Blogs

Filtered on Author (John Jackson), Taxonomy term (Science policy), Date (Jan 2011).

Science Policy USA: new COMPETES Act and collections

A new US COMPETES Act was agreed in late December - an umbrella law that covers a wide range of scientific initiatives and coordination. There will be quite a lot of haggling to come on the money to implement some of these elements, but some reorganise existing allocations and it is an interesting expression of direction and ambition. Of specific interest is section 104 on collections which gives responsibility to OSTP and reads /.....

.../

SEC. 104. FEDERAL SCIENTIFIC COLLECTIONS.

(a) MANAGEMENT OF SCIENTIFIC COLLECTIONS.—The Office of Scienceand Technology Policy shall develop policies for the management and use of Federal scientific collections to improve the quality, organization, access, including online access, and long-term preservation of such collections for thebenefit of the scientific enterprise. In developing those policies the Officeof Science and Technology Policy shall consult, as appropriate, with—

(1) Federal agencies with such collections; and

(2) representatives of other organizations, institutions, and otherentities not a part of the Federal Government that have a stake in thepreservation, maintenance, and accessibility of such collections, includingState and local government agencies, institutions of higher education, museums,and other entities engaged in the acquisition, holding, management, or use ofscientific collections.

(b) CLEARINGHOUSE.—The Office of Scienceand Technology Policy, in consultation with relevant Federal agencies, shall ensure the development of an online clearinghouse for information on the contents of and access to Federal scientific collections.

(1) require that, before disposing of a scientific collection, a Federal agency shall—

(A) conduct a review of the research value of the collection; and

(B) consult with researchers who have used the collection, and other potentially interested parties, concerning—

(i) the collection's value for research purposes; and

(ii) possible additional educational uses for the collection; and

(2) include procedures for Federal agencies to transfer scientific collections they no longer need to researchers at institutions or other entities qualified to manage the collections.

(d) COST PROJECTIONS.—The Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with relevant Federal agencies, shall develop a common set of methodologies to be used by Federal agencies for the assessment and projection of costs associated with the management and preservation of their scientific collections.

(e) SCIENTIFIC COLLECTIONDEFINED.—In this section, the term ''scientific collection'' means a set of physical specimens, living or inanimate, created for the purpose of supporting science and serving as a long-term research asset, rather than for their market value as collectibles or their historical, artistic, or cultural significance, and, as appropriate and feasible, the associated specimen data and materials.

Science Policy UK: career development of research staff

RCUK commissioned a review of implementation of the agenda arising from Sir Gareth Roberts' 2002 report SET for Success, developing careers and skills for PhD students and research staff. This will continue to have a substantial influence on the policies of research funders and creates expectations and frameworks for the responsibilities of research institutions. Recommendations below /.....

.../

Recommendation 1: Future funding arrangements should aim to move the transferableskills and career development agenda towards clearly defined goals and progresstowards these goals should be monitored against quantified starting points.

Recommendation 2: RCUK needs to ensure that specific funding and other initiativescontinue to stimulate and reinforce the development of transferable skills andsupport for career development of researchers, using mechanisms that are efficientfor the whole higher education sector and other stakeholders.

Recommendation 3: All funders must contribute financially (directly andindirectly) to the skills and career development of PhD students and researchstaff.

Recommendation 4: Research organisations must ensure that expertise is maintainedin specialist roles dedicated to maintaining the skills development and supportfor career development of researchers, even following changes in funding mechanisms.

Recommendation 5: Research organisations should continue to find ways ofsharing provision and best practice to minimise duplicated effort and support researchersmore effectively.

Recommendation 6: Research organisations, employers and other relevant stakeholderssuch as Vitae, should develop systematic and frequent interactions such thatthe focus on employment needs is the driver for future developments of transferrableskills training. Mechanisms for this and the blocks that prevent it happeningmust be understood and improved.

Recommendation 7: Vitae could be instrumental in providing a relatively independentand centralised coordinating function to establish a baseline, monitor progressand communicate widely about the benefits of the development of the transferableskills of researchers. Recalling the low level of engagement with employers,the panel believes that Vitae could take a more proactive and visible role asan intermediary between research organisations and other organisations such asemployers, recruitment organisations, careers services, and related stakeholders.

Recommendation 8: To achieve greater stability of the transferableskills training and career development of researchers, it is recommended thatall research organisations should recognise and reward appropriate behaviourssuch as good supervision of PhD students and career development of all researchstaff through their human resources policies and practices.

Recommendation 9: Wide communication and promotion of the standing and valueof the UK doctorate bothwithin and outside the UKis vital. In addition it is recommended that international activities in thedevelopment of researchers' skills are monitored and shared systematically byall stakeholders primarily by research organisations, but also by RCUK andVitae.

Science Policy UK: Science, Trust and Public Engagement

The UK Department of Business, Innovation and Skills is funding a new project Science, Trust and Public Engagement –
exploring future pathways to good governance, looking at the experience of public engagement in the governance of science in the UK since 2000. An element of this has been launched, led by TNS-BMRB with the Royal Society, UEA and others.

Science, Biodiversity and Museums

Filter by Author

Filter by Category

Filter by Date

@nhm_science

Filtered on Author (John Jackson), Taxonomy term (Science policy), Date (Jan 2011).

Science Policy USA: new COMPETES Act and collections

Science Policy UK: career development of research staff

Science Policy UK: Science, Trust and Public Engagement

Pages

Search form

You are here

Filter by Author

Filter by Category

Filter by Date

@nhm_science

Blogs

Filtered on Author (John Jackson), Taxonomy term (Science policy), Date (Jan 2011).

Pages