Comments on: Tinkering at the edges of NSF (again) http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3828 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: soc sci http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3828&cpage=1#comment-4704 soc sci Wed, 24 May 2006 22:15:23 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3828#comment-4704 If one looks at the history of NSF, one can see that a pendulum effect has been occurring since its inception, as with most funding agencies. At times, it has focused on basic research, i.e. research with no immediate benefit but fundamental to building research knowledge. Whereas at other times, NSF has supported research with more definite potential outcomes. This is just my feeling, but I think that being in the midst of the war in Iraq, etc. is a major factor here: this is a war period where there is a definite need for outcome-oriented research. Finally, I do believe that Hutchison's comments were reactive, implying that research on democracy in Hungary, etc. is useless. I think research on building democracy (and various ways of doing so, failure in doing so, etc.) is absolutely essential at this time. If one looks at the history of NSF, one can see that a pendulum effect has been occurring since its inception, as with most funding agencies. At times, it has focused on basic research, i.e. research with no immediate benefit but fundamental to building research knowledge. Whereas at other times, NSF has supported research with more definite potential outcomes. This is just my feeling, but I think that being in the midst of the war in Iraq, etc. is a major factor here: this is a war period where there is a definite need for outcome-oriented research. Finally, I do believe that Hutchison’s comments were reactive, implying that research on democracy in Hungary, etc. is useless. I think research on building democracy (and various ways of doing so, failure in doing so, etc.) is absolutely essential at this time.

]]> By: Eli Rabett http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3828&cpage=1#comment-4703 Eli Rabett Sat, 20 May 2006 01:24:35 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3828#comment-4703 Before bulking up those strawmen it might be worthwhile to look at the NSF's mission and goals from its strategic plan, http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04201/FY2003-2008.pdf Actually, it might even be worthwhile to read the strategic plan, at least that is where I would start if I were thinking about a policy recommendation. The NSF mission is stated in the enabling legislation: To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes. There are four goals from the strategic plan, up from 3 in the last one, I guess you call that goal creep. PEOPLE GOAL – A diverse, competitive, and globally-engaged US workforce of scientists, engineers, technologists and well-prepared citizens. IDEAS GOAL - Discovery across the frontier of science, learning, innovation and service to society. TOOLS GOAL – Broadly accessible, state-of-the-art S&E facilities, tools and other infrastructure that enable discovery, learning and innovation ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE GOAL - An agile, innovative organization that fulfills its mission through leadership in state-of-the-art business practices. Before bulking up those strawmen it might be worthwhile to look at the NSF’s mission and goals from its strategic plan, http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04201/FY2003-2008.pdf

Actually, it might even be worthwhile to read the strategic plan, at least that is where I would start if I were thinking about a policy recommendation.

The NSF mission is stated in the enabling legislation:

To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes.

There are four goals from the strategic plan, up from 3 in the last one, I guess you call that goal creep.

PEOPLE GOAL – A diverse, competitive, and globally-engaged US workforce of scientists, engineers, technologists and well-prepared citizens.

IDEAS GOAL – Discovery across the frontier of science, learning, innovation and service to society.

TOOLS GOAL – Broadly accessible, state-of-the-art S&E facilities, tools and other infrastructure that enable discovery, learning and innovation

ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE GOAL – An agile, innovative organization that fulfills its mission through leadership in state-of-the-art business practices.

]]> By: Roger Pielke Jr. http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3828&cpage=1#comment-4702 Roger Pielke Jr. Fri, 19 May 2006 21:44:35 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3828#comment-4702 Kevin- I would agree that NSF has more to be concerned about with the focus on application-oriented science rather than the quibbling about social sciences in the agency. This debate in fact goes back to its founding and a debate between Vannevar Bush and Senator Harley Kilgore. Susan Cozzens briefly discusses this history here: http://www.cspo.org/products/conferences/bush/Cozzens.pdf What scientists concerned about the fate of NSF should realize from this is the double-edged sword of using societal benefits as the leading justification for basic research. Congress will listen and act accordingly. The result will be that basic research is not so basic anymore. Kevin-

I would agree that NSF has more to be concerned about with the focus on application-oriented science rather than the quibbling about social sciences in the agency. This debate in fact goes back to its founding and a debate between Vannevar Bush and Senator Harley Kilgore. Susan Cozzens briefly discusses this history here:

http://www.cspo.org/products/conferences/bush/Cozzens.pdf

What scientists concerned about the fate of NSF should realize from this is the double-edged sword of using societal benefits as the leading justification for basic research. Congress will listen and act accordingly. The result will be that basic research is not so basic anymore.

]]>