PreambleThis code of conduct is intended to make explicit the norms or standards that govern our behavior so we can examine a) what we aspire to and b) whether we are moving in the right direction. This document sets out a set of expectations for student behavior, so you understand what I expect of you, and a set of expectations for mentor behavior, so you know what you can expect from me. This also allows me to articulate what good leadership looks like: developing the skills and autonomy of my students so they grow into productive members of the scientific community. In this code of conduct, “we/our” refers to everyone in the lab–students and mentors alike. Note that most responsibilities and expectations apply to everyone in the lab. We are all learning and striving to do better science in a better way. “I/me” refers to Dr Grman, and “you” refers to students. This document supplements the EMU Code of Community Responsibility.
I welcome feedback at any point via any means. If you have comments on this code of conduct, suggestions for improvement in the lab environment or my mentoring style, suggestions for lab meeting topics, or other feedback you’d like to share, please talk with me (schedule a meeting using your emich account), send me an email, or fill out this form (either anonymously or not). Violations of the code of conduct or safety concerns can be reported here (either anonymously or not). You will also receive an anonymous survey when you leave the lab so I can obtain standardized feedback–please fill this out! Future students will benefit from your labor in helping me grow as a mentor. I am so grateful for all my current and past students who helped write this document and taught me so much about research and mentoring. Code of ConductWe value teamwork and we regard developing our teamwork skills to be as important as developing our science skills. Although we may have projects that are “ours” (meaning that we take “ownership” and primary responsibility for carrying them out ethically and with attention to quality), we acknowledge that we cannot do ecology in isolation. We actively contribute to the projects of our lab members, and we acknowledge (both formally and informally) the teamwork that has made our “own” projects possible. We endeavor to have open and frequent communication to keep projects running smoothly and head off problems before they become big. We cc Dr Grman and other involved students when we send emails about issues (supplies needed or purchased, problems encountered, schedules modified, tasks completed, etc). We practice peer mentorship, which benefits both more experienced students (who develop higher-order scientific skills and solidify as well as find gaps in their scientific understanding) and newer students (who build relationships with other members of the lab community).
We recognize that our time is our most valuable asset and we work to use our own time efficiently and our lab members’ time respectfully. This means we show up to meetings ready to discuss problems and progress in our projects. If we need to cancel or reschedule meetings, we will do so with as much advance notice as possible. We complete tasks we are asked to do on time and with high quality of work whenever possible; in the instances where we need more time to complete our assigned tasks, we communicate our progress and provide a new estimate of when we will finish the task. This means that no one else has to spend their time tracking down and finishing half-completed and/or forgotten tasks. We track our responsibilities and timelines by keeping to-do lists and organized schedules (ideally using some kind of calendar system; the Grman lab calendar is here and you are welcome to use it to plan out your time in the lab and/or field, but please keep your personal appointments in your personal calendar). This means that we do not ask our lab members to spend their time keeping us organized. We stay home when we are sick so we don’t infect others. We plan out our time usage for research, classes, family responsibilities, work, and maintaining our mental and physical health to ensure each of these important areas receives the time and attention it deserves. We develop our metacognitive and time management skills by setting reasonable goals for ourselves and our lab members, regularly reflecting on whether we have met our goals, and discussing obstacles to meeting goals (including whether goals were indeed reasonable!). We learn from past experiences how long things actually take and modify our expectations accordingly. We allow abundant time for revisions of final products (research proposals, posters, talks, etc)--at least a month and at least 4-5 revisions after a first complete draft. We learn to recognize when something is “good enough” and when it needs more work. We respond to emails promptly (within a couple of working days), even if a full answer is not possible within that timeframe. We recognize that participation in the lab is intended to provide mutual benefit. Students gain experience, knowledge, networking, and sometimes compensation (pay or credits); mentors gain personal gratification in seeing the growth of young scientific minds and research productivity (data collected and results disseminated to the scientific community). If you need a letter of reference for a job/internship application or graduate school, please ask me at least three weeks in advance, and send information on the position so I can write the best possible letter for the opportunity you are excited about. We periodically evaluate whether our participation in the lab results in an appropriate ratio of “giving” to “receiving” and we initiate conversations to correct imbalances when we detect them. Ideally, everyone also has fun! We welcome and value diversity. We believe that a diversity of perspectives and life experiences enriches our lab community and makes our science better. We treat all lab members with respect, kindness, empathy, and honesty. We set and respect boundaries. We use each other’s preferred names and pronouns. When we don’t know how to pronounce someone’s name, we ask. I am comfortable if you call me either Emily (she/her) or Dr. Grman (though other faculty members in the department may feel strongly that students should refer to faculty using titles and last names). We do not tolerate intimidation, discrimination, or harassment of any kind, including that based on gender identity/expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, citizenship, nationality, ethnic or social origin, pregnancy, familial status, veteran status, religion or belief or lack thereof, age, education, socio-economic status, experience, or any other characteristic. We do not tolerate violent or sexual language or images, unwelcome sexual attention, non consensual physical contact, or cruel humor based on racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or other exclusionary -isms. If we witness any of these unacceptable forms of behavior, we honor our responsibility to help maintain a safe environment for the entire lab and report them (to me at this google form, anonymously if you wish, or to other avenues such as the EMU Sexual Misconduct Prevention & Response Office, EMU Ethics Hotline, or the EMU Police). Lab members who violate these rules may be asked to leave the lab. If we make a mistake in our interactions with lab members, we apologize and learn from the experience; if we need help apologizing, we reach out for help or read a useful resource. We all are working at the edge of our abilities and we all need mentoring networks. Our work in the lab is challenging–emotionally, psychologically, intellectually, scientifically, personally, logistically/practically, and in many other ways. We recognize that no single mentor can support us with all of our struggles, and we work to cultivate diverse communities of mentors, including peer mentors, who can support all aspects of our identities. If we are feeling overwhelmed (challenged too much), we reach out for help: from me, our labmates, or other support in the department, across campus, or in our mentoring networks. If you are not feeling challenged enough, you reach out to me, perhaps with ideas about what areas of your participation in the lab you’d like to deepen. If we are asked for support we do not feel capable of providing responsibly, we communicate our boundaries and try to identify a more appropriate source for that support, perhaps from one of the following: MentorNet, CAPS, Academic Success Partnership Resources, EMU Student Resource Guide. We welcome dissent and different viewpoints. We prioritize professionalism when interacting with our colleagues in the workplace, but we do not tone police and we do not shy away from raising hard issues even if we cannot do so in “acceptable” ways. We recognize that emotion is a part of science and we will not discount our lab members’ contributions if they are expressed with strong emotion. We offer positive feedback and constructive criticism on our lab members’ ideas and products, suggesting specific ways to try things differently whenever we can. We avoid “either/or” thinking and try to come up with multiple creative solutions to tasks or decisions. We take big decisions slowly and examine them from all angles. We recognize that many of us require time to process issues, problems, and suggestions; we ask for time when needed and we do not rush decision making. We try to recognize when people do things differently from how we might do them and we consider how those different approaches might improve our own work. We gratefully accept constructive criticism and assume that it comes from a helpful intention. We are working on naming defensiveness (in ourselves and others) when it is a problem and on not acting from a place of defensiveness. We speak only when we have something to say; accordingly we assume that when others are speaking, they too have something to say–our job as listeners is to figure out what that is. We welcome discomfort and cognitive dissonance because they are at the root of all growth and learning. We question the source of our discomfort when we experience it. We attend weekly lab meetings that support our growth as researchers and individuals. We celebrate our accomplishments and triumphs over obstacles (however big or small), get feedback and solve problems, acknowledge our mistakes and discuss what we have learned from them, share research-related updates, and ask for and offer help. We discuss planned and in-progress research, strategies for safe fieldwork, responsible conduct of research, mentoring needs, and other topics suggested by lab members at this google form. We allow time for everyone to speak. The schedule of lab meeting topics is here and any readings we discuss are here. We share our past experiences so others can learn from them, including submitted abstracts, funding proposals, posters, talks, and theses. All lab members are expected to attend hour-long weekly lab meetings whenever possible. Half-hour one-on-one meetings with me are also expected of lab members with their “own” projects (probably weekly) and available to anyone else who asks (send me an email). Individual meetings are your opportunity to have my focused attention–prepare for them and use them however you think it will benefit you the most (career planning, research support, etc). If you cancel individual meetings, be aware that you are missing out on opportunities to develop as a scientist; repeated cancellations negatively impact “your” project and signal that you may need to reevaluate your commitment to participation in the lab. We work together safely. We follow departmental and university safety protocols and complete all required safety trainings such as those for the autoclave. We follow the Biology Department’s policy on lab work: we never perform hazardous work alone or outside business hours (6am-10pm M-Th, 6am-6:30pm F); we ensure that we have someone with us in the lab when we are working outside business hours or with hazardous materials during business hours; we try to have someone with us in all other conditions; and we avoid labwork outside business hours if possible (text me when you arrive and depart). We keep the door to the growth chamber room locked at all times. We work with someone else in the field whenever we can; when we are alone in the field we let someone else know (text me when you arrive and depart). We acknowledge that some members of our lab may need additional safety supports to conduct their work in the lab and field, and we strive to provide these supports however we can. We clean up after ourselves to leave our workspaces and equipment in safe working order for the next lab member. We report unsafe working conditions as soon as we notice them (you can email, text, or call me, or fill out this form, or contact the EMU Police). We share and keep track of research data and metadata in an organized fashion. We keep high-quality lab notebooks so that future lab members can understand and build upon our work. In our lab notebooks, we include metadata (“data about data”) such as the date, the