pjd@mandrill.UUCP (dr. funk) (08/24/87)
Thanks to Eric Green for his comments on my message about donations. 1. The ERTA incentives and requirements were there primarily to qualify for a tax break. This would make the bean counters happy at Big Computer Manufacturer. (FYI: Read "the Reckoning" by Halberstam to see how beanies can screw up well-intentioned technical people.) 2. Even with the number of donations that are made every year, the facility situation in all fields of engineering and science remains critical nationwide. What computer people need is power in Washington to fight for our needs. How many Crays/workstations/etc. could be purchased instead of some multi-billion dollar accelerator for a bunch of -------- physicists? 3. Indeed, many PhD's will disappear into a lab somewhere. However, we don't all write papers for JACM -- some of us teach and practice engineering. (Please don't start me on how tenure policies encourage theoretical screeds over good teaching and the development of sound academic engineering principles and methodology!) PhD students are not the only ones that benefit from donations..... 4. Yes, the funding/support situation is pretty bad all over. Now, rather than look at our own situations (poor facilities, low student support, insufficient research funding, whatever), let's think national policy. >> What will happen to our national competitiveness and national >> security if this trend continues? 5. At every commencement, I look at the line of graduating lawyers and the line of graduating engineers (especially at the MS/PhD level) and get depressed. Looks like our national priorities are a bit out of wack. -- paul drongowski sun!cwruecmp!pjd case western reserve university pjd@CWRU.EDU
gwl@rruxa.UUCP (George W. Leach) (08/26/87)
In article <2229@mandrill.UUCP>, pjd@mandrill.UUCP writes: > > 4. Yes, the funding/support situation is pretty bad all over. Now, > rather than look at our own situations (poor facilities, > low student support, insufficient research funding, whatever), let's > think national policy. > > >> What will happen to our national competitiveness and national > >> security if this trend continues? > > 5. At every commencement, I look at the line of graduating lawyers > and the line of graduating engineers (especially at the MS/PhD level) > and get depressed. Looks like our national priorities are a bit > out of wack. > The priorities of many individuals will constantly be out of wack, no matter how much support or how little is provided for the engineering and science programs. How many people become lawyers, doctors, and dentists strictly for the money? If there is money to be made in engineering and science, then these types will start showing up in greater numbers at the graduate levels in these fields. In fact, to an extent this is happening with many CS programs. I have seen numerous people who want to switch careers to computers, due to the opportunities it provides for jobs and money. Some only wish to use the field as a stepping stone into a management position. Now, if greater support was provided on a national level for increasing faculty salaries and supporting research on a wider basis how would this affect the desirability of an academic position over an industry one? Certainly, there are well intentioned people who would prefer to teach, but perhaps the money is not what they want. Then there may also be those who are only concerned with the money and not with teaching. I think that it is obvious which type of person a university would like to attract, but will higher salaries be enought to ensure that will occur? I feel that industry must pick up the ball here. Industry benefits from the product of universities. Perhaps industry might help ensure that the quality of the universities' graduates remain high, not only with equipment and research support, but with qualified people to help boslter the faculty. Why not allow a few hours a week off for a scientist or engineer to teach a class? Sure many do in the evenings, but why not during the day where a greater impact can be felt? > > -- > > paul drongowski sun!cwruecmp!pjd > case western reserve university pjd@CWRU.EDU George W. Leach Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology 444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept. Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102 (201) 699-8639 UUCP: ..!bellcore!indra!reggie ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"
mps@duke.cs.duke.edu (Michael P. Smith) (08/27/87)
In article <297@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP (George W. Leach) writes: > Perhaps industry might >help ensure that the quality of the universities' graduates remain >high, not only with equipment and research support, but with qualified >people to help boslter the faculty. Why not allow a few hours a week >off for a scientist or engineer to teach a class? Obviously you have never taught. If you have taught a course several times and know it *cold*, AND you have a sufficient number of teaching assistants, you might be able to do a good job in a three-hour course in less than ten hours a week. More typical would be a 12 to 15 hour commitment a week per course. Of course, you COULD teach a three-hour course in three hours a week (or less), but your suggestion, I take it, was meant to improve the quality of CS programs. ____________________________________________________________________________ "Early skepticism to the contrary notwithstanding, some biologically embodied intelligences are now able to play very decent games of chess (quite a few of them can beat computers)." Jerry Fodor Michael P. Smith ARPA: mps@duke.cs.duke.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------