The last time that Mel Levet squared off against Occidental College in a baseball game, Franklin Roosevelt was in his second term as the nation's president and Gone with the Wind had just won the Oscar for best picture.
Now 97, Levet returned to campus last Friday to throw out the first pitch for Caltech against Oxy.
"I haven't pitched a baseball in 65 years," Levet said. "This is pretty exciting."
Family, friends, and members of the Caltech community turned out to celebrate. "This has blossomed into a great day for Caltech baseball and for Caltech. We're delighted to welcome Mel home," said Matt Mark, the Beavers' head baseball coach.
Levet attended Caltech from 1935 through 1940, earning his bachelor's and master's degrees in geology. He fondly recalls studying under Ian Campbell, who later became the geologist for the state of California. "One minute, I would be in a final having to identify minerals from the 200 or so in Caltech's collection," said Levet. "The next, I'd be running out to the baseball field. It was a wonderful time."
During his three years on the varsity squad, Levet led teams to 15 wins—including a 2–0 shutout of Occidental College in his final season. Levet became team captain his senior year, then coached the freshmen while earning his master's degree. In 1938, the Caltech baseball team recognized Levet's accomplishments with their most prestigious honor, the Rawlings Trophy.
"I made a vow to myself when I joined Caltech's baseball team: that I would become captain, and that I would win the Rawlings," said Levet. "I'm proud to say I did both."
World War II broke out not long after Levet's graduation, and he enlisted with the United States Army Air Forces, joining their burgeoning meteorology program. He held posts in numerous locations across the Pacific, including the Solomon Islands and Japan. After the war, Levet worked for several oil companies, including Chevron Corporation, where he spent the majority of his career as a research geologist. He retired from the company in 1982.
"In work and in life, my father has always been deeply curious," said Levet's daughter, Jan Le Pouvir, while she sat in the bleachers with Levet's family after the pitch. "He never stops asking questions. That inquisitiveness comes from Caltech. And in a way, I think it's the secret to his long life."
"Throughout his athletic career here, Mel displayed the qualities of ability, sportsmanship, and character that are hallmarks of the Caltech athlete," said Betsy Mitchell, director of athletics, recreation, and physical education at Caltech. "We're thrilled that Mel is still connected to Caltech and that he is able to share with our student athletes the lessons and memories he took with him from here into life."
Levet did not get to relish a win on Friday—Occidental bested the Beavers, 11–1—but he did not seem to mind. "A lot has changed, but the core of Caltech and its students is all just as I remember. It's a remarkable institution," he said. "I'd love to come back and get my PhD."
Congratulations to seven Caltech alumni and five Caltech professors who have been awarded 2015 Sloan Research Fellowships. The fellowships, awarded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, honor "early-career scientists whose achievements and potential identify them as rising stars, the next generation of scientific leaders." This year, 126 young scientists were awarded fellowships in eight scientific and technical fields: chemistry, computer science, economics, mathematics, computational and evolutionary biology, neuroscience, ocean sciences, and physics. Candidates must be nominated by a department head or other senior researcher and are reviewed by a selection committee of three distinguished scientists in each field.
Brandi Cossairt (BS ’06)
Jennifer A. Dionne (MS ’05, PhD ’09)
Aaron Esser-Kahn (BS ’04)
Michael Kesden (PhD ’05)
Neal Mankad (PhD ’10)
Stephanie Waterman (MS ’02)
Viviana Gradinaru (BS ’05)
In the winter issue of E&S, we interviewed six Caltech alumni leaders in higher education. Here is the full, unedited interview with Phil Hanlon (PhD ’81), president of Dartmouth.
We saw that one of your top priorities has been to be "a magnet for talent," attracting high quality students and faculty. Could you tell us a little bit more about what this priority means for Dartmouth—and what specifically you've done to address this priority?
Certainly, seeing Dartmouth become a magnet for the world’s most talented students and faculty is an ambition, a key ambition even, but it’s part and parcel of a much broader vision for the years ahead – a vision in which this “magnetic force” is simply a byproduct of the exciting work going on here.
The underlying message I try to spread is that I want Dartmouth to think big and act boldly. I want our entire community of students, faculty, staff, alumni and parents to envision how Dartmouth might change the world in the years ahead. In any effort we embrace, by any measure, this will require bold ideas, risk-taking, and pushing the boundaries of traditional disciplines. To ramp-up the intellectual energy that will generate the kind of magnetic force for talent you reference, this will require work on two fronts: our education mission, and our scholarship – both areas where Dartmouth already excels, but where we can do even better with the right focus.
For instance, in our education mission, which is our heritage and the bedrock of everything we do at Dartmouth, we are responding to the myriad and rapid changes in higher education by increasing our focus on providing our students with wisdom above all. Increasingly, information, even knowledge – the ability to put information into context – is becoming a public good, accessible to anyone with an Internet connection. Online universities provide much greater structure to this blizzard of information, but at the end of the day, imparting wisdom – the ability to take all you’ve learned in a broad variety of disciplines, contextualize it and use this knowledge to lead and create new knowledge – this is the key value added by the university. And wisdom isn’t something that comes easily – it takes concerted effort on the part of students and teachers in innovative learning opportunities.
At Dartmouth, we believe the best way to impart wisdom is through experiential, active learning – learning by doing. Students and faculty engaged in real-world problem solving. And this can look like many different things in many different venues: it might be a student working late into the night in a lab on an innovative cancer treatment; or under the bright lights of a performance stage presenting an original work; perhaps students in Africa helping a tribe better position its produce in the economic value chain; or out on an ice cap documenting glacier retreat – the list could quite literally go on and on. Students positively come alive in these situations; it’s in this space where their academic preparation reaches critical mass and allows them to have an impact on the world around them.
Experiential learning is something that has always been evident on our campus, but in an unfocussed way. Our goal is to bring focus to this and to really turn Dartmouth into the campus where students come to think big and innovate. So expanding our experiential learning opportunities will be the key to doing this.
On the faculty side of the equation, in terms of taking our scholarship to the next level, a strategy that is building excitement and momentum is our faculty cluster hiring initiative.
We’re seeking to hire new faculty and combine them with existing faculty around a select number of structured areas where Dartmouth stands to make a profound impact in the world. And this is in play currently, because we’re committed to choose these areas wisely. As president, I can’t direct this from the top down; it has to come from the faculty. We’re studying several great proposals right now, and I’m excited by the discussion. For instance, Dartmouth has an amazing group of scholars unlocking how the brain works. International relations is another high-stakes area where we have a tremendous group of scholars. Dartmouth scholars are already at the forefront of determining how we can design effective health care delivery systems and literally help shape national policy around health care. And these are just a few examples.
But already, the initiative has energized our alumni body and produced the largest ever gift in Dartmouth’s history – an anonymous $100 million, unrestricted gift for academic excellence, which has kick-started our cluster hiring efforts. This, in turn, inspired a long-time friend of Dartmouth and former board chairman, Bill Neukom, to fund the first of these clusters in an area that’s both close to his heart and one that holds tremendous potential to impact so many other areas – computational science.
So in terms of stimulating intellectual energy, I think we’re already on the right track and beginning to see results. The future, in that regard, has never been more exciting. And if we’re able to maintain this kind of sustained energy – I believe Dartmouth will truly become the “magnet for talent” we envision.
Dartmouth is an exceptional school. Do you think these approaches could be applied more widely to elevate higher education in general?
The short answer is yes, and in some ways they already are being applied in various ways. For instance, experiential learning is certainly not something Dartmouth invented – Caltech and any number of world-class colleges and universities could offer their own examples. In fact, it’s one of the things that made my time at Caltech so stimulating and rewarding. And increasingly, higher education institutions of all stripes are realizing the future lies in the imparting of wisdom. This is the role of the university of the future, and I think this is becoming more and more accepted.
But what we’re doing at Dartmouth is taking these two realizations and saying, “How does this apply to our campus?” and “How do we make the investments now that will capitalize on our strengths?” Dartmouth was founded on the mission of providing an undergraduate education that is like no other – a broad liberal arts education that produces capable, intellectually nimble students with a passion and skillset to go out into the world and take-on the big problems. We call them “citizen-leaders.” We are ever mindful that almost 250 years later, this remains at the core of our mission, even though we’ve evolved into an institution that enjoys first-rate graduate and professional schools that strengthen our campus in ways unimaginable two centuries ago.
So we ask ourselves, “How do we build on this heritage and our unique place in the world of higher education?” And we believe strengthening our long-standing capacity for experiential education and developing it to its fullest is the right answer for us. This won’t be the case at every institution, but it’s rooted in our history, and to a large degree, we believe it’s where our future lies.
We also saw that you’re interested in making Dartmouth more accessible to students from diverse backgrounds. In your assessment, how has the university worked to achieve this? How do you hope to extend that reach in the future?
Without a doubt, getting a tight rein on the increasing cost of a college degree is first and foremost in terms of making a Dartmouth education accessible to students from socioeconomically diverse backgrounds.
In this regard, this year the Dartmouth Board of Trustees approved a 2.9 percent increase in undergraduate tuition, mandatory fees, and room and board for the 2014-15 academic year, and this actually represents the lowest percentage increase since 1977 – the year I graduated.
This is a significant rollback from previous years’ increases, and it’s part of an overall strategy to slow the growth of the cost of a Dartmouth education. Part of this is made possible by prioritizing innovation and making new budgetary allocations through self-investment, rather than adding-on.
Additionally, Dartmouth is devoting more than $90 million to financial aid this year and is committed to meet 100 percent of an admitted student's demonstrated need for all four years.
For our neediest students – those whose family's income is below $100,000 – our financial aid initiatives include free tuition and no loans.
On the recruitment side, Dartmouth holds a number of enrichment programs that we believe are critical to increasing the pipeline of underrepresented students. For instance, our First Year Student Enrichment Program was launched in the fall of 2009 as a student-led yearlong mentorship program that connects first-year students who are among the first in their family to attend college with trained upper-class mentors. There’s a pre-orientation and then yearlong peer mentoring to help participants handle some of the challenges they may face during the course of their first year. It’s not enough to say “here we are, send in your application” – we need to cultivate students and make sure they have the opportunities to develop the skills needed to succeed at this level.
This summer, we resumed our College Horizons program, which draws Native American youth and educators to campus. This is in support of Dartmouth's historic commitment to recruit Native American students and is partially responsible for a Native American student population greater than the rest of the Ivy League combined. Or I’d cite our E.E. Just STEM Scholars Program which supports a diverse community of STEM graduate students, postdoctoral scholars and faculty with mentorship and the kind of academic and research strategies that will translate into success in their respective fields.
So both in terms of what it costs to go to school here, and what it takes to succeed here, we are constantly looking for ways we can keep the Dartmouth education accessible to the broadest student body possible. We know this strengthens the institution in the long run.
Dartmouth is about to open a new entrepreneurship center. Can you tell us a bit about its genesis and mission? What role do you believe entrepreneurship plays in higher education today?
Yes, this is something we’re really excited about. I spoke earlier about our ambition to promote bold thinking, innovation and intellectual risk-taking. In short, to amplify an entrepreneurial mind-set on campus is one of my highest priorities. This is key to creating the kind of culture that promotes big ideas and bold thinking – efforts against the world’s most vexing problems – and it’s crucial if we are going to become the “magnet for talent” we spoke of earlier. More than anything, it strengthens the ability to take ideas into action. Not to mention that student entrepreneurship is as compelling an example as you’ll find of experiential learning, where innovation is required and the risk of failure is ever-present.
You know, in my 30-some years of teaching, the biggest change that I’ve seen in students and in my faculty peers is the growth in their interest to make a difference in the world. In this day and age, the best, most creative and ambitious faculty and students don’t want to just analyze the world around them. They want to make a difference in the world around them. Of course, experiential learning offers the ability to tap into this drive and this potential, and the same can be said for entrepreneurship.
When I arrived back on campus last summer, in talking to students, I was somewhat surprised to learn about dozens – something like 80 or more – really interesting business start-ups, product developments and social entrepreneurship efforts that were receiving little or no formal help or guidance from the College. These students were working in relative isolation, navigating the entrepreneurial path alone. They were engaged in experiential learning of the harshest sort, as any entrepreneur can tell you! So I decided that we needed to do something about that, and I committed then to announce as the first initiative of my administration the creation of the Innovation Center and New Venture Incubator.
The Center will have its grand opening in September. And this will be a place where students with an interest in social ventures, business start-ups or application of the creative mind can gather and share ideas. Faculty will provide expertise, including training in the popular, highly sought-after “business basics” course from our Tuck School of Business, and design feasibility from the Thayer School of Engineering. There will be legal advice and even seed funding available. An Accelerator Program has been designed to include $250,000 in seed funding per year, with early-stage funding from three top-tier venture firms in the works. And we’re now looking at developing curricular opportunities through the Center, as well.
What we want to do is coordinate the brilliant minds on campus and within our global alumni family – coordinate those human resources, so the student entrepreneur can fast-forward into the realm of doing, not have to play catch-up by learning the hard way the lessons our faculty and alumni have already learned and lived. Here again, we want to imbue our students’ entrepreneurial capacity with wisdom, as shared by those who have navigated the entrepreneurial path themselves.
