#facultyresearch

[ukfineartsresearch]

Director of Music named Editor of Music Forum

Congratulations to Stanley Pelkey, director of the UK School of Music. Dr. Pelkey has been named the new editor for the Forum section of the College Music Society's official journal, Symposium. Visit the website >

[kateconwayturner]

Research and Creativity: The Buffalo State Way

It was a totally enjoyable experience to attend the 19th annual Faculty and Staff Research and Creativity Fall Forum on Thursday. As I made the rounds in Houston Gym to appreciate the research displayed on posters and to engage in conversations with faculty members about their research projects, I was amazed at the diversity of research being explored on campus.

Hibajene Shandomo presented on “The Impact of Internationally Trained Educators on Youth at Risk, including Refugee Population in the U.S.A. classrooms”

The research covered all academic areas and varied in focus, but many projects tackled applied issues. From the exploration of the aged yellow hue in the Indian yellow pigment to the factors behind the economic growth in China, I was truly enthralled by the projects discussed. I am always impressed by the deep knowledge of our faculty and staff and the enthusiasm they have for their research areas.

Jing Zhang discussing her research topic and presentation: “A Comparison on Elementary Mathematics Textbooks among U.S., Mainland China, and UK”

And I was not disappointed this year! I agree with Provost Perreault, who shared the excitement of learning about new areas.  This wonderful event is an affirmation that Buffalo State faculty and staff members are strong researchers who address complicated and often applied questions. And it is rewarding to see how they cultivate the love of research and creative efforts within our students.

Provost Melanie Perreault welcomes and congratulates participants 

I personally had a wonderful time exploring the projects displayed and only wish I had had more time to spend chatting with faculty, puzzling over new questions, and learning more from our research experts. But then there will be next year, and I can’t wait to see the research projects that will be shared with our community.

Presentation on “Clinical Skill Development for Graduate Clinicians: Five Essential Elements of Intensive Summer Proramming” by Sara Mann Kahris and Theresa M. Cinotti, Speech-Language Hearing Clinic

[cornellcomm]

Cornell ranked #12 in NSF research expenditures--up 2 spots from last year. And Comm is a big part of that--we have several NSF grants!

[mcdonoughschoolofbusiness]

Faculty Friday: The Global Supply Chain

In today’s Q&A, Professors Shiliang Cui and Ricardo Ernst discuss their research on production sourcing decisions and the global supply chain:

1. Given the current political landscape and what is being said by candidates on the election trail, what do you hope policy makers take away from this research?

Companies are currently restructuring their global production footprints. It responds to operational drivers that go beyond politically driven incentives. Raising walls or increasing trade barriers are counterproductive to the desired performance by global companies. It is wrong to assume isolated policies will solve any of the employment and productivity problems faced in the United States. In the end, as this research demonstrates, companies operate under a complicated and interrelated network of facilities. Orchestrating the entire process, which is industry dependent, requires a more global approach. Market forces have driven the extended networks of companies. Myopic policies will only penalize the final consumer.

This research validates that the majority of firms engage in offshoring. It is imperative to recognize the “why” and the “where.” The two main explanations for the “why” are, first, proximity to markets (to sell your products), and second, search for innovation (to acquire knowledge). The “where” includes China, which was expected, and not surprisingly Southern Asia. More surprisingly is the increase in production investment in Eastern European countries (the new China for Western European Countries).

2.  As many Americans are calling for corporations to bring their manufacturing operations back to the United States, did your research find an uptick in production coming back to the States?

North America may be at the cusp of a manufacturing renaissance, but not because of companies bringing their manufacturing operations back (i.e., reshoring). North America is becoming an important destination for companies from other regions. In fact, 60 percent of the investments in North America come from international companies versus 40 percent from North American firms. The two “whys” mentioned before are the key drivers for localizing production in North America for non-American companies, namely proximity to markets and innovation. The first one is explained as an opportunity for market penetration. After all, the United States is the biggest market in the world. The second one is to improve their production platforms through the acquisition of knowledge. For North American firms, the two drivers are already satisfied because most of them already have manufacturing facilities here.

