Harvard

trump-administration-cuts-off-all-future-federal-funding-to-harvard

Trump administration cuts off all future federal funding to Harvard

department of education, federal funding, Harvard, research, Science / /

The ongoing war between the Trump administration and Harvard University has taken a new twist, with the government sending Harvard a letter that, amid what appears to be a stream-of-consciousness culture war rant, announces that the university will not be receiving any further research grants. The letter potentially suggests that Harvard could see funding restored by “complying with long-settled Federal Law,” but earlier demands from the administration included conditions that went well beyond those required by law.

The letter, sent by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, makes it somewhat difficult to tell exactly what the government wants, because most of the text is a borderline deranged rant written in florid MAGA-ese. You don’t have to go beyond the first paragraph to get a sense that this is less a setting of funding conditions than an airing of grievances:

Instead of using these funds to advance the education of its students, Harvard is engaging in a systemic pattern of violating federal law. