October meetings: The theme is change he forum at this yearÕs meeting of UCAR Member Representatives dealt with the changing environment in which universities find themselves. Under the leadership of the UCAR University Relations Committee and UCAR president Richard Anthes, a planning committee designed the session to focus on university needs. Marcia Baker (University of Washington), Timothy Spangler (director of UCARÕs Cooperative Program for Operational Meteorology, Education and Training), Ellen Mosley-Thompson (Ohio State University), Edward Zipser (Texas A&M University), and Robert Gall (director of NCARÕs Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division) organized four working group sessions, each of which considered a particular issue and reported to the full meeting the next day. The forum The meeting was kicked off by a keynote address from Martin Jischke, president of Iowa State University and UCAR trustee. His provocative speech, on the theme of research-intensive universities in a time of change, challenged the UCAR members and academic affiliates to think differently about their roles. Jischke sees a danger in being Òtoo isolated from the society we serve and that supports us.Ó Speaking meteorologically, ÒweÕve got to come out of the clouds.Ó First the land grant colleges and then todayÕs research-intensive universities were established as a result of a national consensus on educational needs, he argued; history teaches us that universities must change to meet changing needs or be supplanted. ÒThroughout all the changes, teaching has been and is the most important thing we do,Ó he said. He stressed that, to remain vital, universities must 1. restore public confidence in them, especially, Òstop behaving as if teaching is not a priority.Ó 2. ÒRethink the idea of a center in a distributed world.Ó The national research agenda is becoming more explicitly linked to economic competitiveness. The way people are organizing partnerships is changing from the bicycle wheel model to a ÒbiologicalÓ model with no central hub and all partners equal. 3. better reflect the growing diversity of our nation. The Òsilver lining,Ó he says, is that society still looks to the universities for help to meet challenges. ÒNobody doubts we have the best universities in the world. They hold a precious public trust and IÕm betting weÕll continue to be worthy of that trust.Ó (The complete text of JischkeÕs speech may be obtained from Pamela Witter, UCAR (see page 15). The meeting participants then dispersed into the four working groups. Their discussions were later described in at least two instances as Òchaotic.Ó But this was a measure of interest, involvement, and enthusiasm, not disorganization. Each group had been provided in advance with a ÒstrawpersonÓ position paper to stimulate discussion. Group leaders and rapporteurs arrived at statements of consensus, reported in the next dayÕs plenary session. Group A: Conflict between research and educationÑis it real? (Group leader, Steven Businger, North Carolina State University at Raleigh; rapporteur, Howard Bluestein, University of Oklahoma). The group began by defining the issue, its dimensions, and its causes (mainly a lack of money at the state level); listed and evaluated possible responses by universities (such as using survey-course instructors who specialize in nonmajor courses and promoting teacher workshops); and made recommendations (for example, that UCAR facilitate the use of new technology and the availability of curricula in the classroom, adjusting the curriculum, and using retired faculty as mentors). Group B: Planning the national atmospheric science program. (Group leader, Robert Gall; rapporteur, Jon Ahlquist, Florida State University). The topic was divided into how to pick strategic issues and how to explain the strategic value of what atmospheric scientists do to legislators, administrators, and the public. Regarding the latter, there was agreement with UCARÕs current activities. Recommendations regarding the former included: augment current National Science Foundation (NSF) planning procedure to include input from nonmeteorologists from legislative offices and government agencies; modify priorities on an ongoing basis to respond to changing needs and to maintain diversity; and establish an activity in UCAR whose mission is to focus on university plans and programs. Group C: Improving university outreach. (Group leader, Edward Zipser; rapporteur, Harold Orville, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology). Identified goals were: attracting more students to science; attracting a proper share of the best students to geosciences; improving K-12 and two-year-college science education; in all the above expending extra effort to increase diversity. Among the recommendations: improve outreach activities for K-12 teachers, because such efforts will reach far beyond the teachers themselves; appoint an outreach faculty member at each university; provide outreach efforts to two- year colleges, schools of education, and introductory science courses for nonscience students. Such introductory courses, participants pointed out, may be a professorÕs most significant outreach activity; it may be the only science many studentsÑand future teachersÑreceive, and an important means of raising the