Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

C--Summary of Prior NRC Reviews of NASA Science And Earth Science Plans
Pages 49-52

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 49...
... Older reviews criticized failures to directly link a plan's science goals to proposed missions, while the 2006 review applauded "a defensible set of rules for prioritizing missions" based on the decadal surveys' priorities. INTERDISCIPLINARY ASPECTS AND SCIENTIFIC BALANCE Previous NRC reviews of NASA Science Plans found good overall scientific balance (though 2003 and 2006 criticized an overemphasis on life detection)
From page 50...
... GENERAL READABILITY AND CLARITY OF PRESENTATION This section was brief in all previous reviews and provided advice relating to specific editorial issues identified in each Science Plan. OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES Possibly the strongest and most frequent criticism of all four previous Science Plans identified under the heading of other relevant issues as determined by the committee was the failure to provide sufficient specificity in two key areas: • The science goals and other criteria that determine mission priorities; and • The timelines, costs, and contingency plans that control mission success.
From page 51...
... 2000. "On the Space Science Enterprise Draft Strategic Plan," letter report from SSB Chair Claude R
From page 52...
... Serafin, chair of the Committee to Review the NASA Earth Science Enterprise Strategic Plan, and SSB Chair John H McElroy to Ghassem R

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.