Experiments in International Benchmarking of US Research Fields (2000) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix C: Workshop on International Benchmarking of US Research
Appendix C: Workshop on International Benchmarking of US Research
Pages 49-58
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 49... ...
With greater rigor and the generation of relevant local data, it can probably be applied with specificity as well, for example, to evaluate particular agency programs.
|
From page 50... ...
· Two independent benchmarking experiments in mathematicsdespite dissimilar panels, mandates, and leadership produced similar results, lending credibility to the technique. · Experts on several panels suggested that a diminished flow of foreign-born scientists and engineers to the United States could weaken the research enterprise in coming years.
|
From page 51... ...
In addition, there was no consensus on how many foreign members a panel should have (immunology had three, two of whom have since moved to the United States) and what effect foreign membership (or lack of it)
|
From page 52... ...
Another standard of performance might be "research productivity." That is, if the United States funds 60% of the research in a field, it should attain at least 60% of the leadership in that field. However, another nation might fund 10% of the research in the field and be able to attain 25% of the leadership in that field.
|
From page 53... ...
The advantage of being among the leaders is that a nation can react quickly to new discoveries or fields that are suddenly hot. The main text uses the example of high-temperature superconductivity, a sub-subfield in which the United States was not the leader but was able to move rapidly because US researchers were among the leaders in related subfields or sub-subfields.
|
From page 54... ...
There are many points of light." In discussing potential threats to the research system, a number of participants mentioned the tendency of industry and government to emphasize applied, results-driven research at the expense of high-risk, high-return basic research. A healthy research enterprise requires a balanced portfolio of research.
|
From page 55... ...
Some participants called the United States "very dependent on them, maybe overly so." The US is attractive to foreign scientists and engineers in part because of the flexibility of the system. "In the [former]
|
From page 56... ...
· Include international leadership status in the charge to existing advisory committees that review federal programs. · Provide clearer definition of "leadership" in a field.
|
From page 57... ...
Appendix C · Conduct a study twice, with different committees, and compare results. · Undertake more careful, in-depth studies of issues identified through benchmarking.
|
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.