The New York Times yesterday had a nice piece on the declining interest of women in computer science, the impact on the field, and some efforts to reverse the trend. Here’s a snippet:
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. For decades, undergraduate women have been moving in ever greater numbers into science and engineering departments at American universities. Yet even as they approach or exceed enrollment parity in mathematics, biology and other fields, there is one area in which their presence relative to men is static or even shrinking: computer science.
Women received about 38 percent of the computer science bachelors degrees awarded in the United States in 1985, the peak year, but in 2003, the figure was only about 28 percent, according to the National Science Foundation.
At universities that also offer graduate degrees in computer science, only 17 percent of the fields bachelors degrees in the 2003-4 academic year went to women, according to the Taulbee Survey, conducted annually by an organization for computer science research. [That’s CRA’s survey, by the way…]
Since then, many in the field say, the situation has worsened. They say computing is the only realm of science or technology in which women are consistently giving ground. They also worry that the number of women is dropping in graduate programs and in industry.
They are concerned about this trend, they say, not just because they want to see young women share the fields challenges and rewards, but also because they regard the relative absence of women as a troubling indicator for American computer science generally and for the economic competitiveness that depends on it.
This is perhaps the trend that’s most disturbing to those in the computing community who care about the issue:
Basically, the interest of women in computing has never been lower. In a previous posting, we’ve described some of the ways the community is trying to address the problem, including hiring an “Image Strategist” to focus on improving the image of computing. (Jill K. Ross is that new strategist and she’ll have an update on the efforts of the “Image of Computing National Task Force” in May at a meeting of the National Center for Women & Information Technology in Boulder.) Efforts like those described in the article are also crucially important. The National Science Foundation supports many such efforts in computing under its Broadening Participation in Computing program in the Computer and Information Science and Engineering directorate. (And we’ve mentioned recently that pending legislation in the House would help programs with the goals of increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in computing such as those supported by BPC (or science and engineering generally) have an easier time getting renewed funding from NSF, as long as they are deemed to be effective.)
We’ll keep you informed on the progress of these efforts — both programmatic and legislative — in the coming weeks. In the meantime, CRA’s Jay Vegso has posted links to some further discussion of the issues cited in the Times piece over at the CRA Bulletin. The Bulletin is a good one-stop shop to lots of data about the state of IT and the IT workforce and pipeline.
Finally, we’ve got a lot of additional information on the state of the IT workforce over at our IT Workforce page, including:
and, Degrees Granted and Job Openings in Broad S&E Fields, 2002-2012, which shows the Department of Labor projections for S&E job growth through 2012, along with projected degree production. (The Bulletin has more detail on the most recent set of projections — through 2014.)
Time Magazine has a pretty decent piece on NSF’s Global Environment for Networking Innovations program, which has the goal of “[enabling] the research community to invent and demonstrate a global communications network and related services that will be qualitatively better than today’s Internet.”
Although it has already taken nearly four decades to get this far in building the Internet, some university researchers with the federal government’s blessing want to scrap all that and start over.
The idea may seem unthinkable, even absurd, but many believe a “clean slate” approach is the only way to truly address security, mobility and other challenges that have cropped up since UCLA professor Leonard Kleinrock helped supervise the first exchange of meaningless test data between two machines on Sept. 2, 1969.
The Internet “works well in many situations but was designed for completely different assumptions,” said Dipankar Raychaudhuri, a Rutgers University professor overseeing three clean-slate projects. “It’s sort of a miracle that it continues to work well today.”
No longer constrained by slow connections and computer processors and high costs for storage, researchers say the time has come to rethink the Internet’s underlying architecture, a move that could mean replacing networking equipment and rewriting software on computers to better channel future traffic over the existing pipes.
Even Vinton Cerf, one of the Internet’s founding fathers as co-developer of the key communications techniques, said the exercise was “generally healthy” because the current technology “does not satisfy all needs.”
We’ve covered the progress ofGENIpreviouslyinthisspace, including the most recent announcement by the Computing Community Consortium (CCC) of the naming of the initial members of the GENI science council. As it stands now, GENI is a “Horizon” project in NSF’s 2007 Facilities Plan — a step away from “Readiness Stage,” which would allow for extensive pre-construction planning. There are currently 10 projects listed in the plan as “Horizon” projects, and just one in the “Readiness Stage” for FY 2008 (the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope). For FY 2008, NSF has requested $20 million to ramp up GENI pre-construction planning — so the program is moving forward, but still has some distance to go before it’s ready to be included in the queue of projects being considered for the “Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction” account in future budget years.
The Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and the House R&D Caucus are hosting a lunch briefing on Tuesday, April 17 at noon. The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security will include speakers from industry and academia and will be based on the second Benchmarks report, Measuring the Moment: Innovation, National Security, and Economic Competitiveness that we have previously covered in this space.
Speakers will include: Dr. Anita Jones from the University of Virginia giving a presentation called, The Role of Defense Research in the Innovation and Competitiveness Debate Dr. C. Dan Mote, President of the University of Maryland . His presentation is Progress Since the Rising Above the Gathering Storm Report and What Still Needs Attention
Amy Burke from Texas Instruments speaking on Industry Perspective on the Importance of Federal Investment in Basic Research
Task Force Chair Doug Comer, the director of legal affairs and technology policy at Intel, will do the welcome, introductions, and speak to the Benchmarks report.
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), the co-chairs of the House R&D Caucus will also make remarks at the briefing.
Anyone with an interest in innovation and competitiveness is welcome to attend. RSVP to Jessica Delucchi at 202.646.5046 or delucchij@battelle.org by Monday, April 16. Space is limited so reservations are on a first come basis. Update: Doug Comer, Dr. Mote, and Amy Burke spoke to a packed room at the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and House R&D Caucus briefing ” The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security.” Over 100 people attended from industry, academia, and the Hill, including Representatives Judy Biggert (R-IL), Rush Holt (D-NJ), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA). Comer discussed the Measuring the Moment report issued last year by the Task Force and gave an overview of the continued importance of federal funding for basic research to the economy as a whole.
As one of the Rising Above the Gathering Storm authors, Dr. Mote discussed the impact the report has had and what is still undone. He emphasized that the states need to be actively engaged in support of basic research at the university level and vocal about their support to their federal delegations.
Burke presented a specific picture of why federally funded basic research is important to Texas Instruments and how that translates to industry as a whole. She gave specific examples of technologies that have had major economic impact and were begun through basic research. Maybe just as importantly, each attendee left with a copy of the Benchmarks report (pdf) and other Task Force material and at least one Member of Congress was seen toting the report around later that day….
All in all, a good, well-attended event.
The House Science and Technology Committee is set to hold two markups for a National Science Foundation reauthorization bill that Chairman Gordon would like to pass this year. The Research and Science Education subcommittee will hold their markup on April 19 and the full committee will have the markup on April 25. The committee has already had twohearings on the NSF reauthorization in March.
CRA has seen some draft language and we think it looks pretty good. It includes authorization of funding at levels that fit with the goals of the ACI and the Democratic Innovation Agenda to double NSF over the next seven years. We are particularly pleased with language that could help programs aimed at increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in science. The language allows the NSF Director the option of continuing funding for these programs after their initial grant award expires if they’re demonstrating success and the problem they seek to address persists.
The language implicitly attempts to clarify NSF’s role in supporting efforts that seek to encourage the participation of women and underrepresented groups in computing, science, technology, engineering and mathematics (CSTEM) disciplines. This is a response to long-standing concerns from CRA and other members of the computing and science communities about NSF’s role. In a letter to the Chairman Gordon back in February, CRA along with 11 other organizations laid out the issue:
NSF, in fulfillment of its mission to “strengthen the U.S. scientific and engineering research potential,” has been very supportive of efforts designed to reach out to women and underrepresented groups in CSTEM. Recognizing the magnitude of the problem within computing, NSF has funded efforts within its Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) directorate to address it, including the current Broadening Participation in Computing (BPC) initiative. These programs have good track records of funding efforts within the community that have demon- strated effectiveness — for example, programs and institutions like the National Center for Women and Information Technology (NCWIT), the Computer Science Teachers Association, and CRA’s Committee on the Status of Women in Computing (CRA-W), which received the President’s Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring in 2004.
Our concern is that NSF, while very willing to fund new programs to address these underrepresentation issues, does not have a funding model to support successful efforts on anything approaching a sustaining basis. Unfortunately, there are no other agencies that have shown a willingness to adopt these successful programs once orphaned by NSF, and it has so far proven difficult for industry to fund them on a sustaining level. So successful efforts — even those that have been independently evaluated and demonstrated effective — must be restructured substantially to include new approaches in order to satisfy NSFs guidelines about new programs and receive new funding when their original grants expire (typically in 3 to 5 years). As you can imagine, this is incredibly counter-productive, especially as the need for these programs remains great.
