Advisory committee for environmental research and education september 12, 2012

[laughter]

MALE SPEAKER: Norine. The voice.

DR. TRAVIS: The voice.

[laughter]

DR. CAVANAUGH: Are also not going to be with us at our spring meeting as members, as members. However, we do have three people who are here who are here for their last meeting, and we, you know -- I can't do much but we do have a presentation of a little certificate of appreciation for those folks, and we thought that, actually, they'd probably appreciate this in their suitcase more than they would something that was framed and had glass on the top. So, but first, Molly Brown. We are very appreciative for all that you have done.

DR. BROWN: Thank you all very much.

DR. CAVANAUGH: We thank you, we'll miss you.

DR. BROWN: Ooh, it's very pretty.

DR. CAVANAUGH: It is very pretty. And the next one is Fred Roberts. Oh, where did Fred go?

DR. TRAVIS: He had a meeting at 1:00.

DR. CAVANAUGH: He had a 1:00 meeting, but I'll see -- I have a meeting with him at 2:00.

[laughter]

So I'll be sure to do that. Okay, and so, you know, you really need to get prepared for a big round of applause on this one, because the other person whose last meeting is today is Joe Travis.

[applause]

DR. TRAVIS: Thank you.

DR. CAVANAUGH: So, any remarks you would like to make, Molly or Joe?

DR. BROWN: Yes, remarks, remarks.

DR. TRAVIS: Remarks, remarks.

DR. CAVANAUGH: Joe?

DR. TRAVIS: Well, one thing is that I hope the committee will take up an issue in the future, that I think is very important, but I think was alluded to a couple of times yesterday, and David, I think, said it best. And that SEES has grown to a wonderful thing, but it is, in some respects, a grab bag of programs. And that's not to say that they're the wrong programs, that's not to say anything about that, but I think the committee would do well to be the guiding light for the NSF as to which programs should continue and which programs should be part of SEES, and which programs ought to de dissociated from SEES, if any. I think there's going to be some very difficult choices to be made in the years ahead because of flat budgets. And when we talk about how certain programs have to be continued because they are the right ones in principle, I think that would extend to the portfolio of SEES, and I think if the decision -- the wisdom of the committee were to say all the programs in SEES are in that category, that would be fine. If the committee were to decide that only some of the programs fall in that category, that would be fine. But the key thing is to be thoughtful and to not default on letting that decision be made -- those decisions be made, without input from this committee. So, I think if I had one thing to sort of hope for, is that the committee will take a very active role in looking at these programs, and as we see more and more tough decisions made, the committee provide its input on which parts of SEES should be SEES, and which things might -- you know, are the lower priority. So, that's really the first thing.

The other final thought I would have for the committee would be that for every year I've been on this committee, for, you know, the three I was chair and the three I was a member before that, we have talked about the issues of diversity in many different contexts, whether it was the pathways in and the pathways out, as we talked last time; issues of place-based science and place-based education that we talked about; there's just a lot of talk. And I think Lil encapsulated my feelings well earlier, that if we don't think about this in a very different way, we're not going to make any progress any faster than we're not making it now. And I just don't see us making enough progress as a community, and I think it would -- I think there's lots of well-meaning folks, and money will be spent on this. I have no doubt people will spend money. As Lil said earlier, we'll just keep spending money, and we will keep, without, I think, a sea change in thought, we will keep seeing very poor results, if we keep doing the same things over and over again. I think that experience, if you will, is well -- that road is well trod, that experiment has been repeated many times. Somehow, I would hope that the committee will take up a way of provoking some different thought about this subject, and I know it's a huge subject; I mean, everyone from Freeman Hrabowski to people on this committee have written about it, studied it, and yet, and yet we're not -- we're not getting much traction. Some kind of -- different kind of creativity is necessary. So those are the two issues I think I would hope the committee will take up.

But, you know, personally, it really has been a lot of fun for me to spend so much time with so many smart people. You know, Alan Kay, with his, you know, really brilliant insights even though he always talked about Xerox PARC before everything he ever said.

[laughter]

It was just terrific. I mean, I learned enormous amounts from Alan.

DR. LOGAN: Yeah, he did.

DR. TRAVIS: But I learned an enormous amount from Alan.

DR. BROWN: I was there, he said.

