Questions? Call 888-624-8373

PAPERBACK
list:$15.00
Web:$13.50
add to cart

PDF BOOK
your price: $11.50
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Science and Technology in the Academic Enterprise: Status, Trends, and Issues (1989)
Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR)

Page
I
bottomleft bottomright
  E-mail
 Facebook
 Digg
 Stumble
 Twitter
More
Page
I

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 R1
. Science and Technology in the Academic Enterprise: Status, Trends, and issues A Discussion Paper The Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine 2101 Constitution Avenue, Nell Washington, DC 20418 National Academy Press Washington, D.C. October 1989

OCR for page R2
THE GOVERNMENT-UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRY RESEARCH ROUNDTABLE The Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable is sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. The Research Roundtable was created in 1984 to provide a forum where scientists, engineers, administrators, and policymakers from government, university, and industry can meet on an ongoing basis to explore ways to improve the productivity of the nation's research enterprise. The object is to try to understand issues, to inject imaginative thought into the system, and to provide a setting for discussion and the seeking of common ground. The Roundtable does not make recommendations, nor offer specific advice. It does develop options and bring all interested parties together. The uniqueness of the Roundtable is in the breadth of its membership and in the continuity with which it can address issues. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 89-63536 International Standard Book Number 0-309-04175-9 Printed in the United States of America First Pnnung, November 1989 Second Planing, November 1990

OCR for page R3
WORKING GROUP ON THE ACADEMIC RESEARCH ENTERPRISE ERICH BLOCH, (Chairman), Director, National Science Foundation WILLIAM H. DANFORTH, (Vice-ChairmanJ, Chancellor, Washington University KATHERINE L. BICK, Deputy Director for Extramural Research, National Institutes of Health JOEL S. BIRNBAUM, Vice President and General Manager, Information Architecture Group, Hewlett-Packard Company HAROLD H. HALL, Vice President (Ret.), XEROX Corporation BARRY MUNITZ, Chairman and CEO, United Financial Group, Inc. T. ALEXANDER POND, Executive Vice President and Chief Academic Officer, Rutgers University RUDI SCHMID, Associate Dean of International Relations, School of Medicine, University of California HAROLD T. SHAPIRO, President, Princeton University LARRY L. SMARR, Director, National Center for Supercomputing Applications, University of Illinois ROBERT L. SPROULL, President Emeritus, University of Rochester S. FREDERICK STARR, President, Oberlin College LINDA S. WILSON, President, Radcliffe College MARK S. WRIGHTON, Chairman, Department of Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology HARRIET ZUCKERMAN, Professor of Sociology, Columbia University FRANK CARRUBBA, (Associated, Director, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories JOHN H. MOORE, fAssociateJ, Deputy Director, National Science Foundation DALE R. CORSON, fAdvisorJ, President Emeritus, Cornell University Staff DON I. PHILLIPS, Executive Director, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable JOHN P. CAMPBELL, Senior Program Officer, Working Group on the Academic Research Enterprise JAMES SINGER, Editorial Consultant EVAN ~ BERMAN, Research Consultant SUSAN TAWFIK, Senior Secretary . . .

OCR for page R4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The interest and support of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine, and of their presidents, for the wide- ranging deliberations of the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable have made possible a thoughtful exploration of difficult issues affecting the research enterprise. The Roundtable Council and its chairman, James D. Ebert, encouraged a far- ranging examination of the characteristics of the enterprise and provided useful input throughout. The able staff of the Roundtable, especially Don I. Phillips, its executive director, and John P. Campbell, the project director for this effort, deserve special thanks for the difficult task of rendering a complex body of ideas and data into a readable and thought-provoking document. Special thanks go to the staff of the National Science Foundation who have contributed to this effort, particularly the Division of Policy Research and Analysis, whose analysts collected, analyzed, and summarized the data on trends. But the document is first and foremost the product of the Working Group on the Academic Research Enterprise. We hope we have assembled a coherent picture of the status of one of America's most valuable resources--its academic research enterprise. IV

