community,”to determine the general level of familiarity of and/or interest in the IMI/NFG among the recipients, who were from educational institutions, government agencies, and industry. In general, the goal of the “GC” survey was to find ways to determine how to improve the visibility of, and increase participation in, the IMI/NFG.

METHODOLOGY:

1: The Glass Community Survey was hosted at:http://www.lehigh.edu/IMI/imievaluationGC.htm

The questions were drafted by IMI/NFG Associate Director Dr. William Heffner, and modified by communication with the Evaluator after testing the survey on a temporary Web site hosted at Lehigh. There were 399 contacts on the original list provided by Lehigh. After weeding out 20names and addresses (mostly duplicates)an email with a note of introduction from the Evaluator and brief information about the survey, plus a hyperlink to the GC survey, was emailed to 379 individuals. Approximately 45 addresses were rejected by their host servers as being invalid, nonexistent, blocked because of institutional security protocols or individual choices to block incoming email from unknown senders, or for other technical reasons. Four contacts responded without usable information: three of these replied that they “were not members of the glass community” or something similar, and a fourth entered a name but nothing else. In the end 329 survey emails were received by recipients and 71 responses returned, for a response rate of almost 22%. This is very good considering that the large list of contact names was gathered from a variety of sources and the individuals were not actively involved with the IMI/NFG. After subtracting the four just noted, there were 67usable returns.

As with the earlier RE (Research Exchange) survey, the respondents were promised confidentiality; on the Web questionnaire the name and email address fields were clearly markedas optional, and 22 individuals chose to respond anonymously.Highlights of the survey appear in the next section. This is followed by a summary of the results (broken down by the

respondent’s position category) for five questions which allowed a single response from several choices. The final section summarizes seven questions for which a yes/no type response was requested but each of these final questions also had a scrolling box for “comments”; those comments are listed below the summary responses to each question. The text of all 12 questions is underlined. (Note: some respondents did not answer every question, so the total will not always be 67.)

EVALUATOR’S SUMMARY: HIGHLIGHTS OF THE GLASS COMMUNITY SURVEY

1. FAMILIARITY WITH THE MISSION AND PURPOSE OF THE IMI-NFG:

  • Most respondents reported that they were “Very” or “Somewhat” familiar with the IMI in general; the majority of these were faculty. However, several comments indicated that the IMI would benefit from publicizing itself more prominently. Examples: “I know very little about this. I read about the program once in an alumni newsletter from PennState.” “I am a member of the Society of Glass Technology as well as the American Ceramic Society. I'm not sure why I have heard so little from you.”
  • Specific suggestions from respondents for higher visibility were: (1) Increase the number of announcements in international glass journals, and at conferences and workshops; (2) Expand international distribution of courses on CD; (3) Improveadvertising at the home campuses (Lehigh & PennState). I would also suggest making sure there is a link to the IMI-NFG site from as many relevant web pages (professional societies, educational institutions, etc.) as possible.

2. PERCEIVED STRENGTHS OF THE IMI-NFG:

  • There were many comments about the opportunities afforded by the IMI-NFG for collaboration at all levels. As one respondent put it, it offers “A very unusual and effective degree of personnel exchange, from undergraduate to grad students/post-docs, to faculty.”
  • The IMI-NFG is seen as being unique in its potential to promote international collaborationin the field of glass science. One respondent went further by saying it is doing “Wonderful work to bring various sections of glass users (academic researchers, industry, artists) together.” The possibility of expanding collaborations with industry and practitioners in the art glass field should be kept in mind in planning future activities and contact.
  • The opportunities for students and younger researchers in general are clearly identified as a strength. One respondent said the IMI-NFG was unique because it is “Enticing young people into the field of glass.”

3. VALUE OF THE EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE BY IMI-NFG:

  • One of the stated goals of the IMI-NFG is to provide learning resources for the glass community. The Institute is a true innovator in making resources freely available to the international glass community, with more than seventy modules already posted to its Web site as streaming videos, .pdf documents, and/or PowerPoint presentations. There are semester length courses and other advanced lectures, introductory tutorials, invited presentations from professional conferences, and other resources.
  • Although there were a few reports of technical problems accessing the videos, there were very positive comments about the value of these resources: “Professor Almeida’s lectures on optical glasses [a full semester course, 39 individual lectures in video and as .pdf documents] are quite fine.” “An extremely useful initiative.” “The slides [PowerPoints] are good; the video gave some problems, but I think this is a great idea.” “Very valuable.” “I am recommending these systems to new young researchers in [our] company.”

4. USEFULNESS OF THE IMI-NFG WEB SITE OVERALL:

  • 49 out of 65 respondents had visited the Web site. Although there were positive responses to the videos and other educational materials in the site (see #4, above) the Web site itself needs some improvement. One respondent perceived the site as “rather unfriendly and not so easy to navigate ... There are all these great programs, and it's just too bad that I'm not aware of [them]. With a better website, I would visit frequently and be better informed about what's going on.” Specific resources in the Web site were apparently hard to find for some respondents. 29 reported that they were “not at all familiar” with the On-Line Glass Science Learning Library; asked about the Video Lectures, one person said “I was aware of the lectures and I tried to locate them in the web site but I was unable to.”
  • Some suggestions from the Evaluator: The IMI-NFG Web site is very elegant in appearance and has many good features, including photos of students on research exchanges and profiles of individual researchers. The site could be improved in several ways. (1)The addition of a “Search:” box (a feature found in most commercial and educational sites today, generally embedding a Google search engine within the site) combined with clear and consistent terminology for the many resources within the site would help users navigate the site effectively. (2) The site should be reviewed for minor errors (such as “The American Ceramics [plural instead of singular] Society” on the Professional Information page) so that they can be corrected. (3) The “Portal” link on the Home Page is not self-explanatory and is easily overlooked. When clicked, it allows the

user to register and enteran area of the site full of educational and research information. Instead of the single word “Portal,” the link might be more easily differentiated from “Home” if identified with a short phrase such as “Register HERE for free access to IMI-NFG Resources.” It is also somewhat confusing that on the Portal page one can choose to click a link that says “See What The IMI Has To Offer,” which allows immediate entry – even without registration -- into some, but not all, of the resources. To maximize registration and use of the resources, and also to collect more user information

for future contacts, the identification of and navigation through this area should be clarified. (4) There is a link to a “Visitor’s Page” from the Home Page. This is also potentially confusing; it would seem to mean visitors to the Web site, but it is actually a page with what is usually identified in Web sites as “Travel Information” (in this case, to the IMI-NFG Offices at Lehigh University).

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE GLASS COMMUNITY SURVEY:

(Survey questions are underlined)

My position is:

  • 35 - Faculty member; 1 - Retired Faculty; 5 - Postdoctoral Researcher; 1 - Senior Research Scientist; 14 - Graduate student; 1 - Undergraduate Student; 5 - In Industry; 3 - In Government; 1 - No position reported .
  • Another respondent self-identified as “Postdoctoral researcher/Faculty/In Government” is counted in this report as “In Government” based on the format of his originating email address, since a single choice had to be made for response tabulation.

Have you visited our IMI Web site at http://www.lehigh.edu/~inimif/home.htm

  • Yes, in some detail - 28: 12 Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 6 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 2 Industry,

1 Government.

  • Yes, briefly - 21: 13 Faculty, 6 Graduate Students, 2 Industry.
  • No - 16: 10 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 2 Graduate Students, 2 Government,

1 No position reported.

How familiar are you with the overall mission or purpose of the IMI-NFG?

  • Very familiar - 25: 11 Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 6 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 1 Government.
  • Somewhat familiar – 23: 17 Faculty, 1 Postdoctoral researcher, 1Graduate Student, 4 Industry.
  • Not at all familiar - 12: 6 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 1Graduate Student, 1 Undergraduate Student, 1 Government, 1 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

How familiar are you with the following opportunities that the IMI-NFG provides for glass researchers and students:

a) Research Exchange Grants Program

  • Very familiar - 19: 8 Faculty, 4 Postdoctoral researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 3 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 1 Government, 1 Industry.
  • Somewhat familiar - 36:20 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 1 Postdoctoral researcher, 11 Graduate Students, 3 Industry.
  • Not at all familiar - 12: 7 Faculty, 1 Industry, 3 Government, 1 No Position Indicated.

