LSU A&M’s Response (Continued)

In Table 13, these same data are compared to our Flagship 2020 peer-identified institutions to discern our relative ranking. As the data indicate, LSU ranks 9^th out of 14 total institutions in terms of the average research expenditures for this 5-year period. These data are used to inform strategies related to inter-institutional collaborations, and senior leadership also utilizes them to examine drivers of success at our peer institutions so that we may learn from and adopt some of the most successful practices in obtaining research funding.

ORED also routinely examines trends in research expenditures disaggregated by college and research unit on both an annual and a monthly basis, an example of which is provided in Table 14. These data are used to assess growth trends and opportunities for improvement. For example, for the College of Engineering, between July 1, 2011, and November 30, 2011, there was a total of $6,777,281 in research expenditures. During that same period of the following year there was slightly over $8 million in expenditures, an increase of 18%. These reports are analyzed by the ORED senior leadership, and strategies for engaging the college-level research deans are devised and implemented. Recent examples of such strategies include the implementation of grant writing workshops geared toward fellowships in the humanities and arts to facilitate the work of scholars in these fields [22]; hosting a major NSF CAREER grant workshop for all EPSCoR institutions to increase the number of CAREER awards; active engagement with local industries such as BASF, Dow Chemical, and Albemarle to enhance research partnerships with industry; the invitation of a delegate from the European Union to provide a workshop on the Horizon 2020 funding program, among many other strategies. 

When feasible, ORED also examines research resources aggregated by the 7 focal research areas as a way to determine progress in growing those areas. The data reported in Table 15 below are drawn from a listing of all active accounts having a function code for research (as opposed to instruction, public service, etc.). The source of funds is broken out by state and local sponsored agreements, federal sponsored agreements, and private sponsored agreements, including foundation accounts and gifts. Only external sponsored agreements are tabulated. The data, updated as of May 31^st, 2013, involved classification of more than 1900 active accounts with associated PI, title, granting agency, department or research unit. The data are classified by the 7 priority research areas, as well as an 8^th area, “Other,” for those cases that did not clearly fit into a priority research area. Given the labor-intensive classification process and its necessarily subjective nature, obvious caveats in the interpretation of these data apply. Nevertheless, this data is useful because it illustrates, for example, that LSU’s most well-funded area in terms of federal dollars is biological, biotechnological and biomedical research, whereas state and local funding is more heavily targeted towards materials science and engineering. ORED uses this information to implement strategies to capitalize on these existing investments, for example, continuing to expand relationships with industry as a means of reinforcing the emerging growth area of materials and manufacturing emphasized in the state economic development strategic growth plan.

In sum, in assessing performance in terms of the Resource indicator, ORED routinely examines metrics on research awards and expenditures over time, by source of funds, and makes relevant comparisons across colleges and research units, benchmarking against peer-identified schools. Since the implementation of the ORED Strategic Plan, data on research funding is now also aggregated by focal research area. These data are routinely used to develop strategies to enhance the research resources at LSU and improve performance.

Learning:  PhDs and Master’s degrees awarded (total and per FTE); placement of PhDs in tenure-track positions and industry; number of post-doctoral associates.

Student Progress in Graduate Degrees

Approximately 5,000 graduate students attend LSU (4,243 FTE), and the institution serves approximately 30,000 undergraduates (22,988 FTE). Thus 20% of the enrollment of the university is involved in programs that require knowledge of research and literature beyond the baccalaureate.  All doctoral students must complete a dissertation, and most master’s degree students must complete a thesis or research project that demonstrates scholarly competence.

Job-placement information is available through the Office of Career Services, which conducts the Graduating Student Survey each semester [23]. According to the 2012-13 survey, approximately 63 percent of LSU graduates indicated they would most likely be employed full-time upon graduating, while an estimated 24 percent indicated they would be attending a graduate or professional school on full-time basis. Additionally, a number of colleges collect more detailed job-placement information, including the specific locations of where their individual graduates are employed upon graduation or where they have been accepted into a graduate or professional program [24].

During the 2012-2013 academic year, 322 students graduated at the doctoral level, and 1,232 students received the master’s degree. These figures document an increase of 26.3% and 12.8%, respectively, compared to the previous year [25].

The latest data available from the Louisiana Employment Outcomes report provide a snapshot of graduate geographic placement 18 months after graduation for both master’s and doctoral level completers [26]. These data illustrate, for example, that 18 months after graduation in 2008-09, 79% of graduates in the Public Administration and Social Services instructional areas were found to be employed in Louisiana (Table 16). Likewise, 60% of doctoral completers, 18 months after their graduation in 2008-09 in the instructional areas of Agriculture and Agricultural Operations, were employed in Louisiana (Table 17).

Post-Doctoral Associates

LSU also assesses learning related to research through an analysis of the number of post-doctoral researchers active on campus. Table 18 below provides institutional research trend data on the number of post-doctoral associates active at LSU over a multi-year period. Since the 2001-2002 academic year, LSU has achieved a 48.6% increase in the number of post-docs, substantially improving this performance indicator over time.

Research is a critical part of the learning process, especially for graduate students and post-doctoral scholars. LSU routinely examines performance indicators relative to graduate student graduation metrics to assess improvements in the learning/research nexus, and the recent results have been promising, as indicated by the 26% increase in doctoral graduates noted above.  In addition, a robust post-doctoral research training program is typically a hallmark of world-class research universities. LSU uses annual data on the number of post-doctoral scholars to gauge its improvement in this realm, and the results over the long term are encouraging, as the number of post-doctoral associates has increased from 70 in 2001-02 to 104 in 2013-14.

Engagement:  patents awarded, number of start-up businesses from LSU research; licensing income; number of faculty consulting engagements; number of national/international symposia organized. 

As part of its assessment of engagement, ORED regularly monitors and assesses its intellectual property activity, which falls under the purview of the Office of Intellectual Property, Commercialization, and Development – which directly reports to ORED. Table 19 provides information on invention disclosures, patents filed and issued, the number of licenses/options signed, licensing income generated, and the number of start-up companies formed from 2007-08 to 2011-12. Most of these metrics are fairly steady over time, but it is notable that there has been over the covered time period an increase in patents filed, as well as a 350% increase in the amount of licensing income generated. 

NOTE: The narrative continues in "3.3.1.4 (Continued - 2)."