p*g
2 楼
Faculty Code of Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures 要求不能conflicts of
commitment, 而且每周超过一定小时数在外面做任何有收入的事情,都必须如实汇报.
commitment, 而且每周超过一定小时数在外面做任何有收入的事情,都必须如实汇报.
p*g
7 楼
2. General Principles
A. Conflict of Commitment
Stanford faculty members owe their primary professional allegiance to the
University, and their primary commitment of time and intellectual energies
should be to the education, research and scholarship programs of the
institution. The specific responsibilities and professional activities that
constitute an appropriate and primary commitment will differ across schools
and departments, but they should be based on a general understanding between
the faculty member and his or her department chair and school dean.
Even with such understandings in place, however, attempts of faculty to
balance University responsibilities with external activities--such as
consulting, public service or pro bono work--can result in conflicts
regarding allocation of time and energies. Conflicts of commitment usually
involve issues of time allocation. Whenever an individual's outside
professional activities as defined in Stanford's policy on Consulting and
Other Outside Professional Activities exceed the permitted limits (normally
thirteen days per quarter), or whenever a full-time faculty member's primary
professional loyalty is not to Stanford, a conflict of commitment exists.
If a situation that raises questions of about a possible conflict of
commitment arises, faculty should discuss the situation with their
department chair or school dean, or the Dean of Research.
B. Conflict of Interest
Stanford University is an institution of public trust; faculty must respect
that status and conduct their affairs in ways that will not compromise the
integrity of the University or that trust.
A conflict of interest occurs when there is a divergence between an
individual's private interests and his or her professional obligations to
the University such that an independent observer might reasonably question
whether the individual's professional actions or decisions are determined by
considerations of personal financial gain. A conflict of interest depends
on the situation, and not on the character or actions of the individual.
Conflicts of interest are common and practically unavoidable in a modern
research university. At Stanford, conflicts of interest can arise out of the
fact that a mission of the University is to promote the public good by
fostering the transfer of knowledge gained through University research and
scholarship to the private sector. Important means of accomplishing this
mission include faculty consulting, outside speaking engagements,
publications, and the commercialization of technologies derived from faculty
research. It is appropriate that faculty be rewarded for their
participation in these activities through consulting fees, honoraria and
sharing in royalties resulting from the commercialization of their work. It
is wrong, however, for an individual's actions or decisions made in the
course of his or her University activities to be determined by
considerations of personal financial gain; faculty should be sensitive even
to the appearance of that possibility. Such behavior calls into question the
professional objectivity and ethics of the individual, and it also reflects
negatively on the University.
Faculty members should conduct their affairs so as to avoid or minimize
conflicts of interest, and must respond appropriately when conflicts of
interest arise. To that end, the purposes of this policy are to educate
faculty about situations that generate conflicts of interest, to provide
means for faculty and the University to manage conflicts of interest, to
promote the best interests of students and others whose work depends on
faculty direction, and to describe situations that are prohibited. Every
Stanford faculty member has an obligation to become familiar with, and abide
by, the provisions of this policy. Conflicts of interest must be disclosed
to Stanford when personal financial relationships or activities with outside
entities occur that would reasonably appear to be related to a faculty
member's Stanford institutional responsibilities for research/scholarship,
education/teaching, administration or clinical care. All such financial
activities and relationships must be disclosed annually and at the time of a
specific transaction. Disclosure and University review also allow faculty
to comply with federal agency regulations for example, see RPH: PHS and NSF
Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosures and Agency Notifications.
Common sense must prevail in the interpretation of these policies. That is -
- no matter what the circumstances -- if an independent observer might
reasonably question whether the individual's professional actions or
decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain, the
relationship should be disclosed to the public during presentations, in
publications, teaching, or other public venues.
A. Conflict of Commitment
Stanford faculty members owe their primary professional allegiance to the
University, and their primary commitment of time and intellectual energies
should be to the education, research and scholarship programs of the
institution. The specific responsibilities and professional activities that
constitute an appropriate and primary commitment will differ across schools
and departments, but they should be based on a general understanding between
the faculty member and his or her department chair and school dean.
Even with such understandings in place, however, attempts of faculty to
balance University responsibilities with external activities--such as
consulting, public service or pro bono work--can result in conflicts
regarding allocation of time and energies. Conflicts of commitment usually
involve issues of time allocation. Whenever an individual's outside
professional activities as defined in Stanford's policy on Consulting and
Other Outside Professional Activities exceed the permitted limits (normally
thirteen days per quarter), or whenever a full-time faculty member's primary
professional loyalty is not to Stanford, a conflict of commitment exists.
If a situation that raises questions of about a possible conflict of
commitment arises, faculty should discuss the situation with their
department chair or school dean, or the Dean of Research.
B. Conflict of Interest
Stanford University is an institution of public trust; faculty must respect
that status and conduct their affairs in ways that will not compromise the
integrity of the University or that trust.
A conflict of interest occurs when there is a divergence between an
individual's private interests and his or her professional obligations to
the University such that an independent observer might reasonably question
whether the individual's professional actions or decisions are determined by
considerations of personal financial gain. A conflict of interest depends
on the situation, and not on the character or actions of the individual.
Conflicts of interest are common and practically unavoidable in a modern
research university. At Stanford, conflicts of interest can arise out of the
fact that a mission of the University is to promote the public good by
fostering the transfer of knowledge gained through University research and
scholarship to the private sector. Important means of accomplishing this
mission include faculty consulting, outside speaking engagements,
publications, and the commercialization of technologies derived from faculty
research. It is appropriate that faculty be rewarded for their
participation in these activities through consulting fees, honoraria and
sharing in royalties resulting from the commercialization of their work. It
is wrong, however, for an individual's actions or decisions made in the
course of his or her University activities to be determined by
considerations of personal financial gain; faculty should be sensitive even
to the appearance of that possibility. Such behavior calls into question the
professional objectivity and ethics of the individual, and it also reflects
negatively on the University.
Faculty members should conduct their affairs so as to avoid or minimize
conflicts of interest, and must respond appropriately when conflicts of
interest arise. To that end, the purposes of this policy are to educate
faculty about situations that generate conflicts of interest, to provide
means for faculty and the University to manage conflicts of interest, to
promote the best interests of students and others whose work depends on
faculty direction, and to describe situations that are prohibited. Every
Stanford faculty member has an obligation to become familiar with, and abide
by, the provisions of this policy. Conflicts of interest must be disclosed
to Stanford when personal financial relationships or activities with outside
entities occur that would reasonably appear to be related to a faculty
member's Stanford institutional responsibilities for research/scholarship,
education/teaching, administration or clinical care. All such financial
activities and relationships must be disclosed annually and at the time of a
specific transaction. Disclosure and University review also allow faculty
to comply with federal agency regulations for example, see RPH: PHS and NSF
Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosures and Agency Notifications.
Common sense must prevail in the interpretation of these policies. That is -
- no matter what the circumstances -- if an independent observer might
reasonably question whether the individual's professional actions or
decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain, the
relationship should be disclosed to the public during presentations, in
publications, teaching, or other public venues.
d*a
9 楼
楼上不是faculty吧。这里说的都是特殊情况,一般是需要教务长书面批准的。
p*g
15 楼
仔细看一看图里的各大学校,他不在Stanford,他也不在Uiowa,他也不在Duke,他也
不在UCLA吧?
那么他在一个什么样的学校能有这么“特殊的”模式呢?
你知不知道一个像样学校的faculty的就连和学生交流这么一个栏目耗费的时间就是每
周至少20小时了?你不会只有office hours才用来和学生交流吧? email不交流么?
交paper的时候不增加见面频率吗?做实验的时候,不反复提醒学生吗?每周没有
seminar吗? 这些都是commitment里的time allocation.
除此之外,我没有从他的帖子里看出来他哪里特殊了,是你告诉我“这里指的特殊情况
”,所以我来问你啊。。
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 嗯?这是什么逻辑。楼主好象不在Stanford,也不是要去Berkeley。
: 做visiting faculty(有各种不同的名称)虽然是需要特别批准的
: 特殊情况,但并不是什么罕见情况。也许个别学校有特殊的规定,但总
: 的来说,绝大多数学校都是可以的。
不在UCLA吧?
那么他在一个什么样的学校能有这么“特殊的”模式呢?
你知不知道一个像样学校的faculty的就连和学生交流这么一个栏目耗费的时间就是每
周至少20小时了?你不会只有office hours才用来和学生交流吧? email不交流么?
交paper的时候不增加见面频率吗?做实验的时候,不反复提醒学生吗?每周没有
seminar吗? 这些都是commitment里的time allocation.
除此之外,我没有从他的帖子里看出来他哪里特殊了,是你告诉我“这里指的特殊情况
”,所以我来问你啊。。
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 嗯?这是什么逻辑。楼主好象不在Stanford,也不是要去Berkeley。
: 做visiting faculty(有各种不同的名称)虽然是需要特别批准的
: 特殊情况,但并不是什么罕见情况。也许个别学校有特殊的规定,但总
: 的来说,绝大多数学校都是可以的。
d*a
16 楼
外行就别瞎操心了。做visiting faculty当然对平时的一些活动有影响。
还有一些implications,比如说,对做工程的发考题,如果出了有重大
影响的专利,IP归谁。
这也是为什么一般需要教务长做为特殊情况,个案批准。如果当事人不能有
充足的justification,很有可以不被批准。
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 仔细看一看图里的各大学校,他不在Stanford,他也不在Uiowa,他也不在Duke,他也
: 不在UCLA吧?
: 那么他在一个什么样的学校能有这么“特殊的”模式呢?
: 你知不知道一个像样学校的faculty的就连和学生交流这么一个栏目耗费的时间就是每
: 周至少20小时了?你不会只有office hours才用来和学生交流吧? email不交流么?
: 交paper的时候不增加见面频率吗?做实验的时候,不反复提醒学生吗?每周没有
: seminar吗? 这些都是commitment里的time allocation.
: 除此之外,我没有从他的帖子里看出来他哪里特殊了,是你告诉我“这里指的特殊情况
: ”,所以我来问你啊。。
还有一些implications,比如说,对做工程的发考题,如果出了有重大
影响的专利,IP归谁。
这也是为什么一般需要教务长做为特殊情况,个案批准。如果当事人不能有
充足的justification,很有可以不被批准。
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 仔细看一看图里的各大学校,他不在Stanford,他也不在Uiowa,他也不在Duke,他也
: 不在UCLA吧?
: 那么他在一个什么样的学校能有这么“特殊的”模式呢?
: 你知不知道一个像样学校的faculty的就连和学生交流这么一个栏目耗费的时间就是每
: 周至少20小时了?你不会只有office hours才用来和学生交流吧? email不交流么?
: 交paper的时候不增加见面频率吗?做实验的时候,不反复提醒学生吗?每周没有
: seminar吗? 这些都是commitment里的time allocation.
: 除此之外,我没有从他的帖子里看出来他哪里特殊了,是你告诉我“这里指的特殊情况
: ”,所以我来问你啊。。
p*g
17 楼
d*a
18 楼
一边去。半懂不懂的,管那么多干吗。你这些问题,对楼主半点帮助没有。
PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
也并不罕见。
faculty
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 我第三遍问你,lz的情况特殊在哪里? 他自己没提,是你主动提及的。你就把这个问
: 题回答清楚即可,其他问题,我没问的,你不用给我主动上课了。
: ps,你已经第三次在这里强调我是外行了,我从来都是主动告诉大家,我不是faculty
: 的,这两天我已经提了至少3次了。
PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
也并不罕见。
faculty
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 我第三遍问你,lz的情况特殊在哪里? 他自己没提,是你主动提及的。你就把这个问
: 题回答清楚即可,其他问题,我没问的,你不用给我主动上课了。
: ps,你已经第三次在这里强调我是外行了,我从来都是主动告诉大家,我不是faculty
: 的,这两天我已经提了至少3次了。
p*g
19 楼
所以,你答不出来,同时,你也举不出来“你嘴里的特殊情况”的例子,
然后你还告诉我们,这样的事情有很多。
最后你还反复谴责我是一个外行.
外行提个问题,你都回答不了的话,你这个内行又“内”在哪里了呢?
如果我没猜错的话,你本科学校是很烂的,顶多三流,绝对不会是2流以上。你在美国
就读的学校也是三流或者以下的,你的思维的低级程度就暴露了你的这个层次。
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 一边去。半懂不懂的,管那么多干吗。你这些问题,对楼主半点帮助没有。
: PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
: 就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
: 大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
: 也并不罕见。
:
: faculty
然后你还告诉我们,这样的事情有很多。
最后你还反复谴责我是一个外行.
外行提个问题,你都回答不了的话,你这个内行又“内”在哪里了呢?
如果我没猜错的话,你本科学校是很烂的,顶多三流,绝对不会是2流以上。你在美国
就读的学校也是三流或者以下的,你的思维的低级程度就暴露了你的这个层次。
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 一边去。半懂不懂的,管那么多干吗。你这些问题,对楼主半点帮助没有。
: PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
: 就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
: 大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
: 也并不罕见。
:
: faculty
p*g
20 楼
你的意思是,90%的faculty根本不这么做, 所以你根据lz的帖子直接推导出来这样的
结论:lz这样做,就是可行的????????
事实上,我都没见过一个这么做的faculty,当然了,1)我是外行, 2)我头发长见识
短---我先替你说了,还给你补充了一条,够用了没?
一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 一边去。半懂不懂的,管那么多干吗。你这些问题,对楼主半点帮助没有。
: PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
: 就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
: 大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
: 也并不罕见。
:
: faculty
结论:lz这样做,就是可行的????????
事实上,我都没见过一个这么做的faculty,当然了,1)我是外行, 2)我头发长见识
短---我先替你说了,还给你补充了一条,够用了没?
一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
【在 d***a 的大作中提到】
: 一边去。半懂不懂的,管那么多干吗。你这些问题,对楼主半点帮助没有。
: PS 我可以回答你这个问题,仅此而已。申请做visiting faculty,本身
: 就是一种特殊情况。一个大学里,出去做visiting faculty的人数很少,
: 大多数人可能一次都没有做过。但从大学总体来说,有visiting faculty,
: 也并不罕见。
:
: faculty
d*a
21 楼
这是什么逻辑。:) 楼主问的是faculty职业中一种特殊的情况。你不是faculty, 问的
问题又钻牛角尖。回答你的问题,对你没有帮助,对别人也没有帮助,只是浪费时间啊
,理由就这么简单,别想的太多。
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 所以,你答不出来,同时,你也举不出来“你嘴里的特殊情况”的例子,
: 然后你还告诉我们,这样的事情有很多。
: 最后你还反复谴责我是一个外行.
: 外行提个问题,你都回答不了的话,你这个内行又“内”在哪里了呢?
: 如果我没猜错的话,你本科学校是很烂的,顶多三流,绝对不会是2流以上。你在美国
: 就读的学校也是三流或者以下的,你的思维的低级程度就暴露了你的这个层次。
问题又钻牛角尖。回答你的问题,对你没有帮助,对别人也没有帮助,只是浪费时间啊
,理由就这么简单,别想的太多。
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 所以,你答不出来,同时,你也举不出来“你嘴里的特殊情况”的例子,
: 然后你还告诉我们,这样的事情有很多。
: 最后你还反复谴责我是一个外行.
: 外行提个问题,你都回答不了的话,你这个内行又“内”在哪里了呢?
: 如果我没猜错的话,你本科学校是很烂的,顶多三流,绝对不会是2流以上。你在美国
: 就读的学校也是三流或者以下的,你的思维的低级程度就暴露了你的这个层次。
d*a
23 楼
呵呵,你想的太多了。楼主是做faculty这个职业的,他的背景不一样。如果是你问同
样的问题,回答的方式会不一样。
不过,这个问题是做faculty职业的人特有的问题,而你不是做这个职业的,应该不会
有这样的问题。你不能理解,那其实也没有什么关系啊。
另外,希望你能知道,这个世界并不是以你为中心的。别人讨论的时候,可能根本就没
有想过要为你“展现“什么素质。说得直白一点,just don't care.
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 我就是给观众看一看,你解答疑惑的能力指标。
: 作为教授,能把一个很普通的问题,给“一堆外行”解释清楚了----是教授的基本素养
: ,无论在什么角落里,都要展现出这个基本素质出来,而不是一开口就上了四次“你是
: 外行”这种调调。
: 你这种特点,家庭生活,能幸福吗? 我有一种不好的直觉,你的沟通能力很弱。
样的问题,回答的方式会不一样。
不过,这个问题是做faculty职业的人特有的问题,而你不是做这个职业的,应该不会
有这样的问题。你不能理解,那其实也没有什么关系啊。
另外,希望你能知道,这个世界并不是以你为中心的。别人讨论的时候,可能根本就没
有想过要为你“展现“什么素质。说得直白一点,just don't care.
【在 p******g 的大作中提到】
: 我就是给观众看一看,你解答疑惑的能力指标。
: 作为教授,能把一个很普通的问题,给“一堆外行”解释清楚了----是教授的基本素养
: ,无论在什么角落里,都要展现出这个基本素质出来,而不是一开口就上了四次“你是
: 外行”这种调调。
: 你这种特点,家庭生活,能幸福吗? 我有一种不好的直觉,你的沟通能力很弱。
p*g
42 楼
你对人性的观察根本不到位, 那位是眼红了,LISB叫了我三声平老师,那位心理就受
不了,然后就过来找茬掐架了,首当其冲的就是故意挑起了“她不是faculty”这个把
柄,简直让人笑到极点,我不是faculty这个信息,整个地球人都知道了好久了吧。。
。他是借此来打击我,还扯了半天不相干的话题,什么什么“世界不是以我为中心”--
--LISB只不过是尊重我而已,他倒好,转身的功夫,就把我当成宇宙太阳了。
他吐出这些象牙的时候,根本没有意识到我这边的心态和思绪,我压根都没想过那么多
无关紧要的事情,这就完全是一个情绪化的小人受不了别人被尊敬的那副虚伪惨象。
这种人心理最不能承受的就是看见我从名校毕业了,他就吃这个,那就给他吃个饱,这
还不容易? 你看看,大早晨的,不去洗漱,专门来吃我给他丢出来的残羹剩饭了,哈
哈哈
你们呀,想在江湖上混出点名堂来,对人性的解读,需要学习很多年才能上路。你首选
要掌握对方在想什么,在做什么,以及为什么这么做,才能有的放矢地反击,才能获取
你要的效果,否则你在那瞎嚷嚷了半天,除了暴露自己,一无所获。
这就是你们总是揣摩不透reviewers的心思,然后自己一厢情愿的写一堆废纸一样的
proposal,倒是应了那句名言, 写自己的稿子,让reviewers拒去吧,哈哈哈
【在 l***9 的大作中提到】
: “对你没有帮助,对别人也没有帮助”
: 这里有个别ID 的帖子的确对别人没有帮助,而且还misleading。 但是有人回帖对
: attention whore自己是有帮助的--最怕没人理。
: 这儿有没有人研究心理的?这种人是不是小时候缺乏attention 和security?也挺可怜
: 的。
不了,然后就过来找茬掐架了,首当其冲的就是故意挑起了“她不是faculty”这个把
柄,简直让人笑到极点,我不是faculty这个信息,整个地球人都知道了好久了吧。。
。他是借此来打击我,还扯了半天不相干的话题,什么什么“世界不是以我为中心”--
--LISB只不过是尊重我而已,他倒好,转身的功夫,就把我当成宇宙太阳了。
他吐出这些象牙的时候,根本没有意识到我这边的心态和思绪,我压根都没想过那么多
无关紧要的事情,这就完全是一个情绪化的小人受不了别人被尊敬的那副虚伪惨象。
这种人心理最不能承受的就是看见我从名校毕业了,他就吃这个,那就给他吃个饱,这
还不容易? 你看看,大早晨的,不去洗漱,专门来吃我给他丢出来的残羹剩饭了,哈
哈哈
你们呀,想在江湖上混出点名堂来,对人性的解读,需要学习很多年才能上路。你首选
要掌握对方在想什么,在做什么,以及为什么这么做,才能有的放矢地反击,才能获取
你要的效果,否则你在那瞎嚷嚷了半天,除了暴露自己,一无所获。
