I ask this question because I feel our University Community needs to have an open discussion on the value we put on research. I have heard that EMU does value research, but if we use the measurement of the dollar – we fall very short of being able to say we value research.
Do we as a University Community feel research is a vital part of the educational experience? I do not think the answer is “look at the ‘Week of Excellence’” We need to look deeper.
I know the faculty and students value research, but does the BoR?
I leave the floor open to a hopefully lively discussion.
Speaking of Research, on the Frank Beckman or Paul W. Smith show? A U of M fundraiser is going to have an auction for a new Hospital (auctioning a customized Motorcycle).
This will boost U of Ms medical research! They plan to host fundraisers and receive $25 million. If they THINK they can do it then that’s 100 miles ahead of everything I have ever heard out of the mouthes of Administrators, Professors, Teachers, Students and Student Representatives over the past decade.
U of M is the university of “We Can Do it” and EMU seems to be, “No we can’t.”
Everyone at EMU that I spoke with says it is virtually impossible to fundraise for (anything) and expect to earn $40 million for Pray Harrold or Mark J or other purposes other than Athletics. Talk about cynical!
How can EMU expect to boost their Research Dollars if everyone seems to be excessively cynical towards both Private Donations Campaigns as well as Fundraising efforts? From Faculty to Administrators to even GREG JONES Student Body President, no one wants to push for Private Donations or Fundraising for anything that isn’t “Atheltics.”
I think EMU could use a boost in Research dollars. But, I think that requires going out there and fundraising for it. I am not advocating that we abandon the State of Michigan or the Federal Government as sources of research revenue. They will always be a source and have been a source.
But anytime you suggest that you aren’t receiving enough money from the sources you normally expect to get the money…. That’s when brand new avenues of revenue need to be investigated.
Instead EMU hires FREEMEN HENDRIX as an expensive way to say, “We are going to continue to live in a 1-track mindset.” Freemen Hendrix never used to think that way.
There was a time in the 1970s when Private Donations were treated as a good source of revenue.
EMU does not put enough money into there fundraising efforts. We have one person for each College. Based on the needs, we probably need four or five per college.
It is easy to talk about other schools and their fund raising experiences. It seems to me that our faculty do not support the place they work. Each year there is a faculty-staff campaign. It would be interesting to learn how much support the university gets from the faculty. The funny thing is that you can specify where you want your money to go. Some departments permit their faculty to donate to the department, through the Foundation so that it is a tax write-off. Then they allow those faculty who have donated to use some of those funds for travel to conferences, etc. This is not entirely legal, but it is done.
Jeff, you might want to check on this, but I doubt that UM raises money for research and buildings although there are those who give substantial amounts to have a building named after them. I would venture a guess that most of the research money at UM comes from federal funds. I doubt that any university can depend on fund raising for all of their research efforts or for all of their buildings. If they did, the cost of attending would not be so great.
EMU supporter, I am sure that someone more familiar with fund raising issues than I will (hopefully) chime in on this, but as I understand it, one of the biggest groups of people to support EMU (if not the biggest group) were, in fact, Faculty and Staff. Those funds have probably dried up quite a bit in lieu of recent labor and other problems, though. I know many colleagues in my department who made significant monetary contributions to the institution over their years of service here, and I also know some who said that the administration walking out of the last contract talks was the last straw.
Second, your claim about specifying funds is not true– or at least it is no longer true. You are right, it is something that used to be done, but you are also right, it is something that is not entirely legal and so it is no longer done.
Third, there’s a big problem at EMU (and I suppose at a bunch of other places too) when it comes to specifying the uses of donated funds. I suppose if you are a big fish and you wanted to contribute $40-60 million for a new sports practice facility (whatever happened to those rumors anyway?), you can tell EMU how to spend your money. But we’ve run into problems with much smaller funds in our department. As I understand it, these small (a few thousand dollars total) program-specific development funds are being reabsorbed back into the general fund or into the EMU Foundation. So, as I understand it, if I wanted to contribute $1000 to the EMU Writing Program for something not specific/just a general fund in the department, I could not be assured that that’s where the money would go.
Anyway, about research:
When I think of “research,” I really think of “scholarship,” the stuff that faculty do as part of the tenure process and as part of the work of the position, the work that is largely invisible to “lay-people.” Non-academic-types get the idea that faculty teach because they had teachers in various forms of school– though few people with no direct experience teaching have a clue as how much time it takes outside of the classroom to do it well. Non-academic-types get the idea that faculty have to go to a lot of meetings and stuff– especially people on the Board of Regents, because the BoR is made up of management-types, which are people who essentially go to meetings for a living.
