 |
|
|
|
Next: dual careers
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 4:54 pm
Post subject: Big purge at ASU
Archived from groups: sci>research>careers (more info?)
|
|
|
Today's WSJ, front page.
A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in
royalty income, well known, etc.
What triggered all this? Guess what? A new administrator came on board and
"re-engineered" ASU into an even biggerer/expanderer institution. Our
original hero lost a major NIH grant, plus got in a squabble with another
faculty member who he said filed improper patent applications, and with
the new regime on board (the new regime was quick to set up the new ASU
uber alles policy, added buildings, programs, departments, brought in new
people including George Poste [retired from SKF?] to head up another
institute), and part of the new regime included very very aggressive
moneyharvesting (as if this, now, is the only reason to live) and our
original hero did not "play ball" with this. Lawsuits filed, our original
hero's budget accounts all frozen, institute taken away from him (but he
still has his tenured position and pay and office), and the university
started the smear machine. They set up a safety violation audit and
totaled up hundreds of safety violations (what a joke, where I was, we had
probably 30 violations per room/lab, etc, and nothing much happened [not
only that, but if you did want to do anything about it, it had to come
out of direct costs of your grant, not the dean's money]). They also had
an external review of the guys programs (another joke) and the guy
complained because the guy who was in charge of the review was the new
institute director who was under the thumb of the new big kahuna (Dr.
Crow, new president of ASU), and the guy in charge of the review brought
in--guess what--all of HIS old buddies who would likely nod-off on
anything that the big kahuna wanted them to nod-off on (I've seen how
these things work several times in my career, they can be apple-polish or
they can be the hatchet men).
And, they had a bar graph to show recent NIH budgets falling flat or
headed down slightly for the last couple years; really bad news for guys
at the bottom of the "hot topics" (read: funded) pool. And, the article
said that applications are up yet more, and funding success rates down
even more.
And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
And, I can talk about how a lot of this began some ten years ago at UMAB.
They did the same thing with Bob Gallo: made a whole building, gave it to
him with a small budget, and told him to fill it up with grant-swinging
science stars (should really be called fundraiser stars, not science
stars). And, oh yes, the guy that came to ASU was previously at Columbia
and pulled the same "magic wand" (big growth, increase size, increase
budgets, increase institutes, make big castles in the sky and even
alliances between the castles [the uberbureaucratization of the
multiversity]) and so, its the old game: BoR sees something neato,
then they gotta have the latest fad, too. Ten years ago I gave an invited
seminar at Mt. Saini SoM, NYC, and they showed me a "research tower" being
built accross the street. 25 stories or something like that, fill them up
with MDs and PhDs writing grant proposals. And, how many careers are going
on the rocks in the process? The article mentioned the same thing going on
at Pitt. Big shift into grant swinging. Name of the game! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Dec 30, 2005
Posts: 9
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 8:14 am
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
> Today's WSJ, front page.
>
> A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
> institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
> something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in
> royalty income, well known, etc.
> (SNIP)
> And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
> order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
> pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
> buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
Art, pres's phiilosophy there is called the "New American University,"
which is what Crow is building in Phoenix. Nothing similar to the New
World Order. (Just an on-the-ground comment from Arizona!).
He has been immensely successful with ASU so far. Very well respected
guy, getting Arizona into all the hot new technologies of the future,
including biotech, nanotech, and more.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of "dead wood" in academia. People like
President Crow will not put up with this old way of doing things. He
carries a mighty big broom, and I am sure we'll see more housecleaning.
DGJ |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 23, 2005
Posts: 89
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 8:56 am
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
DGJ wrote:
> Straydog wrote:
> > Today's WSJ, front page.
> >
> > A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
> > institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
> > something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in
> > royalty income, well known, etc.
>
> > (SNIP)
>
> > And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
> > order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
> > pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
> > buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
>
> Art, pres's phiilosophy there is called the "New American University,"
> which is what Crow is building in Phoenix. Nothing similar to the New
> World Order. (Just an on-the-ground comment from Arizona!).
