Protect NSF funding for political science research Download March 17, 2013 | Author: AAAS CEO Alan I. Leshner The Coburn-McCain amendment (SA-65) would eliminate NSF funding for political science research. On March 14, 2013, AAAS CEO Alan I. Leshner wrote to Senator Barbara Mikulski, Chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, urging her to protect the budget allocations for social, political, behavioral and economic sciences. To read the letter in full please download the PDF on this page. Capitol Connection Open Data policy for all federal agencies Capitol Connection May 16, 2013 On May 9 the President signed an Executive Order on Open Data, and in conjunction issued an Open Data Policy for all federal agencies. NIH announces sequestration policies A look at the NIH sequestration policies Capitol Connection May 20, 2013 On May 8th, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced how sequestration will impact the agency’s fiscal policies. The NIH is now operating under a $29.15 billion dollar budget, which is roughly five percent less than last fiscal year. While this cut was anticipated, it puts further stress on already financially starved labs and scientists. Capitol Connection More on NSF peer-review controversy Capitol Connection May 10, 2013 Last week House Science, Space, and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) issued a statement regarding the discussion draft bill entitled the High Quality Research Act after news leaked regarding the draft legislation.  Politicization of science challenges teaching methods Politicization of science challenges teaching methods Capitol Connection May 20, 2013 One of the very first things we are trained to do as educators is to try to keep anything that can be construed as biased information, propaganda, or false information away from the students. This policy doesn't seem so hard at first, but it really is. After all, the real world is filled with politicized science and the media flaunts it. How can an educator remain unbiased against that background? Federal STEM education policy déjà vu Federal STEM education policy déjà vu Driving Force May 16, 2013 Federal programs in science education “continue to be burdened by a lack of coordination, a lack of evaluation, and a lack of accountability. The federal portfolio of investments... needs a comprehensive, coordinated management plan to provide balance and coherence across and within federal agencies.” Those words appeared in a 1994 report, The Federal Investment in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education: Where Now? What Next? prepared by a White House Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineering, and Technology. Capitol Connection Questions arise about future of SBE research Capitol Connection May 6, 2013 Congressional activity has recently cast a gloom over the future of social, behavioral, and economics (SBE) research. Last week, the chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Lamar Smith (R-TX), submitted a letter to the National Science Foundation requesting “access to scientific/technical reviews and the Program Officers Review Analysis” for five SBE-related research grants. Is the “High Quality Research Act” the antithesis of science? Is the 'High Quality Research Act' the antithesis of science? Capitol Connection May 20, 2013 ScienceInsider obtained a draft copy of the “High Quality Research Act” – legislation that seeks to change how the National Science Foundation selects which grants to fund. Many scientists fear that this draft bill shows a misunderstanding of how science works. House Science Committee holds NSF oversight hearing Lawmaker: Every NSF grant 'should directly benefit the American people' Capitol Connection May 1, 2013 On April 17, the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing on the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) budget request for FY 2014.  During the hearing chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) suggested that every NSF grant include a statement of how the research "would directly benefit the American people." Supreme Court hears high-stakes gene patenting case Supreme Court hears high-stakes gene patenting case Capitol Connection May 2, 2013 The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on April 15 in the case of Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics.  At issue is whether patents on human genes held by Myriad Genetics, Inc. are valid.  
Copyright © 2013. American Association for the Advancement of Science. All rights reserved. Read our privacy policy and terms of use. Contact info.