The Best and Brightest for Science

Is There a Policy Problem Here?
  • William Zumeta
  • Joyce.S. Raveling
Part of the Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation book series (ESTI, volume 23)


Scientific research is exacting work, requiring not only long years of training but also high intellectual ability. Beyond this, one widely subscribed theory holds that within the scientific enterprise it is less the many worker bees than the few genuinely creative minds who make the most critical contributions (Kuhn 1962). In any case, few would argue but that the health of the enterprise requires a steady inflow of top-flight talent.


Innovation Policy Analytical Score Educational Test Scholastic Aptitude Test Graduate Record Examination 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adelman, C. (1985).The Standardized Test Scores of College Graduates 1964–1982.Prepared for the Study Group on Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education. U.S. Department of Education, National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  2. Association of American Universities. Committee on Postdoctoral Education (1998, March 31).Report and Recommendations.Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Bok, D. (1993).The Cost of Talent: How Executives and Professionals Are Paid and How It Affects America.New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bowen, W. G., and Sosa, J. A. (1989). Prospects for Faculty in the Arts and Sciences: A Study of Factors Affecting Demand and Supply. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Breneman, D. W. (1975).Graduate School Adjustments to the ‘New Depression’ in Higher Education.National Board on Graduate Education Technical Report No. 3. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  6. Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology. (1997).Postdocs and Career Prospects: A Status Report.Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  7. Consortium on Financing Higher Education. (1988).Five Years Out: Revisiting the COFHE Class of 1982.Cambridge, MA: Author.Google Scholar
  8. Desruisseaux, P. (1998, September 25). “U.S. Colleges Widen Foreign Recruiting to Offset Loss of Students from Asia.”Chronicle of Higher EducationA55–A57.Google Scholar
  9. Fechter, A. E., and Gaddy, C. D. (1998). “Trends in Doctoral Education and Employment.”Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research Vol. XIII.New York: Agathon Press, pp. 353–377.Google Scholar
  10. Fechter, A., and Teitelbaum, M. S. (1997, Spring). “A Fresh Approach to Immigration.”Issues in Science and Technology28–32.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, R. B. (1971).The Market for College-Trained Manpower.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Goheen, R. F. (1984). “Cultivating Fresh High-Level Talent in the Humanities.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Graduate Schools. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  13. Grandy, J. (1990).Comparison of Expected with Actual Field of Graduate Study: An Analysis of GRE Survey Data.ETS Research Report 90–17. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  14. Hartnett, R. T. (1985).Trends in Student Quality in Doctoral and Professional Education.Talent Trends Project Report, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
  15. Kuhn, T. S. (1962).The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lloyd, M. (1998, July 17). “India’s Brightest Technology Graduates Begin to Stanch the Brain Drain.”Chronicle of Higher EducationA57–A58.Google Scholar
  17. Maslen, G. (1998, May 22). “Australia Plans Campaign to Promote Its Colleges to Students from Other Nations.”Chronicle of Higher EducationA52.Google Scholar
  18. Massy, W. F., and Goldman, C. A. (1995).The Production and Utilization of Science and Engineering Doctorates in the United States.Stanford, CA: Stanford Institute for Higher Education Research.Google Scholar
  19. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (1988).The Recruitment of the Most Talented Students into Graduate Study in the Sciences Mathematics and Engineering: Is There a Problem?Report of a Steering Committee. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  20. National Research Council. Commission on Life Sciences. Committee on Dimensions, Causes, and Consequences of Recent Trends in the Careers of Life Scientists. (1998).Trends in the Early Careers of Life Scientists.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  21. National Research Council. (1969).The Invisible University: Postdoctoral Education in the United States.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  22. National Research Council. (1981).Postdoctoral Appointments and Disappointments.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  23. National Research Council. (annual publication).Summary Report 19xx: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  24. National Science Foundation. (1989, April 25, working draft).Future Scarcities of Scientists and Engineers: Problems and Solutions.Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  25. National Science Foundation. (1990).The State of Academic Science and Engineering.Arlington, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  26. Regets, M. (1999). “Has the Use of Postdocs Changed?” National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources StudiesIssue Brief.NSF 99–310.Google Scholar
  27. Regets, M. (1998, November 27). “What Follows the Postdoctorate Experience? Employment Patterns of 1993 Postdocs in 1995.” National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources StudiesIssue BriefNSF 99–307.Google Scholar
  28. Rosovsky, H. (1990).The University: An Owner’s Manual.New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  29. Sanderson, A. R., and Dugoni, B. (1999).Summary Report 1997: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities.Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  30. Shapiro, D. (in press). Modeling Supply and Demand for Arts and Sciences Faculty: What Can We Say About the Projections of Bowen and Sosa 10 Years Late?Journal of Higher Education. Google Scholar
  31. Smith, B. L. R. (1990).American Science Policy Since World War II.Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  32. Stricker, L. J., and Rock, D. A. (1993).Examinee Background Characteristics and GRE General Test Performance.GRE Board Report No. 89 2013;07R. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  33. Wilson, R. (1999, May 14). “Ph.D. Programs Face A Paucity of Americans in the Sciences.”Chronicle of Higher EducationA 14-AA15.Google Scholar
  34. Zumeta, W. (1985).Extending the Educational Ladder: The Changing Quality and Value of Postdoctoral Study.Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath/Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  35. Zumeta, W. (1998). “State Higher Education Finance and Policy Developments: 1997.”The NEA 1998 Almanac of Higher Education.Washington, DC: National Education Association, pp. 65–92.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • William Zumeta
    • 1
  • Joyce.S. Raveling
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations