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 […]
T.S. Eliot said “April is the cruelest month.” This November has been pretty harsh, too, says blogger Howard J. Silver, who wonders what the new U.S. president will mean for a number of issues, including research funding.
For the fourth straight year, federal funding for research and development at institutions of higher education decreased in absolute terms, according to a new brief on the 2015 fiscal year the National Science Foundation released last week. Despite that overall fall, research and development funding for psychology and for fields identified as social science increased from 2014 to 2015.
Two research executives from the University of Minnesota see there isn’t enough government funding to pay for all the innovative research that needs to be taking place. Might business take up the slack?
The election of Donald Trump illustrates the hazards encountered when scientists and scientific institutions alienate themselves from historic global changes.
After launching the Singapore Social Science Research Council in January, the country’s Ministry of Education is backing that up with a serious infusion of cash.
Noting that one candidate has been claiming the upcoming U.S. presidential vote is ‘rigged,’ our Washington-based blogger takes a look at the ways that past presidential elections have been less than clear-cut, and that ways in which the system bent to accommodate a peaceful transfer of power.
As part of our series on academic freedom, Dylan Kerrigan discusses the wider implications of the financialisation of academic knowledge production by considering academic book publishing. He asks if the success of academic books is best measured by economic or non-economic criteria, by its impact on the business sector or its veracity, by ideological myth-making or evidence.
Addressing the consequences of the “prolonged period of uncertainty” in the three months since the Brexit vote, the Academy of Social Sciences and Campaign for Social Science recommend immediate steps the government should take to support UK science and ensure the “long-term health of research is kept to the fore” during the negotiation process.