Subcommittee on Enhancing Capacity for Distinctive and High Impact Scholarship and Research

Standards Covered

I, III, and VI

Co-Chairs:

Rachel Borchardt, librarian, University Library
Joe Young, professor, SPA

Members:

Diana Burley, vice provost for research and innovation
Derrick Cogburn, professor, SIS and Kogod
Kim Blankenship, professor and associate dean for research, CAS
Raychelle Burks, associate professor of chemistry, CAS
Amy Butler, senior director, corporate and foundation relations, Development and Alumni Relations
Parthiban David, senior associate dean, Kogod
Terry Davidson, director, Center for Behavioral Neuroscience and distinguished professor, CAS
Dustin Friedman, associate professor, CAS
Kiho Kim, professor, CAS; executive director, Center for Teaching, Research and Learning
Jenny Roberts, professor, WCL; member, Faculty Senate Committee on Scholarship
Darrion Sprueill, project manager, AU ADVANCE**
Maggie Stogner, professor and executive director, Center for Environmental Filmmaking, SOC
Matt Taylor, associate professor and finterim associate dean of research, SIS
Matt Zembrzuski, research compliance manager, Office of Sponsored Programs
PhD Student, TBD

**Denotes designated data/evidence lead. This individual will also be a member of the supporting documentation working group to ensure a comprehensive use of available evidence.

Lines of Inquiry

1. How does American University define its scholar-teacher ideal? What are the values that define its research goals within the context of this ideal? How can the university be the best version of this ideal? Who are AU’s aspirational research peers and how does this help the university define what its research profile is? [standard I, criterion 1]
2. How can AU measure productivity and the impact of its scholarship^[6] using both traditional (e.g. citation counts) and non-traditional scholarly measures? How can AU’s portfolio of productivity measures be improved to capture policy impact? What are the most appropriate measures of student engagement in research? How does the university define and measure diversity, equity, and inclusion in the research enterprise? [standard III, criterion 2]
3. How does AU define sponsored research targets that build on our current momentum and align with the ideal of our scholar-teacher model? How can we effectively increase the portfolio of sponsors and the breadth of research supported externally? What are the measures best used to capture sponsored research activity? [standards III, VI]
4. How does AU frame its approach to research within the context of the transformation of higher education, and how can our approach be improved? What does this transformation mean for research at AU in the next five and 10 years? How can resources and structures be used to better meet our goal? How might a new approach further AU’s mission? [standard I, criterion 1; standard VI]