Appendix II

Supporting Documents & Appendices

Referenced in the Self-Study Report

Appendices I through XII

For

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education

January 2008

Appendix I

Relating to “Mission, Strategic Vision, Goals and Objectives: Middle States Standard

1”

I-a; AUC Statement of Mission (Mission Statement)

Mission

The mission of the American University in Cairo (AUC) is to provide high quality educational opportunities to

students from all segments of Egyptian society as well as from other countries, and to contribute to Egypt's

cultural and intellectual life. The university offers programs at the undergraduate, graduate and professional

levels as well as an extensive continuing education program. The language of instruction is English.

The university advances the ideals of American liberal arts and professional education and of life-long learning.

As freedom of academic expression is fundamental to this effort, AUC encourages the free exchange of ideas

and promotes open and on-going interaction with scholarly institutions throughout Egypt and other parts of the

world.

The pursuit of excellence is central to AUC's mission, and the university maintains high standards of academic

achievement, professional behavior and ethical conduct. Toward this end it also provides a broad range of

disciplines and learning opportunities and strives to contribute to the sum of human knowledge.

The university environment is designed to advance proficient use of the tools of learning as well as students'

thinking capabilities, language and personal skills. Through its adult and continuing education programs, the

university offers educational opportunities to enhance the professional and job skills of non-degree students.

AUC considers it essential to foster students' appreciation of their own culture and heritage and of their

responsibilities to society. The university's aim of promoting international understanding is supported by means

of scholarship, learned discourse, a multicultural campus environment, and a diversified publishing program.

To advance its mission, the university seeks to maintain a highly qualified faculty. Emphasis is placed on

excellence in teaching as well as on research, creative work and faculty members' intellectual contributions to

their disciplines. Outstanding administrative, professional and support staff, leading edge instructional

technology and use of other resources are also central to the pursuit of the university's aims.

The American University in Cairo is an independent, non-profit, apolitical, non-sectarian and equal-

opportunity institution.

I-b; AUC Faculty Best Practices

STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AT AUC

By subscribing to the best teaching practices, we the faculty can contribute to promote a culture of academic

integrity for all constituents of the academic community. We may find it useful to remind ourselves of the

norms of academic integrity as outlined in the AUC Code of Academic Ethics. By serving as models for the

students, we can contribute substantially to a consistent application of the principles of academic integrity in

and out of the classroom. Although many within our ranks are familiar with some of the best teaching

practices, this document may provide an impetus for us all to re-examine areas where we might be able to make

a significant contribution to academic integrity by subscribing to the best practices described below.

BEST PRACTICES IN ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

I. When Preparing a Course

With regard to preparing a course, a faculty member can promote the principles of academic integrity by:

 giving careful consideration to the syllabus and to make sure it is updated to reflect the latest

scholarship and the best available texts

 spelling out clearly in the syllabus the nature of the work that will be expected of the students, the

criteria for grading, as well as any expectation s/he might have of them,

 respecting copyrights, trademarks, and patents (on software, for example), and

 planning to talk about what integrity requires of the students, as each new task occurs (exams,

written or lab assignments, group work, oral presentation…)

II. At the Beginning of the Semester

At the beginning of the semester, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by:

 providing the students with a syllabus that clearly spells out course requirements, teacher

expectations, and the grading process, and

 discussing why s/he is committed to academic integrity and why integrity is important for the

discipline. Examples of how professionals in the discipline have violated those principles, and the

consequences of those violations, may perhaps also be included.

III. When Preparing for Class

A faculty member can promote academic integrity by preparing to make the class a worthwhile educational

experience for the students. This can be done by:

 remaining up to date with the recent scholarship and trends in the discipline, as well as current

issues,

 remembering to give credit to his or her sources,

 rereading the assigned text materials in preparation for class, and/or working out problems

ahead of time, in preparation for class

 clarifying information s/he might not be clear about,

 recognizing that some subjects may be uncomfortable for some students and try to find ways

to deal with those issues in a direct and constructive manner,

 preparing the class with an eye toward what is current today (that is, not simply relying on

past notes), and

 creating opportunities for intellectual growth rather than devoting class time to a recitation of

facts or restating what the students can learn for themselves by reading the text.

IV. In Class

With regard to class sessions, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by taking her/his students

seriously and treating them with respect. This requires that s/he:

 show up for all class sessions, unless s/he‟s simply unable to do so,

 come to class on time, and for the most part, not end the class early or keep the class late,

 not wasting class time, but use it well to fulfill the objectives of the course,

 fosters and expecting mutual respect among students and create a safe environment in the

classroom,

 explain what is expected of students when file sharing, downloading protocols, and respecting

software licensing rights,

 do his or her best to answer students‟ questions, or if necessary arranging to do so outside of

class,

 be especially careful when a student asks what might be considered a „dumb‟ question, or one

that has just been answered,

 honestly acknowledge when s/he doesn‟t have an answer or doesn‟t know something, and

then going out and getting the answer by the next class,

 make clear when s/he‟s expressing an opinion, and not impose on the students her or his

views on controversial issues,

 respect the views the students express and not making fun of the students or their views,

 treating all students the equally and not play favorites in applying the policies spelled out in

the syllabus,

 both encourage the students, and giving each of them an equal opportunity, to participate in

class discussions,

 contain those students whose enthusiasm for participating in the discussion makes it difficult

for others to participate,

 discuss discipline-related ethical dilemmas that the teacher has faced and how s/he dealt with

them,

 engage in an ongoing process of self-evaluation of the effectiveness of teaching methods and

whether students are learning from those methods,

 not allow students to ridicule other students or their ideas,

 not talk with students about other students or faculty members,

 adequately prepare students to do the class assignment or activity,

 provide equal opportunity and treatment for all students, such as not modifying syllabus

requirements unless willing to do so for all students,

 encourage students to ask her or him and not their classmates for help with assignments and

laboratories,

 work to identify students who look as though they may not have the study skills and/or study

habits necessary to succeed without cheating and either working with them to help them develop those

skills and habits, or recommend they go to Writing Center where they can get help, and

 know what his or her students are capable of doing by watching them work in laboratory

situations.

V. With Regard to Student Contact Outside of Class

With regard to being available to students outside of class, a faculty member can promote academic integrity

by:

 being available during office hours or at by making arrangements for times to work with

students on an individual basis, and

 returning calls and emails in a timely fashion.

VI. With Regard to Exams

With regard to exams, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by:

 doing his or her best during class time, and through appropriate and meaningful out-of-class

assignments, to prepare the students for the exams,

 developing exam questions that will be a meaningful test not only of the course content, but

also of the student‟s ability to express and defend intelligent judgments about that content,

 making clear what constitutes a violation of academic integrity with regard to exams,

 setting up the classroom in such a way that it reduces the chances of cheating,

 carefully monitoring all exams to ensure fairness and to ensure that honest students will not

feel disadvantaged by other students who might choose to cheat if given the opportunity,

 being consistent in his or her policy regarding makeup exams, and

 being aware of the fatigue factor when grading exams, and

 giving due and careful consideration to exam answers when evaluating them and assigning a

grade.

VII. With Regard to Written Assignments

With regard to written assignments, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by:

 devising meaningful assignments that grow out of and further the work done in the classroom,

 making clear what constitutes a violation of academic integrity with regard to written

assignments, (i.e., what constitutes “doing your own work”),

 providing students with a clear written description of all written assignments so they know

what is expected of them and what the teacher will be looking for when grading them,

 providing students with samples of well-written assignments,

 finding out if students know how to do the assignment, and if not, teaching them how to do

so,

 looking at the students‟ work at the various stages of a long term assignment,

 giving due and careful consideration to the papers when evaluating them and assigning a

grade,

 returning assignments in a timely fashion, and

 confronting students whom s/he suspects of having plagiarized or in other ways not handed in

work that is entirely their own.

VIII. With Regard to Assigning Final Grades

With regard to your final grade, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by:

 having, and adhering to, a clear process and set of criteria for grading which is spelled out in

the syllabus,

 helping students know throughout the course of the semester at what level they are

performing at or what grades they are earning,

 carefully weighing all of the student‟s grades during the course, as well as the other factors

that affect the final grade as spelled out in the syllabus, before assigning a final grade, and

 give respectful consideration to students who question the grade they received.

IX. With Regard to Academic Integrity Violations

With regard to possible academic integrity violations on the part of students, a faculty member can promote

academic integrity by:

 not overlooking a possible violation, but taking the time and make the effort to determine if a

violation did occur, and

 not violating the confidentiality of students who bring information about academic integrity

violations, and

 being familiar with and following the institution‟s policy on dealing with academic integrity

violations.

IX. With Regard to Activities On or Off Campus

With regard to activities on or off campus, a faculty member can promote academic integrity by:

 making sure that the university policies on academic integrity are respected and implemented

 ensuring that none of the activities violate AUC’s Code of Academic Ethics.

