- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: aTm / Mizzou fans - Explain to us the tangible benefits of the AAU
Posted on 10/24/11 at 2:35 pm to DoUrden
Posted on 10/24/11 at 2:35 pm to DoUrden
The SEC works together academically through the SECAC (SEC Academic Consortium). The Universities cooperate on grants, promote cooperation between Universities, cooperate in study abroad and can even borrow each others lab space when necessary to enable the capacity to compete for some grants. Their materials say they are entering phase II which presumably will ramp up the effort to attract more research dollars.
Presumably having more AAU members will enhance the SECAC and help generate more research dollars.
It was modeled after the Big Ten's Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC).
This is mostly about athletics but then again it is also about academics.
Presumably having more AAU members will enhance the SECAC and help generate more research dollars.
It was modeled after the Big Ten's Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC).
This is mostly about athletics but then again it is also about academics.
2
Posted on 10/24/11 at 2:42 pm to Opti
Yep....
Again, the PRESIDENTS are making these decisions. Many of them don't care about athletics even close to as much as fans like us do.
They recognize the importance to the SEC and to their own universities brand, but if you've got a case like Mizzou vs WVU....they'll take the significantly better academic school (Mizzou) over the moderately better athletic school (WVU).
Again, the PRESIDENTS are making these decisions. Many of them don't care about athletics even close to as much as fans like us do.
They recognize the importance to the SEC and to their own universities brand, but if you've got a case like Mizzou vs WVU....they'll take the significantly better academic school (Mizzou) over the moderately better athletic school (WVU).
Posted on 10/24/11 at 3:05 pm to texasaggie08
If we thought federally funded programs have loads of fraud I can only imagine what academic research gets.
I see this think tank like Cal-Berkeley sitting around smoking pot and researching how to get more money from tax troughs in order to continue sitting on arse and getting stoned.
I see this think tank like Cal-Berkeley sitting around smoking pot and researching how to get more money from tax troughs in order to continue sitting on arse and getting stoned.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 3:10 pm to StrickAggie06
quote:It's always pork barrel when someone else gets the money.
I wouldn't call it pork barrel spending
Posted on 10/24/11 at 3:40 pm to Hasan
quote:
It's always pork barrel when someone else gets the money
Pork barrel spending is when senators and congressmen add extraneous sections to a bill to fund specific projects in their states or districts. Research money comes from the NIH and NSF, which are one item funded by the federal budget. By your definition everything the govt does is pork spending, including the military.
Referencing the post before you, there is very little fraud when it comes to research money. Grants are highly regulated, and labs that don't produce results or otherwise appear to be wasting money have a much harder time securing future funding. Grants can be reduced and pulled if they aren't being used correctly. Research is one of the few areas of the govt that isn't very wasteful.
This post was edited on 10/24/11 at 3:55 pm
Posted on 10/24/11 at 4:17 pm to StrickAggie06
"Pork barrel spending is when senators and congressmen add extraneous sections to a bill to fund specific projects in their states or districts. Research money comes from the NIH and NSF, which are one item funded by the federal budget. By your definition everything the govt does is pork spending, including the military."
I agree totally with that and will add to it that not all monies for research comes from the Government. Some research projects are funded by a combination of Government, corporations and private funding.
I agree totally with that and will add to it that not all monies for research comes from the Government. Some research projects are funded by a combination of Government, corporations and private funding.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 6:01 pm to Shaka Zulu
quote:
I didn't hear any concrete examples of anything the AAU schools have created for the betterment of humanity, but I did hear about the awesome pork barrel spending that the AAU enjoys.
Seriously?
Many advancements in medicine occurs at college universities. Posted on 10/24/11 at 6:03 pm to Touchdowns4LSU
quote:
If we thought federally funded programs have loads of fraud I can only imagine what academic research gets. I see this think tank like Cal-Berkeley sitting around smoking pot and researching how to get more money from tax troughs in order to continue sitting on arse and getting stoned.
You should really get out more.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 7:40 pm to Dr RC
quote:
when you call it pork barrel spending you are implying a negative.
do you believe gov't funded research at universities is a bad thing?
It doesn't take much research, i.e. I don't need any government funding, to tell you that the USG currently spends $1T more than it can fund through revenue and it must obtain further debt financing to maintain the profligate spending. Do you think federal funding of universities is a good thing if your children's children's children are expected to pay interest on it?
Posted on 10/24/11 at 9:06 pm to Shaka Zulu
quote:
Do you think federal funding of universities is a good thing if your children's children's children are expected to pay interest on it?
Sure if the research is something that will improve their quality of life.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 9:42 pm to SteelersFan
Shaka Zulu will never be mistaken for Shaka Smart.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 9:47 pm to SteelersFan
quote:
Sure if the research is something that will improve their quality of life.
As the old Pennsylvania saying goes, if your aunt had a nutsack, she'd either be your uncle or a Reading carney freak.
From StrickAggie:
quote:
I can't think of a lot of specific research AAU schools have accomplished off of the top of my head and I have too much actual work to do than to perform a literature search to find out.
If you "have to perform a literature search to find out" then I'd say it's pork barrel spending.
Posted on 10/24/11 at 11:40 pm to SteelersFan
quote:
The 59 AAU receive almost 60% of the U.S. universities research grants and contracts.
So, I wanted to see some data on what this AAU percentage of research funding looked like, and see where the rest of the SEC stacked up. So, I started at The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, which is who classified schools as Research I, etc. From there I was directed to the National Science Foundation Survey of Research and Development Expenditures at Universities and Colleges, and I got a whole boatload of the data. Below are some observations I thought were interesting, and to me shed some perspective on this discussion, so I thought I would share.
You can stop reading now if you are not interested...
- There are 697 total universities and colleges in the US as of FY2009.
- In FY2009, these universities and colleges spent a total $54,935,457,000 (~$55B) in R&D efforts.
- 339 schools account for 99% of total R&D expenditures at universities and colleges.
- 148 schools account for 90% of total R&D expenditures at universities and colleges.
- Rice, Oregon, and Brandeis (all AAU schools) fall in the lower 10% of total funding, as does Alabama.
- 101 schools account for 80% of total R&D expenditures at universities and colleges.
- The AAU institutions Brown, Tulane, Rice, Oregon, and Brandeis fall in the lower 20% for funding, as do Auburn, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama.
For FY 2009, the 59 AAU institutions accounted for 55% of the total R&D expenditures at universities and colleges. Of these, 22 AAU member institutions account for about half (27% total) of the 55%.
When TAMU joins, it will be the highest funded SEC school, ranked (#20) nationally, followed by Florida (#23), Vanderbilt (#39), and LSU (#43). Missouri (#78) will be the 8th best funded school in the SEC in total R&D funding, also led by Kentucky (#49), Georgia (#55), and Tennessee (#70). The rest are Mississippi State (#90), USCe (#99), Auburn (#114), Arkansas (#128), Mississippi (#140), and Alabama (#201).
Prior to the change in classification, TAMU, Missouri, LSU, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, and Florida were all classified as Research I institutions.
In 2005 the Carnegie Foundation removed the "Research I" nomenclature and modified the classification methodology, instead classifying Doctorate granting Universities as RU/VH (Research Universities / Very High research activity), RU/H (Research Universities / High Research activity), and DRU (Doctoral / Research Universities).
All SEC schools are currently classified as RU/VH institutions with the exception of Alabama, Auburn, and Mississippi, which are all classified as RU/H. (NOTE: UA Birmingham and UA Huntsville are both considered separately from UA Tuscaloosa in the NSF study, and are both classified as RU/VH).
