|
Items in cart [4] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
PAPERBACK PDF BOOK Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 19
EMERGING TRENDS
The ability of universities to broaden their missions and play a larger role in the
nations research enterprise will depend on the resolution of three sources of tension, each
pulling at the fabric of the enterprise. The first strain on the enterprise is slow adaptation
to an increasingly complex research and educational environment; the organization,
culture, and resources of academic institutions and their research sponsors constrain their
response to new demands and opportunities. The second source of stress on the enterprise
is the replacement of retiring high-quality research personnel during the next decade; it
may not be possible, given the current production level of research scientists and
engineers. The third source emanates from the need to sustain the quality of current
research institutions and programsj which is increasingly expensive-to do and--in an era ot~
severely constrained fiscal resources--increasingly difficult.
The Research Environment
The er''ironment in which the academic research community must function will increase in
complexity. National and international economic, political, and social cross-currents
influence the priorities, topics, and contexts of scientific investigation. These influences
are combining to challenge the traditional way scholars and their host institutions operate
and relate to each other. Furthermore, many new scientific and technological opportunities
require more flexible, cross-disciplinary relationships both within and among universities,
industries, and governments.
There are many factors at work here. First, important and exciting advances in
fundamental science are occurring are creating more complex questions on the research
frontier and many of the questions are more frequently in multi-disciplinary settings at
the interface between disciplines. Furthermore, some traditional fields, such as molecular
biology and microelectronics, are merging with other fields or being redefined.
Second, as product life cycles become shorter, advances in fundamental knowledge
become more relevant to technology development. As a result, industries, universities, and
financial institutions are developing sophisticated relationships that include a multiplicity
of formal and informal structures. Some faculty members, for example, are assuming
entrepreneurial roles, including developing relationships with non-academic organizations
to pursue the commercial development of their research.
Third, international cooperation is intensifying in many scientific and engineering
fields. The growing research capabilities of other nations provide new opportunities for
collaboration--especially in astronomy, oceanography, and high-energy physics--that
require large capital investments. International cooperation is also required for research
on such problems as global climate change, ozone depletion, and acid rain.
New technologies increasingly shape the scholarly agenda in the sciences and
engineering. State-of-the-art instrumentation allows for experiments requiring heretofore
un-achievable precision and scale. New generations of computers make possible large-scale
1-17
OCR for page 20
data analysis and provide the mechanism for rapidly transferrin& and sharing information
among institutions, organizations, and nations.
News of new processes and products of scientific research reach an ever-wider U.S.
audience. To the extent that popularization contributes to public understanding of science,
it enhances political support. But it also brings greater societal scrutiny to the research
enterprise. There is, for example, growing public pressure on federal regulatory and grant-
making agencies to control the use of toxic substances and radioisotopes, and experiments
involving animals. In addition, societal intervention in the research agenda is increasingly
exercised through the courts, notably in environmental protection, radiation and
carcinogen disposal, and the release of genetically engineered material. In addition to
increasing regulatory complexity in some fields, the lack of regulations in other fields is
also a problem--often forcing researchers to curtail or abandon lines ot Inquiry In areas
such as biotechnology.
The most pronounced recent trend is state and local regulation of research. A few state,
county, and city governments have begun to influence the conduct of local university
research through controls on the type and location of university facilities and on research
protocols, such as the use and care of test animals and the use of genetically altered
organisms. Should this trend become more widespread, investigators and their host
institutions would have to adapt to a changing array of costly reporting requirements,
safeguards, controls, and regulatory supervision.
Universities and research sponsors face difficulty in rapidly adapting to a changing
research environment. In response to the changing research environment, some members of
the academic enterprise are testing innovative strategies for organizing, conducting,
managing, and financing research. Rapid adaptation to new demands and opportunities in
the research area, however, is slowed by many factors--including tradition, inertia, the
competition for university resources, the demands of the university's educational mission,
and the aging of faculty--impinging on the current organization, culture, and resources of
university-based scholars and their funding agencies.
There is growing debate within universities over the ability of the current disciplinary
and governance structures to respond adequately to the expanding research agenda, as well
as to find an appropriate balance of commitments to scholarship, education, and public
service. New research opportunities often require more flexible budgeting and assignment
of research faculty, inter-disciplinary approaches, expansion of non-faculty research
personnel, extra-departmental initiatives, and allowance for faculty entrepreneurial
activity. Furthermore, larger-scale multi-disciplinary research efforts require hierarchical
management and more centralized governance structures for rapidly making strategic
decisions and for inter-departmental planning. In addition, the intense regulatory
environment in many areas of research requires active participation by the institution's
administration in deciding faculty research topics and protocols, as well as in serving as a
necessary buffer against unwarranted outside interference.
On the other hand, the present university disciplinary structure has proved adaptable
to new research opportunities and, more importantly, provides a necessary, albeit
cumbersome, system for quality control through peer review. Young faculty, who are
1-18
OCR for page 21
strongly trained in disciplines, enter a reward system that favors a single-discipline setting
to establish professional credentials. Moreover, the traditional collegial culture of
universities, including the faculty tenure system, provides an atmosphere essential to
fostering the creative process and maintaining academic proficiency.
For the external sponsors of academic research, the topics and capital requirements of
new research opportunities pose challenges to their decision-making and budgetary
structures. Inter-disciplinary research opportunities generate pressure for federal funding
mechanisms that cut across divisions within a given agency, and often across agencies.
Collaborative ventures among government funding agencies are often limited by
competing Congressional committee jurisdictions and federal agency bureaucracies, and
conflicting procedures and legal restrictions. The active participation of state governments
in funding research provokes demands for federal-state consultation and cooperation in
funding decisions. Among industries, collaborative ventures for supporting academic
research are often constrained by anti-trust laws, competitive pressures, and trade secret
and patent rights concerns.
Research Personnel
During the next decade, faculty retirements will increase demand for academic research
personnel. Steady-state student enrollments during the past two decades have reduced the
number of new faculty job openings. As a result, between 1973 and 1987, the percentage of
academic scientists and engineers under 35 years of age fell from 27 to 12 percent.~4 This
aging of the faculty indicates an increased number of faculty are slated for retirement in
the foreseeable future. In some instances, however, the impact of these retirements may be
eased temporarily by the end of mandatory-retirement policies and movement of non-
tenure-track personnel into faculty positions. The risks of such solutions, however, are that
they may dissuade students from choosing academic careers by reducing placement
opportunities for new graduates.
Fewer numbers of U5. students are now interested in or qualified for academic science and
engineering careers. The number of baccalaureate degrees in science and engineering
awarded to U.S. citizens has stabilized or declined in most fields. This situation results
from the current decline in the college-age population and the steady rate at which 22-
year olds attain such degrees. In the early 21st century, enrollments may slowly return to
1983 levels, riding an upswing in the number of 18- to 22-year olds. During the next
several decades, however, assuming current enrollment rates, U.S. higher education
enrollments will most likely not exceed current levels.~5 Nor is it likely that increased
participation of women, minorities, and foreign students in undergraduate science and
engineering programs will offset these general demographic declines.
Since the mid 1960s, the rate at which students with natural science and engineering
baccalaureate degrees from U.S. institutions went on to earn Ph.D.s has declined by half.
This reduction has been especially apparent among U.S. males, a group that has historically
been the mainstay for doctoral degrees. The recent growth in Ph.D. awards in several
fields is due in part to greater participation by foreign students. In engineering, almost 60
percent of all doctorates are now awarded to foreign students, as are over a third of
1-19
OCR for page 22
doctorates in mathematics and physics. Approximately half of all foreign students remain
in the United States, making valuable contributions to the nation s economy' research, and
education. However, the large numbers of foreign students involved and the likelihood
that they will return in increasing numbers to take advantage of improved career
opportunities in their homeland raises serious questions about the drain of much needed
scientific knowledge and technical experience.l7 Increases in Ph.D. degrees in the
biological sciences primarily result from the growing participation of U.S. females.