level of science literacy in this country. Group D: National needs for atmospheric scientistsÑthe role of universities. (Group leader, Radford Byerly (UCAR); rapporteur, Roger Wakimoto University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA). One strong recommendation was to collect and disseminate information on the current job market to students and prospective students. Questions to be resolved: (1) should retraining programs for highly trained people from other fields who wish to enter atmospheric sciences be instituted or strengthened? (2) are we teaching the right kind of atmospheric sciences to our studentsÑboth majors and nonmajors? A full report on the outcome of these working groups is being prepared for the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. Other items The new cooperative agreement between NSF and UCAR for the operation and management of NCAR calls for a greater NSF role throughout the planning process. UCAR and NSF will more closely coordinate their planning activities to result in an integrated plan for the Atmospheric Sciences Division (ATM) at NSF. ÒThis change,Ó says Anthes, Òwill strengthen the partnership between NCAR, the universities (through the UCAR Board of Trustees), and NSF. The joint planning process should also lead to a stronger ATM long-range plan.Ó At the members meeting, Anthes and ATM director Richard Greenfield described the new planning process and reported on steps taken so far. Discussions over the summer among NCAR division directors and program heads and ATM program directors developed scientific and facility plans for the next five years. The plans highlighted areas of continuing, increasing, and decreasing effort based on three budget assumptions: current funding and 5% increases and decreases. In August, senior management from ATM and UCAR met to define further budget strategies. At any funding level, Greenfield and Anthes stressed, the priority will be on facilities. A plan for NSF-supported atmospheric science research will be developed during 1994 and will include significant community involvement. Information regarding the process for gaining community input will be provided shortly in a ÒDear ColleagueÓ letter from Greenfield. Representatives from UCARÕs academic affiliates met on 12 October; Jeffrey Stith (University of North Dakota) chaired the meeting. Cliff Jacobs, ATM/NSF facilities coordinator for NCAR, informed the affiliates of grants for equipment available through the NSF Unidata equipment grants and the Instrumentation and Laboratory Improvement grants programs. Other topics included working out a plan for equipment transfers (see the NovemberÐ December 1992 issue of the UCAR Newsletter), ways the Academic Affiliates Program (AAP) can interact more effectively with UCAR and its members, finding a way to encourage schools to hire computer system administrators, and the perception among funding agencies that research and teaching are mutually exclusive. Discussion also focused on recruiting studentsÑfor example, by offering stipends and research grants to promising minority students and providing potential meteorology majors with a clearer idea of the true breadth of the profession. David Smith (United States Naval Academy) submitted a proposal for assisting in the development and implementation of precollege atmospheric and related science programs. Smith calls for more interaction by AAP atmospheric science departments with the education departments of their own institutions and with their local schools and state and local teacher organizations. The regular business of the meeting included election of new trustees and members. From a slate of candidates prepared by the Nominating Committee (chaired by Philip Krider of the University of Arizona), institutional trustees elected were Susan Avery, University of Colorado at Boulder; William Chameides, Georgia Institute of Technology; Lennard Fisk, University of Michigan; and Roger Wakimoto, UCLA. Richard Hallgren, executive director of the American Meteorological Society, was elected trustee-at-large. The University of Iowa was nominated and confirmed as UCARÕs sixty-first member institution. The Membership Committee, headed by Thomas Warner of Pennsylvania State University, reported that teaching and research in the atmospheric and related sciences at Iowa are concentrated in three Òmulti-programsÓ in five departments and institutes that offer some 15 graduate courses in these fields. Most of the atmospheric sciences research is coordinated through the Center for Global and Regional Environmental Research housed in a new building on campus. The centerÕs affiliates consist of 46 faculty from 18 departments and 5 colleges; its research spans a broad range of disciplines within earth system science and includes studies in atmospheric chemistry, biogeochemistry, hydrology, hydrometeorology, magnetospheric and ionospheric physics, ecological systems and dynamics, earth-system history, radiation and remote sensing, and health effects and other human dimensions of atmospheric processes. Institutions whose memberships were renewed: University of Arizona, UCLA, University of Chicago, Cornell University, Florida State University, Johns Hopkins University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the University of Rhode Island.