BETWEEN FORUMS Cameron Fincher, Associate Editor for AIR

Policies and Priorities in Funding Research

The National Institute of Education (NIE) is interested in research on institutions of postsecondary education. The Institute's program on edu- cational policy and organization has been broadened to include studies of postsecondary organization and management, and funds for the current fiscal year are available in the amount of approximately 700,000 dollars. There is much about NIE's new-found interests and the possibilities for funding that ought to interest institutional researchers.

More or less implicit in the Educational Amendments Act of 1972 was the notion that NIE would concentrate on the problems and issues of el- ementary and secondary education, while the Fund for Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) would stimulate innovation and change in institutions beyond the high school. Changes in funding policies suggest, however, that the federal government at last perceives education as an interrelated sys- tem that does not easily lend itself to neatly ordered priorities. If funded as described in NIE's announcement of grants, the studies to be supported will deal with many issues and concerns within the realm of institutional research.

Included in the possibilities of federal funding are studies of the pro- cesses by which colleges and universities "establish goals, allocate re- sources, select personnel, adjust curricula, and solve a wide range of institutional problems." Also possible are studies of internal processes that are affected by "distinctive institutional traditions" and by other internal, political, or economic forces. Even more relevant, perhaps, are possible studies of the responses postsecondary institutions make to social and economic conditions and of the contributions they make to community and society.

NIE takes explicit recognition of the possibility that the problems and issues ofpostsecondary education are organizational in nature, and what is needed is research on the organizational processes of PSE institutions.

Research in Higher Education © 1980 Agathon Press, Inc.

Vol. 13, No. 2, 1980 0361-0365/80/060189-04501.50

189

190 AIR BETWEEN FORUMS

Proposals will apparently be welcome if they view institutions as complex organizations with intricate internal and external relationships. The door is open to studies that will focus on the social and cultural forces shaping education and influencing students, faculty, and administrators. Interest in such studies is apparently triggered by "declining resources, persistent inequality, and diminishing autonomy."

Definite priority is given proposals that would focus on the diversity of postsecondary institutions, the sources of that diversity, and the compara- tive effectiveness of different groups of institutions within state systems or geographic regions of the nation. Further priority in funding is given re- search that relates the consequences of postsecondary education to its organizational processes and, in particular, those processes that promote or inhibit student retention, transfer, or upward mobility to graduate and professional education. It is all quite encouraging.

FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH

There is a crucial proviso, however, in the announcement of grants. The research to be funded by NIE must be "fundamental." Specific rejection is made of proposed projects that seek to "operate, implement, improve, or evaluate" programs that are ongoing. The intent is to reflect NIE's com- mitment to scholarly or scientific inquiries that will clarify the fundamental processes of education and eventually provide a foundation for specific improvements in policy and practice. That, too, is encouraging.

The commitment to fundamental research stems from a report (Kiesler & Turner, 1977) submitted to NIE by the National Academy of Sciences. Prepared by the Committee on Fundamental Research Relevant to Educa- tion, the report dealt with ways in which NIE can meet its Congressional charge of improving education by strengthening its scientific foundations.

No distinctions are made between fundamental research and pure or basic research, as those concepts have been defined in the past. The Committee is unequivocal, however, in recommending increased funding for education research and development that is designated as fundamental research. Basic research has received only 11 or 12 percent of all federal funds allocated for research and development, and education has received even less (4 percent) for research into fundamental or basic processes.

The Committee contends that federal policies for funding "quick solu- tions to educational problems" have been premature. Recommended is a change in policy that would permit a more careful assessment of what is known and what must be leamed for solution-oriented programs or proj- ects. The significance or urgency of an educational problem is not the best guide for research funding, and the funding process should include more

AIR BETWEEN FORUMS 191

active researchers who are sensitive to the scientific feasibility of proposed research.

Higher education is seen as a particular determinant of socioeconomic attainment and is thereby in need of reexaminations of its goals. The Committee notes that research in higher education has benefited from cross-disciplinary inquiry, but quickly identifies other questions and issues that have been raised about state and federal aid to private colleges, student demands for alternative modes of higher education, and the need to include social as well as private benefits in accountability systems. It is questions and issues such as these, the Committee adds, that brings us to "the frontiers of social science research."

Although its general thrust is commendable, the NIE report on funda- mental research includes much that may be reactionary. Strongly implied in its pages is the view that research is funded best when initiated by active researchers with special research interests. Not so strongly implied is the possibility that "importance" or "urgency, ' is a deceptive criterion by which to set funding criteria. The Committee apparently holds a stereotype of creative, specialized researchers who will eventually lay scientific foun- dations for educational edifices if their research interests are adequately funded. Such research interests should be indulged with no promissory notes for practical results.

CENTERS AND LABORATORIES

The Panel for the Review of Laboratory & Center Operations (1979) has prepared its report from a different set of premises and with different funding implications. Fulfilling its responsibility to review and report on the 17 regional laboratories and research and development centers funded by NIE, the Panel "strongly endorses the concept" of centers and laboratories, while affirming the importance of maintaining and improving their stability and quality. The Panel finds good evidence of research that leads to improved educational practice, the development and dissemina- tion of products and techniques that can improve instruction and curricula, and other forms of technical assistance or collaborative problem solving.

The success of such efforts is directly dependent upon federal policies and procedures for financial support, and the Panel recommends "new and responsive policies and procedures" to NIE that would provide institu- tional stability, ensure accountability, and enhance the setting of priorities by both NIE and the laboratories and centers. The Panel acknowledges the "history of instability and conflict" experienced by the centers and labs, but believes that present policies take into account this past history and give promise of overcoming past problems.

192 AIR BETWEEN FORUMS

As reviewed by the Panel, R&D Centers have been designed to conduct basic research, to provide leadership, and to engage in development and dissemination activities when appropriate. The regional Laboratories have been designed to conduct applied research within a context of regional concerns and priorities. Their functions and services are more aptly de- scribed as providing technical assistance, facilitating communication, and promoting and disseminating the uses and applications of research.

The Panel is aware of duplication in the missions of regional laboratories and R&D centers, but believes some duplication to be in the best interest of progress. It does recommend, nontheless, that NIE should discourage centers and labs from undertaking projects not closely related to their central mission. It also suggests that NIE should encourage the centers and labs to subcontract and decentralize when such action is advantageous to stability or fulfillment of mission.

CONCERNS AND CONCLUSIONS

The problems and issues of postsecondary education that should be amenable to research are surely "organizational in nature," and there is, indeed, a need for research on organizational processes. It is less clear, however, that the recommendations of the Committee on Fundamental Research will lead to the kinds of studies that will resolve those issues and concerns. It is especially dubious that self-initiated proposals prepared by specialized researchers will produce the know-how and know-why that PSE institutions so sorely need.

Much the same can be said about the enhancement of centers and labs. Their distinctive missions may not be distinctive at all, and their failures may well be the failures of individual initiative and research interest. It is still true, to no small extent, that regional labs and R&D centers have long been the captives of the educational researchers that they were designed to replace.

REFERENCES

Grants for research on institutions o f postsecondary education:fiscal year 1980. Program Announcement 80-0004. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Edu- cation, 1980.

Kieslar, S.B., & Turner, C.F. (eds.) Fundamental research and the process of education: Final report to the National Institute of Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1977.

Panel for the Review of Laboratory and Center Operations. Research and devel- opment centers and regional educational laboratories: strengthening and sta- bilizing a national resource. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education, 1979.