bypass all navigation science and engineering Indicators Home Page HTML Contents Page PDF Contents Page Help Page Comments Page Print format page
Indicators 2002
Introduction Overview Chapter 1: Elementary and Secondary Education Chapter 2: Higher Education in Science and Engineering Chapter 3: Science and Engineering Workforce Chapter 4: U.S. and International Research and Development: Funds and Alliances Chapter 5: Academic Research and Development Chapter 6: Industry, Technology, and the Global Marketplace Chapter 7: Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding Chapter 8: Significance of Information Technology Appendix Tables
Chapter Contents:
Highlights
Introduction
Financial Resources for Academic R&D
Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in Academia
Outputs of Scientific and Engineering Research: Articles and Patents
Conclusion
Selected Bibliography
 
Sidebars
Appendix Tables
List of Figures
Presentation Slides

Academic Research and Development

Selected Bibliography

Association of University Technology Managers, Inc. (AUTM). 2000. AUTM Licensing Survey, Fiscal Year 1991–1999. Norwalk, CT.

Blackburn, R., and J. Lawrence. 1986. "Aging and the Quality of Faculty Job Performance," Review of Educational Research (Fall): 265–290.

Blumenthal, D., E.G. Campbell, M.S. Anderson, N. Causino, and K. Seashore Louis. 1997. "Withholding Research Results in Academic Life Science." The Journal of the American Medical Association (April 16). Available at <http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/journals/archive/jama/vol_277/no_15/oc6d11.htm>. Accessed May 2001.

Brainard, J., and R. Southwick. 2000. "Congress Gives Colleges a Billion-Dollar Bonanza in Earmarked Projects." The Chronicle of Higher Education 46 (July 28): A29.

———.2001. "A Record Year at the Federal Trough: Colleges Feast on $1.67 in Earmarks." The Chronicle of Higher Education 47 (August 10): A20.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 1994. A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. Princeton.

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 1998. CIA World Factbook 1998. Langley, VA.

European Commission. 1997. Second European Report on S&T Indicators. Brussels.

Florida, R. 1999. "The Role of the University: Leveraging Talent, Not Technology." Issues in Science and Technology (Summer). Available at <http://www.nap.edu/issues/15.4/florida.htm>. Accessed May 2001.

Geisler, E. 2001. "The Mires of Research Evaluation," The Scientist 15(10): 39. Available at <http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2001/may/opin_010514.html>. Accessed May 2001.

Goldman, C.A., and T. Williams, with D.M. Adamson and K. Rosenblatt. 2000. Paying for University Research Facilities and Administration. Santa Monica, CA: Science and Technology Policy Institute, RAND.

Gotbaum, J. 2001. "Clarification of OMB A-21 Treatment of Voluntary Uncommitted Cost Sharing and Tuition Remission Costs." Memorandum M-01-06. Washington DC: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President.

Huttner, S. 1999. "Knowledge and the Biotech Economy: A Case of Mistaken Identity." Paper presented at the High Level CERI/OECD/NSF Forum on Measuring Knowledge in Learning Economies and Societies, Arlington, VA. May.

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). 2000. World Development Indicators, 2000. Washington, DC.

Levin, S., and P. Stephan. 1991. "Research Productivity Over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists." American Economic Review 81 (March): 114–32.

National Academies Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy (National Academies STEP). 2001. Intellectual Property in the Knowledge-Based Economy. www4.nationalacademies.org/pd/step.nsf

———. Forthcoming. Trends in Federal Support of Research and Graduate Education. Washington, DC.

National Research Council (NRC). 1991. Ending Mandatory Retirement for Tenured Faculty. Washington, DC: National Academy Press

National Science Board. 2000. Science and Engineering Indicators 2000. NSB-00-1. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

National Science Board. 1996. Science & Engineering Indicators 1996. NSB-96-21. Arlington, VA.

National Science Foundation (NSF), Division of Science Resources Statistics. 1995a. Guide to NSF Science/Engineering Resources Data. NSF 95-318. Arlington, VA.

———. 1995b. NSF Survey Instruments Used in Collecting Science and Engineering Resources Data. NSF 95-317. Arlington, VA.

———. 1996. Human Resources for Science and Technology: The European Region. NSF 96-316. Arlington, VA.

———. 1998. How Has the Field Mix of Academic R&D Changed? NSF 99-309. Arlington, VA.

———. 2000a. Latin America: R&D Spending Jumps in Brazil, Mexico, and Costa Rica. NSF 00-316. Arlington, VA.

———. 2000b. National Patterns of R&D Resources: 2000 Data Update NSF 01-309. Arlington, VA.

———. 2001a. Academic Science and Engineering R&D Expenditures: Fiscal Year 1999. Detailed Statistical Tables. NSF 01-329. Arlington, VA.

———. 2001b. Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1999, 2000, and 2001. Detailed Statistical Tables. Vol. 49. NSF 01-328. Arlington, VA.

———. 2001c. Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions. Fiscal Year 1999. Detailed Statistical Tables. NSF 01-323. Arlington, VA.

———. 2001d. Scientific and Engineering Research Facilities at Universities and Colleges: 1998. NSF 01-301. Arlington, VA.

———. 2001e. Scientific and Engineering Research Facilities: 1999. NSF 01-330. Arlington, VA.

———. Forthcoming. Characteristics of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in the United States: 1999. Detailed Statistical Tables. Arlington, VA.

New York Times. 2001. "Technology Intensifies the Law of Change." Interview with Gordon E. Moore. (May 27).

Organization of American States. 1997. "Science & Technology Indicators." Iberoamerican/Interamerican. Washington, DC.

Raghuram, N., and Y. Madhavi. 1996. "India's Declining Ranking" Nature 383 (October 17): 572.

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. 1993. "Academic Earmarks: An Interim Report by the Chairman of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology." Washington, DC.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2000. Cost Principles for Educational Institutions. Circular A-21. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

———. 2001. "Analytical Perspectives." Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). 2000. Analysis of Facilities and Administrative Costs at Universities. Washington DC.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). 2000. Technology Assessment and Forecast Report, U.S. Universities and Colleges, 1969–99. Washington, DC.


Note: Some web links may no longer be active because of changes at the referenced organization's web site.


Previous Section Top of Section Next Section
home  |  help  |  comments
introduction  |  overview  |  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  appendix tables