OCR Text |
Show if ftd- at tvi 7j rir ia i DAILY THE THE CHRONICLE'S V i E UTAH iX-TV- V Wow, Somebbdy's Secede e. CHRONICLE AJsct &p cmtus. Meemt Sootm frn Hi - miliiig :.on " very x March , uiaversny administrators, higher edu- JS cation officials and most studenU- - and faculty members king their heads and offer Bp that expression, "Wait, 'til next year" That's because almost every March i the day after the closing cf the Utah State Legislature's annual session our legislators have managed to shut us out. Yeat after year, the Legislature rejects requests for additional funding and additional support for the state's higher education sys- -. . oft-quot- ed 7iut this March i, you might "see some smiles on campus. That's because things weren't . so bad for higher ed up on the Hill this year. For the first time in recent memory, not only did the highor education syftera get most of the money it asked for, but leg- islators actually acknowledged that students have a voice, that our schools need more money and that the siatus quo cannot remain. This year's Legislature appropriated $72.5 million for higher education. While this fell short of the Board of Regents' lofty request of $85.6 million, It is more than the amount of money the Legislature handed out in the past two years combined. Also, after years of fighting it, the Legislature approved a formula funding program that will annu March ; sipc 1 j III 1 ally earmark money for financial aid, libraries, salary equity and technology. The formula funding makes university budgets much more stable. With the passage of the "Truth in Tuition" bill, the Legislature not only acknowledged student con- cerns, but did something about them. The Legislature also capped tuition increases for University of Utah s.tudenls at 4 percent Of course, the session wasn't a total victory for Utah's higher education system. The Regents the body that governs the state's nine public colleges and universities lost key battles on where that jz million will go. For example, the Legislature approved the engineering initiative, which will require universities to double the amount of engineering graduates within five years, but didn't even appropriate half the money it will cost to pull off such a gbnt task. The higher ed system also took a hit when the Legislature decided to give schools 80 percent of the costs related to enrollment growth. Still, despite some setbacks and losses on a few battlegrounds, both the higher education system and the U achieved some wonderful victories during this legislative session, hopefully marking a shift in the way the Legislature views higher education. 1 JSMSL " .... f?''''" LETTER TO fev ) ,,""- I - THE EDITOR Conundrums Won't Boggle a Big Mind Editor: While browsing through the paper Feb. 27, I had a chance to read Carlos Ponce's, "A Paradox That Must Be Hard to Live With." Mr. Ponce asserts that claims about truth based on science have greater truth-valu- e than those based on faith. When talking about truth, it is helpful to differentiate between two types of truth. First, there is truth that is attainable by scientific facts. This truth, says Stephen Hawking, "describes how." Second, there is truth that "explains why." It is truth of this kind that lies outside the realms of science. Mr. Ponce uses the "dragon in the garage" analogy to illustrate the absurdity of truth claims not corroborated by empirical evidence. This seems to be" an indirect reference to belief in a Supreme Being. I suggest that the "dragon in the garage" analogy simplifies and misrepresents the circumstances of d truth claims. I prefer the "key in the building" faith-base- analogy. Imagine that I am in possession of the keys to the J. Willard Marriott Library. I am going to hide the keys somewhere in the building. For you to prove that the keys do not exist, you must search the entire building and not find them there. You quickly discover, however, that not only must you search the entire building, but you must do so simultaneously lest, while you are searching one part of the building, some one moves the keys to a different place. see PARADOX, page 6 one 11 Woes L eave Campuses to Sell Intearit is mr Not only did the BRIAN WATTS Chronicle Managing Editor knew a kid in high school who would do anything for money. He would lick mayonnaise off cafeteria tables, he would eat used Kleenex; you name it, he would do it. There just had to be a little cash in it for him. Unfortunately, America's universities are beginning to remind me more and more of my high school comrade. But, whereas my high school friend would abandon principles such as common decency and basic hygiene, universities are currently abandoning ideal principles like the free exchange of information and ideas, and the quest for whatever knowledge a researcher is inclined to pursue. This is what is sacrificed for a little cash. The research principles of institutes of higher learning are being hijacked by corporate money and corporate mentality. The proverbial marketplace of ideas is becoming more and more just that a marketplace. A lot of the blame for this phenomenon Act can be placed squarely on the Bayh-Dol- e to allows universities of 1980. This act patent results from federally funded research. The idea was simple enough: The government was attempting to bring university research into the corporate world. One side effect is devastating, however. I Bayh-Dol- e Act give universi- ties access to the corporate marketplace, it allowed corporate ethics and corporations themselves to gain a strong foothold in the realm of academia. Universities want the money that corporations can provide, but they want the money with no strings attached. Yet.even a freshman in business can tell you that strings will, inevitably, be attached. That seems fair enough. Private interests can't very well be told they can only give research money if they promise to keep their hands off the results and have no say in where the money is spent. Thus far, researchers have been willing to deal with the strings. Some universities have even allowed large corporate donors seats on research committees that make crucial decisions about where money will be spent. The fact that corporate infiltration of university research greatly impacts the way university research is conducted is unarguable. The patent numbers alone tell the story. According to a recent article in The Atlantic Monthly, universities produced roughly 250 patents per year prior to the pasIn 1998, however, universage of Bayh-Dolsities were responsible for the production of more than 4,800 patents. Act Many patents prior to the Bayh-Dol- e were never commercialized. My guess is that nearly air of the 4,800 patents produced by universities in 1998 were commercialized, or at least thought to be commercially viable. certain: One While thing seems to have mini researchers kept grumbling e. CHRONICLE OPINION EDITOR SCOTT LEWIS just happy to have money at all corporations obviously feel research is a great investment, especially when they are able to call all the shots. mum Admittedly, I'm no business major, but I do know corporations would not shell out that kind of money unless they were getting a major-leagu- e return on their investments. The proof is in the numbers. The Atlantic Monthly reports that corporate giving has risen from $850 million in 1985 to a whopping $4.25 billion prior to 1995. Admittedly, I'm no business major, but I do know corporations would not shell out that kind of money unless they were getting a e return on their investments. The fact that companies are spending more money than ever for university research means universities are giving too much away. The numbers show that corporations arc eager to partner themselves, and their money, with universities too eager for my liking. The strings should be cut. I'm painfully aware that money doesn't major-leagu- LETTERSCHRONICLE.UTAH.EDU grow on trees. I'm also aware that many people feel that the money granted by corporate America should be viewed as a means to a positive end. And, with federal research money on the decline, isn't it better for universities to have tainted money than no money at all? Perhaps. But if universities continue to take corporate financing at the rate that is currently practiced, they must be prepared to abandon many of the core principles that institutes of higher learning were built upon. Universities will no longer be places of removed, uninterested, study, but corporate dollar. machines that bow to the semi-distastef- ul ty are Already forcing corporations researchers to sign forms swearing them to secrecy, at least until a patent can be secured. Publication of research results has been held off as long as six months by some corporate sponsors. If this trend is allowed to continue, scientific discoveries will become as closely guarded as the original formula for Coke. Universities that lack funding will cut money from humanities programs and channel resources into commercially viable research. The downsizing practices of corporations may soon raise their heads on the campuses of America. Universities may eventually become corporations themselves doing anything for money. Even if it means eating a used Kleenex. Brian welcomes feedback at: bwattschron-iclc.utah.ed- u or send a letter to the editor to: lettcrschroniclc.utah.edu. 581-704- 1 |