News Article | April 17, 2017
Trusted Choice Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island donated $25,000 to the University of Rhode Island, and were recognized during a ceremony at the URI men’s basketball game versus Davidson College at the Ryan Center on March 4, 2017. Over the past 20 years, Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island has given $600,000 to the University of Rhode Island, which has helped fund more than 70 scholarships in the College of Business Administration and supported the University’s Robert L. Carothers Library to benefit all students. “The Independent Insurance Agents’ leadership and contributions over time have been vital to our ability to positively impact the community and the state,” stated David M. Dooley, President of the University of Rhode Island. “Their gift has ensured that our students can continue to prosper and thrive at the University and beyond.” Each year, on average, four students from the College of Business Administration who show academic talent and financial need are selected for the Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island Scholarships. The scholarships have made a direct impact on the current needs and future aspirations of a number of business students. “This scholarship has motivated me to work even harder in school because I am no longer solely doing it for myself, but also for those who see something in me and are willing to invest in my future,” said Tatiana Golditch, a junior in the College of Business Administration. The concept of paying it forward was found in the comment of Brandon Pettit, a senior in the College of Business Administration, who said, “After I graduate from the University, I would like to have the opportunity to give back to a deserving student like the Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island has so graciously done for me.” In addition to benefiting a number of students, IIARI’s support of the University’s libraries has helped to continue to provide invaluable resources to URI faculty, staff and students. “The Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island cares about growth and longevity,” said Karim Boughida, Dean of University Libraries. “Their investment in teaching and resources has enriched the experience of the College of Business and the entire University community.” “As an active community partner, it is essential to IIARI’s mission to support the next generation by providing the educational tools needed for success,” said Richard Paquin, president of Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island. IIARI executive vice president Mark Male added, “IIARI members work and live in the communities where they provide insurance, and are committed to making a meaningful impact everyday.” About the Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island: Founded in 1900, the Independent Insurance Agents of Rhode Island is comprised of independent insurance agents who provide property and casualty insurance solutions to their customers and clients. Located in Warwick, IIARI participating agencies are independently owned and operated throughout most communities in Rhode Island as Trusted Choice® agents.
News Article | April 17, 2017
All stakeholders in the scientific research enterprise -- researchers, institutions, publishers, funders, scientific societies, and federal agencies - should improve their practices and policies to respond to threats to the integrity of research WASHINGTON - All stakeholders in the scientific research enterprise -- researchers, institutions, publishers, funders, scientific societies, and federal agencies - should improve their practices and policies to respond to threats to the integrity of research, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Actions are needed to ensure the availability of data necessary for reproducing research, clarify authorship standards, protect whistleblowers, and make sure that negative as well as positive research findings are reported, among other steps. The report stresses the important role played by institutions and environments - not only individual researchers -- in supporting scientific integrity. And it recommends the establishment of an independent, nonprofit Research Integrity Advisory Board to support ongoing efforts to strengthen research integrity. The board should work with all stakeholders in the research enterprise to share expertise and approaches for minimizing and addressing research misconduct and detrimental practices. "The research enterprise is not broken, but it faces significant challenges in creating the conditions needed to foster and sustain the highest standards of integrity," said Robert Nerem, chair of the committee that wrote the report, and Institute Professor and Parker H. Petit Professor Emeritus, Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience, Georgia Institute of Technology. "To meet these challenges, all parties in the research enterprise need to take deliberate steps to strengthen the self-correcting mechanisms that are part of research and to better align the realities of research with its values and ideals." A growing body of evidence indicates that substantial percentages of published results in some fields are not reproducible, the report says, noting that this is a complex phenomenon and much remains to be learned. While a certain level of irreproducibility due to unknown variables or errors is a normal