I truly believe this will be a hotbed of innovation, and I think we’ll be amazed by some of the efforts coming out of the Center.
In what ways do you think your training and career as a mathematician helped prepare you for a leadership role in higher education? In what ways did your time at Caltech prepare you?
One of the things that people outside mathematics often fail to see is that at its core, pure mathematics is a creative enterprise. Yes, mathematics teaches structured, logical, data-driven thinking. But advances in mathematics are made when creativity is called upon to complement critical thinking and analysis. This can apply to any number of life’s toughest challenges – including being a modern college president!
But there are a couple of experiences from my time at Caltech that really proved seminal in my career. First was working with my thesis advisor, Olga Taussky Todd – one of the great algebraists of the 20th century and truly a pioneering woman in mathematics, being the first woman to receive a full professorship at Caltech. She was hugely influential and her personal story drove home for me the importance of diversity and inclusion in all walks of life, but especially in education. In a larger sense, I can also say that Olga and Caltech really trained me to have high scholarly expectations – and that’s something all of us in higher education should demand of ourselves, our students and our institutions.
Second, I did my first teaching at Caltech and can honestly say I loved it from the very first day in class. As much as I love mathematics, the only thing that surpasses that is helping a student make an intellectual breakthrough or connection that suddenly changes everything – seeing them “get it.” No matter how many times that’s happened in the course of my teaching career, it’s always exciting and rewarding. And teaching remains a passion for me. In fact, I still teach freshman mathematics as president. Dartmouth has a history of teaching-presidents, and I’m happy to carry on this tradition. Frankly, I consider it one of the great perks of this job!
Are there any additional challenges or opportunities in higher education—and especially to education and research in science and engineering—that you are focusing on? If so, how are you addressing them at your university?
Higher education is being shaped at present both from outside and within, in a number of ways. The external forces at play represent challenges and opportunities, as you rightly frame it, and the same can be said for the internal forces we’re seeing. It’s a dynamic that’s been many years in the making.
The last half of the 20th century was a period of reductionism – we felt that if we could understand the world in its finest components, then we would solve all problems. Accordingly, we created stunning new technologies to harvest data at the most fine-grained level – we learned to sequence the genome, collect information about individual-level usage of the web, observe single molecules – only to learn that instead of solving all problems we had created a new class of integrative problems. Today’s most pressing issues – things like providing the world’s population reliable access to fresh water, dealing with climate change, sustainable job creation, transforming K-12 education in this nation – these are complex and multifaceted challenges. They concern the complexity of systems, informed by the amazing new data sets that technologies provide us.
Meanwhile, we have a new generation of students at our universities. They’re every bit as talented as students of the past, but as I mentioned, they have a hunger to make a difference in the world and an impatience to do so immediately. Long gone are the days when you could tell students that curing cancer or addressing climate change are really complicated and they need take tons of courses and get an advanced degree before they dive in. Students today want to make a difference and they want to do so right now. And that’s very exciting, and inspiring.
So, given these two powerful realities, I believe the most successful research universities will be those that weave together these two trends and bring their research enterprises together across disciplines and across generations.
And of course, this imperative is especially strong in the sciences and engineering, really for two reasons. First, these are problem-driven areas, and so interdisciplinary work is natural and accepted – whatever tools will solve the problem are accepted openly. Second, these are areas where the nation needs graduates who are trained in these technical areas, and so involving students in research activities helps meet a national need.
At Dartmouth, one of the first priorities I announced was expanding our engineering capacity at the Thayer School. Demand for an engineering education is reaching unprecedented levels. Last year, we had roughly 110 majors in the senior class, which was a record, while the numbers of matriculating freshmen and sophomores who say they’re interested in engineering are even greater. Yet we don’t currently have enough faculty to meet this demand and maintain the class size and the intimate, closely connected experience that we offer. So we’re setting about increasing faculty to reduce the student-faculty ratio, while increasing project and research opportunities for students, and developing new courses to challenge them. Most importantly, by expanding engineering, we can enhance the liberal arts education for all Dartmouth students by making a real engineering experience part of a much larger number of students’ undergraduate education. We want to take a leadership role in defining what a liberal arts education means in the 21st century, and we believe engineering is an essential component, giving our young citizen-leaders a much broader skillset to apply against any pursuit they take on.
In a similar way, as I mentioned, Dartmouth has endeavored in the past few years to change the face of health care delivery science by developing synergies and pushing new knowledge in the spaces that normally exists between traditional disciplines, say at a medical school, a business school, an engineering school. We were really astounded by the advances and progress made in this area, and so we want to replicate that energy in any number of other areas.
What changes do you see on the horizon for higher education in the United States? In what ways do you think education and research will be different 10 years from now? 50 years from now? As a leader, how do you prepare for these types of changes?
I expect a period of significant change in the years ahead in US higher education driven by multiple factors: opportunities provided by IT; the impacts of globalization and the reality that the traditional funding model of higher education is unsustainable and probably near the breaking point. At the top end – the elite universities such as Caltech and Dartmouth – the most successful educational programs will be those whose graduates enter the world with strong skills for success in the world, rather than broad information and knowledge about the world. Leading educational programs will be characterized by more learning outside of the classroom, whether through research or entrepreneurial activities, service learning or creative performance delivered away from campus at locations across the globe. And all of the leading universities will need to rein in costs and operate more efficiently, holding our net cost of attendance close to the rate of inflation.
Looking at higher education more broadly, I expect to see much more dramatic change. At the undergraduate level, you will see blended models emerge where students spend less time in residence and more time studying online. The pressure to slow the growth of costs, or even lower costs, will be even more intense outside the highly selective universities. This will lead to stark economic circumstances for many. I can’t say how they will cope, but I would not be surprised to see a greatly altered landscape in U.S. higher education fifty years from now.
It’s a time of real change, but even in the face of formidable challenges, there’s a tremendous potential here to build America’s higher education system into something that unleashes the promise and potential of our students in ways never before possible. As an educator, and a college president, that’s tremendously exciting.
Cyrus Behroozi wants to connect the whole world to the Internet.
“Two-thirds of the world’s population still doesn’t have access,” says Behroozi, an engineer with Google X, the Internet giant’s experimental division. Although it’s easy to think of the Internet as a luxury, he says, it’s now inextricably tied to economic development.
Considering that Google X is most widely known for engineering the driverless car, its solution to global connectivity might seem charmingly low-tech—balloons. But these aren’t everyday balloons. Behroozi leads the network engineering for Project Loon, an ambitious experiment by Google X that’s focused on creating a global wireless network of balloons floating around the world 12.5 miles (20 kilometers) aboveground, within the stratosphere—twice the elevation flown by commercial airlines.
We spoke with Behroozi to hear about his path from Caltech to Google’s lofty experiment.
Tell us about your time at Caltech.
My parents were physicists, and I had grown up with a bit of hero worship for Richard Feynman. So when I arrived at Caltech, I felt that I had found “my people.” I fell under the wing of physics professor Ken Libbrecht (BS ’90), who at the time was very interested in Bose-Einstein condensates [cooling subatomic particles to near absolute zero so that they coalesce into larger structures, in some cases observable on a macroscopic scale]. Being able to trap and observe atoms has a very obvious “cool factor,” so I continued to pursue it after graduation. A couple of years later, I was part of a research team at Harvard that was able to slow down light traveling through a Bose-Einstein condensate. That project received a lot of press and really seemed to capture the imagination of the public. Jay Leno even made a joke about it: “Researchers announced that they were able to slow light. You know how they did it? They took a laser and aimed it through the post office.”
What exactly are Google X and Project Loon?
Google X is a research lab of Google, but it’s not just focused on problems related to the company’s core business. We look for big problems that might require radical solutions and breakthrough technologies. The self-driving car is perhaps our best-known project and a great example. The problem: People are generally terrible drivers; we cause traffic jams and get into accidents. A radical solution might be to teach computers to drive. Technology exists that might make that possible, but it’s an enormous challenge to implement it. So—big problem, radical solution, breakthrough technology.
Project Loon is an attempt to solve the problem of Internet access around the world. Right now, two-thirds of the world’s population does not have the ability to use the Internet. You might consider it a luxury, but access is now so closely correlated with economic development. There is an emerging global digital divide. People in developing countries could be greatly helped by gaining access.
So that's the problem: global Internet access. The radical approach and the breakthrough technology are doing it by balloon—and not just stationary balloons hovering over one location and providing access to a small group willing to pay for it. Most likely, that approach actually turns out not to be technologically feasible. Instead, the idea is to let the balloons float freely, travel with the winds in the stratosphere, and have just enough of them that as some drift out of range, new balloons come from the other direction to take their places.
Why balloons? Why not use satellites?
Well, satellites are also a great solution, but they're extremely expensive to launch. There's a long time delay between when a satellite is proposed, when it's built, when you can get a launch window, and the duration that it has to last in orbit to sort of pay for itself. You might be developing technology for a satellite that launches five years from now. It has to last for the next 10 years to become economically viable. So you're dealing with technology that might be 10 or 15 years old by the time it really gets used.
With balloons, we have more flexibility. We can make them cheaply. We can launch them cheaply. We can refresh and iterate the technology on a month-by-month basis. So it's sort of low-stakes aerospace. We get the altitude and coverage similar to a satellite and gain the ability to iterate quickly—all at a much lower cost.
What are the challenges involved?
It’s a terrific challenge of engineering. There's a big jump between making a balloon that can last one day and one that can last 100. Going through the day-and-night cycle is treacherous, requiring what's called a super-pressure balloon. Then, there's the navigation. Winds within the stratosphere tend to travel in one direction, which we can take advantage of to navigate. The balloon needs to be able to change altitude to catch a current headed in the right direction.
My responsibility is the communication, connecting the balloons to the end users on the ground. As balloons drift in and out of range, we need the connectivity to feel seamless. We also need to link the balloons to one another, back to ground stations, and the Internet. One of the first basic challenges we faced was the fact that most transmitters are polarized, meaning the signal transmits in only one direction. But balloons rotate. So we designed special antennae that provide a signal no matter which way the balloon is oriented.
So to make this all work, we need: balloons capable of staying aloft for 100 days, altitude-control systems, an “air-traffic control” system that can predict weather models, and a network to tie them all together.
What stage of the project are you in?
Well, we've already done pilot testing in New Zealand and Brazil. We've been working furiously and growing the team since then. We're launching and flying balloons continuously right now. We're definitely “all in” to make this work.
[Update: Since this interview was conducted, Astro Teller, the head of the Google X lab, announced that Project Loon had logged more than 1.2 million miles (2 million kilometers) in testing and was on track to have a “semi-permanent” ring of balloons in the Southern Hemisphere within the next year or so.
How did your training at Caltech prepare you for this career?
I really think that Techers fit very well within Google X. We have a bunch here right now. We really look for what we call T-shaped people—people with really diverse backgrounds (the top of the T) who also have very deep expertise in one area (the stem). Because of the way that Caltech trains us, that describes most Techers. I also believe that the collaborative culture at Caltech is really helpful. If I have a hard problem, my first reaction is to go find somebody else who might be an expert in it rather than attack it myself.
As an engineer, I’m very pleased to be here. Just about every project in Google X is something that relates somehow to the physical world. We have generous resources to tackle them and an environment that encourages risk—even if we end up failing.
Professor Libbrecht always impressed me with his ability to jump between projects and follow his interests. He often joked, “If at first you don’t succeed, no need to make a fool of yourself.” I would encourage people to be adventurous and explore many paths in order to find the ones that suit them best.
Cesar Bocanegra (BS ’95)
Chief Operating Officer, DonorsChoose.org
Long before "crowdfunding" became a buzzword, Cesar Bocanegra had been harnessing it to bring needed resources to public schools at DonorsChoose.org, a nonprofit that matches classroom projects with potential benefactors.
Founded in 2000, the organization invites teachers and school administrators to post a project on its website, along with the supplies required to complete it and a budget. Donors then bid gifts, usually in small amounts. Once the budget is met, DonorsChoose.org ships the supplies directly to the school. According to the company, 62 percent of public schools in the United States have at least one teacher with projects on DonorsChoose.org.
Bocanegra, who holds degrees from Caltech, MIT, and Wharton, leads the organization's operations, helping it to translate gifts made in cyberspace into physical supplies in the hands of students. We spoke with him about his work and the role technology can play within nonprofits today.
You have expressed a particular interest in education and mentoring. What drives that?
I think it’s because I know the power of having strong teachers and mentors in one’s life. I grew up traveling between the United States and Mexico. I knew as a child that I wanted to become an engineer, but by the time I reached the 10th grade, I was behind in my English and math courses. A counselor sat me down and said, “Look, if you’re serious about going to a top engineering school, you’ll need to work very hard to catch up.” She laid out an ambitious plan. I joined a magnet program at San Fernando High School and devoted myself to my studies. I did well enough to eventually make it to Caltech. That could not have happened without the support and guidance of my teachers.
