A controversy that holds the values of academic pursuit at odds with the values of capitalism has long been brewing within institutions of higher education nationwide. While the lines between government and the private sector become increasingly muddled in our nation’s capital, so too do those that separate our institutions of higher education as islands of disinterested research across the country. It seems that the days may be long gone when academic idealism in research played a large role determining progress.
As state and federal funding for university research continue to decline, the market is playing the increasing role of proprietor in the advancement and general direction of academic inquiry. The private sector is picking up the slack where the public is falling short. And with this support, there are always strings attached.
Here lies the point where two ideological roads diverge into a crucial debate for the future of higher education at the University of Oregon and perhaps more crucially, across the entire nation. It is also here that I wish I could begin to argue why the University should take the higher moral ground and detach itself from corporate interest in the name of educational values and freedom. This however is both a counterproductive and unrealistic argument for the future of this institution. We need to work towards more private-backed research on the cutting edge of industry. We need to increase the extent to which private research funding supplements a lacking state budget for higher education.
The nation’s top research institutions are becoming more and more like businesses. They create products for profit, heavily recruit research investments and launch subsidiaries. They increasingly work toward the goals of their beneficiaries, which in turn help to bolster their resources.
Almost every university in the country maintains a department for technology licensing, the development of startup businesses using research findings and the recruitment of corporate partners with which to collaborate in their respective areas of interest. While there are examples of greed and unethical behavior within these departments, their fiscal success is perhaps one of the best indicators of how useful the research being conducted at the University is to the public.
At the University, there is the Office of Technology Transfer (OTT), which is responsible to managing the intellectual property assets of the university, bridging the gap between academia and the commercial market. In the 2005-06 fiscal year, according to their Web site, the OTT brought in $4.3 million in licensing revenue for the University, a new record at Oregon.
This record, however, does not amount to much at all in comparison to other public research universities of our size. During the 2005-06 fiscal year the Tech Transfer department at the University of Washington brought in $18.6 million in revenue.
According to the 2007 edition of the U.S. News and World Report evaluation of colleges and universities, the veritable bible for prospective freshmen, the University of Oregon ranks a paltry 120th among the nation’s top schools. In regards to research, a 2005 evaluation by the University of Florida, titled The Top American Research Universities, ranked the University of Oregon 49th of the top 50 public research universities. These rankings are even more disappointing when juxtaposed with one of the highest tuition rates for a public university in the country.
While the debate regarding the merits of unattached, academic research, as opposed to research driven by market demand and corporate funding is as multifaceted as one can be, its implications become slightly more simple when applied to a specific institution with dwindling national credibility, such as the University of Oregon. In order for the University to reach a level of research accomplishment where it is even relevant to make the argument against increased corporate funding, it’s going to need a lot more of it.
The research reputation of the University is falling and that may be due in large part to its inability to attract the type of private research partnerships that can bolster departmental capabilities. This argument from a self-proclaimed liberal student is a testament to the changing times. It is time for us to revamp our conception of what an institution of higher education serves to accomplish in terms of the public. Apparently, the research efforts at the University need market direction to become more nationally relevant. Rather than continually raising tuition to account for a lack in state funding, the University should pool more resources into to the commercial viability of its research projects in order to attract funding.