3 ms·

One hypothesis: the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 [1], which allowed federal grantees to own the intellectual property developed with federal funds. Prior to this Act,

by atg2taa 13y ago

One hypothesis: the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 [1], which allowed federal grantees to own the intellectual property developed with federal funds. Prior to this Act, all IP made with federal funds belonged to the government. As R&D is extremely expensive, one theory is that colleges raised their tuition to help cover the venture capital requirements of research. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act

ahomescu1 13y ago
Can you give some examples or numbers for this? I find it hard to believe that this alone (or at least in large part) lead to such an increase in tuition. Most STEM research is still funded by the federal government (through the NSF, DARPA, NIH and similar agencies). Many research projects don't require venture capital, because they're not really marketable.
- atg2taa 13y ago
  Certainly. I haven't reserached this issue much, and while certainly other factors come into play, I suspect that Act does have an impact. I used the word "venture capital" loosely. I do not refer to the traditional sense of VCs on sand hill road, but venture capital in the sense of money that can pay for extremely specialized and expensive research equipment and labor. In general, the Harvardization ("we must be the best at all areas of research") has infected even second-tier research institutions; for places like Harvard, MIT, etc. the financial gains from patents probably outweighs the outlay. However, for second-tier research institutions, they may be simply caught up in a ratings arms race. Here is a report that has some interesting facts. http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/cshe/working-papers/WP%236 http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/cshe/working-papers/WP%236 'Over the current era, this has produced a pronounced intensification of research. For 99 research universities, enrollments grew by 15 percent from 1980 to 2000, but real research expenditures grew by 128 percent (Geiger, 2004, p. 147).'
  - ahomescu1 13y ago
    From the link you shared, I assume the relevant chart is the one on page 14, showing the growth of university research expenditures. What I couldn't find in the text (maybe I missed it) is the source of those funds; I think that most of it is paid not by universities, but by the federal government through various agencies. Like another commenter said, the university also receives money from research grants (as overhead), they don't have to pay anything except maybe the professors' salaries. A growth in "Research Expenditures" doesn't necessarily mean that universities are spending more money on research. As an anecdote, here's my personal example. As a PhD student in CS at a public US university, my experience has been this: all our equipment (mostly computers, CS is relatively cheap) has been paid from grants, and I have been funded from 3 sources: a 1-year federal fellowship (FAFSA), 1 year as a TA (that one was funded by the university, but in exchange for teaching) and the rest on a federal research project. Now, it is possible that richer private universities do pay for their own equipment and researchers. I don't have any numbers for that, though.
anigbrowl 13y ago
Wow, what a fucked-up piece of short-termism that was.
dnautics 13y ago
I'm not certain this makes sense. Why would they need to raise tuition if the venture capital requirements were covered by the feds anyway? Moreover, typically gov't granted departments are helping pay for other departments through overhead, not the other way around.
- atg2taa 13y ago
  I don't think federal grants cover the research costs completely. For example, if my professor wins one grant, part of the money will be put aside for to cover 10% of his salary. He certainly doesn't have 10 big grants in play at any given time, so the remainder has to be offset by the University. Add to that, you need a lot of overhead like administrative assistants, grant managers, technology transfer officers.
  - jurassic 13y ago
    I would be surprised if your professor's research tab is partly covered by the university unless they are using startup funds as a new faculty hire. The universities I've been at all (Caltech, MIT) have a significant "overhead" charge against all incoming grants to cover the cost of university infrastructure, keeping the lights on, etc. So it is research that is subsidizing the university, not the other way around.
    - mjn 13y ago
      The last sentence is somewhat questionable, except at the top universities. Only at the most grant-successful universities does the overhead actually break even in recouping the extra outlays universities put into research. Examples: construction of research-specific laboratory facilities, co-financing of expenditures they wouldn't have otherwise undertaken (many grants require co-funding), increased salaries and hiring packages caused by bidding wars for faculty who have successful grant-getting records, department backstopping of PhD stipends when a large group has a dry year grant-wise, salaries for grant-writing assistance and research-support staff, etc., etc. The former Dean of Georgia Tech's College of Computing reached a similar conclusion: http://innovate-edu.com/2011/05/18/if-you-have-to-ask-ten-sure-fire-ways-to-lose-money-on-research/ http://innovate-edu.com/2011/05/18/if-you-have-to-ask-ten-su...

