The academic incentive structure is "funny". If I wanted to maximize academic success, I would spend almost all my time on grant writing, a minimum of time on teaching and PhD student supervision, and no time on reviewing, outreach, writing papers or even doing research myself.
It really looks like what you're doing here is insisting that the failures of the extant system is *evidence for* maintaining it as the only available access point.
-
-
Oh no, not at all! The original thread is arguing for essentially abolishing the existing system, where grant income is expected. The focus on applying for, and getting, research grants is perverting academia and leads to the wrong people staying in the system, and worse research
-
What I want instead is a system that maximizes researchers' freedom to work on the problems they care about the most, and associate with the researchers they want to work with. Instead of, like now, worrying about how to please review committees so they can keep their jobs.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.