1. 1 UCAR 2009 Community Survey and Comparison with 2000 and 2004 surveys PACUR 27 April 2009 Rick Anthes

2. 2 Roughly Right vs Precisely Irrelevant

3. 3 UCAR Community Surveys 2000-2005-2009 Year#sent#resp%resp 2000203859929% 20053572135338% 200915,5352,21514% Fall 2000 UCAR Quarterly President’s Corner http://www.ucar.edu/communications/quarterly/fall00/president.html Summer 2009 UCAR Quarterly President’s Corner (in preparation) Public web site of complete results: http://www.ucar.edu/survey/2009_comm/http://www.ucar.edu/survey/2009_comm/

4. 4 1. Discipline (2000) Number of responses123 Atmospheric sci/meteor3057625 Atmospheric chemistry253920 Climatology329237 Oceanography612317 Astronomy/solar phys301610 Solar-terrestrial352410 Biological sciences5810 Computer science222335 Social sciences200 Engineering172211 Physics253427 Hydrology42023 Geology/geophysics241512 Other201914

5. 5 1. Discipline (2005) Number of responses123 Atmospheric sci/meteor58917566 Atmospheric chemistry575748 Climate143215116 Oceanography495266 Astronomy/solar phys13614 Solar-terrestrial168 Biological sciences17247 Computer science266864 Social sciences10614 Engineering243027 Physics132935 Hydrology203353 Geology/geophysics181216 Remote sensing389275 Other332633

6. 6 1. Discipline (2009) Number of responses123 Atmospheric sci/meteor39118170 Atmospheric chemistry524635 Climate5515379 Oceanography633644 Astronomy/solar phys641617 Solar-terrestrial523522 Biological sciences311822 Computer science303846 Social sciences1986 Engineering362431 Physics304644 Hydrology271939 Geology/geophysics261621 Remote sensing448271 Other883528

7. 7 2. Principal Employer (2000) College/university45377% Fed Govt 9015% Private non profit 234% Private for profit 142% Other 102%

8. 8 2. Principal Employer (2005) College/university664 63% Fed Govt225 21% Private non profit 43 4% Private for profit 79 8% Other 43 4%

9. 9 2. Principal Employer (2009) College/university633 59% Fed Govt22521% Private non profit 56 5% Private for profit 63 6% Other1019%

10. 10 3. Is Your Institution? (2000) Member of UCAR29842% Academic Affiliate 619% International Affiliate 51% Unidata participant10512% UNAVCO participant 142% Sponsor of a UCAR prog 274% None of the above 9714% Don’t know10315%

11. 11 3. Is Your Institution? (2005) Member of UCAR30927% Academic Affiliate 575% International Affiliate 171% Unidata participant 797% SuomiNet participant 403% Sponsor of a UCAR prog 353% None of the above38433% Don’t know24421%

12. 12 3. Is Your Institution? (2009) Member of UCAR25222% Academic Affiliate 545% International Affiliate 323% Unidata participant 575% SuomiNet participant 151% Sponsor of a UCAR prog 545% None of the above24621% Don’t know43638%

13. 13 4. Position level? 2000 Student305% Entry level (Asst Prof, Sci I…7913% Mid level (Assoc Prof, Sci II..14023% Sr level (Prof, Senior Sci… Meteor in Charge, Sr Sci Off, Associate Dir, Assoc VP23840% Executive lvl, Dir, VP, Chair of Dept, Dean, President 7513% N.A. (e.g. retired) 41% Other 305%

14. 14 4. Position level? 2005 Student14814% Entry level (Asst Prof, Sci I…21220% Mid level (Assoc Prof, Sci II..27226% Sr level (Prof, Senior Sci… Meteor in Charge, Sr Sci Off, Associate Dir, Assoc VP29828% Executive lvl, Dir, VP, Chair of Dept, Dean, President 777% N.A. (e.g. retired) 81% Other 394%

15. 15 4. Position level? 2009 Student 93 9% Entry level (Asst Prof, Sci I…17917% Mid level (Assoc Prof, Sci II..25023% Sr level (Prof, Senior Sci… Meteor in Charge, Sr Sci Off, Associate Dir, Assoc VP38336% Executive lvl, Dir, VP, Chair of Dept, Dean, President 757% N.A. (e.g. retired) 212% Other 737%

16. 16 Relationship with UCAR past 10 yr (2000) Collaborator23514% Visitor24114% User of community model17710% User of data set or data stream27416% User of obs facility (e.g. aircraft..) 845% User of computational facility1539% User of UCAR software (e.g. NCAR graphics..)18711% User of educational facility or product (e.g. COMET, Skymath….)1117% Member of adv panel, committee1308% Participation in advocacy activities 724% Participation in SOARS 91% Sponsor of a UCAR program 241%

