EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH POLICIES COMMITTEE
October 1, 2010
MEMBERS PRESENT: Marcus Agustin, Chair, Sarah Bailey, David Duvernell, Christa Johnson, Yuliang Liu, Suman Mishra, Joe Schober, Mariana Solares
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Rakesh Bharati, Terry Yan
Denise Cobb, Director of Assessment
Lynn Maurer, Associate Dean, The Graduate School
Associate Dean Christa Johnson announced that the STEP applications are due soon. The LINC conference will take place on February 24 and 25, 2011 at Chase Park Plaza Hotel. So far, six institutions of higher learning are involved.
Associate Dean Lynn Maurer announced that the Graduate Open House took place and was a great success. The Admissions office received about 200 applications for graduate programs.
II. Minutes of March 26, 2010
David Duvernell made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted; Joe Schober seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
III. GS/GC Operating Papers Revision
The committee decided to postpone discussion on this topic.
IV. Graduate Committee on Assessment (GCOA) Operating Papers
Denise Cobb gave an overview of the history of the committee. Former Graduate Dean Steve Hansen formed the committee in the Fall of 2009. He selected members based on expertise in assessment. The Director of Assessment is a voting member of the GCOA. The membership uses staggered terms. The method for selecting the chair is consistent with Undergraduate Committee on Assessment. Cobb said that the GCOA operating papers are consistent with Undergraduate Committee on Assessment in its practices and processes. and sh praised the work the committee has done. They did a tremendous amount of commendable and important work in the first year. They were engaged in the process, which included fact-to-face meetings with program directors and chairs.
Under the proposal, the Director of Assessment will also serve as a nonvoting member of Programs Committee. Cobb mentioned that the members of the Programs Committee may be overloaded if some of them were asked to also serve on GCOA.
Cobb added that the Office of Assessment evaluates which graduate programs would receive the most benefit from having its assessment plan review and schedules accordingly. The primary consideration is which programs are going to be undergoing program review within the next year. When departments change or modify their graduate assessment plan, they may implement it immediately and submit the revised plan to the Office of assessment for feedback. Although the Office of Assessment is using the word, “approval,” to describe the feedback process, it does not intend to introduce obstructions to graduate programs’ efforts to provide rigorous graduate education.
One question that arose concerned the number of members. The undergraduate COA has eight members, and it was felt that eight was a manageable number. The initial membership of the committee had expressed concerns that a large number of members would become unwieldy.
David Duvernell made a motion to approve the Operating Papers as submitted; Yuliang Liu seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
V. ICR Distribution on Multidisciplinary Grants
According to SIUE’s ICR Policy 5D1, indirect cost reimbursement funds generated by externally sponsored grants, contracts, and special projects beyond real and necessary costs of Research and Projects Fiscal Management are distributed as follows:
Training Grants (Instructional), Public Service, and Other Special Projects:
67% Generating Unit
33% Graduate School – Office of Research and Projects
40% Generating Unit
60% Graduate School – Office of Research and Projects
When there are investigators from more than one “generating unit,” however, the ICR is distributed only to the school or college of the lead Primary Investigator (PI). The Graduate School is considering amending this policy to share the ICR across multiple generating units on multidisciplinary projects that that involve faculty from more than one school/college.
Marcus Agustin asked whether three committee members would volunteer to look into how other universities address this issue. Joe Schober volunteered to help Christa look into it. They will ask for 1.) Feedback from faculty from all other units; 2.) Information about practices at other institutions that are similar to SIUE in size and structure and mission; 3.) What the last 10 multidisciplinary grants looked like at SIUE and what the impact would be in new scenarios; 4.) Recommendations about potential thresholds (all grants that recover the full 43% or only those above $10 K, etc., and 5.) information about research centers at other institutions and if they receive a portion of ICR or not and if so how much? A formal charge memo will be forwarded to Joe Schober to form this task force.
VI. ICR Distribution on Projects Involving Research Centers
The committee began a discussion on ICR distribution to research centers should also be shared with the generating units. One question that arose is how STEM should be included in cost sharing for grants that are housed there. The committee decided to invite Sharon Locke, the director of the STEM center, to the next meeting
VII. Intellectual Property and Copyright Policies
This topic will be addressed at a later meeting.
VIII. Support for Student and Faculty Travel
This topic will be addressed at a later meeting.
IX. Continuing Business
There was no continuing business.
X. New Business
Christa Johnson announced that the ERP needed to consider staggering the terms of the members of the Research and Development (R&D) Committee. All of the members’ terms will expire in Spring of 2011.
The meeting adjourned at 11:31 AM.
Jerry B. Weinberg
Acting Associate Provost for Research and
Dean, Graduate School