>
Could you expand this a bit more? For people who are out of academia
for some time it might be interesting. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 23, 2005
Posts: 89
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 1:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
>
>We never got any
> assessment of the outcome of this model except for Project Sunshine and
> Project Lookback, which had conflicting conclusions (i.e. there was a lot
> of spinoff from govt spending, or, conversely, a lot of govt waste with
> little to show). There were more studies like this and I remember only a
> few (also conflicting).
>
Well, the result of this models is skyrocketing of research in this
country and the final outsourcing of them. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 2:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 6 May 2006, Old Pif wrote:
>
> DGJ wrote:
>> Straydog wrote:
>>> Today's WSJ, front page.
>>>
>>> A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
>>> institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
>>> something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in
>>> royalty income, well known, etc.
>>
>>> (SNIP)
>>
>>> And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
>>> order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
>>> pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
>>> buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
>>
>> Art, pres's phiilosophy there is called the "New American University,"
>> which is what Crow is building in Phoenix. Nothing similar to the New
>> World Order. (Just an on-the-ground comment from Arizona!).
>>
>
> Could you expand this a bit more? For people who are out of academia
> for some time it might be interesting.
>
It began about 10 years ago. There are at least two books out there on the
commercialization or corporatization of the university. I just read part
of an article on something related to this in the most recent BW, but it
deals with endowments. Evidently there is so much pressure to gain wealth
by academic institutions that a lot of them are plunging their endowment
assets into hedge funds in the hopes of growing their booty. OK, nice idea
or are they putting their rainy day money into too much risk?
The "new world order" in academia also began in a small way maybe two or
more decades back when many departments began incentivizing new asst prof
faculty to encourage fundraising over research over teaching (not all that
new since I remember complaints in the journal Science back in the '60s
about non-grant holding faculty complaining about how grant swinging
faculty got kisses and hugs from chairs and deans for swinging grants and
to hell with research and teaching). Garfield and daSilva Price (I think)
wrote a book on this, generally, with the title "Little Science, Big
Science" and then a second edition "Little Science, Big Science and
Beyond", generally about how inexpensive science was being replaced by
grant-funded science, and forget about quality of science or discoveries,
and concentrate on qualities such as: i) how many people on the team, ii)
only teams can get anything done, and iii) how much money was in the
budget, iv) that the money came from NIH or NSF. We never got any
assesment of the outcome of this model except for Project Sunshine and
Project Lookback, which had conflicting conclusions (i.e. there was a lot
of spinoff from govt spending, or, conversely, a lot of govt waste with
little to show). There were more studies like this and I remember only a
few (also conflicting).
Zip to ~1990s, and at a faculty meeting (UMAB) where a new president was
coming, and the "new world order" came down from above: departments would
henceforth not play a major role in the activities of the university, but,
instead, "centers of excellence" would be formed (and supported mainly by
grants and contracts, and not hard money) and exist for a cycle of 10-15
years, and then be disbanded and new "centers of excellence" come into
existence. MicroEmpires if you will. All controlled by the "administrator"
gods, and thus, one can be a director but no longer a "god" because they
have to be under the thumb of a real "god", the ubergod
administrator....you get my drift? And, so we are back to the old model of
"the underlings do all the work" and the "overlings go in after the work
is done, and appropriate the credit and trappings for that work." This
is, essentially, the "new world order."
It even applies to that model where the new kids come to the institution
and pay four times the market price for a laptop computer because the
institution requires it, and so they get the "take" for tuition, the
"take" for dorm fees, the "cut" on the computer, and whatever else they
can "stick it to" the student. And, another article I read about how
commercial interests build nice "student unions" on campuses now that
are essentially not much different from shopping malls out in real
life, complete with highly commerciallized shops, vendors,
service-for-fee botiques, etc.
