Large-scale interdisciplinary collaboration between natural and social sciences has been advocated by funding agencies for enhancing communication between science and society. However, the actual infrastructure design and operation remain challenging, particularly for social-science-led interdisciplinary centers, which normally do not have core scientific facilities or centralized laboratories to coordinate collaborations among disciplines. Drawing upon ethnographic and interview data, this paper examines how the notion of interdisciplinarity was practiced in two federally-funded Centers for Nanotechnology in Society. We show how federal policies, university cultures, and local organizational structures significantly impacted forms of interdisciplinary practice and identity. In addition, we show that individuals’ interdisciplinary rhetoric, epistemic claims, and daily operation of interdisciplinarity require strong infrastructural support in terms of spatial and human resource arrangements to nurture cross-disciplinary coordination and trust as well as softening collaborative tensions while developing complementary projects.
This content will become publicly available on October 1, 2024
The goals of open science are driven by policies requiring data management, sharing, and accessibility. One way of measuring the impact of open science policies on scientific knowledge is to access data that has been prepared for re‐use. But how accessible/available are data resources? In this paper, we discuss a method for exploring and locating datasets made available by scientists from federally funded projects in the US. The data pathways method was tested on federal awards. Here we describe the method and the results from analyzing fifty federal awards granted by the National Science Foundation to pursue data resources and their availability in publications, data repositories, or institutional repositories. The data pathways approach contributes to the development of a practical approach on availability that captures the current ways in which data are accessible from federally funded science projects –ranging from institutional repositories, journal data deposit, PI and project web pages, and science data platforms, among other found possibilities. This paper discusses some background and motivations for such a method, the method, research design, barriers encountered when searching for data resources from projects, and how this method can be useful to future studies of data availability.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10474780
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
- Volume:
- 60
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2373-9231
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 379 to 387
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- ["Data availability","Open Science Policies","Data Management"]
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
Too few two-year technical and community colleges pursue funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF). Instead, they tend to rely on the U.S. Department of Education or the U.S. Department of Labor for federal grants. From the way grant funding opportunities are announced, to the processes used in reviewing proposals and making funding decisions, to the policies and procedures that govern submission of proposals and implementation of grants, NSF operates differently from other federal funding agencies that make grant awards. The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) Program is unique within NSF because of its focus on two-year colleges and workforce development, specifically for those who complete for-credit programs of study and earn credentials that enable program completers to enter the skilled technical workforce. NSF expects faculty to be involved in developing proposals and implementing projects funded by the agency. Meeting this expectation requires a paradigm shift for many community and technical colleges where the primary emphasis is on teaching and where there is seldom any expectation that faculty will contribute to college efforts to secure external funding from federal sources. In addition, in 2021, the overall NSF funding rate was 26% which presents daunting odds for success. However, 10 years of research demonstrate the effectiveness of an intervention that dramatically increases the funding rate for two-year colleges seeking funding from the NSF ATE Program. Since 2012, the Mentor-Connect initiative has been funded by the NSF ATE Program to help two-year college technician educators and related STEM faculty develop the grant-writing skills needed to meet NSF expectations and benefit from ATE funding. Over the past decade, 80% of Mentor-Connect participants have successfully submitted proposals. To date, the average funding rate for these proposals is 71%. This paper describes how the Mentor-Connect intervention works and for whom, what outcomes have resulted for participants who become grantees, and how two-year colleges and technician educators can benefit.more » « less
-
A substantial investment by the National Science Foundation (NSF), including awards from Engineering Education and Centers in the Engineering Directorate and the Division of Undergraduate Education in the Education and Human Resources Directorate, has led to the creation and study of the Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD). This large database of student records has yielded groundbreaking research on student pathways by a small interdisciplinary team of researchers. The team has shown that while individual engineering programs may have poor graduation rates, a multi-institutional view reveals that engineering programs as a whole graduate a larger fraction of students than other groups of disciplines. The team has also shown that women and men have similar graduation rates in engineering, likely a result of efforts to make engineering education a welcoming environment for women and the high academic credentials of the women who do study engineering. As with the overall graduation rate, individual institutions and programs can and do have outcomes that depart from this aggregate perspective. A comprehensive study of student pathways in various engineering disciplines provided practitioners with rich information specific to their disciplinary context. The team has also designed a variety of metrics that have provided researchers and practitioners with an improved understanding of student pathways. The quality of the data source and the research team is attested by these substantial findings, multiple best paper awards, and other recognitions. This paper provides updates on transitioning MIDFIELD to the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), documentation of institutional policies, and supporting a growing community of researchers in using the database including the second offering of the MIDFIELD Institute. This work is supported by the NSF Division of Engineering Education and Centers.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract To meet the demands of technological change required for climate change mitigation, academic research must cover a broad range of climate solutions. Diverse participation in this research is important because research shows that a variety of backgrounds and problem-solving approaches are important to solving complex problems such as climate change. In our study, we examine the discplinary and institutional diversity of federal funding for academic research on climate solutions (ARCS) in the United States. We identify $1.42 billion in federal funding for ARCS in fiscal years 2019 and 2020. Our findings reveal that 85% of federal ARCS grants are awarded to Principal Investigators in engineering and the natural sciences. Additionally, institutions classified as having high research activity (R1s) receive over 60% of the ARCS funding per student. Tribal institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Hispanic Serving Institutions collectively receive only $109.20 in ARCS funding per student, compared to $334.30 per student for other institution types. These disparities in federally funded ARCS grants are, in part, a consequence of the absence of policies that promote interdisciplinary collaboration and broader participation in academic research. We discuss the policy implications that have contributed to the identified inequities in ARCS funding and current policies that could enhance the distribution of ARCS in the future. We propose strategies for federally funded ARCS to support an equitable energy transition that addresses the needs of contemporary society and beyond.
-
The last 15 years have seen a marked growth of data management and sharing policies among federal agencies in the US and Canada. While these policies have an undeniable impact in terms of increased publicly available datasets, they have also impacted the research practices of funded researchers and the services and infrastructure provided by institutions. Researchers and institutions alike share the responsibility to align practices with funding agency requirements concerning data management and sharing, but each stakeholder group has responded in ways that may not align with one another. This presentation delves into research resulting from the National Science Foundation-funded Realities of Academic Data Sharing (RADS) Initiative and provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of services and infrastructure of six academic institutions, as well as an overview of the overall impact of these policies for researchers and institutions. Insights into services, infrastructure, and impact can lead to the creation of streamlined pathways for enhancing institutional efficiencies in data management and sharing.more » « less
