Memorandum 116
December 10, 1998

Members Present:     Tebbs Adams, Barbara Adamcik, Ken Rodnick for Brian Attebery, Dean Longmore for Ron Balsley, Richard Brey, Raymond Clark, Sandra Wilkins for Steve Daley, Chris Daniels, Kay Flowers, Dianne Horrocks, Edwin House (presiding), Rudy Kovacs, Skip Lohse, Mark McBeth, Sarah Patrick, Anna Ratka

Members Absent/Excused:     Jonathan Blotter, Frank Harmon, Richard Inouye, Dave Kleist, Subbaram Naidu, Dan Wolfley, Paul Zelus

Dr. House declared a quorum was present.

I.     It was MSC (11y, 0n) to approve Memorandum #115.


1.    The Faculty Senate approved the Humanities/Social Sciences Bylaws and Guidelines for Proposals this week.

2.    The deadline for Technology Incentive Grant proposals to be submitted to the Sponsored Programs Office for review is February 26, 1999. Dr. House reported that the internal peer review committee has been successful in the past, and he hopes it will continue to be. He hopes people recognize the value of this internal review and will get their proposals in by the February 26 deadline. Ralph Norton, the grantwriter in the Office of Research, has helped people write successful proposals for this competition.

3.    Dr. Ratka reported that the Faculty Research Committee will meet tomorrow to award proposals submitted this semester.

4.    Raymond Clark reported that the Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee (GSRSC) met last Thursday and allocated $10,500. There were 16 research proposals awarded and 2 dissemination proposals. The GSRSC approached the ISU Foundation to develop an endowment fund to ensure a funding source for GSRSC that would continue to exist if ISU budgetary constraints were to replace or eliminate the GSRSC budget.

5.    Dr. House will be calling a meeting early spring semester to revise the University Research Committee’s Guidelines for Proposals and plans to have the revisions approved by RCC before people begin writing proposals. The current rating form does not correlate with the guidelines and this needs to be corrected.

6.    Dr. House reported that there are currently 11 nominations for the Distinguished Researcher competition.

G.     The Idaho Accelerator Center and the Center for Ecological Research and Education are two of the top three finalists in the SBOE Research Center Competition. The third is the Idaho Universities Policy Research Center in Boise. The Policy Research Center is is a joint proposal involving BSU, ISU, and UI. Even if this proposal is the one awarded, ISU will received $100,000/year for three years. BSU will receive $50,000 for administration of the grant. The ISU Centers are scheduled for an on-site visitation by a panel of seven people during the first week of February 1999 at ISU.

H.     Outcome of Proposed Research Alliances with INEEL - INEEL is also very interested in forming the alliances and has conducted meetings that included DOE-Idaho representatives. The two alliances have proposed that INEEL provide them with $.5 million this year. One alliance has asked that this figure be increased to $1 million the second year with a smaller amount the third year; the other alliance has asked for $.75 million each year. President Denson and President Bowen hope to have signed off on this agreement by December 18.

I.     Dr. House approved travel costs from EPSCoR funds and University Research funds for six undergraduate students to attend the Council of Undergraduate Research sponsored national symposium

J.     Dr. House will also underwrite the Undergraduate Research Day (March 26, 1999).

K.     Other - None

III. COUNCIL BUSINESS A.     Dr. House has instructed Dr. DeJesus to proceed with establishing the Undergraduate Research Committee. One member suggested that the word "scholarship" should be added to the name of this committee because some work would probably be more of a scholarly nature than a research nature. Dr. House reported that "scholarship" was added to the Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee because this committee makes recommendations for ASISU scholarships. The Undergraduate Research Committee will not be deciding ASISU scholarships and to include this in the committee name might cause confusion. B.     The proposed changes in the "Conflict of Interest Policy" were discussed. Dianne Horrocks stated that a disclosure form needs to be created and that enforcement mechanisms and sanctions need to be addressed. Also, a list of the agencies requiring a Conflict of Interest form should be available so faculty are not submitting forms unnecessarily. Council members wanted to know who on other campuses is responsible for notifying the General Counsel in these situations and who at ISU would notify the General Counsel, if that became necessary. Dr. House said he would be the designated official to notify the General Counsel. Dr. House informed the Research Coordinating Council that he and Ms. Horrocks would develop a draft and bring it to the next meeting.for review. Dr. Daniels asked what happens during the summer when faculty are not on contract. Dr. House said this was a good question and he would pursue it further.

C.     It was MSC (11y, 0n) to approve the Good/Bad Practices in Research document as now written. Dr. House informed the Council that he is dealing with issues the document addresses on a regular basis, such as authorship issues, ownership of data issues, etc.

D.     The Council then considered the Intellectual Property and Conflict of Interest Policies that are currently in the ISU Faculty and Staff Handbook. Dr. House informed the Council that both RCC and Faculty Senate formed special committees last year to look at instructional materials created by faculty and staff which would be made available on the Internet. These materials were reviewed to determine whether or not changes should be made in the Intellectual Property Policy. This policy needs to reflect the updated titles of the offices and the additions of the Humanities/Social Sciences Research Committee and the new Undergraduate Research Committee. Kay Flowers informed the Council that, with the growing importance of software, the software is more frequently being viewed as a patent, which is owned by the university with licensing rights belonging to the university and the individual. Dr. Patrick asked if CD ROM’s were now considered in the same category as publications since they sometimes contain course work. Should they be moved out of the copyright area and into the patent area? Dr. House said his opinion is that if there is a grant or contract in place to produce the CD, it is considered "work for hire" under the copyright rule. Dr. House asked the members to think about this issue and discuss it with their colleagues. He will put it on the agenda for next semester.

The meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.