The authors are 3 very well respected UO faculty PI's, there was a lot of input from others, and a lot of drafts and back and forth. This final version has sat on Bean's desk since he got back from the Fiesta Bowl. A snippet:
Given its importance to UO's efforts to stay in the AAU I've posted the part of the report with 7 specific recommendations here. I'm leaving out the background material though. That part is very blunt, and I think making it public might discourage future honest discussion.
For the Potemkin Village view of UO's research situation, check out this Around the O report. Word has it that Espy closed the event with a rousing rendition of "Mighty Oregon". Comments welcome. 2/1/2013.
UOMatters is redacting???
ReplyDeleteNo, I'm haggling. I'll post it all in exchange for the usual emolument.
DeleteIt's amazing what a bottle of 20 year old scotch will get you these days. On a University campus it's like cigarettes or coffee in a post-apocalyptic world.
DeleteYou're all talk. I'm sitting here drinking Evan Williams.
DeleteAnyone got a cell phone recording of that? I hear it was pretty special.
ReplyDeleteForget about Mighty Oregon, please just make a FOIA request for the report and all the preparatory documents listed in it and then post them all. Bean has sat on his ass ignoring research for too many years, and he needs to be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteWere there any social science or humanities faculty on the committee? What the committee report doesn't acknowledge is that a few areas are generating disproportionately high enrollments with disproportionately few resources. In these`areas, asking them to continue teaching more with even fewer resources seriously impedes research too. A comparison of funding per student across campus relative to AAU comparators would make the point. The solitary focus on research comparisons is telling and no doubt self serving. or am I just cynical? Despite the carping, I expect the report to be useful. VPRI got off much too easy because I didn't see that she went much out of her way to reach out to leaders of key research-intensive colleges and departments before beginning to sweep with the new broom. Of course she obviously either didn't get much help or guidance from above, or got the wrong advice and 'help'.
ReplyDeleteThe Oregon Budget Model is all about tying resources to butts in the seat so I think you've got it backwards. This report is trying to wake Bean up to the fact that research has fallen between the cracks.
DeleteI agree research has fallen through the cracks in many dimensions. can we also agree that starving relatively starving areas,leaves little time, energy or resources for research in those areas? I don't see how that point is backward, unless you are happy to sacrifice research in those areas to support research in your preferred areas. who's ox is gored? Of course, everyone's in the current state of affairs.I am no fan of the Oregon Budget model, by the way. The weight for any dimension of quality is zero, and in the model's effects, zero might be an overestimate.
DeleteThe report is quite good as far as it goes. It is misleading, however, in laying most of the blame for what has been happening on poor communication. There was certainly plenty of that but much more concerning are the poor decisions and, in some cases, the sheer incompetence we have seen from the VPRI. Better communication isn't going to fix that.
ReplyDeletehere, here. absolute nonsense is all I have encountered.
DeleteVPRs office is a center of incompetence and disrespect. Expect grand things to never emerge from there.
DeleteWith all the carping about the current VPR, I am wondering why the silence about the former VPR? Apparently when he left, the coffers were empty. We have heard little or not information about why that happened, and why no one was held accountable. The F&A rate fell during his tenure. What can anyone tell us about that? And the former VPR drifted off into the sunset, with no consequence Can anyone say why? and what happened?
ReplyDeleteSearch this blog for Linton and ICC rate cut, or start with this post: http://www.uomatters.com/2011/04/lariviere-gets-all-bellotti-on-linton.html
ReplyDeleteShort version? Bean dropped the ball on supervising Linton too.
We really need to be thinking forward on this, and also thinking independent of sniping at particular administrators. The current failure is a joint consequence of all administrative leadership - or lack thereof - on campus. The VPR's office was in trouble, no other office stepped up or went up the chain to point it out. This RAP makes a first attempt at explaining the structural flaws. SO- if $$ were released from above or redirected from the budget model towards research support, how should they be administered and where should they go?
ReplyDelete1. New faculty startup
2. Current facilities
3. Match for proposals that improve infrastructure or training
4. ??
Administered by:
1. CAS -or-
2. VPR -or-
3. Independent body with little overhead?
Dog says
ReplyDeleteMy hope out of all this mess is that a new model for funding startup packages results. Yes the VPR should fund some of that, but the expectation that the VPRI office fund 100% of that cost is both unfair and unrealistic in the current environment.