A lot has changed over the last several decades in how we do research.  I wonder if we’re better off.  I’d like to suggest that some of these changes need to be undone.

Consider the following significant changes from “the norm” of the past and how they should be corrected:

• GET RID OF BROADER IMPACTS:   About 15 years ago, the National Science Foundation (NSF) instituted the formal requirement for demonstrating “broader impacts” in our research proposals (that is to say, in addition to the technical or intellectual merit of the work being offered).  In my humble opinion, this was a most insidious change.  After all, NSF is that last bastion of fundamental research, established for the benefit of improving understanding.  All of the other agencies are mission agencies, whose research clearly needs to benefit their mission.  At NSF, however, the broader impacts requirement was introduced because a vocal minority felt they were not getting enough immediate return from their tax investments in science.  It’s absurd and should be repealed.

  

  (Here’s an interesting quick game anyone can play: do a Google search on “top researchers of the last hundred years”, then try to determine how that list of individuals might have fared under the test of “broader impacts” … should Heisenberg or Pauli have been judged by their assessment of the utility of their research?)

Somebody needs to explain Pasteur’s quadrant to our elected policy makers.

• UNLEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD: Early in my research management career I was asked to provide a history of the US Navy’s establishment of what was called the Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS).  Those of you who are Tom Clancy aficionados will recognize this acronym as the true-to-life basis for our maritime superiority in the Cold War; SOSUS was our acoustic network that served as the most effective component of our anti-submarine warfare toolbox, detecting Soviet submarines throughout the Atlantic and Pacific.  Anyway, the short version of the story is that in the early 1950s a gaggle of Navy Admirals went up to Cambridge, Massachusetts, with a problem and a blank check.  They invested in the best engineers and marine scientists to design, build and deploy the SOSUS array within about two years.  They sole-sourced the contract, conducted no competition, and used a closed peer-review process.  They did not invoke a Gantt chart of Technology Readiness Levels.  In short, by today’s Federal Acquisition Regulations, they broke a lot of rules.  The outcome, however, was clearly successful.  Today, we are encumbered by so many accountability-based requirements, just to get to “go” on a research program that the odds are stacked against any proposal to the tune of 5:1 for rejection.  Most of this dilemma is a consequence of ensuring that every researcher has the same opportunity to compete and that no unfair advantages are put in place.  The same concept underlies the current trend toward prohibiting cost-sharing by institutions on research proposals.  That idea is intended to ensure that the research faculty at a less well-off institution can compete fairly with another Principal Investigator at, say Cal Tech or Johns Hopkins.  Okay, I get that, but maybe the better solution is to encourage research institutions to actually make investments in the research, and not rely exclusively on the federal coffers.   That means playing on an uneven field, but it also means we’ll start strengthening the major research institutions and (gasp!) eliminating some of the smaller or less performing institutions.  With federal funding getting tighter we need to rethink how we spread the wealth.  The old saying that a rising tide floats all boats has an inverse: a sinking tide grounds the unmoving.

• COMMINGLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESEARCH DOLLARS:  Fortunately I can’t get thrown in jail for advocating this, but I can be locked up for doing it!  Now, I’m stretching my point here, since this was never really done the way I’m proposing, but if you go back a century or so, you’ll see that a lot of the research that was done was supported by private benefactors.  In fact the major researchers of the 19th Century were mostly wealthy entrepreneurs who were almost exclusively self-supported.  What I’m suggesting here is that we researchers in the U.S. are competing against peers overseas who enjoy much more latitude in combining private (e.g. industry) funding with the resources of their taxpayers (just take a look at Finnish telecommunications research as one good example).  We bend over backwards to ensure that the dollar from a corporate sponsor never sees the dollar from a federal agency, even though both dollars may be spent in the same lab by the same PI.  Again, the basis for this makes sense: it ensures transparency as needed on how our tax dollars are used, and it avoids mischief in areas such as conflict of interest.  But let’s assume for a moment that the vast majority of our researchers are smart, educable, and ethical, and that we build a system of oversight and accountability within the research institution.  If those assumptions are viable then we ought to be able to combine investments from all sources in a way that gets more bang for the buck, eliminates unnecessary duplication of proposals, while still protecting intellectual property effectively.   My guess is that industry would be a lot more eager to come on campus and pay for research.  And, after all, with federal budgets trending as they have recently, we are going to want that industry investment on campus!

