Public Benefit from Research-Intensive Universities/Federal Government Relationship: 



Among the Congressional declarations that provided reasons for establishing the National Endowment for the 

 Humanities in 1965 was the finding "that a high civilization must not limit its efforts to science and technology alone 

 but must give full value and support to the other great branches of scholarly and cultural activity in order to achieve a 

 better understanding of the past, a better analysis of the present, and a better view of the future." Thus, from the 

 beginning, NEH's charge has been linked with high civilization in which there is general and profound knowledge. 

 Accordingly, all of the NEH programs that support research and education in the humanities are designed to increase 

 the public's understanding of important events, of ideas and their consequences, as well as the people who have in- 

 fluenced and have been influenced by ideas and events. 



Just as research in theoretical science seeks its justification in what it does to enhance general human under- 

 standing, so research in humanities gains federal support only insofar as it argues for the expansion and/or transmis- 

 sion of knowledge. By requiring NEH applicants to provide a statement about the broad significance of their 

 proposed projects, NEH keeps the public purpose central to the evaluation of proposals. NEH supports projects in re- 

 search and education that assure upcoming generations access to significant works and accomplishments in literature, 

 history, foreign language, philosophy and other humanities subjects. 



NEH Expectations/Requirements for Relationships with Universities: 



NEH expects that there be a strong institutional commitment to the projects it funds. The degree of commitment 

 can be assessed in several ways but is indicated most directly in the amount of the cost of the project that will be 

 shared by the university. Although the percentage of cost sharing varies by program and type of project, the 

 Endowment's contribution to a project normally will not exceed 80 percent of the project's total costs. Cost sharing 

 consists of the cash contributions made to the project by the university and in-kind contributions, such as donated 

 services and goods. The university's cost sharing may include both direct costs and indirect costs. Cost sharing also 

 includes gift money raised to release Federal matching funds. 



Issues with Current Relationships/Barriers to an Effective Relationship: 



RIUs by their very nature are geared to cutting-edge research. Grants and contracts awarded to departments of 

 science and technology are major revenue-enhancing ventures. The general atmosphere at RIUs encourages progress, 

 innovation, daring. Research in the humanities, in contrast, is ruminative, deliberative, and painstakingly thoughtful. 

 A research team editing the papers of one of the Nation's founders, for example, does not attract significant numbers 

 of students nor does it attract similar projects. And most important, the amount of money such a project is able to 

 bring into the institution is minimal in comparison to science and technology projects. Consequently, RIU commit- 

 ment to humanities research is often meager. 



Erosion of institutional support for a humanities research project serves to undermine an effective relationship 

 between NEH and RIUs. There have been instances when a project director discovers that university endowment 

 revenues have been over committed; and in those cases, if the cost sharing declared in the project proposal is heavily 

 weighted with matching funds, the researcher often is asked by the institution to raise the matching funds. In these 

 cases, the researcher's activities are diverted away from the project to fund raising. 



Elements/Characteristics of a Productive Future Relationship: 



The National Endowment for the Humanities continues to challenge research-intensive universities to 

 strengthen their commitment to undergraduate education. Although research in the humanities is important as a con- 

 tinuous investment in civilization, education in the humanities is vital for the immediate future of the humanities. At 

 RIUs it is often the case that elementary and secondary teachers are prepared with little experience in the subject 

 matter they intend to teach; often the advisor-to-student ratio is 1 to 1000, making sheer luck or extraordinary 

 acumen factors in a student's coherent education; often loose distribution requirements leave students to accumulate 

 a hodgepodge of courses to satisfy graduation requirements; and often too few faculty teach required undergraduate 

 courses, resulting in students having to return an extra semester or year to fill requirements. 



51 



