- All Proceedings Atlantis Press | Atlantis Press
- Design Engineering and Management
- Journal of Engineering and Technology Management
- All Proceedings Atlantis Press
Congress could then examine this budget as a whole before dividing it among the appropriations subcommittees, and it could monitor the science and technology budget as it passes through various budget steps. This unified approach to science and technology budgets would allow for tradeoffs among agencies, programs, and research institutions. It would enable government to shift funds toward high-priority fields, reduce or close projects that have become less important, and incorporate the results of program and agency evaluations.
Particularly in times of fiscal stringency, a unified budget for science and technology would bring coherence to what has previously been a piecemeal approach to policymaking. For more information on the federal funding of science and engineering research:. Beyond the allocation of resources to individual fields of research, how can government ensure that the research that it funds is of the highest quality possible?
Government and the research community have distilled what we have learned from experience into several important principles. First, it is important to maintain the ability to change research directions as circumstances change. The pace of discovery has increased, and the time from discovery to innovation and commercialization is becoming shorter in many fields; this makes the flexibility and responsiveness of the research enterprise increasingly crucial.
Indeed, the flexibility of the US research enterprise has been one of its great strengths. The reported incidence of misconduct in research is very low, but any misconduct comes at a high price for both researchers and the public. Cases of misconduct in research breach the trust that allows researchers to build on each other's work, as well as eroding the trust that allows policymakers and others to make decisions based on scientific evidence and judgment. Breaches of responsible conduct in research can be divided into three categories: misconduct in research, questionable research practices, and other misconduct.
The three types need to be distinguished to avoid counterproductive policies and regulations. Misconduct in research has been defined as making up data or results fabrication , changing or misreporting data or results falsification , and using the ideas or words of another person without giving appropriate credit plagiarism. Such vague definitions of misconduct as "other serious deviations from accepted research practices" risk the possibility that researchers will be accused of misconduct for using novel or unorthodox research methods, even though the methods might sometimes be needed to proceed in research.
Questionable research practices, which include such actions as inappropriate inclusion of an author in a list of authors or maintaining inadequate research records, can erode confidence in the integrity of the research process and waste time and resources. Researchers and their institutions need to discourage these practices through a broad range of formal and informal means, including education, institutional policies and procedures, and peer review. C-3 Government's role in addressing questionable research practices should be to support the efforts of researchers and research institutions to discourage such practices.
Other forms of misconduct are not necessarily associated with scientific conduct and are best handled through generally applicable legal and social penalties. To make the research system more responsive to changing opportunities and national needs, government agencies should preferentially fund projects and individual scientists and engineers, rather than institutions. C-1 When the funding commitment is for a specific project of limited duration, the funding in a field can be adjusted relatively easily. To make resources available or reallocate them to meet new opportunities and needs, it is much easier to cut back or eliminate a program of project grants than it is to disengage from the direct support of institutions.
Funding people and projects also facilitates the use of independent review to promote the highest quality of work.
In making decisions about funding research projects in science and engineering, government agencies should emphasize independent review, preferably involving external reviewers. C-1 , C-2 In allocating federal funds, the government typically has established broad priorities and criteria for the distribution of the funds. Individual projects have been funded on the basis of assessment of their merit, often with advice from peer reviewers outside government although there are exceptions, such as research conducted for national-security purposes.
The government has solicited this advice in the belief that the public interest is best served by letting scientists decide, on the basis of their experience, which research is most qualified for support. Competition for research support, with evaluation of merit by peers, helps to create a diversity of highly motivated funders and performers. If independent external review is not used for a program, other forms of rigorous merit review, such as the methods employed successfully at institutions like the Advanced Research Projects Agency and Bell Labs, should be utilized.
The trustworthiness of research results is an integral part of their quality. Traditionally, researchers have relied on each other, on the self-correcting mechanisms intrinsic to the nature of research, and on the traditions of their community to safeguard the integrity of the research process. Yet as research has become more tightly linked to national needs, the accountability of researchers and research institutions supported with public funds has become an increasingly prominent issue.
In defining misconduct in research, different government agencies use different definitions, and some of these include ambiguous categories into which unconventional but acceptable research practices could fall.
- Stochastic models in queueing theory.
- Advanced Manufacturing Technologies.
- Journal of Engineering and Technology Management?
As discussed in more depth in the box on the previous page, government agencies should adopt a common definition of misconduct in research and avoid ambiguous categories, such as "other serious deviations from accepted research practices. Misconduct should not include errors of judgment; errors in recording, selection, or analysis of data; differences in opinions involving the interpretation of data; or misconduct unrelated to the research process.
All Proceedings Atlantis Press | Atlantis Press
For more information on ensuring the quality of research:. Scientists and engineers with PhDs and other advanced degrees play a central and growing role in American industrial and commercial life. And as the country responds to expanded economic competition, urgent public-health needs, environmental degradation, new national-security challenges, and other pressing issues, a widening variety of professions and organizations are hiring the roughly 26, people who receive PhDs in science and engineering each year up from 18, a decade ago.
