University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

December 9, 1992


                            COMMISSION ON RESEARCH

                               December 9, 1992

                                206 Sandy Hall

                                   3:30 p.m.



  MEMBERS PRESENT:  H. Doswald, C. Flora, J. Johnson, H. Kriz, J. Lee, R.

                    Lytton, A. McNabb, R. Olin, P. Rasnick, R. Reneau, P.

                    Scanlon, D. Stoker, E. Stout, J. Tank, J. Wightman, T.



  MEMBERS ABSENT:   T. Brandon, J. Eaton, P. Edwards, P. Eyre, E. McNeil, J.



  INVITED GUESTS:   D. Shelton, S. Trulove




  1.  APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 11, 1992:  Dr. Reneau motioned approval

      of Minutes and Dr. Stoker seconded.  Minutes were approved.


  2.  APPROVAL OF AGENDA:  Dr. McNabb added two agenda items:  1) the Profes-

      sional Practices Institute proposal and 2) the Intellectual Properties

      Committee.  Dr. Scanlon added a brief report from the Interdisciplinary

      Research Centers Review Committee.  Dr. Wightman motioned approval and

      Dr. Doswald seconded.  Agenda was approved.


  3.  INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES COMMITTEE:  As chair of the Intellectual Prop-

      erties Committee, Dr. Johnson was asked to prepare a statement outlin-

      ing the committee duties and describing the timing of their reports to

      the Commission on Research.  This document will define the relationship

      of the Intellectual Properties Committee to the Commission on Research

      as required by the new governance system.



      Scanlon presented a brief report on the role of the committee and indi-

      cated that centers which originated in 1988 and one other will be re-

      viewed this year.  The committee will probably be involved in a SCHEV

      mandated review of the Coal and Energy Center.  Committee discussions

      have focused on criteria for reviews and preparation of a draft of the

      guidelines.  The committee solicited suggestions from Commission on Re-

      search members.


  5.  MISCONDUCT IN SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES:  Dr. Johnson provided some back-

      ground information on the requirement for a misconduct policy.  All in-

      stitutions receiving Federal money are mandated to file a procedure by

      which they would handle misconduct in science.  There are very specific

      guidelines in the code of Federal regulations.  An interim policy was

      filed earlier using existing policies statements.  The new draft docu-

      ment that Dr. Johnson presented represents work which the Faculty Eth-

      ics Committee incorporates input from many sources.  The draft was

      discussed at length and is being revised.


  6.  PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES INSTITUTE:  Consideration of the Professional

      Practices Institute proposal was tabled for the year so that it could

      be evaluated after a new Vice Provost for Research had arrived.  (Mo-

      tion - Dr. Stout; second - Dr. Scanlon; Motion approved.)



      vided the membership with a handout summarizing what has been done in

      this area and described the background that led to these efforts.  Fol-

      lowing concerns expressed at a COR meeting last year about the nature

      of research budgeting programs used by the Controller's Office and the

      Office of Sponsored Programs, Dr. Stout and Mr. Shelton organized a

      committee to study these concerns.  A proposed new FRS report has been

      prepared and is being revised by the committee before field testing by

      a larger group of faculty.  The next step will be to include the new

      financial report form in the FRS menu and distribute it campus-wide.

      To meet different requirements there may be 2-3 different reports users

      can choose from.  Mr. Shelton mentioned current field testing of an on-

      line inquiry system which is easy to get to, provides more flexibility

      including on demand printing, printing at your location or the Comput-

      ing Center, ability to make tailor-made reports, etc.  Feedback about

      that program is good; it will be evaluated by a survey in January with

      a February to early March release for the entire university.  Mr.

      Shelton also reviewed the issues the committee addressed in working on

      the new report format and discussed a number of other budgeting issues

      including requirements within which the Office of Sponsored Programs

      must work.



      McNabb stated that Dr. Carlisle found the discussion with the COR very

      useful.  Because he did not respond to all the specific questions from

      COR, he said he would be happy to come to another meeting.  There was a

      general agreement to invite him back.


  9.  ADJOURNMENT:  Meeting adjourned at 4:50PM.





Current Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

Return to Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives

Send questions or comments to:

Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001

Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:25 EDT