Tell us about DonorsChoose.org and how it became involved with public schools.
DonorsChoose.org was started 14 years ago by Charles Best, who at the time was a history teacher at a public high school in the Bronx. He found that he was starting to spend money—his own money—on school supplies. His friends wanted to support him, but they weren’t quite sure how, given the opaque bureaucracy of school systems. Charles decided to create a crowdfunding website, before the word “crowdfunding” entered public consciousness. Teachers could post projects—all aimed at public education—and then anyone could donate to that specific project. Before Kickstarter, Twitter, or Facebook, DonorsChoose.org was a pioneer in the world of crowdfunding and social media.
What is your role?
I joined in 2007 as Chief Operating Officer to help scale the organization. DonorsChoose.org is a bit different from other crowdfunding sites in that we don’t just pass on funds, we actually fulfill orders of school supplies and ship them to classrooms. Where once it might take three minutes to fulfill a single order, I helped set up systems, integrations, and partnerships that allowed us to do 1,000 orders with the click of a button. In the first nine months, we went from supporting 10,000 schools to supporting 100,000. Today, we have fundraised more than a quarter of a billion dollars and helped more than 400,000 teachers.
The crowdfunding model has become more established since you started. What kinds of challenges and opportunities do you face today?
We actually have many of the same issues normal online retailers would have in terms of sourcing inventory and creating a distribution network. We joke that we have become the Amazon.com of the nonprofit sector. I’m proud to say we’re quite good at quickly translating an online donation into physical supplies in the hands of students.
Now we see new opportunities in the data. We’ve been doing this for 14 years, so we have accumulated a great deal of information that could drive new insights. Hypothetically, we might observe, “Why do California teachers seem to order more pencils than teachers in the rest of the country?” or “Why are teachers in this Texas school district asking for more technology than books?” What stories would such data tell us? At a minimum, this could help enlighten key decision-makers about the needs and priorities of educators in their regions.
We’re also starting to drive more experimentation in the classroom. The best teachers are in many ways entrepreneurs, so we also want to connect them with entrepreneurs in industry. When MakerBot, a 3D-printing company, wanted a way to make its technology available to schools, we were able to affordably place more than 1,000 printers across the country in less than two months. Classes are using them to make anything from chess pieces to prosthetic limbs to replicas of artwork.
How does your training as a Techer help you in the nonprofit sector?
I think many people assume that nonprofits don’t necessarily need a lot of technical expertise. In fact, the opposite is true. Advances in technology have created similar opportunities and opened the same kind of disruption you see in business. We have fewer resources, so we need to be efficient with them. In the case of DonorsChoose.org, I was able to apply lean management techniques that I learned at Caltech, and MIT and Wharton afterwards, to refine it into what I call a “social, lean enterprise.” Even though we have been doing crowdfunding for 14 years, we still feel like we’ve realized only a fraction of the potential.
Engineers and people who work in nonprofits share this in common—we want to make the world a better place. When people ask me for career advice, I often say that every company has a mission, so it’s important to find a mission that matches your passion. There is probably a position or job within that company that requires your skill set and education. I feel incredibly lucky to have found such a role, and I get paid to do it.
I’m even more blessed to know that we’re making a difference in the lives of educators...because they certainly made a difference in mine.
Learn more about DonorsChoose.org.
Eric Betzig (BS '83), a group leader at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Janelia Farm Research Campus in Ashburn, Virginia, has been awarded the 2014 Nobel Prize in Chemistry along with Stefan W. Hell of the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry and William E. Moerner of Stanford University. The three were honored "for the development of super-resolved fluorescence microscopy," a method that allows for the creation of "super-images" with a resolution on the order of nanometers, or billionths of a meter. In essence, the work turns microscopy into "nanoscopy."
The technique developed by the trio overcomes the so-called Abbe diffraction limit, which describes a physical restriction on the sizes of the structures that can be resolved using optical microscopy, showing that, essentially, nothing smaller than one-half the wavelength of light, or about 0.2 microns, can be discerned by these scopes. The result of the Abbe limit is that only the larger structures within cells—organelles like mitochondria, for example—can be resolved and studied with regular microscopes but not individual proteins or even viruses. The restriction is akin to being able to observe the buildings that make up a city but not the city's inhabitants and their activities.
Betzig, building on earlier work by Hell and Moerner, found that it was possible to work around the Abbe limit to create very-high-resolution images of a sample, such as a developing embryo, by using fluorescent proteins that glow when illuminated with a weak pulse of light. Each time the sample is illuminated, a different, sparsely distributed subpopulation of fluorescent proteins will light up and, because the glowing molecules are spaced farther apart than the Abbe diffraction limit, a standard microscope would be able to capture them. Still, each of the images produced in this way has relatively low resolution—that is, they are blurry. Betzig, however realized that by superimposing many such images, he would be able to obtain a sharp super-image, in which nanoscale structures are clearly visible. The new technique was first described in a 2006 paper published in the journal Science.
After Caltech, Betzig, a physics major from Ruddock House, earned an MS (1985) and a PhD (1988) from Cornell University. He worked at AT&T Bell Laboratories until 1994, when he stepped away from academia and science to work for his father's machine tool company. Betzig returned to research in 2002 and joined Janelia in 2005.
To date, 33 Caltech alumni and faculty have won a total of 34 Nobel Prizes. Last year, alumnus Martin Karplus (PhD '54) also received the Chemistry Prize.
We interviewed the Johnson's for the winter 2013 issue of E&S.
“A lot of the things that you think a company like Facebook is doing with its data right now, it turns out that it can’t,” Bobby Johnson says. “The tools that exist just aren’t good enough.”
He ought to know. Bobby served for six years at the social media giant, rising through the ranks to become director of engineering, charged with scaling the technology as the site grew from hundreds of thousands of users to nearly one billion.
With its exponential growth, Facebook was often in jeopardy of being crushed under its own digital weight. Bobby helped develop software, build infrastructure, and grow an army of engineers to keep the site humming as hundreds of millions signed on. Then, to collect the massive amounts of data coming in from servers around the world, he wrote a program called Scribe, which was so effective that Facebook eventually made it open source.
“Most people don’t have a good feel for scale,” says Ann, who met Bobby while the two were students at Caltech in the late ‘90s; they married right after graduation. “Many think that after a million, the next large amount is a billion, without understanding how enormously different those numbers really are. Bobby has a strong intuition for it.”
Now that the race is on to analyze the huge troves of data collected by services around the world, Bobby’s intuition tells him there’s a flaw in the existing system for doing so.
