Provost Workman would like for the Research Committee and new research proposals to recognize the importance of two initiatives of the University. 

The first is the Quality Enhancement Plan that centers on community-based learning.  The second is the Diversity Task Force.  Diversity should be considered not just in terms of faculty but also with regard to curriculum.  We are encouraged to give some degree of preferential treatment to proposals that address one of these two initiatives.  This means that in the case of two equally strong proposals, higher priority might be given to the one that addresses one of the two initiatives.  This may only account for 10% of the proposals.  We should not favor a weaker proposal based on these initiatives. We will publicize this in our documentation and provide guidance for applicants both on the application form and in more detail on the Committee’s website.  
 
To facilitate this and other improvements, we may change to date that all submissions have to
be finalized to about 3 weeks later, around the beginning of December. This is to be determined.

Possible improvements to the application form were discussed.  The form needs to address whether the proposal is targeted to one of the two initiatives.  Louanne volunteered to revise the application to reflect all of the evaluation criteria identified in the call for proposals.

The possibility of creating a template or other means of electronic submission was discussed.  The guidelines for font size and format need to be reemphasized.  The creation of a template would make adherence to the guidelines easier for applicants. Karthik volunteered to create the template if this is the way we decide to go for this year. We will also repeat the guidelines for font and format in the Call for Proposals email.

If we are unable to fully implement electronic submission this year we may want to make this one of our goals for continuous improvement.

The possibility of a Blackboard site for reviewers was discussed.  If 30 proposals were received this would require setting up 30 groups so that access to documents could be restricted to the appropriate reviewers.    Ken volunteered to experiment with Blackboard and speak with ITS about this idea.  One advantage of Blackboard would be that we are all familiar with the platform.  Reviews could be posted in Blackboard but we would have to find a way to restrict these as well to maintain the blind review process.

It may also be possible to utilize the SharePoint software for this.  One advantage is that one may type or paste directly into SharePoint.

Various professional organizations have been utilizing software on their websites, which allow for password protected online submissions of proposals.  We may need to determine what software packages they are using.  It could be something that UNF already possesses a license for. 

In lieu of a new platform, we could just use space on the server, which is locked.  If we do implement a new system, we need to have a trial year with both the new software and the former method of submission in place.  

Committee Business:
Monday mornings appear to be the best time for the Committee to meet this semester.  Kathy will check Theo’s Monday schedule, and set the next meeting date.

Committee Elections:
Courtenay will continue to serve as Secretary.
Kathy will continue to serve as chair, and David will serve as the Vice Chair.

Adjournment & Next Meeting:
The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m

Submitted by D. Courtenay McLeland
 August 29, 2008