|
Items in cart [4] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
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 107
4
Method
The charge to the Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of
the 21st Century constitutes a challenge both daunting and exhilarating: To
recommend to the nation specific steps that can best strengthen the quality
of life in America—our prosperity, our health, our security. This chapter is
an overview of the committee’s methods for arriving at its recommenda-
tions and for identifying the specific steps it proposes for their implementa-
tion. Chapters 5-8 identify the committee’s list of action items. Appendix E
is an overview of the committee’s investment cost of its proposed actions
and programs. Appendix F provides the rationale for the K–12 programs
proposed in Chapter 5.
Despite a demanding schedule for completion of the study, members
reviewed literature and case studies, studied the results of other expert pan-
els, and convened focus groups with expertise in K–12 education, higher
education, research, innovation and workforce issues, and national and
homeland security to arrive at a slate of recommendations.
The focus groups, involving over 66 individual experts, were asked to
identify, within their issue areas, the three recommendations they believed
were of the highest urgency. The results became raw material for the com-
mittee’s discussion of recommendations. The committee later met numer-
ous times via conference call to refine its recommendations as it consulted
with additional experts. Final coordination involved extensive e-mail inter-
actions as the committee sought to avail itself of the technology that is
pervading modern decision-making and making the world “flat,” in the
words of Thomas Friedman (see Chapter 1).
107
OCR for page 108
108 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND PAST
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Before meeting in person, the committee requested a compilation of the
results of past studies on the topics it was likely to address. Appendix D
provides these background papers on topics such as science, mathematics,
and technology education; research funding and productivity; the environ-
ment for innovation; and science and technology issues in national and
homeland security.
The committee used those documents as a means to review the work of
many other groups. Some were individual writers and scholars1 and others
were blue ribbon groups, such as the one chaired by former Senator John
Glenn, which produced the report Before It’s Too Late2 for the National
Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century
and others at the Council on Competitiveness,3 Center for Strategic and In-
ternational Studies,4 Business Roundtable,5 Taskforce on the Future of Ameri-
can Innovation,6 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technol-
ogy,7 National Science Board,8 and other National Academies committees,
such as those which produced A Patent System for the 21st Century,9 Policy
Implications of International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars
in the United States,10 and Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facili-
1R. B. Freeman. Does Globalization of the Scientific/Engineering Workforce Threaten US
Economic Leadership? NBER Working Paper 11457. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of
Economic Research, 2005.
2Before It’s Too Late: A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Math-
ematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. Glenn Commission Report. Washington,
DC: US Department of Education, 2000.
3Council on Competitiveness. Innovate America. Washington, DC: Council on Competi-
tiveness, 2004.
4Center for Strategic and International Studies. Global Innovation/National Competitive-
ness. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1996.
5Business Roundtable. Tapping America’s Potential. Washington, DC: Business Roundtable,
2005.
6Task Force on the Future of American Innovation. The Knowledge Economy: Is America
Losing Its Competitive Edge? Washington, DC: Task Force on the Future of American Inno-
vation, 2005.
7The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Sustaining the Nation’s
Innovation Ecosystems. Report on Information Technology Manufacturing and Competitive-
ness, January 2004.
8National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004. NSB 04-01. Arlington,
VA: National Science Foundation, 2004.
9National Research Council. A Patent System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press, 2004.
10The National Academies. Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Post-
doctoral Scholars in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.
OCR for page 109
109
METHOD
ties.11 Others were the committee and analyst at other organizations who
have gone before us producing reports focusing on the topics discussed in this
report. There are too many to mention here, but they are cited throughout the
report and range from individual scholars to the Glenn Commission on K–12
education, the Council on Competitiveness, the President’s Council of Advi-
sors on Science and Technology, the National Science Board, and other Na-
tional Academies committees. Such work and the reaction to it once pub-
lished were invaluable to the committee’s deliberations.
The committee decided to provide a “box” in each chapter containing alter-
native points of view as captured in a review of existing reports, studies, reviewer
comments, and informal consultations with experts and policy-makers.
The committee examined numerous case studies to gain a better under-
standing of which policies had the most potential to influence national pros-
perity. For example, many of the recommendations on K–12 and higher
education rely on extrapolating successful state or local programs to the
national level. The committee also reviewed existing federal programs for
higher education and research policy that work well in one place and could
potentially be applicable to other parts of the federal infrastructure. The
committee also studied other nations’ experiences in implementing policy
changes to encourage innovation.
FOCUS GROUPS
The focus groups (Appendix C) convened experts in five broad areas—
K–12 education, higher education, science and technology research policy,
innovation and workforce issues, and homeland security. Group members
were asked to identify ways the United States can successfully compete,
prosper, and be secure in the global community of the 21st century.
Their contributions were compiled with the results of the literature
search and with recommendations gathered during committee interviews.
More than 150 concrete recommendations and implementation steps were
identified and discussed at a weekend focus group session in Washington,
DC. Each focus group, following its own discussions, presented its top three
proposed recommendations to the committee members and to other focus-
group participants.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
The committee itself met over that same weekend and then in weekly
conference calls. Using the focus-group recommendations as a starting point,
11NAS/NAE/IOM. Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press, 2006.
OCR for page 110
110 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
the committee developed four key recommendations (labeled A through D
in this report), which it ranked, and 20 actions to implement them. It as-
signed ratings of either most urgent or urgent to each of the four recom-
mendations. They are summarized here. Specific implementing actions are
discussed in later sections of this report.
Most Urgent
10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds, and K–12 Science and Mathematics
Education. Increase America’s talent pool by vastly improving K–12 science
and mathematics education.
Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research. Sustain and
strengthen the nation’s traditional commitment to long-term basic research
that has the potential to be transformational to maintain the flow of new
ideas that fuel the economy, provide security, and enhance the quality of
life.
Urgent
Best and Brightest in Science and Engineering Higher Education. Make the
United States the most attractive setting in which to study and perform
research so that we can develop, recruit, and retain the best and brightest
students, scientists, and engineers from within the United States and
throughout the world.
Incentives for Innovation. Ensure that the United States is the premier place
in the world to innovate; invest in downstream activities such as
manufacturing and marketing; and create high-paying jobs that are based
on innovation by modernizing the patent system, realigning tax policies to
encourage innovation and the location of resulting facilities in the United
States, and ensuring affordable broadband access.
Unless the nation has the science and engineering experts and the re-
sources to generate new ideas, and unless it encourages the transition of
those ideas through policies that enhance the innovation environment, we
will not continue to prosper in an age of globalization. Each recommenda-
tion represents one element of an interdependent system essential for US
prosperity.
Some of the committee’s proposed actions and programs involve
changes in the law. Some require substantial investment. Funding would
ideally come from reallocation of existing funds, but if necessary, via new
funds. The committee believes the investments are small relative to the re-
turn the nation can expect in the creation of new high-quality jobs, inas-
OCR for page 111
111
METHOD
much as economic studies show that the social rate of return on federal and
private investment in research is often 30% or more (Tables 2-1 and 2-2).
The committee fully recognizes the extant demands on the federal budget,
but it believes that few problems facing the nation have more profound
implications for America than the one addressed herein and, thus believes,
that the investment it entails should be given high priority.
CAUTIONS
The committee has been cautious in its analysis of information. How-
ever, the available information is, in some instances, insufficient for the
committee’s needs. In addition, the limited timeframe to develop the report
(10 weeks from the time of the committee’s meeting to report release) is
inadequate to conduct an independent analysis. Even if unlimited time were
available, definitive analysis of many issues is simply not possible given the
uncertainties involved.
The recommendations in this report rely heavily on the experience, con-
sensus views, and judgments of the committee members. Although the com-
mittee consists of leaders from academe, industry, and government—
including several current and former industry chief executive officers,
university presidents, researchers (including three Nobel prize winners), and
former presidential appointees—the array of topics and policies covered in
this study is so broad that it was impossible to assemble a committee of 20
members with directly relevant expertise in each. The committee has there-
fore relied heavily on the judgments of experts in the study’s focus groups,
additional consultations with other experts, and the panel of 37 expert
reviewers.
The recommendations herein should be subjected to continuing evalua-
tion and refinement. In particular, the committee encourages regular evalu-
ations to determine the efficacy of its policy recommendations in reaching
the nation’s goals. If the proposals prove successful, more investment may
be warranted. If not, programs should be modified or dropped from the
portfolio.
CONCLUSION
The committee’s recommendations are the fundamental actions the na-
tion should take if it is to prosper in the 21st century. Just as “reading,
writing, and arithmetic” are essential for any student to succeed—regard-
less of career—“education, research, and innovation” are essential if the
nation is to succeed in providing jobs for its citizenry.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
science education
