Re: [AISdiscuss] Re: AIS Bulletin Scientific Editor

[Chandler Fulton <fulton@brandeis.edu>]

Dear Friends:
At Jeanne's suggestion, last November I wrote at length on the subject 
of coordination of science and science funding at AIS. I will be happy 
to send a copy to anyone who has not seen it - let me know. Here I will 
just summarize a couple of thoughts.
	The big problem of science in AIS is not committee structure but lack 
of scientific activity. The Scientific Editor usually has nothing to 
do. The Scientific Committee has little (we depended a lot on Currier's 
active curiosity). The Grants Committee laments too few promising 
applications. Reorganization, however needed, will not solve the dearth 
of scientific activity. Perhaps we should worry more about encouraging 
science involving irises.
	I've chaired the Scientific Committee for a long time (too long?). In 
early years, this committee was occasionally called upon by the 
Bulletin Editor to find an expert to render advice on a paper, then 
Terry established a separate position. The Scientific Committee also 
used to be frequently asked for advice about proposals by the 
Scholarship committee, as well as the Foundation. (To correct one of 
Bill Shear's comments on my November essay, I did not mean to suggest 
that the Science Committee should have oversight over funding, but 
simply was available to offer suggestions.) However structured, we 
should make better use of each other.
	If the committees were active, I would profoundly disagree with 
combining the advice committee and the funding committee, for reasons 
explained in my long essay. As one who has been involved with research 
funding at NSF and NIH, these should be separate from the policy 
decisions (as NAS). But since we have so little activity...
	As a research scientist, I agree with Clarence that Jeanne's 
suggestion of a "liaison" to the Board only makes sense if the liaison 
is a scientist. The interaction of these committees with the Board may 
be the crux of a recurrent problem. It is good for the Society to have 
active research scientists involved on these committees. Yet most of us 
have schedules that allow us to attend Board meetings (or even National 
Conventions!) only infrequently. I think the absence of a scientist at 
Board meetings is unfortunate, but don't see an immediate solution, 
unless you can find a retired scientist to serve. In which case, I 
suggest that person should chair the Scientific Committee and be 
expected to attend Board meetings, that the Bulletin Editor should 
consult that committee for advice, and that the separate Grants 
Committee should also consult with and report through the Scientific 
Committee chair.
	With my best wishes to all of you for an excellent year,
		Chandler
	
On Saturday, Jan 8, 2005, at 15:07 US/Eastern, PlankMail@aol.com wrote:

> New Years Greetings to all:
>      Just recently, Don Spoon, Scientific Editor for the AIS Bulletin
> submitted his resignation in advance of a very busy schedule and 
> research
> projects he
> is planning.  When considering appointing a replacement for Don, the 
> question
> arose concerning "who" had that responsibility, Bruce and I exchanged 
> emails
> about it, then, Bruce sought input from Terry. Terry's response gave 
> flesh
> and  significance to something I had previously alluded to in 
> exchanges not
> only
> our Scientific Chairs, but also two days ago with Bruce.  Terry's 
> recent email
> appears below, followed by my response to what Terry had written.
>      The idea generated is one I would like to have examined by not 
> only AIS
> Board members, but also by other AIS leaders throughout our 
> organization who
> might be able to contribute insights that will help produce an ever 
> better
> functioning AIS
>
>
> In a message dated 1/7/05 2:54:21 PM, Terry@flowerfantasy.net writes:
>
> > During my term as editor, I simply appointed a scientific editor (
> > Lawyers in my case) The position was never blessed by a vote of the
> > board, but, then, maybe it should have been?  The editor is not 
> > expected
> > to be knowledgeable in all areas and the scientific editor was simply 
> > a
> > consultant to the editor. It might even be better if there were a
> > scientific committee since many consultants are specialists. I dont 
> > know
> > that the position even needs to be in the bulletin as there is 
> > precious
> > little consulting actually needed. I think I called on Lawyers once 
> > in 5
> > years.
> > If we have a scientific committee listed as a chair position, maybe 
> > the
> > editor consultant thing could just be included in their duties?
> > I dont think I am helping!!
> My response:
> Terry and all:
>      Terry's suggestion is my thinking, also.  I have even expressed 
> it to a
> few people -- and to Bruce in just the last couple of days.
>      Before moving to what I really prefer, in my opinion if there is a
> "Scientific Editor," it should be someone approached by the Bulletin 
> Editor
> who has
> the best grasp on what might be needed from anyone taking the position.
>      Moving to what I prefer:
>      What I would like to see is a "Scientific Consultation Committee" 
> to
> replace ALL AIS Scientific committees or positions.  I would like to 
> see this
> committee composed of at least five knowledgeable people who 
> could/would
> review
> scientific material for Bulletin publication, select candidates for
> grants/scholarships,and recommend scientific projects for the AIS to
> encourage.
>      Since I would imagine all these folks to be busy in the academic 
> and/or
> science world, I'm sure their deliberations and work would and could 
> be done
> readily by email.
>      Right now I believe our three scholarly/scientificly oriented 
> operations
> are -- as currently functioning -- not as productive as they might be 
> if they
> were "centralized" into a Scientific Committee.  The "chairman" of 
> such a
> committee could be a Board director who is not a working part of the 
> committee
> but a "liaison" -- if you will -- to shepherd the committee reports to 
> the
> Board
> at the appropriate time for action, and function with the Board in 
> much the
> same way as the Board's Section and RVP counselors function (or 
> something like
> that).  Such a Board liaison would be an informed "courier" of 
> committee
> report material TO AND FROM the Board, thereby relieving committee 
> members
> from the
> obligation of being present (unless they wanted to be present).
>      I think this idea has real merit for discussion and further 
> examination.
>      Cheers!
>           Jeanne
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> aissecjill@earthlink.net.
Professor Chandler Fulton
Department of Biology, MS 008
Brandeis University
415 South Street
Waltham, MA 02454-9110

Kosow 308
781-736-3150, lab 781-736-3152
Fax 781-736-3153

For air courier (e.g., FedEx) shipments:
Dr. Chandler Fulton
c/o Lab Supplies and Services/Kalman Bldg.
Brandeis University
415 South St.
Waltham, MA 02454 USA

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
aissecjill@earthlink.net.