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

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

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.