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.