Social, Behavioral Scientists Eligible to Apply for NSF S-STEM Grants
Solicitations are now being sought for the National Science Foundation’s Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics program, and in an unheralded […]
UPDATING: A presentation on social, behavioral and economic sciences funded by the National Science Foundation pressed one overriding message: we matter.
A U.S. Senate bill to renew the landmark America COMPETES Act, and to contest with NSF funding authorization contained with the House’s FIRST Act, was introduced this week.
A seminal figure in solidifying the importance and position of the social and behavioral sciences in the federal research infrastructure, sociologist Cora Marrett leaves the National Science Foundation next month.
Other nations looking at successful American universities and seeing the invisible hand of the marketplace at work should take a closer look at the arm attached to that hand, argues Steve C. Ward.
Australia allocates around A$9 billion a year of taxpayers’ money for research, but how do we know if that money is being spent wisely?
Trying to measure the benefits of scientific research using traditional business-oriented metrics may not be the best tool in our shed, argues Michael White.
A little bit of poli sci learning might be a tonic in Washington. But as Michael Harris points out, some legislators like Dr. Tom Coburn want to restrict funding for their ‘medicine.’
David Takeuchi argues that even if the FIRST act doesn’t pass, it is clear that U.S. politicians are demanding more of a say in federally funded research. While a push to ensure research remains relevant can be a good thing, scientists and politicians must not forget that initial outcomes do not constitute substantive evidence. Scientific integrity and replication shouldn’t have to be sacrificed in order to meet political time frames.