Cover Story

From the Dean

Alumni

College Briefs

Research and Learning

Past Issues

Alumni Interest Survey

Credits

Alumni Relations

Research

Today at ISU

Cyclone News

Admissions

Muses Editor
212 Marston Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-2153
email: preinig@iastate.edu

Kushner Looks to Sharpen College’s Focus Beyond “2020 Vision”
Asked late one afternoon in his Marston Hall office why he would pack up his world-class plasma physics lab at the University of Illinois to assume the rigors of academic administration at Iowa State, Mark J. Kushner straightens in his chair, pushes up his glasses, and clears his throat.

“My entire career has been in the land-grant environment,” says Kushner, who became the tenth dean of the College of Engineering in January. “I identify with its mission.”

Kushner’s own mission involves nothing less than re-envisioning the traditional focus of the land-grant university—or at least the College of Engineering—to meet the distinctive challenges facing Iowa in the 21st century.

“Iowa State has a history of excellence,” Kushner says. “But it hasn’t seen its mission as national or international so much as service to the state. We are here to serve Iowa. But we must pull in resources from the nation and the world rather than simply looking within our borders and saying, ‘Here are the resources, let’s optimize these.’”

An Engineers’ Caucus in Congress
Kushner acknowledges the college as an engine of economic development for a state widely viewed as trailing the nation in business startups. Indeed, his vision extends to a hi-tech corridor stretching from Ames to Iowa City, a vision he’s shared with political and business leaders in Des Moines, Mason City, and other Iowa towns, as well as members of the Iowa congressional delegation.

Yet the global perspectives Kushner champions are grounded equally in the college’s core mission of educating engineers to face the radical changes outlined in a recent report of the National Academy of Engineering. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century calls for “more involvement by engineers in the setting of public policy and in participation in the civic arena,” exhorting educators to go beyond traditional education models to produce graduates “who see themselves as global citizens, who can be leaders in business and public service, and who are ethically grounded.”

Educating engineers to view their work in a larger social context may not be surprising, given this focus at the highest levels of the profession. What may surprise is that, for Mark Kushner, the summons goes well beyond notions of the engineer as citizen or even adviser to policy makers—the national academies’ historical role—to envision engineers at the highest levels of leadership.

“Engineers have been successful in the corporate world,” Kushner concedes, “but they generally haven’t aspired to political leadership. What would this country be like if there were, say, one hundred engineers in Congress? People able to make objective, return-on-investment types of decisions? Who are not easily swayed by less analytic arguments? That’s a perspective we’re in dire need of.”

The college, Kushner says, must expand the ranks of leaders through programs for engineers at all levels. Together with the campus honors program, he and his staff are developing a program to generate a cadre of students who will assume increasing responsibilities at Iowa State. These are the people, Kushner says, whose more analytical perspectives might one day have a “multiplier effect” beyond their minority status in the halls of Congress and other policy-making venues.

A More Expansive Technocracy
Kushner harbors no illusions about the political process. He understands that, no less than other officeholders, engineers must respond to constituents who often are less than disinterested. And, he concedes, in the absence of a similarly enlightened citizenry, the tenure in office of any thoughtful technocrat would be short indeed. But Kushner has plans for that half of the equation as well: more than merely electing engineers, he says, Iowa State’s land-grant vision must extend as well to the technological literacy of non-engineers in leadership positions.

“We also must acknowledge that the vast majority of our leaders will continue to be non-engineers,” Kushner says. “So we should provide a technological foundation for those individuals who will never walk into an engineering school.”

Kushner and his staff are considering a minor in engineering that would benefit students of any major who desired a deeper understanding of technology and the ability to approach tasks with greater analytical tools. Refocusing the college’s vision this way, Kushner adds, would benefit not only potential engineers but also the college itself, making the field more attractive to a wider range of students.

“We’re very good about training that makes students ask ‘How can my leadership help the vitality of my company?’,” Kushner reflects. “But we’re not so good at thinking about the social benefit. One reason veterinary medicine, the biological sciences, and medical careers are attractive to women is that a social benefit is apparent to individuals who choose those disciplines.”

Curing Double Vision: Perspective versus “Proximity”
Professional ethics, public service, social accountability: will a curriculum reflecting these values bridge the divide between technological elites and citizens increasingly dependent upon technologies they understand imperfectly at best? And will non-engineering students wrestle with the knowledge that can take them from passive consumers of technology to citizens making informed judgments about how their societies manage technological change?

There remains considerable distance between these perspectives—sometimes, Kushner says, even in the mind of a single person. “One of my graduate students once told me, ‘Mark, I’ve decided not to go for my PhD. I want to go to the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard instead because I want a role where my contribution to the individual on the street is more personal.’

“His perception of benefit to an individual was one of proximity,” Kushner continues. “For him, someone offloading a bag of rice to a malnourished child in Rwanda is making the greater contribution because the ‘proximity’ is there.”

Though well intentioned, from Kushner’s perspective such a viewpoint suggests a social and even professional myopia that confuses proximity with impact—if not one’s own needs with the needs of others. For while Kushner’s vision of leadership transcends the profession itself, it ultimately returns to the particular contribution of the engineer.

“I would argue,” he offers, “that the biochemical engineer who, through bioinformatics research, helps develop a new strain of rice that allows huge yields in arid climates is making a larger impact.”

He pauses and adds, “Even if that person never leaves Iowa.”