OCR for page R5
PREFACE The Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable was organized in 1984 under the aegis of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. It is governed by a Council of 25 distinguished scientists, engineers, administrators, and policy makers from government, universities, and industry. Its purpose is to create a national forum to air the issues that affect the nation's research enterprise, inject imaginative thought into understanding the issues, and explore strategies and options for improving the future of U.S. scientific research. In short, the Roundtable brings together interested parties and develops options; it does not take sides, make recommendations, or offer specific advice. In 1987, the Roundtable Council inaugurated a comprehensive review of the U.S. academic research enterprise. This effort was in response to concerns raised by the universities themselves, their research sponsors, and the general public. Among many concerns were the changing nature of science and engineering research, declines in the college-age population, the increasing financial and human resource requirements for carrying out research, and the growing expectations placed on the academic research enterprise. These concerns raised questions regarding the role of universities and colleges within the overall U.S. research system, the nation's ability to support the academic research enterprise, the management of universities and colleges, and the responsibilities of research sponsors. The Council assigned this review to a Working Group of government officials, corporate executives, university administrators, and scientists. The charge to the Working Group was: Examine current trends in the university research enterprise. Predict the impact of the trends on the future of the enterprise. Determine the options for the future of the enterprise. Explore national strategies for meeting the challenges of the future. The Working Group divided the project into two phases. Phase one would analyze the status, trends, and issues affecting academic research in science and technology, and examine the implications growth in these fields holds for the larger academic enterprise. During phase two, the Working Group will select for further analysis topics identified in phase one, and identify alternative options for the future of the enterprise and criteria for choosing among the alternatives. In setting forth an analytic process, the Working Group took special note of the fact that science and technology comprise only two components in the full range of academic scholarship. Combined, however, they represent a large and discrete percentage of national financial support for academic research. Other components of academic scholarship--the arts and humanities, for example--also merit analysis. Their absence from this study, however, should not be construed as a statement of academic or public policy priority. They have meaningfully different cultures and requirements, and deserve independent inquiry beyond the capability of this Working Group. v

OCR for page R6
This is a discussion paper describing the Working Group's progress in analyzing the status of scientific and technological research in academic settings and identifying issues central to its future. It is a working document, integrating the experiential knowledge of group members with quantitative analyses of available data. It should be noted at the outset that the quantitative information presented in this discussion paper primarily describes inputs to the academic research enterprise, such as financial and human resources. While some output measures have been developed--using publication and citation rates, patents, or departmental rankings--they require further methodological refinement before they can be meaningfully incorporated into analyses of academic research. Reliable data on long-term trends in academic research quality, productivity, or efficiency do not exist. The purpose of this paper is to stimulate policy discussions--especially among individuals and organizations who have a direct role in funding or performing academic research. In the near future, the Working Group will hold a series of conferences for university, congressional, federal and state governmental, and industry officials, as well as academic scientists and engineers, to discuss options and alternative scenarios for sustaining the quality of academic research during the 1990s and into the next century. In preparing for those conferences, the Working Group invites candid responses to this paper; additional perspectives will enhance understanding of the issues and sharpen insights into the underlying influences on the academic research enterprise. The paper has two parts. Part One analyzes the status of the current research enterprise, emerging trends affecting it, and major issues to be addressed regarding its future. Part Two provides an overview of the academic research enterprise, describing long-term trends in financial and human resources. vi

OCR for page R7
TABLE OF CONTENTS PART ONE: STATUS, TRENDS, AND ISSUES INTRODUCTION .......... STATUS OF IME ACADEMIC RESEARCH ENTERPRISE 1958 to 1968: Expansion ............................ 1968 to 1978: Steady-State ............ 1978 to 19~: Diversification .......... Forces for Expansion and Diversification .................. EMERGING TRENDS ......... _ Research Personnel . . . Financial Resources . . . ISSUES FOR THE 1990S & BEYOND ....... Role of Universities ................... Organization and Management of Universities Conduct of Research and Transfer of Knowledge Scientific and Technological Education Funding Academic Research ....... CONCLUSION ............. 1-1 1-3 1-5 1 1-7 1-9 1-17 The Research Environment 1-17 1-19 1-20 NOTES .......................................... PART TWO: OVERVIEW OF THE ACADEMIC RESEARCH ENTERPRISE INTRODUCHON ............. 1-22 1-22 1-23 1-24 1-25 1-26 1-27 1-28 2-1 SUMMARY OF TRENDS 2-3 National R&D: Character 2 Academic R&D: Share of Total U.S. R&D 2-5 Academic R&D: Share of U.S. GNP 2 Doctoral Institution Growth Patterns: R&D Expenditures 2-7 Doctoral Institution Growth Patterns: Revenues and Expenditures 2-8 Doctoral Institution Growth Pattems: Personnel 2-9 Doctoral Institution Growth Patterns: Enrollments 2-10 Doctoral Institution Growth Patterns: S&E Degrees 2-11 Doctoral Institution Growth Patterns: Per-Person Expenditures ..... .......... 2-12 NATIONAL R&D EXPENDITURES Nt I ~ Ale P^r(^rm~rc a lone ~ _~. _.._...._. ...... National R&D: Sources of Funding . . National Research: Performers ......... National Research: Sources of Funding . . . National Basic Research: Performers ..... National Basic Research: Sources of Funding ACADEMIC R&D EXPENDITURES ...... Academic R&D: Character of Research ............. Academic R&D: Science and Engineering Flelds Academic R&D: Sources of Funding ............... . . V11 2-13 2-14 2-15 2-16 2-17 2-18 2-19 2-21 2-22 2-23 2-24