Okay, I’m finished.  Now I’ll start cleaning up some of this shattered china!

Do it vicariously, via the ongoing blog  Deep Sea and Polar Biology.

Andrew Thurber (Principal Investigator, post-doc in the College of Earth, Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences) and his assistant Rory Welsh (graduate student in the Department of Microbiology)  have begun a long deployment to McMurdo Station, Antarctica, where Thurber is continuing his Antarctic research on energy flows and nutrient cycling in the soft-sediment seafloor communities beneath the ice.

Thurber and Welsh are both OSU scientific divers. They spent the last month working  with OSU Diving Safety Officer Kevin Buch, completing the workup and proficiency dives to meet  requirements of the National Science Foundation United States Antarctic Program. To prepare for working under the ice, the team practiced advanced drysuit skills and sample-collection techniques at soft sediment dive sites in the Hood Canal and at the OSU Pier of the Hatfield Marine Science Center.

At McMurdo, they are diving in water temperatures of 28° F. They use scuba regulators designed to minimize the potential for freeze-ups, and wear drysuits, multiple layers of thermal undergarments, special multi-layer hoods, and sealed dry gloves.

To keep track of their progress, and to learn more about the OSU Scientific Diving Program:

• Thurber and Welsh’s research blog
• OSU Scientific Diving Program
• U.S. Antarctic Program

It’s not a usual day when one gets to hear Bill Gates plus two Cabinet Secretaries, yet I was so privileged at the convocation of the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU) in Washington, DC in late June.  The event was a celebration of the Morrill Act of 1862, the enabling legislation for the concept of Land Grant institutions.

I listened carefully throughout the day for hints at the speakers’ perspectives on - what else? – research.

Mr. Gates was quite enthusiastic in his advocacy of extending higher education to broader audiences via  – no surprise – technology.  He loves that universities already are putting courses on line for hundreds of thousands of students –  a first wave of future capabilities. He intimated that such use of technology begs the need for more advances in managing educational content, delivery and assessment.  I sat proudly thinking about how OSU is right where we should be on this wave, reaching out to the far corners of the state and the world, and developing better ways to do so.

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack made an impassioned plea:  when you think of agriculture, think beyond food. Think, for instance, textiles. Think biofuels.  I appreciated his broadened perspective, which got Dean Arp (sitting next to me at the session) and me thinking about emerging OSU leadership in the intersection of ag sciences and material sciences. In both fields, OSU researchers already hold positions of preeminence.

The presence of  Secretary of Education Arne Duncan helped remind me that our researchers are superlative not only in their fields of study, but also in inspiring and training the next generations of researchers – and how that also is integral to our land-grant commitment.

One of my favorite presentations emphasized the role of Land Grant universities in building and sustaining our national strengths in physical sciences and engineering. Dr. Chuck Vest, President of the National Academy of Engineering, and past President of MIT, really inspired me to think about our strengths in these areas here at OSU.

The APLU convocation was a great confirmation of what so many of us here know: Land Grant Universities are a linchpin in the technological progress and leadership of our nation.  And they have been for a century and a half.  Our challenge is to continue to build on that legacy. I imagine our descendants celebrating the Morrill Act with the same enthusiasm at the tercentennial in the year 2162!

Rick Spinrad, Vice President for Research

What is the difference between a researcher and a superhero?

Discuss the riddle with Rick Spinrad on the Terra blog

Many famous scientific mishaps do not conjure up images of safety gloves or sound evacuation plans. While  absentminded practices may sometimes have led to discoveries that were interesting,  Oregon State’s advances are based on laboratory practices that are safe (stirred into a test tube of common sense).

Let’s also remember to be aware of how our scientific procedures are depicted in the media.

Say a popular publication  gets wind of your brilliant hypothesis, and wants an exclusive of you in the moment of invention. In situ, the photographer thinks you’ll look more dashing if your eyelashes show, so “off with those goggles for a sec, please.” Or the reporter thinks it would be cute to get you to cuddle that rat .  .  .

The results: the world – via magazine, newspaper, web, video – receives images of less-than-best practices. Young would-be scientists pooh-pooh their teachers’ precautions. Havoc is unleashed on the world – probably not in the form of a new Beatles song.

If the media is ringing you up, sweep the floors, check your hair, and review your safety procedures. Contact Environmental Health and Safety for guidance and training needs.

Historical information from Discover Magazine – 20 Things You Didn’t Know About … , and other sources (- must be true – we  read it on the web).

A few years ago I was invited to deliver a talk at a science pub in Washington, DC (of course, since it was Washington, they called it a “science café,” as I suspect that’s more politically correct. ) It was held in the gorgeous, airy atrium of the National Science Foundation headquarters – what a treat!

I talked about climate change and its implications for a range of societal issues.  The venue was conducive to a healthy discussion and debate afterward.  I was an instant aficionado of the concept of casual public gatherings in which experts converse with lay people on subjects of topical import.

Coming back to Corvallis, I was delighted to learn that science pubs are now an active part of OSU’s relationship with the community, at the Old World Deli* –  a familiar local venue with its own unique charm.

So, I am especially excited about the opportunity to be host for the March 12 Corvallis Science Pub.

As always at this monthly event, we will begin with the fun of a trivia competition, complete with prizes – yet the topic of the evening, biofuels, is not trivial.

Of course, raising crops such as corn and soybeans specifically in order to produce fuel poses difficult questions for policymakers in areas ranging from managing greenhouse gases to security issues associated with energy independence.

We’ll hear from two scientists whose work points us toward a more efficient and sustainable way to produce biofuels.

Vince Remcho is a professor in the analytical chemistry at Oregon State University and an affiliate scientist for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. He has authored numerous scientific publications on microfluidics, biosensors and nanoscale separations. His primary responsibilities are at OSU. As part of that capacity, he will be the principal investigator for Trillium FiberFuel’s work with the Oregon Nanoscience and Microtechnologies Institute (ONAMI) on advanced isomerization systems.

Chris Beatty has an MS in Materials Science with an emphasis in Microfabrication. He worked at Hewlett-Packard for 22 years, including 15+ years in product/process development and 5 years in business development. He has 18 issued and numerous pending patents in MEMS, inkjet, and fuel cells. He founded and managed Ecopress (book publishing), which was later acquired by a larger press. Chris is president of Trillium FiberFuels and a member of its board of directors.

I am eager to hear what Vince and Chris will say – and I know that the topic will elicit pointed questions from the audience and a lively discussion. I hope you can join us.

- Rick Spinrad
VP for Research

Corvallis Science Pubs are generally the second Monday of the Month,
6:00pm – 8:00pm at The Old World Deli, 341 SW 2nd St., Corvallis.
No RSVP or tickets are required. Come early for food, drink, and a seat. Quench your thirst and feed your head. Learn about cutting-edge topics in science and technology from leading experts, in an interactive, informal atmosphere where there’s no such thing as a dumb question. Everyone has fun at Science Pub, from those completely unfamiliar with science to self-identified “science geeks.”

Corvallis Science Pubs are for ages 21+, or minor with adult, but please read the disclaimer if you’re thinking of bringing kids.

note: I made one of my first public appearances on that very Old World Deli stage  in 1976 – not as a scientific administrator, but playing my banjo and passing the hat -  the start of a prematurely (but appropriately) aborted career as a professional musician! – RS

The creek’s world let us in, early one  morning. A yellow-eyed heron, engrossed in its walking meditation/fishing, tolerated our binoculared stares.  Four fluffed round tree swallows, cuddled on a curving reed, were oblivious to everything but the treats swooped to their mouths by their parents. On thick leaf pads, husky yellow blossoms, a local version of lotus?, ignored our bumping as we glided in to peer at their  delicacies.

We relished the benign neglect that the wildlife offered us. Paddling our kayaks silently upstream, we could blissfully feel we were one with nature, and all was right with the environment. Is that sound still the automobiles? No – it’s the swash of the ocean waves.

After disembarking and reloading the kayaks on top of our cars, we became one with that traffic to Newport’s featured human event: the open house for the new Marine Operations Center-Pacific  of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration  (NOAA). We had figured that waiting until the weekend’s final hours would mean “the public” would be gone. Ha. We waited in lines to get in through the doors and out onto the vast pier of our federal government come-to-town. Over three thousand curious people, the gatekeepers figured, had already come through.

Because I work for Rick Spinrad, who not long ago was the assistant administrator for research of NOAA, and having for years known Jane Lubchenco, who is now NOAA’s head, I was pretty aware of this Department of Commerce bureau. Yet I had so much to learn. In the warehouse, we shuffled past table-top displays about the science, created especially for this celebration, and in the administrative building we saw permanent exhibits. Scientists and other guides remained intensely enthusiastic after hours of explanations.

We  got to look up-close at antique and new artifacts, including: A lead line mold. Intricate model ships. A chronometer. Drift bottles. Sextants. China from the Captain’s table.  A huge wooden ship’s wheel. A precise level. Tools for hand-drawn maps, including India ink.

There were illustrations of a salmon’s life cycle, and what it needs from its environment at each stage. Hands-on demonstrations of salinity-testing tools. Instructions on how to escape a flood and survive a tsunami.

The information shared made it clear that our species does much more than peep at and enjoy nature, and is trying to figure out how to stop bumping it.

I found that the active verbs of NOAA include “protect, research, collect, understand, support, monitor, maintain, steward, manage, educate, explore, alert, oversee, deploy, provide . . .”

Did you know? : the US Coast and Geodetic Survey began releasing “messages in bottles” in 1959 to learn about ocean currents.  NOAA is home to “the seventh uniformed service” of the United States.  Four of the nine ships in the MOC-P fleet are homeported in Newport.  Rachel Carson worked early-on for NOAA.  NOAA Fisheries has had a presence in Newport for 35 years.  A “NOAA Weather Radio All Hazards,” portable and battery-powered, can automatically alert you to severe conditions, including lightening.  A salmon finds its way home to its breeding ground through its sense of smell.   Susan Solomon, formerly of NOAA, is known as the Ozone Hole Sleuth.  NOAA does not own the Newport property -  it has a 20-year lease.

Kayaking that day kept me in touch with the brilliance of nature. NOAA’s official vision of the future: “Healthy ecosystems, communities, and economies that are resilient in the face of change” helps assure me that it (and OSU) are helping create a better symbiosis of the natural and human-made environments, for a vital world.

- Jana Zvibleman

__

Note

If you weren’t among the hordes in  Newport that weekend, you can still view some of the scientific displays at the Hatfield Marine Science Center for a little while. And, if your group arranges a tour, you may be able to get into NOAA’s administrative building to see the mini-museum of photos and artifacts.

From http://www.moc.noaa.gov/mop_faqs.html

We plan to offer the public opportunities to visit the facility and ships as we are able. Visit opportunities will be posted to this website

To view the current location of any NOAA ship:  NOAA Ship Tracker

____________

The issues we discussed at the meeting were fascinating, and relevant to all researchers, such as: prevention of muzzling of research, ensuring scientific results are used appropriately in development of policy, and fostering engagement by researchers with the media.  We discussed how important these issues are in terms of sustaining a leadership role for the U.S. in science, technology, engineering and math.