part of research, data falsification and detrimental research practices -- such as inappropriate use of statistics or after-the-fact fitting of hypotheses to previously collected data -- apparently also play a role. In addition, new forms of detrimental research practices are appearing, such as predatory journals that do little or no editorial review or quality control of papers while charging authors substantial fees. And the number of retractions of journal articles has increased, with a significant percentage of those retractions due to research misconduct. The report cautions, however, that this increase does not necessarily indicate that the incidence of misconduct is increasing, as more-vigilant scrutiny by the community may be a contributing factor. The report endorses the definition of scientific misconduct proposed in the 1992 Academies report Responsible Science: "fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reporting research." However, many practices that have until now been categorized as "questionable" research practices - for example, misleading use of statistics that falls short of falsification, and failure to retain research data -- should be recognized as "detrimental" research practices, the new report says. Detrimental research practices should be understood to include not only actions of individual researchers but also irresponsible or abusive actions by research institutions and journals. "The research process goes beyond the actions of individual researchers," said Nerem. "Research institutions, journals, scientific societies, and other parts of the research enterprise all can act in ways that either support or undermine integrity in research." Because research institutions play a central role in fostering research integrity, they should maintain the highest standards for research conduct, going beyond simple compliance with federal regulations and applying these standards to all research independent of the source of funding. Institutions' key responsibilities include creating and sustaining a research culture that fosters integrity and encourages adherence to best practices, as well as monitoring the integrity of their research environments. Senior leaders at each institution -- the president, other senior executives, and faculty leaders -- should guide and be actively engaged in these tasks. Furthermore, they must have the capacity to effectively investigate and address allegations of research misconduct and to address the conflict of interest that institutions may have in conducting these investigations -- for example, by incorporating external perspectives. In addition, research institutions and federal agencies should ensure that good faith whistleblowers - those who raise concerns about the integrity of research - are protected and their concerns addressed in a fair, thorough, and timely manner. Inadequate responses to such concerns have been a critical point of failure in many cases of misconduct where investigations were delayed or sidetracked. Currently, standards for transparency in many fields and disciplines do not adequately support reproducibility and the ability to build on previous work, the report says. Research sponsors and publishers should ensure that the information needed for a person knowledgeable about the field and its techniques to reproduce the reported results is made available at the time of publication or as soon as possible after that. Federal funding agencies and other research sponsors should also allocate sufficient funds to enable the long-term storage, archiving, and access of datasets and code necessary to replicate published findings. Researchers should routinely disclose all statistical tests carried out, including negative findings, the report says. Available evidence indicates that scientific publications are biased against presenting negative results and that the publication of negative results is on the decline. But routine reporting of negative findings will help avoid unproductive duplication of research and make research spending more productive. Dissemination of negative results also has prompted a questioning of established paradigms, leading ultimately to groundbreaking new discoveries. Research sponsors, research institutions, and journals should support and encourage this level of transparency. Scientific societies and journals should develop clear disciplinary authorship standards based on the principle that those who have made a significant intellectual contribution are authors. Those who engage in these activities should be designated as authors, and all authors should approve the final manuscript. Universal condemnation by all disciplines of gift or honorary authorship, coercive authorship, and ghost authorship would also contribute to changing the culture of research environments where these practices are still accepted. To bring a unified focus to addressing challenges in fostering research integrity across all disciplines and sectors, the report urges the establishment of a nonprofit, independent Research Integrity Advisory Board. The RIAB could facilitate the exchange of information on approaches to assessing and creating environments of the highest integrity and to handling allegations of misconduct and investigations. It could provide advice, support, encouragement, and where helpful advocacy on what needs to be done by research institutions, journal and book publishers, and other stakeholders in the research enterprise. The RIAB would have no direct role in investigations, regulation, or accreditation; instead it will serve as a neutral resource that helps the research enterprise respond to challenges. In addition, the report recommends that government agencies and private foundations fund research to quantify conditions in the research environment that may be linked to research misconduct and detrimental research practices, and to develop responses to these conditions. The study was sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey of the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Office of Research Integrity of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation, the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, the Society for Neuroscience, and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are private, nonprofit institutions that provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions related to science, technology, and medicine. They operate under an 1863 congressional charter to the National Academy of Sciences, signed by President Lincoln. For more information, visit http://national-academies. . A roster follows. Sara Frueh, Media Officer Joshua Blatt, Media Assistant Office of News and Public Information 202-334-2138; e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org national-academies.org/newsroom Follow us on Twitter at @theNASEM Copies of Fostering Integrity in Research are available from the National Academies Press on the Internet at http://www. or by calling 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242. Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above). Robert M. Nerem1,2 (chair) Institute Professor and Parker H. Petit Professor Emeritus Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta Ann M. Arvin2 Lucile Packard Professor of Pediatrics, Vice Provost and Dean of Research, and Professor of Microbiology and Immunology Stanford University Stanford, Calif. C.K. (Tina) Gunsalus Director National Center for Professional and Research Ethics University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Deborah G. Johnson Anne Shirley Carter Olsson Professor Emeritus of Applied Ethics Department of Science, Technology, and Society School of Engineering and Applied Science University of Virginia Charlottesville Michael A. Keller Ida M. Green University Librarian, and Director of Academic Information Resources University Libraries and Academic Information Resources Stanford University Stanford, Calif. W. Carl Lineberger3 E.U. Condon Distinguished Professor of Chemistry, and Fellow JILA University of Colorado Boulder Victoria Stodden Associate Professor of Statistics Institute for Data Sciences and Engineering University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Sara E. Wilson Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, and Academic Director Bioengineering Graduate Program University of Kansas Lawrence Paul R. Wolpe Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Bioethics, and Director Center for Ethics Emory University Atlanta 1 Member, National Academy of Engineering 2 Member, National Academy of Medicine 3 Member, National Academy of Sciences
Tuberville T.D.,Savannah River Ecology Laboratory |
Todd B.D.,University of California at Davis |
Hermann S.M.,Auburn University |
Michener W.K.,University Libraries |
Guyer C.,Auburn University
Journal of Wildlife Management | Year: 2014
Recovery or sustainable management of wildlife populations often entails management of habitat on which they depend. In this regard, turtles pose unique conservation challenges because of their life histories. The combination of late maturity, low survival when young, and dependence on high adult survival suggests they may be slow to respond demographically to conventional habitat management. Thus, long-term studies are necessary to understand population dynamics and recovery potential in these species. We used 5-11 years of mark-recapture data from 3 populations to evaluate survivorship, demography, and somatic growth of gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus). Green Grove and Wade Tract (southwest GA) are ecological reserves with a history of land management compatible with tortoises. In contrast, Conecuh National Forest (south-central AL) is a closed-canopy pine plantation with prior intensive site preparation but where management intervention improved habitat for tortoises during the study. Apparent survival was high for mature tortoises (87-98%) compared to immature tortoises (70-82%). Adults comprised 57-79% of individuals captured, with Green Grove and Wade Tract populations dominated by larger individuals but Conecuh having a more uniform size distribution. The largest adults captured at Conecuh (297 mm maximum carapace length [CL]) were smaller than the largest adults from Green Grove (337 mm CL) or Wade Tract (341 mm CL), although characteristic growth constants from von Bertalanffy models were similar among sites. We suggest these results indicate a recovering population at Conecuh, where habitat conditions for gopher tortoises have improved despite a legacy of intense predation by humans and reduced habitat quality at the inception of this national forest. Further, we recommend using a combination of short-term and long-term monitoring metrics to assess population recovery in such long-lived species. © 2014 The Wildlife Society. © The Wildlife Society, 2014.
