Suchergebnisse

Between 1980 and 1985 representatives of academic science changed their policy positions, moving from veneration of basic or fundamental research to promotion of entrepreneurial science. This change is examined through research university presidents' testimony before the U.S. Congress. The presidents' move from "fruits of research" narratives that emphasize the benefits of basic science to narratives that celebrate technology based on fundamental research in "orders of magnitude more production from the efforts of orders of magnitude less workers. " This change reflects presidents' endorsement of conservative policy initiatives that depend on privatization, deregulation, and commercialization of science. These policies will probably result in major realignments within research universities, with institutional managers, scientists, and graduate students in the physical sciences involved in entrepreneurial activity receiving privileges and rewards that other faculty and students do not.

This paper examines the way "corresponding rights and duties" surrounding academic freedom were negotiated between professional associations and organizations of university managers and trustees. The subject is approached through an analysis of the American Association of University Professors' (AAUP) major documents on academic freedom. In general terms it is argued that American academics, as intellectuals dependent on their employing institutions, have consistently sacrificed individuals and substantive principles in order to gain compliance for procedural safeguards from university officials for the profession as a whole. Restitution or reinstatement were not serious issues: the goal of the AAUP was a uniform personnel policy recognizing tenure. Even this goal was difficult to achieve. To win its acceptance, professors effectively traded civil liberties for job security.

Examined is the way "corresponding rights & duties" surrounding academic freedom were negotiated between professional associations & organizations of U managers & trustees. The subject is approached through an analysis of the American Assoc of U Professors' (AAUP) major documents on academic freedom. In general terms it is argued that US academics, as intellectuals dependent on their employing institutions, have consistently sacrificed individual & substantive principles in order to gain compliance for procedural safeguards from U officials for the profession as a whole. Restitution or reinstatement were not serious issues: the goal of the AAUP was a uniform personnel policy recognizing tenure. Even this goal was difficult to achieve. To win its acceptance, professors effectively traded civil liberties for job security. HA.

This article analyzes the National Science Study produced by the Republican-dominated U.S. Congress in the mid-1990s to see if the priorities of S&T policy were changing, if state agencies were being reorganized to achieve new priorities, and if universities were expected to work closely with industry in reconfigured agencies. Also analyzed was the economic composition of board members of eight S&T policy organizations that informed the National Science Study. It was found that, generally, Republican policy supported both basic science and civilian technology policy but did not advocate reorganization of state administration of S&T. However, a number of the S&T policy groups pushed for the establishment of a separate mission agency for civilian technology. This suggests that conceptualization of a unitary social contract between science and society or iterated principal-agent relations expressing the interaction of science and society are insufficient because there may be multiple social contracts and many principals and agents.

This article describes the emerging bipartisan political coalition supporting commercial competitiveness as a rationale for research and development (R&D), points to selected changes in legal and funding structures in the 1980s that stem from the success of the new political coalition and suggests some of the connections between these changes and academic science and technology, and examines the consequences of these changes for universities. The study uses longitudinal secondary data on changes in business strategies and corporate structures that made business elites in the defense and health industries consider supporting competitiveness R&D policies. The article identifies and assesses an array of national R&D legislation concerned with competitiveness that was passed in the 1980s and 1990s and that has implications for academic R&D. The effects of competitiveness R&D policies on universities and academic science and technology are appraised by analyzing changes in time-series data (1983-1993) on science and technology indicators compiled by the National Science Foundation.