Literally from the moment I came in the door of MIT, it was very clear that a highly productive 40-year partnership between U.S. research universities and the federal government was badly eroding.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Of course, MIT was notable not just for its faculty but also for its students. And, facing such extremely bright kids as a rookie teacher was something like being thrown to the wolves.
There was a time when I was wondering about this business of going public, so I visited about a half-dozen companies in the Boston area, all of them formed by MIT faculty and all had gone public.
The thing that we at MIT must understand is the amount of real damage that is being done to us in the fine structure of how research funds are expended.
Postwar U.S. was the world's leader in science and technology. The investment in science research was staggering.
Yeah, but now suddenly - you know, universities are notoriously market oriented, too.
It's very important that there should be cross-fertilisation between government and academia. Both parties can benefit from having a better understanding of how the other works.
It used to be that the only ones with access to cutting-edge technology were top government labs, big companies and the ultra-rich. It was simply too expensive for the rest of us to afford.
Great research universities must insist on independence from government and on the exercise of academic freedom.
College had little effect on me. I'd have been the same writer if I'd gone to MIT, except I'd have flunked out sooner.
I believe that our office has clearly been the leader in building coalitions, in getting other universities across the contrary to interact more effectively with the government and particularly the Congress.