Penn State professor: BOT says Rutgers next in line to join Big 10

[pj]

In federal research funding, Rutgers is #52 and UConn #72: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf12316/pdf/tab17.pdf. That's not great but it's only marginally below the AAU membership criterion (59 AAU members). They seems to like being an exclusive club, so I wouldn't count on an invitation. But when it comes right down to it, it's a club and a lobbying organization. It has no major function, since the universities lobby individually as well. It's not going to affect a football/sports decision. The Big Ten just doesn't want to associate with small-time institutions and that's not a problem with UConn and Rutgers.

 

[lv99]

In federal research funding, Rutgers is #52 and UConn #72: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf12316/pdf/tab17.pdf. That's not great but it's only marginally below the AAU membership criterion (59 AAU members). They seems to like being an exclusive club, so I wouldn't count on an invitation. But when it comes right down to it, it's a club and a lobbying organization. It has no major function, since the universities lobby individually as well. It's not going to affect a football/sports decision. The Big Ten just doesn't want to associate with small-time institutions and that's not a problem with UConn and Rutgers.

The reason why it's so valuable to be in the AAU is that research grants often go to many universities. If you aren't in the AAU, you will get passed over for those jointly awarded research grants.

Once the school is awarded a grant, it keeps the money it gets from those grants; the money is used to pay the researchers. But in order to get those grants, it really helps to be in the AAU. That doesn't mean you wouldn't get research grants if you're not in the AAU. You would get a lot more if you are in the AAU. The lobbyists lobby on behalf the AAU members.

The Big 10 doesn't actually make money from you being in the AAU. It's just a point of prestige.

 

[pj]

The reason why it's so valuable to be in the AAU is that research grants often go to many universities. If you aren't in the AAU, you will get passed over for those jointly awarded research grants.

Nonsense. I've spent much of my career in academia at top research universities, and my wife is on the Harvard faculty. AAU membership does nothing to help anyone get a research grant. Principal investigators at the collaborating institutions organize the grant proposal and it's evaluated by independent review panels selected by the government with no consideration as to whether anyone is from an AAU institution. Any institution with a research agreement with the federal government can participate in such a collaboration; the vast majority of these are not in the AAU. PIs at AAU institutions are quite happy to collaborate with PIs at non-AAU institutions, so long as their top-quality people who will help them get funded.

 

[UConnDan97]

Nonsense. I've spent much of my career in academia at top research universities, and my wife is on the Harvard faculty. AAU membership does nothing to help anyone get a research grant. Principal investigators at the collaborating institutions organize the grant proposal and it's evaluated by independent review panels selected by the government with no consideration as to whether anyone is from an AAU institution. Any institution with a research agreement with the federal government can participate in such a collaboration; the vast majority of these are not in the AAU. PIs at AAU institutions are quite happy to collaborate with PIs at non-AAU institutions, so long as their top-quality people who will help them get funded.

Based on my information, this is absolutely true. My former professor in chemistry at UConn described grants in this manner, and I have spoken with a Stanford chemistry professor (DuBois) who has explained to me his experience on the panel. The individuals on the panel judge the merits of the research proposal and essentially grade it for feasability. The composite grade of the panel determines whether the grant is awarded or not. It is independent of institution. At least that's how it works in chemistry.

 

[lv99]

The major practical purpose of the AAU is research. The major criteria for membership in the AAU is research. Syracuse didn't suddenly become a worse college. The criteria now is more about research.

If you're in the AAU, you have a better chance of getting research grants. Being in the AAU helps you keep on track with regard to research (lobbying, getting good faculty, etc.).

Does it make a difference if you're in the AAU? Who knows, but a majority of research does go to AAU institutions. What if your school lost accreditation? It would still be the same school, so would it really matter?

Faculty don't care about the what athletic conference their school belongs to; many of them don't even know what conference they're in. They don't really even care about the overall academic standing of their school. What they care about is their department and the corresponding departments at other schools. Someone at Harvard would have no qualms about working with someone at West Virginia. They would only care about where their departments are ranked. They would care who's on the faculty in the corresponding department, what projects they have going, etc.

 

[Adios]

We can market ourselves so easily. I think B1G fans would appreciate a road trip to NJ, NY and/or New England every year. The league would still be Chicago-cenrtric, but spread into and completely dominate the tri-state area/southern New England market.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Oh really...so we're supposed to believe Wikipedia and other websites are wrong on this and you're right... So you're saying that Syracuse got kicked out last year? Show me a link...