Science and engineering PhDs have the qualifications and talents to serve in a broad variety of occupations that will contribute to the economy and society. But a mismatch between the numbers of new PhDs and traditional research-oriented jobs in academe has led to considerable frustration and disappointment among young scientists and engineers.
Fewer than one-third of those who received PhDs in science and engineering in were in tenure-track positions or had tenure in New PhDs are often spending more and more time as postdoctoral fellows while they wait for permanent jobs to become available. Staff reductions and restructuring in industry and government also have reduced the number of jobs focused on basic research.
More than public and private institutions offer master's or doctoral degrees in science and engineering. In the last year on which data are available , these institutions awarded about 80, master's degrees and 26, doctoral degrees in science and engineering compared with 72, and 19,, respectively, in Most of the growth in the graduate-student population has been due to an increased number of foreign students studying in the United States. Historically, about half these students leave the United States after receiving their degrees or after serving postdoctoral appointments.
Design Engineering and Management
About , people with doctoral degrees in science and engineering from US universities work in this country. Despite the difficulties in finding jobs in basic research, hiring in other fields has been vigorous enough to keep the overall unemployment level of PhDs relatively low. For example, an increasing number of doctorate recipients are engaged in applied research, development, and management in industry. Those changes have important implications for the graduate education of scientists and engineers. Graduate training and particularly the pursuit of the PhD traditionally have focused on the preparation of young scientists and engineers for academic careers.
But more than half of PhDs now work in nonacademic settings, where they often need to call on a broad range of skills.
Journal of Engineering and Technology Management
This nation has a strong interest in ensuring that talented and skilled people continue to pursue science and engineering careers and are well prepared for the careers that they pursue. Government can help colleges and universities to meet these objectives in several ways. Federal agencies should move toward the use of education and training grants to provide financial support to graduate students.
D-1 These grants should be awarded competitively to institutions and departments that work to enhance the versatility of students, both through curricular innovation and through more-effective faculty mentoring to acquaint students with the full range of employment options. Such versatility would enable students to contribute to national goals in academic and nonacademic jobs.
All Proceedings Atlantis Press
The federal government also should help to establish a national database on employment options and trends in science and engineering. D-1 The database should be designed and managed by the research community and used both by students and by their advisers to learn more about graduate programs and possible career tracks. The federal government has a particular interest in science and engineering education: it is the largest employer of scientists and engineers with more than , holders of bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees in science and engineering on federal payrolls.
In the past the government has encountered difficulties in recruiting and retaining highly qualified people because of restrictions on pay and professional advancement. The Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of gave agencies the authority to ease these restrictions, but implementation of the act has been uneven. Federal agencies need to have flexibility in compensating employees, including scientists and engineers.
E-1 Although several promising pilot programs are under way, departments and agencies need greater latitude in redressing pay inequities and rewarding superior performance among scientists and engineers. A "senior research and development service," modeled on the Senior Executive Service, could help to maintain a high-performance workforce for senior positions. At the top of the federal workforce are fewer than 80 presidentially appointed persons who give direction to the entire federal effort in science and technology.
The federal government needs to recruit exceptionally able scientists and engineers into its top policy positions to weigh the advice of technical specialists and make key programmatic and policy decisions. A particularly important position is that of the president's adviser for science and technology. As was done at the beginning of the Clinton administration, the early designation of the president's adviser for science and technology enables the president to call on this person in recruiting highly qualified appointees to science and technology positions in the federal government.
Cabinet secretaries and agency heads also can play important recruitment roles. For more information on scientists and engineers in the federal workforce:.
follow site Leadership in the 21st century will belong to those nations that can capitalize best on change, and science and engineering research has become the most powerful force for change in our society. A strong research capacity will also allow us to deal with a large variety of future challenges, whether national-security threats, environmental problems, medical or public-health emergencies, or crises that we cannot yet predict. Solutions to pressing problems will continue to emerge in unexpected ways from new knowledge. In summary, our capacity for problem-solving and creative discovery will continue to be essential for keeping the United States in its world leadership position economically, militarily, and intellectually.
Prudent stewardship of science and engineering research, as much as any other component of government policy, will dictate how our children and grandchildren will live. We recommend that scholars read the available reviews, assessments and descriptions provided here, and then decide for themselves whether they want to submit articles, serve as editors or on editorial boards. In a few cases, non-open access journals whose practices match those of predatory journals have been added to the list. We emphasize that journals change in their business and editorial practices over time. This list is kept up-to-date to the best extent possible but may not reflect sudden, unreported, or unknown enhancements.
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates. Get Started. Go to Update. Original description This is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access standalone journals.