COE Faculty Advisory Council
April 12, 2017
9:00 – 10:00 a.m. Hill 100
In attendance: David Hough, Deanne Camp, Cory Fearing, Kim Finch, Joe Hulgus, Robin Koerber, Annice McLean, Melissa Schotthofer, Eric Sheffield, Becky Swearingen
1. Research Active Document, 3-8-17
The revised Research Active Document approved at the March FAC meeting was discussed due to the need for more discussion/clarification. “Research Active” is a university term so cannot be changed and KPI needs to be in the document. The document went from a larger window of time to a shorter one to produce a KPI document. There could be a section added for other activities that due to the definition, do not qualify for consideration. Everyone was reminded that the document is a guideline for tenured faculty, and as such is not as rigorous as P & T guidelines. Even so, new faculty, i.e., assistant professors and associate professors working toward the rank of full professor should be research active in order to be reassigned up to 3 hours for scholarship. All faculty with reassigned time for research / scholarship need to have a bona fide research agenda to justify teaching nine hours. Anyone who does not meet research active criteria should be assigned 12 hours teacher per semester.
A suggestion was to allow one KPI product in two years or two in four years. Another suggestion was to possibly either create two categories, KPI and “grant active” status for faculty to write grants for a predetermined dollar amount. FAC members agreed there needs to be more conversations on the role of grant writing.
2. Draft Faculty Ethics Document – Kim Finch, Becky Swearingen, Melissa Schotthofer
This draft document was created per a discussion at the March FAC meeting. The document has three categories: Ethics of Authorships, Ethics of Presentations, and Ethics of Service. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (IMCJE) was used since it is the most commonly cited source. FAC members discussed problems that occur in the college such as too many co-authors, their names are listed on the program, and only some or none attend the conference. A faculty member has to be listed as Principal Investigator on IRBs. Do they get full credit for the publication, what about the student? Need to look at the amount of time put in.
This document was not created to tell faculty what to do, but to state what is considered to be ethical practice. Faculty should only take credit for what they actually do and should indicate the percent of contribution. The FAC Code of Ethics Sub-committee with rewrite the document to read such that it can be signed by anyone reading and agreeing with the code.
3. August 18, 2017 College Meeting – FAC Activity
Per last month’s FAC meeting, suggestions were made on how to get to know your colleagues. FAC members will have a “Getting to Know Your Colleagues” activity at the August 18th College meeting. Members agreed to have a “breakout box” activity. Robin Koerber and Annice McLean will work on this and it and schedule a time to meet in May with FAC. Faculty and staff could sit where they want when they arrive, but will be put in groups for the activity. They asked to have 45 minutes blocked out. They will also schedule a time to meet this summer to finalize plans for the meeting.
Submitted by Sharon Lopinot