University of Michigan
Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR)
Research Policies Committee (RPC)

Friday, November 19, 2004
10:15 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
4006 Fleming Building

PRESENT:     Anika Ball-Anthony, Lajos Balogh, Wendy Banka, Fred Bookstein, Michael Combi, Mary Haan (chair), Rex Holland, Josephine Kasa-Vubu, Pinaki Mazumder, Carol Persad, Susan Shore, Fawwaz Ulaby, Roscoe Warner, and Jane Ritter (staff).

OVPR:            Lee Katterman, Judy Nowack, and Marvin Parnes

Summary of Discussion

1.         Welcome to Josephine Kasa-Vubu, new member                  Mary Haan, chair

2.         PEERRS (handouts)                                                                 Lee Katterman

            1.  Requirements:  who should take which courses?  Review of PEERRS Utilization data.

DISCUSSION: Who oversees whether requirements are being met, i.e., in Med School?  People who must become certified are tracked via their sponsored projects, at DRDA level.

MOTION by Mary Haan:  1) the Committee recommend that PIs, co-PIs, key staff and students involved in human/animal research be required to take all modules on foundations, research, and COI (or) human/animal research and 2) that all human/animal research be covered by this and 3) it not be dependent on funding source (all current and new research) Motion made by Mary Haan, seconded by Fred Bookstein.

NEXT MEETING:  PUBLICATIONS AND AUTHORSHIP MODULE DISCUSSION.  SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON CONTENT AND WHO SHOULD TAKE IT?  WHO IS THE AUDIENCE?(LEE TO SEND MATERIAL TO REVIEW PRIOR TO NEXT MEETING – OLD VERSION IN RPC NOTEBOOK.)

FTU:  From perspective of graduate students, etc., regs on authorship are vague and different cultures and norms exist in schools and colleges.  Writing module universal enough will be difficult.  Basic general principles, be fair to all who contribute.  Then have links to different professional societies.  Norms in different fields.  Second approach, more meaningful, to congregate disciplines into 5 major areas (humanities, social sciences, etc.) and to have examples in the 5 categories (like IRBs –health, behavioral science & medicine). 

ACTION: WOULD LIKE RPC FEEDBACK ON WHICH APPROACH.

3.   Update on Science Policy Program                                               Lee Katterman

Committee assembled about 2 yrs ago to review whether UM should establish a program on Science Technology & Public Policy.  Homer Neal brought this to OPVRs attention.  Provost agreed this summer to fund program, housed in School of Public Policy, committee authorized to advertise for junior faculty position in Science Policy and approval to advertise for senior faculty (although not advertised at this time).  Seminar schedule will be sent out shortly.  Student hired (GSRI), conducting inventory on courses that could be included in certificate program.

4.  Update on Research Professor Implementation                           Fawwaz Ulaby

Handout:  Research Faculty Guidelines.  Approved, in final review, initial review approved, pending and outstanding.

5.  Update on Conflict of Commitment Policy                                    Fawwaz Ulaby

Jim Woolliscroft made presentation to last year's Committee.  Recommendation, endorsed, supported and presented to Deans.  COC portion translates into each school and college to develop process for how they do this; from defining standard and acceptable activities among those activities outside the UM.  General guidelines developed over the summer and just recently sent to schools and colleges.  Requesting response back from early March or April.  Will need to go through second round.  After we get it back, it will be translated into SPG; then to Regents in June or July.  By next academic year, should have this in place.  Lee did review of CIC institutions.  Of 12 CIC schools, 3 have COC policies, 9 did not.  Now everyone has a policy except for 3; UM and two others in final stages.

6.  Discussion of RPC annual agenda                                                Committee

Draft annual agenda looks good.  IRB is good discussion issue/topic for RPC.  Come up with a review/evaluation of its own impressions.  Particularly for vulnerable subjects.

ACTION: INVITE MARK BURNHAM AND JULIE PETERSON TO DISCUSS THEIR PRESENTATION.

7.  Human subjects review                                                                  Mary Haan

DISCUSSION:  After discussion with members, it was agreed to perform an evaluation and review of the IRBs.

ACTION: RPC to review/evaluate IRBs at UM.

8.  Computer millennium (Handout)                                                   Pinaki Mazumder

'The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998', U.S. Copyright Office Summary, December 1998.  Related story of new movie being downloaded on one of his research lab computers by a student.  Machine was confiscated by Computer Group.  Returned after 1 month, no info provided. 

9.  Multidisciplinarity                                                                          Hunter Waite/Lajos Balogh

ACTION:  Lajos will talk to Hunter.

10.  Review/approve minutes from October 8, 2004                        Committee

MOVED:  REX HOLLAND, SECOND SUSAN SHORE TO APPROVE.

Next meeting:  December 17, 2004; 10:15 a.m. – 12:15 a.m.; 4006 Fleming Building