The National Science Foundation's Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers Program Looking Back, Moving Forward (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 The Future of National Science Foundation Materials Centers
6 The Future of National Science Foundation Materials Centers
Pages 162-176
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 162... ...
grants with all of the associated responsibilities? An analysis of inquiries made of faculty at both MRSEC and non-MRSEC institutions revealed multiple motivations for participation in the MRSEC program.
|
From page 163... ...
Although the industrial collaborations that take place within the MRSEC framework are of a character similar to those conducted elsewhere, the activities initiated by MRSECs generally represent efforts that would not have occurred otherwise. The MRSEC program allows NSF, and thereby the nation, to make a different style of investment in materials research: one that couples group-based research with facilities, industrial interactions, educational programs, and so on.
|
From page 164... ...
The National Research Council (NRC) report Midsize Facilities: The Infrastructure for Materials Research stresses this point, stating, "A continuing and fundamental chal lenge facing a majority of small to midsize facilities is planning, securing, and maintaining the long-term infrastructure necessary for productivity 1See,for instance, National Research Council, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2006.
|
From page 165... ...
The increased number of MRSECs being supported only amplifies the strains. 3National Research Council, Midsize Facilities: The Infrastructure for Materials Research, Washing ton, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2006, p.
|
From page 166... ...
The MRSEC program neither fully funds nor does it wholly own the creative outputs of its various programmatic components, and yet it continues to justify its existence by contending that it is in some way different from the individual principal-inves tigator (PI) grants with which it competes for funds.
|
From page 167... ...
A NEW LOOK Although many positive outcomes have been identified in this report, it is the committee's judgment that the resources are simply too small and are spread over too many centers to enable the MRSEC program to continue to have substantial impact in research, facilities management, and education and industrial outreach. The downside of local management is that NSF has not specified clear, overarching objectives for the program or any of its components (education, industrial outreach, and so on)
|
From page 168... ...
The current MRSEC program could be evolved beyond the current model, by which "each center should try to do everything." Units of the program would be encouraged to focus either on agile teams of group-based research or on larger
|
From page 169... ...
The committee believes that this recommendation is valid even in the favorable event of an overall increase in MRSEC funding. This prototype program structure is described in Tables 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 using the assumption of $30 million per year for the MCE program (perhaps 10 TABLE 6.1 Comparison of the Current MRSEC with the Possible New Materials Center of Excellence and Materials Research Group Programs Annual Budget Category Existing MRSEC New "MCE" New "MRG" Budget $1 million-$4 million $3 million-$5 million/yr $0.5 million-$1.0 million $1 million + yearly operating Equipment $0-$1 million $0.1 million-$0.2 million costs equipment 5 year + 1 year 5 year + 1 year 4 year + 1 year Review cycle Number of awards 26 total 10 to 12 total 45 to 50 total Number of awards/cycle 11 renew/2 (last cycle)
|
From page 170... ...
The MCEs would have much the same mix of activities as expected for a current MRSEC: excellent and focused research, a compelling interdisciplinary environment for student training, power ful research tools, sustained educational outreach, and responsiveness to indus trial needs. By suggesting a concentration of more resources in these MCEs, the committee's intention is to ensure an appropriate level of funding for this broad and diverse mission.
|
From page 171... ...
According to the sample budget outlined in Table 6.2, the committee believes that the three-IRG MCEs should have a target annual budget of $4.5 million. Considering the current research and infrastructure portfolio of the present MRSEC program, 10 or 11 MCEs would form a critical mass.
|
From page 172... ...
An MRG could make use of facilities, industrial partnerships, and education outreach resources facilitated by an MCE. However, the competitive review basis of the MRGs would focus on the research agenda.
|
From page 173... ...
A potential option to help reduce the load on the peer review community would be for NSF to offer merit-based opportunities to MRGs to renew rather than needing to recompete for the next cycle of support. The trade-off here would be in allowing MRGs a better chance at persistence and requiring NSF program managers to handle the additional workload of organizing and facilitating a full and complete open competition.
|
From page 174... ...
Such ac tivities might include but not be limited to the following: organizing conferences and workshops addressing significant questions in materials research; creating and maintaining a national directory of MRSEC expertise and facilities; leverag ing economies of scale in industrial and/or educational outreach; and providing geographically based infrastructure for materials research facilities. The committee notes, however, that this suggested direction for the MRSEC program should not be construed as yet another requirement for the centers.
|
From page 175... ...
the future n at i o na l s c i e n c e f o u n dat i o n m at e r i a l s c e n t e r s of OUTLOOK Interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research will continue to be a hallmark of materials research, and NSF needs to continue to maintain a leadership role in supporting such activity. This committee endorses the concepts embedded in the current MRSEC program, but it encourages a significant realignment of budget, program structure, and management oversight to ensure optimum effectiveness of the NSF group research program in the face of limited resources.
|
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.