After 29 program cuts were announced last week, we were led to believe that ASU was left with no other choice.
Taking a look at what programs were cut as well as what programs we are gaining can reveal ASU’s evolution into a research-funding giant.
New graduate programs such as global technology and development would likely bring grant funding into the University by replacing such liberal arts programs as master’s of communications that would not necessarily bring in the same outside revenue.
If there was research funding coming into these cut programs, would we be so quick to remove them?
Crow’s origins at Columbia University, where he created eight research centers and a plethora of grant-funding opportunities, can hint to where our University is headed. Through the expansion of Columbia’s research department as well as the establishment of online programs, Crow left Columbia with $100 million a year profits.
ASU is on the same track. The Office of Knowledge Enterprise Development (OKED) reported that since Crow has been in office, research spending has more than tripled from $120 million in 2001 to $370 million in 2010, according to Inside Higher Ed.
Crow first started his research enterprise at ASU with the Biodesign Institute, which encompasses studies of nanotechnology, microbiology and solar technology, to name a few.
Research is based off of outside funding, which can determine a professor’s credibility if they gain or lose funding from outside institutions, according to The Pittsburgh Post Gazette.
The business plan for the Biodesign Institute allows for the expansion or contraction of lab studies based on how much funding is given to the institute.
Many colleges have discovered that research based programs are the way to make a profit. Many schools aim for funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Schools pressure scientists and researchers to report their discoveries so they can apply for patents, grant contracts and federal grants, according to The Wall Street Journal.
ASU is a major competitor in research funding. NIH funded ASU with a $7.7 million dollar grant last October to study membrane proteins that protect against disease. ASU and OKED are hosting a three-day NIH Regional Spring Seminar in April that will educate researchers on the application and review process for NIH grants.
Last year, NIH announced that ASU was ranked in the top 20 for funding in nursing and health programs.
This fact is already obvious on our website: type in asu.edu and the first thing you see is a research project. The homepage is almost always news on biotechnology, renewable energy, Mars exploration, etc.
It appears that ASU is trying to save the world, but not without a profit. If business continues in this direction, what will happen to the rest of our liberal arts and social change programs that cannot keep up with grant funding?
There is nothing wrong with studying cures for infectious diseases within our University, but the direction of research is for business purposes, and that needs to be addressed to students.
For comments reach Justine at jgarci8@asu.edu
