Recognizing Scientific Excellence, Since 1955
2011 Meeting Minutes


Minutes of the 2011

Meeting of the Board of Governors

 

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Baltimore, Maryland  

 

I. Introduction


 A. Welcome and Roll Call

Present: R. John Collier (Chair), Edward DeLong, Susan Gottesman, Diane E. Griffin, Louis H. Miller, Edward G. Ruby, Peter K. Vogt, Christopher T. Walsh, Bonnie Bassler (ex-officio, President, American Society for Microbiology), Joseph Campos (ex-officio, Secretary, American Society for Microbiology), Arturo Casadevall (Member of the Working Group on Election to Fellowship and Editor of mBio), Michael Goldberg (ex-officio, Executive Director, American Society for Microbiology), Ann Reid (ex-officio, Director, American Academy of Microbiology), Katie Carl (Coordinator, American Academy of Microbiology).


Absent: Gerald R. Fink, Peter H. Gilligan, and Carol A. Gross. Dr. Fink participated by conference call, and Dr. Gilligan provided his reports by conference call. Mary Jane Osborn, chair of the Working Group on Election to Fellowship, also reported by conference call.

The meeting was called to order by Dr. Collier at 7:30 a.m.

 

B. Approval of Agenda

 

A motion was made to add a discussion about whether Academy Fellows should be required to be members of ASM to the agenda.  This was approved.  The agenda with this addition was then approved.

 

 

C. Approval of Minutes of January 23, 2010

 

The 2010 minutes were approved without edits.

 

II. New Business

 

A. mBio Update

 

Dr. Casadevall provided a status report on mBio.  The journal has been successful and is publishing high quality papers.  Dr. Casadevall attributed much of this success and quality to the involvement and submissions of Academy Fellows.  Acceptance for paper submitted by Fellows can often be very rapid—sometimes within a day.  Editors flag papers they think are significant, and press releases are sent out through ASM if there is a sense that the media would be interested.

The current acceptance rate for non-Academy submissions is 30% and average time to first decision is 23 days.  Dr. Casadevall emphasized that mBio hopes to publish papers from all areas of microbiology.  mBio articles are currently listed in PubMed and most of the other electronic databases.  

In addition to research articles, mBio includes observations, minireviews, opinions and hypotheses, commentaries, perspectives, editorials, and letters to the editor.  Merry Buckley is serving as mBio’s Commentaries and Social Media Editor.

 

B. Discussion of potential requirement that Academy Fellowship nominees be members of ASM

 

The Board was asked to consider whether nominees for election to Fellowship should be required to be members of ASM.  The possibility of being elected might encourage more people to join ASM or maintain their membership. A discussion followed weighing the pros and cons of this suggestion.  

The Board concluded that because the Academy was founded independently of ASM, it should continue to honor excellence in microbiology irrespective of membership in ASM.  There is also currently the possibility of flow in the opposite direction—newly elected Fellows who were not previously members may become more aware of ASM and its benefits and decide to join.

The group also discussed whether new Academy Fellows could be given the opportunity to speak at the ASM General Meeting.  It was decided that the Academy will send a list of new Fellows to the GM Program Committee each summer so that they can take them into account when considering session speakers.

 

C. American College of Microbiology

 

Dr. Gilligan reported on the American College of Microbiology and the Clinical Microbiology Task Force.

The ABMM and ABMLI recertification requirements were revised in May to be more rigorous.  The ABMM is also undertaking a job analysis to ensure the exam is reflective of current practice.