90% time you can get away with quickly looking something up and acting like you know what you're talking about. This wasn't one of those times.

the only piece I read was that Syracuse and Nebraska were both notified that their membership was going under review at the same time. While Nebraska elected to have their membership come to a vote, Syracuse elected to leave on their own.
Was Syracuse voted out? No. Did they leave on their own? yes.
What would the vote have been had they decided to persue that route? Nobody knows, but there is a reason Syracuse elected not to go to a vote...

Was Marinatto terminated, or did he resign on his own? It's debatable. My belief is that he was shown the writing on the wall and the BE Presidents wanted a change. Rather than smearing his name which is all too common, they did it the professional way and allowed him to resign.

I think this was a similar issue with Syracuse and AAU. They were't going to get the votes, they knew it, and rather than go through a process like Nebraska, they bowed out.

And for the record, I didn't need to look up whether Nebraska was in the AAU. I actually remembered the articles from when they were voted out. I will concede that a school needs to be an AAU member to be 'invited' to the Big10 may still apply (unless you're ND). But the conference can no longer state all schools are AAU members.

 

[upstater]

The reason why it's so valuable to be in the AAU is that research grants often go to many universities. If you aren't in the AAU, you will get passed over for those jointly awarded research grants.

Once the school is awarded a grant, it keeps the money it gets from those grants; the money is used to pay the researchers. But in order to get those grants, it really helps to be in the AAU. That doesn't mean you wouldn't get research grants if you're not in the AAU. You would get a lot more if you are in the AAU. The lobbyists lobby on behalf the AAU members.

The Big 10 doesn't actually make money from you being in the AAU. It's just a point of prestige.

LOL, you continue to make the same mistake. Grants are not rewarded based on lobbying.

 

[upstater]

Nonsense. I've spent much of my career in academia at top research universities, and my wife is on the Harvard faculty. AAU membership does nothing to help anyone get a research grant. Principal investigators at the collaborating institutions organize the grant proposal and it's evaluated by independent review panels selected by the government with no consideration as to whether anyone is from an AAU institution. Any institution with a research agreement with the federal government can participate in such a collaboration; the vast majority of these are not in the AAU. PIs at AAU institutions are quite happy to collaborate with PIs at non-AAU institutions, so long as their top-quality people who will help them get funded.

+1

 

[upstater]

The major practical purpose of the AAU is research.

No, the purpose is lobbying to have congress fund the national foundations.

If you're in the AAU, you have a better chance of getting research grants.

Please explain why this is so. What dynamic produces this result? And, since you already stated that you believe the AAU is involved in securing research grants, how do you come about your knowledge of that process?

Being in the AAU helps you keep on track with regard to research (lobbying, getting good faculty, etc.).

What does this even mean? Keeps you on track? Wha?

 

[CL82]

This is one of the funniest threads I've seen in a long time. Part of me is thinking "staying down lv99, just stay down" but the rest of me is enjoying a world class @ss whoopin'. I nearly spit my coffee out when he said "The problem is you are referring to original documents , but I'm relying on Wikipedia. Ever heard of that site?"

 

[pj]

Iv99, the key point is that the AAU is a lobbying organization and only a lobbying organization. Its goal is to persuade Congress to appropriate lots of money for university-hosted research. But its lobbying has little effect, because no one in Congress wants to cut university funding but there is no money to increase it. Its members want membership to be a mark of prestige so that they get some marketing/branding value in exchange for their $80k/year contribution. Thus, they impose stringent membership criteria. This exclusivity is purely for show. If the organization were doing anything of real value, then they would want more members in order to strengthen the organization.

No school is going to let AAU membership determine the future of its athletic programs. There is no relationship between the AAU and athletics.

 

[UCFBfan]

This is one of the funniest threads I've seen in a long time. Part of me is thinking "staying down lv99, just stay down" but the rest of me is enjoying a world class @ss whoopin'. I nearly spit my coffee out when he said "The problem is you are referring to original documents , but I'm relying on Wikipedia. Ever heard of that site?"

I've had the same thought but I give the guy credit for persistence! He's not going down without a fight!

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[auggie22]

I'm not convinced IV99 is being serious. This reads like some Sasha Baron Cohen stunt.

 

[Waquoit]

I'd suggest you enjoy the holiday and sleep the sleep of angels.