I think that scholarship remains more of a mystery because of a sheer lack of familiarity, and the research/scholarship that the majority of faculty-types do (at research schools and at places like EMU) is often just not that interesting to people outside of a particular discipline/field of study. I mean, I can understand in an abstract way why it’s important to study dinosaurs, but I personally find it terribly boring. I’m sure that most people feel the same way about the theoretical dynamics of the rhetorical situation.
Frankly, I also don’t think that the faculty at EMU value research/scholarship enough because I think the standard for the amount of scholarly activity we expect from faculty for tenure and promotion at EMU is way too low. But that is perhaps a van of worms I will merely point at but not open entirely.
Research is valued by some at EMU, but not by all the decision makers. For instance, the budget cuts to the academic programs last summer included the elimination of ALL the Graduate Assistantships in the history MA program. This decision was made at the Dean’s office level, over the objections of the history faculty. If you value research, you don’t cut funding to a graduate program. You don’t eliminate GAs that get valuable research experience while pursing their degrees. And you don’t over look the fact that the EMU history graduate program is one of the largest in the state, and it is comprised almost entirely of part time students; the removal of the GA positions limits the program’s ability to attract students and offer broader opportunities for GAs.
So, research is valued by some but not by those with the budgetary authority. The Continuing Education office still has GAs in its budget, but it is doubtful that those grad students employed there are doing academic work related to their field of study; all of the eliminated history GA positions were entirely used for professionally related history activities. It appears that EMU may now have the distinction of having the largest or one of the largeset history graduate program in the country that has no university funded GAs! A distinction to be ashamed of, as it puts us in an uncompetative position.
Strange way to run a university, huh, Chris? Thanks for the interesting and important post!
Dr. Higbee – or sitedad (or anyone) – does EMU have a publish or parish policy for faculty? Should we?
Sitedad, without trying to be contentious I am not incorrect about designating your funds. I do it each year. You really ought to check with the Foundation before you write so authoritatively about it. Each faculty-staff campaign letter comes with a card that allows you to designate where you want your money to go. Check it out.
Jim – Yes we do have a publish or parish policy for faculty. I feel we need one BUT it should not out way the teaching in the classroom it should be EQUAL. EMU needs to sell the fact our professors both do research AND teach!
Mark – I know far to well about the GA issue. Both myself and Donna fought hard this summer to try to save the GAs. We saved some but not all.
Over my last few months I will fight even harder for the Graduate Students as well as the value of research. I am optimistic that Bob Nealy, Don Loppnow, and Deb de Laski-Smith will fight the good fight with the support of Grad Council.
We also need to take control of the budget. Currently there is no Graduate Student on the Budget Council – however there should be one! The Academy must set the plan for the budget AND the B&F Division should manage the budget.
I hear many of my colleagues, who have been at Eastern longer than my 3.5 years, often discussing that at EMU the discipline of Art is often shoved to the side when people are up for consideration for things such as leave time or sabbaticals. Many proclaim that there is not an understanding for what it is we do as artists (whether painters, sculptors, etc.) as scholarship. While I cannot say I have directly experienced this, to me this suggests that our own fellow colleagues do not understand each other’s discipline in the context of what their disciplinary specific research/creative/scholarly work may be and what that entails.
Based on my own experiences many understand the kind of research the sciences do, it has a clear objective and measurable outcomes (such as Mapping human genomes or as sitedad added Dinosaurs!). Many understand the “ivory tower” humanities scholarship that manifests itself in books, presentations, or articles (such as the theoretical dynamics of the rhetorical situation). A great deal of people I speak to even understand the discipline of creative writing as scholarly, but have a difficult time understanding an abstract painting and its importance or relevance as scholarship.
To add a sub question to this post (or perhaps this should be a separate post), are their hierarchies of research at EMU? Should there be?
Mark, there is a huge lack of support for graduate students. This past year the art department lost prospective graduate students because we were unable to offer financial assistance, such as GA positions.
