Herbst full steam ahead on faculty hiring-"key to building an even better research university"

[Rumrunner]

The University of Connecticut says a $10.3-million cut in its state appropriation will not make it abandon its highly touted plan to hire nearly 300 professors.

"Things are very tight here. It's a tough economy," said Susan Herbst, the university's president, in an interview on Thursday. "But we're committed to hiring new faculty because it's the key to building an even better research university. Without the intellectual firepower of our faculty, we can't go forward."

***

The university is in the second year of its hiring spree. So far 75 new professors have already started work, and more will arrive this spring. About 120 searches are under way for professors who will arrive next fall.


http://chronicle.com/article/UConn-...zI184NXMSYnwwMjkWNDYHYXBoYksjZnZKPn50blBWGA==

A reminder:

President Herbst, on realignment, November 28, 2012, after Louisville was added to the ACC:

"This may seem like a tough moment for our fans...but when we focus on research, discovery, and student success, we’ll never go wrong."

 

[Dann]

full mother steam ahead chooooochooooooo!!!!

 

[Adios]

I am not sure if the Storrs brothers ever imagined this happening.

 

[Dooley]

Research. AAU. B1G.

 

[Dann]

Research. AAU. B1G.

#B1GRESEARCH

 

[sportsart]

Hiring professors (not new news), building B1G research facilities and new mascot look. I don't know about you but.....makes you go hmmmmm, doesn't it?

 

[UC990411]

O

Hiring professors (not new news), building B1G research facilities and new mascot look. I don't know about you but.....makes you go hmmmmm, doesn't it?

Or too little too late

 

[timdawg]

I remember when the ACC picked Louisville and some posters commented that if we wanted to go to the ACC, we should have hired an AD from the ACC. Think it's just a coincidence our AD is from Michigan?

 

[Rumrunner]

From a couple of weeks ago:

mark blaudschun @blauds nothing until its a done deal. but ADs at UConn and BC are both michigan men

Herbst's goal is to get uconn to $300m/yr research. last yr was $112m fed/$162m total.

once herbst gets to that goal, uconn would see $200,000 per faculty member (assuming 1500 faculty-currently around 1350). that would get uconn aau, assuming majority of total research was fed. upstater will chime in, but UT austin reportedly has an average faculty member bringing in $168,000 a year total research.

I remember when the ACC picked Louisville and some posters commented that if we wanted to go to the ACC, we should have hired an AD from the ACC. Think it's just a coincidence our AD is from Michigan?

 

[upstater]

From a couple of weeks ago:

mark blaudschun @blauds nothing until its a done deal. but ADs at UConn and BC are both michigan men

Herbst's goal is to get uconn to $300m/yr research. last yr was $112m fed/$162m total.

once herbst gets to that goal, uconn would see $200,000 per faculty member (assuming 1500 faculty-currently around 1350). that would get uconn aau, assuming majority of total research was fed. upstater will chime in, but UT austin reportedly has an average faculty member bringing in $168,000 a year total research.

Every school is trying to increase research dollars....

...in an environment of dwindling research dollars.

From the inside, we look at the situation as a foolish approach when it comes to the current mix of funding. That research park mentioned in the other post is becoming the model rather than internal funding for research grants. In other words, there's funding if you can find partnerships for start-up. The way this plays out is that the federal gov't--and then the states--have changed the revenue flow. More emphasis on applied science, which is good. But the fact this comes at the expense of research, I think, is a bad sign.

There are a lot of internal changes that will hurt research at American universities. For one, because of state budget cuts (note that the state is cutting $10 million from UConn, which doesn't sound like a lot, but on the back of previous big cuts, and in terms of the part of the budget that is fungible, this is a hefty amount that will hurt UConn quite a bit. Those of you concerned with UConn athletics and the athletic budget should be scared that the school is soon entering Rutgers (pre-B1G) territory). Given the cuts all over the country, there are now disincentives for research at top AAU and R1 universities. More schools are refusing to top-off faculty that get research grants (i.e. meet the salary needs of faculty who get fellowships/grants in cases -- frequent -- when the grant itself falls short [after the school's 60% cut] of meeting annual salary). Then, because of the dwindling amount of people on campus and because of state regulations everywhere trying to address the imbalances, there are new regulations preventing people from taking multiple year-long grants/research fellowships in any given 6 year period (the time between 1 semester sabbaticals at most research schools). This may all sound confusing to some of you, but the general gist is this: faculty have less reason to conduct research at precisely the time when they should be most productive in their careers (i.e. after getting tenure and before becoming full profs) precisely because conducting research means less pay. And sure, many can forego that 20% of salary for only a year, but most of these Associate Profs are in their 40s and likely in the midst of their children's formative years.

Do I think UConn can increase research greatly in this environment? Only if it is an outlier, a special case, that somehow beats the other schools trying to do the same exact thing. And before anyone mentions that quote from the Chronicle of Higher Ed. expert on hiring at UConn, I was skeptical of it. Most schools I know are similarly ambitious when it comes to hiring, yet the huge amount of professors in their 60s right now (most schools are top heavy with baby-boomers) also means large retirements are already accounted for by the schools, and so the new hires may not add much.

I'm skeptical of UConn as I am of the schools I've been affiliated with. All these schools have been talking a big game for awhile now (since at least 2008) with little to show for it. And meanwhile, American education is sinking. It's getting worse in a whole wide range of ways.

