Research Committee Minutes


Call To Order:	Caroline Guardino, 10:30am

Members Present:	Caroline Guardino, Stephanie Weiss, Paul Mason, Alexandra Schonning, Tammie Johnson, Wanda Hedrick

Members Absent:	Laura Heffernan

Also in attendance:	Gordon Rakita, Dr. Catherine Christie


I.	Approval of Minutes:
	The minutes were posted on the overhead for review and approval - approved

II.	Introductory Remarks/Old Business
	Wanda introduced herself as the new member.

III.	New Business/Agenda Items/Information Reports

	Divvying of the 59 proposals
		Reviewer 1 gets paper copy, Reviewer 2 goes to webaccess to get an e-copy
		Caroline demonstrated how to access proposals (instructions in email from Caroline)
		If submission does not follow guidelines, it will be removed from consideration and inform Caroline immediately, so she can communicate it to the applicant.
		By Oct 26, Reviewer 1 will look at each proposal to make sure it has met the fatal criteria. If it does have issues, Reviewer 1 will email Caroline and she will let all of us know what has been rejected.
		If the proposal is very strong, comments are helpful. However, they are essential for questionable or poor ones so they can be forwarded to applicant if desired.
		Caroline will clarify who is eligible based on the time frame of last award.
			- Marianne Jaffee confirms that she has checked the submissions and they should all be in compliance (via email after meeting)
	Proposal reviews are to be completed by Monday, November 12^th.
	Next meeting is November 14^th at 10:30 AM to determine recommendations to Provost Workman.
	Guest Speaker: Dr. Catherine Christie:
		ORSP-Research Management Review
		http://www.unf.edu/uploadedFiles/academic/acadaffairs/SRA%20final%20report%208-6-12.pdf
			- Started reviewing on August 16th to review the recommendations put forth in the ORSP review. The group has had guests to discuss different aspects of the ORSP.
			- Just finished reviewing the recommendations.
			- Minutes are on the AA website under the Task Force link (lower left hand side)
			- Plan to group recommendations (next week)
			- The Task Force is not to investigate but to take the recommendations at face value.
			- Will write a formal report with recommendations to the Provost likely to be completed by mid-November.
			- The recommendations will be across the board in terms of campus climate, Research Committee, ORSP.
			- The definition of research has been defined by the Provost and is on his website. The Task Force has asked for additional information related to the functioning of the IRB committee from Kathe Kasten (chair) and of the Animal Care committee, Michael Lentz (chair).
			- The union contract is an area that needs to be addressed and reviewed in terms of the weight that is given to research and grants.

IV.	Other Discussions and Announcements
		Charge of this committee and relationship with ORSP, IRB? Establish in spring so that it is set up for the incoming chair. Survey of faculty?
		This committee should not duplicate the work of the ORSP or the ORSP task force
		Alex, a member of the ORSP Task Force, stated that they are potentially interested in having the Research Committee take on more tasks.
		Caroline shared that after reviewing the constitution and meeting with Imeh Ebong, we have more responsibilities than we have taken on in the past. This year we are to establish a relationship with regular communication between Imeh and the Committee. This spring the relationship will be solidified, so the incoming chair in the fall 2013 will understand and continue the communication and collaboration with ORSP.
		Gordon stated that the Committee should go ahead and take on the responsibilities that will allow them to have a voice for the faculty and that the problems that exist with the ORSP are taken care of. Conceptualize the relationship we need to have with ORSP and put that forward to the Faculty Association President.
		The members agreed that there is a general degree of confusion around campus regarding “what is research?” at UNF. Where does community engagement fall when defining research?
		Wanda would like that the Research Committee helps to define research with extensive input from campus constituents.
		Paul stated that overhead needs to be addressed because it is a serious problem.
		Caroline shared that the issues in the report regarding IRB resound with her and her current issues she is experiencing with IRB and protocols.
		Tammie shared that the issue between pursuing grants and doing the research is a conundrum, especially for tenure earning faculty who are required to do research and publish. There should be some flexibility factored into the tenure and promotion process so that there is incentive to want to write large grants and engage in more rigorous research activities.

V.	Adjournment & Next Meeting
	Meeting adjourned at 12:10 p.m.
	Next Meeting:
	Wednesday, November 14^th at 10:00 a.m. in EDSE Conference Room

	Submitted by Stephanie Weiss on October 25, 2012