Appendix II

Relating to “Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal: Middle States

Standard 2”

II-a; Sample of an Interview with Academic Staff

Interview with Dr. Ed Simpson, VP for Continuing Education, CACE, now School of Continuing Education;

Dr. Waguida El Bakary, Associate Dean for Educational Services. (November, December 2006).

Overview:

The CACE Long Range Planning process is impressive and fulfills the criteria outlined in the charges for

Taskforce B.

The CACE plans build on the President’s directives in his paper ―Building on Strong Foundations, AUC in

2012,‖ presented at the University Forum, September 25, 2006. The plans are very well written and thought

out, conveying all of CACE’s new initiatives in this outstanding effort and exercise. Outcomes are clearly

stated as well as the processes followed to attain them, and performance indicators are outlined. In many

cases, resource allocations are made at a minimum, with fundraising activities projected. For instance, a fund

raising policy will be developed and implemented for El Gouna in close collaboration with the Office of

Institutional Advancement.

Dr. Simpson initiated several significant changes in philosophy and operation, which he made in full

consultation with his staff. His goal is the ―full reintegration of the continuing education and outreach function

of AUC into the life of the university. It must be seen as an integral element of the University’s mission and

philosophy of service to Egypt and the region.‖

Interviews:

The interviews with Dr. Ed Simpson and Dr. Waguida El Bakary were very informative.

A. Interview with Dr. Ed Simpson, V P for Continuing Education:

1. Describe the process by which your School / Dept / Unit / developed its goals / objectives / outcomes? A

key issue here is: what was the starting point of those discussions? Was it ―top-down;‖ i.e. starting with AUC’s

mission statement…or ―bottom-up;‖ i.e. beginning with what we in our School/ Dept / Unit wanted to produce?

Dr. Simpson built on the directives of the President’s paper, ―Building on Strong Foundations.‖ The planning

process was initially top/down and strategic planning driven – the vision of a leader.

He outlined the 8 strategic questions facing higher education cited in ―Strategic Change in Colleges and

Universities” which were relevant to AUC Continuing Education.

(Daniel James Rowley, Herman D. Lujan, Michael G. Dolence. ―Strategic Change in Colleges and

Universities‖ Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco: 1997.)

What should we teach?

Who will our students be?

How should we teach it?

How will students learn?

What are society’s needs?

How does society expect us to meet its needs?

What role will learning play?

How will we pay for it?

Dr. Simpson initiated and led the whole process and gave it to the group for reactions and suggestions. He had

numerous communication meetings, four general meetings, and sent the results to all units after everyone was

given an overview. The process was highly participative. The President also addressed a group of around 20

to 30 senior and administrative staff. Ed followed up after the President’s meeting and talked further about

their plans. They also held a workshop, whereby they talked about organizational structure and change, and

discussed the philosophy of what they were doing. People (72 people) were comfortable about asking

questions and added their concerns. The outcome would be to update and completely reshuffle the strategic

objectives, looking at quality, internal perceptions, and to send questions asked.

There was consensus on what directions to take, i.e. a graduate diploma for employment, confirmed by Dean

O’Connor and Dr. Sherif Kamel. SCE is to increase its efforts in broadening its mission, and therefore its

service (apparent in plan, and the outcome is visible), and find ways to give better service.

Recently (about a couple of weeks ago, after the New York meetings), the ―School of Continuing Education‖

was validated.

2. How accessible was the AUC mission statement to those in the planning process? Was it considered a vital

tool in the process? Were the planning guides provided by IPART used in the formulation of the LRP?

The AUC mission statement and the President’s paper ―Building on Strong Foundations‖ were accessible. The

planning guides provided by IPART were used as given in the formulation of the LRP to provide consistency

and uniformity among the CACE units. The six strategic themes were followed.

Waguida El Bakary, Associate Dean for Educational Services, did a good job in summarizing and integrating

the various unit plans prepared by unit heads, and in preparing a comprehensive report.

3. How was the resource allocation devised (for the School / Dept / Unit)? In particular was it done alongside

– and according to – the planned objectives and activities of the School / Dept / Unit, or was it done apart from

the plan according to some other method and set of criteria/

Ultimately there is responsibility at each level, accountability, transparency, and a consultative process.

Resource allocation flows directly from the LRP initiatives.

A new organization chart for the School of Continuing Education was prepared, top-down mostly, however the

final draft was shared with everyone for input and negotiations.

An analysis on how to build administrative excellence was made, including surveys and with a customer focus.

Outcomes are quality and academic integration (logo for brochure no longer theirs, but AUC’s). New programs

were initiated for monitoring and evaluating quality.

Once the plan was approved, it was translated into a budget.

B. Interview with Dr. Waguida El Bakary, Associate Dean for Educational Services:

1. Describe the process by which your Unit developed its goals / objectives / outcomes. A key issue here is:

what was the staring point of those discussions? Was it ―top-down;‖ i.e. starting with AUC’s mission

statement…or ―bottom-up;‖ i.e beginning with what we in our Unit wanted to produce?

The mission statement was important.

The process was top-down, as well as full participation by all staff. The final draft was shared and

improvements and negotiations were welcome. An analysis was made on how to achieve the administrative

excellence they aspired to—how then to relate it to work review. An assessment was made with a sample of

students from all programs, and hearings took place.

Outcomes of surveys were reviewed, all with a customer focus, as well as the results of the previous

assessment—a rolling plan. There were to be longer evening hours, for instance, during the first week of

registration (customization of input from earlier assessment). Outcome is quality and integration with the

academic area. They now have the AUC logo.

2. How was the resource allocation devised (for the Unit)? In particular, was it done directly alongside – and

according to – the planned objectives and activities of the Unit, or was it done apart from the plan according to

some other method and set of criteria/

The renewal was translated into the budget once the plan was approved. An example is the disposition of the

Old Campus facilities. There will be new programs for monitoring and evaluating Quality, programs in the

John Gerhart Field Station in El Gouna, and with PVA on the present campus.

3. What are the tools by which you solicit feedback from relevant constituencies in order to improve your

programs and activities?

We solicit feedback from students, student evaluations for instance, administration’s evaluation of instruction,

reports every three months, teacher training programs, preparation of Arabic translations for foreigners, etc.

4. Who do we include to determine the level of coordination concerning the disposition of the ―old campus?‖

Coordination of space allocations for the Tahrir Campus made between Dr. Hisham Abdel Aziz, CACE, IMD,

and Engineering Services was very effective. A committee was formed, and this committee had access to

programs, facilities and services.

Summary of Unit Plan for Educational Services:

The plan is excellent in all respects.

The process was consultative and participatory. There were numerous meetings and communications within

and across units with clients and other CACE divisions & units. A SWOT analysis was made.

For the theme of ―Institutional Effectiveness‖, one of their goals is to ―further link and integrate planning,

assessment and resource allocation processes.‖ Another goal reflects service orientation. Quality is always an

important outcome.

For the theme of ―International Education‖ one goal is to ―expand the Arabic Language and ME Studies

Program‖. These programs are in demand. Service goals are also in the plan.

Transformation and outcome is: ―to enhance CACE’s role as a leading training resource center for Egypt and

the region.‖

Operational Excellence theme: one goal is to ―promote the use of technology in the classroom.‖ The objective

is to create an educational technologies unit. Another goal is to ―institute ’Best Practice’ facilities management

systems and procedures in both new campus and downtown campus facilities.‖

In the plan, linkages with CAPS, Sports Unit, Advising services are made and paralleled. We envisage a

complete transformation and institutional renewal for CACE. The whole planning process leads to a positive

renewal outcome and positive integration into the life of AUC.

Summary of the Unit Plan for Instructional Affairs:

I wasn’t able to interview Dr. Bahgat Moussa, Associate Dean for Instructional Affairs. However, I have

provided a summary of the Unit Plan for Instructional Affairs (attached):

Restructuring is apparent, and the plan starts off with an overview and Unit Plan for all the divisions of

Instructional Affairs.

In line with the President’s directives in his paper, ―Building on Strong Foundations,‖ outcomes are the

enhancement of the quality of AUC’s Continuing Education. The theme is ―Service‖, with a view of satisfying

the market. The goal is to strengthen and expand AUC’s continuing education programs, maximizing the use of

existing down-town campus resources and facilities, and providing a link with New Cairo. Different objectives

are enumerated, with needed resource allocations and funding needs itemized; the initiation of a career

certificate for teaching translation and simultaneous interpreting, and for teaching Arabic as a Foreign

Language; the creation of proficiency testing batteries to enhance institutional effectiveness; enhance faculty

compliance with internal benchmarking standards and integrity; programs to attract and retain instructors with

projected outcomes to be a wider pool of qualified and motivated instructors as well as student satisfaction. A

big boost is planned for the Computer Studies Division by introducing and developing new certification

preparation and training programs. One of the objectives is to ―extend computer programs to address the New

Campus emerging market needs.‖

Other new programs proposed are diplomas in professional education, in educational leadership, and a Master’s

degree in education – all as a service to the community. Emphasis is also placed on serving the English needs

of new communities and market segments, in the New Cairo community and the Red Sea area.

II-b; Examples of Planning and Resource Allocation at both the Academic and Unit

Levels

At the unit level in this example, development of the Department of Construction Engineering (CENG) LRP

report was initiated by the Chair. Although a subcommittee of three departmental faculty were responsible for

the actual compilation of the report, the content was supplied from several meetings of all the faculty of the

department. The LRP form and guidance document provided by IPART was used from the beginning. Two

documents served as the starting point for the LRP unit report. As noted above, the first was the department’s

recent ABET re-accreditation self-study. This already contains the department’s mission statement, 7 specific

goals, and 22 measurable outcomes. These were formulated as a result of extensive deliberations during the

Fall 2004 Semester by the departmental faculty, and are revisited at regular intervals in accordance with

ongoing assessment activities as prescribed in the accreditation self-study. It should also be pointed out that the

mission statement was developed using the AUC mission statement as the base document.

The second document was the set of academic initiatives developed by SSE faculty subcommittees during Fall

2005 and referred to above. Of the four main initiatives in the CENG LRP, two of these derive from the

internally approved initiatives of the School within the strategic theme of academic excellence. The other two

initiatives are within the same strategic theme and reflect: (1) the CENG response to feedback from constituents

(particularly students and employers) to diversity academic options and employment opportunities for students;

and (2) the President’s plan for academic excellence grounded in competitive programs and enhanced

enrollments (both quantity and quality of new students).

The second example derives from planning activities under the area of the Vice President for Planning and

Administration (VPPA). In Spring 2006, the VPPA gave a directive to the heads of the various units (at least 12

in his area) to produce goals / objectives / outcomes for planned activities according to the guidance documents

issued by IPART. The process by which this was carried out varied from unit to unit, but it is largely ―bottom-

up.‖ It should be pointed out that the units in this area are highly diverse, ranging from Human Resources to

Facilities to University Computing / IT to Office of Health and Safety to Printing, etc. The planning documents

are then presented to the VPPA who modifies and integrates them into a single document. Modifications are

according to the awareness of the VPPA of university priorities and resource capabilities via his presence on the

Executive LRP and President’s Budget Committees. The completed document is submitted to IPART. While

the AUC mission statement is accessible to everyone in the process, many of the units in this area are service

oriented, i.e., they engage primarily in practical activities in response to needs of the academic enterprise.

Planning and resource allocation in this instance, therefore, is more focused on strategic themes such as

operational excellence and service, including training programs to improve the professional conduct of staff,

rather than initiation of new programs and long-term tasks. The university mission becomes more evident only

as the planning document moves up the chain of administration within the area.

II-c; Example of the Association between Budget Planning and the LRP at the Unit

Level

At the academic unit level, the LRP guidelines documents required that under each stated objective, the

following must be specified: (1) expected outcomes; (2) proposed programs, initiatives and/or activities to

achieve the objective / outcomes; (3) how achievement of the outcomes will be measured; (4) the time frame of

the proposed activities; and, (5) the resources required on a year-by-year basis over the time frame of the

proposed activity. For example, one of the new academic initiatives in the School of Sciences and Engineering

referred to in Self-Study Question 1 was a new major in Architectural Engineering proposed in the Department

of Construction Engineering LRP Unit Report. Under ―Resources‖ for this objective were included the faculty,

administrative staff, office space, instructional space, equipment, library and other budget requirements and

their proposed distribution over a four year period. In compiling the School LRP document, the Dean of SSE

followed the departmental requests for resource allocation as closely as possible. In some instances, however,

the Dean had to make adjustments based on his own judgment with the knowledge that the plan would have to

subsequently meet with the approval of the Provost and the President. For instance, the School designed six

new academic program initiatives as part of its LRP. The Dean has proposed a staggered start-up of these

programs over a period of several years so as not to incur an unrealistic capital expenditure in a one or two year

period.

Appendix III

Relating to “Institutional Resources: Middle States Standard 3”

III-a; Office of the Budget and Financial Planning Mission Statement

Mission, Objectives, and Outcomes

The University’s Budget Office develop annual and long-range University budgets, administer these through the

fiscal year, originate research, develop analysis and make recommendations on a wide variety of academic and

financial issues that have a major impact on the university budget. The objectives are: budget preparation,

maintenance and control, support decision making and planning. Expected outcomes include: (1) Resource

allocation in line with the long range plan in the proposed budget request, (2) Budget/actual performance report

and year-end forecast report ensuring control over revenue & expenditures in compliance with the approved

budget, & (3) Reporting year-end results and explaining reasons for variances/deviations from the approved

budget.

Process

Over a period of eight months the budget preparation passes through 6 phases in budget planning, beginning

with phase 5 and ending with phase 0:

(5) Submission of Department/Unit plan

(4) Review/modification by Deans (where an intermediate level of management exists)

(3) Review by Area Heads

(2) Review by the President and the Budget Committee

(1) Budget adopted by the administration

(0) Budget adopted by the Board of Trustees

Measurements of Effectiveness

1) Periodically meeting the expected outcomes of reporting year end results and explaining reasons for

variance/deviations from the approved budget.

2) Identifying challenges and improvement venues (non-periodically).

STRENGTHS

Process allows everybody to have input into budget

process from staff to upper management.

The budget operations managed through an

integrated information system allowing the

university to control and manage its resources.

WEAKNESSES

The budget process starts a year prior to its

implementation, making it difficult for some

departments to accurately forecast for their needs

(eg. planning for technology).

OPPORTUNITIES

To build on the implementation of the SAP Fund

Management (FM) and build on its features to have

workflow and to Integrate the FM with other

business applications.

THREATS

Budget forecasts being inaccurate can lead to

budget deficits.

Appendix IV

Relating to “Leadership, Governance and Administration: Middle States Standards 4

& 5”

IV-a; AUC Board Of Trustees

Officers

Mr. B. Boyd Hight, Chair

Mr. Paul L. Corddry, Vice Chair

Dr. Elias K. Hebeka, Vice Chair

Dr. Barbara Brown, Treasurer

Dr. Farhad Kazemi, Secretary

Dr. Larry L. Fabian, VP / Executive Secretary

Mr. Mohammad Abughazaleh ( elected in 2007) is an AUC alumnus whose company, Fresh Del Monte

Produce has a market capitalization of $1.2 billion. Its most recent acquisition of Del Monte Foods Europe in

2004 gave it a more diversified and global reach, with sales of $3.3 billion. With 37,000 employees and

customers in approximately 100 countries, the company farms over 100,000 acres in 12 countries, including

Chile, Costa Rica, Hawaii, the Philippines, South Africa, Kenya, and New Zealand. Prior to his current position

he was the president and chief executive officer (CEO) of IAT Group Inc. From 1986-96, he served as the

president and CEO of the United Trading Company. Prior to that, he served as the general manager for Metico

in Dubai and Kuwait. He was awarded the Distinguished Alumni Award by AUC in 2006.

Mr. J. Dinsmore Adams, Jr. (elected in 1991) is a partner with the law firm of Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt &

Mosle LLP in New York, where he is co-chairman of the firm's personal clients group. He worked for Webster

& Sheffield for 20 years, where his practice included litigation, civil rights, estate and tax planning,

representation of educational and other tax-exempt organizations, and civil rights. A graduate of University of

Pennsylvania Law School and Harvard University, he is a former president and executive committee chairman

of the Harvard Club of New York City, a former director of the African Medical & Research Foundation, Inc.,

and a former trustee of the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, the Adirondack Museum, Concern for

Dying, and the Riverdale Yacht Club. He currently serves as a trustee of the Lincoln Center Institute and several

charitable trusts and private foundations.

Mr. Moataz Al-Alfi (elected in 1997) is the chairman of the Americana Group (Egypt), a sister company of

Kuwait Food Company (Americana) with about 25,000 employees and total sales over US$ 1 billion. With over

35 years in management of food industry business, including high value-added consumer products, he has led

the continuous growth of Americana, now the regional market leader in agribusiness poultry and chicken feed

industries, and QSR franchises in 12 Middle East countries. Mr. Al-Alfi is also the Chairman of Heinz Egypt

and the Managing Director of Egypt Kuwait Holding Co. (EKH), a direct investment company in Egypt since

1998, with a total investment of US$ 600 million in natural gas, petrochemicals, and utilities. Mr. Al-Alfi holds

a B.Sc. in food technology from Cairo University. He is a member of several non-profit NGO’s serving the

development of human resources, education, and the environment. He is the founder and Vice Chairman of the

Future Generation Foundation (FGF); a board member of the Social Fund of Development (SFD); the founder

and board member of the Egyptian Center for Economic Studies (ECES); a board member of the National

Specialized Councils, the long- range planning council of Egypt; and the Chairman of the Egyptian Franchise

Development Association (EFDA). He has been appointed by H.E. President Mubarak to the Egypt-US

Business Council as the Chair of the Human Resources Development Committee.

Dr. Lisa Anderson is a specialist on politics in the Middle East and North Africa. Prior to being named Dean of

the School of International Public Affairs, she was the chair of the political science department at Columbia

University. She also served as the director of Columbia’s Middle East Institute. Before joining Columbia, she

was assistant professor of government and social studies at Harvard University. Anderson is the author of

Pursuing Truth, Exercising Power: Social Science and Public Policy in the Twenty-first Century (Columbia

University Press, 2003), The State and Social Transformation in Tunisia and Libya,1830-1980 (Princeton

University Press, 1986), and editor of Transitions to Democracy (Columbia University Press, 1999). She serves

as chair of the Board of Directors of the Social Science Research Council, is a member of the Council on

Foreign Relations, and an emeritus member of the Board of Human Rights Watch.

Mr. David D. Arnold (ex officio ) became president of AUC on September 1, 2003. Prior to joining AUC, Mr.

Arnold was Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the New York-based Institute of

International Education (IIE), the world’s largest non-profit educational exchange organization. He has also

held senior positions with the Ford Foundation, notably as the Foundation’s Representative in New Delhi,

where he was responsible for overseeing Ford’s programs in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka. Mr. Arnold was the

Foundation’s first program officer responsible for efforts to encourage government innovations and improve

democratic practices in the U.S. He was also responsible for coordinating the Foundation’s Governance and

Public Policy Programs in developing countries, including East and Central Europe and the former Soviet

Union. He has held senior positions with the National Governors’ Association and the Northeastern Governors

Policy Research Center in Washington, D.C. Mr. Arnold holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration

from Michigan State University and a B.A. in History and Political Science from the University of Michigan.

Mr. Kenneth H. Bacon (elected in 2003) is President of Refugees International, an advocacy organization

based in Washington, D.C. From 1994-2001, he was Assistant Secretary, Public Affairs, at the U.S. Department

of Defense. Prior to that, he was an editor, columnist, and reporter for The Wall Street Journal, concentrating on

defense, banking, economics, and international finance. Mr. Bacon received an M.B.A. and an M.A. in

Journalism from Columbia University, and a B.A. in English from Amherst College. From 1968-74 he served in

the U.S. Army Reserve. Mr. Bacon is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International

Institute for Strategic Studies. He serves on the boards of Population Action International and InterAction.

Mr. Paul H. Bartlett (elected in 2001) is a business executive in the technology industry, formerly COO &

CFO of Critical Path, Inc. He was previously the CEO at Quintus Corporation until the company was acquired

by AVAYA in 2001. He also served as President and Director of Hall Kinion & Associates, a $200 million

publicly traded IT services and recruiting company for the Internet. Mr. Bartlett has been a general partner at

The Sprout Venture Capital Group where he focused on technology start-ups, buy-outs and divisional spin-offs,

and an associate at the investment banking firm of Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette. Mr. Bartlett earned his B.A.

in economics from Princeton University in 1982, and his M.B.A. from Stanford Graduate School of Business in

1987. His business background includes broad exposure to technology, information systems development and

related management issues.

Mr. Richard A. Bartlett (elected in 2003) is managing director of Resources Holdings, Ltd., a merchant

banking firm in New York City. Prior to joining that firm in 1984, he served as a law clerk to Supreme Court

Justice Harry A. Blackmun, and prior to that, as a law clerk on the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of

Columbia. Mr. Bartlett received his J.D. from Yale Law School and his B.A. from the Woodrow Wilson School

of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. He is a council member of the Brookings Institution,

and serves on the board of U.S. Airways Group, Inc., and several private companies.

Mr. James D. Bond (elected in 1998) is the vice president of Collins & Company in Arlington, Virginia,

specializing in trade, foreign affairs, and appropriations issues. He joined the firm in 1997 after serving for

nearly 26 years on the staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, including several years as staff

director of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee. In this capacity, he had appropriations and oversight

responsibilities for the full range of U.S. economic and military assistance programs. He has also been the

minority staff director of five other Appropriations Subcommittees: Agriculture, Interior, Energy and Water,

HUD, Space and Science, and the District of Columbia. He has served as an adjunct professor at Georgetown

University, teaching a course on the Congressional budget process. He served in the 101st Airborne Division in

the Vietnam War, during which he was awarded the Bronze Star and the Combat Infantryman’s Badge. He

serves on the board of Vietnam Assistance for the Handicapped, based in Arlington, Virginia, and the

Tewaaraton Award Foundation based in Washington, DC. He holds a B.A. degree from Marquette University.

Dr. Barbara Brown (elected in 1993) is the treasurer of the board. She is assistant professor of anatomy in

orthopaedic surgery at the Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine where she teaches human gross

anatomy. She received her B.A. from Connecticut College and her M.A. and Ph.D. from Kent State University.

She also taught human gross anatomy at The Johns Hopkins University and Ohio University and was a

postdoctoral associate in the Department of Anthropology at Yale University. Dr. Brown’s specialty is human

origins research. She has been involved in paleontological fieldwork in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Pakistan for over

two decades.

Mr. Richard Cashin (elected in 2001) is Managing Partner of One Equity Partners, the private equity

investment unit of J. P. Morgan Chase, which manages $4.5 billion of J. P. Morgan’s private equity capital. He

has also been president of Citicorp Venture Capital. Mr. Cashin grew up in Africa and Asia, where his parents

served in diplomatic posts. He has been especially active in support of disadvantaged students and athletics. He

currently serves on the Board of the Boys Club of New York, the Board of the National Rowing Foundation,

and the Board of Jazz at Lincoln Center and the Board of the Central Park Conservancy. He has also been on

the boards of Phillips Academy and International Preschools. He received both his B.A. in East Asian studies

and his M.B.A. from Harvard University. He was a member of the 1976 and 1980 Olympic rowing teams, and

was World Champion in 1974.

Mr. Paul I. Corddry (elected in 1991) is vice chairman of the board. He retired as senior vice president -

Europe for the H.J. Heinz Company in 1993. He holds a B.A. from Swarthmore College and an M.B.A. from

the University of Chicago. Mr. Corddry is on the board of the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C.,

Swarthmore College, and the Naples Center for the Performing Arts, and is a director of Albertson’s Inc. He has

also been a director of the Western States Arts Foundation, the Boise Public Library Foundation, the College of

Idaho, Citizens National Bank, and St. Luke's Regional Medical Center; and has been a member of the advisory

council of the Boise State University's School of Business.

Mrs. Mary Cross (elected in 1993) is a photographer and writer. She has authored and/or photographically

illustrated numerous books, articles, and papers. Her work has been exhibited in sixteen one-woman

photographic shows across the United States in museums and universities. She collaborated with Frances

FitzGerald on Vietnam: Spirits of the Earth , published in 2001 by Little Brown/Bulfinch. Her Vietnam

photographs were exhibited in 2002 in Washington, D.C. at Meridian House, and in 2001 at the Council on

Foreign Relations in New York. Her photographs of Vietnam were published in the Fall/Winter 1997-98 issue

of the Ontario Review. Her book, Egypt , was published in 1991 by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, and reissued by

the AUC Press in conjunction with AUC's 75th anniversary. American and French editions of her book,

Morocco: Sahara to the Sea , were published simultaneously in 1995. Mrs. Cross was educated at both Sweet

Briar and the Sorbonne, and received a B.A. from Hollins College. She studied portrait photography under

Phillipe Halsman. At Princeton University she serves on the advisory council of the Department of Comparative

Literature and on the Council of the Institute for the Transregional Study of the Middle East, North Africa and

Central Asia. She is a trustee of the American School of Tangier. She is a former governor of the Foreign Policy

Association of New York, OTR's speaker's series. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the

Century Association.

Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei (elected in 2007) started his career in the Egyptian diplomatic service in 1964,

serving in the permanent missions of Egypt to the United Nations in New York and Geneva. Later, ElBaradei

served as a special assistant to the Foreign Minister of Egypt where he was a member in many presidential and

ministerial bilateral delegations. In 1980 ElBaradei joined the United Nations as a senior fellow of the

International Law Program at the United Nations Institute for Training and Research. In 1997, he was appointed

director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). ElBaradai and the IAEA were jointly

awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts in preventing the use of nuclear energy in military purposes in

1995. In 2006, AUC awarded ElBaradei an honorary doctorate; he has also received honorary degrees from

New York University, University of Maryland and others.

Mr. C. Stedman Garber, Jr . (elected in 2000) retired in 2003 from his position as president and chief

executive officer of GlobalSantaFe Corporation. He joined Santa Fe International Corporation in 1984, and

served in various positions in the company, including chief executive officer, president and chief operating

officer, and senior vice president for strategic planning. He has also been president of Santa Fe Minerals, Inc., a

former subsidiary of the company. Mr. Garber holds a B.S. in engineering from the United States Naval

Academy. After five years in the navy, he received an M.B.A. in finance from UCLA. He served in a number of

management positions with Getty Oil Company.

Mr. Peter A.D. Giblin (elected in 1993) is a graduate of Yale University and Columbia University School of

Law, and was a Fulbright scholar in Venezuela. He has spent the majority of his career, which includes law and

banking, as a management consultant focusing on human resource issues. He established the European

operations of Russell Reynolds Associates in London and subsequently opened their offices in Paris and

Madrid. He is currently chairman of The Giblin Company, a London-based management- consulting firm. He is

the former chairman of Republicans Abroad for Europe and Africa, a former president of the Yale Club of

London, and a member of the advisory board of the Columbia London Institute. He is a Visiting Professor in the

Faculty of Management at the Cass Business School, City University, London, and a member of various

associations and clubs in the U.S. and Europe.

Mr. Paul B. Hannon (elected in 1976) is former chairman of the board, a businessman, and a London- based

lawyer who serves as an arbitrator in international dispute-resolution proceedings. He sits on the boards of

various other educational and charitable institutions and business enterprises. Mr. Hannon retired in 1992 as

vice president and general counsel of General Atlantic Group Limited, an international investment company. He

practiced law for 20 years in Paris and Los Angeles with O'Melveny & Myers. A graduate of Yale Law School

and of the University of Colorado, he was a Fulbright scholar at the Universidad Central de Venezuela. He has

completed programs at Harvard Business School, the Parker School of International and Comparative Law

(Columbia Law School), and the Universidad Autonima de Mexico.

Dr. Elias K. Hebeka (elected in 1990) is vice chair of the board. In December 2003 he retired from Revlon,

Inc., where he served as president, worldwide operations and technical affairs. Born in Alexandria, Egypt, he

received his B.S. in pharmacy and pharmaceutical chemistry from Cairo University, and his M.S. in

bacteriology and Ph.D. in microbiology from Rutgers State University. He was an assistant professor at Cairo

University and at the American University of Beirut. Dr. Hebeka began his career as a research microbiologist

at Parke Davis Company before joining Warner Lambert Company in 1966. He was Warner Lambert’s

corporate vice president for technical operations, with worldwide responsibility for manufacturing, distribution,

and technical matters. After retiring from Warner Lambert in 1993, he was the president and chief executive

officer of the Liberty Science Center in New Jersey before joining Revlon, Inc. in 1993. He is also a member of

the Board of the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America.

Mr. B. Boyd Hight (elected in 1987) is chair of the board. He retired as a partner in the Los Angeles law firm

of O'Melveny & Myers. He received his B.A. from Duke University; his law degree from Yale University,

where he was an editor of the Yale Law Journal ; and a diploma in comparative law from the University of

Stockholm. From 1979 to 1981 he served as deputy assistant secretary for transportation and

telecommunications at the U.S. Department of State. He was the executive vice president, general counsel and a

director at Santa Fe International Corporation in Alhambra, California from 1985 to 1989. Mr. Hight is an

overseer of The Huntington Library, a trustee of the Autry Western Heritage Museum, and a member of the

Council on Foreign Relations and the Pacific Council on International Policy. He is past president of the board

of Planned Parenthood-World Population, Los Angeles.

Ms. Katherine Nouri Hughes (elected 1996) is a writer. After completing a Masters Degree in Near Eastern

Studies from Princeton University, she lived in Cairo and worked at AUC. She was later a vice- president at

Robinson, Lake, Lerer & Montgomery in New York and for 12 years vice-president for communications at the

Milken Family Foundation in Los Angeles. She continues to serve as special consultant to its president. She

serves on the national finance board of the Democratic National Committee, the boards of the Women's

Leadership Forum, the Milken Family Foundation and the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, the Advisory Council

of Princeton University's Near Eastern Studies Department, and the Advisory Board of Cambridge College. She

lives in Princeton with her husband, Robert Del Tufo, former state attorney general (NJ) and United States

Attorney (NJ).

Dr. Mohamed Ibrahim (elected in 2006) is Founder and Chairman of Celtel International, which operates

mobile networks in 15 African countries. The company was sold in 2005 to the Kuwait company, MTC (Mobile

Telecommunications Company) for $3.4 billion. He originally founded MSI (Mobile Systems International), a

cellular consultancy and software house, in 1989, which was sold in 2000 for $900 million. Prior to this, he

spent six years as Technical Director of Cellnet, the mobile arm of British Telecom at that time. He is Chairman

of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, established in March 2006, which focuses on the issues of governance and

leadership in Africa. He was awarded an Honorary Fellowship from the London Business School in July 2006.

Commonly known as Mo Ibrahim, he is an acknowledged global expert in mobile communications. Dr. Ibrahim

is of Nubian, Sudanese origin. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of

Alexandria, Egypt, a Masters of Science in Electronics and Electrical Engineering from the University of

Bradford, UK, and a PhD in Mobile Communications from the University of Birmingham. He is married to Dr.

Hania Fadl.

Mr. Abdallah S. Jum‟ah (elected in 2001) is president and chief executive officer of Saudi Aramco, Saudi

Arabian Oil Company. He studied at AUC before attending the American University of Beirut, from which he

holds a B.A. in political science. He has also completed the Management Development Program at Harvard

University. He is a member of Saudi Aramco’s board of directors and has served on the boards of several of

Saudi Aramco’s subsidiaries and joint ventures. Mr. Jum’ah is a member of the Saudi Arabian Supreme Council

for Petroleum and Mineral Affairs and has served on the boards of various company subsidiaries and affiliates,

including Aramco Services Company (USA), Saudi Refining, Inc. (USA), Saudi Petroleum International, Inc.

(USA), Motiva Enterprises (USA), S-Oil Corporation (Korea), Petron Corporation (Philippines) and Motor Oil

(Hellas) Corinth Refineries S.A. (Greece). In January 2005, he was appointed energy community leader for

2005 by the World Economic Forum.

Mr. Robert W. Kasten Jr. (1994) is president of Kasten & Co., an international banking and consulting firm.

He is also chairman and founder of the Legislative Studies Institute, and senior associate at the Center for

Strategic and International Studies. Mr. Kasten was elected to the United States Senate in 1980, where he

represented the State of Wisconsin from 1981-1993. He served on the Senate Appropriations Committee, where

he was chairman of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations; the Senate Budget Committee; and the

Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. He also served in the House of Representatives from 1975-

79. Mr. Kasten’s service in Congress was marked by leadership in international affairs and business issues. He

was appointed to the President's Export Council in 1985 by Ronald Reagan. He was named secretary of the

Republican Conference in 1990 and served as the co-chairman of the National Republican Party Platform

Committee. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Arizona and his M.B.A. in finance

from Columbia University.

Dr. Farhad Kazemi (elected in 1997) is secretary of the board. He is a professor of politics and Middle Eastern

studies at New York University. He holds an M.A. from Harvard University and a Ph.D. from the University of

Michigan. A specialist in comparative, international, and Middle Eastern politics, he has been acting dean of the

Graduate School of Arts and Science at NYU, as well as chairman of the Department of Politics, director of the

Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies, and Vice Provost for Global Affairs. He has served as president of

the Middle East Studies Association of North America and of the Society for Iranian Studies. He is a member of

the Council on Foreign Relations, and has been a trustee of several academic institutions and a consultant to the

U.S. government. He has written numerous books and scholarly articles, including Poverty and Revolution in

Iran , and Peasants and Politics in the Modern Middle East . He has taught at the University of Michigan and

has been a visiting professor at Princeton University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Oxford.

Mr. Arthur Lindenauer (elected in 1998) was chairman of Schlumberger Technology Corporation from 1999

until his retirement in 2003. His career has included 18 years as executive vice president and chief financial

officer of Schlumberger. He was also Price Waterhouse's partner in charge of mergers and acquisitions for the

U.S. He has a B.A. from Dartmouth and an M.B.A. from the Tuck School of Business Administration, where he

is currently a visiting lecturer. He is chairman of the Audit committee of Transocean. Mr. Lindenauer was

appointed by the Chief Judge of the State of New York to the Legal Services Project in 1998. He is a member of

the New York State Society of CPAs.

Mr. Troland Link (elected in 1993) was the general counsel of Deutsche Bank Americas and is now senior

counsel to Davis Polk and Wardwell. He specializes in international and banking law with a current focus on

privatization and capital-raising in Latin America and Eastern Europe. He holds a B.A. and a law degree from

Harvard University. Mr. Link serves on the board of trustees of the New York Downtown Hospital and is a

director of the French-American Foundation.

Mr. Bruce L. Ludwig (elected in 1992) is chairman of Ludwig & Company, a real estate consulting firm in

Los Angeles concentrating on the Middle East. He attended Glendale College and received a business degree

from California State University. Mr. Ludwig and his wife, Carolyn, have been the principal benefactors of the

AUC Valley of the Kings project and the Giza Plateau Mapping Project in Egypt. He was the initial sponsor in a

joint effort by the American Research Center in Egypt and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to showcase

Egyptian artifacts in U.S. museums. He is a trustee of the Urban Land Institute, the International Council of

Shopping Centers, and the American Research Center in Egypt. He is an elected member of the Explorers Club,

the Royal Geographic Society and the Egyptian Exploration Society of England, the Oriental Institute, and

numerous other philanthropic and research organizations in the Middle East and Africa. Carolyn is publishing a

large format photographic book, jointly with AUC Press, on the Churches, Monasteries, and Shrines of Egypt.