这就是你们总是揣摩不透reviewers的心思,然后自己一厢情愿的写一堆废纸一样的
proposal,倒是应了那句名言, 写自己的稿子,让reviewers拒去吧,哈哈哈
【在 l***9 的大作中提到】
: “对你没有帮助,对别人也没有帮助”
: 这里有个别ID 的帖子的确对别人没有帮助,而且还misleading。 但是有人回帖对
: attention whore自己是有帮助的--最怕没人理。
: 这儿有没有人研究心理的?这种人是不是小时候缺乏attention 和security?也挺可怜
: 的。
e*9
49 楼
http://plantsciences.utk.edu/lockwood.htm
这个教授是65%对35%
这个教授是65%对35%
d*a
50 楼
你其实不用给她找例子,只要楼主知道有这种先例就行了。对发考题来说,这种事经常
可以看到,我在的系里就有一个。
那种街道大妈,她的本意就是要吸引注意力,仅此而已。
【在 e******9 的大作中提到】
: http://plantsciences.utk.edu/lockwood.htm
: 这个教授是65%对35%
可以看到,我在的系里就有一个。
那种街道大妈,她的本意就是要吸引注意力,仅此而已。
【在 e******9 的大作中提到】
: http://plantsciences.utk.edu/lockwood.htm
: 这个教授是65%对35%
A*y
51 楼
Well, there is a full-time Georgia State endow-chair holding a full time
Dean position in China. Kurt Wüthrich has two labs one at ETH and one at
Scripps, Swiss actually passed a law named after him. Sydney Brenner is
everywhere, he actually made a joke about him getting promoted to professor
from visiting professor at Scripps. There used to be a professor at Scripps
who also hold a full professorship at Berkley national lab but I forgot his
name (he spending 6 months at San Diego and 6 months at San Francisco).
Dean position in China. Kurt Wüthrich has two labs one at ETH and one at
Scripps, Swiss actually passed a law named after him. Sydney Brenner is
everywhere, he actually made a joke about him getting promoted to professor
from visiting professor at Scripps. There used to be a professor at Scripps
who also hold a full professorship at Berkley national lab but I forgot his
name (he spending 6 months at San Diego and 6 months at San Francisco).
p*t
52 楼
楼主怎么怂了.
相关阅读
大家的第一个proposal是怎么写的阿?刚刚面试犯了很stupid的错误如何能克服人一激动,脑子就不好使的情况CAREER结果出来了NSF proposal上PI 和co-PI有区别吗?PI和collaborator呢?Tenure clock stop去了工业界还可能做faculty吗?如果均分很低,要curve成啥样才能平众怒寻求审稿机会(Neurological disease)请问开会和教课时间冲突刚电话interviw 完。说说感想。兼问问题。问消息问到了interviwer那UC的新Logo太丑了faculty 换学校的timing问题,请大家讨论一下。博后有给年终bonus的吗?有用blackboard的么招国内postoc在什么地方登广告呢?请推荐一款27寸适合读文档的显示器今天突然好伤心请问:用什么方法或标准从差异性表达的基因里筛选出候选的关键基因?