3 ms·

I think the research branches of a university are much less ambiguously positive than the teaching branches. One of the things people consistently fail to grok

I think the research branches of a university are much less ambiguously positive than the teaching branches. One of the things people consistently fail to grok is that community colleges of the sort that are generally fairly cheap, are cheap in large part because their mission is to make higher education accessible. Universities do not (and probably shouldn't) have that mission. Their mission is to fund original research that would otherwise go undone and record it.

xkjkls 8y ago
I wonder if general research is really a great charitable investment either. Medicine seems the most obviously positive research initiative to fund, but looking at the last few decades of medical research, I don't see many discoveries that have demonstrably improved human well being.
- dgacmu 8y ago
  In the big picture, research needs to be balanced, because it builds on itself across fields. Medicine needs physics, computer science, biology, robotics, chemistry, material science, math ... (think drug discovery/modeling, materials for implants, sutures, techniques for laparoscopic surgery, medical records, virology, ... everything). Each of these fields has cross-dependencies as well. The real thing that's needed is investments in high-risk, long-term fundamental research. Companies have a very hard time doing things with long, risky timelines (and justifiably so, they have a bottom line to account for in general). In _all_ fields.