RESEARCH COORDINATING COUNCIL
Memorandum 136 - Revised
September 20, 2001
Members Present: Curtis Anderson, Sean Anderson, John Bennion, Alok Bhushan,
Steve Byers, Deb Easterly, Nancy Griffin for Kay Flowers, Larry
Ford, Dianne Horrocks, Edwin House (presiding), Jeanne Lancaster
for Skip Lohse, Subbaram Naidu, Pamela Park, Rosemary Smith,
Beth Stamm, Dennis Stowe, Jane Strickland, Dan Wolfley
Members Absent/Excused: Phil Blick, Jonathan Blotter Graduate Student representative,
Frank Harmon, Health Professions representative, Richard
Inouye, Keith Weber, Doug Wells,Paul Zelus
Dr. Edwin House declared a quorum was present. He introduced himself and had the other Council
introduce themselves. He gave the members a brief history of the Council. It was created about 18
years ago when the Faculty Research Committee was the only campus committee that dealt with research.
Because of the diversity of issues—reporting to Faculty Senate regarding policy recommendations,
whether or not to fund master’s and dissertation research, funding of equipment of moderate cost which
was in excess of the limits in place at the time, there was a reorganization approved by Faculty Senate.
As a consequence, the Research Coordinating Council was formed and became the research policy-making
body. This is its primary function, although it does have others. All of the other university-wide research
committees report to the Research Coordinating Council. Some members of the Council have that
membership because they are chairs of one of these research committees. These are: 1) University Research
Committee, 2) Faculty Research Committee, 3) Humanities/Social Sciences Research Committee, 4)
Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee, 5) Undergraduate Research Committee. These
committees report to the Research Coordinating Council. The Faculty Research Committee has an
expanded function of review and selection of the outstanding researchers and the distinguished researcher
each year. The Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee was originally just a research
committee but now also makes recommendations to ASISU for graduate student scholarships. The
Undergraduate Research Committee sponsors the Undergraduate Research Symposium, Undergraduate
Research Day, students attending regional and national meetings as well as funding research proposals. The
Humanities/Social Sciences Research Committee has a $90,000 annual budget for research proposals
and $10,000 travel budget for faculty to further their research and scholarly activities. The University
Research Committee awards research proposals and when a faculty member receives an award from this
committee, there is an expectation that external funds will be pursued. The Research Coordinating
Council, in addition to recommending policy, also recommends funding in a program that Dr.
Lawson started. These recommendations are for awards for Release Time for External Funding and awards
release time funds to faculty for the purpose of writing extramural grants.
I. It was MSC (10y,0n) to approve Memorandum #135
A. Faculty Research Committee – John Bennion reported that the committee had not met yet
this semester. Not all members have yet been replaced but he should have the names of
the new members by the end of the week. The call for proposals will be going out shortly
with a November 5, 2001 deadline.
B. Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee – Dr. House reported that this
committee met last Friday and elected the Chair, Vice Chair and representative to the
Graduate Council. The election of a representative to the Research Coordinating Council was
deferred until the next meeting. The call for proposals will be going out fairly soon and this
committee will be dealing with the ASISU scholarship applications in the next month or so.
C. Undergraduate Research Committee – Curtis Anderson reported that the committee will meet
next Tuesday. The Research Symposium is scheduled for April 4, 2002 in the ballroom. There
are a few bylaw changes which the committee will deal with at the next meeting.
D. Humanities/Social Sciences Research Committee – Dr. House reported that he is the Chair for
this committee and Rudy Kovacs was elected as the Vice Chair. The call for proposals was
sent out last May and a reminder will be going out this month with a deadline of November 1,
2001. The committee will meet in late November or early December to make decisions on those
E. University Research Committee – Dr. House reported that this committee met last spring and
allocated its $80,000 budget. This committee will not meet again until next spring after the
deadline for the call for proposals.
F. Federal Initiatives – ISU submitted proposed projects totaling about $24 million for 9 projects.
Dr. House anticipates receiving about $5-7 million for these projects if federal allocations are similar
to last year. Dr. House and Dr. Ford will be getting a call out to the university campus for requests
for the next funding period. Cassidy and Associates will come here for a visit and listen to presentations.
Dr. House has asked all deans to think about projects that would make sense for this process. This is
a process by which we ask Congress for line item appropriations. Many of the federal initiative
projects are research center oriented but some are strictly project oriented. Cassidy has stated that
requests need to be $1 million or more. Success to date are: 1) $1.7 million for a two-year project
in Telehealth- Beth Stamm; PI 2) $1.4 million for information assurance-Dr. Corey Schou; PI and 3)
$500,000 in GIS-Keith Weber, PI.
G. NEH Summer Stipend – Deb Easterly reported that the National Endowment for the Humanities
makes an annual award of $5,000 to one junior and one senior faculty member. This year’s nominees
are Dr. Mei Zhong, Music Department, junior faculty and Dr. Jennifer Attebury, English, senior faculty.
The awards will be made in April so that the faculty members have them for summer work. The
deadline for the upcoming year was October 1 and ISU had four applicants.
H. Release Time for External Funding – Dr. Lawson approved funding of the two faculty proposals
(submitted by Dr. J. B. Owens and Dr. William Woodhouse) that were recommended by this Council.
I. Center for Science and Technology Building – There are four partners who have a stake in this
building—Idaho State University, University of Idaho, Inland Northwest Research Alliance and the
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. Dr. Larry Ford (Research), Dr.
Dave Rodgers (Geology), Dr. Richard Inouye (Biological Sciences) and Darren Dehle (Physical
Plant) went to several meetings over the summer and did a fine job in securing our share of the
space and assuring that the construction would accommodate our needs. There will be offices for
research faculty, rooms for graduate students, and there will also be a major facility called the
geocentrifuge that will be put in this building. The underlying principle behind the building
was that it be collaborative—that is that it would facilitate faculty and researchers working together
from the other universities, as well as researchers from INEEL and visiting researchers. The
design is such that we can do that. Dr. House reported that this should open up many
opportunities in the future. This building is strictly for research; teaching will be done in other
buildings. ISU will have ten research faculty in this building and has already hired four—Nancy
Glenn, Terence McGonigle, Peter Sheridan, and Malcomb Shields. Part of this funding is from
the state and part from INEEL.
J. Research Coordinating Council (RCC) Annual Report to President – This is an annual report
to the University President about the Council’s activities. It reflects the work of the various research
committees that report to the Research Coordinating Council and also some policy issues. One is
the recommended Guidelines for Evaluation Procedures for Research Faculty which is still being
reviewed by Faculty Senate. Another is the recommended policy for indirect cost funds. RCC
also approves the title of “center” for Level I and Level II research centers. Level I allows the
use of the term “center” where research is one of its functions, and having the term center in a
title is helpful in securing external funds. However, the University is not obligated to allocate
funds to a Level I center. Last year, the Natural Heritage Center was approved at Level I. For a
Level II, there is an expectation that the University will put resources into that center. The Family
Medicine Clinical Research Center was approved at Level II. This center already has
significant institutional support.
K. Other – No other business to report.
III. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. Evaluation Guidelines and Procedures for Research Faculty – Dr. House
reviewed the changes recommended by the Faculty Senate. In the first paragraph, the
insertion of “no more than” was in agreement with this Council and with the original intent.
This sentence was revised to read as follows: Research Faculty who are being
paid 9 or more months salary by Idaho State University will typically be expected
to teach no more than one upper division/graduate level course (3-4 credits) and
no more than one upper division/graduate level seminar course (1-2 credits) per
year. The amount of public service required of research faculty has been the issue
of contention. Faculty Senate recommended the following changes: Service contributions
serving on Department, College, or University committees, reviewing
manuscripts for journals, reviewing grant proposals or serving on review panels
for funding agencies, and serving on review panels or advisory boards for
public or private agencies (e.g. management agencies, governmental panels).
Public service will be evaluated by the Department in which
the Research faculty member
is located, using a standard that is acceptable for that Department .
No more than 10% of the Research Faculty member=s time will be committed to
Some departments have very different philosophies regarding these issues. Rosemary
Smith said she believed the view of Faculty Senate was that the research faculty
could say “no” to participating on some committees because this commitment could
become excessive and actually reduce the amount of time spent on research which
is what they were hired for. Dr. House clarified that this did not mean that research faculty
could not be a member of a graduate student’s committee or a research committee.
He believed the 10% was to address time spent on university-wide committees and
was not related to supervising postdoctoral fellows and others involved in a research
project. The consensus of the Council was that the paragraph regarding public
service needed to be rewritten, public service needed to be defined, research should
be placed at the top of the page so that research was addressed first, teaching
second, and public service third. Larry Ford, Deb Easterly, Jane Streubel, Dan
Wolfley and Beth Stamm will work on this.
B. Intellectual Property - Dr. House reported what had transpired in the statewide Intellectual
Property Committee last year. A document has been prepared that would take away
significant rights and freedoms. Academic Vice Presidents’ of all schools objected. Boise
State University’s provost recommended that an outside consultant be hired. This was done
and is now in the stage of data collection from universities throughout the country. When
this process is complete, the consultant will come forward with a recommendation for a policy.
The consultant should have his/her recommendation by December.
We will be expected to write a new policy to match the State Board of Education’s policy
terms. Copyright is an area of difficulty. The Patent Policy is very similar so that should
not be an issue. Intellectual Property issues can often be solved with a Memorandum of
Agreement. Council members received a copy of the SBOE Intellectual Property Benchmarks.
C. Dr. House asked Council members to review the memorandum submitted by Dr. Will Hamlin,
last year’s Faculty Research Committee Chair. It was MSC (10y, 0n) to increase the
maximum award by the Faculty Research Committee (FRC) from $4,000 to $5,000. Dr.
House stated that the guidelines for proposals will need to be changed as well as the guidelines for
the University Research Committee and the Humanities/Social Sciences Research Committee
because the minimum award from those committees is $4,000 based on the FRC maximum.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m.