But first, drink heavily.

 

[Waquoit]

This reads like some Sasha Baron Cohen stunt.

Without the humor.

 

[lv99]

Iv99, the key point is that the AAU is a lobbying organization and only a lobbying organization. Its goal is to persuade Congress to appropriate lots of money for university-hosted research. But its lobbying has little effect, because no one in Congress wants to cut university funding but there is no money to increase it. Its members want membership to be a mark of prestige so that they get some marketing/branding value in exchange for their $80k/year contribution. Thus, they impose stringent membership criteria. This exclusivity is purely for show. If the organization were doing anything of real value, then they would want more members in order to strengthen the organization.

No school is going to let AAU membership determine the future of its athletic programs. There is no relationship between the AAU and athletics.

So you're agreeing with me that the AAU does lobbying for exactly the purpose I stated? But what you're saying is that it's not really useful right now because there isn't a lot of funding right now? I can't disagree with that. I have no idea, but that seems reasonable, what with the economy. But even if that was true, AAU would still be valuable for when the funding comes back.

Every school wants to be in the AAU. It's not up to the school to decide. If the Big 10 doesn't want an non-AAU school, they don't have to take them. It may not be fair, but that's the way it is. If you don't get invited to the conference you want, that will decide your fate.

 

[upstater]

 

[HuskyHawk]

After Nebraska was removed from the AAU, Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman said "I doubt that our application would've been accepted had we not been a member of the AAU."

Exactly my original point. The question is at least debatable. And the Big Ten didn't kick them out. It came from application of a set of rules for calculating research grants that excluded agricultural research and excluded research from the med school because it is off campus. Which is one reason why I keep saying that UConn has the same problems, despite better overall academics.

 

[auggie22]

HuskyHawk, I remember reading (though I am too lazy to research my recollection) that NU's med school was not included because it is not actually legally organized as their med school - different BOD, loose affiliation with the university, etc. I think this situation was more unusual than the facilities being off campus.

 

[HuskyHawk]

HuskyHawk, I remember reading (though I am too lazy to research my recollection) that NU's med school was not included because it is not actually legally organized as their med school - different BOD, loose affiliation with the university, etc. I think this situation was more unusual than the facilities being off campus.

You could be right. http://chronicle.com/article/Ouster-Opens-a-Painful-Debate/127364

"In his e-mail to the campus and in interviews with The Chronicle, Mr. Perlman said what put Nebraska at a particular disadvantage was the lack of an on-campus medical school.
While other AAU members, such as Cornell and Pennsylvania State Universities, for instance, lack medical schools on their main campuses, Nebraska's medical school is also under a totally separate administrative structure from the Lincoln campus, an arrangement that is unlike the ones at those other institutions. As a result, its research dollars are not counted by the AAU, even though, as a medical school, it can't belong to the association on its own.
A medical school both improves an institution's absolute number of research dollars and improves its score on the ratio of research output to tenure-track faculty, since medical schools often rely heavily on researchers who are not tenure-track faculty, Mr. Perlman said."

 

[upstater]

Exactly my original point. The question is at least debatable. And the Big Ten didn't kick them out. It came from application of a set of rules for calculating research grants that excluded agricultural research and excluded research from the med school because it is off campus. Which is one reason why I keep saying that UConn has the same problems, despite better overall academics.

Did you read the emails in question? Because the position of the PSU, N'Western, Iowa and Ohio State presidents was that Nebraska was being railroaded by Wisconsin and Michigan.

 

[Fishy]

Please stop with the AAU discussions - no one knows what the hell they're talking about. They're almost as duck*ing insane as the Penn State threads and the legal opinion threads.

UConn isn't joining the AAU and UConn isn't being invited to the Big Ten. It's not happening next year or in five years or in ten years.

 

[CL82]

Please stop with the AAU discussions - no one knows what the hell they're talking about. They're almost as duck*ing insane as the Penn State threads and the legal opinion threads.

UConn isn't joining the AAU and UConn isn't being invited to the Big Ten. It's not happening next year or in five years or in ten years.

So you're saying we're a lock in 11 years?

 

[Fishy]

So you're saying we're a lock in 11 years?

We just need to sit tight.

With three Germans on the hoop team, we almost look like a Big Ten team, although the accents are a little off.

 

[lv99]

Here that, Boston College? We'll be in Big Ten 11 years from now. And this time we'll be the ones blocking you.

Revenge is sweet.