Program Review of the NSF Science and Technology Centers, 2000-2009

2000-2009 年 NSF 科技中心项目回顾

• 批准号: 0949599
• 负责人: Daryl Chubin
• 金额: $ 49.53万
• 依托单位: American Association for the Advancement of Science
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2009
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2009-09-01 至 2011-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0949599&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Program; Review; NSF; Science; Technology

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) proposes a review of the NSF active Science and Technology Centers (STC): Integrative Partnerships as a program. The review will focus on the ``value added`` of the STCs, i.e., what these centers provide that individual investigator research does not, and would characterize the STC portfolio, not individual centers. Our aim is to appraise the collective impact of the STCs on the conduct of academic research?upon individual faculty and students and upon universities; the range of disciplines that constitute the research foci of the centers; and the progress of the scientific enterprise in creating and nurturing new (inter)disciplines. Intellectual MeritAAAS proposes this review for several reasons. First, the STC program as a totality has been reviewed only once in its history. The 17 centers launched in 2000, 2002, and 2005-06 have never been subject to a program review. Second, within NSF and outside NSF, expectations and requirements concerning the need for evidence of program impacts have intensified. Third, and most important, are compelling intellectual reasons: (a) new understanding of the course of scientific discovery and progress, including increased attention to the presence of competing theories and research priorities in the initial phase of what over time comes to be seen as dominant paradigms in which discipline evolve; (b) increased appreciation for the interaction among advances in theory, experimentation, and instrumentation; and (c) conjectures about the selective contribution that patrons of science-corporations and private foundations as well as federal agencies-make to the direction and pace at which some research trajectories flourish. Broader ImpactsThe project will address additional outcomes from the conduct of research created through the mechanism of investing in STCs: (1)to inform NSF, and thus provide a management tool for investment of public funds. (2) At the same time, the STCs constitute a high-profile program and investment in team science. Capturing and clarifying these impacts demands metrics related to the consumers of knowledge, products and other benefits. Capturing and clarifying these impacts demands metrics related to the consumers of knowledge, products and other benefits. Howe can differences in outcomes be traced to STC processes and research impacts, and in turn provide insights into the federal investment process while demonstrating accountability. The STCs are challenged to demonstrate leadership in fostering participation in groups traditionally underrepresented in science and engineering. Thus, should this mechanisms be found to have significant added value in the ways investigated, there will be lessons to share on how the mechanisms of investments affect the diversity of performers and the character of their work. The site www.aas.org , as well as the Research Competitive Program and Capacity Center sites, will be used to highlight the project and the results. We will disseminate the report findings to the STCs, the policy community (in peer-reviewed outlets such as Research Evaluation, Research Policy, and Science and Public Policy), and all interested in research partnerships, management, and evaluation. Finally, presentations of lessons learned may be instructive to agencies when aiming for certain goals and building portfolios.

美国科学促进会（AAAS）建议对NSF活跃的科学和技术中心（STC）进行审查：作为一个计划的综合伙伴关系。 审查将侧重于科技联络员的“增值”，即，这些中心提供了个体研究者研究所没有的，并将表征STC组合，而不是单个中心。我们的目的是评估科技联络员对学术研究的集体影响？对个别教师和学生以及对大学的影响;构成中心研究重点的学科范围;以及科学企业在创建和培育新（跨）学科方面的进展。美国科学促进会提出这一审查有几个原因。首先，STC计划作为一个整体在其历史上只进行了一次审查。 2000年、2002年和2005-06年启动的17个中心从未接受过项目审查。第二，在NSF内部和外部，对项目影响证据的需求的期望和要求已经加强。第三，也是最重要的，是令人信服的智力原因：（a）对科学发现和进步过程的新理解，包括越来越多地注意到，随着时间的推移，在学科发展的主导范式的初始阶段，存在着相互竞争的理论和研究优先事项;（B）越来越多地认识到理论、实验和仪器进步之间的相互作用;以及（c）关于科学公司、私人基金会以及联邦机构的赞助人对某些研究轨迹蓬勃发展的方向和速度做出的选择性贡献的猜测。 更广泛的影响该项目将解决通过投资科技中心的机制进行研究所产生的额外成果：（1）为国家科学基金会提供信息，从而为公共资金的投资提供管理工具。(2)与此同时，STC构成了团队科学的一个备受瞩目的计划和投资。 捕捉和澄清这些影响需要与知识、产品和其他利益的消费者相关的衡量标准。 捕捉和澄清这些影响需要与知识、产品和其他利益的消费者相关的衡量标准。Howe可以将结果的差异追溯到STC过程和研究影响，并反过来提供对联邦投资过程的见解，同时展示问责制。科技联络员面临的挑战是，在促进传统上在科学和工程领域代表性不足的群体参与方面发挥领导作用。因此，如果发现这种机制在所调查的方式中具有重要的附加值，就可以分享投资机制如何影响执行者的多样性及其工作性质的经验教训。网站www.aas.org以及研究竞争计划和能力中心网站将用于突出项目和结果。 我们将向科技联络员、政策界（通过同行评审渠道，如研究评估、研究政策和科学与公共政策）以及所有对研究伙伴关系、管理和评估感兴趣的人传播报告结果。最后，介绍所吸取的经验教训可能对各机构在争取实现某些目标和建立项目组合时具有指导意义。