University Research Model Committee - Key points/issues - Other points/issues - New ideas - “University Model” issues in the report - Findings and Recommendations.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Elementary. The District Heard Your Concerns In teachers requested that the following three documents be merged into one. Instructional Focus.
Advertisements

GUIDED GROUP WORK IN MATHEMATICS
© Grant Thornton UK LLP. All rights reserved. Review of Partnership Working: Follow Up Review Vale of Glamorgan Council Final Report- November 2009.
Funding Mechanisms to Ensure Stability, Innovation and Sustainability in Higher Education Arthur M. Hauptman IUA Symposium-21 st Century Universities Dublin,
January 5 th  What benefits can you see emerging from using Peer and Self Assessment?  What do you see as the likely.
Design Research Intelligent questioning for effective designs.
Performance Appraisal System Update
Study conducted on behalf of Microsoft by Harris Interactive Inc. Study conducted on behalf of Microsoft by Harris Interactive, Inc. Study conducted on.
1 Strategic Planning: An Update March 13, Outline What we have done so far? Where do we stand now? Next steps?
Planning for a Western Analysis Facility Richard P. Mount Planning for a Western Analysis FacilityPage 1.
Association for the Education of Adults EAEA European AE Research – Look towards the future ERDI General Assembly, 2004.
MSP course 2007 Phase 0 – Setting up Kumasi, Ghana 2008 Wageningen International.
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
All-University Advisory Board Meeting November 30, 2011 Oakland University Brand Review Oakland University Brand Review.
PAINTING THE FULL PICTURE
Synthesis of Ideas from MERGA Conference 2007 Participants in VP Development Session on National Curriculum Gaye Williams VP (Development) thanks all MERGA.
Report to Los Angeles County Executive Office And Los Angeles County Health Services Agencies Summary of Key Questions for Stakeholders February 25, 2015.
EMU Strategic Planning Strategic Planning Material Mission/Vision/Values Goals and Objectives January 10, 2014.
Petra Engelbrecht Stellenbosch University South Africa
F. Gianotti, AFP kick-off meeting, 20/9/2012 Recommendations for the next steps Reports from the:  Technical Review A.Henriques  Physics Review R.Hawkings.
A big picture for Outstanding Citizenship. Three key questions 3 How well are we achieving our aims? 1 What are we trying to achieve? 2 How do we organise.
Developing a result-oriented Operational Plan Training
Elementary & Middle School 2014 Mathematics MCAS Evaluation & Strategy.
Outcome Assessment Reporting for Undergraduate Programs Stefani Dawn and Bill Bogley Office of Academic Programs, Assessment & Accreditation Faculty Senate,
WG Goals and Workplan We have a charter, we have a group of interested people…what are our plans? goalsOur goals should reflect what we have listed in.
Enhanced Case Management: Moving Beyond Service Brokering to Care Collaboration Unit I.
IMPLEMENTING AN ACTIVITY BASED BUDGET SYSTEM PRESENTATION BY MATTHEW DINGIE DIRECTOR OF BUDGET, MOFED.
Maple Cross School Governing Body Role of Governing Body The prime concern of the Maple Cross School Governing Body is to ensure that the school promotes.
SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing RemarksPage 1 SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing Remarks David MacFarlane Associate Laboratory Directory for PPA.
DOE Annual Review of SLAC HEP Research Program June 14-16, 2005 SLAC Charge to Committee Issues Procedures.
CSU High Energy Physics Consortium Overview Why a CSU high energy physics (hep) consortium? – To pool resources and talent of faculty/students across the.
OPTN Strategic Plan Maureen McBride United Network for Organ Sharing August 28, 2012.