“Most information still ends up in standard databases,” he says. Such systems were built to put data into neat boxes, making them less useful for finding relationships in these large, amorphous, and interconnected streams. “You can track statistics, but you can’t really draw meaningful patterns.”
So Bobby and Ann joined with one of Bobby’s like-minded colleagues from Facebook to form Interana, a company created with the goal of designing a next generation platform capable of analyzing extremely large and loosely structured data sets. Ann serves as the chief executive, while Bobby directs the technology development.
Still in its early stages, the company has grown quickly, quietly generating buzz. “Caltech trains us to take an unknown, break it down to first principles and solve it,” says Bobby.
“Starting a business isn’t some magical thing, it’s a real skill to be taken seriously. It can be learned, but it’s important to find the people you trust to give you support and advice.”
Geophysicist Sean C. Solomon (BS ’66) was named a recipient of the National Medal of Science by President Barack Obama on Friday.
A recipient of Caltech’s Distinguished Alumni Award (2006), Solomon is the director of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and principal investigator of NASA’s mission to Mercury.
“These scholars and innovators have expanded our understanding of the world, made invaluable contributions to their fields, and helped improve countless lives,” President Obama said in a statement. “Our nation has been enriched by their achievements, and by all the scientists and technologists across America dedicated to discovery, inquiry, and invention.”
In a career spanning four decades, Solomon has served on numerous projects exploring Earth and Earth-like planets in the solar system, including the Magellan mission to Venus, the Mars Global Surveyor mission, the GRAIL mission to the moon, and a number of ocean-bottom seismological explorations.
“The four inner planets of our solar system are nature’s experiments in how a planet like Earth became the planet it is today, and they had four extraordinarily different outcomes,” Solomon said in an interview with Columbia University in 2013. “To understand our own planet, we must understand how all Earth-like planets formed and evolved.”
Prior to Lamont-Doherty, Solomon served for nearly two decades as director of the Carnegie Institution for Science’s Department of Terrestrial Magnetism in Washington, D.C. When he departed in 2011, colleagues arranged to have a previously discovered asteroid named after him: asteroid 25137 Seansolomon, which orbits the sun between Mars and Jupiter.
"Sean Solomon is a pioneer in both Earth and Planetary Sciences, and a world leader in the discipline of geophysics," said John Grotzinger, chair of the Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences (GPS) and Fletcher Jones Professor of Geology at Caltech. "Being awarded the National Medal of Science is a celebration of his extraordinary career, which has been rich with exploration, extending from the structure of the Earth, to the Moon, Mars, Venus, and Mercury. We are very proud of our alumnus from Caltech’s Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences."
Solomon is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has received numerous other awards, among them the Geological Society of America’s G.K. Gilbert Award and the American Geophysical Union’s Harry H. Hess Medal.
The National Medal of Science was created in 1959 and is administered by the National Science Foundation. Awarded annually, the medal honors individuals who have done work of outstanding merit or have had a major impact in the fields of science and engineering. A committee of presidential appointees recommends medal candidates to the president based on their extraordinary knowledge in and contributions to chemistry, engineering, computing, mathematics, and the biological, behavioral/social, and physical sciences.
The new awardees will receive their medals at a White House ceremony later this year.
More from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory:
When the NSA surveillance news broke last year it sent shockwaves through CERN, the particle physics laboratory in Switzerland. Andy Yen, a PhD student, took to the Young at CERN Facebook group with a simple message: “I am very concerned about the privacy issue, and I was wondering what I could do about it.”
There was a massive response, and of the 40 or so active in the discussion, six started meeting at CERN’s Restaurant Number 1, pooling their deep knowledge of computing and physics to found ProtonMail, a gmail-like email system which uses end-to-end encryption, making it impossible for outside parties to monitor.
Encrypted emails have actually been around since the 1980s, but they are extremely difficult to use. When Edward Snowden asked a reporter to use an end-to-end encrypted email to share details of the NSA surveillance program the reporter couldn’t get the system to work, says Yen.
“We encrypt the data on the browser before it comes to the server,” he explains. “By the time the data comes to the server it’s already encrypted, so if someone comes to us and says we’d like to read the emails of this person, all we can say is we have the encrypted data but we’re sorry we don’t have the encryption key and we can’t give you the encryption key.”
“We’ve basically separated the message that’s encrypted apart from the key – all the encryption takes place on your computer instead of our servers, so there’s no way for us to see the original message.”
Roominate, a startup toy company founded by Bettina Chen (BS ’10) and Alice Brooks aimed at inspiring girls toward an interest in engineering and science, earned bids from investors Mark Cuban and Lori Greiner during the season premier of "Shark Tank." Watch the clip:
When Chen met Brooks in graduate school at Stanford, they quickly bonded over a shared goal of influencing young girls to become interested in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM).
They realized that an educational toy could be a good introduction to STEM, and Roominate—a fully modular build-your-own dollhouse complete with wiring capabilities—was born. Each kit comes with all the walls, furniture-building pieces, circuit components, and decorations needed to construct a room from scratch. There is no set way to assemble a Roominate room; instead, the girls are encouraged to explore and experiment.
“Girls must use creativity and problem-solving skills—essential skills to develop
for STEM—in order to build and wire a room with Roominate,” says Chen. “We believe that Roominate is the type of toy that is missing from the market today: a toy that will help girls build up the skills and confidence they need to persevere in more male-dominated fields.”
Theoretical nuclear and particle physicist Iain Stewart (PhD ’99) offers his MIT course on Effective Field Theory on edX. Take a look:
The Stanford paleobotanist and 2013 MacArthur Fellow answers a few questions about his work, and what a 100-million-year-old leaf can tell us about the world today.
CAA: What is a Paleobotanist?
Boyce: Very different people work on the front line of fossil records. Some analyze vertebrates, such as dinosaurs. Paleobotanists like me study how plants are formed. Taken together, all of our work creates a picture of Earth’s environment from a different time.
CAA: How did you choose this line of work?
Boyce: What I do isn’t the type of biology pursued at Caltech, but it was important for me to be there. I studied cell morphology in Eric Davidson’s lab and Joe Kirschvink in geobiology helped to spark my interest in Earth’s biodiversity. I also majored in literature. George Pigman’s classes on Chaucer interested me in historical texts—which are similar to fossils, in a way.
I'd be perfectly happy being a biblical scholar if I wasn’t so terrible with foreign language. Reading someone like Chaucer, it's very easy to think you understand the text by projecting our modern world back on to it. Then you'll get to something that you just can't understand from a modern perspective—and you can't justify it away. That’s also true with fossils. There were forests 350 million years ago. They may feel familiar on a first look, but they were fundamentally different.
CAA: How do you approach your work with fossils?