EMU Supporter: without getting overly technical or saying too much in a forum like this, all I know is that there has been a host of issues with making sure that funds that are donated to a particular departmental development funds actually are in the right accounts, aren’t “re-captured” by the foundation. Like I said, I don’t directly deal with this stuff, so I will defer to those who do; but I will tell you that I know someone very very well who has first-hand accounts about these “challenges.”
Jim, as far as “publish or perish” goes: at a lot of universities/colleges, particularly “research” or “prestigious” institutions, the standard for tenure (at least in my field) is a book. I’ve always thought that was a pretty goofy standard, especially at places like EMU, where the teaching load is kind of high (compared to research-oriented schools, at least). At the same time, I think (speaking only for my own department and the “Department Evaluation Document” that I am quite familiar with) that the basic standards for what it takes in terms of publishing to get tenure or promotion are way too low.
I use my own scholarly record, which I am happy to share with anyone, as an example. While I think it is certainly enough to have earned me tenure and promotion, I don’t think it is enough for me to appear to be “well-above average” in terms of scholarly activity in my department. But it is….
And during either the most recent or the previous faculty contract, I believe the AAUP argued against a pretty basic “floor” for what would have been minimal standards/sign-posts for scholarship. I thought that was kind of a problem when it came up, actually.
Hi All
The question was do we value research? But we seem to be having trouble with the basic question “What is research itself?” Is research defined by the production of a journal article? A book? A grant? Is research only done in a lab? Is “research” automatically done if it occurred in a lab? And who gets to decide? Who is the authority on research?
In my lab, students complete projects as part of their basic training in “doing science”. Is this research? In my opinion, yes. However, none of the work is new or ground-breaking to the scientific community, and it already appears in a journal somewhere. Our work will probably never appear in a journal article. The student and I read about it and formulated a plan. We put all the equipment in place to make something “scientific” happen at EMU that never happened before at EMU. We designed parts from raw materials we found. We built probes. They look like works of art to me. We ran experiments for weeks. We collected some cool-looking data using computer programs we wrote. We analyzed this data using incredibly sophisticated mathematical functions.
We got the same results as the article we read. We will not re-write that article. Did we do research? I say yes. Why? The student is learning how to “do science” by completing this project. And more importantly in my eyes, the work has never been done before by this student. It is groundbreaking work to him/her. It will be the foundation of his/her career.
I believe there are degrees of research. Not all research, even in science, produces a paper. The outcome is so much more important than a paper. The process and the participants must be considered. That makes it hard to define in a contract, and it should be purposely vague.
Do I value research as described above? Absolutely. It is the highlight of my job at EMU. I also know an awful lot of students and faculty at EMU who do “their thing” in their disciplines too. I can’t wait to see all the wonderful research we do at EMU on display at the Undergraduate Symposium and the Graduate Research Fair in March.
JP
Ryan, you are absolutely right about the inadequate support for EMU grad students. I mentioned the history GAs because that’s the case I am most familiar with, and it shows that some at EMU value research, while often the decision makers do not. GAs should be asssigned tasks that are relevant to their academic studies — and not used as mere office staff, as is too often the case. Funding for GAs should go to dept.s that have academic programs, rather than just to units of the university that have political clout, like CE. It makes no sense for CE to have GA funding and the history grad program to have its GA funding eliminated….
JPhysics is right about the many different types of ‘research’ — it’s one word with a thousand different meanings.
Jim Allen, I’d say there is no actual “publish or perish” rule at EMU, as that term implies but that all faculty here are measured by the same standard, and that’s not true at EMU. EMU faculty do have a professional requirement, specified in the contract, for faculty to produce “scholarly activitiy” or comparable artistic works in the appropriate fields; further, it is required that this scholarly or artistic activity be “disseminated’ in appropriate professional venues. Without such disseminated scholarly or creative activity, one cannot earn tenure here or be promoted; but each discipline sets its own standard. Dissemination of scholarly or creative activity can be publishing a book, giving a paper, or performing a dance that a dance professor choreographed. Or an exhibition of visual arts. Or a study of community health issues disseminated by a public health agency – that too would count as disseminated, if so defined by the faculty in the relevant faculty members’ DED. In short, the standards for what is scholarly or artistic activity must be defined by the faculty members in the relevant academic programs. You don’t want historians determining what qualifies in physics, or dance professors judging the economists. Least of all do you want standards defined in a one size fits all fashion by upper administration, as that opens the door to arbitrariness and violations of academic freedom. During my days as AAUP Grievance Officer, I saw attempts by one dean to impose his own notions of quality and quantity of scholarship, and it was a disaster.