 

[Rumrunner]

I missed the technology park release where it was stated that

" UConn faculty members won more than $220 million in research awards in 2012."

http://today.uconn.edu/blog/2012/12/university-unveils-master-plan-for-technology-park/

just so we're comparing apples to apples:

uconn's 2010 fact sheet shows $210m ($90m health center)
uconn's 2011 fact sheet shows $232m ($101m health center)
uconn's 2012 fact sheet (prepared nov 2012) shows $225m ($95m at health center)

these numbers don't break out fed/state/private/ag grants

i guess we'll see if herbst's efforts bear fruit in 2013

 

[ctchamps]

Every school is trying to increase research dollars....

...in an environment of dwindling research dollars.

From the inside, we look at the situation as a foolish approach when it comes to the current mix of funding. That research park mentioned in the other post is becoming the model rather than internal funding for research grants. In other words, there's funding if you can find partnerships for start-up. The way this plays out is that the federal gov't--and then the states--have changed the revenue flow. More emphasis on applied science, which is good. But the fact this comes at the expense of research, I think, is a bad sign.

There are a lot of internal changes that will hurt research at American universities. For one, because of state budget cuts (note that the state is cutting $10 million from UConn, which doesn't sound like a lot, but on the back of previous big cuts, and in terms of the part of the budget that is fungible, this is a hefty amount that will hurt UConn quite a bit. Those of you concerned with UConn athletics and the athletic budget should be scared that the school is soon entering Rutgers (pre-B1G) territory). Given the cuts all over the country, there are now disincentives for research at top AAU and R1 universities. More schools are refusing to top-off faculty that get research grants (i.e. meet the salary needs of faculty who get fellowships/grants in cases -- frequent -- when the grant itself falls short [after the school's 60% cut] of meeting annual salary). Then, because of the dwindling amount of people on campus and because of state regulations everywhere trying to address the imbalances, there are new regulations preventing people from taking multiple year-long grants/research fellowships in any given 6 year period (the time between 1 semester sabbaticals at most research schools). This may all sound confusing to some of you, but the general gist is this: faculty have less reason to conduct research at precisely the time when they should be most productive in their careers (i.e. after getting tenure and before becoming full profs) precisely because conducting research means less pay. And sure, many can forego that 20% of salary for only a year, but most of these Associate Profs are in their 40s and likely in the midst of their children's formative years.

Do I think UConn can increase research greatly in this environment? Only if it is an outlier, a special case, that somehow beats the other schools trying to do the same exact thing. And before anyone mentions that quote from the Chronicle of Higher Ed. expert on hiring at UConn, I was skeptical of it. Most schools I know are similarly ambitious when it comes to hiring, yet the huge amount of professors in their 60s right now (most schools are top heavy with baby-boomers) also means large retirements are already accounted for by the schools, and so the new hires may not add much.

I'm skeptical of UConn as I am of the schools I've been affiliated with. All these schools have been talking a big game for awhile now (since at least 2008) with little to show for it. And meanwhile, American education is sinking. It's getting worse in a whole wide range of ways.

Just another trend in a vicious cycle. Research is the engine that gives the most bang for the buck long term but the financial mess this country is in forces us to look for quick fixes. And of course that is a major factor that got us in this mess.

 

[junglehusky]

I missed the technology park release where it was stated that

" UConn faculty members won more than $220 million in research awards in 2012."

http://today.uconn.edu/blog/2012/12/university-unveils-master-plan-for-technology-park/

just so we're comparing apples to apples:

uconn's 2010 fact sheet shows $210m ($90m health center)
uconn's 2011 fact sheet shows $232m ($101m health center)
uconn's 2012 fact sheet (prepared nov 2012) shows $225m ($95m at health center)

these numbers don't break out fed/state/private/ag grants

i guess we'll see if herbst's efforts bear fruit in 2013

If the government goes over the quote-unquote fiscall cliff, there will be a reduction of >2,000 NIH grants (I think this is over a multi-year period but I'd have to check). NSF, FDA will also take a hit. I'm not as familiar with engineering / physical sciences grants, maybe those are more from private sources but some of those labs are reliant on NSF. This will reduce the number of grants and amount of money brought into universities at UConn and everywhere else. The funding climate is already ebbing, established research faculty where I work (Yale) are losing their grants now, and this will accelerate if a deal is not reached either in the lame duck session or when the new congress meets.

Sorry for the bad news... though it's not set in stone. My colleagues are hoping it's a small dip or plateau since the economy appears to be doing better.

 

[CL82]

I'm skeptical of UConn as I am of the schools I've been affiliated with. All these schools have been talking a big game for awhile now (since at least 2008) with little to show for it. And meanwhile, American education is sinking. It's getting worse in a whole wide range of ways.

Some of that path will be easier because UConn has been underperforming vis a vis other similar institutions. It will 'relatively' easy to regain that ground and establish some momentum. Hopefully this new empahsis will prevent lost opportunties like the Pfizer partnership that fell by the wayside.

 

[Rumrunner]

since the way that the aau measures research $'s -3 yr average- and compares the numbers relatively (it's not the total $'s the aau cares about, per se, it's the total $'s of institution x v. institution y), i don't see how that harms uconn with respect to the aau. i can see the harm in general to uconn and all schools, but not for purposes of an aau invite.

moreover, uconn by hiring now can cherry pick those professors whose research is less likely to be impacted by proposed cuts. eg, genomics will get more $'s in 3 years than it does now. emergent fields have that advantage. uconn isn't "stuck" with a bunch of unproductive professors that will see research dollars dry up only because it has statistically fewer of them. herbst has uconn nimble and lean at the best time.