My questions about this:

1. The announcement suggests this responds to the CIHR Strategic Action Plan on Training. But I was assigned to the training/early career table at the CIHR strategic planning meetings & I am not seeing how this responds to any of the issues we raised. https://twitter.com/CIHR_IRSC/status/1347596457642250243
2. If you have to offer “high-caliber” mentors 2.4M to get their involvement, how good of mentors can they really be?
3. This reads as being designed for empire building rather than either collaborative team science or ‘let every flower bloom’ discovery research. All the evidence I’ve seen on science funding policy suggests both of those are far better than empires for research & researchers.
It just seems like a very weird use of people’s time and scarce research funds right now. I can’t imagine how something like this could possibly yield more bang for the buck than putting extra funds in open trainee awards + extra funds in project grants dedicated for ECIs.
You can follow @hwitteman.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.