College Committees – Research – End of Year Report

Chair of Committee: Lynne Beaty (SCI)

Committee Members: Justyna Skorma (BUS), Hyunsoon Yim (BUS), Ihab Ragai (ENG), Liyong Sun (ENG), Amy Pogson (HSS), Joshua Shaw (HSS), Bruce Wittermshaus (SCI)

Meeting Dates: 10/8/2021, 10/22/2021, 2/25/2022, 4/19/2022

Charges: (Include the status/progress of each charge)

Charge 1 (standing charge): Review sabbatical leave applications and recommend individuals for sabbaticals.

  • Progress with charge: The committee reviewed 7 sabbatical leave applications in the fall. Our rankings and recommendations were sent to the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Affairs. 
  • Was the charge completed? Yes

Charge 2 (standing charge): Review nominations and select recipients for Council of Fellows Faculty Research Awards and Faculty Outreach Award.

  • Progress with charge: The committee reviewed the nominations for the Faculty Research (4 nominations) and Faculty Outreach Awards (only 2 nominations) and selected the recipients for the awards. 
  • Beyond these two recommendations, the committee would also like to commend each school for the high quality of their nominees. These decisions were tough to make and not always unanimous. If possible, we would like to encourage the schools whose nominees were not selected to continue putting forth their strongest candidates; just because someone was not selected this year does not mean that they would not be selected next year.
  • Was the charge completed? Yes

Charge 3 (standing charge?): Review the nominations for the 2020-2021 Undergraduate Research Award.

  • Progress with charge: The committee reviewed the nominations for the Undergraduate Research Award and selected two recipients for the award.
  • Was the charge completed? Yes
  • Other relevant information/discussion: Prior to 2019-2020, this was not one of the committee’s standing charges. It now appears to be a standing charge. Whether or not this is a standing charge should be confirmed for 2022-2023. 

Charge 4 (non-standing charge): Implement some (?) research productivity recommendations

  • Progress with charge: Addressing this charge and Charge #5 were discussed at our first meeting but returning members of the committee indicated that these charges were more of interest to some of the committee members than others. It was suggested that a subcommittee be formed to address this charge and Charge #5. A subcommittee was not formed.
  • Was the charge completed? No
  • Other relevant information/discussion: Retain this charge for next year so that it can be readdressed by the full committee.

Charge 5 (non-standing charge): Reconsider the Council of Fellows awards

  • Progress with charge: Addressing this charge and Charge #4 were discussed at our first meeting but returning members of the committee indicated that these charges were more of interest to some of the committee members than others. It was suggested that a subcommittee be formed to address this charge and Charge #4. A subcommittee was not formed.
  • Was the charge completed? No
  • Other relevant information/discussion: Retain this charge for next year so that it can be readdressed by the full committee.

Suggested Charge(s) For Next Year: Retain suggested charges from last year 

  1. Implement some (?) research productivity recommendations. The recommendations made by the 2020-2021 Research Committee should be revisited with the committee and the interim Dean of Research (or new Dean, depending on the hiring process) to discuss what recommendations could be implemented. 
  2. Reconsider the Council of Fellows awards.
    [The following text is from 2021 Research Committee Report]
    • Several committee members raised a concern toward the end of the year about the Council of Fellows awards in research and outreach. The concern, roughly, is that Behrend has too many “winner takes all” reward systems. Only one award is given in each category. Each school can only nominate one candidate. Each school’s candidate is also generally the de facto recipient of that school’s research award.
    • The committee worries that this system alienates most faculty and reinforces the perception that Behrend lacks a “culture of research” because only a small number of faculty receive recognition for their research accomplishments.
    • The committee included suggestions for how to improve the situation in its report on removing barriers to research productivity (see Charge #4). However, next year’s committee may want to investigate this issue further.