Dr. Gilligan next updated the Board on the activities of the Clinical Microbiology Task Force (CMTF). The CMTF was established by the Council Policy Committee (CPC) in 2010 to evaluate how ASM could better meet the needs of clinical microbiologists. The CMTF membership includes David Hooper (Chair), Joseph Campos, Peter Gilligan, Janet Hindler, Nathan Ledeboer, J. Michael Miller, Lucia Rothman-Denes, Robert Sautter, and James Tiedje.   Six working groups have been established to carry out the following tasks:

  • Examination of the ASM organizational structure to determine the   optimal means to meet the needs of clinical microbiologists
  • Development of evidence-based practice guidelines
  • Development of a clinical microbiology portal on the ASM website
  • Examination of the ways ASM can work with other scientific societies to ensure a unified voice for the clinical laboratory profession
  • Examination of how ASM can enhance professional development through mentoring to promote the profession of clinical microbiology
  • Coordination of planning for Clinical Microbiology sessions at the newly structured ASM General Meeting in 2011

Dr. Gilligan chaired the working group on organizational structure, the one with the most potential affect on the Academy.  He explained that currently clinical microbiology products and services are scattered among various boards and there is no official communication between them or coordination of efforts. The strategic planning required to meet the changing professional needs of the membership is lacking.  There are also products and services that would be easier to create and deliver under a different governance structure. The working group decided that a governance unit that has the authority to manage most of ASM’s clinical microbiology professional products and services is needed.   The working group voted to recommend the creation of a CPC standing committee without a vote for the chair.  This recommendation will be discussed at the CPC meeting in April. The implication of this recommendation for the Academy is that the College, one of the core components of this new committee, would ask for the BOG’s approval to be removed from the Academy contingent on the Council’s approval.

Dr. Collier thanked Dr. Gilligan for his work, and assured him that the Board would be supportive of the decisions of the CMTF and CPC.

Dr. Gilligan thanked Suzy Leous, Peggy McNult, and other ASM staff who have been supportive of the CMTF’s efforts, and Dr. Campos for being a voice of wisdom during this whole process.

 

D. Report of the Working Group on Election to Fellowship

 

Dr. Osborn presented the findings and recommendations of the working group on election to Fellowship.  The group examined recent election results, Academy and Committee on Elections (COE) composition, and the early experience of Fellows submissions to mBio.

Also examined were the current criteria for election to Fellowship, a section of the bylaws that defines Fellowship in the Academy.  These criteria are very general, leaving nominators and reviewers with responsibility for determining the meaning of ‘distinguished,’ ‘outstanding’ and ‘significant,’ and for weighing the importance of scholarship versus receipt of awards or record of service. The working group suggested that Fellowship is not meant to be granted on the basis of a solid, but unexceptional, career, or for service to ASM, but instead that Fellowship should reflect scientific excellence in the form of innovation, discovery or impact. Therefore it is important that nomination materials demonstrate that the candidate has contributed novel results, fundamental new discoveries, or insights that have changed the view of the field or spurred the development of new fields.

In addition to scholarly publication, other achievements that could attest to the candidate’s originality might include patents, development of new tools, technologies, methods, processes, or analytical approaches, or successful collaborations combining microbiology with other disciplines. The working group suggests that it be made clear that awards, service, mentoring, or teaching achievements can be used to strengthen a nomination, but should not themselves be sufficient for election to Fellowship in the absence of evidence of originality.

The following changes, proposed by the working group, were agreed on by the BOG:

  • Changes to the Bylaws (will need to be voted on by Fellows):
    • Make criteria for election to Fellowship more specific and provide examples for the contributions and achievement desired in the Academy
    • To the description of the COE, increasing the minimum to twelve members serving four-year terms
  • On the website:
    • Update the criteria for election to Fellowship with new bylaw language, if approved
    • Add a letter from the Chair of the BOG that emphasizes the importance of demonstrating the candidate’s originality and impact on the field
    • Add additional explanations and examples of information that can be provided in nominations
  • On the nominating form:
    • Add language with specific examples of useful information to include in nominations
  • Arrange for an annual email from division leaders soliciting nominations from their divisions, including detailed examples of "noteworthy" contributions
  • Have the BOG identify 4-5 Fellows from emerging, cross-cutting or interdisciplinary fields and ask them to participate in a conference call with Academy staff each August to solicit candidate names and identify nominators
  • Expand the COE and improve its representativeness:
    • Increase the size of the committee to 16 (minimum will still be 12, as stated in proposed bylaw revisions above)
    • Make appointments with attention to ensuring diversity of scientific expertise
    • Change term from 5 years to 4 years (reflected in bylaws above)
    • Develop guidance for members and chair of COE concerning how to evaluate nominees
    • Adjust current COE appointments to transition to 16 members in diverse fields of scientific expertise

