John Proctor wrote:

---

Invictus wrote: I don't think that's the point, Proctor. I think the point is that NSF doesn't permit MIDAS type rewards. I'm not sure about that, so RC or someone more knowledgeable about NSF regs will have to clarify, but that's the impression I got from things said up-thread from here. My impression about USM faculty's objections to MIDAS has always been that it's an inherently biased & inequitable system. A person who happens to work in a discipline where there is ready grant money can get a bonus award for getting grants. I do have enough background to know that a run-of-the-mill science professor can get grants that are utterly unavailable to the very best humanities professor. Personally, I think the money that's being given away for MIDAS might be better used as seed money to help those in harder-to-fund research areas develop better proposals & get their research projects off the ground. You've made my point here. Your gripe is that it's "biased." I could argue that the NFL, NBA, MLB, PGA, etc., are biased against people with different skill sets than an athletic one. Again, your srgument boils down to "sour grapes" because you're not in a grant-friendly discipline. Instead of being happy for those who benefit, you complain. Reminds me of a child who wants another child's better toy and throws a fit until all toys get taken away. Then, the jealous child is happy because nobody has more than he does.

---

I'm very appreciative of your name choice -- Proctor was a man who was both within the community and yet on the outside as well -- the perfect skeptic in other words. Incidently if you have ever been to Salem there is an excellent and very moving memorial to the victims of the witchcraft frenzy.

I can't speak for anyone else but my own concern about the Midas Program is my suspicion that it another way to validate disciplines (and faculty members) who are both enteprenaurial and are successful at that. My concern is without a fairly well-articulated philosophy that speaks fairly clearly and institutes policies that also show support for those scholars working in disciplines that are less able to raise grant money, messages are sent to students and to faculty about what kind of research is valued -- thereby potentially skewing the mission of the university towards enteprenurialism as THE value. I don;t think there is a conspiracy here but I do think there is a lack of sensitivity and awareness. Most importantly, the context in which we perform does not create equal validation (it does not have to be money but it must then be in pretty active rhetoric and recognition) for intellectual activity leading to outcomes that may carry significance though may not generate income for the university.

So I think that is the context here -- not the denigration of the work of those who may get the MIDAS awards, but deep concern that those rewards are in themselves a subtle message about what is valued in the absence of an equally strong message about the importance non-revenue generating research and how that contributes to the intellectual life of the university, which is, after all, the principle activity of the university.