Investing in Research A Proposal to Strengthen the Agricultural, Food, and Environmental System (1989) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Institutional and Administrative Issues
6 Institutional and Administrative Issues
Pages 87-92
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 87... ...
. Second, several program transitions must be arranged: program planning and advisory committees must be set up, the peer review process must be managed and its quality ensured, and the program ' s administrative capacity must be expanded to match the increase in program scope and number of grants.
|
From page 88... ...
In addition, both the intra- and extramural components of ARS's ongoing research programs would be changed in other ways to strengthen the quality and importance of scientific input in setting priorities and adjusting budgets. The agency's program planning and peer review procedures would also be changed to more closely match those used by NIH.
|
From page 89... ...
Participation by private sector scientists on such advisory committees is highly desirable and can lead to valuable exchanges of views on the evolving character of practical problems, on the promise of new science and technology, and on ensuring linkages between public and private sector scientists; between science and technology and their further development, innovation, and application; and between science opportunities and the needs of the program area. Committee members would also include some scientists with basic research experience, some with applied research experience, and some with multidisciplinary research experience.
|
From page 90... ...
A reliable way of ensuring that peer review panels are not limited in their vision of science and technology opportunity is to have a varied group of scientists serve on panels on arotatingbasis. When themembership of a panel rotates regularly and is made up by individuals from a range of disciplines, from a variety of institutional affiliations, and with a breadth of research experiences, there will be greater recognition and support of creative approaches.
|
From page 91... ...
They include · selecting peer review panels whose membership is suitable for evaluating the proposals, because most members are likely to be experts in the relevant discipline, some are likely to be experts in cognate disciplines that can advance understanding of the proposed research, and a few are likely to be experienced in multidisciplinary research; · avoiding undue disciplinary biases, yet ensuring major scientific strength; · ensuring that the mission-linked proposals relate to major problems, yet also focus on scientific advances and do not have only a practical orientation; · ensuring that the plan of study is appropriate for the proposal's objectives; · evaluating the results and the processes used so that they become a basis for increasing the effectiveness of subsequent multidisciplinary research; · creating and sustaining effective linkages between mission-linked research and the development and applications sectors; and · managing the grant, the research, and the relationships so that the grant's objectives are achieved.
|
From page 92... ...
. Multidisciplinary grants programs offer significant roles for scientists from federal agencies such as ARS and NIH, from universities both within and outside the SAESs, and from the private sector.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.