Its all about _moneyharvesting_ and forget anything else going on,
including morals, ethics, and actual learning and critical thinking and
expanding on one's wits. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 02, 2006
Posts: 11
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 7:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
> ... academics on whose backs all of the risk is placed for
> fundraising as first priority
Aren't we living in the world of the free market ? (Which is good, by
default.) More people gets born; thus the competition pressure is
growing. More competitiveness bring cheaper and better-quality
products. The "manufacturers" of the scientific product (academics,
that is) will have to worker harder, too, in this competitive world.
Those who complain about the need to work harder are whiners; they are
those who got used to their cushy life situations and cushy jobs.
> My motto: Lesson to learn is to never
> affiliate with overlings or "prestigeous institutions"... The cases I
> know about, "they" end up stealing your "baby" and cheating you out of
> big bucks.
When I started to work with my present supervisor at my present
temporary job at a govt lab, I put his name alongside my name on the
publications which arose from my work. Though, the tradition at this
lab is that the one who does the job does not put the name of his boss
(who gave him this project) onto the reports and publications. However,
having put my boss' name onto the paper, I got a strong moral support
for this work. He spends a few hours per week out of his busy schedule
to give me a much-needed feedback onto the report and on my work. He
gives me the access to resources. My previous supervisor did not give
me any feedback at all.
So, this seems to be a "win-win" situation -- the boss gets his name
onto publications, and I get support from him for my work. However, it
started to occur to me that I short-changed myself. Putting my boss'
name onto my report just reinforces him and the management in the idea
that they can continue short-changing me in other areas as well. They
see that they can take stuff from me and I am OK about that; and that
they can take more from me. Eventually, they willpass me onto such
things as better office space, resourcs for work, funding for overseas
travel, and, finally, a promotion to a higher-level job. I just did not
have enough of guts to stand for myself in the initial period when I
was vulnerable because I wanted a permanent position with them. Alas,
that's the life.
\/ >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 9:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 6 May 2006, Old Pif wrote:
>
> Straydog wrote:
>>
>> We never got any
>> assessment of the outcome of this model except for Project Sunshine and
>> Project Lookback, which had conflicting conclusions (i.e. there was a lot
>> of spinoff from govt spending, or, conversely, a lot of govt waste with
>> little to show). There were more studies like this and I remember only a
>> few (also conflicting).
>>
>
> Well, the result of this models is skyrocketing of research in this
> country and the final outsourcing of them.
>
I'll give you an even better focus in this country: the vast majority of
grant proposal writing is done NOT for the science but for the fundraising
(i.e. the transfer of money FROM the granting agency bureaucrasies and TO
the institutions to subsidize vast campus empires of bureaucrasies).
Pardon my "negative" attitude. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 02, 2006
Posts: 11
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 9:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
> > So, this seems to be a "win-win" situation -- the boss gets his name
> > onto publications, and I get support from him for my work. However, it
> > started to occur to me that I short-changed myself. Putting my boss'
> > name onto my report just reinforces him and the management in the idea
> > that they can continue short-changing me in other areas as well. They
> > see that they can take stuff from me and I am OK about that; and that
> > they can take more from me. Eventually, they willpass me onto such
> > things as better office space, resourcs for work, funding for overseas
> > travel, and, finally, a promotion to a higher-level job.
>
> And, this is bad?
Perhaps, you missed my idea. I might have written it poorly. My idea
was that the managers saw that I was submissive (I wanted a permanent
position from them), I included the manager into my the authors of my
papers etc. So that they decided that they can exploit me more and NOT
giving me anything in return such as better office space, bla-h-blah,
and, eventually a promotion to a higher level position. They can see
that I am working productivel being paid as a junior researcher -- so
why bother and promotre me ? They will save money and worries by not
giving me a promotion. So, I am suspect that what I have gotten myself
into by including the boss' name into the co-authors of my report, even
if the tradition at this place is not to include the boss if he
provided no substantial intellectual input.
\/ >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 02, 2006
Posts: 11
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 9:37 pm
Post subject: Re: Afterthoughts....Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
> You are there to enjoy, hopefully, that permanent
> job (assuming it comes to you someday) and take the extra money and spend
> it on a hobby, and when you go to work, just tell yourself that you are
> doing this for the permanent job and the money it gives you.
Huh. My hobby is to rule the world. The salary of a junior scientist
(even permanent one) is not enough to implement that.
(Eventually, I would like to be owner/CEO of a company developing and
manufacturing a high-tech product. The chances of this happening is
considerably less than 100%.)
\/ >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 11:00 pm
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 6 May 2006, S. 'Trash' Ny Qui wrote:
>
> Straydog wrote:
>> ... academics on whose backs all of the risk is placed for
>> fundraising as first priority
>
> Aren't we living in the world of the free market ?
Yeah, you're free to find your own food, money, etc., or you're free to
starve.
(Which is good, by
> default.)
The taxes are also free, you get to pay them freely. Because if you don't
pay them freely, you will pay them unfreely (i.e. your money will
be _seized_ [i.e. confiscated]). Kabish? Comprende?
> More people gets born;
More hungry mouths that need feeding.
> thus the competition pressure is
> growing.
And, the food is NOT free (not to be confused with free markets which are
not free).
More competitiveness bring cheaper and better-quality
> products.
I would say "competition" not "competitiveness." But, then, you would have
to define cheaper, better, and then prove the statement. Being that in my
lifetime, I have noticed that, today, a greater proportion of manufactured
products break down and fail within days after the warranty expires than
many decades ago.
> The "manufacturers" of the scientific product (academics,
> that is) will have to worker harder, too, in this competitive world.
Yeah, yeah, ....28 hours per day.
> Those who complain about the need to work harder are whiners; they are
> those who got used to their cushy life situations and cushy jobs.
Where? When? How?
>> My motto: Lesson to learn is to never
>> affiliate with overlings or "prestigeous institutions"... The cases I
>> know about, "they" end up stealing your "baby" and cheating you out of
>> big bucks.
>
> When I started to work with my present supervisor at my present
> temporary job at a govt lab, I put his name alongside my name on the
> publications which arose from my work. Though, the tradition at this
> lab is that the one who does the job does not put the name of his boss
> (who gave him this project) onto the reports and publications. However,
> having put my boss' name onto the paper, I got a strong moral support
> for this work.
Ah, your "kissing up" was recognized in a positive way.
He spends a few hours per week out of his busy schedule
> to give me a much-needed feedback onto the report and on my work. He
> gives me the access to resources. My previous supervisor did not give
> me any feedback at all.
This is called "building alliances." To have an ally, a friend, or at
least a person who will return favors in the future, is a good strategy. A
good investment.
> So, this seems to be a "win-win" situation -- the boss gets his name
> onto publications, and I get support from him for my work. However, it
> started to occur to me that I short-changed myself. Putting my boss'
> name onto my report just reinforces him and the management in the idea
> that they can continue short-changing me in other areas as well. They
> see that they can take stuff from me and I am OK about that; and that
> they can take more from me. Eventually, they willpass me onto such
> things as better office space, resourcs for work, funding for overseas
> travel, and, finally, a promotion to a higher-level job.
And, this is bad?
I just did not
> have enough of guts to stand for myself in the initial period when I
> was vulnerable because I wanted a permanent position with them. Alas,
> that's the life.
Good luck.
> \/
>
> >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 11:07 pm
Post subject: Afterthoughts....Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 6 May 2006, S. 'Trash' Ny Qui wrote:
>
> Straydog wrote:
>
>> My motto: Lesson to learn is to never
>> affiliate with overlings or "prestigeous institutions"... The cases I
>> know about, "they" end up stealing your "baby" and cheating you out of
>> big bucks.
>
> When I started to work with my present supervisor at my present
> temporary job at a govt lab, I put his name alongside my name on the
> publications which arose from my work.
After posting a response to your comments above and below, I had the
afterthoughts about the _relation_ between what you wrote above, and what
I wrote above that. If that was the stimulus for your response, then let
me make an ammendment to my original comment. If you have some idea that
is commercially viable, you'd better think about protecting it. If you
have "crank-the-box" work, and never ends, may not go anywhere, or is
rehashed over an over again, or you may be administratively switched from
project A to project B, then to project J, and then later, to project Z,
then it doesn't matter. You are there to enjoy, hopefully, that permanent
job (assuming it comes to you someday) and take the extra money and spend
it on a hobby, and when you go to work, just tell yourself that you are
doing this for the permanent job and the money it gives you.
===== no change to below, included for reference and context =====
Though, the tradition at this
> lab is that the one who does the job does not put the name of his boss
> (who gave him this project) onto the reports and publications. However,
> having put my boss' name onto the paper, I got a strong moral support
> for this work. He spends a few hours per week out of his busy schedule
> to give me a much-needed feedback onto the report and on my work. He
> gives me the access to resources. My previous supervisor did not give
> me any feedback at all.
>
> So, this seems to be a "win-win" situation -- the boss gets his name
> onto publications, and I get support from him for my work. However, it
> started to occur to me that I short-changed myself. Putting my boss'
> name onto my report just reinforces him and the management in the idea
> that they can continue short-changing me in other areas as well. They
> see that they can take stuff from me and I am OK about that; and that
> they can take more from me. Eventually, they willpass me onto such
> things as better office space, resourcs for work, funding for overseas
> travel, and, finally, a promotion to a higher-level job. I just did not
> have enough of guts to stand for myself in the initial period when I
> was vulnerable because I wanted a permanent position with them. Alas,
> that's the life.
>
> \/
>
> >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 11, 2004
Posts: 63
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 2:13 am
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Straydog wrote:
>
> Today's WSJ, front page.
>
> A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
> institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
> something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil
> in royalty income, well known, etc.
>
> What triggered all this? Guess what? A new administrator came on board
> and "re-engineered" ASU into an even biggerer/expanderer institution.
> Our original hero lost a major NIH grant, plus got in a squabble with
> another faculty member who he said filed improper patent applications,
> and with the new regime on board (the new regime was quick to set up the
> new ASU uber alles policy, added buildings, programs, departments,
> brought in new people including George Poste [retired from SKF?] to head
> up another institute), and part of the new regime included very very
> aggressive moneyharvesting (as if this, now, is the only reason to live)
> and our original hero did not "play ball" with this. Lawsuits filed, our
> original hero's budget accounts all frozen, institute taken away from
> him (but he still has his tenured position and pay and office), and the
> university started the smear machine. They set up a safety violation
> audit and totaled up hundreds of safety violations (what a joke, where I
> was, we had probably 30 violations per room/lab, etc, and nothing much
> happened [not only that, but if you did want to do anything about it, it
> had to come out of direct costs of your grant, not the dean's money]).
> They also had an external review of the guys programs (another joke) and
> the guy complained because the guy who was in charge of the review was
> the new institute director who was under the thumb of the new big kahuna
> (Dr. Crow, new president of ASU), and the guy in charge of the review
> brought in--guess what--all of HIS old buddies who would likely nod-off
> on anything that the big kahuna wanted them to nod-off on (I've seen how
> these things work several times in my career, they can be apple-polish
> or they can be the hatchet men).
>
> And, they had a bar graph to show recent NIH budgets falling flat or
> headed down slightly for the last couple years; really bad news for guys
> at the bottom of the "hot topics" (read: funded) pool. And, the article
> said that applications are up yet more, and funding success rates down
> even more.
>
> And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
> order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
> pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
> buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
>
> And, I can talk about how a lot of this began some ten years ago at
> UMAB. They did the same thing with Bob Gallo: made a whole building,
> gave it to him with a small budget, and told him to fill it up with
> grant-swinging science stars (should really be called fundraiser stars,
> not science stars). And, oh yes, the guy that came to ASU was previously
> at Columbia and pulled the same "magic wand" (big growth, increase size,
> increase budgets, increase institutes, make big castles in the sky and
> even alliances between the castles [the uberbureaucratization of the
> multiversity]) and so, its the old game: BoR sees something neato,
> then they gotta have the latest fad, too. Ten years ago I gave an
> invited seminar at Mt. Saini SoM, NYC, and they showed me a "research
> tower" being built accross the street. 25 stories or something like
> that, fill them up with MDs and PhDs writing grant proposals. And, how
> many careers are going on the rocks in the process? The article
> mentioned the same thing going on at Pitt. Big shift into grant
> swinging. Name of the game!
Things have always been screwed up in the biological sciences/med
schools and that is primarily because if NIH money and the fact that
people are will to take jobs under these conditions. You won't find an
engineer dumb enough to take a faculty job without a 9 month guaranteed
salary, but plenty of bio-types would jump at the chance to get paid for
3 out of 12 months. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 7:02 am
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 6 May 2006, S. 'Trash' Ny Qui wrote:
>
> Straydog wrote:
>
>>> So, this seems to be a "win-win" situation -- the boss gets his name
>>> onto publications, and I get support from him for my work. However, it
>>> started to occur to me that I short-changed myself. Putting my boss'
>>> name onto my report just reinforces him and the management in the idea
>>> that they can continue short-changing me in other areas as well. They
>>> see that they can take stuff from me and I am OK about that; and that
>>> they can take more from me. Eventually, they willpass me onto such
>>> things as better office space, resourcs for work, funding for overseas
>>> travel, and, finally, a promotion to a higher-level job.
>>
>> And, this is bad?
>
> Perhaps, you missed my idea. I might have written it poorly. My idea
> was that the managers saw that I was submissive (I wanted a permanent
> position from them), I included the manager into my the authors of my
> papers etc. So that they decided that they can exploit me more and NOT
> giving me anything in return such as better office space, bla-h-blah,
> and, eventually a promotion to a higher level position. They can see
> that I am working productivel being paid as a junior researcher -- so
> why bother and promotre me ? They will save money and worries by not
> giving me a promotion. So, I am suspect that what I have gotten myself
> into by including the boss' name into the co-authors of my report, even
> if the tradition at this place is not to include the boss if he
> provided no substantial intellectual input.
OK, fine. However, they did tell you to apply for that permanent position,
didn't they? And, you did, didn't you? And, so when are you going to get
the answer?
And, if you didn't put the bosses name on the paper, do you think you
would have done, differently? Better?
I think all you can do is wait, pray, and hope. And, if some other guy
gets the position, then you have to decide if you want to stay there as
you are, or quit the place. Then where will you go?
> \/
>
> >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 9:54 am
Post subject: Re: Big purge at ASU [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Threeducks wrote:
> Straydog wrote:
>>
>> Today's WSJ, front page.
>>
>> A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his institute
>> and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had something like
>> 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in royalty income,
>> well known, etc.
>>
>> What triggered all this? Guess what? A new administrator came on board and
>> "re-engineered" ASU into an even biggerer/expanderer institution. Our
>> original hero lost a major NIH grant, plus got in a squabble with another
>> faculty member who he said filed improper patent applications, and with the
>> new regime on board (the new regime was quick to set up the new ASU uber
>> alles policy, added buildings, programs, departments, brought in new people
>> including George Poste [retired from SKF?] to head up another institute),
>> and part of the new regime included very very aggressive moneyharvesting
>> (as if this, now, is the only reason to live) and our original hero did not
>> "play ball" with this. Lawsuits filed, our original hero's budget accounts
>> all frozen, institute taken away from him (but he still has his tenured
>> position and pay and office), and the university started the smear machine.
>> They set up a safety violation audit and totaled up hundreds of safety
>> violations (what a joke, where I was, we had probably 30 violations per
>> room/lab, etc, and nothing much happened [not only that, but if you did
>> want to do anything about it, it had to come out of direct costs of your
>> grant, not the dean's money]). They also had an external review of the guys
>> programs (another joke) and the guy complained because the guy who was in
>> charge of the review was the new institute director who was under the thumb
>> of the new big kahuna (Dr. Crow, new president of ASU), and the guy in
>> charge of the review brought in--guess what--all of HIS old buddies who
>> would likely nod-off on anything that the big kahuna wanted them to nod-off
>> on (I've seen how these things work several times in my career, they can be
>> apple-polish or they can be the hatchet men).
>>
>> And, they had a bar graph to show recent NIH budgets falling flat or headed
>> down slightly for the last couple years; really bad news for guys at the
>> bottom of the "hot topics" (read: funded) pool. And, the article said that
>> applications are up yet more, and funding success rates down even more.
>>
>> And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
>> order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
>> pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
>> buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
>>
>> And, I can talk about how a lot of this began some ten years ago at UMAB.
>> They did the same thing with Bob Gallo: made a whole building, gave it to
>> him with a small budget, and told him to fill it up with grant-swinging
>> science stars (should really be called fundraiser stars, not science
>> stars). And, oh yes, the guy that came to ASU was previously at Columbia
>> and pulled the same "magic wand" (big growth, increase size, increase
>> budgets, increase institutes, make big castles in the sky and even
>> alliances between the castles [the uberbureaucratization of the
>> multiversity]) and so, its the old game: BoR sees something neato,
>> then they gotta have the latest fad, too. Ten years ago I gave an invited
>> seminar at Mt. Saini SoM, NYC, and they showed me a "research tower" being
>> built accross the street. 25 stories or something like that, fill them up
>> with MDs and PhDs writing grant proposals. And, how many careers are going
>> on the rocks in the process? The article mentioned the same thing going on
>> at Pitt. Big shift into grant swinging. Name of the game!
>
> Things have always been screwed up in the biological sciences/med schools and
> that is primarily because if NIH money and the fact that people are will to
> take jobs under these conditions. You won't find an engineer dumb enough to
> take a faculty job without a 9 month guaranteed salary, but plenty of
> bio-types would jump at the chance to get paid for 3 out of 12 months.
Can you answer a few questions for me?
1. At how many higher tier institutions (say the better ranked public and
private, and that means research, not teaching) with engineering
departments are you familiar with the "guarantees" for salary?
2. For all those who get tenure, are those full 9 month hard money
salaries guaranteed 100% regardless of whether they are bringing in any
grant-contract money?
3. What are the formulas that trade-off teaching load vs. extramural
funding (yeah, I'd pick full time teaching for security, too, but the
prestige ain't there, either, and the fundraisers often got better
raises and promotions, too).
As one reference point I knew about, when I was an undergraduate physics
major (Urbana-Champaign) in the mid '60s, all of my friends were EE
undergrads and we all were often "bumming around" in the EE departments
labs and it was common knowledge that half the department was full time
teaching (office and no lab), and the other half was on reduced or no
teaching (office and lab space) because they had DoD, Air Force, Navy,
and other military grants and contracts or maybe a commercial contract.
Oh, yes, the EE building had an antenna test pattern tower and I often saw
it going up and down, rotating, elevating, etc., so there were really
using that facility. The Nuclear Engineering department had its own low
power research reactor; funded by (at that time) AEC. I got to see
Cherenkov radiation in person.
At IIT (Chicago), at that time, too, I was a part time night student, also
visited their research institute skyscraper which, after being built, just
about doubled their lab space. It was all funded on soft money grants and
contracts, and mostly engineering research (IIT was private), and I knew
that some department faculty had arrangements for space in the big building,
but otherwise were full time scientists (no teaching).
I also gave a seminar at Hopkins, on the main campus (not the med school),
in an engineering department (the chair told me he was firing a guy who
"hadn't brought in any grant money in five years," I didn't ask if he had
tenure of any kind.)
So, I'd like you to tell me if the situations you know about (and how
many) in the "engineering racket" are much different from the "science
racket" according to the three questions I asked above. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 11, 2005
Posts: 332
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 10:46 am
Post subject: Afterthoughts: Before Dave Jensen, After Dave Jensen...was: [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Reread Daves comments farther down then mine.
On Sat, 6 May 2006, DGJ wrote:
> Straydog wrote:
>> Today's WSJ, front page.
>>
>> A guy (a head of their cancer center) removed from control of his
>> institute and 30 of his scientists let go as the axe fell. The guy had
>> something like 25-30 years there, $1.5 mil in NIH money, another $1 mil in
>> royalty income, well known, etc.