1 Regional Innovation Strategies RIS. 2 About Regional Innovation Strategies The RIS projects aimed to support regions to develop regional innovation.
MHC at its Best MHC at its Best.
Lessons Learned about Going to Scale with Effective Professional Development Iris R. Weiss Horizon Research, Inc. February 2011.
HEP Status. HEP: Vital Stats Theory: 6.8 faculty – Allen, Dutta, Nanopoulos (phenomenology); K. Becker, M. Becker, Pope, Sezgin (string/supergravity),
ASCAC-BERAC Joint Panel on Accelerating Progress Toward GTL Goals Some concerns that were expressed by ASCAC members.
Performance Stories Evaluation - A Monitoring Method to Enhance Evaluation Influence Riad Naji, Catriona King, Richard Habgood.
THE ATTRACT INITIATIVE Marzio Nessi, Markus Nordberg CERN.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
MDRT – response to proposed regs. MDRT – Responding to proposed regs Determine overall goals & objectives Ask for clarification Ensure understanding of.
National Developments in Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy
Ruth Pordes November 2004TeraGrid GIG Site Review1 TeraGrid and Open Science Grid Ruth Pordes, Fermilab representing the Open Science.
Dave Barney, Michael Kobel Overview Key objectives Motivation Next Steps.
Looking at Professional Development Opportunities as an Institutional Barrier to Effective e-Learning in Schools.
Project Design Jennifer Coffey OSEP May 4,
1 Your reference A Case for Gender Statistics in National Statistical System Mr. Pali Lehohla Statistics South Africa 26 January 2009.
November 30, 2015 Discussion Draft. Beginning with the End in Mind.
John Womersley 22 July John Womersley Where have I been? U of Florida Postdoc Florida State Assistant Professor Fermilab Scientist.
Getting Institutions Right for Women Women’s Leadership in the International Arena.
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
© BLR ® —Business & Legal Resources 1408 Teambuilding for All Employees.
Farmer to Farmer ICT Workshop Evaluation Results Based on the responses of 19 workshop participants out of 24 total Presented to USAID by the FACET project.
U.S. ATLAS Computing Facilities Overview Bruce G. Gibbard Brookhaven National Laboratory U.S. LHC Software and Computing Review Brookhaven National Laboratory.
Open Science Grid in the U.S. Vicky White, Fermilab U.S. GDB Representative.
GEO Implementation Boards Considerations and Lessons Learned (Document 8) Max Craglia (EC) Co-chair of the Infrastructure Implementation Board (IIB) On.
JOINT CLUSTER PRESENTATION CINDI BOARD 18 June 2008.
Behavioral Health Initiatives $17,000,000 seems like a large amount, however due to a lack of Medicaid funding, this money will be spent quickly. In order.
Gender Equality in Aid for Trade: How can we do better? Henni Arup, Office of Trade Negotiations Annemarie Reerink, Gender Equality Branch April 2016.
DETECTOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Fred Borcherding 1.
Nigel Lockyer Fermilab Operations Review 16 th -18 th May 2016 Fermilab in the Context of the DOE Mission.
CMS Crosscut Operations and Research, Theory, Computing, University Involvement C. Young and B. Zhou.
Educational Excellence – Phase One Lisa Blazer & Dan Gelo Presenting.
Experience from H2020 Proposals (a personal assessment)
1 Measuring Impact Guide This guide is an introduction to assessing the impact and spending effectiveness of your district’s initiatives and the resources.
Project Design SPDG Competition FY C. QUALITY OF PROJECT DESIGN (0-20 points)  Describe the extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes.
US CMS Meeting U. Virginia May 8, US CMS Constitution Nick Hadley May 8, 2009.
1 CF lab review ; September 16-19, 2013, H.Weerts Budget and Activity Summary Slides with budget numbers and FTE summaries/activity for FY14 through FY16.
OVERVIEW What is Ashoka? What is Changemakers.com?
Structure and Responsibility
Presentation transcript:

University Research Model Committee - Key points/issues - Other points/issues - New ideas - “University Model” issues in the report - Findings and Recommendations

University Model - key points/issues The model has already changed! “Old”/base: faculty (summer) + students + postdoc(s) with flat or slow growth – but still valid and in need of support. “New”: project funding, e.g. ATLAS + CMS project funding is on same scale as whole university program. The project funding can last several (many?) years, but is transient. Is this the new model we want (LHC…ILC…?). We have discussed erosion of base support, erosion of infrastructure, problems with ILC R&D funding, need for more phenomenologists, etc.

- Fixing any or all of these problems within the context of a flat (or worse) budget implies realignment of funds. - Simply recommending an increase in funding for HEP has been tried several times by other groups (Gilman ’98, Treiman ’88) with limited success. We have to focus on how to best use the existing funding resources, while taking into account the fluidity of the project funds. - This requires looking at the field as a whole in order to be able to suggest changes in the University Program – extends scope of this group! - Winding down current U.S.-based accelerator program/changing nature of Labs -> opportunity. University Model - key points/issues

- Erosion of infrastructure – fewer groups involved in detector work. Should we recommend a specific program to re-establish university infrastructure and/or a dedicated source of support? Should this be generic or only tied to specific need? ILC in the U.S. – must act NOW to improve participation in detector R&D! Large number of HEP groups – strength in diversity of people/ideas vs. funding spread thin. Efficiency? Do we need to justify the size of the program vs. activity? Ensuring support for the individual(s) with a bright idea. - Self organization – e.g. Tier 2 computing centers for LHC extend to multi-group collaborative efforts. University Model - key points/issues

Other points/issues - Base vs. project funding. Is there a better way to organize this or is this an inevitable feature of the present model? Concern over lack of review of allocation of project funds. - Relation of theory and experiment – need for expanded phenomenology program. Distribution of people? -Planning changes before we know the LHC results. HEP “phase change” driven by LHC results?

New ideas - Talked to many people…common sense of this exercise being an opportunity to change “the model”. - However, on reflection, the present basic model seems to work well and should be supported and strengthened. - Possible changes considered: - Fewer groups – more efficient program? - Handing greater educational/training roles to national labs. - Forming more data/analysis centers - Certainly need better ways to work remotely – true internationally, but also beneficial intra-nationally.

New ideas - Expanded support for university program from program(s) ending at lab(s) vs. sustaining size of lab programs overall. - Targeted revitalization of university infrastructure, and strengthening of base program using realigned funds. - The focused physics/computing efforts of Tier 2 centers and the Fermilab LPC seem to be starting to work well. Should we encourage more such enterprises, perhaps with funding specifically designated for their support? E.g. Centers of specific physics/detector expertise?

Findings and recommendations 1)The existing (“old”) model of a university HEP group is still valid and essential to maintain the creativity and diversity of the field. 2) Erosion of base support for people and infrastructure has limited the effectiveness of university groups. 3) Project funding is playing an increasing role in the support of university groups. However, it is managed rather than being pier reviewed. 4) Previous recommendations for funding increases have met with limited success. A new approach is needed. Findings

Findings and recommendations Findings (cont.) 5) There is a need to have more phenomenologists working in university groups, particularly for analysis and interpretation of imminent LHC data. 6) The self-organization of groups in relation to e.g. Tier 2 LHC computing centers is a useful concept and appears to be working.

Findings and recommendations Recommendations 1)The university base program and university HEP infrastructure should be strengthened. 2) Part of the funding to be released by the ending of the Tevatron and Babar programs should be used to strengthen the university base program and its infrastructure. 3) The strengthened university base program should include an increased number of phenomenologists to work with experimentalists on data analysis and interpretation.

Findings and recommendations Recommendations (cont.) 4) Further self-organization of university (and lab) groups in terms of computing and analysis centers should be encouraged and supported.

“University Model” issues in the report - University program contributions: scope, quality, relevance – is the size of the present program well matched to the scope? Do we need to re-scope? How could the quality be enhanced? - University program manpower, resources, infrastructure – realignment of support seems to be the only way to address deficiencies in these areas. Quantitative: how much realignment is needed?

“University Model” issues in the report - Funding Model and program management – recommending an increase in support is obvious; realignment of support may be more realistic. How do we achieve a consensus in the U.S. HEP community on this issue? - Enhancing the University role – all of the above!