3. As businesses globalize, did you find that companies manufacturing in the United States are producing 100 percent of their products in the country or are products purely “Made in the USA” not so common?

Products purely “Made in the USA” are almost impossible! Just look at any of the products that you are wearing, eating, or using and you will be surprised by the interrelations. A single cup of Starbucks coffee depends upon as many as 19 different countries. We found in our research that cost is no longer the driving force in manufacturing location decisions. Firms make complex trade-offs among a variety of factors. Cost is still important, but is traded off against factors such as proximity to markets, supply availability, and to a lesser extent, government policies and risk. More and more global supply chains are at the core of global companies.  The ideas of “competing in a flat world,” “competing with everyone from everywhere for everything,” and “produce nowhere to sell everywhere,” are currently the norm and not the exception.

4. Is there anything that surprised you as you conducted this research?

We found a decline of manufacturing in developed economies (e.g., Western Europe and Japan). While a substantial share still invests in these regions, even more firms are divesting. Western European countries found a closer “China” in Eastern European countries. Similar to the way Mexico was being used for “maquila operations” for the United States, China is using Cambodia and Vietnam.

China is still the most attractive region for production sourcing, followed by developing economies in Eastern Europe and Southern Asia.  However, the drivers are different. China is the second largest economy in the world and the reason for going there shifted from a “low cost production platform” to market destination. They found their own “Chinas” in Southern Asia.

Conventional wisdom suggested a comeback of production operations to North America (which is known as re-shoring). The surprise came not from the validation of that expectation but from the sources.  Most of the companies bringing manufacturing to North America are from other regions for the reasons explained before.

To learn more about the research, visit http://msb.georgetown.edu/newsroom/news/wave-restructuring-global-supply-chain-strategies.

[apooria]

MOS Architects

Reproduction No. 6 (Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Average Soap Dish)

[kateconwayturner]

Faculty Again Gain Great Value from the FITT Academy

One of the many reasons I love being a part of a campus community is that I learn something new every day. Friday was a great example of extending my knowledge as I listened to presentations by five faculty members who were integrating technology into their classes in new ways after completing the Fostering Innovation in Teaching with Technology—or FITT—Academy. Each was extremely interesting, and I appreciated the energy and dedication that the faculty and RITE staff members had put into each project.

Kathleen McNerney, assistant professor of speech-language pathology, described how she would use badges to promote learning in her graduate courses. I was impressed with the careful way she and her RITE team had thought through these issues and had developed an array of methods to document knowledge learned at varied levels.

Kathleen McNerney, assistant professor of speech-language pathology

Andrea Nikischer, assistant professor of adult education, presented on the increased engagement and retention see wished to foster by adding gamification to an online graduate course. It was interesting to hear her describe the different levels of confidence that adult learners bring to her classes and how she hoped to build and expand on their initial knowledge.

Andrea Nikischer, assistant professor of adult education

Nirmala Nutakki, lecturer in the Mathematics Department, presented on how she developed digital e-learning modules to support the learning of elementary math content by preservice teachers. The thoughtful way she described how to parse learning into smaller chunks to improve comprehension was very interesting. And I loved her comment that “math is not a spectator sport.”

Nirmala Nutakki, lecturer, Mathematics Department

Robin O’Dell, associate professor of mathematics, gave an informative presentation on how she had used Adobe Captivate as an interactive remediation tool to help students in MTH 122. Her detailed and humorous descriptions of how she mastered the Adobe program gained not only some good chuckles from the audience but also a clear appreciation of the hours of work she had put into learning this tool.

Robin O’Dell, associate professor of mathematics

The last presentation was given by Lisa Rafferty, chair and associate professor of exceptional education, on increasing student engagement and individualized feedback in an e-learning environment. She will use Qualtrics in the fall with her EXE 501 class to enrich student learning. I was particularly impressed to learn that she would be able to give students real-time feedback, so they would be practicing with useful information.

Lisa Rafferty, chair and associate professor of exceptional education

In each presentation, faculty members shared the value of their RITE team and others in implementing their technology to better serve student learning. It was an exciting set of presentations, but most importantly, each will have a positive impact on teaching and learning.

Kate Conway-Turner with all the presenters

I encourage those not in attendance to seek out these faculty members to learn more about what they developed during the FITT Academy and how they are moving the needle to enhance student learning at Buffalo State.

[kateconwayturner]

Recognizing Research

Two annual celebrations recently highlighted the varied research opportunities that are nurtured and cultivated at Buffalo State. Last week, 350 students presented their research and creative work at the 19th annual Student Research and Creativity Conference. Students from across campus showcased their faculty-mentored research to the campus and broader community.

Faculty, staff, and students gathered at the 19th annual Student Research and Creativity Conference

Again the students demonstrated that undergraduate students can and do delve deeply into issues to answer important questions, illuminate fields of study, and creatively attack questions related to their academic pursuits. Kudos to Jill Singer, director of the Undergraduate Research Office, for bringing national recognition to Buffalo State’s undergraduate research program and for her many years of coordination of this splendid conference.

Student Emily Parra-Amador presents her research to Kate Conway-Turner

Student Robert Flores discusses his research with faculty member Saziye Bayram

Following closely on the heels of the Student Research and Creativity Conference was the 20th annual Research Recognition Reception. This event celebrates the significant faculty research that occurs on campus and especially those who have successfully competed for external funding to support their research.

The event was held in the atrium of the Science and Mathematics Complex, and faculty, staff, and students came together to celebrate another successful research year. Many thanks to the Research and Economic Development Office and the Sponsored Programs Office for co-sponsoring this important event.

Undergraduate summer research fellowship recipients with their faculty mentors

The Research Recognition Reception ended with an announcement from Dr. Singer of this year’s Undergraduate Summer Research Fellowship recipients and their mentors. The topics ranged widely from landscape-inspired tapestries to cell-to-cell communication responses to osmotic challenges to elderly support systems. The summer projects promise another group of outstanding presentations for next year.

Jill Singer making her closing remarks

Research at Buffalo State College is an important part of what we do, but our research is uniquely applied, tied to our strong teaching mission, and provides opportunities for both undergraduate and graduate students to work alongside our outstanding faculty members.

[kateconwayturner]

Faculty and Staff Showcase Their Research and Creative Efforts

I had the pleasure this week of attending the 17th annual Faculty and Staff Research and Creativity Fall Forum, held in Houston Gymnasium. The room was filled with posters displaying the scholarly work of the Buffalo State community. Over 100 faculty and staff members participated this year, and it was wonderful to see the many projects on display.

Rita Zientek, associate dean, School of the Professions, gives opening remarks at Thursday’s Fall Forum

This forum had three aspects that I found particularly noteworthy. It was an opportunity for faculty to share their research with the Buffalo State community.

From creative studies, to biology, to business, to fashion and much more, I was impressed over and over as I talked with faculty members and heard about the research they were sharing. It was wonderful to have faculty reveal important explorations with all members of the Buffalo State community. It was also great to see the synergy occurring as faculty and staff made connections and began to consider collaborations across disciplinary boundaries.

Students check out Eric Dolph’s research on spatial discovery using virtual reality. Photo credit: Eric Dolph @ericdolph

Eric Dolph, assistant professor, interior design, with his poster. Photo credit: Eric Dolph @ericdolph

Andrea Nikischer, assistant professor, adult education, presenting collaborative research from two disciplines. Photo credit: Andrea Nikischer @AndreaNikischer

Poster presentation from Lynn M. Boorady, fashion and textile technology chair and associate professor

I am positive that this forum forged some new connections that will result in collaborative projects. And third, the faculty showcase was filled with students milling between posters. This forum provided students a glimpse into the lives of their faculty members as scholars. I am sure students gained a deeper understanding of faculty-based research and creativity and how it contributes to their knowledge.

So it was a wonderful interlude in my day to attend our annual Research and Creativity Forum, and I look forward to upcoming years.

[cornellcomm]

Katherine McComas coauthors paper on genetically-modified food labeling

The Conversation recently published an article, “ What consumers want in GM food labeling is simpler than you think,“ by Prof. Katherine McComas and COMM PhD alums Graham Dixon (‘14) and John Besley (’06)

[mcdonoughschoolofbusiness]

Faculty Friday: Simon Blanchard

In today’s Q&A, we learn about Professor Simon Blanchard’s research on the “favor request effect.”

1. It is clear “the favor request effect” is beneficial for businesses. How can consumers benefit and what do you hope they take away from your research’s findings?

Out of fear of “getting hosed” or fear of finding a better deal elsewhere, many deals that would greatly benefit both sellers and consumers never get completed. We believe consumers benefit from having sellers both focused on the discount that they are offering and who are aware that a key to a successful interaction with consumers is to make it seem less competitive.

We also want consumers to recognize some of the social influence strategies that can be used by salespeople. Consumers often recognize that a seller that “sweetens the deal” by providing extra components (e.g., extended warranty, free service) uses reciprocity to make the deal more appealing, but may not have recognized that the request for a favor might have the same effect.  

2. Why do you think something as simple as requesting a favor could successfully change the perception of the interaction, and on the opposite end of the spectrum, how could asking a favor potentially backfire?

We expect three components to matter: How the request is phrased, the nature of the favor requested, and consumers’ level of uncertainty regarding the price.

First, the favor should not be required or forced (e.g., stating “please write this positive review right now” instead of “it would be nice if you consider”). It is meant to be a request, not a requirement.

Second, even though there is no requirement that the favor requested is actually done, the type of favor requested still should be appropriate for the circumstances. For instance, in an additional study, we found that requesting consumers to “take a picture with the product when they get home and send it back so it can be used on the store’s website” worked great for a painting gallery. However when this same favor request was used in the context of designer jeans, requesting a picture was seen as inappropriate and creepy. In fact, participants were quite upset at the idea. Yet, requesting a positive review worked as expected.

Third, the favor request is most effective when consumers are (somewhat) uncertain that the deal being offered is the lowest price available. If consumers know that the deal offered is somewhat typical (e.g., most people in the store end up with this discount) or if the discount was not offered by the seller as a “sacrifice” (e.g., the discount is offered through a storewide promotion), the addition of a favor request will not increase acceptance.

To learn more about Blanchard’s research, visit http://msb.georgetown.edu/newsroom/news/favor-request-effect-requesting-favor-consumers-seal-deal.

[cornellcomm]

Prof. Katherine McComas presented the 10th session of the 2016 Cornell University Climate Change Seminar. The university-wide seminar provides important views on the critical issue of climate change, drawing from many perspectives and disciplines.

[cornellcomm]

Prof. Natalie Bazarova is featured on the Cornell Research website for the work that she and her Social Media team are doing on wellbeing.

[mcdonoughschoolofbusiness]

Faculty Friday: Jason Brennan

In today’s faculty Q&A, Professor Jason Brennan discusses his research on the potential economic impact of adjuncts’ rights proposals on colleges and universities:

1. Your research focuses on the potential financial repercussions from meeting the demands of adjunct professors. What do you hope leaders of higher education institutions take away from your findings?

I’m hoping they see the hidden costs of the adjuncts’ rights movement. Money spent helping adjuncts has to come from somewhere, and money spent helping adjuncts is not money spent on other worthwhile goals, such as reducing tuition, greening the university, or creating scholarships for poor, first-generation college students. Further, for universities to stop “exploiting” adjuncts, they would need to fire about two-thirds of them to “help” the remaining third. Universities can help the few by harming the many, but they cannot help everybody.