17. 17 Relationship with UCAR past 10 yr (2005) Collaborator32010% Visitor36911% User of community model66020% User of data set or data stream56617% User of obs facility (e.g. aircraft..)1033% User of computational facility2357% User of UCAR software (e.g. NCAR graphics..)52116% User of educational facility or product (e.g. COMET modules)2046% Member of adv panel, committee1174% Participation in advocacy activities 522% Participation in SOARS 231% Sponsor of a UCAR program 201%

18. 18 Relationship with UCAR past 10 yr (2009) Collaborator43614% Visitor48616% User of community model35112% User of data set or data stream42814% User of obs facility (e.g. aircraft..) 943% User of computational facility1645% User of UCAR software (e.g. NCAR graphics..)35512% User of educational facility or product (e.g. COMET modules)2147% Member of adv panel, committee1303% Participation in advocacy activities 391% Participation in SOARS 211% Sponsor of a UCAR program 231% User UCAR Service (e.g. JOSS, VSP)1415%

19. 19 UCAR positions held past 10 yr (2000) Members Rep8311% Trustee182% URC223% UCAR Nom Com 61% UCAR Membership Com142% SPEC101% NCAR Post Doctorate appt132% NCAR Affiliate Scientist122% Visitor to NCAR16222% Visitor to UOP233% UOP Visiting Sci Prog142% Member of NCAR or UOP adv com689% Formal reviewer of NCAR or UOP335% SOARS mentor111% None of above26235%

20. 20 UCAR positions held past 10 yr (2005) Members Rep776% Trustee171% URC202% UCAR Nom Com121% UCAR Membership Com181% SPEC 71% NCAR Post Doctorate appt141% NCAR Affiliate Scientist121% Visitor to NCAR28422% Visitor to UOP312% UOP Visiting Sci Prog131% Member of NCAR or UOP adv com706% Formal reviewer of NCAR or UOP202% SOARS mentor181% None of above64851%

21. 21 UCAR positions held past 10 yr (2009) Members Rep494% Trustee121% URC101% UCAR Nom Com 81% UCAR Membership Com 91% SPEC 50% NCAR Post Doctorate appt132% NCAR Affiliate Scientist222% Visitor to NCAR39431% Visitor to UOP474% UOP Visiting Sci Prog544% Member of NCAR or UOP adv com695% Formal reviewer of NCAR or UOP181% SOARS mentor262% None of above53641%

22. 22 Interactions with NCAR and UOP (2000) ACD 52COMET96 CGD133JOSS61 HAO 62UNAVCO22 MMM131GPS/MET16 ASP 30PAGE23 ESIG 24VSP42 RAP 38Unidata104 ATD 77 SCD108Advocacy31 Other 9Education23 SOARS12

23. 23 Interactions with NCAR and UOP (2005) ACD 84COMET192 CGD243JOSS148 HAO 12UNAVCO22 MMM333COSMIC53 ASP 72DLESE66 ISSE 80VSP81 RAL 75Unidata275 ATD104GLOBE48 SCD281Advocacy46 Image 24Edu-SOARS 71 TIMES 22Communic168

24. 24 Interactions with NCAR and UOP (2009) ACD119COMET239 CGD254JOSS157 HAO126UNAVCO--- MMM321COSMIC106 ASP153DLESE63 ISSE ---VSP199 RAL145Unidata291 EOL141GLOBE93 CISL178Advocacy57 Image 72Edu-SOARS 129 TIMES ---Communic259 NSDL 65

25. 25 Part III Challenges, Issues and Future UCAR Activities

26. 26 Should the level and quality of interdisciplinary research in the atmospheric sciences be increased? 20002005 2009 YES376408638 NO 3522 39 Same level ---91149 Don’t know/ not sure 11473157 Is the academic community (including UCAR) organized adequately to carry out IR? YES151186337 NO177153199 Don’t know/ not sure198255440

27. 27 2.3 Are the funding agencies organized adequately to support IR? (2000) YES6713% NO29155% Don’t know/ not sure16732%

28. 28 2.3 Are the funding agencies organized adequately to support IR? (2005) YES8615% NO25944% Don’t know/ not sure24842%

29. 29 2.3 Are the funding agencies organized adequately to support IR? (2009) YES18920% NO35637% Don’t know/ not sure42444%

30. 30 How far should UCAR go toward IR? 2005 2009 Too much, reduce a lot71% 41% Reduce somewhat255% 314% OK as is17432% 24127% Increase somewhat27650% 43049% Increase a lot6712% 17820% Increasing support for interdisciplinary research

31. 31 Do the atmospheric sciences attract and keep the best and brightest graduate students? (2000) YES8015% NO25449% Don’t know/ not sure18836% Many cited low pay and/or lack of jobs as the reason.