So we are particularly pleased with the language that allows (but does not mandate) NSF to continue funding programs with proven track records to encourage underrepresented groups to enter CSTEM fields for an additional funding cycle without needing to make significant revisions to the programs. By including the language, it seems clear that the committee is endorsing the view that it’s an appropriate a part of the NSF mission to support these efforts, and giving the agency the flexibility to continue those programs that appear to be working.
We’ll keep you posted on the bill as it moves through the markup process. Update:HR 1867, the NSF Authorization Act of 2007, was passed today by voice vote out of the Subcommittee on Research and Education with three amendments. The amendments included a request for a yearly report by NSF on the agencies Education and Human Resources funding allocation, a joint report from NSF and the National Academies on the barriers to STEM participation for underrepresented minorities and policy strategies to correct the low participation, and a requirement to fund undergraduate research awards at a sustainable level by calling it out of the general NSF Research and Related Activities account. Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-IL), while not objecting to the last amendment, did cite concerns about designating funds within the general allocation and that doing so could eventually create a line item in the budget that would be vulnerable to cuts in the future.
The full Science and Technology Committee will mark up the bill next week.
CRA Board member, Eugene Spafford, has received the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) President’s Award for “his long and effective leadership on issues of computer security and policy, professional responsibility, and the Internet.” The award, given to only seven previous recipients since 1985, will be presented in June in San Diego. The award is given to those who “have demonstrated their exceptional abilities to advance computing technology and enhance its impact for the benefit of society through generosity, creativity and dedication to their respective missions.”
From the press release:
Professor Spafford, considered one of the most influential leaders in information security, is being cited for his extensive and continuing record of service to the computing community, including major companies and government agencies. He was a member of the President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) from 2003-2005. He was also a senior advisor to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Assistant Director of the CISE (Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering) Directorate during the 2003-2004 academic year. In addition, Professor Spafford has been a senior advisor and consultant on security, cybercrime, and policy issues to several agencies, including the U.S. Air Force, the National Security Agency, the Government Accountability Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Energy.
Spafford is a joint professor in Computer Science and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University, where he has received three teaching awards, and the founder and Executive Director of the Purdue CERIAS, the Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security, as well as an Adjunct Professor of Computer Science and Executive Director of the Advisory Board of the Institute for Information Assurance at the University of Texas San Antonio. He is a Fellow of ACM, IEEE, and AAAS and a Lifetime Member of Sigma Xi and ISSA. He has received many awards from a variety of scientific societies and universities, including IEEE, NIST, and the US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board.
Congratulations Spaf!
The House Science and Technology Committee approved H.R. 362, the 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act, today and will recommend it to the House for consideration. The bill was passed with five amendments that are meant to improve access for teachers and students from low-income schools and to improve science labs in secondary schools.
The bill is based on the recommendations of the National Academies Rising Above the Gathering Storm Report. A press release on the legislation states that the goal of the legislation is increasing scholarships for students majoring in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields and who are committed to pursuing teaching; establishing a teacher education program at the National Science Foundation to encourage education faculty to work with STEM faculty on ways to improve education for math and science teachers; providing in-service training to math and science teachers to improve content knowledge and teaching skills; and authorizing the development of masters degree programs for in-service math and science teachers.
This is just one of several innovation and competitiveness bills based on the Gathering Storm recommendations that the Committee has or plans to address this year, along with the reauthorization of NSF and the No Child Left Behind Act.
A webcast of the hearing is available.
Forgive the ad, but since we’ve got such a well-connected, Web 2.0-ish sort of readership here, I thought I’d use the space to announce that we’re looking for someone to help update CRA’s digital presence and support our office IT needs.
We’re currently looking for a full-time IT Manager/Webmaster for our world headquarters here in Washington, DC. This person will be responsible for working with our staff and membership to design, develop, deploy and maintain CRA’s web presence and other digital assets, in addition to helping support the office network (a mix of Mac and Windows machines). The ideal candidate is one with an eye for clear, concise design who is excited about the possibility of using innovative technologies to help communicate with our tech-savvy constituency.
Experience in designing and deploying fully-interactive websites is required. The ideal candidate also likely has four to five years experience in web-based graphic design, and a BA or BS in graphic design, art or related fields, or equivalent academic or work experience. Needed skills include the ability to work with database technologies like MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Access; scripting languages like PHP and Javascript; and fluency in HTML and CSS. This position will also require supporting the CRA office network and CRA staff IT needs (including a Director of Gov’t Affairs who likes to try all the latest stuff…). Being conversant in Unix is a big plus….