2.  Can you expand upon the impacts on students should adjuncts’ demands be met?

Some adjuncts teach niche courses; if staffing those courses became too expensive, universities will probably just cut them. Many adjuncts are working professionals who moonlight on the side. If universities had to eliminate adjunct positions in favor of “good” full-time jobs, students would likely lose access to the real-world wisdom and experience of working professionals teaching practical courses. But the main cost is hidden: If universities somehow freed up an additional $15 – $50 billion for adjunct salaries, that money could have been used to reduce tuition, create scholarships for poor students, or to create retention programs for first-generation students.

3. Is there anything that surprised you as you conducted this research?

We did not realize the severity of the trade-offs. We obtained data about how many adjuncts there are and how many classes they teach, and then calculated what it would take to have adjunct-taught classes taught instead by people with “minimally good jobs” hired out of the adjunct pool. To our surprise, that involved firing about two-thirds of all current adjuncts to retain the rest.

Another big surprise was how most public commentators do not do their homework. The data we use is from the Department of Education and publicly available. Yet, a few outlets mistakenly reported that 76 percent of all professors are adjuncts, and suddenly everyone repeats that without checking the source. Our research found that the actual number is about 50 percent.

Along those lines, we were surprised to discover that the ratio of full-time faculty to full-time students has remained almost constant in the United States over the past 40 years. We believed the story that full-time faculty were being replaced with adjuncts. On the contrary, the growth of full-time faculty has kept pace with the growth in the student body. There’s just been an explosion in the number of adjuncts on top of that. So the common story that adjuncts are replacing full-time professors is just a myth.

To learn more about Brennan’s research, visit http://msb.georgetown.edu/newsroom/news/exploring-university-business-ethics-estimating-cost-justice-adjuncts.

[mcdonoughschoolofbusiness]

Faculty Friday

In today’s faculty Q&A, Professor Brooks Holtom discusses his research on the influence of social networks on employee turnover:

1. Your research is the first to use social network position and reputation to create a predictive model of employee turnover. What inspired you to research this?

Over the past decade, my colleagues and I have engaged in extensive field research. Spending time with top leaders in organizations has made abundantly clear the high cost of losing employees who are central in their organizational networks. So, while we were aware of the cost, we could quantify how frequently firms lost highly connected talent. So, we approached two world-class organizations and were grateful to work collaboratively with them to answer this question.

2. How can HR managers use your model to increase retention rates?

HR leaders should consider alterations to their talent programs—from on-boarding to career planning to leadership development—to help employees understand and build personal networks. In addition, leaders can also adapt project staffing practices, rotation programs and even succession planning to help encourage more structurally diverse networks. While past research has shown that these efforts should lead to improved performance, this research shows the investment of time and effort should also help reduce voluntary turnover.

3. What advice would you give to employees to increase their social network capital and help them become a power broker in their organization?

First, employees should work hard to develop a reputation for competence and integrity. Second, they should they attempt to see the world from other peoples’ perspectives and identify ways they can help others. Third, employees should seek to build genuine relationships with others. If the reputation and empathy are in place, others will want to collaborate with them. These interactions will expand and strengthen the employee’s social capital over time.

Finally, employees need to understand that they put themselves at some risk when they leave a beneficial network position. As prior work has shown, knowledge workers who move from one organization to another tend to underperform in the second context. A good deal of this performance loss is a product of losing the network that helped one to get work done in the first organization.

To learn more about Holtom’s research, visit http://msb.georgetown.edu/newsroom/news/employees%E2%80%99-internal-social-networks-can-predict-turnover.

[cornellcomm]

[cornellcomm]

The Media Effects Lab is here--like outside the building here! Sahara Byrne, Amelia Greiner Safi, and Chris Skurka with Katrina Simon and Megan Fitzgerald (Human Ecology) are outfitting the mobile lab today.