The percentage of total R&D funding (% of $55B) going to SEC schools (plus Mizzou) is:
TAMU - 1.148%
Florida - 1.078%
Vanderbilt - 0.786%
LSU - 0.731%
Kentucky - 0.680%
Georgia - 0.637%
Tennessee - 0.519%
Mizzouri - 0.446%
Mississippi State - 0.395%
USC(e) - 0.340%
Auburn - 0.261%
Arkansas - 0.192%
Mississippi - 0.165%
Alabama - 0.066%
The percentage of total R&D funding (% of $55B) going to the top 20 schools for R&D expenditure is:
Johns Hopkins - 3.379%
Michigan - 1.833%
Wisconsin-Madison - 1.733%
UC San Francisco - 1.725%
UCLA - 1.620%
UCSD - 1.601%
Duke - 1.465%
Washington - 1.416%
Penn State - 1.371%
Minnesota - 1.349%
MIT - 1.340%
Penn - 1.323%
tOSU - 1.304%
Stanford - 1.282%
UC Davis - 1.241%
Cornell - 1.222%
UC Berkeley - 1.188%
Colorado - 1.180%
UNC Chapel Hill - 1.176%
TAMU - 1.148%
And, if it makes any difference, WVU is classified as an RU/H institution, and is ranked (#116) with 0.254% of the total R&D expenditures. Notre Dame is an RU/VH school, ranked (#135) at 0.178% of total R&D expenditures at universities and colleges.
And yes, I know... tl;dr. I don't care, so GFY, DIAF, etc.
This post was edited on 10/26/11 at 8:06 pm
Posted on 10/25/11 at 1:08 am to Shaka Zulu
quote:
It doesn't take much research, i.e. I don't need any government funding, to tell you that the USG currently spends $1T more than it can fund through revenue and it must obtain further debt financing to maintain the profligate spending. Do you think federal funding of universities is a good thing if your children's children's children are expected to pay interest on it?
yes I do. You seem to be terrible at looking at the big picture.
I put scientific research in the same category as putting money into building infrastructure.
Do you have a problem with the gov't spending on that as well?
B/c if you do you may as well stop using the internet.
quote:
If you "have to perform a literature search to find out" then I'd say it's pork barrel spending.
this shite takes the cake.
So if you are uneducated about something and don't have an immediate answer, it must be bullshite.
Do you not realize how stupid a stance like that is?
This post was edited on 10/25/11 at 1:13 am
Posted on 10/25/11 at 7:34 am to Dr RC
quote:
Do you not realize how stupid a stance like that is?
What I do realize Dr RC, is that had you been alive during the Middle Ages, you would have been a proponent of applying leaches to the body as a remedy for illness.
quote:
I put scientific research in the same category as putting money into building infrastructure.
Do you have a problem with the gov't spending on that as well?
I'm really glad you brought up infrastructure. They are doing wonders with it all over Asia.. The link is mostly pictures, so have at it. Do you think that was money well spent, RC?
This post was edited on 10/25/11 at 7:39 am
Posted on 10/25/11 at 7:42 am to Shaka Zulu
There's been plenty of research generated by A&M's VetMed program (possibly the top vetmed program in the world). I know people laugh at all of the cloned animals, but they are on the verge of genetically eradicating animal diseases that destroy herds every year.
Posted on 10/25/11 at 7:45 am to Opti
quote:
Presumably having more AAU members will enhance the SECAC and help generate more research dollars.
Or build a new building.
Posted on 10/25/11 at 7:46 am to smillerlsu
quote:
smillerlsu
With that analysis, you must have gone to a AAU school!
Thanks for dispelling the myth of the AAU prestige. Apparently there's a pecking order within the AAU and Mizzou is not high on that pecking order. quote:
The percentage of total R&D funding (% of $55B) going to SEC schools (plus Mizzou) is:
TAMU - 1.148%
Florida - 1.078%
Vanderbilt - 0.786%
LSU - 0.731%
Kentucky - 0.680%
Georgia - 0.637%
Tennessee - 0.519%
Mizzouri - 0.446%
Mississippi State - 0.395%
USC(e) - 0.340%
Auburn - 0.261%
Arkansas - 0.192%
Mississippi State - 0.165%
Alabama - 0.066%
Posted on 10/25/11 at 7:56 am to Shaka Zulu
On June 1st the SECAC relocated to Birmingham.
The wiki pic is outdated.
The wiki pic is outdated.
Posted on 10/25/11 at 2:02 pm to Shaka Zulu
quote:
What I do realize Dr RC, is that had you been alive during the Middle Ages, you would have been a proponent of applying leaches to the body as a remedy for illness.
I am sure that had you been alive during the Middle Ages you would have believed the world is flat.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News