South Dakota Must Focus to Lead in Research (Montana as well..!)

South Dakota’s drive to be a leader in research must tightly focus on things the state can do well with patience and without much money, a specialist from Ohio said Monday.

By:
Terry Woster
Sioux Falls Argus Leader

http://www.nasvf.org/web/allpress.nsf/pages/8933

"What you’re embarking on is a long-term struggle," said Dan Berglund, executive director of the State Science and Technology Institute of Columbus. "Undertake only those things you can do well. Focus on excellence. … Given limited resources, you want to focus, because if you are going to do something, do it well."

He spoke at a conference concerning how South Dakota might boost its scientific research activity. About 220 people, most from the state’s six public universities but with a mix of business interests represented, attended the session in Pierre.

The conference links to Gov. Mike Rounds’ 2010 Initiative, a set of goals he introduced last fall for the state to achieve by the end of the decade. Among those is an effort to move South Dakota from last in the nation to 30th in funding for research and development.

"Your discussion here is to create a sharper focus on the kinds of research we should be doing," the governor said as he opened the day-long session. He said the research should be directed toward projects with commercial or marketplace value.

"We want to be recognized as a place to go if you really want to do research in specific areas," Rounds said. "Pure research is important, but just as important to South Dakota is research which is commercially applicable."

More professors

A sustainable research climate requires increased intellectual capacity, meaning in South Dakota’s case that its universities probably will have to recruit more professors, Berglund said.

And that would mean replacing faculty members who step away from teaching.

"We’re going to have to develop, over time, more faculty, more equipment and more facilities if we are to sustain this initiative," Tad Perry, executive director of the state Board of Regents, said during a break between speakers. "If you are going to encourage professors to step out of the classroom and do research, you have to put a replacement in the classroom. We’re going to be buying that time for research."

South Dakota lags behind other states in some key areas, although Berglund noted that the state ranked 32nd in per-capita income. "That’s good news," he said. The state also is 35th in percentage of the population with bachelor’s degrees. "That’s also not too bad," he said.

A recent National Science Board comparison showed South Dakota was in the top quarter of states in scientist and engineering degrees as a share of total higher-education degrees but only in the third quarter of states in scientists and engineers in the work force. The same source showed South Dakota in the bottom quarter of states in patents awarded per 1,000 scientists and engineers and in the bottom quarter in research and development as a share of the gross state product.

Berglund described a program he called "Bucks for Brains” in which Kentucky committed $300 million in six years to recruit top scholars from other states. He said South Dakota will need to develop its intellectual capacity to move into research in a meaningful way.

Doctoral programs

Creating doctoral programs is one way to pump up the research and development activity in the state, Perry said. It would take about five years for a new doctoral program to begin producing researchers, he said.

In terms of Ph.D. research, "we do not have a significant doctoral program in the state," he said. "We are going to have to have one that is strong, that is competitive, if we are going to succeed with research in the state."

The last Legislature appropriated $3.7 million to help kick-start the research initiative on the campuses. Higher education and economic development officials are considering 11 research proposals for that money. Perry said the available money likely will pay for only two or three of those proposals.

"The downside of this is … that there are going to be unfunded ideas left on the table,” he said. "You may want to have extensive conversations on how to fund those."

The successful proposals receive a five-year commitment of funding. After that, they are to be self-sustaining, Perry said.