The
House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Science
Education held a hearing on Wednesday June 27, 2012 on The Role of Research Universities
in Securing America's Future Prosperity: Challenges and Expectations. Witnesses
included: Mr. Charles O. Holliday, Jr., Chair, Committee on Research
Universities, National Academies; Dr. John M. Mason, Jr., Associate Provost and
Vice President for Research, Auburn University; Dr. Jeffrey R. Seemann, Vice
President for Research, Texas A&M University and Chief Research Officer,
The Texas A&M University System; Dr. Leslie P. Tolbert, Senior Vice
President for Research, The University of Arizona; and, Dr. James N. Siedow,
Vice Provost for Research, Duke University.
Subcommittee
Chair Mo Brooks (AL) opened the hearing saying it would focus on the
"challenges faced by the Nation's research universities as well as the
findings and recommendations from the June 14 report issued by the National
Academies, Research Universities and the Future of America." Mr.
Holliday testified about the report, officially titled Research Universities and the
Future of America: Ten Breakthrough Actions Vital to Our Nation's Prosperity
and Security. He outlined the "especially important" challenges
identified in the report:
-Federal
funding for university research has been unstable and, in real terms, declining
at a time when other countries have increased funding for research and
development (R&D).
-State
funding for higher education, already eroding in real terms for more than two
decades, has been cut further during the recent recession.
-Business
and industry have largely dismantled the large corporate research laboratories
that drove American industrial leadership in the 20th century (for example,
Bell Labs), but have not yet fully partnered with research universities to fill
the gap.
-Research
universities must improve management, productivity, and cost efficiency in both
administration and academics.
-Young
faculty have insufficient opportunities to launch academic careers and research
programs.
-There has been an underinvestment in campus infrastructure, particularly in
cyberinfrastructure, that could lead to long-term increases in productivity,
cost effectiveness, and innovation in research, education, and administration.
-Research
sponsors often do not pay the full cost of research they procure, which means
that universities have to cross-subsidize sponsored research from other
sources, such as tuition or clinical revenues.
-A
burdensome accumulation of federal and state regulatory and reporting
requirements increases costs and sometimes challenges academic freedom and
integrity.
-Doctoral
and postdoctoral preparation could be enhanced by shortening time-to-degree,
raising completion rates, and enhancing programs' effectiveness in providing
training for highly productive careers.
-Demographic
change in the U.S. population necessitates strategies for increasing the
educational success of female and underrepresented minority students.
-Institutions
abroad are increasingly competing for international students, researchers, and
scholars, as other nations increase their investment in their own institutions.
Mr.
Holliday further outlined the report's ten recommendations for improvement,
which would address three main goals: (I) strengthen the partnership among
universities, federal and state governments, philanthropy, and business in
order to revitalize university research and speed its translation into
innovative products and services; (ii) improve the productivity of
administrative operations, research, and education within universities; and
(iii) ensure that America's pipeline of future talent in science, engineering,
and other research areas remains creative and vital, leveraging the abilities
of all of its citizens and attracting the best students and scholars from
around the world.
Dr.
Mason testified about the connection between research and quality education,
saying, "when research is reduced, instruction and learning at all levels
are diminished, especially in those disciplines where much of our innovation
originates - those in science, technology, mathematics and engineering."
Further "as research declines, bright kids do not select these tougher
academic disciplines" resulting in the "U.S. industry and government"
having "fewer skilled employees for the advanced positions that move our
economy." Dr. Mason also offered comments on the report's recommendations,
including cautionary testimony that research and academic programs, when cut,
are rarely reinstated.
Dr.
Siedow offered his critique of the recommendations of the report after
expressing his organization's strong support for the three overarching goals of
those recommendations. One involved the recommendation regarding setting and
implementing a nationwide commitment to government-funded research and
development at 3 percent of gross domestic product. Dr. Siedow said the call
for immediate implementation was "unrealistic" in the short term, but
commended "the principle of achieving an agreed upon level of national support
for R&D."
Drs.
Tolbert and Seemann also offered unique perspectives on the report through the
lenses of their respective institutions as well as critiques of the report's
recommendations.
For
more information, see: http://science.house.gov/
The message can be summarized:
No comments:
Post a Comment