Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 333
FUTURE OF THE ACADEMIC ENDEAVOR IN THE LIFE SCIENCES 333
TABLE 49 Factors Seriously Limiting the Research Programs of Indi-
vidual Life Scientists
ACADEMIC
SCIENTISTS
LIMITING FACI~OR
Number %
NONACADEMIC
SCIENTISTS
Number To
GRAND TOTAL a7~007 1003~076 100
Space3~529 501~277 42
Budget for:5~399 772~187 71
Supplies1~779 25371 12
Equipment2~806 40803 26
Professional Staff1~554 22957 31
Technicians3~353 481~454 47
Clerical-Administrative1~169 17404 13
Student Stipends1~742 25196 6
Postdoctoral Stipends1,621 23339 11
Computer Time245 3100 3
Travel1,329 19661 21
Insufficient Research Time due to:
Heavy Teaching Responsibilities
Service
Administration
3~429 49
1~851 26
848 12
27
1~118 36
75 2
371 12
867 28
Unfilled Funded Positions for: 1,446 21 725 24
Professional Staff 759 11 430 14
Technicians 832 12 432 14
Clerical-Administrative 149 2 62 2
Life scientists reporting one or more limiting factors.
Source: Survey of Individual Life Scientists, National Academy of Sciences Committee on Research
in the Life Sciences.
INDIVIDUAL SCIENTISTS
Academic Scientists
Half the scientists considered that the space available to them was seriously
limiting. A fifth to a quarter were hampered for lack of access to one or
another specialized research facility. Three fourths of all scientists declared
that they had insufficient funds, with pharmacologists least needful in this
regard and those studying morphology most severely constrained. Although
the lack of funds resulted in different difficulties for different individuals
OCR for page 334
334
THE LIFE SCIENCES
TABLE 50 Additional Factors Seriously Limiting the Research Programs
of Individual Life Scientists
LIMITING FACIOR
ACADEMIC
SCIENTISTS
Number %
NONACADEMIC
SCIENTISTS
Number To
GRANI) TOTALa 7,007 100 3,076 100
Constraints on Nature of Research Problem due to: 1,835
Conditions of Employment 539
Source of Research Funds 1,3 84
Other 236
Inadequacy of Personal Training in:
Chemistry
Statistics
Mathematics
Computer Use
Electronics
Physics
Other Biological Sciences
26
8
20
3
3,120 45
1,303 19
776 11
1,056 15
1,121 16
707 10
360 5
696 10
1,054
643
516
109
34
21
17
4
1,238 40
449 15
350 11
356 12
434 14
261 8
129 4
376 12
a Life scientists reporting one or more limiting factors.
Source: Survey of Individual Life Scientists, National Academy of Sciences Committee on Research
in the Life Sciences.
in the population, the pattern, by research areas, showed few significant
variations. Twenty to thirty percent were limited by available consumable
supplies; about a third required specialized equipment, a requirement
stated most frequently by biochemists and least frequently by systematic
biologists. Almost every individual in the study would expand his research
group somewhat if he could: one fourth indicated a desire for additional
professional staff, a desire least often asserted by the developmental biol-
ogists and most often by those studying disease mechanisms; half felt an
urgent need for additional technicians, the most numerous being the nu-
tritionists. About a sixth of these scientists have insufficient clerical and
administrative assistance while a fourth desire additional support for
students; those studying pharmacology (13 percent) and disease mech-
anisms (19 percent) felt this need least severely, whereas those engaged
in studies of ecology (40 percent) and systematic biology considered it
considerably more urgent (35 percent). A fifth of the group expressed a
need for additional postdoctoral fellows, a need apparently least frequent
among ecologists ( 14 percent) and most urgent among the molecular
biologists and biochemists (30 percent), reflecting the style of research
in these disciplines and the existing distribution of postdoctoral fellows.
OCR for page 335
FUTURE OF THE ACADEMIC ENDEAVOR IN THE LIFE SCIENCES
Approximately one fifth of the life scientists polled considered themselves
hampered by insufficient funds in support of travel, most particularly the
systematic biologists, reflecting their requirement for far-flung field studies.
Insufficiency of funds was most common among the faculty of agricul-
tural schools (86 percent) and less urgent in the medical schools (71
percent), with those in the graduate colleges of arts and sciences in between.
Those working in agricultural schools also felt most pressed for lack of
supporting technical help, which was in better supply in the laboratories
of the medical schools. Funds to support and, presumably, to increase the
number of graduate students were in great demand in the colleges of arts
and sciences and in the agricultural schools but less pressing in the medical
schools, where National Institutes of Health training grants had alleviated
the pressure in considerable degree. The events of Fiscal Year 1970 and
1971 may very well alter that situation dramatically, and for the worse.
These statements, descriptive of circumstances during the summer of
1967, should be read in the light of the subsequent serious deterioration in
the federal funding of all research, particularly that in the life sciences.
If three fourths of all life scientists considered their research limited by lack
of funds at the beginning of fiscal year 1968, at this time the problem must
be both well-nigh universal and considerably more urgent and constraining.
Our best guess concerning the magnitude of the deficit between current
support and a level that would be commensurate with current capability,
opportunities, and needs is 20-25 percent.
Research is an all-engrossing, compelling aspect of a scientist's life, and
it is hardly unexpected that this research-performing population feels itself
pressed for lack of time to pursue research wherever it leads. This problem,
common to all research areas and to all schools within the universities is,
however, most pressing in those groups with the largest teaching responsi-
bilities (biologists in the colleges of arts and sciences) or that engage in the
delivery of patient care.
Nonacademic Scientists
Nor does it appear that the research needs of scientists employed by non-
academic organizations are significantly better met than are those of their
academic colleagues. Forty-two percent of all such scientists indicated that
they have insufficient research space, and 71 percent reported insufficient
funds. The primary difficulty occasioned by insufficient funds is an insuffi-
ciency in the supply of supporting help, particularly of professional asso-
ciates. As one might expect, the demand among this group for funds for
student fellowships or postdoctoral appointments is relatively minor. They
OCR for page 336
336
THE LIFE SCIENCES
too, although in slightly lesser degree, wish that there were more time
available to pursue their research, but it is usually administrative or service
duties rather than instruction that claim their time.
Personal Constraints on Research
All respondents were asked whether the conditions of their employment or
the sources of the funds that support their research in some manner imposed
very serious constraints on the nature of the research problems on which
they are engaged. The question might have been stated, "If you were
employed elsewhere with complete freedom to choose your own research
problem, or if the funds that support your research had no strings attached,
would you be engaged in a research problem other than that which now
claims your attention?" Of the entire group under study, 2,889 scientists
(29 percent) consider themselves to be constrained by the conditions of
their employment and 1,900 (19 percent) appear to have tailored their
research, in some degree, to meet the requirements of a funding organ~za-
tion. Members of academic faculties, in all colleges, feel relatively uncon-
strained by such considerations, whereas a fifth of all of those in nonaca-
demic institutions appeared to consider that the conditions of their
employment adversely affect their choice of research problems. This is
somewhat surprising in view of the very large fraction of life scientists in
such organizations who also stated that they are engaged in the perform-
ance of fundamental research. This aspect of life was twice as troublesome
to federal employees ( 17 percent) as it was to academic employees, while
it gave concern to 35 percent of all employees of private industry. At the
same time, almost a fifth of all academic life scientists are disturbed by the
constraints implicit in the sources of the funds that support their research,
most notably those studying nutrition (28 percent), disease mechanisms
(24 percent), and ecology (23 percent). No major deviations from this
pattern were apparent among the faculties of the various colleges of the
. .
universities.
In view of the multiple and diverse opportunities for employment and
the remarkable diversity of sources of research funds, the relatively high
degree of direction seemingly given to the research endeavor in all sectors
by funding agencies, which overrides the personal research preferences
of so many investigators, particularly those in academic life, came as a
surprise. The constraints imposed by insufficiency of space, funds, and
other requirements can be alleviated by an expansion of the total funding
of the research enterprise. It is not at all clear that the reported constraints
OCR for page 337
FUTURE OF THE ACADEMIC ENDEAVOR IN THE LIFE SCIENCES 337
on the choice of research problems either can or should also be mitigated
in this way.
Over the long teen, a totally laissez faire system of choice of research
area might well serve society adequately. But it is a responsibility of gov-
ernment to assure that, at all times, the most pressing problems of society-
e.g., food supply, population control, quality of the environment, allevia-
tion of disease, national security, habitability of the cities are receiving
vigorous attention from the research-performing community while also
assuring a fundamental research effort sufficient to long-term goals. The
primary leverage available to the government to assure a satisfactory bal
ance of this effort is a combination of mission-oriented laboratories and
the pattern of funding of academic research. It is regrettable that there
are scientists engaged in mission-oriented research who would prefer to be
engaged in fundamental research of their own choosing, but it would be a
grave error to reduce the level of mission-oriented research on that account.
Indeed, we draw hope from the observation that increasing numbers of
talented young investigators seek means of serving the nation by addressing
their research to significant scientific aspects of the great variety of societal
problems.
It appeared to be of interest to ascertain whether the factors seriously
limiting research productivity vary with the age of the investigators. Only
one such correlate was found among academic life scientists: the feeling
that there simply is not enough time to pursue research as vigorously as
one would like increases with the passage of the years! Thus 30 percent
of investigators under 30, 41 percent of those in the age range 30 to 39,
55 percent of those in the age range 40 to 49, and 56 percent of those in
the age range 50 to 59 are disturbed about the lack of time for research.
The fraction of time devoted to teaching does not change markedly with
years of academic service, remaining constant at about 22-24 percent for
all academic ranks in medical schools and decreasing from 35 percent for
assistant professors to 30 percent for full professors on the rest of the
campus. Accordingly, it is increasing administrative duties, which rise
steadily from 7 percent of time for those under 30 to 39 percent of time
for those in the 50-to-59-year-old bracket, that is the major encroachment
on the opportunity for research. The democratic advantages of adminis-
tration by committee are not without penalty!
Similar considerations dominate the pattern of responses from life scien-
tists employed by nonacademic institutions. The time for research is
eroded by increasing administrative duties with the acquisition of seniority,
but there are no other correlates of age with the general pattern of factors
that limit the research productivity of nonacademic life scientists. In view
OCR for page 338
In
A,
·
~ -
.
o
Id
· -
o
-
In
in
.=
ret
'e
A:
. -
4 -
·
-
.
ct
-
Lot
hi
o
m
-
338
~1 = ~1 1 A' 1 1
I,
\,\
~~~ ~7'~n
\ ~%~
~~,~\ ~
; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1
$~1 ~ 1 ~4 = Al ~ _ ~ m - ~ \V = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - 1
- ~4; ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - - 1 - ~ -' ° ~ ~ - ~ -' 1 - - ~ - ~ -'
Aft ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
\ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - ,
x
~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~
x
it, ~ ~ ~ 1 ~
.O
V)
Ct'=
==
Coo
~0
C,)
A._
.C o
=
O.o
C) Cot
=
=F
en
an
C)~i~
~ , , , . :; a, , 2 , ~ ~ >.~ ~ ~ '- , - e ~
o .c~ ~ x to ~o ~o ~ .= 3 .= ~ ~ o .t ~ ~ ·- ·- ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ .- ~ ·_ ~ - L ~ ~
l~ en ~ CJ, ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ 1
~ 1
r~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ 0\ ~ ~ ~u~ ~ ~ 0 v~ ~ ~ cr~
_ C4 ~cr -
0 oO ~ en ~ ~ ~D
- ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1
~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
U) ~ ~_ ~o
LL1 ~
,~
~-
-C~
~:
~ ~L'
P~
CQ
.° ,.' ~V,
C~
~ - ~
o
o
-
~^-- ~ ~ ·_ o ~
OCR for page 339
FUTURE OF THE ACADEMIC ENDEAVOR IN THE LIFE SCIENCES
of our own ages, the authors of this report will eschew comment concerning
inherent personal limitations as a concomitant of the advancing years!
Specialized Facilities
Each scientist was also asked what specialized facilities and instruments,
currently unavailable to him, he requires and would use were they made
available. The general pattern of response of those engaged in various
research areas with respect to the potential utility of both specialized facili-
ties and instruments was rather like the general pattern of the current dis-
tribution and availability of facilities and instruments viz., those in most
common use are in greatest demand. To sharpen the question, however,
each investigator was asked to indicate his first, second, and third priorities
for acquisition of these research tools.
The most seriously unfilled requirements for specialized facilities, as
indicated by first-priority choices (Table 51), are programmed climate-
controlled rooms, centers for the production of biological materials, and
facilities for instrument design and fabrication, named by 18, 14, and 13
percent, respectively, of the total responding population. The second tier
of requests for facilities was comprised of primate centers, germ-free
facilities, and facilities for growth of cells and tissues in culture, each of
which was the first priority of about 6 percent of respondents.
A few special requirements are noteworthy. There was little demand
for tropical biology stations other than those already available, except for
23 systematic biologists who required access to a tropical terrestrial station;
only 41 scientists, of all categories, expressed need for a tropical marine
station, unavailable to them at present, as a first-priority request. Climate-
controlled rooms were in demand by scientists from all research areas;
unexpectedly, this was most frequent among the geneticists. Germ-free
facilities were most desired by scientists studying disease mechanisms and
cell biology, while the molecular biologists and biochemists expressed a
most acute need for centers for production of biological materials (43 per-
cent of their first choices) .
Instrumentation
Responses to the question, "Which major instruments, currently unavail-
able to you, would you use if they were available?", indicate that there is a
considerable backlog of unmet demand for a wide variety of biological
research equipment. Again to sharpen the question, each was asked to
Representative terms from entire chapter:
academic endeavor