Ms. Elizabeth (Lisa) Nitze (elected in 2006) has spent most of her career in non-profit management, planning

and consulting. She is now Vice President, Global E2 Program at Ashoka: Innovators for the Public. Working

with the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, she developed a plan to maximize the social benefits derived from

Doris Duke’s New Jersey estate’s combined assets. As Executive Director of The New Jersey Governor’s

Commission on the Preservation and Use of Ellis Island, she developed a restoration and reuse plan for the

Island. Also under the Whitman Administration, Ms. Nitze created Prosperity New Jersey, a statewide

public/private partnership that developed collaborative strategies and plans for improving the New Jersey

economy. During the 1994 World Cup Soccer Games in New Jersey she advised Governor Whitman on cross-

cultural protocol issues. While Executive Director of the World Trade Center Baltimore and World Trade

Center Institute, Ms. Nitze represented the State of Maryland abroad, attracting foreign investments to

Maryland and assisting companies in the State in getting their products into foreign markets. Ms. Nitze has also

taught at the International College, located on the campus of American University in Beirut. She holds a BA in

International Relations from Harvard College and an MBA from Stanford.

Dr. Robert A. Oden, Jr . (elected in 1990) is president of Carleton College. He was president of Kenyon

College from 1995-2002, and headmaster of the Hotchkiss School from 1989-95. Dr. Oden holds a B.A. from

Harvard College and advanced degrees from the Harvard Divinity School and from the University of

Cambridge, where he was a Marshall scholar. His Ph.D. in Near Eastern languages and literature is from

Harvard University. He was a professor in the Department of Religion at Dartmouth College, where he received

Dartmouth’s first Distinguished Teaching Award. He is the author of seven books, including The Bible Without

Theology , and scores of scholarly articles, as well as a number of articles on fly-fishing. His chief research

interests are in ancient Near East languages and history, and comparative religion. In 1989, he was selected to

be among the first of The Teaching Company’s ―Superstar Teachers,‖ and he has taped several series of lectures

for them on comparative religion and the Old Testament.

Ms. Dina Habib Powell recently resigned from the State Department to join Goldman Sachs, a leading global

investment banking, securities and investment management firm, where she has been named Managing Director

and Global Head of Corporate Engagement. She was nominated and confirmed as assistant secretary of state for

educational and cultural affairs in 2005. Previously, Powell served as assistant to the president for presidential

personnel, a senior staff member at the White House, as well as director of congressional affairs for the

Republican National Committee and as a staff member of former US House Majority Leader Dick Armey.

Powell is a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A graduate of the University of Texas at Austin,

she was born in Cairo, Egypt. Her mother, Hoda Soliman, is a graduate of the American University in Cairo

(AUC).

Dr. William B. Quandt (elected in 1992) is the Edward R. Stettinius Professor of Politics at the University of

Virginia. He was formerly a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. He has his B.A.

from Stanford University and received his Ph.D. from M.I.T. Dr. Quandt was a staff member of the National

Security Council during the Nixon and Carter administrations. He served as President Carter's chief Middle East

aide and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the 1978 Camp David summit. He is the author of several

books on the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Algeria, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. His latest publication is entitled

Peace Process: American Diplomacy Toward the Arab-Israeli Conflict Since 1967 (Brookings, 2005). He is a

member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Middle East Studies Association and serves on the board

of the Foundation for Middle East Peace.

Dr. William A. Rugh (elected in 1997) is an Associate at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Georgetown

University. In September 2003 he retired after eight years as the president of America- Mideast Educational and

Training Services Inc. (AMIDEAST), a private organization that promotes understanding and cooperation

between Americans and the Middle East through education, training, and development programs. A former U.S.

ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, as well as to Yemen, he has held numerous other posts in the U.S.

Foreign Service, among them public affairs officer at the American Embassy in Cairo, director of USIA’s Near

East and South Asia Bureau, and deputy chief of mission at the American Embassy in Syria. He holds a B.A.

from Oberlin College, an M.A. from Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, and a

Ph.D. from Columbia University. He has taught at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and serves on the

Executive Committees of AMIDEAST and the Public Diplomacy Council.

Mr. Thomas E. Thomason (elected in 1996) is Globeleq’s Vice President for the North Africa Region and

Managing Director of Sidi Krir Generating Company, with overall management responsibility for the financial

and operational performance of Sidi Krir Units 3&4, Egypt’s first privately owned and operated power plant.

Prior to joining Globeleq in 2004, Mr. Thomason was InterGen’s Vice President and Country Executive for

Egypt, as well as the General Manager for Sidi Krir. Before joining InterGen in 1998, Mr. Thomason was

Bechtel’s Vice President and Senior Regional Executive for the Middle East located in Cairo. Mr. Thomason’s

previous positions with Bechtel included Chief Legal Counsel, Manager of Commercial Operations for Bechtel

Construction, Manager of Contracts, and Manager of Bechtel’s Washington, D.C. Office. Mr. Thomason

received his B.A. and Doctor of Jurisprudence from the University of Texas at Austin. Mr. Thomason is on the

Boards of the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt and the Bi-national Fulbright Commission.

Mr. John Elting Treat (elected in 1995) is CEO of Treat Management Company and Vice Chairman of

Pinnacle Partners Systems. Living in California, he is a retired but still active Partner of Booz Allen Hamilton.

His career has included positions as Publisher of Petroleum Intelligence Weekly, as a Partner in Bear Stearns

and Company, and as President of the New York Mercantile Exchange. He served in the White House as

international energy advisor on the National Security Council staff under Presidents Carter and Reagan. He held

senior positions in the U.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Energy Administration, a Presidential-

Congressional Commission on foreign policy organization, the Department of State and the U.S. Senate. Mr.

Treat was commissioned an officer in the U.S. Navy after receiving his B.A. from Princeton University and an

M.A. from Johns Hopkins University, both in international economics. He serves on a number of corporate as

well as on other non-profit boards, including the Yosemite National Institutes, the World Affairs Council of

Northern California and the Business Development Initiative. Mr. Treat is also the author/editor of several

books, including Energy Futures, Dinosaurs Can Fly, and The Encyclopedia of Energy.

Ambassador Frank G. Wisner (elected in 1997) is Vice Chairman, External Affairs, at American International

Group. A career diplomat with the personal rank of Career Ambassador, he previously served as US

Ambassador to India from 1994-1997. Additionally, he held the positions of Ambassador to Zambia (1979-82),

Egypt (1986-91), and the Philippines (1991-92). Ambassador Wisner has served in a number of positions in the

U.S. government, including Undersecretary of Defense for Policy (1993-94), Undersecretary of State for

International Security Affairs (1992-93), Senior Deputy Assistant Secretary for African Affairs (1982-86), and

Deputy Executive Secretary of the Department of State (1977). During the course of his career, Ambassador

Wisner served in the Middle East and South and East Asia. He is a member of the Boards of Directors of

American Life Insurance Company (ALICO), EOG Resources and Ethan Allen, as well as the boards of

numerous non-profit organizations. A native of New York, Mr. Wisner was educated at Princeton University.

Dr. Ahmed Zewail (elected in 1999) is the Linus Pauling Chair Professor of Chemistry, professor of physics at

the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) and the Director of the Physical Biology Center. He received

the 1999 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. He has received numerous other honors, including the Robert A. Welch

Prize, the Wolf Prize, the King Faisal Prize, and the Benjamin Franklin Medal. He has also received Egypt’s

highest state honor, the Order of the Grand Collar of the Nile. Dr. Zewail received his B.S. and M.S. from

Alexandria University in Egypt, and a Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. He is an elected member of

numerous international societies, including the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts,

Sciences, and Humanities, the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, the Indian Academy of

Sciences, and the Royal Society of London. He serves on the Board of Directors and Trustees of universities,

research institutions, and major corporations.

Advisory Trustees

Dr. Esmat Abdel Meguid, Dr. Alexander Aldrich, Mr. Gordon M. Anderson, Dr. Nabil Elaraby, Mr. Theodore

S. Bacon Jr., Dr. Thomas A. Bartlett, Mr. Miner D. Crary Jr., Mrs. Elizabeth S. Driscoll, Mr. John R. Hayes,

Ms. Edith Crary Howe, Mr. Lawrence H. Hyde, Mr. George F. Jewett Jr., Mrs. Suad Al-Husseini Juffali, Dr.

Ibrahim Kamel, Dr. Mostafa Khalil, Mr. Weldon D. Kruger, Mr. Richard M. Morrow, Mrs. Louise W. Moore

Pine, Dr. A. Lachlan Reed, Ambassador Samir S. Shihabi, Dr. William K. Simpson, Mr. John A. Urquhart

Appendix V

Relating to “Academic and Institutional Integrity: Middle States Standard 6”

Appendix V-a and V-b; Opinion Surveys measuring Students‟ and Faculty‟s

Satisfaction with AUC Policy Effectiveness

Very Low Low Somewhat Effective Very

Effective

Effectiveness of Policies

Student's Responses (%)

In 2003

Currently

Appendix V-a

Very Low Low Somewhat Effective Very

Effective

Effectiveness of Policies

Faculty Responses (%)

In 2003

Currently

Appendix V-b

Appendix V-c- Intellectual Property Policies (approved by AUC Community 2006/2007)

I. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY

I.1. Introduction

This policy (―Policy‖) is intended to provides guidance for faculty, staff and students on the practices and

procedures of the American University in Cairo (―AUC‖ or the ―University‖), with respect to Intellectual

Property. The policy is further intended to protect the respective interests of all concerned by ensuring that the

benefits of such property accrue to the public, to the Creator(s), to AUC, and to the sponsors of specific

research. This Policy statement includes the nature of Intellectual Property, its ownership, commercialization

and specific procedures adopted within the University.

The University is committed to providing an environment where scholarship and innovation can flourish and

those participating can be justly rewarded for their efforts. At the same time, recognizing that certain

Intellectual Property is developed as a result of the environment provided by the University and the special

relationships which exist between the University and its faculty, staff and students, the University itself wishes,

where appropriate, to benefit from the creative activity, with the benefits flowing on to future generations of the

AUC community. Accordingly, AUC encourages the protection of expressions of knowledge and creative

activities through the utilization of appropriate Intellectual Property protection.

In developing this policy, the University has been guided by Intellectual Property policies elsewhere. It

acknowledges, in particular, input provided by a significant number of other universities and has adopted some

of the wording provided in those documents.

The foregoing considered, the American University in Cairo does hereby establish the following policy with

respect to the development, protection, and transfer of rights to Intellectual Property resulting from the work of

its faculty, staff or students.

I.2. Definitions

Certain terms as used in this Policy shall have the meanings set forth below.

I.2.1. ―Creator‖ shall refer to any inventor, creator, originator or developer of Intellectual Property.

I.2.2. ―Incidental use of university resources‖ shall refer to resources usually or normally provided or

made available to similarly situated faculty, staff or students. They include, for example, ordinary use

of resources such as the libraries; one’s office, computer and University computer facilities;

secretarial and administrative support staff; and supplies. For any given department, unit or

individual, what constitutes a usual resource will depend upon the functions and responsibilities of

that department, unit, or individual.

I.2.3. ―Intellectual Property‖ shall refer to intellectual property of all types, including but not limited

to any invention, discovery, trade secret, technology, scientific or technological development, and

computer software regardless of whether subject to protection under patent, trademark, copyright or

other laws.

I.2.4. ―Intellectual Property Rights‖ shall refer to legally based protection for Intellectual Property,

governed by the laws of a particular country, region or jurisdiction.

I.2.5. ―Net Revenue‖ means royalty, licensing and other income received from the assignment, sale

or licensing of the rights to Intellectual Property, less legal and other fees incurred directly in the

process of establishing and maintaining the legal protection of those rights.

I.2.6. ―Trademarks‖ shall refer to trademarks, service marks, trade names, company names, seals,

symbols, designs, slogans, or logotypes.

I.3. Policy Applicability to Faculty, Staff and Students

I.3.1. This Intellectual Property policy applies to all persons employed by AUC including, but not

limited to, full and part-time faculty and staff and visiting faculty members and researchers. The

policy also applies to undergraduate and graduate students when employed by the university and

when Intellectual Property arises directly from activities related to such employment.

I.3.2. This policy does not apply to Intellectual Property created in the course of demonstrably private

research unrelated to the Creator’s University functions or in the course of private consulting

activities to outside bodies, when such activities do not involve more than incidental use of University

facilities or resources. Similarly, Intellectual Property created in the course of extra-curricular

activities by students is not subject to this policy.

I.3.3. AUC shall not assert any interest in scholarly or educational materials, artworks, musical

compositions, and dramatic and non-dramatic literary works related to the Creator’s academic or

professional field, regardless of the medium of expression.

I.4. Disclosure

All Intellectual Property conceived or first reduced to practice in whole or in part by members of the

faculty or staff (including student employees) of the University in the course of their University

responsibilities or with more than incidental use of University resources, shall be disclosed on a

timely basis to the University according to procedures which may be prescribed by the University.

I.5. Determination of Rights and Equities in Intellectual Property

I.5.1. Sponsor-Supported Efforts

The grant or contract between the sponsor and AUC, under which Intellectual Property is produced,

may contain specific provisions with respect to disposition of rights to such Intellectual Property. The

sponsor (1) may specify that the Intellectual Property be placed in the public domain, in whole or in

part, (2) may claim reproduction, license-free use, or other rights, or (3) may assign all rights to AUC.

When the terms of the grant or contract either do not specify the disposition of the Intellectual

Property arising from that sponsorship, or permits the University and/or the Creator(s) to retain or

acquire rights to such Intellectual Property, the University will originally retain such rights. In those

cases where income is realized by AUC, the Creator may appropriately share in the income.

I.5.2. Institution-Assigned Efforts

Ownership of Intellectual Property, when developed in the course of duties/tasks assigned as part of

employment, shall reside with AUC. The general obligation to produce scholarly and creative works

does not constitute a specific assignment for this purpose. For example, AUC does not automatically

claim ownership of faculty-created instructional materials or courseware merely because it requires

faculty members to teach courses as part of their regular responsibilities. Similarly, AUC does not

claim ownership of faculty-initiated scholarly works based merely on general expectations that

faculty members will publish such works.

I.5.3. Institution-Assisted Individual Effort

When AUC provides support of the efforts of faculty, staff or students of AUC through more than the

incidental use of University resources in the creation of Intellectual Property, ownership of such

Intellectual Property shall be shared by the Creators(s) and the University, with the University having

control over the exploitation of such Intellectual Property, subject to the provisions of Section II.6..

I.5.4. Individual Effort

Other than Intellectual Property covered by Sections I.5.1., I.5.2. or I.5.3., ownership of Intellectual

Property developed by faculty, staff or students of AUC shall reside with the Creator(s).

I.5.5. Other Efforts

Ownership of Intellectual Property developed under any circumstances other than those listed in

Section I.5.1. through I.5.4. of this Policy shall be determined on an individual basis and approved by

the President or his or her designated representative. The University may also, at its sole discretion,

assume ownership of Intellectual Property which is voluntarily assigned to the University by the

Creator(s), but which would not otherwise be owned by the University.

I.5.6. Revenue Sharing

In those cases where income is realized by AUC from the ownership and/or exploitation of

Intellectual Property, the Creator(s) may appropriately share in the income. The nature and extent of

such income sharing is set forth in Section III.

I.5.7. Trademarks

Within the context of the development or promotion of Intellectual Property, there shall be no use of

any Trademarks of the University without the express prior written approval of the Office of the

Provost or other University office as may be delegated by the Provost from time to time. This

restriction applies to the inclusion of the name of the University in the title of any Intellectual

Property, regardless of whether such Intellectual Property is the property of the University pursuant to

this Policy. This is not intended to limit the use of the AUC name for legitimate purposes that fall

within the normal scope of University activities and in a manner customary in the academy.

II. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

II.1. Intellectual Property Policy activities shall be under the general cognizance of the Provost who

will be advised by an Intellectual Property Committee. The Office of the Provost is responsible for

implementation of the University’s Intellectual Property Policy, and shall be empowered to negotiate

the University’s rights under the Policy.

II.2. The Intellectual Property Committee shall be appointed by the Provost after consultation with

the Faculty Senate. One representative and the Chair of the Committee shall be the Vice Provost

representing the Provost; one representative shall be selected from the Office of the Vice President

for Finance; one representative shall be selected from each school, center and other bodies as

determined by the Provost; and one representative shall be selected from the student body. Committee

appointments (other than that of the student body representative) will be for three years; provided,

however, that of the original members of the Committee, three shall be appointed for a term of one

year, three shall be appointed for a term of two years, and the remainder shall be appointed for a

term of three years. The student representative shall be appointed for a term of one year or until

he/she graduates or ceases to be a full-time student, whichever comes first. Members of the

Committee may be appointed to serve consecutive terms; but may not serve for more than six

consecutive years. In the event any seat on the Committee is vacated prior to expiration of the

normal term, the Chair may appoint a successor to fill the unexpired term of the seat vacated.

II.3. Day-to-day management of all Intellectual Property Policy activities shall rest with the Vice

provost. The Vice Provost shall implement the decisions of the University Intellectual Property

Committee as approved by the Provost.

