Fulbright Follies

Just to follow up on Dan’s posting yesterday of Professor Paula Monopoli’s Boston Globe op-ed on the changing dynamics between law schools and their university motherships, I think it’s worth flagging her suggestion (and one that is increasingly trendy) that law faculty should rely for something often called ‘external funding’ for the research portion of their jobs.  This is a long discussion—one which is currently plagued by confusing understandings of what makes funding ‘external’—and one I’ll follow up on in future posts.  (For previous posts of mine on the relationship between law schools and universities generally, see here and here; as you can see, I am largely sympathetic to Monopoli’s Boston Globe piece.) 

For now, however, I merely wish to draw your attention to one potential source of ‘external funding’ for all academics—namely, the Fulbright program—and the cuts that the Obama administration is attempting to institute in relation to the Fulbright program. 

Not only keeping, but also expanding, the Fulbright program seems to be a no-brainer.  If you agree, please contact the White House, your Congressperson, or your Senator, or do all three.  As a former Fulbrighter—I started my Fulbright in September 2001 in Pakistan, before moving to India in October 2001, where I finished out my Fulbright—and friend of numerous other former Fulbrighters, I can attest to the important role that this inter-governmental program plays in the maintenance of international collaborations between academics, artists, and policy-makers.

NB:  The usual rules of relevance will be applied vis-a-vis comments.

Comments

[Darren Rosenblum]

Couldn't agree more - I have written to the relevant parties. This is appalling that we spend as much as we do on the military but overlook the riches of the Fulbright program.

[Jeff Redding]

Darren, thank you!