Fundraising for the Institute is now a major priority. With the new scanner and building coming on line, labs must be fitted out, faculty must be hired and equipment must be purchased. All of these require significant financial support. The Institute is, in this area, extraordinarily lucky. We have an Advisory Board that has repeatedly stepped up to the plate and supported the Institute at critical times during its sixteen year history. Now, that Board, is once again engaged in a new campaign to raise monies that will support the massive new science initiatives of the Institute. With these new dollars, the Institute will expand its footprint in the area of translational research that will make a real difference for people who are suffering from brain diseases. At the same time, the Institute will continue to build upon its existing strengths in integrative neuroscience, complex adaptive systems and modeling socially complex systems.

The overarching goal is for the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study to become an international center for top-flight “mind” research over the next decade.

Jim

I guest lectured in a class for the biosciences management program in Mason’s School of Management yesterday evening. Of of the interesting questions that came up, one had to do with the possibility that incentive structures for scientists might be different than for other professionals. Along these lines, it might be useful to think of a pie chart representing the total set of rewards for say…a senior partner in a law firm and a top-flight scientist.

Both pie charts would of course have a section for monetary compensation. This might include salary, but would also include bonuses, disbursements and benefits. It’s fair to say that, in general, for the lawyer, the monetary compensation side of the pie chart would be larger than for the scientist.

However, let’s look at the “toys” side of the pie chart (very important for scientists). The lawyer’s toys might include a nice office, a blackberry, perhaps a new Mac powerbook along with some fairly expensive furniture. But the scientist’s toys would be of a different league: perhaps a $500K mass spec, or a $250K confocal microscope, or even a $3M MRI machine.

In other words, the toys side of the scientist’s pie chart would more than compensate for the monetary compensation side, so that in fact the total value of the rewards for both the lawyer and the scientist would be fairly similar.

Interesting huh? I think this gets at something unique about what motivates scientists. And this is perhaps the reason that “set up” packages are so important to the recruitment of scientists.

Jim

Yesterday one of my graduate students and I went to visit Dr. Adrianne Noe who is the director of the National Museum of Health and Medicine. We are interested in collaborating with Dr. Noe and her colleagues who curate the Comparative Mammalian Brain Collections at the Museum, one of the truly great neuroanatomical resources(click on the link above). For those of you who haven’t visited, I really recommend a trip to the Museum next time you are in Washington.

Jim

Yesterday I had the honor of representing Mason at a reception for students admitted to next year’s freshman class. The reception was held at the estate of Patricia Kluge, who serves on the Krasnow Advisory Board, in the Charlottesville area. The amazing enthusiasm of these extremely bright kids for their soon to be alma mater was extraordinary. As we exchanged Mason stories surrounded by the beautiful Virginia Piedmont I couldn’t help be struck by the intersection of achievement, good luck and just plain hard work that has put this young university at the forefront of our collective imagination. It’s a great time to be at George Mason University.

The Financial Times today had a very interesting article on Americans who are moving to the UK. Among the listed reasons for the migration: health insurance, quality of life, and the ability to travel between the countries of Europe the way most Americans view traveling between the States.

I worry about the potential effects of such a trend on science here in the United States. If this country becomes a less attractive place for the best and the brightest to pursue a career in research, then the nation will be poorer as a result (both metaphorically and actually). I also would add to the list above some additional factors that are specific to science as it’s currently being practiced here in America. Among my items: the increasing politicization of science (e.g. stem cell research and climate change) and the perceived “unfriendly” visa environment for foreign scientists to work in the US.

The second point is significantly more subtle than the first. The latter item refers to the added value to a scientific environment that comes from internationalization. Here at Krasnow, we have an institute for advanced study that currently houses scientists and students that come from China, Russia, Italy, Ukraine and Brazil among many others. That trans-national milieu is considered a real plus among most of the scientists I’ve known. I believe the reason is that scientists value exploration of different cultures almost as highly as they do exploration of nature. If we in the US trend towards more nationalistic science, then I fear the result will be a migration of the science away from the United States.

Jim

A lot has been going on the past week, so it’s probably a good time to update here with some of the more important items:

1) The MRI radio frequency shield will receive its first test today. If that’s successful, we’ll then go on to install the magnetic shield.

2) We’re looking at delivery of the Magnet over the weekend of May 8. We’ll arrange video recording of the delivery and will put it up on the Institute’s web site for download.

3) The Provost made his annual visit with the Krasnow faculty yesterday. It was a very productive Q&A session for which we’re all very grateful.

4) The Krasnow Advisory Board met last week and formed two new subcommittees: one will be in the area of fundraising and it will be chaired by Ms. Patricia Kluge. The other will be in the area of public relations and that committee will be chaired by Dr. Adrianne Noe. My sense is that both of these new subcommittees will be crucial as we move forward with our growth plans.

Jim

The new journal that I’m involved with, Journal of Cognitive Neurodynamics, has its web site up (click on the link above). I’m really excited about my other colleague editorial board members and the initial set of articles I think will be very exciting.

Jim

My friend and colleague Anne Rosenblum sent along a wonderful report on how important basic research is at the Academy (linked above).

Money quote from the accompanying press release:
“At present, only 20% of all basic research in the US is performed by the private sector. Colleges and universities account for 60% of such research, with government accounting for the remaining amounts. Washington is the largest funder of basic research, paying for 57% of the total.”

For those of you who were wondering about the 18-Wheeler that was pulled
up this morning to the back of the building, the cargo was the shielding
for the new MRI which will now be rapidly installed over the next
several days. It should be very exciting to watch.

Jim

I’m sure I saw the best hoops game of my life this afternoon. And
that includes the Lakers of 1972 with their 38 game win streak–which
I lived through as a 16 year old growing up 20 miles from the so-
called “House that Wilt Built”. Congrats once again to Mason’s
Patriots who beat number one seeded UConn to advance to the NCAA
Final Four. Sometimes Hoops intersects with science….my sense is
that this is one of those very rare times–a tipping point for a
university.