>
>> (SNIP)
>
>> And, so here it is, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the "new world
>> order" (yes, they used that term in the article to describe the new ASU
>> pres philosophy) is _moneyharvesting_ and also the latest buzzwords,
>> buzzthink, and buzzprograms.
>
> Art, pres's phiilosophy there is called the "New American University,"
> which is what Crow is building in Phoenix. Nothing similar to the New
> World Order. (Just an on-the-ground comment from Arizona!).
>
> He has been immensely successful with ASU so far. Very well respected
> guy, getting Arizona into all the hot new technologies of the future,
> including biotech, nanotech, and more.
>
> Unfortunately, there is a lot of "dead wood" in academia. People like
> President Crow will not put up with this old way of doing things. He
> carries a mighty big broom, and I am sure we'll see more housecleaning.
>
> DGJ
After my original comments responding to Dave, here, I thought about
something else. I didn't mention the name of the guy who got the boot, who
had a 25-30 year track record and brought in lots of money to ASU, but the
way Dave Jensen talks about the new guy, its like the old guy was swept
away as if, by Dave's "innuendo" that "there is a lot of 'dead wood'" in
academia, all the guys 25-30 years just vaporized into denseless gas and
evaporated. It sounds as if the new guy, Crow (representing the New World
Order), according to Dave's middle paragraph, is maybe making sure
anything he does gets into the media (where Dave would welcome
self-promoters or anyone who exploited the power of name recognition just
because their name was on everyone's lips) or making sure that he does
things that will get noticed by the media (I don't recall hearing that
Dave is down on the ASU campus, intimately familiar with everything going
on and thus hearing it first hand by being part of it).
Dave never mentioned the old guy and so maybe even though the guy made
scientific contributions AND brought in substantial sums of money, Dave
surely did't even know about him, specifically or his cancer center. And,
thus, we have additional proof and evidence that PR-hucksterism really
needs to be part of high end career preservation and/or growth. All these
guys come into the picture with "new ideas" that are not really new, but
minor modifications of old ideas but packaged in "new bottles" with new
buzznames, buzzwords, and plenty of hype and PR, and, like Crow, can say
"see, I did this at the old place and it worked" and, poof, they get hired
and they are getting hired for the money and not quality of teaching,
research, etc. And, this is going to become a serious problem in the
future. Ultimately, economics will become the new religion and it will
dictate that the way to measure human happiness and success will only
involve measuring how much money you have in your wallet.
And, in case anyone considers that _I_ have a "negative attitude" about
any of this, I can list titles of books that have been written about
excess hype and hucksterism in quite a few of the new eng/tech industries.
One name that comes to mind is Michael Lewis whose very popular books
include "Liar's Poker" (I listened to the audio tape) and "The Money
Culture" and he gets invited to speak in front of large tech (eg IT)
conference audiences, too. >> Stay informed about: Big purge at ASU |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | polymerase chain reaction PCR - Could anyone assist me with materials for methods polymerase chain reaction PCR, I shall appreciate it. thank you.
Chemist-Rubber Products - JOB MEMO PLANT CHEMIST / PROCESS ENG-CENTRAL INDIANA Large international company manufacturer of automotive rubber molded products needs hands-on type who can liaison between lab and production and engineering. General Functions: Responsible for..
scientific career - So far, I have been in a passive mode regarding my scientific career and was going with the flow: I got a PhD because in the beginning it seemed a good thing to have and later I had no other employment options, and then I scrambled to find any employment...
My Future - Okay, In the fall I will start what will likely be a five year stint as a graduate student in the life sciences. I never thought it would be an easy path but after browsing through this newsgroup I was amazed about how overwhelming negative an opinion so...
NCSA/Visiting Research Programmer (Specializing as a Softw.. - Integrated CyberServices Directorate Innovative Systems Lab Division <font color=brown> ; ; ; </font> Visiting Research Programmer (Specializing in Software Development) The National Center for Supercomputing Appl... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You can delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
