National Academies Press: OpenBook

Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies (2000)

Chapter: Part II: Relevant Data for Science Engineering Resources

« Previous: 3 Dimensions of Relevance
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Relevant Data for Science Engineering Resources." National Research Council. 2000. Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9775.
×

PART II
RELEVANT DATA FOR ISSUES IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESOURCES

The previous chapter described how federal statistical agencies should ensure the relevance of the information they provide by monitoring changing policy issues and concepts, identifying useful data linkages, and improving data currency. The following two chapters outline current issues in the changing science and engineering enterprise about which SRS could improve the relevance of the data and analyses it provides to policymakers, researchers, and others in order to better inform the decisions they make.

The analysis here highlights the importance of specific science and engineering resources issues that warrant attention by SRS at this time. We identified these issues through briefings given by SRS managers, interviews and focus groups with SRS staff and data users, and a national workshop on measuring resources for science and engineering. Committee members discussed these issues and separated them into those that SRS is already addressing and those that require further changes or investigation. We then sought to substantiate that these latter issues are of sufficient consequence to warrant further attention by SRS. First, we examined the recommendations of national reports on science and technology policy, graduate education, and the labor market for scientists and engineers. Often, these recommendations not only substantiated the critical nature of certain issues, but also made specific observations about the data needed to address them. Second, we examined data trends, where possible, to draw our own conclusions about the direction of change and the importance of certain issues. SRS did not provide the committee with complete data on its budget and how it is distributed across staff salaries and benefits, survey operations, data analysis, publications, and other activities. Our analysis, therefore, does not attempt to provide a cost-benefit analysis that would have led to further prioritization of changes in SRS surveys that we suggest or to a protocol for trade-offs among current and proposed activities. In a limited number of cases we do raise the issue of cost and suggest that the costs of obtaining certain

Suggested Citation:"Part II: Relevant Data for Science Engineering Resources." National Research Council. 2000. Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9775.
×

data should be weighed against the benefit of collecting them.

As we identified issues of current concern to the science and engineering community, we were aware that, given the short time frame and limited resources within which we were working, it would be impossible to be exhaustive in our review of the SRS data collection portfolio. Therefore, we describe what we believe are important examples of issues that SRS should better address. Others may well identify additional issues. Also, we describe these issues in a general way. It is our hope that advisory committees for each SRS survey will continue the work of this committee by further investigating current and emerging issues and by providing SRS staff with recommendations for operationalizing changes in specific survey instruments to better measure the new concepts that have been identified.

We should also point out that, in examining data collection activities across the SRS portfolio, we identified only a few items that we believe should be deleted. We concur with the suspension of the Survey of Scientific Instruments and Instrumentation Needs. We believe that SRS's resources are better spent on other activities and issues. We also specify that the collection of data in the Survey of Industrial Research and Development on the product class of applied research and development be dropped, but we also suggest that SRS examine the costs and benefits of fielding the survey at the line-of-business level rather than at the firm level. We believe that other SRS activities should remain in the division's portfolio. Again, specific items within these activities may be dropped as necessary when identified in the future by advisory committees or through other forms of dialogue with the data user community.

Suggested Citation:"Part II: Relevant Data for Science Engineering Resources." National Research Council. 2000. Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9775.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Part II: Relevant Data for Science Engineering Resources." National Research Council. 2000. Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9775.
×
Page 58
Next: 4 Science and Engineering Human Resources »
Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $51.00 Buy Ebook | $40.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The science and engineering enterprise has continued to evolve, responding over the last decade to increased economic globalization, a post-cold war military, federal budget fluctuations, and structural changes in the way science and engineering are conducted and innovations are adopted. This report suggests ways to revise the data collection activities of the Science Resources Studies Division (SRS) of the National Science Foundation to better capture the current realities of R&D funding and S&E human resources. The report’s recommendations would improve the relevance of the data on graduate education, the labor market for scientists and engineers, and the funding and conduct of research and development, and thus better meet the data needs of policymakers, managers, and researchers.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!