FASTS —The Federation of Australian Science and Technology
Societies
http://www.fasts.org
The Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
represents the views of the workers in Australian science. FASTS
aims to have a significant influence in the formulation of science
and technology policy, and by improving the overall climate for
research and development, to bring economic, environmental and
social benefits to Australia.
For more information on member benefits click here
ESA is a member of FASTS and nominates
a representative to attend events and liaise between the Society
and the Federation. Our current representative is Dr Michael Roderick.
SCIENCE MEETS PARLIAMENT
"Science meets Parliament" is an annual two day event which encourages scientists to put a personal and enthusiastic face to their science before Federal MPs and Senators. ESA is keen to encourage more "ecological" representation at this event and provides travel assistance for 2 interested members to attend.
SCIENCE MEETS PARLIAMENT 2010 will be held March9/10 at Parliament House, Canberra, and ESA is calling for expressions of interest from both student and professional members to attend as one of two ESA representatives. An application form for next year's event will be available here in early 2011
Alex Gold, PhD candidate, UNSW, attended SmP 2010 as ESA's nominated representative - read his report here
LATEST NEWS
1.The Science workforce: the changing nature of science based work
1. Background
The FASTS Board has agreed to examine the changing nature of science based work. The initial impetus was twofold:
- concern expressed by industry, that graduates did not have the right technical skills upon graduation and the gap was growing, and
- concern expressed by academics that there was a decline in capacity to provide technical, laboratory, field work and other non-theoretical skills in undergraduate science programs (and a disconnect between the practical/technical and theoretical dimensions of undergraduate programs).
Education authorities, Governments and science organisations promote the study of science on the basis that technology drives the global economy, and a scientifically skilled workforce is necessary for competitive advantage in both generating and adopting new technology. From here there is a tacit leap to the idea that there are lots of ‘science’ jobs out there. FASTS claims to represent the working scientists who are in these jobs.
While there is quite an extensive literature – typically industry/sector driven – on skills shortages both the ACDS and FASTS believe the issues are deeper (and more interesting) than skills. We are concerned there is:
- a poorly articulated sense of how the nature of the technical workforce has changed over the last 30-50 years in the face of the globalisation, generalisation of ICT and technological change including rapid changes and adoption of instrumentation; computer systems, for example, do much of the routine technical work that trained technicians used to. (or to pose the issue in different language – how has the ‘business model(s)’ of being a working scientist or scientifically trained changed in the past few decades?);
- a lack of clarity as to how employers identify and describe the kind of science background that they require of their recruits, and the roles that they have in mind for them, and
- a lack of convincing profiles of science in 21st century work.
One way of describing this is an identity crisis as to what are scientists in the market place(s).
There are a range of intertwined factors that contribute to this, including:
- Lack of sense of science as a profession (other than academic research as a vocation);
- Science degrees seem to have both generic characteristics such as a BA but also some vocational characteristics such as a BEng;
- Apparent low identity with disciplines, professional societies or science for most BSc graduates within a short time after graduation (possibly connected with a view that academic culture infers that being a research scientist is the only legitimate outcome of a science education and, conversely, to not take that pathway constitutes a form of failure for science graduates).
Getting a handle on these dimensions requires very significant research, analysis and work with industry, scientists, students and other end-users.
It is worth exploring the question of what role technically trained people now play in a developed economy. How have the required skill sets and roles changed over time? Do developed economies need fewer science trained people but in higher level and more specialised areas? How do employers now identify and describe the kind of science background that they require of their recruits, and the roles that they have in mind for them? How has this changed over time?
2. The five studies
ACDS and FASTS have decided to initiate five modest studies to explore dimensions of the issues. Both organisations well recognise that this is a very complex area and well beyond both organisations resource bases, however we hope these studies will not only inform future research and workshops but also promote strong ‘buy in’ from Governments, industry and other organisations.
The proposed studies are:
1) qualitative study on changing nature of work
Qualitative study to gain some insights into how the nature of work has changed through, for example, new instrumentation and consequent changes in division of labour and changes in types of skills required or presupposed.
2) Pilot study of BSc graduates (who did not go on to PhD programmes) Request cooperation of two universities to contact BSc graduates from selected years eg 2005, 2000, 1995, 1990, 1985, 1980. Purpose is to find out the value of the science degree to them; what skills did/do they use, what skills they didn’t and so forth. Study to use quantitative and qualitative elements. Initial task is to examine the value/difficulty of such a study with a view to learning from it to inform decision as to whether to undertake a more thorough examination of this nature.
3) Literature review of skills profiles
Review literature from Engineers Australia, Industry councils and similar bodies to see what information/assumptions they have on required skills that might be useful. In particular, it might be worth clarifying whether attributes are better defined for professional characteristics as distinct from technical characteristics (on the grounds that science is not constructed as a profession in the way that Engineering is) and thus there may be less utility/relevance for science in examining this literature and cognate practices than might be supposed– what information do they have on skills required
4) industry profiles of sciences
Commence dialogue with industry groups notably the newly formed industry Innovation Councils to develop convincing profiles of science work. First stage is to commission/request Lesley MacLeod and the Dairy Corporation to develop their ideas into a brief case study as an exemplar of the sort of things we think are needed in work profiles.