by atg2taa 13y ago

ahomescu1 13y ago

Can you give some examples or numbers for this? I find it hard to believe that this alone (or at least in large part) lead to such an increase in tuition. Most STEM research is still funded by the federal government (through the NSF, DARPA, NIH and similar agencies). Many research projects don't require venture capital, because they're not really marketable.

atg2taa 13y ago
Certainly. I haven't reserached this issue much, and while certainly other factors come into play, I suspect that Act does have an impact. I used the word "venture capital" loosely. I do not refer to the traditional sense of VCs on sand hill road, but venture capital in the sense of money that can pay for extremely specialized and expensive research equipment and labor. In general, the Harvardization ("we must be the best at all areas of research") has infected even second-tier research institutions; for places like Harvard, MIT, etc. the financial gains from patents probably outweighs the outlay. However, for second-tier research institutions, they may be simply caught up in a ratings arms race. Here is a report that has some interesting facts. http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/cshe/working-papers/WP%236 http://www.ed.psu.edu/educ/cshe/working-papers/WP%236 'Over the current era, this has produced a pronounced intensification of research. For 99 research universities, enrollments grew by 15 percent from 1980 to 2000, but real research expenditures grew by 128 percent (Geiger, 2004, p. 147).'
- ahomescu1 13y ago
  From the link you shared, I assume the relevant chart is the one on page 14, showing the growth of university research expenditures. What I couldn't find in the text (maybe I missed it) is the source of those funds; I think that most of it is paid not by universities, but by the federal government through various agencies. Like another commenter said, the university also receives money from research grants (as overhead), they don't have to pay anything except maybe the professors' salaries. A growth in "Research Expenditures" doesn't necessarily mean that universities are spending more money on research. As an anecdote, here's my personal example. As a PhD student in CS at a public US university, my experience has been this: all our equipment (mostly computers, CS is relatively cheap) has been paid from grants, and I have been funded from 3 sources: a 1-year federal fellowship (FAFSA), 1 year as a TA (that one was funded by the university, but in exchange for teaching) and the rest on a federal research project. Now, it is possible that richer private universities do pay for their own equipment and researchers. I don't have any numbers for that, though.

anigbrowl 13y ago

Wow, what a fucked-up piece of short-termism that was.

dnautics 13y ago

I'm not certain this makes sense. Why would they need to raise tuition if the venture capital requirements were covered by the feds anyway? Moreover, typically gov't granted departments are helping pay for other departments through overhead, not the other way around.

atg2taa 13y ago
I don't think federal grants cover the research costs completely. For example, if my professor wins one grant, part of the money will be put aside for to cover 10% of his salary. He certainly doesn't have 10 big grants in play at any given time, so the remainder has to be offset by the University. Add to that, you need a lot of overhead like administrative assistants, grant managers, technology transfer officers.
- jurassic 13y ago
  I would be surprised if your professor's research tab is partly covered by the university unless they are using startup funds as a new faculty hire. The universities I've been at all (Caltech, MIT) have a significant "overhead" charge against all incoming grants to cover the cost of university infrastructure, keeping the lights on, etc. So it is research that is subsidizing the university, not the other way around.
  - mjn 13y ago
    The last sentence is somewhat questionable, except at the top universities. Only at the most grant-successful universities does the overhead actually break even in recouping the extra outlays universities put into research. Examples: construction of research-specific laboratory facilities, co-financing of expenditures they wouldn't have otherwise undertaken (many grants require co-funding), increased salaries and hiring packages caused by bidding wars for faculty who have successful grant-getting records, department backstopping of PhD stipends when a large group has a dry year grant-wise, salaries for grant-writing assistance and research-support staff, etc., etc. The former Dean of Georgia Tech's College of Computing reached a similar conclusion: http://innovate-edu.com/2011/05/18/if-you-have-to-ask-ten-sure-fire-ways-to-lose-money-on-research/ http://innovate-edu.com/2011/05/18/if-you-have-to-ask-ten-su...