I think that, overall, individuals on the EMU faculty faces a fair and demanding requirement for scholarship, given our teaching load and the very low levels of support for scholarship. But EMU faculty are judged first and foremost by their effectiveness as instructors, as per the contract.
The way to raise scholarly standards at a university is with carrots, not sticks; with encouragement and demonstrations of support for research and scholarship. Research, as my colleagues in physics and art who’ve made comments on this thread have stated, is inextricably part of university teaching. If EMU values teaching, it will support research. But the reality is that EMU decision makers are not really in touch with what EMU teaching entails….
And hey Chris, funding for history GAs has not been restored to the Dept. budget. A one year funding of history GA appointments already made for 07-08 was provided by the Business and Finance Division, since appointments were already made, but Bob Neely and all other top administrators who’ve been asked about this by faculty in my dept. give no sign of having the GA funds restored, and they have made no promise that this highly unusual, and totally temporary, external funding of a few GA slots will be continued next year. Indeed, Dr. Neely told me that he has no funds for it and sees no prospect for it in next year’s budget. The cuts were to the base budget. They are gone. Unless you Chris know something that the history faculty don’t know….
I specify donations to specific accounts all the time. What I do is call the Foundation Development Director for the specific College and make sure the money goes to a specific account. It can not be used for anything else. When I have found out that a Dean or a Department Head has appropriated the money I have donated for something else, I call the Foundation and have the same amount of money re-directed to something else. This can send an important message to those who do this. Department Heads and Deans are not suppose to use designated donations in specific accounts for other uses. This is very easy to do – I think you would find the Foundation staff very receptive to your concerns and questions. However, don’t bother calling the Vice President of Development or the Associate – call the Director of Development for your College directly.
Its sounds to me that most of you would benefit from having coffee some morning with Jill Hunsberger (College of Arts and Sciences) to answer your questions. I’m sure you would find what she has to say about the fund raising process interesting. Will any of you follow through on this? Probably not!
Alum, the only reason I won’t be following this advice is because I don’t deal with the accounts that I have heard about in our department that are problematic, and I am not going to go into any more detail about this now because this isn’t the right forum for it. I guess I’ll just end by saying that what I have heard from very good sources within my department is that, in a time where the administration wants to save money by gutting academics beyond the bone– as some of the comments here about GAs and the like have already suggested– it would appear to me that these development funds set up for particular programs are not as invulnerable as you are implying here. It’s nothing evil about about the development people.
OK. I didn’t start this thread about fundraising! Just trying to lend some advice. I just hear allot of bitching and moaning! I challenge you to understand what’s going on with these so called accounts and whether or not they are somehow tied to donated money that is either specific or non-specific. My suggestion to faculty is that if you want to raise money for something you have in mind, bring your ideas to the College of Arts and Sciences Resource Development Board. Better yet, get someone on the Board who can advocate for the Department faculty and help them identify areas to raise money. However, be aware that you will be asked to volunteer your time. I found it very interesting when I went to the G/G Department with the Director of Development to hear their ideas. They thought that somehow the Foundation staff would snap their fingers and the money would appear. I told them to give me a call if they’d like some help, since this is my home Department. That was in September. So far, no phone calls. If you want to start fundraising for something, start now. In three to five years you’ll have results, and it will be money that know one can take away from you.
Alum has said it all; no need to repeat.
Hi Alum,
This is just to say that I apporeciate your suggestions. If people could have faith that their funds were actualy going to the intended places, development funds would be a whole lot easier to come by. I am willing to start afresh, assume whatever happened in the past is just that, something in the past, and move forward from here when it comes to the foundation.
I will actually be donating funds like this soon to sponsor some grad students. If I have a difficulty, I am very glad to know who to call. Sometimes simply knowing who the right person is to talk to does wonders in getting things to run smoothy.
Yes, I too would love to call you up and get your advice on this, Alum.
Oh, wait: I don’t know who you are. In fact, you’ve never actually identified yourself at all here.
Maybe I can get help from EMU supporter. Oh, wait. That’s a problem too….
So, um, why are these “credible” sources?
Again, I will not pretend to know all the details here, but also again, I do know some very specific problems/issues in my department that counter this. So if it’s okay with everyone else, I think I’ll trust people I know rather than pseudonyms I don’t.