Boyce: Any examination of fossil records has to start with our understanding of modern ecology. You look at a fossil of a leaf and think, “Okay, that looks like a leaf. I understand that.” But as you examine the details more closely—and plant fossils can offer a great deal of detail, down to cellular anatomy—you discover that there are a number of differences within the structure. This leaf may not, in fact, operate like leaves today in terms of its construction or biological processes.
CAA: What does a prehistoric plant look like?
Boyce: There's a lot of weird things out there, like Lepidodendron. Their closest relative today are these scruffy little plants a couple inches tall that poke their heads out of leaf litter in temperate forests. But if you went back 300 million years, they were the canopy trees — 30, 40 meters tall. They weren’t constructed at all like today’s trees, though. They had almost no wood at all, just a great deal of bark. It's unclear what was holding them up. Everything about their construction is very strange.
CAA: What significant changes have occurred in plant life?
Boyce: Today, most plants are flowering plants, with reproductive characteristics that typically include flowers, seeds, or fruit. But more than 100 million years ago, these types of plants didn’t exist. So how is it that they came to take over? Through my work, I demonstrated that as temperatures rose at that time, flowering plants’ evolved a high vein density which allowed them to cycle water at faster rates than previously dominant plants.
CAA: What can these plants teach us about today’s ecology?
Boyce: They can help us understand the origins of our food supply—which is dominated by crops that are all basically flowering plants.
One focus of my research is how primary production, the process by which living compounds are synthesized from carbon dioxide, has changed over time. We know that today, carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere. Generally, if you give plants more carbon dioxide, they’ll perform more photosynthesis and grow faster. That effect is easy to study over a couple of years. But what would happen if you were looking at increased levels of carbon dioxide across very large scales and over revolutionary time periods?
Understanding how past ecologies adapted and changed may yield us valuable clues into our ecology today. And—presented with new changes to the environment, how it might adapt again.
Embracing the entrepreneurial spirit to help build a Bay Area startup, delving even deeper into research with Caltech faculty, heading off to that colder institute of technology for graduate study—these are choices that not every new college graduate could afford.
Caltech’s inaugural cohort of Stamps Leadership Scholars—Randall Lin (BS ’14), Ted Xiao (BS ’14), and Jetson Leder-Luis (BS ’14)—have earned an extra measure of freedom in choosing what to do next, thanks to scholarships that afforded them special opportunities during their Caltech days.
The Penelope W. and E. Roe Stamps IV Leadership Scholar Awards Program at Caltech, one of 35 Stamps scholarship programs nationwide, provides exceptional students with four years’ worth of tuition, academic, and living expenses as well as supplementary funds to help pay for study abroad, research, internships, conferences, and more. The program is made possible by a one-to-one funding match between the Stamps Charitable Foundation and Caltech.
“I don’t know if it’s true,” says Randall Lin, “but my mom always says if I hadn’t had this scholarship, I would have had to study what they wanted me to study.
“They wanted me to go to med school. And now I have a physics degree and a computer science minor, even though I still did premed.”
The first in his family to attend college, Lin loves challenges. After steeping himself in biophysics and computational neuroscience at Caltech, he has deferred graduate school to join Halo Neuroscience, a start-up developing a transcranial therapy.
Thanks to this award, he was able to spend summers researching how neurons process information. He also dared himself to go outside his comfort zone by traveling to South Korea and Japan, countries he had never visited, and shooting documentary footage about perceptions of plastic surgery in Seoul and about a Tokyo DJ who caters to middle-aged house and hip hop fans. Lin was also able to avoid taking on loans, which he says made all the difference in his choice to join a start-up.
Ted Guoning Xiao came to Caltech for the opportunity to work in the labs of world-class professors. Inspired by his mother’s love of her medical career and an experience shadowing a City of Hope investigator, Xiao focused on science and math in high school, excelling in research.
“I knew early on what I wanted to do,” he says. “And now I’ve had the opportunity to go to different hospital environments and experience what it’s like to be in the ER and the operating room.”
His unpaid hospital preceptorships were made possible by this opportunity. The funding also gave him the flexibility to spend summers conducting research in the lab of Frances Arnold, Caltech’s Dick and Barbara Dickinson Professor of Chemical Engineering, Bioengineering and Biochemistry.
“The scholarship has really helped me,” he says. “Without it, I would have had to do a lot of work study. As an engineering major, I had to study until early morning often. With the Stamps scholarship, I made it.”
Xiao also had the freedom to achieve another long-held goal: reaching out to schoolchildren in the local community where he grew up, some from disadvantaged backgrounds. He started a volunteer program that brings several Caltech students to the nearby Learning Lab at the Hathaway-Sycamores Family Resource Center each week to help middle and high schoolers learn math and science.
Now a bioengineering graduate, Xiao hopes to spend a year working with another Caltech research group before enrolling in an MD/PhD program.
Graduating with options in economics and in applied and computational mathematics, Jetson Leder-Luis already has made contributions as a researcher.
Through summer work with Jean Ensminger, Caltech’s Edie and Lew Wasserman Professor of Social Science, Leder-Luis helped conceptualize tools to spot fraud in development aid. He also collaborated with Harvard scientists to produce statistical models for analyzing survey responses, coauthoring a 2014 paper in the American Journal of Political Science.
Leder-Luis says the Stampses’ generosity gave him the freedom to focus and excel. The scholarship also funded extensive travel—enabling him to gain firsthand experience in developing nations such as Albania and Malaysia, which galvanized his interest in economics.
“This is my job,” he says. “I basically started being a grad student three years ago.” Next up, he will begin doctoral studies in economics at MIT.
Being a Stamps Scholar gave Leder-Luis the chance to engage his artistic skills as well. He held leadership roles in Caltech’s Fluid Dynamics a cappella group, Glee Club, and Chamber Singers, and was music director of an acclaimed Caltech production of the musical Rent.
Leder-Luis is thankful for every opportunity allowed by this award.
“I’ve never had to compromise academics for funds, and I’ve been able to do things I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to do otherwise,” he says. “Really, it feels like we have the sweetest deal in academia.”
Caltech president Thomas F. Rosenbaum accepts the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge from MIT president Rafael Reif. Dr. Rosenbaum gets doused in the flume in the Earth Surface Dynamics Laboratory of Michael Lamb, Caltech professor of geology. Dr. Rosenbaum challenges Worcester Polytechnic Institute president and Caltech alumna Laurie Leshin (MS '89, PhD ’95) and University of Chicago provost Eric Isaacs. The water used in the flume's experiments is recycled; it gets pumped from the flume's floor back up to the top of the incline. No water was wasted in the making of this video.