II.4. Intellectual property subject to this Policy shall be disclosed to the Office of the Vice Provost,

which will be responsible for: (i) timely review of all disclosures; (ii) a complete review of the

patentability and marketability of the Intellectual Property disclosed; and preparing a

report/recommendation to the Intellectual Property Committee. This office shall also be responsible

for working with Creators, obtaining patent, copyright, or other protection of Intellectual Property

owned by the University, and marketing and licensing of all such Intellectual Property. In concert

with the Office of the Vice President, Finance, this office shall also set up and manage expenses and

income accounts for AUC’s Intellectual Property portfolio.

II.5. The Role of the Intellectual Property Committee is to:

(a) Advise the Provost on policy matters relating to Intellectual Property and Intellectual

Property Rights.

(b) Propose amendments considered necessary to the Intellectual Property Policy.

of this Policy.

II.6. The University undertakes to exercise its ownership over any Intellectual Property which it

acquires under this Policy, for the good of the public, the Creator(s) and the University. To this end,

the University shall make, or shall cause to be made, efforts which are reasonable in order to promote

the commercial development and utilization in appropriate jurisdictions of Intellectual Property and

obtain commercially significant Intellectual Property protection in such jurisdictions. The University

may make such arrangements for the licensing, sale or other disposition of any Intellectual Property

in any country as will reasonably serve the interests of the public, the Creator(s) and the University.

The interests of the Creator(s) in such matters are recognized and preferences expressed by the

Creator(s) will be actively sought and given the strongest consideration. Exclusive licensing

agreements by AUC will contain a provision to terminate the license or cause the license to revert to

AUC within a reasonable period of time in the event that a licensee does not commercialize the

technology or otherwise make the technology available to the public. The University, in the exercise

of its discretion, may take, or delegate others to take, such action as the University deems appropriate

in order to enforce or defend any rights associated with any Intellectual Property under the

University’s control under this Policy, and any such action, including the conduct and any settlement

thereof, shall be subject to the University’s exclusive control.

II.7. AUC will advise the Creator(s) of its decision to accept particular Intellectual Property for

administration under the Policy within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete Intellectual Property

disclosure statement (in a form to be established). Should AUC decide not to accept the particular

Intellectual Property for administration, or if it at any future time decides not to take any further

action in marketing, or encouraging further developments as a prelude to marketing, such Intellectual

Property, AUC shall within thirty (30) days of such decision notify the Creator(s) and, should the

Creator(s) so request, release or assign the particular Intellectual Property to the Creator(s), at no cost

to AUC.

II.8. Upon acceptance by AUC of any particular Intellectual Property for administration, the

Creator(s) of such Intellectual Property shall do all things necessary and comply with reasonable

requests by AUC, to assist in obtaining appropriate intellectual property protection, securing AUCs’

rights and title thereto, and marketing of such Intellectual Property. Such assistance will be at no cost

to the Creator(s).

II.9. Appeals and Conflicts

University faculty, staff or students shall have the right to appeal from decisions of the Intellectual

Property Committee. Appeals from committee decisions shall be made to the Provost. Appeals from

decisions by the Provost shall be made to the President.

II.10. Changes in Policy

This policy may be changed by the President on the recommendation of the Intellectual Property

Committee, with the endorsement of the Faculty Senate, or on his/her own initiative, after consulting

with the Intellectual Property Policy Committee and the Faculty Senate.

III. DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME

III.1. Net Revenues received by the University through income or other exploitation of Intellectual

Property under this policy shall be distributed in a manner that recognizes the efforts and

contributions of the Creator(s). The University will maintain a detailed accounting for all

expenditures and receipts associated with each disclosed Intellectual Property and will manage the

distribution of income according to this policy under the auspices of the Provost.

III.2. Net Revenue will be distributed as follows:

Creator(s), Creator’s heirs, successors, and assigns: collectively 50%

Creator(s) School(s) or Center(s): collectively 20%

University: 30%

III.3. The above terms of distribution of Net Revenue may be replaced by other terms mutually

agreed upon by the Creator(s), the organizational unit, and the University. However, any modification

in the terms described above must be approved by the Provost.

III.4. In the case of multiple Creators of Intellectual Policy, the Creators may enter into an agreement

among themselves specifying a distribution formula that takes into account the differential

contributions of the individual Creators. This Net Revenue distribution agreement should be

submitted to the Office of the Vice Provost at the time of filing of the Intellectual Property disclosure

to the University. In the absence of such an agreement, the University’s policy will be to divide Net

Revenue payments equally to all Creators. Where multiple schools or centers are involved, the

University’s policy will be to divide Net Revenue payments equally to all schools and/or centers,

however, the Provost may determine if an adjustment in payments is appropriate.

Appendix VI

Relating to “Assessment of Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness:

Middle States Standards 7 & 14”

VI-a; Outcomes Assessment Timeline

VI-b; AUC‟s Key Institutional Learning Outcomes for All Students

Using AUC’s mission statement as a guide, the university’s Long-Range Planning subcommittee on assessment

developed a set of educational outcomes for students, to be used in the development and assessment of student

learning. These outcomes were later endorsed by the university’s governance structure.

Because this process pre-dated the current assessment standards, many of the outcomes were not expressed in

the current language of assessment. For that reason, these outcomes have been edited and organized into five

logical groupings in the appropriate format as the university’s key institutional learning outcomes for all

students. These outcomes, which derive from institutional documents approved through the university’s formal

governance structure, are still in draft format, but they provide a strong foundation for the development of

departmental assessment plans.

Professional Skills

AUC graduates will synthesize discipline-based knowledge with a broad-based liberal arts education. They will

be proficient in the tools of their discipline as well as the tools of research and learning; make decisions that

reflect the highest standards of ethical conduct and professional behavior; and understand the importance of

life-long learning.

Advanced Communication Skills

AUC graduates will be fluent in English and will be able to write and speak effectively in a variety of settings.

AUC graduates will be able to communicate in Arabic, establish rapport in groups, be adaptable to new

circumstances, work both independently and in collaboration with others, and function effectively as leaders.

Critical Thinking

AUC graduates will be independent learners, adept at using current technologies to access information and

applying strong quantitative, analytical, and critical thinking skills to analyze and synthesize complex

information to solve problems.

Cultural Competence

AUC graduates will have an understanding and appreciation of Egyptian and Arab culture and heritage, as well

as an understanding of international interdependence, cultural diversity, and consideration for values and

traditions that may differ from their own. In addition, AUC graduates will have an aesthetic awareness of the

various modes of human artistic expression and will be able to collaborate effectively in a multicultural context.

Effective Citizenship

AUC graduates value service to their local community and to broader causes at national and international levels.

Appendix IX

Relating to „Faculty and Staff: Middle States Standard 10‟

Appendix IX-a: Characteristics of AUC Full-Time Faculty Fall 2007

Department

Gender

Citizenship

Highest Academic Degree

Total

Other

Total

MA/MSc

Ph.D

Total

Economics

Journalism and Mass

Communications

Management

Total

Biology

Chemistry

Computer Science

Construction Engineering

Core Curriculum (Sc. Th.)

Electronics Engineering

Mathematics

Mechanical Engineering

Petroleum & Energy Engineering

Physics

Total

Arabic Language Institute

Arab and Islamic Civilization

English and Comparative Literature

English Language Institute

History

Law

Performance and Visual Arts

Philosophy

Political Science

Rhetoric and Composition

Soc., Anth., Psyc. and Egpt.

Total

148

238

122

238

112

126

238

Administrators

Others

216

197

413

246

126

413

137

274

413

Appendix IX-b: Characteristics of AUC Part-Time Faculty Fall 2007

Characteristics of AUC Part-Time Faculty Fall 2007

Department

Citizenship

Gender

Highest Academic Degree

No. of Semesters at AUC

Total

Other

MA/MSc (or

equivalent)

Ph.D (or

equivalent)

Other

1-6

13-

19-

ECON

MGMT

JRMC

TOTAL

Department

Citizenship

Gender

Highest Academic Degree

No. of Semesters at

AUC

Total

Other

MA/MSc (or

equivalent)

Ph.D (or

equivalent)

Other

1-6

13-

19-

ARIC

ALI

ECLT

RHET

ELI

HIST

PFVA*

POLS

LAW

SAPE

TOTAL

104

136

Department

Citizenship

Gender

Highest Academic Degree

No. of Years in Rank

Total

Other

MA/MSc (or

equivalent)

Ph.D (or

equivalent)

Other

=<6

13-

19>=

BIOL

CHEM

PHYS

CSCI

CENG

EENG

MENG

ENGR

MATH

TOTAL

Department

Citizenship

Gender

Highest Academic Degree

No. of Years in Rank

Total

Other

MA/MSc (or

equivalent)

Ph.D (or

equivalent)

Other

=<6

13-

19>=

CORE (SEM)

CORE (Sci

Thinking)

Info Literacy**

GRAND TOTAL

246

141

142

174

147

283

* Doesn't include 10 adjunct faculty in the Music Program

** This course is taught by 5 staff members working in the AUC Library

Appendix IX-c; Number of AUC Faculty who earned their PhDs from Top Institutions

Worldwide

Top Research Institutions

US News & World Report 2006-07