Followup: I've confirmed that at least some NSF panels have been canceled/postponed today. I don't know if all have. My guess is that this is due to unresolved issues about assessment of broader impacts statements and review criteria more broadly, in light of Trump's anti-DEIA executive order. - ThreadSky

carlbergstrom.com • 33 days ago

Followup: I've confirmed that at least some NSF panels have been canceled/postponed today. I don't know if all have.

My guess is that this is due to unresolved issues about assessment of broader impacts statements and review criteria more broadly, in light of Trump's anti-DEIA executive order.

Comments

davidw38.bsky.social•33 days ago

Show some backbone and hold the reviews as scheduled.

carlbergstrom.com•33 days ago

WaPo: "The National Science Foundation has halted for at least the rest of the week the work of review panels, in which outside experts rate the merit of proposals for scientific research."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/27/trump-presidency-news/#link-RGIL3TW4LBAC3FFJT346EM4ZKU

petrarca.bsky.social•33 days ago

We've all seen the label. It means "this product won't burn your house down, injure, or poison you."

scottguy.bsky.social•33 days ago

And NPR.

https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/01/27/nx-s1-5276342/nsf-freezes-grant-review-trump-executive-orders-dei-science

rajoyce.bsky.social•33 days ago

NPR cites an NSF statement now “NSF spokesperson said that all review panels will be rescheduled. ‘This will allow the agency to make the best use of everyone's time and resources as we continue to develop guidance to ensure compliance with the recent executive orders.’”

haleyho.bsky.social•33 days ago

Why comply? Why is everyone acting like this is normal? Were they given instructions that said to do so?

400trix.bsky.social•33 days ago

Because if they don’t comply they get fired for cause.

haleyho.bsky.social•33 days ago

Ok but is it possible that because the whole thing isn’t following the law, they’d have a good case to sue after this? And if all of them stood together they couldn’t fire all the hundreds or thousands of them could they? It’s all a pipe dream but I wish they’d prepared for this.

400trix.bsky.social•33 days ago

The trouble is that they’d be disobeying a direct order from their managers, which in any situation is cause for dismissal. And in the meantime they still have to feed their families.

rajoyce.bsky.social•33 days ago

The suspension of panels isn’t really the place to fight IMHO. Staff at NSF need to be prepared to object if there are attempts to reach into the funding process that ignore the statutorily required consultation. It is bad for everyone to have delays but these can be made back up.

stemxicaned.bsky.social•33 days ago

There are ways in which they can give advice while still getting some of this stuff funded. They found workarounds last time they will find them again

haleyho.bsky.social•33 days ago

Thank you!

newpie.bsky.social•33 days ago

Is that actual reporting or from the Riveting Storytelling for All of America section of WaPo?

famousjameisamos.bsky.social•33 days ago

“Those science people are out there helping people and telling the truth! This must cease!

aheise.bsky.social•33 days ago

NPR: . In a statement to NPR, an NSF spokesperson said that all review panels will be rescheduled. "This will allow the agency to make the best use of everyone's time and resources as we continue to develop guidance to ensure compliance with the recent executive orders." Cite to follow

aheise.bsky.social•33 days ago

https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/01/27/nx-s1-5276342/nsf-freezes-grant-review-trump-executive-orders-dei-science

chadtopaz.bsky.social•33 days ago

It’s been real fun for N years being the only reviewer in the room to be like BUT THE BROADRR IMPACTS ARE DISQUALIFYINGLY ABSENT. Guess that era of my life is over.

bwyble.bsky.social•33 days ago

Think of all the space those proposals will get back now.

chadtopaz.bsky.social•33 days ago

😭

jimthommo.bsky.social•33 days ago

Dozens of words!

bwyble.bsky.social•33 days ago

Wait, that's a lot. Is that how much you write for that?

shuasanchez.bsky.social•33 days ago

Hi! I’ve been funded by NSF a couple times. In your experience, did raising this point ever result in the person/project not getting funding? I’ve seen some pretty disappointing broader impact statements from professors in the past that still got funded.

chadtopaz.bsky.social•33 days ago

It’s hard to know because the final funding decisions are not up to us. The panel certainly doesn’t even get told what the program directors decided to fund in the end. (It’s 100% their decision but they have to justify it.)

jgilligan.org•33 days ago

In several panels I have served on in the past several years, broader impacts were taken very seriously by most or all of the panelists, and affected panel recommendations for funding.

mathprofcarrie.bsky.social•33 days ago

A few months ago I had an excellent conversation with someone who was a Division head at NSF during the prior Trump administration and asked about how things changed there. They relied on the fact that "broadening participation" at NSF was legislated by congress. So undermining congress...? 🧐

ejwillingham.bsky.social•33 days ago

100%

Any scuttlebutt on GRFP?

wavewatchr.bsky.social•33 days ago

Either that or the tech bros have convinced the felon that AI will cover it now. Don't need scientists with their skepticism and unrelenting need for evidence and facts

yvandutil.bsky.social•33 days ago

My bet too. Recipe for faillure.

shilanordone.bsky.social•33 days ago

I saw 4 were canceled, I don’t think it’s BI but maybe their topic area. All were in translational impacts (TIP?). But the good news is GRFPs got done. Not sure if we will see more fall over the next few weeks.

niais.bsky.social•33 days ago

I'm not sure it's hit you yet, but we just heard from OSP which is complying in advance while it combs over our grants to notify the funding agencies what they need to target.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply