1. Announcements 1) PLEASE COMPLETE ONLINE STUDENT OPINION SURVEY 2) Graduate Resource Center on campus. The Graduate Resource Center is a space strictly for graduate students. Students are welcomed to study, have group meetings, use the smart board, attend workshops, and make appointments with writing c ​ onsultants for writing support. See flier on website for more information about writing support 3) Assignment due next week, if you missed last class - this should take about 1 hour, the time missed from class - no credit will be issued for class if this is not completed

2. Keeping a lab notebook - ask your advisor what style of notebook he/she prefers - date every entry - write down EVERYTHING, whether it seems relevant or not - trouble-shooting problems is only as easy as you make it - easier to write it down now, than to try to remember 5 years from now what exactly you did - do NOT write things on stray pieces of paper; if you do, these need to get taped permanently into the notebook - print-outs can be inserted or attached to the notebook

3. Keeping a lab notebook - avoid using “template” sheets if this means you get lazy, and don’t make separate annotations of what you’re doing - put an index of major experiments in the front, so later students and your advisor can easily find entries after you are gone - your notebook belongs to your lab; it doesn’t leave with you. Keep it updated, organized, and clear so that anyone who comes after can use it to figure out exactly what you did - patent lawsuits, scientific fraud and misconduct hearings come down to lab notebooks, which are incredibly serious big deals - open e-notebooks: what do you think?

4. Research Ethics Scientific ethical conduct and ethical implications of scientific issues in society are important National Academy of Sciences broke misconduct into 3 broad categories: 1. Professional Misconduct (bad mentoring, authorship disputes) 2. General Misconduct (embezzlement, sexual harassment) 3. Research Misconduct

5. Research Ethics Scientific ethical conduct and ethical implications of scientific issues in society are important National Academy of Sciences broke misconduct into 3 broad categories: 1. Professional Misconduct (bad mentoring, authorship disputes) ♦ Improprieties of authorship: duplicate publication of results ♦ “Gift” or “honorary” authorship ♦ Incomplete citation of previously published work ♦ Bias in peer review of proposals or manuscripts ♦ Skewed selection of data or results to hide or disguise observations that do not fit the author’s conclusions.

6. Research Ethics Scientific ethical conduct and ethical implications of scientific issues in society are important National Academy of Sciences broke misconduct into 3 broad categories: 1. Professional Misconduct (bad mentoring, authorship disputes) 2. General Misconduct (embezzlement, sexual harassment) 3. Research Misconduct ♦ forged or fabricated data ♦ falsified or invented results ♦ plagiarism

7. Research Ethics In 1996, 170 scientists were under suspicion by the federal government for possible scientific misconduct at least 20 scientists were found to have committed scientific misconduct (Dooley and Kerch 2000). NIH had ~100 “active cases” of scientific misconduct; found 17 individuals to have committed scientific misconduct NSF had ~70 active cases, found ~6 individuals guilty 1991: American Association for Advancement of Science surveyed 1500 scientists. 25% of respondants reported they had witnessed faking, falsifying, or theft of research in the past decade (Marsa 1992:40)

8. Outstanding Graduate Student nominations Sally Jimmy - awarded a competitive X graduate fellowship - applied for, and was awarded, X a $3,000 research grant - won CSULA, and CSU-wide,X annual student research competition - graduated with 4.0 GPAX - admitted into Ph.D. programX at Max Planc Institute - thesis will be a stand-aloneX publication