5) analyse job adds for perspectives in what technical requirements are being specified (and presumably not specified)
Commission analysis of technical requirements in advertisements
3. Participants required for Qualitative study
To kick off the first study, FASTS are looking for 20 –30 experienced industry based people for one-on-one interviews with the contractor (Di Marzio Research). We are particularly interested in people who have worked in a given industry sector for 30 years plus and thus are in a good position to describe some of the changes in working life. (It is not necessary that they still be hands-on science/technical work if they are now a manager but it is hoped that they would have spent considerable time being hands-on).
Please note this project is not about changes to academic life and we don’t intend to interview people who are primarily academics or public sector research scientists (although it might be very interesting to talk with science graduates in Government who work, for instance, in regulators).
If you can recommend anyone who fits this description and would be interested in making themselves available for a one hour interview then please forward their details (or ask them to contact me directly) by Monday 31st of August.
2. EIF 3rd Round
Today Ministers Carr and Gillard have opened the next round of the Education Investment Fund (EIF) with a total of $300m available for infrastructure projects for universities, vocational education institutions and research institutions. Concurrently, the first $250m of the $650 million set aside for for green university, vocational education and research infrastructure projects. The $250 million Sustainability Round will place an emphasis on advancing teaching and research in the areas of climate change through projects that also showcase environmentally sustainable design and allow for large scale demonstrations of new and emerging green technologies. Applications close 8 September and further details will be made available at www.deewr.gov.au/eif
3. Sustainable Research Excellence (SRE) in Australia
One of the key budget announcements was the Sustainable Research Excellence (SRE) initiative. This provided $512m over 4 years to help address the serious structural shortfalls in funding the indirect costs of research (The Govt remains silent on direct costs of research).
This program is in addition to the existing Research Infrastructure Block Grant (RIBG), which currently provides about 20 cents in the dollar for each dollar earned in National Competitive Grants Scheme. Ultimately, the aggregate of the two programs will provide on average 50 cents in the dollar by 2014.
The issues paper proposes a model to allocate funding using three components:
Sustainability – 20%, Incentive 13% and Excellence 67%.
The 20% sustainability element is straightforward – it will be allocated to eligible institutions based on RIBG formula (ie relative success of institutions in competitive grants)
The 80% balance is novel and requires universities to participate in Transparent Costing (TC) and Excellence In Research For Australia (ERA)
This pot is divided into two “Thresholds”.
To qualify for Threshold 1 (incentive 13%) institutions will need to participate in TC and ERA. It is proposed that funding for this tranche be allocated on the relative share of each institution for the first $2.5m or less of competitive grant income it receives.
TC will comprise two elements;
1. a set of allowable indirect costs, each of which is associated with a defined indirect cost category; and
2. a set of allowable cost drivers to attribute costs in each of these categories to different university activities (eg non-ACG research, ACG research, teaching)
Allen consulting have proposed various allowable indirect cost categories
- Non-academic salaries and on-costs
- Maintaining physical university infrastructure
- Depreciation
- Finance, borrowing and insurance costs
- Other costs associated with research
The real action will, of course, be Threshold 2 (Excellence 67%) where institutions will need to participate in TC and ERA and meet performance thresholds based on ERA data or proxy measures.
Allocation of this tranche is more complicated and will involve individual negotiations with institutions to test and confirm costings and performance. Each institution’s share will be based on competitive research income > $2.5m, agreed indirect costs and a performance factor.
Until ERA is sorted it is proposed to use publications as a proxy for performance.
A key implication is the Government intends that institutions will receive differential funding for indirect costs based on the different costs associated with their profiles and missions. Thus while the intent is to provide an average 50 cents in the dollar some institutions may get higher if they have particularly expensive research costs and conversely some institutions may get less if they have a higher proportion of lower cost research activity (and/or they have poor performance).
Institutions can also choose not to participate in TC and ERA and just take the first 20%. This may be a cost effective strategy in the first instance for those institutions only getting a handful of ARC grants, although it is clear that any institution that wants to be a serious research player will need to develop effective internal costing systems and participate in ERA.
The Department is undergoing a consultation process with submissions due by 31 August.
FASTS will make some comments and as always I am keen to hear your comments on the proposal to inform our thinking.
The link for the SRE discussion paper is
http://www.innovation.gov.au/ScienceAndResearch/programs_funding/Pages/SustainableResearchExcellence(SRE).aspx
DIISR are also undertaking a consultation process and will be holding various meetings at nearly every university starting in Sydney on 5th and 6th of August followed by Adelaide (10th/11th) Perth (12th/13th), Canberra (14th), Brisbane (18th) and Melbourne 20th.
See this URL for schedule details.
http://www.innovation.gov.au/ScienceAndResearch/programs_funding/Documents/SRE%20Schedule%20Web%2024%20July%2009.pdf
|
