MOTION TO REFER CAPP AND CPM RESOLUTIONS ON CLASSIFIED AND PROPRIETARY RESEARCH TO AN AD HOC COMMITTEE ON CLASSIFIFED AND PROPRIETARY RESEARCH
Approved by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on December 8, 2004
|Date||Document & Link||Committee|
|December 8, 2004||
|November 17, 2004||
Motion to Refer CPM Draft Resolution to an Ad Hoc Committee on Classified and Proprietary Research
That the SEC appoint an ad hoc committee, drawing from standing committees with an interest in this area and that this ad hoc committee report back to the Senate in January on: 1.The definition of classified research (as opposed to proprietary research) and 2.The issue of whether classified research should be conducted at Manoa and if so, 3. What the guidelines should be.
CPM Resolution on the Conduct of Classified Research at the University of Hawaii
- WHEREAS: The conduct of certain acceptable types of classified research, in the presence of proper governance and oversight, can benefit both the University of Hawaii and the polities of which we are a part;
- WHEREAS: The conduct of classified research, in the absence of proper governance and oversight, can also significantly degrade the academic ambiance of a university by, for example:
- Allowing external agencies to bar certain students from research activities for which they cannot obtain clearance;
- Permitting faculty and student research that may not be examined and properly taken into account in tenure and promotion decisions and in certification for academic degrees;
- Permanently preventing the publication of research findings and even wholly concealing the existence of research activities;
- Compromising the approval and review procedures routinely used to ensure that proper academic standards are observed: i.e., human studies, research ethics, animal care, hazardous materials, etc.
- WHEREAS: There may be opportunities to support the conduct of classified research in way that respect the four areas of concern listed above as A-D;
- BE IT RESOLVED: That the UH Administration submit to the Manoa Faculty Senate, for its approval, a draft of policies and procedures that adequately address the four areas of concern listed above.
- BE IT RESOLVED: That the Manoa Faculty Senate stands ready to cooperate with the Administration in drafting a satisfactory policy.
Motion to Refer the CAPP Resolution on Classified and Propriety Research to a Committee and to Request a Report
Motion to Refer the Resolution on Classified and Proprietary Research to a committee to evaluate classified and proprietary research, and, after campus-wide consultative discussions, for this committee to submit a report at the May Senate Meeting
Manoa Faculty Senate CAPP Resolution on Classified and Proprietary Research
CAPP is aware that other UHMFS committees, such as COR, CAB, and CPM, are evaluating guidelines governing classified and proprietary research at the University of Hawaii. However, CAPP notes that such research raises issues related to academic policies, programs, and other matters within the Committee's jurisdiction, moreover that some of these issues are distinct from the broader issue of whether such research ought to be carried out at all.
CAPP notes that from the standpoint of the University and of the people of Hawaii, classified and proprietary research is much more akin to independent consulting than it is to the ordinary duties of a UH faculty member. Such consulting is permitted by the University, since it can have value both to the consultee and to the researcher. At the same time it is very carefully limited, in recognition that the core mission of the University is scholarly research and teaching carried out under normal conditions of open discourse.
CAPP believes that research programs should not be micromanaged, and that any policy which imposes limits on what an investigator can or cannot study should be entered into only with the greatest care and exactitude. However, we note that even though research is technically done by individuals and not by institutions, that research carried out by anyone while an employee of the University is generally understood (correctly or not) to have been carried out under standards to which the University community subscribes. Open faculty review, such as promotion and tenure committees, outside examination of doctoral candidates, and so forth, is the concrete instantiation of this understanding. CAPP therefore recognizes that the faculty as a whole have a direct professional stake in any research done in their name, and that any research should either be open to broad faculty review, or not be considered as having been done in the name of the University.
CAPP sees potential for the unintentional degradation of academic programs in the relatively easy availability of funding from classified or proprietary sources. Within a department, faculty who limit themselves to funding from more competitive sources could find themselves "punished" with increased administrative or teaching duties. G-funded positions could be engulfed by the classified category, leaving teaching to soft-money replacements. Student access to University resources could become either diminished or structurally discriminatory, in that classified programs could be open only to students with appropriate clearance and citizenship. Moreover, the availability of funds from such sources could be used as an excuse to underfund the normal University activities of teaching and open research.
CAPP wants to emphasize that the purpose of the following resolution is neither to support nor prohibit classified or proprietary research, but rather to emphasize that it is not a core University activity, and to offer some safeguards for core University activities which might be impacted by the spread of such research.
A CAPP RESOLUTION ON CLASSIFIED AND PROPRIETARY RESEARCH
(1) Whereas "the role of our university is to promote the free exchange of ideas and to generate and disseminate knowledge" (UH-Manoa Strategic Plan, 'Our Futures'); and
(2) Whereas the Strategic Plan includes as "Strategic Imperatives" that we "encourage research that benefits and involves the local community" and "publicize our research more widely to local, national, and international community" and "promote the free exchange of ideas and be a source of renewal for our society;" and
(3) Whereas the University represents a source of knowledge in the State which is by nature and charter isolated from political and commercial influence, and that this isolation is critical to the credibility of all work done at the University; and
(4) Whereas research contrary to the principles above is permitted by the university because it is similar to professional consulting work, such research nevertheless remains outside normal UH duties and subject to a variety of limits; therefore
Be It Resolved that
(1) Classified or proprietary research shall not in any way deplete resources used for regular research and teaching at the University of Hawaii. In particular, no general funds, tuition income, or other similar funding, or equipment or facilities bought with such funding, shall be applied to any classified project, in whole or part.
(2) Research that is not part of the public record shall not be counted towards researchers applications for tenure or promotion, nor counted as part of their normal duties at the University of Hawaii, excepting possibly as professional service. The policies governing tenure and promotion decisions will be understood to reflect this, as will guidelines distributed to candidates and committees.
(3) The University of Hawaii shall not have its name associated officially with classified or proprietary research, nor shall such research be included in tallies of departmental or University accomplishments.
(4) Under no circumstances shall a UH faculty member engaging in classified or proprietary research be treated any differently with respect to service responsibility from any other faculty member engaged in a comparable amount of independent consulting.
(5) In this resolution, "classified or proprietary" shall mean not only research that is classified or proprietary at the outset, but also any research entered into as part of a contract where the contractor retains the right to unilaterally restrict access to the research at any later stage of the project.