1144
RIP America (mander.xyz)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
155 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Graduate students provide enormous value for their cost in funding. I’d like to better understand how k-12 students contribute here. Those students make up 88.7k of the reduction. How much do these students contribute and at what cost?

I’m in no way against inspiring the next generation. My question is aimed at correctly interpreting this table. The NSF is a worthwhile expense, but let’s understand the data we have.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] 32 points 1 year ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago*

    I’m not disagreeing. The report isn’t clear. This is written by people asking Congress for a budget cut.

    NSF programs indirectly impact millions of people, reaching PreK-12 students and teachers, the general public, and researchers

    The actual impact to the pipeline may be far larger.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    The chart is on a page discussing this:

    My workplace is NSF funded and supports a number of activities designed to increase interest in the discipline among young kids or improve teaching techniques for k-12 teachers. Similarly, we run an REU (Research Experiences for Undergraduates) program to give undergraduate students exposure to hands on research (and hopefully encourage them to stay in the discipline for graduate school).

    A majority of our funding still goes to PhDs doing fundamental research, but the pipeline that feeds academic research begins with children, and research funding priorities aren’t blind to that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent