SAES-422 Multistate Research Activity Accomplishments Report
Sections
Status: Approved
Basic Information
- Project No. and Title: NCAC16 : Biological and Agricultural Engineering
- Period Covered: 02/01/2018 to 02/02/2018
- Date of Report: 05/07/2018
- Annual Meeting Dates: 02/01/2018 to 02/02/2018
Participants
Accomplishments
Research – open discussion on improving ASABE impact factor and publishing processing to increase value to other NCAC / SAC committees and communities of scientist and researchers
International – How to maximize outcomes of the October 3, 2018 joint academic administrators meeting during the Global Water Security Conference in Hyderabad, India. There will be 25 international attendees and 20 attendees from EOPD-210. Focus on format and content of that meeting, breakout sessions, limiting presentation times and highlighting senior design projects of North American Universities.
ABET - The new ABET curricular requirements 1-7 which replace A-K. A transition plan needs to be developed and reported to ABET. Faculty depth in all areas represented in the curriculum is necessary which might influence new faculty hires and program direction.
Advisory Councils - Advisory councils that consist of members of industry and are program benefits include involvement with senior design, mock interviews, program review, philanthropy, and political advocacy. Advisory councils provide linkages between academics and industry.
Federal Agencies – Discussions with federal agencies provided opportunity to learn how to engage new faculty with federal agencies and insights into new program initiatives. This interaction strengthens the linkages between federal agencies and academic communities.
Impacts
- 1. NC 1023: The reviewers concluded that this project is moving along as it should and that there are no concerns at this time.
- 2. S-1041: John March (Cornell) led the review and stated that there was no activity on the website for 2017. At that time Julie Carrier (U. Kentucky) and Troy Runge (U. Wisconsin), who are the new leadership (and were in attendance) for this multistate project announced that they had filed the report and that it was not yet posted. They sent the report and progress updates to March who, after this meeting confirmed that the project was moving along nicely and that the proposal to continue this project was in order. The group had met in 2017. This information was sent to Richard Straub (U. Wisconsin).
- 3. S-1063: Garey Fox (NC State) led the review. The group met once in 2017. The project was at a mid-year evaluation stage. Fox stated that there were many products coming out of this multistate project. The project had wide representation and that the work being done was successfully quantifying best management practices using a combination of models and research. At the time of the meeting there was no report. Steve Searcy (Texas A.M.) expressed concern that the mid-year evaluation form did not align well with the reports that had previously been given and that some effort needed to be undertaken to get better agreement between the two.
- 4. S-1069: Paul Heinnemann (Penn State) led the review. The project looks at the roles of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) across agriculture in the southern region. The group met once in 2017. Agricultural engineers are well-represented on the project. Heinnemann was concerned that the project overlaps with other work being done around the country and that perhaps it should be expanded outside the southern region. Sreekala Bajwa (ND State) agreed that the project should broaden its scope to include UAVs in other regions. She also pointed out that a survey had been set up but the results were not yet available. Data science programs were discussed but information was missing on what type of data science and what applications they would focus on. It was pointed out that NSF also has a parallel program to S-1069 and that synergy between the two efforts would be beneficial. There was concern expressed that Natural Resources may be underrepresented in the in the applications. Also, there was concern that data science was missing from the objectives, specifically: analytics, transfer and storage. There was a suggestion that the project look into broadband in rural settings and that the project work more to bring in industry since so much activity was going on there. Straub asked if they were looking for collaborative funding from industry and the answer from Bajwa was that there was a proposal to do so. Searcy was concerned about the amount of extension in the project. He concluded that there should be more extension activity and that the project would do well to take advantage extension.org to disseminate information of UAV operation to the farming community. Also, Searcy pointed out that crop consultants could be leveraged for their connections to industry. Straub agreed that the project should be expanded (re-publicized) and that they should have more extension activities. Bryan Jenkins (UC Davis) mentioned that Davis had a lot of activity in this area but was not on the project. Straub wondered if the experiment station was not getting the word out.
- 5. There was a long discussion of Western and Northern projects which are not reviewed at this meeting. Searcy asked if other regions were missing opportunities in not being able to participate in these projects. Straub pointed out that projects have to ask to be reviewed and that the Western and Northern states have their own regional reviews that are long-standing. The experiment stations in those regions have not asked to be reviewed which Brad Rein (NIFA) clarified was necessary for them to be reviewed at this meeting.