        |
|
           
|
Notes and Comment on UUP’s Meeting with Gerry SonnenfeldFebruary 4, 2005 As discussed in the December Executive Board meeting, UUP was to visit Gerry Sonnenfeld, the new Vice President for Research, to convey to him some of the concerns UUP members have expressed about Research Foundation support for non-science faculty. This meeting took place February 4, 2005. In attendance were Jim Dix, Darryl Wood, and Gerry Sonnenfeld. Sonnenfeld went to great lengths to reassure non-science faculty that BU must maintain scholarship in areas that do not generate lots of money, and declaimed that non-science faculty will not become second-class citizens. The university will “do whatever it can” to support non-science faculty whose research does not have a source of require large amounts of funding. What Sonnenfeld is asking of faculty is that they be open to new ways to pursue support for their research. For example, faculty whose research interests are in medieval history could study the effect of infectious disease on the ascent of Western Europe and become eligible for funding from the Department of Homeland Security, or collaborate with an infectious disease specialist and submit a joint research proposal. As evidence of the Division of Research’s commitment, Sonnenfeld pointed to RF’s support of Organized Research Centers (many of which are not in highly funded areas), and the support of staff in RF to develop non-science grant applications. He said he has told department chairs (not only science chairs) that he is willing to visit departments or groups of faculty to explain his vision of BU’s research and scholarship, to brainstorm about collaborations, and to point faculty in the right direction to get support. The conversation turned toward certain statements made in the new draft of the Strategic Plan (cf comments on the strategic plan in the February issue of the Connection). UUP pointed out that according to the Strategic Plan, the university plans to double the amount of external research support in the next five years, and will do so by supporting faculty who challenge sponsoring agency’s limits “by crafting proposals that imaginatively interpret and effectively reframe” those limits, and who “consider whether modest reformulation of [the faculty member’s] initiatives might result in greater success in securing extramural support.” The university expects that “all faculty will diligently seek out and aggressively pursue every opportunity to grow sponsored research, scholarship and creative activity on our campus.” In other words, to get funding, it might appear that faculty have to convince the granting agencies to change their criteria, or that faculty have to change their research goals. Sonnenfeld disagreed with UUP’s interpretation of the sentiment expressed in the Strategic Plan. He said that given declining state support for BU, we have to be innovative in replacing state funds. He asked the faculty to be open to changes in where money comes from to support research. The university will help faculty who try to change their research focus and try to change sponsoring agencies. Faculty need to do things differently in seeking support for research. Sonnenfeld said that the bulk of campus resources for research will go to areas that will assist the faculty in developing their own research. There will be a “balanced approach” in allocating resources. Sonnenfeld did say that all research done at BU must have the stipulation that all information from the research is to be disseminated freely. Research done at the ITC will also have this stipulation. There can be no contract work done whose research findings must be kept secret. All told, Sonnenfeld’s agenda seems to be to shake faculty out of their usual modes of getting research support, and to consider ways of getting support they never thought of before. He seems open and eager to help faculty do this, and has some new ideas. Many UUP members have expressed the view that faculty whose research does not generate large amounts of funding will not be treated equally in terms of resources and rewards to those faculty that do generate funding. However, Sonnenfeld should be given a chance in implementing his strategy to support all types of research at Binghamton. Sonnenfeld will have a challenge in meeting BU’s stated goal of doubling extramural research dollars in the next five years. The new strategic plan calls for a 20% increase in full-time faculty in the next five years; if the increase tracks the faculty we have now, research funding will increase only by 20%, not by the 100% called for in the strategic plan. The university may be counting on the Innovational Technology Center (ITC) and the extra industrial money that the ITC will attract to bring in the extra 80%. Without an additional source of sponsored research, the university may be implicitly expecting faculty to adjust their research programs primarily to get more money rather than to advance scholarship. Then there is the challenge of resources. The number of graduate students is slated to double in the next five years, and the graduate student stipend is expected to become “competitive” (requiring a substantial increase in the stipend level). This will take a big chunk of additional resources. The start-up packages for new science hires will also require new resources, as will space and support staff for all the new hires. No one in the administration seems willing to offer an accounting of where these new resources are coming from, whether there will be enough resources to fund all the university wants to do, and whether there will have to be a reallocation of resources (leading to winners and losers). It will be an amazing accomplishment if Sonnenfeld is able surmount these considerable obstacles and implement the university’s plan for sponsored research growth.
|
|
 |
||
|
||