I know I had made a list in the last entry about what I was going to write but on my ride back from the airport I retold a story to my husband and he felt very differently than I about the fairness of this story. I've also noticed on other issues he's always had the opinion that the professor knows best, or it's the professors grant they can do what they want with it. Is he emulating the "big boys?" I once told him that he was going to end up being one of those old white men we all complain about.
So here is the story and I am curious to hear your take on it.
My department applied for federal funding called the GAANN and we received it. I'm not sure if it was the graduate director or all the faculty who solicited for this grant. It's a large grant and we have it for many years. The department had the grant when I was a first year (2002) and then subsequently lost it or it didn't get renewed. When we had this grant before it was delegated out by the faculty to pay for students stipends. I'm not sure how they decided this but the students were no part of the decision. The grant at that point also paid for computers for these students.
However for this next time, which started in Fall 2006, each student who wanted to be considered for GAANN support had to write a one page application stating why they needed the money, how their research was of national interest and make an argument for how cool they are. 7 students were chosen and in addition to a stipend and tuition we (myself being one of the 7) received $5000 for research/travel and our health insurance is paid for. Oh and our stipend was $1000 more per year than the other students. It was a pretty sweet deal if you ask me.
This year there were two students who were suppose to graduate in the fall so in essences they were sharing an award. However both of them stuck around since they didn't have job offers yet and thus we over spent that year, causing our research funds to be less for the next year.
So for this year starting in Fall 07 some people were renewed and some new applicants were accepted. One of the renewals graduated in the Fall. I asked two other graduate students over lunch what then happened to the other half of her stipend, expenses, ect..
I feel one of two things should have happened.
1) that money goes back into the pot for next year (in case they mess up and over spend again)
2) they must have had one or two runner ups from the initial applications and they choose one of them
My friend suggested they open up the application again.
This is what happen. The graduate director e-mail one student, who hadn't applied initially, and ask her to apply. She now has funding for this next semester from the GAANN.
This seems unfair to me.
My husband said
1) the graduate director received the GAANN and can do what he wants with it
2) there maybe issues we don't know about
3) what if this student didn't have any funding and was going to not get paid next semester
These are all valid points, yet again, what about fairness.
Hm, what do you think should have happened?
Another issue with this funding was that the graduate director told all first years not to apply because the funds would only be given to those who passed their prelims. However, one first year did apply and did get funded. She did have a Master's degree from another university.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I must say, I've never heard of anything like this (e.g., applying for this type of funding once admitted into the dept) in my own department. But, student funding works much differently and is determined/guaranteed upon admittance based on your incoming grades. This way, it is a more objective process.
I don't think it is fair that the student was "invited" to apply for the award. Seems to be some sort of favoritism. But, I know this stuff happens fairly regularly. I think it really points to the need for students to contribute to the department and get to know "well-positioned" faculty members.
Personally, I don't really agree with the point that the graduate director received the GAANN and can do what he wants with it. If that is the case, why bother having students write an application if they're just going to hand out the money to whomever they want? Plus, I think giving a director too much power (i.e., not having to answer to anyone) opens the door for corruption.
I should clarify that first year students have to TA and that is their type of funding. During this first year students try to find a lab that fits them and their interests. Most faculty members have funding for students but this department wide funding is a way to lessen the burden on the faculty members grants. Personally if I didn't get the GAANN there could have been funding for me if my adviser shifted things around.
I never thought about the power problem that is a good point.
Sounds really complicated! The application process may be something new required by the funding agency, though.
The funding situation does remind me of my labmate. Our lab ran out of money one year, and our advisor forced my labmate to work without a stipend for 4 months, while the rest of us in the group were paid standard stipend. This situation could have been avoided if we had something like GAANN, but then it would have just encouraged our advisor to be even more fiscally irresponsible.
I think it is likely that:
1) The money expires every school year, so had to be used this year.
2) Grad director didn't want to mess with the whole application thing.
When the agency only cares that the money is spent on students, whoever is in charge can select the said students by their own standards. I believe that is the definition of subjective.
I think you and your husband are both correct. It is unfair, but the graduate director does have the authority to select students for this funding at his discretion. Many such decisions in science are entirely subjective--paper reviews, grant study sections, tenure review, etc. Perhaps I'm too much of a cynic, but I think that's just how life is.
In order to receive the GAANN funds, your department had to write a 40-page proposal to the Department of Education. Perhaps you could ask to read that proposal, and it would give you some clues to how the money is spent. For example, most of the successful GAANN proposals indicated that they would make a particular effort to support groups that are traditionally underrepresented in the sciences. Perhaps that is why the graduate director asked a woman to apply for the available spot.
Post a Comment