C’mon, sitedad. That is a cheap shot. It should be beneath you, but we have to let you actions speak for themselves. Alum gave you the name of the person who is responsible for development activities in your college; you really don’t need us if you really want to find out.
I am merely pointing out that I have information from of “real people” who I know extremely well that directly contradicts what you and Alum are saying. If I have to pick between real people and anonymous ones, I’ll go with the real people every time.
But let’s get back to the subject here, which was research (and I do think it is odd/interesting that this somehow turned into a discussion about fund raising, as if the message is “you faculty should stop doing research/scholarship and raise some money):
I very much appreciate what Ryan is saying here, and as someone from the English department, I can tell you that many of my colleagues feel the same way about things like releases, FRFs, etc. From my vantage point, it seems like the science folks have an advantage in terms of these awards for the reasons you mention, and maybe because the projects science folks propose are things the folks involved in the selection process can relate to. I mean, I know a lot of art folks– especially painters/sculptors who do abstract art of one variety or another–have are constantly facing criticism along the lines of “my kid could do that” or “that’s stupid.” How often do scientist get those kinds of criticisms?
And I very much agree with the kind of research that J Physics is talking about. If someone still doesn’t get the connection between teaching and research after reading that comment, well, then they never will.
But I guess I’m also thinking about something a little different. I actually describe this in an article I published about the value of “self-published” scholarship as “S/scholarship.” In brief, faculty, students, and others in the academic community do “Scholarship” in a variety of shapes and forms, and that of course is the most important aspect of all this. But faculty at tenure-granting institutions like EMU also do “scholarship” (small s) in that they publish/present scholarship/research for the purposes of meeting a criteria for tenure and promotion– this is the DED that Mark mentioned, commonly pronounced (ironically enough) DEaD.
Scholarship and scholarship often overlap, but not always, and I guess my problem is I think the standards for scholarship at EMU are too low. Further, there aren’t a lot of reasons for many faculty to have much to do with scholarship after a certain point. I have a colleague/friend of mine who teaches at MSU, and their system, based on merit, means that people who are active in terms of scholarship (and a whole bunch of other stuff too– it isn’t just what you publish or what grants you bring in or whatever) make more money than those that don’t.
Now, I am simplifying this horribly, MSU is a very very different place from EMU, and I know a good way to be the recipient a good old-fashioned stoning is to show up to an EMU-AAUP meeting and say something like “Hey, I got an idea: how about a merit system?” But I think it is kind of a shame that we haven’t figured out an incentive to promote both Scholarship and scholarship more than we do.
If EMU had, year in and year out, been run by capable administrators who had the universal respect of the EMU community, who were trusted by the faculty, who were known to be — to a person, not just many persons in the administration — to be ethical and honest and open to information beyond that provided by their superiors — well, Steve, in that utopian EMU, I could support a merit system for pay raises. A pal of mine at UofM likes the system they have there, and benefits from it: he gets outside grant money and pubs, and gets awarded merit pay by his dept chair and Dean. But the tough question is, who decides what merit is for EMU faculty? Where’s the record of great administrative achievements that would warrant – er, merit? — our trust? Want to allow the Welch hall officials who cut class sections that more than pay for themselves and fill student needs to decide who gets the merit pay raise, the professor of painting or the scientist? The literature professor or the accounting professor? Or the two colleagues in one dept., one of whom does no advising but publishes a lot and another who publishes little but does all the student advising in their program? Who has merit, or more of it, among these hypotheticals? None of the provosts or presidents we’ve had in my years at EMU, and none of the Deans we’ve had in Arts and Sciences since 2000, are people the faculty would trust to administer a merit system.
Merit pay only works in universities where there’s a very high degree of trust and respect and professionalism in the deision making ranks of he administrators. Kind of like democracy – it only works if the basics are settled and agreed upon. Otherwise it will produce favoritism and conflict (just as democratic systems in societies without the basics settled and agreed to by all can produce civil war). I favor systems that minimize conflict.
That said Steve, I promise to defend you against stoning in any venue you care to discuss this idea in!
Sitedad: Since you are the moderator of this, I assume that you monitor this site. Speaking of scholarship and research, wouldn’t you think it would be easier to go back and see how fundraising got into this discussion rather than bitch about it. Your sophistry amazes me because you seem to pride yourself of being and “academic and a scholar.” So much for that.