We also had an engrossing discussion about the implications of social media on issues of scientific integrity.  How do we consider the treatment of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in the context of transmittal of scientific information?  How do we ensure that high quality, accurate research results are fairly represented in such media, and that specious and inaccurate information is flagged as such?  What lessons might we learn from Wikipedia and other such programs?

The issues associated with scientific integrity are manifold, and can become complicated quickly.  I wonder whether there is interest in having a similar dialogue here, at OSU, among our research community.  Let me know your thoughts.

Rick Spinrad
Vice President for Research

Read more Blog by Jane Lubchenco of NOAA ;    OSU Media Release

Round Table participants (alphabetical): brief bios – please see more about the distinguished careers, accomplishments, and contributions on websites of the organizations represented.

Dr. Robert D. Ballard, University of Rhode Island, Director for the Center for Ocean Exploration at URI’s Graduate School of Oceanography, member of the President’s Commission on Ocean Policy.

Dr. Ralph Cicerone, National Academies of Science, President, and Chair of the National Research Council.

Dr. John Holdren, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Dr. Peter J. Lamb, University of Oklahoma, Professor in School of Meteorology and Director of Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies, was founding Chief Editor of the Journal of Climate,  currently Editor of Meteorological Monographs.

Dr. Jane Lubchenco, NOAA,  Administrator, and Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.

Dr. Sandy MacDonald, NOAA, directs  Earth System Research Laboratory and serves as Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes.

Dr. Jonathon R. Pennock, University of New Hampshire, director of both new Hampshire Sea Grant and the Marine Program at UNH.

Dr. Larry Robinson, NOAA, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Conservation and Management, and Deputy Administrator.

Ms. Lois Schiffer, NOAA, General Counsel.

Dr. Richard W. Spinrad, Oregon State University, Vice President for Research at OSU, previously Assistant Administrator for research for NOAA, and Research Director with the U.S. Office of Naval Research.

Dr. Warren Washington, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Senior Scientist, science advisor to five U.S. presidents.

Mr. Andy Winer, NOAA, Director of Strategic Initiatives & Partners and the Acting Director of External Affairs.

Mr. Robert Winokur,  Deputy and Technical Director, Office of the Oceanographer of the Navy, Chief of Naval Operations.

Dr. Terry Yosie, World Environment Center, President and CEO.

__
Please subscribe to The Spin on Research for notification of new entries, and to join the discussion.

Vannevar Bush, the force behind the creation of the National Science Foundation

Roger Revel, one of the first scientists to study global warming and the movement of tectonic plates

Rachel Carson,  marine biologist and conservationist whose writings are credited with advancing the global environmental movement

Senator Fritz Hollings, father of important environmental legislation

Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockhead Martin, and author of the seminal report Rising Above the Gathering Storm

Carl Sagan, astronomer, astrophysicist, cosmologist, author, science popularizer, and science communicator, advocated skeptical inquiry and the scientific method. He pioneered exobiology and promoted the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI)

Jacques-Yves Cousteau, explorer, ecologist, filmmaker, innovator, scientist, photographer, author and researcher who pioneered marine conservation

If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to this blog to enter the conversation and to receive notices of updates.

Role models are useful to inspire us. As I entered the study of science, I became aware of many who had forged the way.

I was  especially attracted to some because of any of a variety of attributes:  their commitment, contributions, genius,  energy, leadership.

These were individuals who came from a variety of different communities: politics, military, science, conservation.

One thing they had in common was a capability to fly above the fray, to recognize the not-so-obvious connections between society’s needs and scientific opportunities.

They also had an abiding optimism.  Most of those who have great influence on science are skeptical optimists.  They question everything, but know that in so doing they will seed progress.

Here are images of those who, early in my career, became what I call my Champions of Science.

They have remained so over the years.

I’m wondering if you can identify them. And whether you agree about their standing.

Who are your champions in your field? How have they influenced your work/your life?

I invite you to comment to this blog.

In an upcoming entry, we’ll post the names of those pictured here.

-Rick Spinrad
Vice President for Research
If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to this blog to enter the conversation and to receive notices of updates.