• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

While many undergraduates may not realize it, research is one of the major ways universities like UCLA bring in revenue and enhance their reputations. As a result, professors and graduate students must devote considerable time and effort to this endeavor. However, while research is crucial to the university, it is important that research not imperil our university ethically or result in a decreased focus toward undergraduate concerns.

There are many positive benefits to university research. For example, one of the modern developments so often used in our lives, the World Wide Web, had many of its initial steps taken right here at UCLA in research programs. A great amount of research also pertains to the medical field.

Private companies have substantial interests in research as well, as they may stand to benefit from the marketing of a beneficial new discovery. One example is the research conducted by the UCLA Neuro-Oncology Program that seeks to understand causes and treatments of brain cancer and channel these results into the development of more effective cancer drugs.

UCLA ranked third among all public institutions in doctoral programs, largely because of its high quality of research. This attracts top-notch graduate students and makes progress possible in important fields. Thus, research is important not just in its benefits for all of humanity but for UCLA and the UC system in general.

However, there are several major problems with research at UCLA and other universities that should cause all students to demand increased scrutiny of these programs. First, as research activities by professors increase, time spent focusing on teaching and other student concerns decreases. This inverse relationship presents a dilemma for UCLA, and it is often tempting to sacrifice academic quality for research.

Professors’ reactions regarding graduate student fee hikes is one example of the privileging of research over undergraduate education at the university. Although professors are fully correct to bemoan these fee hikes, one must wonder why they showed so little concern when undergraduate fees underwent a 40 percent increase this past year. Clearly, undergraduate education takes a back seat to the research-driven concerns some professors have for their graduate students.

Although many professors care tremendously about undergraduate students, there are those who seem less willing to put undergraduate concerns on equal footing with research. UCLA administrators should enforce a stronger system of accountability regarding professor commitment to undergraduate learning.

Furthermore, UCLA students, especially undergraduates, must be very vocal regarding faculty and administrative accountability. Just as various student groups fight against fee hikes with the University of California Board of Regents and administrators, so too must they demand support from professors in such important matters for undergraduates.

But just as troubling as professor commitment and priorities is the potentially harmful impact of corporate involvement in research, which has been observed both within the UC system and in private universities.

Derek Bok, former Harvard University president, details this in his book “Universities in the Marketplace.” Bok argues that because of funding concerns, universities are forced to accept funding from various private entities, and this sometimes results in attempts to control scientific research.

Bok cites the example of the Novartis Company, which provided $25 million for research to the Department of Plant and Microbial Biology at UC Berkeley, demanding in return considerable control over research, hiring and patents. This in itself is not shocking because Novartis would expect benefits from its investment.

However, in other situations this type of control has proven much more serious.

One of the most pertinent examples of this, as reported by the Daily Bruin, is seen in the case of Knoll Pharmaceuticals and its drug, Synthroid. Researchers at UC San Francisco discovered this product was not more effective than cheaper, generic counterparts and that it had certain negative side effects. However, Knoll prevented this information from being released. After nearly seven years, the truth finally was exposed, and Knoll paid $135 million to those angered and affected by this misinformation.

This is an excellent example of how academic freedom can be stifled by companies that have influence over research and are tied to universities.

The UCLA administration must exercise care to ensure this does not happen in the future. Students and outside observers must be even more observant and vigilant, for the consequences of not doing so are catastrophic.

It is clear that research can be a highly beneficial undertaking for the university if performed in a manner that balances undergraduate concerns with graduate students and research. The university must ensure that scientific progress and ethical experimental procedures are not imperiled by conflicts of interest or companies seeking to control the very research that is supposed to shape and monitor their efforts.

As always, students must play a key role in this endeavor, for at the end of all these complex issues, the simple fact remains that this is our university. If we do not take responsibility for our university’s practices and demand more, who will?

Bhaskar is a third-year political science and history student. E-mail him at sbhaskar@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Comments

Post a comment