. "3 The Globalization of Science and Engineering." Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States
For a number of reasons, it is difficult to compare such entrepreneurial educational systems with higher education in the United States, the EU, or Japan. For example, Australia is recruiting tuition-paying undergraduates rather than subsidizing graduate students. For that reason, Australia’s international students are almost all in undergraduate or professional programs, and few of them do research; by one calculation, only about 3 percent were in the OECD “research” category in 2004.95 The entrepreneurial approach has also been criticized for failing to improve the research quality of faculty, and thus for causing an apparent decline in the quality of published research, and for placing proportionately less emphasis on teaching than on such activities as recruitment.96
INTEGRATING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING POLICY WITH FOREIGN POLICY
An aspect of S&E strength deserving brief mention is the challenge in integrating scientific research and educational policies with foreign policy. A familiar, if only occasional, overlap between scientific and foreign policy has been seen in the realm of “big science” such as the multinational particle accelerators and detectors at CERN, large telescopes, and international ocean and geophysical projects. Negotiating big science is seldom easy, partly because of the obvious differences between the realms of science and large-scale political structures. Among the most obvious is that many intergovernment research activities are “top-down,” established and monitored by government officials, whereas most research collaborations are “bottom-up,” with scientists choosing partners and applying to government for research support. Traditional research linkages create what were long ago called “invisible colleges”97 of practitioners, below the radar of policymakers. As the globalization of S&E progresses, a better understanding of how to integrate top-down and bottom-up cooperation is needed if nations are to maximize the benefits of their investments in S&E.98 Scien-
Fazal Rizvi, professor, Department of Educational Policy Studies, University of Illinois, presentation to committee, October 11, 2004.
Marginson. 2004. Ibid. Marginson found that “the spectacular growth of higher education in Australia was not grounded in superior quality, but in burgeoning demands, business acumen driven by a combination of scarcity and opportunity, an adequate quality English-language product, a good location and a cheaper price.” The program has been, he said, “unable to attract many high-calibre international research students,” and “the average quality of published research appears to be in decline.”
Derek John de Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science … and Beyond, New York: Columbia University Press, 1963; see also Caroline Wagner and Loet Leyesdorff. 2005. “Network structures, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science.” Research Policy (in press).
Caroline Wagner. 2002. “The elusive partnership: Science and foreign policy.” Science