b) Research Experience of Undergraduates (REU) in Glass

  • Very familiar - 19: 12 Faculty, 3 Postdoctoral Researchers, 2 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 1 Industry.
  • Somewhat familiar - 29:14 Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 8 Graduate Students, 2 Government, 2 Industry.
  • Not at all familiar - 19: 8 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 4 Graduate Students, 2 Government, 3 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

c) On-line Glass Science Learning Library

  • Very familiar - 10: 6 Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 1 Graduate Student.
  • Somewhat familiar - 27: 14 Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 7 Graduate Students, 2 Government, 2 Industry.
  • Not at all familiar - 29: 15 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 6 Graduate Students, 2 Government, 2 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

d) International Conference Travel Scholarships

  • Very familiar - 13: 3 Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 5 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 2 Industry.
  • Somewhat familiar - 22: 15 Faculty, 3 Postdoctoral Researchers, 3 Graduate Students, 1 Industry
  • Not at all familiar - 29: 15 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 6 Graduate Students, 4 Government, 2 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

Have you attended any of these international conferences/workshops sponsored by IMI (in each case only answers of “Yes” or “No” were counted):

a) 17th University Glass Conference, June 2005, PennStateU.

  • Yes - 17: 11 Faculty, 2 Postdoctoral Researchers, 4 Graduate Students.
  • No - 50: 24 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 3 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 10 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 4 Government, 5 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

b) Flow & Fracture of Advanced Glasses, Oct 2005, PennStateU.

  • Yes - 10: 7 Faculty, 1 Government, 2 Industry.
  • No - 47: 20 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 13 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 1 Government, 4 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

c) Interfaces in Functional Materials, Oct. 2006, Bear Creek, PA

  • Yes - 1: 1 Government
  • No - 56: 27 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 13 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 2 Government, 5 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

Is our Research Exchange program of interest to you now or in the future?

  • Interested and/or considering -28: 11 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 4 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 6 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 3 Government, 1 Industry.
  • Perhaps in the future - 24: 14 Faculty (2 others answered “Yes”);5 Graduate Students, 2 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.
  • Not likely - 12: 8 Faculty, 3 Graduate Students, 1 Government.

Comments:

  • Prof. Almeida's lectures on optical glasses are quite fine.
  • Very efficient.
  • I am at Lehigh, so an exchange would be meaningless for me. I do, however, have interest in bringing people to Lehigh for collaborative work.
  • I hope that there will be opportunity to learn not only about glass materials but also glass surface modification.
  • I am graduating, but otherwise I would be perhaps interested.
  • I am interested to cooperate with participants of the program.
  • I think that the program contributes to develop glass science & technology and to accelerate the interaction between university & company.
  • I would like to spend a six or 9 month sabbatical leave in Europe or Japan and can use some financial support.
  • I'll enter the Web page.
  • I will be traveling to Portugal for the summer as part of the IMI research exchange and REU programs.

Have you tried viewing any of our glass learning video lectures in streaming video on our website (http://www.lehigh.edu/~inimif/TechMods.htm) or on DVD?

  • Yes - 20: 10 Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 1 Graduate Student, 2 Government, 2 Industry.
  • No - 36: 18 Faculty, 12 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 2 Government, 2 Industry, 1 No Position Indicated.

Comments:

  • It is [an] extremely useful initiative.
  • They are very good systems for new glass researchers to learn science and to learn presentation techniques.
  • I was aware of the lectures and I tried to locate them in the web site but I was unable to locate them.
  • The slides are good. The video gave some problems. But I think this is a great idea.
  • I entered briefly while filling out this form.
  • [No ...] But perhaps now I will, now that I know that they exist.

If “Yes,” does the material seem to be of value to you?

  • Yes - 16: 6 Faculty, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 1 Postdoctoral Researcher, 2 Graduate Students, 1 Undergraduate Student, 2 Government, 3 Industry.
  • No - 8: 5 Faculty, 3 Graduate Students.
  • Haven’t seen enough yet - 15: 9 Faculty, 1 Senior Research Scientist, 4 Graduate Students, 1 Industry.

Comments:

  • Very valuable. But these are the only ones available so far...
  • The topic may be suitable for PSU students. I find the topic too narrow.
  • I'm only peripherally involved with glass community even though we use glasses in many of our applications.
  • I am recommending these systems to new young researchers in company.

Is our program of Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) in glass of interest to you or students at your institution?

  • Yes - 23: 10 Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 5 Graduate Students, 1 Government, 2 Industry.
  • No - 7: 4 Faculty, 1 Retired Faculty, 1 Graduate Students, 1 Government.
  • Perhaps - 5: 3 Faculty, 1 Government, 1 Industry.
  • Not sure - 1: 1 Faculty.

Comments:

  • We do not have majors in glass at OSU. However, there are some students who specialize in Ceramics. They may have an interest in carrying out their senior thesis project at Lehigh or PSU.
  • Advised a student last summer.
  • The REU program at Lehigh was well run and a good experience for me.
  • Not aware of the program - how do we find out more?
  • It is an international community of glass researchers linked through the IMI-NFG aimed at collaboratively improving the functionalities of glass in several key targeted areas. It provides a central venue for administering this collaboration and organizes meetings and workshops of interest to the glass researchers.
  • It is one of the few (or only) web sites dedicated to glass and it is an important first step in using the internet to stimulate closer collaboration among glass scientists.

Do you know of any programs offering resources similar to our IMI-NFG?

  • Yes - 2: 1 Graduate Student, 1 Government.
  • No - 26: 12 Faculty, 5 Postdoctoral Researchers, 4 Graduate Students, 1 Government, 1 Industry.

If “Yes,” please provide the name of the other programs(s) here:

  • The Glass Science program at Alfred is where I'd go to learn about glass; it is funded by New YorkState.
  • University of Central Florida, Arizona, Rochester.
  • Marie-Curie exchange program.
  • My web site is a link (glass-fracture) and I collaborate with IMI. My site is specific to mechanical properties. I have not yet distributed the information about my site to its intended targets. I am hoping that others involved in glass mechanics will develop their own sites to share information with the rest of the glass community. The IMI site is a much more general site and so has to consider more general issues. However, I think that they should encourage the development of other sites for issues related to glass as mine does.
  • Materials Research Laboratory at UC-Santa Barbara.

What do you consider the unique aspects of our IMI-NFG program?

  • It helps both under and post graduates, by supporting them financiallyand by supporting them scientifically.
  • International connectivity.
  • Wonderful work to bring various section of glass users (academic researchers, industry, artists) together.
  • Well coordinated international activity.
  • Support for international visiting faculty and students.
  • A very unusual and effective degree of personnel exchange, from undergraduate to grad students/post-docs, to faculty.
  • Travel support, research exchange.
  • That it concentrates on glass.
  • The number of different people that the IMI has brought together from all over the world is very unique, as well as the opportunities that have been provided to me as an undergraduate.
  • Encouraging/supporting the young students to take part in the conferences- research exchange program to integrate the student community in this area of glass science from other countries. Making lectures available for larger community (on the net) is unique.
  • The program is very stimulating especially to young scientist like undergraduate student who are interested to high quality science to further their knowledge especially in the glass science because there are so many things being offered by the program to give better understanding about glass science.
  • The ability to host as many conferences as it has.
  • The program has a major outreach component and sharing of research programs. NSF's vision is however very limited in time -- make a 15 to 20 year program commitment to have a major impact and solve some of the materials issues.
  • 1- Exchange visits for young researchers 2- Collaborations between national and international materials researchers.
  • The six thrusts focused by the IMI-NFG program are very complete and surely will promote the development of advanced glasses in the future.Great opportunity for undergraduates, graduates and professors for developing new work in glass science and technology, using facilities of LehighUniversity and other research centers in US. Efficient way of scientific knowledge exchange between different countries.
  • It is the only Glass Science oriented Program for International Exchange. It was a great idea and great realization.
  • Its total focus on glass science and technology.
  • It seems to me that it is a new way of funding research. This is not a very focused research method, quite diffuse and may even delay some creative work. It does however provide some junior researchers with new opportunities.
  • Its uniqueness is its emphasis on "new glass applications" and its aims to promote these by bringing together a world-wide network of researchers in the area.
  • I think the whole IMI is very unique.
  • Enticing young people into the field of glass.

Please add below any additional comments you would like to share with us.