OCR for page R8
Academic R&D: Types of Institutions ·~1~_:~ C. D.17 =~:1:~;~. ~^ Of U''^Aimn ................................................ 2-25 Sources of R&D Funding: Private Doctoral Institutions 2-26 Sources of R&D Funding: Public Doctoral Institutions 2-27 Academic S&E Facilities: Research and Instruction 2-28 Acauemlc ~= rack. our U1 rut 2-29 Ar~APm;r RPC~Z\r~h F~uinment source of Funds 2-30 2-31 2-32 2-33 2-34 , ^~ ~ ~ Academic R&D Expenditures per Investigator: Equipment and ~q~iliti~c _`A1 At; n Qua. MA mat ~r~n~ntc 1 Ula1 ~'--~U~I1JI~ ~ OCR for page R9
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PART ONE: STATUS, TRENDS, AND ISSUES figure 1-1: Figure 1-2: Figure 1-3: Figure 1~: Figure 1-5: Figure 1~: figure 1-7: Figure 1~: Figure 1-9: Figure 1-10: Figure 1-11: ~, ___ ~ Figure 1-12: Distribution of Public Doctoral Institution R&D Revenues by Source of Funds Figure 1-13: Distribution of Private Doctoral Institution R&D Revenues by Source of Funds Figure 1-14: R&D Expenditures among Doctoral Institutions .................................. Figure 1-15: Distribution of R&D Expenditures among Doctoral Institutions ....................... Figure 1-16: Distribution of Federal Academic R&D Funding by Federal Agency, 1945-1988 Figure 1-17: Enrollment in Academic Institutions by Institution Type and Govemance ................. Figure 1-18: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Science and Engineering by Institution Governance ............. Figure 1-19: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Citizenship .............................. Figure 1-20: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Natural Sciences by Citizenship .......................... ArnA - mid Uar',l~l her Inetit''tir~n To Leading U.S. Research Universities Based on the Number of Distinguished Faculty, 1906 ...... U.S. Higher Education Enrollment and Major Socioeconomic Events, 1900-19~ ............ Distribution of U.S. Basic Research Expenditures by Performer ........................ Total and Federal Academic R&D Funds as Percent of U.S. Gross National Product -3 4 1-11 1-11 Academic R&D Expenditures bar Type of Research and Development 1-11 Academic R&D Expenditures by Science and Engineering Field 1-11 P-1 ~ Investigators in Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance 1-12 Academic R&D Expenditures Per P-lb Investigator by Type of Expenditure 1-12 ~~~~ -- ~ ~-~~ A ~' ~ ~ rat· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-12 Ar~rl~mir non F'~nAc he ~'rr~1-13 Il'stnhotion OF Academic Kite bungs [A source ................. 1-13 -13 -13 -14 -14 -14 1-15 1-15 1-15 1-15 SUMMARY OF MAJOR TRENDS 2-3 Figure 2-1: U.S. R&D Expenditures by Type of Research and Development 2= Figure 2-2 Distribution of R&D Expenditures by Type of Research and Development 2 Figure 2-3: Academic Share of U.S. R&D Expenditures 2-5 Figure 2~: Total and Federal Academic R&D Funds as Percents of U.S. GNP 2 figure 2-5: Index of Doctoral Institution Total and Federal R&D Funds 2-7 figure 2~: Index of Doctoral Institutions Operating Revenues and Expenditures 2~ figure 2-7: Index of Doctoral Institution Employment of Faculty, Scientists and Engineers, and Investigators . 2-9 figure 2~: Index of Total and Graduate Enrollment in Doctoral Institutions 2-10 Figure 2-9: Index of Doctoral Institution Ph.D./Bachelors Degrees Awarded in Science and Engineering 2-11 Figure 2-10: Index of Doctoral Institution Per-Unit Expenditures 2-12 NATIONAL R&D EXPENDITURES 2-13 Figure 2-11: U.S. R&D Expenditures by Performer 2-14 Figure 2-12: Distribution of U.S. R&D Expenditures by Performer 2-14 Figure 2-13: U.S. R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-15 Figure 2-14: Distribution of U.S. R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-15 Figure 2-15: U.S. Research Expenditures by Performer 2-16 Figure 2-16: Distribution of U.S. Research Expenditures by Perfo~er 2-16 figure 2-17: U.S. Research Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-17 Figure 2-18: Distribution of U.S. Research Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-17 PART TWO: OVERVIEW OF THE ACADEMIC RESEARCH ENTERPRISE IX

OCR for page R10
Figure 2-19: U.S. Basic Research Expenditures by Performer 2-18 Figure 2-20: Distribution of U.S. Basic Research Expenditures by Performer 2-18 Figure 2-21: U.S. Basic Research Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-19 figure 2-22: Distribution of U.S. Basic Research Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-19 ACADEMIC R&D EXPENDITURES 2-21 Figure 2-23: Academic R&D Expenditures by Type of R&D 2-22 Figure 2-24: Distribution of Academic R&D Expenditures by Type of R&D 2-22 Figure 2-25: Academic R&D Expenditures by Science and Engineering Field 2-23 Figure 2-26: Distribution of Academic R&D Expenditures by Science and Engineering Field 2-23 Figure 2-27: Academic R&D Expenditures by Source 2-24 Figure 2-28: Distribution of Academic R&D Expenditures by Source 2-24 Figure 2-29: Academic R&D Expenditures by Institution Type 2-25 Figure 2-30: Distribution of Academic R&D Expenditures by Institution Type 2-25 Figure 2-31: Private Doctoral Institution R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-26 Figure 2-32: Distribution of Private Doctoral Institution R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-26 Figure 2-33: Public Doctoral Institution R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-27 Figure 2-34: Distribution of Public Doctoral Institution R&D Expenditures by Source of Funds 2-27 Figure 2-35: Academic Expenditures for S&E Facilities bar Purpose 2-28 Figure 2-36: Distribution of Academic Expenditures for S&E Facilities by Purpose 2-28 Figure 2-37: Expenditures for Academic S&E Facilities by Source of Funds 2-29 Figure 2-38: Distribution of Expenditures for Academic S&E Facilities by Source of Funds 2-29 Figure 2-39: Expenditures for Academic Research Equipment by Source of Funds 2-30 Figure 240: Distribution of Expenditures for Academic Research Equipment by Source of Funds 2-30 Figure 2~1: Academic Expenditures for R&D Equipment per [-lE Investigator 2-31 figure 2~2: Academic Expenditures for R&D Facilities per Al ~ Investigator 2-32 figure 243: Estimated Cost Components of U.S. Academic R&D Budget 2-32 figure 2 44: Distribution of Estimated Cost Components of U.S. Academic R&D Budgets 2-32 Figure 2~5: Academic R&D Expenditures per t-1t Investigator by Type of Expenditure 2-33 Figure 2 46: Distribution of Academic R&D Expenditures per t-lE; Investigator by Type of Expenditure 2-33 Figure 247: Average Salary and Benefits Paid Academic Ph.D~ in Natural Sciences and Engineering 2-34 TOTAL ACADEMIC EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES 2-35 Figure 248: Total Academic Operating Expenditures by Purpose ............ 2-36 Figure 249: Distribution of Total Academic Operating Expenditures by Purpose 2-36 figure 2-50: Academic Institution Operating Revenues by Source of Funds 2-37 figure 2-51: Distribution of Academic Institution Operating Revenues by Source of Funds 2-37 Figure 2-52: Doctoral Institution Operating Expenditures tar Purpose 2-38 Figure 2-53: Distribution of Doctoral Institution Operating Expenditures by Purpose 2-38 Figure 2-54: Doctoral Institution Operating Expenditures per Faculty Member 2-39 figure 2-55: Doctoral Institution Education Expenditures per Student 2-39 Figure 2-56: Revenues of Doctoral Institutions by Source of Funds 2 40 Figure 2-57: Distribution of Revenues of Doctoral Institutions by Source of Funds 240 Figure 2-58: Operating Revenues of Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance 241 Figure 2-59: Distribution of Operating Revenues of Doctoral institutions by Institution Governance 241 Figure 2 60: Private Doctoral Institution Operating Revenues by Source 242 Figure 2~1: Distribution of Private Doctoral Institution Operating Revenues by Source 2~2 Figure 2~2: Public Doctoral Institution Operating Revenues by Source 243 Figure 2~3: Distribution of Public Doctoral Institution Operating Revenues by Source 2~3 x

