With news that Northwestern University has discovered a compound that
stops degeneration of the brain in diseases such as Alzheimers, Parkinson's, stroke and traumatic brain injury and that it has licensed the discovery
exclusively to a pharma company for clinical development (see below), the
privatization of funding for public schools is not an idle issue.
The statistics cited below are from the state of California but the
issue is nationwide. kwc
Colleges' new economics
State universities
have been forced into a competitive marketplace for financial support, and that
is threatening public education.
OpEd by Jennifer Washburn, the LA Times, January
23, 2006
Jennifer Washburn is a fellow at the New America
Foundation and author of "University, Inc.: The Corporate
Corruption of Higher Education."
A trend toward
privatization and a shift in spending priorities is putting California's public
colleges and universities at risk of forsaking their mandate to deliver a
quality public education to the state's growing ranks of would-be college
students.
The eye-popping compensation packages paid by the University of California to
its top administrators — even as Sacramento raised fees, cut services and
increased class sizes — are the latest sign that the state's higher-education
system is in trouble. Last year, according to recent reports, UC quietly doled
out more than $871 million in bonuses and other benefits to its top employees
and administrators. Former Chancellor Robert M. Berdahl of UC Berkeley, for
instance, got a 13 1/2 -month paid leave, at $315,600 a year.
These extraordinary expenditures can't just be explained away as waste,
mismanagement or greed; the problem is more fundamental than that. It's all
part of a changing business model, a new economics that is driving public
colleges nationwide into uncharted, potentially troublesome, waters.
Over the last two decades, public financing for higher education has waned at
the same time that education costs (labor, laboratories, health coverage, etc.)
have continued to rise. This has forced public colleges nationwide into a
competitive marketplace that is threatening public education.
Many college presidents no longer see their state schools as
public; they are "state assisted." Over the last four
years, UC absorbed a 16% reduction in state funding while student enrollments
rose by 16%. Nationwide, even flagship state universities are struggling to
compete against private colleges that have endowments and can charge whatever
tuition the market will bear.
To make up for state budget shortfalls, public colleges have turned to private
donors, the federal government and corporations for a larger share of their
operating funds — and boosted tuition and fees.
From 1993 to 2003, industry-sponsored research in the UC system
grew from $65 million to $155 million — meaning that public higher
education more and more is driven by what private interests and business will
pay for, and less and less by the public interest or the needs of students
"If private donors and corporations are providing much of a university's
budget," said a former president of the University of Wisconsin,
"then they will set the agenda."
Here's another, unhealthy change brought on by this heightened competition:
Public colleges used to provide an important ladder of opportunity to every
student in the state who was academically qualified, regardless of family
income. Today, this democratic vision is rapidly being shunted aside in favor
of recruiting high-performing students, prestigious research professors and
highly paid administrators who can raise an institution's ranking and,
ultimately, its overall wealth.
These national rankings, published by U.S. News & World Report among
others, have a huge bearing on a school's reputation and its ability to attract
federal and private money. Because the ranking system places the greatest value
on research, income and prestige (and little value on teaching or learning
outcomes), it has encouraged many colleges to neglect their primary teaching
mission.
In the hopes of luring the best and brightest students (who
often also are the most affluent ones), colleges are also splurging on luxury
dormitories, lavish new gymnasiums and other country-club-like amenities. (Duke
University gave iPods to all its first-year students.)
Similarly, both public and private colleges now use financial aid
as a competitive tool to attract the highest-performing students, at the
expense of those with the greatest financial needs. According to a recent
study, the amount of student financial aid that states awarded not on the basis of need grew from 10% to
more than 25% from 1998 to 2002, the latest year for which figures are
available.
Administrators of public institutions, who are responsible for private
fundraising, are demanding salaries commensurate with those in the private
sector. A Chronicle of Higher Education survey found that 23 public university
presidents now earn more than $500,000, six more than the previous year.
Meanwhile, the gap between administrative and faculty salaries continues to
worsen. (Of course, star professors — who can bring in research revenue and
prestige — are offered six-figure salaries and promises that they will rarely,
if ever, have to see an undergraduate.) The undergraduates are taught largely,
if not exclusively, by part-time adjuncts and graduate students. Studies
suggest that an increase in the use of low-paid, part-time faculty is
associated with a drop in student graduation rates.
What is needed is a new compact between the state of California and all of its
public colleges. In exchange for providing a larger, more dependable revenue
stream to all of its public colleges and universities, the state should insist
on measurable improvements in undergraduate education. This might include
expanding low-income access, giving undergraduates more time with full
professors and improving graduation rates, which remain unacceptably low, both
in California and nationally.
If the state wants to meet the challenges of a post-industrial
economy, it will need to reaffirm its commitment to public — not market-driven
— higher education.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-washburn23jan23,0,4057827.story
New compound stops brain cell degeneration in
Alzheimer’s disease: “Drug discovery researchers at
Northwestern University have developed a novel orally administered compound
specifically targeted to suppress brain cell inflammation and neuron loss
associated with Alzheimer's disease. The compound is also rapidly absorbed by
the brain and is non-toxic – important considerations for a central nervous
system drug that might need to be taken for extended periods. As described in
the Jan. 11 issue of the Journal of Neuroscience, the compound,
called MW01-5-188WH, selectively
inhibits production of pro-inflammatory proteins called cytokines by glia,
important cells of the central nervous system that normally help the body mount
a response, but are overactivated in certain neurodegenerative diseases, such
as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, stroke and traumatic brain
injury. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-01/nu-ncs011906.php
Note:
“Northwestern has patented the compound designated 188WH and exclusively
licensed the patent rights to NeuroMedix, Inc., for clinical development. Also See Journal of Neuroscience abstract http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/2/662
