NSF Urged to Think More Boldly, Take Risks

A new draft report from its oversight body calls on the U.S. National Science Foundation to be more receptive to funding wild-eyed ideas that, just maybe, could revolutionize science.

NSF's peer-review system is widely seen as the gold standard for selecting high-quality research proposals. But board members say they are worried that some scientists don't even bother to apply for grants for ideas that cut across the scientific grain because of what the draft report calls "the external perception that NSF is not as welcoming as it should be to such research."

To erase that perception, the report suggests "a new, distinct, and separate foundation-wide program designed to solicit and support transformational and paradigm-challenging proposals." The mechanism would serve scientists with brilliant but not-ready-for-prime-time ideas, the kind that "might be at odds with the current thinking in the field," says board member Douglas Randall, a plant physiologist at the University of Missouri, Columbia. "And if it goes into that merit-review meat grinder, it'll just get spit out."

Several board members say they would like the proposal review process to place more emphasis on the investigator's ideas and track record and less on preliminary data showing that the project is feasible. "Business as usual is what people are comfortable with. We need something different," says board chair Steven Beering. The report asks NSF to come up with a management plan by August.
Source: Science News