I also encourage you to look into the differences between “major institutions” like UM and MSU and WSU and regional ones like EMU, CMU, WMU, etc. I think you will find less emphasis on teaching and more on producing papers, books, and obtaining grants. Also, tenure comes with rank at those institutions and you have a limited time to obtain it or move on. If you don’t make Assoc. Prof. you do not have tenure –ever. Typically, you have 7 years in which to earn tenure; if not, it is expected that you will get the message and move on. Usually, you will move to a place like EMU where tenure comes after 4 or 5 years. You will also find that merit works best when there is an adequate “floor” for pay. As Mark notes, he doesn’t trust any of the Deans and Provosts since 2000. That is the reason against merit pay. If caprice and whimsy comes into play, merit pay goes out the window.
I monitor/moderate the site, I don’t dictate what people say or what direction the conversations take. If you look at this particular item, it’s clear that it veered off into the fund raising direction with Jeff’s first comment.
I don’t really have time to go through your discussion about tenure right now– got things to do, I’m afraid– but all I’ll say for now is that it isn’t completely accurate in a number of different ways, including the time-frame, what it takes at these different places, what rank at different places means, etc., etc. And people who come to EMU– at least in my field– don’t come here because they tried to run with the big dogs at U of M and it didn’t work.
I agree that a merit system does have to do with trust, and I also agree that has been lacking at EMU. But you know, the concept of some kind of merit pay system is something that the EMU-AAUP won’t even entertain, and if you ask why, they’ll bring up war stories that are 20+ years old. I think it might just be time to at least talk about it again.
Abby:
I would definitely call Jill Hunsberger about your plans. Start with her first and follow her advice.
Sitedad, I find it impossible to have any meaningful discussion with you. You are the one who noted that it was “odd/interesting” how this turned into a discussion about fund raising. Yet, the very first response raised that issue in the second sentence.
I also note that whenever you get into a “discussion” and you are challenged, you make some snide comment and get out of it. You have done it with Alum and me. I KNOW that you don’t dictate what I can write, but I was simply trying to point out that you had the information about how this turned into a discussion about fund raising, if you looked at the thread. Still you made the observation that “and I do think it is odd/interesting that this somehow turned into a discussion about fund raising.”
I am beginning to think this is a useless conversation.
Well EMU supporter (if that is your real name…), I’m sorry you feel that way.
I think what we’re seeing in this conversation when it comes to the fund raising thing is an impasse, an “is not/is too” level of discourse. I did talk to at least one of the people who has more knowledge about the issue I am thinking of in particular and directed this person to read this discussion. Again, without going into a lot of details, what this person said was that we were basically both right. Or, another way of putting it: what counts as a donation to a designated development fund is not really as cut and dry as people might think, and it probably isn’t something we are going to be able resolve here, either.
Anyway, I guess I’ll just mention a few things related to EMUTalk.org “rule” issues:
<ul>
<li>People are free to comment anonymously, but they should be aware that this might cause a gap in credibility. People who read EMUTalk.org know who I am; many people who read EMUTalk.org don’t know who “EMU supporter” is.</li>
<li>It’s my opinion, both as the “sitedad” of EMUTalk.org and as someone who researches blogs (see? this will come back to scholarship yet!) that the use of pseudonyms in blog spaces is more often than not about enabling someone to post what they want, regardless of its accuracy, tone, etc., than it is about protecting of the innocent.</li>
<li>As I have said before, anyone not happy with this forum is more than free to start their own. You could do it all spiffy and cool like it is here for about $80 a year, or you can do it free at blogger or wordpress.com or some other sites. And if you do start your own blog, let me know so I can link to it.</li>
</ul>
On a side note: there was an interesting post and discussion about using pseudonyms and anonymity in comments on design observer a while back What’s In A Name?.
I mentioned fundraising in this thread merely because the word DOLLAR
and BOARD OF REGENTS got mentioned within the thread article.
If I was off-topic I apologize. But, I felt the need to respond to the notion that the Board of Regents is the sole source DOLLAR VALUE of Research.
So…. For anyone baffled by my mention of fundraising that’s why I did it. If the thread article was a listing of research project examples and wanted our feedback on the quality of research projects and whether there were factors limiting EMU’s capabilities then I wouldn’t have mentioned fundraising. But, the thread article left the discussion completely open ended.
P.S. I am an alumnus with no where near the same perspective as EMU faculty.