On Mar 11, 2010, at 3:47 PM, Alan Rudy wrote:
> The problem here is that research faculty and pro-Big Science and
> university-industry collaboration/technology transfer agreement
> administrators argue that the overhead brought in by Big Science
> grants pays
> for the research, the overhead, the auditing and more... that big
> research
> grants fund general education... when, in fact - and Chuck is right
> on this,
> big research grants (and athletics) draw down the general fund.
>
> If researchers and administrators argued that Big Science
> contributed to the
> commonweal and, as such, deserved a subsidy through tuition, fees
> and state
> dollars that'd be one thing... and we could hold them to that, but
> they
> don't... at the most they argue that what's good for large corporate
> profits
> and info-/bio-tech start-ups is good for the public.
I'll agree with this, because it's actually has some detail. The idea that "research" is just a pointy-headed waste of time when profs should just teach grates on my nerves.
Doug