If interested, please send a current resume along with salary expectations and links to examples of your previous work to the CRA employment mailbox.
CRA is an equal opportunity employer and a fantastic place to work. This position features a competitive salary and benefits, great environment, and the ability to interact with one of the most interesting and cutting-edge communities around.
The Chairman of the House Budget Committee today released the “chairman’smark” (both pdf) of his committee’s FY 2008 Congressional Budget Resolution that includes funding caps large enough to accommodate the continuation of funding increases at key federal science agencies called for in both the American Competitiveness Initiative and the Democratic Innovation Agenda. The resolution contains healthy increases in a number of budget accounts designed to allow congressional appropriators the budget “room” to include increases for ACI agencies — National Science Foundation, National Institute of Standards and Technology, and Department of Energy Office of Science — as well as the National Institutes of Health and additional federal education spending at a variety of agencies.
The overall budget levels are similar to those found in the Senate version of the Congressional Budget Resolution (S. Con. Res 21), which was introduced back on March 15th and is being considered on the Senate floor now. The House bill is a bit more generous for the science accounts, but because of the convoluted way the budget process works, it’s hard to translate either set of numbers to likely actual appropriations. In each case, it’s enough to know that both the House and Senate budgeters appear to have factored in the requested increases (or greater) for key science agencies in their budgets. (Update below) The House also included “sense of the House” language that really calls out their support for science funding increases:
SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON THE INNOVATION AGENDA: A COMMITMENT TO COMPETITIVENESS TO KEEP AMERICA #1. (a) It is the sense of the House to provide sufficient funding that our Nation may continue to be the world leader in education, innovation and economic growth. This resolution provides $___ [this is still to be determined–PH] above the Presidents requested level for 2008, and additional amounts in subsequent years in Function 250 (General Science, Space and Technology) and Function 270 (Energy). Additional increases for scientific research and education are included in Function 500 (Education, Employment, Training, and Social Services), Function 550 (Health), Function 300 (Environment and Natural Resources), Function 350 (Agriculture), Function 400 (Transportation), and Function 370 (Commerce and Housing Credit), all of which receive more funding than the President requested.
(b) Americas greatest resource for innovation resides within classrooms across the country. The increased funding provided in this resolution will support important initiatives to educate 100,000 new scientists, engineers, and mathematicians, and place highly qualified teachers in math and science K12 classrooms.
(c) Independent scientific research provides the foundation for innovation and future technologies. This resolution will put us on the path toward doubling funding for the National Science Foundation, basic research in the physical sciences across all agencies, and collaborative research partnerships; and toward achieving energy independence through the development of clean and sustainable alternative energy technologies.
Both House and Senate budget chairs believe they have the votes to move the respective resolutions in their chambers. We’ll keep you posted as they move.
For those who like numbers, here are the funding levels for each budget function in the House resolution, and here are the Senate numbers (click on Sec. 103, Major Functional Categories) Update: (6:14 pm 3/21/07) — It appears I was a little quick in my analysis of the Senate version of the resolution. While the Senate does include increases for some of the budget functions that cover science agencies, it’s not clear those increases would be used for science funding. Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) have an amendment to the resolution that will be voted on this evening that would “restore” $1 billion to the resolution for the President’s request and to fund the provisions of the America COMPETES Act. Here’s a press release from Alexander’s office which spells out the detail.
We’ll have more after the vote. Update 2: (8:19 pm 3/21/07) — The amendment passed overwhelmingly.
One of the side effects of these exciting times for science policy in Washington is that we don’t get as much time to blog as we need to. Even as late as two years ago, the drumbeat for competitiveness and innovation — the driving themes behind most of the science policy developments over the last year — was significantly softer than it is now…almost inaudible, in fact. That gave us plenty of time to devote to lengthy coverage of just about every development in the space — every news article, every press conference, every mention by a key (or not so key) policymaker.
Well, over the last two years, the pace of developments has quickened dramatically. Nearly every day there’s some mention of innovation policy, or the importance of IT research, or the need to ramp up the federal commitment to the “physical sciences” somewhere. Our queue of potential topics for blog posts has grown considerably. Unfortunately, because we’re also out in the trenches working these developments, we don’t often get the time we need to really delve into the topics as we usually do with our posts.
Rather than let those topics grow stale in a queue that isn’t moving any faster than it ever has, we’ve decided to go a little “Web 2.0” and start a Computing Research Policy TumbleLog, on which we can post quick links to articles we find noteworthy, or quotes that resonate, or events with think are interesting. There won’t be much (or even any) analysis of the topics on the TumbleLog, just pointers to the original sources. All the meaty stuff — the analysis, the details — will still be here, with a frequency that’s hopefully unchanged.
So, you might want to bookmark the Computing Research Policy TumbleLog if you’re interested in some of the things we’ve found interesting to note, but keep an eye here for our usual content as well.
I’ve also attempted to set up a little widget over there on the left sidebar that shows the most recent topics on the tumblelog, but it doesn’t seem to work very well in Safari on my Mac. So if anyone has a suggestion for a better approach, please let me know! This Web 2.0 stuff is tricky. 🙂 Fixed, I think!
A proclamation from members of U.S. industry and academia (including CRA) calling on Congress to ramp up federal basic research funding, improve student performance in math and science, enable the U.S. to recruit and retain the best talent, and make permanent the R&D tax credit was officially released at a standing room only press event yesterday hosted by House Science and Technology CommitteeChairman Bart Gordon (D-TN), with speakers Norm Augustine, Craig Barrett (Chairman of Intel), Harold McGraw III (CEO of McGraw-Hill), Robert Dynes (Pres of UC Berkeley), Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), Rep. Dan Lipinsky (D-IL), and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN). The proclamation is online and has over 270 endorsements from industry, academic, and professional groups. The proclamation was printed on parchment (an electronic version of the parchment scroll is available here) and delivered to every congressional office.
The Committee put out a press release about the event and an audio webcast is also available.
Directly following the press conference, the Committee held a hearing on two of its innovation bills, H.R. 362 and 363, “10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds” Science and Math Scholarship Act and Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act. Both bills are designed to enact the recommendations of the oft-cited National Academies Rising Above the Gathering Storm report that are under the House S&T Committee’s jurisdiction. The bills are a parallel effort to the Senate’s America COMPETES legislation, which was introduced by the Senate leadership on March 4th and will go straight to the Senate floor.
The written testimony of the witnesses, many of whom spoke at the press conference, and a webcast of the hearing are available online.
Please use the Category and Archive Filters below, to find older posts. Or you may also use the search bar.
NY Times on Women’s Interest in Computing
/In: People /by Peter HarshaThe New York Times yesterday had a nice piece on the declining interest of women in computer science, the impact on the field, and some efforts to reverse the trend. Here’s a snippet:
This is perhaps the trend that’s most disturbing to those in the computing community who care about the issue:
Basically, the interest of women in computing has never been lower. In a previous posting, we’ve described some of the ways the community is trying to address the problem, including hiring an “Image Strategist” to focus on improving the image of computing. (Jill K. Ross is that new strategist and she’ll have an update on the efforts of the “Image of Computing National Task Force” in May at a meeting of the National Center for Women & Information Technology in Boulder.) Efforts like those described in the article are also crucially important. The National Science Foundation supports many such efforts in computing under its Broadening Participation in Computing program in the Computer and Information Science and Engineering directorate. (And we’ve mentioned recently that pending legislation in the House would help programs with the goals of increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in computing such as those supported by BPC (or science and engineering generally) have an easier time getting renewed funding from NSF, as long as they are deemed to be effective.)
We’ll keep you informed on the progress of these efforts — both programmatic and legislative — in the coming weeks. In the meantime, CRA’s Jay Vegso has posted links to some further discussion of the issues cited in the Times piece over at the CRA Bulletin. The Bulletin is a good one-stop shop to lots of data about the state of IT and the IT workforce and pipeline.
Finally, we’ve got a lot of additional information on the state of the IT workforce over at our IT Workforce page, including:
Time on GENI
/In: Computing Community Consortium (CCC), CRA, R&D in the Press, Research /by Peter HarshaTime Magazine has a pretty decent piece on NSF’s Global Environment for Networking Innovations program, which has the goal of “[enabling] the research community to invent and demonstrate a global communications network and related services that will be qualitatively better than today’s Internet.”
We’ve covered the progress of GENI previously in this space, including the most recent announcement by the Computing Community Consortium (CCC) of the naming of the initial members of the GENI science council. As it stands now, GENI is a “Horizon” project in NSF’s 2007 Facilities Plan — a step away from “Readiness Stage,” which would allow for extensive pre-construction planning. There are currently 10 projects listed in the plan as “Horizon” projects, and just one in the “Readiness Stage” for FY 2008 (the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope). For FY 2008, NSF has requested $20 million to ramp up GENI pre-construction planning — so the program is moving forward, but still has some distance to go before it’s ready to be included in the queue of projects being considered for the “Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction” account in future budget years.
Innovation Briefing Event
/In: Events, Funding, Policy, Research, Security /by MelissaNorrThe Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and the House R&D Caucus are hosting a lunch briefing on Tuesday, April 17 at noon. The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security will include speakers from industry and academia and will be based on the second Benchmarks report, Measuring the Moment: Innovation, National Security, and Economic Competitiveness that we have previously covered in this space.
Comer discussed the Measuring the Moment report issued last year by the Task Force and gave an overview of the continued importance of federal funding for basic research to the economy as a whole.
Maybe just as importantly, each attendee left with a copy of the Benchmarks report (pdf) and other Task Force material and at least one Member of Congress was seen toting the report around later that day….
Speakers will include:
Dr. Anita Jones from the University of Virginia giving a presentation called, The Role of Defense Research in the Innovation and Competitiveness Debate
Dr. C. Dan Mote, President of the University of Maryland . His presentation is Progress Since the Rising Above the Gathering Storm Report and What Still Needs Attention
Amy Burke from Texas Instruments speaking on Industry Perspective on the Importance of Federal Investment in Basic Research
Task Force Chair Doug Comer, the director of legal affairs and technology policy at Intel, will do the welcome, introductions, and speak to the Benchmarks report.
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), the co-chairs of the House R&D Caucus will also make remarks at the briefing.
Anyone with an interest in innovation and competitiveness is welcome to attend. RSVP to Jessica Delucchi at 202.646.5046 or delucchij@battelle.org by Monday, April 16. Space is limited so reservations are on a first come basis.
Update: Doug Comer, Dr. Mote, and Amy Burke spoke to a packed room at the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation and House R&D Caucus briefing ” The Role of Basic Research in Innovation, Economic Competitiveness and National Security.” Over 100 people attended from industry, academia, and the Hill, including Representatives Judy Biggert (R-IL), Rush Holt (D-NJ), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).
As one of the Rising Above the Gathering Storm authors, Dr. Mote discussed the impact the report has had and what is still undone. He emphasized that the states need to be actively engaged in support of basic research at the university level and vocal about their support to their federal delegations.
Burke presented a specific picture of why federally funded basic research is important to Texas Instruments and how that translates to industry as a whole. She gave specific examples of technologies that have had major economic impact and were begun through basic research.
All in all, a good, well-attended event.
NSF Reauthorization
/In: CRA, Diversity in Computing, Funding, Policy, Research /by MelissaNorrThe House Science and Technology Committee is set to hold two markups for a National Science Foundation reauthorization bill that Chairman Gordon would like to pass this year. The Research and Science Education subcommittee will hold their markup on April 19 and the full committee will have the markup on April 25. The committee has already had two hearings on the NSF reauthorization in March.
CRA has seen some draft language and we think it looks pretty good. It includes authorization of funding at levels that fit with the goals of the ACI and the Democratic Innovation Agenda to double NSF over the next seven years. We are particularly pleased with language that could help programs aimed at increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in science. The language allows the NSF Director the option of continuing funding for these programs after their initial grant award expires if they’re demonstrating success and the problem they seek to address persists.
The language implicitly attempts to clarify NSF’s role in supporting efforts that seek to encourage the participation of women and underrepresented groups in computing, science, technology, engineering and mathematics (CSTEM) disciplines. This is a response to long-standing concerns from CRA and other members of the computing and science communities about NSF’s role. In a letter to the Chairman Gordon back in February, CRA along with 11 other organizations laid out the issue:
So we are particularly pleased with the language that allows (but does not mandate) NSF to continue funding programs with proven track records to encourage underrepresented groups to enter CSTEM fields for an additional funding cycle without needing to make significant revisions to the programs. By including the language, it seems clear that the committee is endorsing the view that it’s an appropriate a part of the NSF mission to support these efforts, and giving the agency the flexibility to continue those programs that appear to be working.
We’ll keep you posted on the bill as it moves through the markup process.
Update: HR 1867, the NSF Authorization Act of 2007, was passed today by voice vote out of the Subcommittee on Research and Education with three amendments. The amendments included a request for a yearly report by NSF on the agencies Education and Human Resources funding allocation, a joint report from NSF and the National Academies on the barriers to STEM participation for underrepresented minorities and policy strategies to correct the low participation, and a requirement to fund undergraduate research awards at a sustainable level by calling it out of the general NSF Research and Related Activities account. Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-IL), while not objecting to the last amendment, did cite concerns about designating funds within the general allocation and that doing so could eventually create a line item in the budget that would be vulnerable to cuts in the future.