OCR for page R11
ACADEMIC PERSONNEL 245 2~6 Distribution of Academic Facula by Institution Type 2~16 Academic Scientists and Engineers by Institution Type and Governance 247 Distribution of Academic Scientists and Engineers by Institution Type and Governance 2 47 Doctoral Institution Faculty by Institution Governance 2 48 Distribution of Doctoral Institution Facula by Institution Governance 248 249 249 2-50 2-50 . 2-51 .. 2-51 ... 2-52 ~ . . 2-52 Figure 2-64: Academic Faculty by Institution Type . figure 2~5: Figure 2 66: Figure 2-67: Figure 2 68: figure 2~9: figure 2-70: Figure 2-71: Figure 2-72: Figure 2-73: Figure 2-74: Figure 2-75: Figure 2-76: Figure 2-77: Student-to-Faculty Ratio in Doctoral Institutions ........................ Degrees Awarded-per-Faculty Ratio in Doctoral Institutions .................. Scientists and Engineers in Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance ......... Distribution of Scientists and Engineers in Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance Investigators in Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance ................. Distribution of Investigators in Doctoral Institutions by Institution Governance ........... Ratio of t-lE Scientists and Engineers to All Faculty in Doctoral Institutions .... Ratio of F-l~ Investigators to P-l~ Scientists and Engineers in Doctoral Institutions HIGHER EDUCATION ENROLLMENTS . . . Figure 2-78: Enrollment in Academic Institutions by Institution Type and Governance .... Figure 2-79: Distribution of Enrollment in Academic Institutions by Type and Governance ...... Figure 2~0: Undergraduate and Graduate Enrollments in Doctoral Institutions ............ figure 2~1: Distribution of Undergraduate and Graduate Enrollments in Doctoral Institutions . Figure 2~2: Average Annual Enrollments in Private and Public Doctoral Institutions . Figure 2~3: Percents of Females Enrolled in Institutions of Higher Education .... SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING DEGREES ............................. Figure 2 84: Degrees Awarded in Science and Engineering by Degree Level ......... Figure 2~5: Distribution of Degrees Awarded in Science and Engineering by Degree Level . . . Figure 2~6: Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E and Other Fields ... ~ ......................... Figure 2~7: Distribution of Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E and Other Fields .................. Figure 2~8: Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E by Yield of Study .................... figure 2~9: Distribution of Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E by Field of Study .......... Figure 2-90: Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E by Gender ................. Figure 2-91: Distribution of Bachelors Degrees Awarded in S&E by Gender ..... Figure 2-92: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in S&E and Other Fields .............. Figure 2-93: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in S&E and Other Fields .... figure 2-94: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in S&E by Field of Study .............. Figure 2-95: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in S&E by Field of Study .... Figure 2-96: Science and Engineering Ph.D. Degrees by Institution Governance . . . Figure 2-97: Distribution of Science and Engineering Ph.D. Degrees by Institution Governance . . Figure 2-98: Ph.D. Degrees in S&E by Gender .......................... Figure 2-99: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees in S&E by Gender ................ Figure 2-100: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Natural Sciences by Ethniciy ..... Figure 2-101: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Natural Sciences by Ethnicity . . Figure 2-102: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Ethnics ............................. Figure 2-103: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Ethnicity ..... Figure 2-104: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Natural Sciences by Citizenship .......... Figure 2-105: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Natural Sciences bat Citizenship . Figure 2-106: Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Citizenship ............... Figure 2-107: Distribution of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded in Engineering by Citizenship .... In ... 2-53 ... 2-54 ... 2-54 ... 2-55 ... 2-55 . . 2-56 .................. 2-57 . 2-59 .. 260 .. 260 .. 2~1 .. 2~1 ........ 2~2 .. 2-62 .. 2~3 .. 2~3 . 2~4 .. 2~4 .. 2-65 .. 2~5 .. 266 .. 266 .. 2~7 .. 2-67 .. 268 .. 268 .. 2-69 .. 2-69 2-70 .. 2-70 . 2-71 .. 2-71

OCR for page R12