News Article | February 15, 2017
Digital Science, a technology company serving the needs of scientific and research communities, today announced Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) as a key customer and development partner. By implementing a suite of products from the Digital Science portfolio, Carnegie Mellon will unveil a solution to capture, analyze and showcase its leading research. Using continuous, automated capture of data from multiple internal and external sources, including publication and associated citation and altmetrics data, grant data, and research data, Carnegie Mellon will be able to provide its faculty, funders and decision-makers with an accurate, timely and holistic picture of the institution’s research. With the goal of championing new forms of scholarly communication, Carnegie Mellon is creating a number of research platforms that will work together to enable innovation and provide opportunities for interactive research among the university's researchers. As part of this effort, the university is building out an ecosystem of support, processes and tools that underpin the full research lifecycle from ideation to dissemination. Carnegie Mellon plans to roll out a suite of tools from Digital Science to its academic community over the coming months. These tools offer a multitude of benefits including: “The library is at the heart of the work of the institution and must provide a reimagined ‘intellectual commons’ for a campus community,” said Keith Webster, Dean of University Libraries, Carnegie Mellon. “With this partnership, we have the opportunity to position ourselves as a world leader in the development of the scholarly ecosystem. Digital Science is central in allowing us to build the best research information system that exists today and we look forward to sharing our experience and expertise with the global academic community.” “Carnegie Mellon is at the forefront of creating a transformative and collaborative research environment that is open to the free exchange of ideas, where research, creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship flourish,” said Daniel Hook, CEO Digital Science. “We are very proud indeed to be working with the team at CMU to support their researchers to spend more time on discovery and collaboration. We also look forward to working with them as a development partner to continue to drive this innovation.” *About Digital Science* Digital Science is a technology company serving the needs of scientific and research communities at key points along the full cycle of research. It invests in and incubates research software companies that simplify the research cycle, making more time for discovery. Its portfolio companies include a host of leading brands including Altmetric, BioRAFT, Figshare, IFI CLAIMS Patent Services, Labguru, Overleaf, Peerwith, ReadCube, Symplectic, ÜberResearch, TetraScience and Transcriptic. It is operated by global media company, the Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. Visit http://www.digital-science.com and follow @digitalsci on Twitter. *About Altmetric* Altmetric was founded in 2011 and has made it a mission to track and analyze a world beyond scholarly citations around scholarly literature. Altmetric tracks what people are saying about research outputs online and works with some of the biggest publishers, funders, and institutions around the world to deliver this data in an accessible and reliable format. Visit http://www.altmetric.com for more information and follow @altmetric on Twitter. *About ÜberResearch* ÜberResearch, the company behind Dimensions, is a leading provider of software solutions focused on helping funding organizations, non-profits, and governmental institutions make more informed decisions about science funding. The company's cloud-based platform provides better views of an organization's grant data, peer organisation activities, and the data of the funding community at large. The software functions span search and duplication detection to robust tools for reviewer identification and portfolio analysis. For more information, visit: http://www.uberresearch.com and follow @uberresearch on Twitter. *About Figshare* Figshare is a web-based platform to help academic institutions manage, disseminate and measure the public attention of all their research outputs. The light-touch and user-friendly approach focuses on four key areas: research data management, reporting and statistics, research data dissemination and administrative control. Figshare works with institutions in North America and internationally to help them meet key funder recommendations and to provide world-leading tools to support an open culture of data sharing and collaboration. For more information, visit http://figshare.com and follow @figshare on Twitter. *About Symplectic* Symplectic is a leading developer of Research Information Management systems. Founded in 2003, Symplectic’s flagship product Elements is used by over 300,000 researchers, repository managers and librarians at over 80 of the world’s top institutions including the University of Oxford, University of Melbourne, and Duke University. For more information, visit http://www.symplectic.info and follow @symplectic on Twitter. *About Carnegie Mellon University* Carnegie Mellon is a private, internationally ranked research university with programs in areas ranging from science, technology and business, to public policy, the humanities and the arts. More than 13,000 students in the university's seven schools and colleges benefit from a small student-to-faculty ratio and an education characterized by its focus on creating and implementing solutions for real problems, interdisciplinary collaboration and innovation. Carnegie Mellon's main campus in the United States is in Pittsburgh, Pa. It has campuses in California's Silicon Valley and Qatar, and programs in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and Mexico.
Colombo C.J.,Georgia Regents University |
Colombo C.J.,U.S. Army |
Baer S.,Georgia Regents University |
Blake L.,University Libraries |
And 10 more authors.