32. 32 Do the atmospheric sciences attract and keep the best and brightest graduate students? (2005) YES14725% NO19333% Don’t know/ not sure25343%

33. 33 Do the atmospheric sciences attract and keep the best and brightest graduate students? (2009) YES22524% NO28229% Don’t know/ not sure45948% Not much change since 2005

34. 34 Balance of types of Research (2000) Not enough instrumentation development or education on the sources and use of observational data in universities. A significant problem28257% A minor problem18137% Not a problem 286%

35. 35 Balance of types of Research (2005) Not enough instrumentation development or education on the sources and use of observational data in universities. A significant problem23042% A minor problem27750% Not a problem 468%

36. 36 Balance of types of Research (2009) Not enough instrumentation development or education on the sources and use of observational data in universities. A significant problem44850% A minor problem36140% Not a problem 8710% Has been perceived as a significant problem since 2000

37. 37 Balance of types of Research Is the distribution of research effort, at UCAR and the universities, appropriately divided among field research, modeling, theory, and laboratory work? 2000 2005 2009 YES14729% 335 68% 248 27% NO12425% 150 32% 159 17% Don’t Know- not sure23346% --- --- 513 56%

38. 38 Private Sector (2000) Do you collaborate or work with the private sector –YES17334% –NO34166% On a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the highest, how would you rate the present quality of interactions among these sectors? Mean SD N –Academic-Govt 3.65 0.97 445 –Academic-private 2.50 0.96 410 –Govt-private 2.57 1.08 380

39. 39 Private Sector (2005) Do you collaborate or work with the private sector –YES17732% –NO39169% On a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the highest, how would you rate the present quality of interactions among these sectors? Mean SD N –Academic-Govt –Academic-private –Govt-private

40. 40 Private Sector (2009) Do you collaborate or work with the private sector –YES35036% –NO62464% On a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the highest, how would you rate the present quality of interactions among these sectors? Mean SD N –Academic-Govt –Academic-private –Govt-private

41. 41 5. Equity and Diversity Issues Essay question Most (but not all) supported efforts to increase the diversity in the atmospheric sciences A few concerns about “reverse discrimination” 2009 only: Do you think the community is making progress? Yes55159% No 74 8% Not sure31433%

42. 42 What additional or increased areas of service to the community should UCAR consider? (2000) Observational facilities1498.3% Computational facilities1397.7% Instrumentation1558.6% Community models1558.6% Data sets or data streams22112.3% Educational/training matls20411.3% Support for field programs (planning, logistics, ops and data mgmnt)1126.2% Advocacy on behalf of community1357.5% Provide RT data to univ1669.2% Community workshops 18010.0% Help with recruiting grad students1588.8% Other 170.9% None of above 70.4%

43. 43 What additional or increased areas of service to the community should UCAR consider? (2005) Observational facilities1719.2% Computational facilities1538.2% Instrumentation1266.7% Community models22211.9% Data sets or data streams25813.8% Educational/training matls20911.2% Support for field programs (planning, logistics, ops and data mgmnt)1276.8% Advocacy on behalf of community1126.0% Provide RT data to univ1749.3% Community workshops 1839.8% Help with recruiting grad students1095.8% Other 130.7% None of above 120.6%

44. 44 What additional or increased areas of service to the community should UCAR consider? (2009) Observational facilities30210.3% Computational facilities2448.3% Instrumentation2297.8% Community models33911.6% Data sets or data streams40413.8% Educational/training matls32611.1% Support for field programs (planning, logistics, ops and data mgmnt)1956.6% Advocacy on behalf of community1525.2% Provide RT data to univ2348.0% Community workshops 31210.6% Help with recruiting grad students1625.5% Other 180.6% None of above 190.7%

45. 45 What additional or increased areas of service to the community should UCAR consider? (2005)

46. 46 What additional or increased areas of service to the community should UCAR consider? (2009)

47. 47 7.3 What ways, if any, would you personally like to participate in, or increase your participation in UCAR activities? (2000) Governance (adv com, Trustees, etc)12814% Collaboration24527% Participation in UCAR education activ11913% User of UCAR observational facilities 9711% User of UCAR computational facilities11412% User of UCAR community models14416% Other 50.5% None of above 627%

48. 48 7.3 What ways, if any, would you personally like to participate in, or increase your participation in UCAR activities? (2005) Governance (adv com, Trustees, etc)11610% Collaboration30225% Participation in UCAR education activ15813% User of UCAR observational facilities13911% User of UCAR computational facilities17715% User of UCAR community models27423% Other 40.3% None of above 484%

49. 49 7.3 What ways, if any, would you personally like to participate in, or increase your participation in UCAR activities? (2009) Governance (adv com, Trustees, etc)18810% Collaboration58129% Participation in UCAR education activ27314% User of UCAR observational facilities24412% User of UCAR computational facilities25213% User of UCAR community models36518% Other 110.6% None of above 704%

50. 50 7.3 What ways, if any, would you personally like to participate in, or increase your participation in UCAR activities? (2005)

51. 51 7.3 What ways, if any, would you personally like to participate in, or increase your participation in UCAR activities? (2009)