b*****d
发帖数: 61690 | 1 https://www.agronomy.org/files/science-policy/letters/2013-04-25-smith-nsf-
grants.pdf
Also last week, recent efforts in Congress to question the long-established
process of peer review escalated when the Chairman of the House Science,
Space, and Technology Committee, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), released an early
draft of legislation entitled the High Quality Research Act. As reported by
Science, this legislation would apparently alter the National Science
Foundation’s (NSF) mission of supporting fundamental research by requiring
the Director to certify that all funded grants are “in the interest of the
United States to advance the national health, prosperity, or welfare, and to
secure the national defense by promoting the progress of science,” as well
as “groundbreaking” and not duplicative of other federally-funded
research. This certification requirement broadens a similar requirement
recently included in the FY 2013 continuing resolution (CR) specific to
political science research funded by the NSF.
Following in this theme, Chairman Smith (R-X) sent a letter to the NSF
stating “based on my review of NSF-funded studies, I have concerns
regarding some grants approved by the Foundation and how closely they adhere
to the NSF’s “intellectual merits” guideline.” The letter then asks for
more information on five separate research projects funded by the agency.
This inquiry drew a pointed response from the Committee’s Ranking Member,
Rep. Eddie Bernice-Johnson (D-TX). Rep. Johnson’s letter to the Chairman
states this “is the first step on a path that would destroy the merit-based
review process at NSF and intrudes political pressure into what is widely
viewed as the most effective and creative process for awarding research
funds in the world.” | f******h
发帖数: 609 | |
|