DR. TRAVIS: He was there. And he was, and he was. He wasn't kidding. And he helped me, in particular, to think differently about a whole lot of problems. The one I remember most vividly is his comment that, "Why don't we, instead of writing software for the machine, why don't we build a machine to do the problem?" And it's that kind of creative thinking that really helped me to be a better thinker. So, there, from Alan; and even before that, getting to know Susan Stafford, who chaired this committee before; John Moore; and the inimitable John Delaney that some of you may know and others of you may not. I never -- John Delaney personally changed my whole attitude about monitoring systems. I mean, John Delaney made me appreciate how important they could be when used well. I was worried about big monitoring systems as what I call in my lab, "Concept-Free Research," we can measure it so we should. We can, so we will. Without saying, "Should we? What are we going to do with the data and to what end?" And John convinced me that these big programs can be done thoughtfully and well. That doesn't mean they're always done thoughtfully and well, but they can be. And so, from John and Alan all the way to all of you, I've taken something from all of you that I've learned and applied in the rest of my academic world. So it's been a lot of fun, I learned a lot, and you can't ask for more. I mean, I laughed, I cried, it was a total experience.

[laughter]

What more can you ask for? So, thanks to all of you for making it so much fun for me. And I leave you in great hands.

[laughter]

[applause]

DR. CAVANAUGH: Molly, did you want to say anything?

DR. BROWN: Well, I had a great time. It's very fun. I think usually the junior person here, although maybe Erin will give me a run for my money, but you know, it's really -- I always find these -- I always have different expectations coming into meeting. I always think, "Oh, they must be doing X and Y; it's always P and Q, I never -- ” it always shocks me, and the things that NSF struggles with are exactly the things that NASA struggles with. I think we have -- we also have a donation program with grants and the similarities are quite striking, so I learned a lot. And I actually am a student of institutional change, so I do love institutional change; it’s a very fun thing to talk about, because it's really where all the action is, and it's hard but it's interesting, because I'm not a people person. So, anyway, I wish you guys well next year. Good luck getting a good AD.

DR. CAVANAUGH: AD. That's right, don't forget, don’t forget. Send us any names or suggestions that you have to Beth, and we'll bring them to Suresh's attention.

DR. ALESSA: Yeah, we had a conversation late last night about that, so we have a plan.

[laughter]

DR. CAVANAUGH: It's always scary when she says that.

[laughter]

DR. TRAVIS: All right. So, anyone else have anything they want to add just before we adjourn? Or is our work here done?

DR. PFIRMAN: Yeah, we want to thank you for shepherding us through all these.

DR. ALESSA: We don't know what we're going to do with the new guy.

[laughter]

DR. BROWN: Good job for volunteering; I hear you volunteered willfully.

[laughter]

DR. LOGAN: It's a great committee. It is truly a great committee.

DR. TRAVIS: Keep saying that.

DR. CAVANAUGH: So, any concerns, I guess that you have, and Bruce, is that it?

DR. LOGAN: We had a phone call. He told me everything that I wasn't allowed to repeat.

DR. CAVANAUGH: Oh, okay.

DR. TRAVIS: Yeah, the secret handshake, where the files are, you know.

[laughter]

DR. LOGAN: Who really killed Kennedy.

DR. TRAVIS: And was Alan Kay really at Xerox PARC?

[laughter]

DR. LOGAN: And was I really at the big game?

DR. BROWN: And how big the fish was.

DR. TRAVIS: Just so you know that what your chair -- the kind of -- the kind of credentials your chair brings to this, Bruce was at the very famous Cal Berkeley-Stanford football game with the famous come-from-behind victory when the Cal player bounced off the tuba section WHEN the band took the field prematurely. He was there.

DR. LOGAN: I was there. I won't say I was at Woodstock, but --

DR. TRAVIS: But this was even better.

[laughter]

DR. LOGAN: I was in the highway, actually.

DR. BROWN: You were on the highway outside of Woodstock?

DR. LOGAN: I -- we were heading from -- we were in upstate New York heading back down, and we were seeing these cars of people heading north on the thruway. It was noticeable. Said, "Oh, yeah, there's a big concert up there." And that was my weird recollection of Woodstock.

DR. TRAVIS: That was Woodstock for you.

DR. LOGAN: I saw somebody who went there.

[laughter]

DR. TRAVIS: All right. We're adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 1:35 p.m., Day Two of the Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education meeting was adjourned.]

Hamilton, Dr. Bruce 81