University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
AC-8: Responsible Research and Innovation
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
7.00 / 7.00 |
Melanie
Elliott Sustainability Analyst Sustainable Carolina |
8.1 Published ethical code of conduct for research
Online location of the institution’s ethical code of conduct for research:
Copy of the institution’s ethical code of conduct for research:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
8.2 Recognition of integrated, community-based, and extra-academic research
Description or text of the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that explicitly recognize integrated research:
While departments of the College of Arts and Sciences generate unique tenure guidelines, all include language similar to this statement: "Quality research, creative activity, teaching excellence and a commitment to service are important areas of evaluation of faculty by the Department. In addition to long-standing criteria for such evaluation, innovative faculty work in these areas should also be considered when germane. Thus, tenure and promotion guidelines must balance the need for precedent and consistency with openness to new approaches and ideas for which establishing criteria for evaluation may be difficult, at least at first. Candidates for promotion and their departments share the responsibility for effectively evaluating innovative contributions. Candidates should help articulate the nature and value of their new work. Departments should continually educate themselves on the changing landscape of the profession, and they should consider when to seek evaluations of the candidate’s work that inform and can help explain particular innovations. Some of the prominent areas in which innovation occurs include engagement, digital technologies, and interdisciplinarity."
Do the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that recognize integrated research cover all of the institution’s research-producing academic divisions?:
Does the institution have published promotion or tenure guidelines or policies that give explicit positive recognition to community-based research?:
Description or text of the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that explicitly recognize community-based research:
https://facultyaffairs.unc.edu/policies-and-procedures/faculty-policies-by-school/
While departments of the College of Arts and Sciences generate unique tenure guidelines, all include language similar to this statement: As a public university, we recognize the importance of faculty engagement. Engagement may be embedded in one or more aspects of a faculty member's research, teaching, and service activities. Faculty engagement refers to scholarly, creative, pedagogical, and service activities directed toward persons and groups outside UNC Chapel Hill and outside the usual spheres of professional academic work. Such activities typically take the form of collaborative interactions, include partners outside the University, and seek to enhance the "public good" or "public life" of the state, nation, or wider world.
Do the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that recognize community-based research cover all of the institution’s research-producing academic divisions?:
Does the institution have published promotion or tenure guidelines or policies that give explicit positive recognition to research impact or reach outside of academic journals?:
Description or text of the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that explicitly recognize research impact or reach outside of academic journals:
Do the promotion/tenure guidelines or policies that recognize research impact or reach outside of academic journals cover all of the institution’s research-producing academic divisions?:
If Yes to any of the above, provide at least one form of evidence (website URL or document). If reporting on multiple guidelines or policies, provide the best available example and/or a website that provides an overview of promotion/tenure for academic employees.
Copy of the institution’s promotion/tenure guidelines or policies:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
8.3 Inter-campus collaboration for responsible research and innovation
Description of the institution’s inter-campus collaborations for responsible research and innovation:
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is a member of SPARC. "SPARC is a non-profit advocacy organization that supports systems for research and education that are open by default and equitable by design. We believe everyone should be able to access and contribute to the knowledge that shapes our world."
https://sparcopen.org/who-we-are/members/
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
8.4 Support for open access publishing
Narrative and/or website URL providing an overview of the open access repository:
The Carolina Digital Repository is UNC's Open Access institutional repository. It provides long-term access and safekeeping for scholarly works, datasets, research materials, records, and audiovisual materials produced by the UNC-Chapel Hill community. The CDR expands the reach and impact of research and brings Carolina's scholarhship to the world.
Does the institution have one or more published policies that require its employees to publish scholarly works open access or archive final post-peer reviewed versions of scholarly works in an open access repository?:
Do the open access policies cover all of the institution’s research-producing academic divisions?:
Text or online location of the institution’s open access policies:
Copy of the institution’s open access policies:
Does the institution provide an open access article processing charge (APC) fund for employees?:
Narrative and/or website URL providing an overview of the open access APC fund:
Does the institution negotiate or participate in transformative open access agreements that are consistent with ESAC guidelines?:
Narrative and/or website URL providing an overview of the institution’s transformative open access agreements with publishers:
The Reporting Tool will automatically calculate the following figure:
Optional documentation
Additional documentation for this credit:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.