The cross-subsidy of research by teaching is a myth

The mantra that research is loss-making is a convenient fiction used to draw more money to the centres of universities, say Peter Coveney and Christopher Greenwell    

Published on
December 14, 2017
Last updated
December 14, 2017
Nate Kitch illustration (14 December 2017)
Source: Nate Kitch

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (2)

Very good article which, however, mentions academic time only briefly. This is another anomalous area since if I win a grant I do not get the actual time bid for because part of my hours are already allocated for research. Equally, when I do not get a grant my job thankfully continues but this model has often caused some coffee room discussions as to whether it is worth pursuing some grants. Given that for computational work, it is cheap to produce world class results with a PhD student (who cannot be funded via most grants) and for experimental work, the funds are insufficient for a long-term programme of activity, one wonders about the viability of the current model. That is of course if its purpose is to fund truly outstanding and disruptive research rather than to maintain the status quo.
https://dr-majidghiasi.ir

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT