Date of Meeting:
Jeff Denburg, Michael Flatte, Ed Folsom, Meredith Hay, Vicki Hesli, Richard Hichwa, Bob Kirby, Boyd Knosp, Johna Leddy, George Malanson, Russell Noyes, Jay Semel, Tom Sharpe, Linda Snetselaar, and Sarah Vigmostad
Leddy called the meeting at 1:00 PM.
The Research Council reviewed and approved the minutes from the December 13, 2006 Research Council Meeting.
Responsible Conduct for Research (RCR)
Richard Hichwa followed up discussion from the December meeting regarding Responsible Conduct for Research (RCR). Hichwa handed out a document that helped guide the discussion link to the document.
Research Council members were asked to consider the following questions related to RCR:
- Should the University of Iowa have a policy that requires RCR training?
- Who specifically should the policy affect?
- What is a satisfactory level of compliance, if enacted?
- How do we entice faculty, staff and/or students to comply?
- How do we accommodate different disciplines and widely varying areas of research and scholarship?
- Should this be viewed as one time training or should there be requirements for continuing education?
- Who should be involved in designing and implementing this activity?
- What is the cost to broadly deliver RCR training and who should fund RCR training?
- What are the implications if we do not pursue broadly based RCR training?
- Is the Research Council willing to make a strong statement in support of broadly-based mandatory RCR training?
The following issues were discussed:
- Some of the issues for research misconduct are disciplinary specific. How would you address these types of issues in a standardized training format?
- Creating a system were multi-levels of implementation (department, in orientation programs, and centrally) could also be effective.
- One suggestion would be to create an on line training system (similar to the FERPA training). Although this is a requirement, it has helped foster a new appreciation on the sensitivity of handling student records.
- Others expressed concerns regarding the effectiveness of an on-line course training course.
- There were also concerns related to the time commitment for this training for faculty, staff and students and if this would duplicate systems set up at the departments.
- Overarching theme was the faculty and student mentor relationship. It was stated that faculty need to take responsibility for their students to learn discipline specific issues related to misconduct.
Meredith Hay talked about next steps. As an institution we need to be able to ensure that faculty, staff and students have received access to and knowledge of the information . She will consult with the Associate Deans for Research and other key constituents groups. At some point in the spring, this will be brought back to Research Council for input.
Internal Funding Process, Hichwa, Semel and Kirby
Semel updated the Research Council on the process. The review meetings are currently underway for SSFP, MPSFP and BSFP. He mentioned that we are developing an on-line progress report that will be implemented in the spring. This will help assess the effectiveness of the IFI programs. He also mentioned that the number of applications submitted in the fall was lower than last year.
Semel also highlighted the two major changes in this year's process:
The criteria were modified to specifically define the purpose of the seed grant programs. This purpose is to provide funds to position research proposals to be competitive with external grant proposals.
The implementation of a more effective review process by creating uniformity, consistency and fairness.
Kirby reported on the IREU program. This continues to be an effective program that provides $3K for students to conduct research with a faculty mentor. In the upcoming year, Kirby will look at how USA and IREU complement each other.
Kirby also mentioned the upcoming Research in the Capitol program (March 5, 2007).
20 students will present at the Rotunda in Des Moines, Iowa.
Meeting adjourned at 2:20 pm.