Journal of Investigative Medicine | Year: 2016
To encourage departmental research activities, the Department of Medicine of the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) introduced an internally funded Translational Research Program (TRP) in 2014. Patterned after the Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, the program offers research studios for project guidance, research mentoring and the availability of limited financial support through research vouchers. Additional academic services include abstract reviewing, conducting research conferences, organizing departmental research programs for students, and offering courses in biostatistics. During the first 15 months of its existence, the TRP working group addressed 132 distinct activities. Research mentoring, publications, and the conduct of research studios or voucher approvals encompassed 49% of working group activities. Other academic services constituted the remaining 51%. Twenty-four per cent of TRP committee activities involved research mentoring of 32 investigators (25% faculty and 75% trainees). Mentored projects generated 17 abstracts, 2 manuscripts and $87,000 in funds. The TRP conducted 13 research studios; trainees presented 54%. The TRP reviewed 36 abstracts for local and state organizations. Monthly research conferences and statistical courses were conducted and well attended. Our experience thus far indicates that a departmental TRP may serve to facilitate the growth of patient-oriented research with minimal financial support. It requires active engagement of volunteer faculty and departmental leadership willing to balance research with the other demands of the academic mission. © 2016 American Federation for Medical Research.
Scalfani V.F.,University Libraries |
Frantom P.A.,University of Alabama |
Woski S.A.,University of Alabama
Journal of Chemical Education | Year: 2016
A new graduate chemistry course was introduced in the Department of Chemistry at The University of Alabama. The new course, CH584¯Literature and Communication in Graduate Chemistry, replaced a second year graduate student literature seminar requirement. Course topics included chemical information resources, critical analysis, scientific writing, scientific presentations, and peer-review. CH584 was well received by both the chemistry faculty and chemistry graduate students. This article discusses the detailed implementation and content taught in CH584. Moreover, we present our experiences teaching CH584 as well as potential revisions. © 2015 The American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Kelly J.,University Libraries |
Letnes L.,University Libraries
Journal of Digital Information | Year: 2010
AgEcon Search is a subject repository containing the full text of working papers, conference papers and small press journals in agricultural and other areas of applied economics. In existence since 1995, it contains material from 215 organizations. Comparisons are made between the operations of a subject repository and those of an institutional repository, with each having easier and more challenging aspects. The field of economics has characteristics that contribute to the success of a subject repository, such as a pre-print culture and an interest in intellectual property and the economics of publishing.
Scalfani V.F.,University Libraries |
Vaid T.P.,University of Alabama
Journal of Chemical Education | Year: 2014
Tangible models help students and researchers visualize chemical structures in three dimensions (3D). 3D printing offers a unique and straightforward approach to fabricate plastic 3D models of molecules and extended solids. In this article, we prepared a series of digital 3D design files of molecular structures that will be useful for teaching chemical education topics such as symmetry and point groups. Two main file preparation methods are discussed within this article that outlines how to prepare 3D printable chemical structures. Both methods start with either a crystallographic information file (.cif) or a protein databank (.pdb) file and are ultimately converted into a 3D stereolithography (.stl) file by using a variety of commercially and freely available software. From the series of digital 3D chemical structures prepared, 18 molecules and 7 extended solids were 3D printed. Our results show that the file preparation methods discussed within this article are both suitable routes to prepare 3D printable digital files of chemical structures. Further, our results also suggest that 3D printing is an excellent method for fabricating 3D models of molecules and extended solids. © 2014 The American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Wakimoto D.K.,University Libraries
Internet and Higher Education | Year: 2014
While there is discussion of eportfolios in many fields in higher education, there is little literature on eportfolios in the helping professions fields of school counselor and school psychology education. This study sought to explore graduate students' perceptions of the value of creating eportfolios and ways of improving the eportfolio process. Overall, the students found the construction of their eportfolios to be useful in reflecting on their competencies and in gaining confidence in using technology. The students also valued the hands-on training sessions, peer review opportunities and model portfolios, and technological skills built by creating the eportfolios, which they stated may be useful in job searches. Suggestions for improving the eportfolio process for future students include having all students only create eportfolios, being more explicit about reflection, and meeting with students earlier to expose them to the eportfolio platform in order to lessen technology anxiety and increase time for reflection. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.