Although the continuation rate for U.S. citizens into Ph.D. programs appears to be
increasing, there is still concern that it will be inadequate for meeting academic labor
demands in the next decade.
These trends in the potential supply of academic personnel, however, must be seen in
the context of trends in education and training throughout U.S. society. The nation
requires increasing supply of highly trained personnel in all economic sectors.
Financial Resources
Sustaining the quality of current research institutions and programs is increasingly
expensive. An accelerating pace in the development of knowledge generates a proliferation
of research opportunities. It is a self-reinforcing phenomenon: A theoretical or
technological breakthrough--in any field, molecular biology, high-energy physics, or
computer science--provokes demand for expensive new research. Increasing numbers of
scientists and engineers, in pursuit of such exciting opportunities, propose sophisticated
research designs, which often require additional laboratory space and equipment, and
highly trained personnel. Universities and research sponsors, committed to maintaining
their place at the frontier of scientific advance, are pressured to approve the proposed
research.
High-quality research o
the frontier of any discipline is increasingly capital intensive.
In all sciences, the term State-of-the-art implies a technological sophistication of
equipment and facilities that is increasingly costly, especially as dramatic technological
advances accelerate the obsolescence of vast portions of existing equipment and facilities.
This rapid pace in technological change is indicated by the fact that, in 1986, the median
age of all academic research instrumentation classified as state-of-the-art was only 2 years
old, in computer science, electrical engineering, chemistry, and environmental science' the
median age was I year.'8 Other factors are also involved in equipment costs. One of the
more important is the expense associated with keeping highly trained technicians on staff;
another is a growing awareness of essentials for environmental and work-place safety,
which inevitably drive up costs.
University research facilities, many built during the 1960s boom years, need to be
renovated or replaced. Recent surveys indicate that $3.4 billion is obligated nationally for
construction of academic science and engineering facilities. University administrators
estimate, however, that about $8.5 billion in necessary construction has been deferred. In
repair and renovation alone, $777 million has been obligated for academic research
facilities, but almost four times that amount has been deferred.~9 This, in effect, is an
1-20
OCR for page 23
unfunded liability of nearly $3 billion and it continues to grow. This represents a
potential danger to the long-term viability of these institutions.
The average compensation of an academic researcher has risen sharply in the last few
years.20 The reasons for this seem to be the result of two important factors: First,
universities have to compete with industry for research personnel in several fields. Second,
competition among universities for top research faculty fuels wage costs. In this regard, it
should be noted that during the l990s, wage pressures will likely continue to intensify
because of the shortage of and demand for teaching Ph.D.s, particularly if an increase in
student enrollments materializes. Growing demand by industry for Ph.D.s, driven by the
complex technological base of the service, manufacturing, and agricultural sectors, will
also fuel wage increases.
The United States has entered a period of constrained fiscal resources. In the nation's
current economic circumstances, financing the perceived needs of the academic research
enterprise will not be easily accomplished. Government policies during the next decade
will be affected strongly by the large federal budget deficits and public resistance to
raising taxes. State governments--many of which are confronting budgetary constraints--
appear to be closely evaluating their needs and priorities, including the funding of
academic research. In addition, industry-sponsored research may flatten or decrease,
potentially exacerbated by corporate mergers and leveraged buy-outs. These pressures will
intensify competition for available federal dollars and foster priority setting among
federal programs. Academic research funding will not be immune from these processes.
The ability of many universities to generate significantly greater research funds
through internal resources is likely to be limited. For public universities, for example,
steady enrollments and state budget constraints may press the limits on state
appropriations. For both private and public universities, constraints on tuition increases
and additional philanthropic contributions may diminish their ability to maintain world
leadership in research.
1-21
Representative terms from entire chapter:
highly trained