 

E. Update from ASM Membership Working Group

 

Dr. Bassler updated the Board on the activities of a working group that has been studying and proposing changes to ASM’s membership structure.  Membership in professional societies as a whole, including ASM, has been declining steadily.  The working group asked the question, how do we get people to want to sustain the society that supports their profession?  Why did people join in the first place, and why do they renew?  The current structure is $63 for a regular membership.  Other non-profit dues models were also scrutinized.

Data show that people are joining ASM to:

  1. Obtain discounts on books, page charges, registrations, and journals
  2. Network and meet peers- the ASM provides a community
  3. Support their science
  4. Grow their career
  5. Review scientific information at meetings

Proposed changes to the dues structures are being discussed and a plan will be presented to the CPC in the near future for voting.  Greater membership numbers helps ASM gain sponsors for meetings and have a voice with Congress, among other things.  Keeping a strong membership base and providing the members support and benefits that are most useful to them are goals of ASM.

The BOG was strongly supportive of the working group’s efforts.

 

F. Colloquia Program Update

 

Ms. Reid reported on the Academy’s colloquia program.  Three colloquia took place in 2009, and draft reports have been written for each.  These will be published in 2011.

  • Upcoming colloquia:
    • Linking Microbes to Climate: Incorporating Microbial Activity into Climate Models. Co-chaired by Ed DeLong and Caroline Harwood, will take place Monday February 21, 2011—Wednesday, February 23 in Dallas, TX.
  • Recent colloquia:
    • Educating the Microbiologist of the Future—The Role of Summer Courses. Chaired by Roberto Kolter, took place Friday, January 14, 2011—Sunday, January 16, 2011 in San Francisco, CA.
  • Recent mini-colloquia:
    • Microbes and Oil Spills Mini-Colloquium. Moderated by Stan Maloy, this mini-colloquium took place Thursday, October 28, 2010 at ASM Headquarters in Washington, DC.


The inaugural mini-colloquium went very well and had a very quick turnaround (three months)—the report has already been published.  The finance committee has authorized the Academy to devote a portion of its colloquium fund to hold two additional mini-colloquia in 2011. Topic ideas are welcome.  It was suggested that shorter FAQ documents also be available for some mini-colloquia in the future, when it makes sense for the subject.  

  • Colloquia in development:
    • Diagnosing infectious diseases in developing countries: the cutting edge and beyond. A joint meeting organized by the Fondation Merieux and the American Academy of Microbiology, to be chaired by Keith Klugman and partially sponsored by the Fondation Merieux.  Will take place in September, 2011, in Annecy, France.
    • Designing drugs that last: incorporating the biology of drug resistance into drug design. Chaired by Peg Riley; not yet scheduled.
    • The microbiology of the water supply: A Case Study of the Microbiology of the Built Environment. Chaired by Norm Pace and sponsored by the Sloan Foundation; not yet scheduled.


The finance committee has authorized the Academy to devote a portion of its colloquium fund to provide a one-year fellowship to a recent microbiology Ph.D. to work with the Director on the Colloquium program.

 

III. Information Items

 

A. Annual report

 

Dr. Collier’s annual report was submitted and is attached hereto.

 

IV. Adjournment

 

Dr. Bassler acknowledged outgoing Board Chair Dr. Collier for his years of service.  The meeting was adjourned at 10:53 a.m.