Rumi Chunara, a researcher at Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, was named to MIT Technology Review's annual list of innovators under 35.
Chunara investigates how social media and other online sources of information can help alert the public and authorities to an outbreak of disease.
According to Chunara, a rise in cholera-related Twitter posts in Haiti correlated with an outbreak. "That’s important, because it takes the ministry of health in Haiti a couple of weeks to get their data aggregated,” she told the Review.
By Rebecca Oppenheimer (PhD ’99)
Professor and chair of the astrophysics department at the American Museum of Natural History
Studying the universe — perhaps even modern science as a whole — is as American as apple pie and baseball.
Although America was not the first country to launch a satellite into orbit, it has, for more than half a century, pioneered the exploration of the universe from the advantageous perspective that sensors, robots and telescopes offer once they are off-world. Looking through a telescope in space — as opposed to one on the ground — is, to an astrophysicist, as revelatory as a child's first sense that shapes and faces are physical, can be touched and explored, and that vision is a meaningful way to understand where one is.
Far from the water-laden, turbulent atmosphere that protects Earth's cozy climate, a telescope can study otherwise invisible aspects of the cosmos: black holes, the evolving structure of the universe, the birthing of stars and our closest, smallest neighbors, some comparable in size to Jupiter, yet roaming the universe alone. We even have evidence that planets similar to Earth may be quite common in orbits around stars other than the sun. These discoveries made by astrophysical experiments in space have completely transformed our view of where we are and how this planet came to be.
Twenty years ago, when I started graduate school at Caltech, if I said I wanted to find planets around other stars, people in the field would laugh and say, "Go watch 'Star Trek.'" Now the study of "exoplanets" is a rich field of research that addresses fundamental questions surrounding our own origins. Much of that knowledge comes from telescopes in space.
This priceless knowledge is a result of the dedicated effort of thousands of people over several decades. It could not have been achieved without the resources and forward-thinking mentality that NASA enables. Today, however, our country's political climate has put this groundbreaking work in jeopardy.
I recently chaired an independent review committee for NASA's astrophysics division to conduct a senior review, the highest-level peer review that division conducts. Our group of 10 experts was tasked with examining the existing telescopes and other types of sensors currently in operation, some in orbit around Earth, others trailing at huge distances and orbiting the sun.
There are 10 current missions, representing an investment of billions of dollars over three decades, including smaller contributions by the European and Japanese space agencies. All of these spacecraft have unique capabilities to render facets of the universe visible for scientific scrutiny, capabilities that probably will never be replicated.
Our committee's charge involved ranking the scientific value of these missions, and helping the senior administration at NASA allocate available funds to ensure the highest-quality science for the next four years. For three weeks, we professors, researchers and other professionals, none of whom was directly involved in any of the projects, deliberated pro bono to develop a plan that would keep the field healthy within the specified budget guidelines.
When we heard what the guidelines were, we were horrified. We estimated that NASA was operating many of these missions at a level that was below 2% of the initial construction and launch expenses. Standard management practice suggests that 10% of the initial construction cost is a reasonable annual budget for operating a facility. We had to work with a total of $75 million. That is what the government spends roughly every 10 minutes. It is less than a third of the L.A. Dodgers' payroll in 2014, and represents a contribution of a little less than 25 cents per American each year.
In the next few years, this mission operating budget is projected to fall to less than 40% of this year's value. As a result, several fully operational spacecraft will be turned off — and lost in space.
Because our panel sought to maintain as much scientific breadth as possible, other projects have been reduced in funding almost to the point of simply collecting the data but not analyzing it. If the current budget guidelines are put into law, teams of scientists, engineers and software experts will be laid off. The collective talent of these groups will be permanently lost.
Is this extreme austerity, an artifact of the current political climate, really the right way forward? The United States is in a better position than ever to advance human understanding of the universe in ways unimaginable to Ben Franklin as he established American science many years ago. Are we, as a nation, to be remembered by future generations for building these remarkable eyes on the universe, simply to let them drift away into darkness or vaporize in the atmosphere, when they can still see things no one has ever imagined? Are we not obliged to continue this bold exploration, with vigor, for the benefit of all of humanity?
Rebecca Oppenheimer (PhD ’99) is curator, professor and chair of the astrophysics department at the American Museum of Natural History. This article originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times, with the author credited as B.R. Oppenheimer. Reprinted with permission.
Paul Chirik (PhD ’00) was named the editor-in-chief of Organometallics, a peer-reviewed journal published by the American Chemical Society focused on organometallic and organometalloid chemistry.
Chirik is currently the Edward S. Sanford Professor of Chemistry at Princeton University.
"My vision for the journal is to continue its position of excellence as the flagship publication in the field and also to capture the growth and new multidisciplinary chemistry moving forward," Chirik says.
Before earning his PhD at Caltech, Chirik studied at Virginia Tech. He went on to become a postdoctoral fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 2001, he joined the faculty at Cornell University, where he stayed for 10 years before joining Princeton.
The research group he now leads focuses on solving long-standing problems in chemical synthesis. For example, they are working on developing catalysts using earth-abundant elements, focusing on more environmentally benign syntheses.
"We are delighted to welcome Dr. Chirik in his new role as editor-in-chief of Organometallics," says Susan King, Ph.D., senior vice president of ACS Publications. "Dr. Chirik has been an active supporter of ACS Publications through his authorship, reviewing activities and Editorial Advisory Board capacity. Dr. Chirik's breadth of scientific interests, his strong leadership skills and his editorial experience will ensure Organometallics continues to innovate and expand into multidisciplinary areas."
Patricia Thiel (PhD ’81) has been named the 2014 winner of the AVS Medard W. Welch Award, which recognizes outstanding research in the fields of materials, interfaces and processing. Thiel, who is a faculty scientist at the U.S. Department of Energy's Ames Laboratory and a Distinguished Professor of chemistry at Iowa State University, is recognized for her "seminal contributions to the understanding of quasicrystalline surfaces and thin-film nucleation and growth."
"We congratulate Pat on the Welch Award and for her outstanding contributions to the field of surface chemistry. Pat's work in understanding the surface structures of complex materials has advanced the understanding of quasicrystals and nanoparticles on metal and semiconductor surfaces," said Adam Schwartz, director of the Ames Laboratory.
The Welch Award was established in 1969. Thiel is the first woman to win the Welch Award in its 44-year history.
"This award is defined by the people who won it before me. They have been the giants in the field of surface science. I am humbled and honored to be joining their ranks. The award really recognizes much more than me. It recognizes my many talented coworkers and the agencies that have enabled our work, especially the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation," said Thiel.