This project supports the Broader Impacts and Outreach Network for Institutional Collaboration (BIONIC), a national Research Coordination Network of Broader Impacts to support professionals who assist researchers to design, implement, and evaluate the Broader Impacts activities for NSF proposals and awards. All NSF proposals are evaluated not only on the Intellectual Merit of the proposed research, but also on the Broader Impacts of the proposed work, such as societal relevance, educational outreach, and community engagement. Many institutions have begun employing Broader Impacts support professionals, but in most cases, these individuals have not worked as a group to identify and share best practices. As a consequence, there has been much duplication of effort. Through coordination, BIONIC is expected to improve efficiency, reduce redundancy, and have significant impact in several areas: 1) Researchers will benefit from an increased understanding of the Broader Impacts merit review criterion and increased access to collaborators who can help them design, implement, and evaluate their Broader Impacts activities; 2) Institutions and research centers will increase their capacity to support Broader Impacts via mentoring for Broader Impacts professionals and consulting on how to build Broader Impacts support infrastructure, with attention to inclusion of non-research-intensive universities, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Hispanic- and Minority-Serving Institutions that may not have the resources to support an institutional Broader Impacts office; and 3) NSF, itself, will benefit from a systematic and consistent approach to Broader Impacts that will lead to better fulfillment of the Broader Impacts criterion by researchers, better evaluation of Broader Impacts activities by reviewers and program officers, and a system for evaluating the effectiveness of Broader Impacts activities in the aggregate, as mandated by Congress and the National Science Board. Through its many planned activities, BIONIC will ultimately help advance the societal aims that the Broader Impacts merit review criterion was meant to achieve.
The main goals of the project will be accomplished through the four specific objectives: 1) Identify and curate promising models, practices, and evaluation methods for the Broader Impacts community; 2) Expand engagement in, and support the development of, high-quality Broader Impacts activities by educating current and future faculty and researchers on effective practices; 3) Develop the human resources necessary for sustained growth and increased diversity of the Broader Impacts community; and 4) Promote cross-institutional collaboration and dissemination for Broader Impacts programs, practices, models, materials, and resources. BIONIC will facilitate collaborative Broader Impacts work across institutions, help leverage previously developed resources, support professional development, and train new colleagues to enter into the Broader Impacts field. This project will improve the quality and sustainability of Broader Impacts investments, as researchers continue to create unique and effective activities that are curated and broadly disseminated. BIONIC will create a network designed to assist NSF-funded researchers at their institutions in achieving the goals of the Broader Impacts Review Criterion. In so doing, BIONIC will promote Broader Impacts activities locally, nationally, and internationally and help to advance the Broader Impacts field.
This award is co-funded by the Divisions of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences and Emerging Frontiers in the Directorate for Biological Sciences and by the Division of Chemistry in the Directorate for Mathematics and Physical Sciences.
The emergence and recognition of outreach and engagement staff and non-tenure track faculty in higher education literature as key figures in the success of university outreach and community engagement are welcome developments for these practitioners. This article describes the perceptions of outreach and engagement staff at large, public research universities with decentralized engagement initiatives. The authors describe efforts to organize outreach and community engagement staff to create supportive networks, improve practice, provide professional development opportunities, and advocate for
During the last decade universities have developed policies and infrastructures to support open access to publications but now it is time to move a step forward. There is an increasing demand for accessing data supporting the research results to validate and reproduce them. Therefore universities have to be prepared for this new challenge that goes beyond dissemination because it requires a strategy for managing research data within institutions. In this paper I will try to give some hints on how to deal with this challenge that can be framed in the new open science movement aimed at providing
The organization and functioning of research have radically changed over the last 10 or 20 years, as a result of a determined political action. The activism of some scientists, during this period, has failed to significantly alter this trend. So far. Today, New Public Management is triumphant. It has been implemented by a category of former scientists who have become administrators, evaluators, organizers. As a result, the prime role of scientific publications is no longer to exchange scientific information but to allow a measure of scientific production, and to rank the principal
Knowledge is not static or unique. It can be exchanged between activists, academia and policy circles: from science to activism and from activism to science. Existing scientific knowledge is being used by activists to expose wrongdoings or improve practices and knowledge in environmental and health conflicts. Activists can either adopt scientific knowledge and data in their own argumentations or produce new scientific knowledge either by becoming scientists themselves or in co-operation with experts. Local and scientific knowledge is being combined to challenge government policies and the
This commentary explores a traditionally supposed boundary between science and politics, with particular attention to activist scientists who engage in public communication. Work in fields like science and technology studies shows that framing this boundary in terms of epistemological rules fails. Boundaries dictating proper scientific activities are at best pragmatic, context-dependent, and fluid. Certainly, certain kinds of politics can undermine the integrity of scientific knowledge, but it is imperative to recognize that all science is political. As we see with activist climate scientists