The full Science and Technology Committee will mark up the bill next week.
Eugene Spafford Honored with ACM President’s Award
/In: CRA, People /by MelissaNorrCRA Board member, Eugene Spafford, has received the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) President’s Award for “his long and effective leadership on issues of computer security and policy, professional responsibility, and the Internet.” The award, given to only seven previous recipients since 1985, will be presented in June in San Diego. The award is given to those who “have demonstrated their exceptional abilities to advance computing technology and enhance its impact for the benefit of society through generosity, creativity and dedication to their respective missions.”
From the press release:
Spafford is a joint professor in Computer Science and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University, where he has received three teaching awards, and the founder and Executive Director of the Purdue CERIAS, the Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security, as well as an Adjunct Professor of Computer Science and Executive Director of the Advisory Board of the Institute for Information Assurance at the University of Texas San Antonio. He is a Fellow of ACM, IEEE, and AAAS and a Lifetime Member of Sigma Xi and ISSA. He has received many awards from a variety of scientific societies and universities, including IEEE, NIST, and the US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board.
Congratulations Spaf!
Innovation Bill Moves Forward
/In: American Competitiveness Initiative, Diversity in Computing, Policy /by MelissaNorrThe House Science and Technology Committee approved H.R. 362, the 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act, today and will recommend it to the House for consideration. The bill was passed with five amendments that are meant to improve access for teachers and students from low-income schools and to improve science labs in secondary schools.
The bill is based on the recommendations of the National Academies Rising Above the Gathering Storm Report. A press release on the legislation states that the goal of the legislation is increasing scholarships for students majoring in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields and who are committed to pursuing teaching; establishing a teacher education program at the National Science Foundation to encourage education faculty to work with STEM faculty on ways to improve education for math and science teachers; providing in-service training to math and science teachers to improve content knowledge and teaching skills; and authorizing the development of masters degree programs for in-service math and science teachers.
This is just one of several innovation and competitiveness bills based on the Gathering Storm recommendations that the Committee has or plans to address this year, along with the reauthorization of NSF and the No Child Left Behind Act.
A webcast of the hearing is available.
CRA’s Hiring
/In: CRA /by Peter HarshaForgive the ad, but since we’ve got such a well-connected, Web 2.0-ish sort of readership here, I thought I’d use the space to announce that we’re looking for someone to help update CRA’s digital presence and support our office IT needs.
We’re currently looking for a full-time IT Manager/Webmaster for our world headquarters here in Washington, DC. This person will be responsible for working with our staff and membership to design, develop, deploy and maintain CRA’s web presence and other digital assets, in addition to helping support the office network (a mix of Mac and Windows machines). The ideal candidate is one with an eye for clear, concise design who is excited about the possibility of using innovative technologies to help communicate with our tech-savvy constituency.
Experience in designing and deploying fully-interactive websites is required. The ideal candidate also likely has four to five years experience in web-based graphic design, and a BA or BS in graphic design, art or related fields, or equivalent academic or work experience. Needed skills include the ability to work with database technologies like MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Access; scripting languages like PHP and Javascript; and fluency in HTML and CSS. This position will also require supporting the CRA office network and CRA staff IT needs (including a Director of Gov’t Affairs who likes to try all the latest stuff…). Being conversant in Unix is a big plus….
If interested, please send a current resume along with salary expectations and links to examples of your previous work to the CRA employment mailbox.
CRA is an equal opportunity employer and a fantastic place to work. This position features a competitive salary and benefits, great environment, and the ability to interact with one of the most interesting and cutting-edge communities around.
Innovation Funding Featured in House Budget Resolution
/In: American Competitiveness Initiative, Funding, FY08 Appropriations, Policy /by Peter HarshaThe Chairman of the House Budget Committee today released the “chairman’s mark” (both pdf) of his committee’s FY 2008 Congressional Budget Resolution that includes funding caps large enough to accommodate the continuation of funding increases at key federal science agencies called for in both the American Competitiveness Initiative and the Democratic Innovation Agenda. The resolution contains healthy increases in a number of budget accounts designed to allow congressional appropriators the budget “room” to include increases for ACI agencies — National Science Foundation, National Institute of Standards and Technology, and Department of Energy Office of Science — as well as the National Institutes of Health and additional federal education spending at a variety of agencies.
