Slashdot Mirror


Fewer Grants For Young Researchers Causing Brain Drain In Academia

BarbaraHudson writes: Johns Hopkins University President Ronald J. Daniels has written about the decline of research grants to younger researchers. "For more than a generation, grants for young scientists have declined. The number of principal investigators with a leading National Institutes of Health grant who are 36 years old or younger dropped from 18 percent in 1983 to 3 percent in 2010. Meanwhile, the average age when a scientist with a medical degree gets her first of these grants has risen from just under 38 years old in 1980 to more than 45 in 2013. The implications of these data for our young scientists are arresting. Without their own funding, young researchers are prevented from starting their own laboratories, pursuing their own research, and advancing their own careers in academic science. It is not surprising that many of our youngest minds are choosing to leave their positions."

1 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sports TAKES the money. by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, not really. The vast majority of Division I schools lose money on athletics, none of the Division III schools cover their athletic expenses.

    from http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

    "Just 23 of 228 athletics departments at NCAA Division I public schools generated enough money on their own to cover their expenses in 2012. Of that group, 16 also received some type of subsidy — and 10 of those 16 athletics departments received more subsidy money in 2012 than they did in 2011."

    Sports provides valuable marketing (for the top schools), and that has value, but don't kid yourself that sports is generating net revenue.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?