project/set of samples/experiment or larger topic the notes relate to, the names of anyone working with us, which protocol we used (if any) plus any modifications, the approximate amount of time it took to do the task (if processing samples), any mistakes or possible points of confusion, or any other random research-related thoughts that occur to us. I may ask to examine your lab notebook at any time; when you leave the lab you must leave your notebook here for future researchers (but you are welcome to keep a copy if you wish). If you have your “own” project, I will send you a link to a shared Google drive folder; I expect you to keep all data, analysis, and writing files relevant to your project in there. We enter data promptly and accurately into shared Google spreadsheets and record metadata with as much completeness as possible. We collect field data with pen and paper and we retain original paper data sheets (please give them to me after data entry). We also electronically back up our paper data sheets by taking photos or scanning (perhaps with an app such as Scanner Pro or something similar) and saving them to our shared Google drive. We recognize that authorship is both an honor and a responsibility. Authorship (on papers, posters, presentations, etc) is the result of a recurring, iterative conversation. We expect authors to contribute in significant ways to at least 2 of the following 4 categories: 1) conceive the project idea/design the study, 2) carry out the study/collect the data, 3) analyze the data, 4) prepare or provide substantial feedback on the research product (paper, poster, talk, etc). As an author, we feel confident discussing our contributions to the project and able to communicate the main points of the overall project to people outside the lab. We have the option to “opt out” (decline authorship if we do not want to invest the time and labor) or “opt in” (increase our contribution to the point of meriting authorship) on all projects to which we have contributed. We revisit authorship conversations frequently. We actively avoid conducting scientific misconduct, through periodic trainings in lab meetings, conversations in individual meetings, and constant self-reflection. We complete responsible conduct of research (RCR) training provided by EMU’s Office of Research Development and Administration (ORDA). We periodically review our data management policies and practices (see previous paragraph) to ensure we are collecting and maintaining our datasets completely and responsibly. We do not falsify (make up or edit) data. We maintain healthy collaborations both within EMU and with the broader community, including restoration practitioners, conservation organizations, and other scientists. If we obtain funding to support our research, we manage and spend those funds responsibly and in accordance with funders’ and EMU policy. We avoid plagiarism by giving attribution to the originators of ideas and information and by writing in our own voices. If we are unsure about how to avoid plagiarism, we ask our labmates or me or seek out support at the EMU library. If you think you may have witnessed research misconduct or you have questions about how to handle a situation, please send me an email or fill out this form. We strive to create an antiracist lab environment. “One either allows racial inequities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequities, as an antiracist. There is no in-between safe space of ‘not racist’” (Kendi 2019). We do our best to support BIPOC researchers at all levels and we welcome suggestions about how to improve BIPOC student recruitment, inclusion, retention, and success after graduation. We regularly discuss antiracism in science and in ecology specifically. References and suggestions for further readingBaucom, G. 2019. Guest post: How to be an ally. Dynamic Ecology. https://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2019/09/04/guest-post-how-to-be-an-ally/ Accessed 30 Mar 2023.
Bowles, T. Berkeley Agroecology Lab: Lab and professional guidelines. https://nature.berkeley.edu/agroecologylab/lab-and-professional-guidelines/ Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Chaudhary, VG, AA Berhe. 2020. Ten simple rules for building an antiracist lab. PLoS Computational Biology 16:e1008210. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008210 Cronin MR, SH Alonzo, SK Adamczak, DN BAker, RS Beltran, AL Borker, AB Favilla, R Gatins, LC Goetz, H Hack, JG Harenčár, EA Howard, MC Krusta, R Maguiña, L Martinez-Estevez, RS Mehta, IM Parker, K Reid, MB Roberts, SB Shirazi, T-aM Tatom-Naecker, KM Voss, E Willis-Norton, B Vadakan, AM Valenzuela-Toro, ES Zavaleta. 2021. Anti-racist interventions to transform ecology, evolution and conservation biology departments. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5:1213-1223. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01522-z Demery, A-JC, and MA Pipkin. 2020. Safe fieldwork strategies for at-risk individuals, their supervisors and institutions. Nature Ecology & Evolution doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01328-5 Duffy, M. Lab guidelines: an introduction to the Duffy Lab. https://duffylab.wordpress.com/lab-guidelines/ Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Ecological Society of America. 2021. Code of ethics for the Ecological Society of America. https://www.esa.org/about/code-of-ethics/ Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Kendi, IX. 2019. How to be an Antiracist. One World/Ballantine. Okun, T. 1999. White supremacy culture. dismantlingracism.org. whitesupremacyculture.info/uploads/4/3/5/7/43579015/okun_-_white_sup_culture_2020.pdf Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Recurse. User’s Manual. https://www.recurse.com/manual#sub-sec-social-rules Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Sloan, J. 2023. Putting your skin in the game: allyship vs co-conspiratorship. https://sites.google.com/emich.edu/fdcteachingblog/teaching-blog/winter-2023/putting-your-skin-in-the-game-allyship-vs-co-conspiratorship?authuser=0 Accessed 30 Mar 2023. The Carpentries. 2023. The Carpentries code of conduct. https://docs.carpentries.org/topic_folders/policies/code-of-conduct.html Accessed 30 Mar 2023. Wai-Ling Packard, B. 2016. Successful STEM Mentoring Initiatives for Underrepresented Students: A Research-Based Guide for Faculty and Administrators. Stylus, Sterling, VA. Whiteman, N. Workplace culture expectations. http://www.noahwhiteman.org/uploads/7/1/3/1/7131048/workplace_culture_expectations__working_document___1_.pdf Accessed 30 Mar 2023. |