The overall budget levels are similar to those found in the Senate version of the Congressional Budget Resolution (S. Con. Res 21), which was introduced back on March 15th and is being considered on the Senate floor now. The House bill is a bit more generous for the science accounts, but because of the convoluted way the budget process works, it’s hard to translate either set of numbers to likely actual appropriations.
In each case, it’s enough to know that both the House and Senate budgeters appear to have factored in the requested increases (or greater) for key science agencies in their budgets.(Update below) The House also included “sense of the House” language that really calls out their support for science funding increases:Both House and Senate budget chairs believe they have the votes to move the respective resolutions in their chambers. We’ll keep you posted as they move.
For those who like numbers, here are the funding levels for each budget function in the House resolution, and here are the Senate numbers (click on Sec. 103, Major Functional Categories)
Update: (6:14 pm 3/21/07) — It appears I was a little quick in my analysis of the Senate version of the resolution. While the Senate does include increases for some of the budget functions that cover science agencies, it’s not clear those increases would be used for science funding. Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) have an amendment to the resolution that will be voted on this evening that would “restore” $1 billion to the resolution for the President’s request and to fund the provisions of the America COMPETES Act. Here’s a press release from Alexander’s office which spells out the detail.
We’ll have more after the vote.
Update 2: (8:19 pm 3/21/07) — The amendment passed overwhelmingly.
Announcing the Computing Research Policy TumbleLog
/In: CRA /by Peter HarshaOne of the side effects of these exciting times for science policy in Washington is that we don’t get as much time to blog as we need to. Even as late as two years ago, the drumbeat for competitiveness and innovation — the driving themes behind most of the science policy developments over the last year — was significantly softer than it is now…almost inaudible, in fact. That gave us plenty of time to devote to lengthy coverage of just about every development in the space — every news article, every press conference, every mention by a key (or not so key) policymaker.
Well, over the last two years, the pace of developments has quickened dramatically. Nearly every day there’s some mention of innovation policy, or the importance of IT research, or the need to ramp up the federal commitment to the “physical sciences” somewhere. Our queue of potential topics for blog posts has grown considerably. Unfortunately, because we’re also out in the trenches working these developments, we don’t often get the time we need to really delve into the topics as we usually do with our posts.
Rather than let those topics grow stale in a queue that isn’t moving any faster than it ever has, we’ve decided to go a little “Web 2.0” and start a Computing Research Policy TumbleLog, on which we can post quick links to articles we find noteworthy, or quotes that resonate, or events with think are interesting. There won’t be much (or even any) analysis of the topics on the TumbleLog, just pointers to the original sources. All the meaty stuff — the analysis, the details — will still be here, with a frequency that’s hopefully unchanged.
So, you might want to bookmark the Computing Research Policy TumbleLog if you’re interested in some of the things we’ve found interesting to note, but keep an eye here for our usual content as well.
I’ve also attempted to set up a little widget over there on the left sidebar that shows the most recent topics on the tumblelog,
but it doesn’t seem to work very well in Safari on my Mac. So if anyone has a suggestion for a better approach, please let me know! This Web 2.0 stuff is tricky.🙂 Fixed, I think!Innovation Press Conference and Hearing
/In: American Competitiveness Initiative, Policy /by MelissaNorrA proclamation from members of U.S. industry and academia (including CRA) calling on Congress to ramp up federal basic research funding, improve student performance in math and science, enable the U.S. to recruit and retain the best talent, and make permanent the R&D tax credit was officially released at a standing room only press event yesterday hosted by House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN), with speakers Norm Augustine, Craig Barrett (Chairman of Intel), Harold McGraw III (CEO of McGraw-Hill), Robert Dynes (Pres of UC Berkeley), Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), Rep. Dan Lipinsky (D-IL), and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN). The proclamation is online and has over 270 endorsements from industry, academic, and professional groups. The proclamation was printed on parchment (an electronic version of the parchment scroll is available here) and delivered to every congressional office.
The Committee put out a press release about the event and an audio webcast is also available.
Directly following the press conference, the Committee held a hearing on two of its innovation bills, H.R. 362 and 363, “10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds” Science and Math Scholarship Act and Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act. Both bills are designed to enact the recommendations of the oft-cited National Academies Rising Above the Gathering Storm report that are under the House S&T Committee’s jurisdiction. The bills are a parallel effort to the Senate’s America COMPETES legislation, which was introduced by the Senate leadership on March 4th and will go straight to the Senate floor.
The written testimony of the witnesses, many of whom spoke at the press conference, and a webcast of the hearing are available online.