|
Faculty Association |
|
May 10, 2007 |
|
|
QUESTIONS FORWARDED PENDING RESPONSES |
| |
QUESTIONER: |
DATE ASKED: |
FORWARDED TO: |
| Anonymous
|
February 1, 2007
March 1, 2007 |
Mark Workman
Provost & Vice President
for Academic Affairs
|
QUESTION SYNOPSIS – I.
The following text from Chp 10.5 of the Faculty Handbook describes faculty membership on the Institutional Review Board: "The Institutional Review Board for the protection of Human Subjects will be comprised of faculty and staff members or persons who because of particular skill are asked to serve on the Committee. Nomination for membership on the committee may be submitted through the IRB chair to the Vice President of Academic Affairs or they may be submitted by deans of Colleges. Members will be appointed by the vice president for one, two, or three year terms. A member may be re-appointed, but may not serve more than three consecutive years." How then is it that at least 1 member of the current committee has served far more consecutive years than what is allowed? Who is overseeing or ensuring that adequate faculty rotation occurs to protect against the tainting of this important process from subjective bias and personal vendettas? Ultimate power ultimately corrupts, while transparent membership processes will allow for greater confidence in this committee.
QUESTION SYNOPSIS – II.
What are the members’ term limits on the IRB?
The question was referred to the Provost who acknowledged that term limits have not been watched as closely as they should and that he intends to be more vigilant.
|
| |
QUESTION SYNOPSIS
Has there been any thought to allowing our athletes to be admitted to the university at the same standing as Duke, Florida or North Carolina?
Answer recieved Tuesday, June 12, 2007
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|