Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
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.
Senator Tom Coburn’s long-standing effort to restrict political science funding has returned with a new amendment filed for the latest bill that funds the National Science Foundation.
The more things change, the more they stay the same — especially when it comes to political reluctance for the U.S government to pay for social science research. Our new blogger, Howard J. Silver, is an old hand at lobbying the feds for research funds, and details how political headwinds blew in a suite of lobbying groups.
The front-line soldiers in the skirmishing over U.S. government funding of social science are durable stories told over and over.
On May 29, the National Science Foundation issued an Important Notice to Presidents of Universities and Colleges and Heads of Other National […]
A blow-by-blow account of last weeks U.S. House of Representatives’ tussling over social sciecne funding differed markedly from dainty action in the Senate this week.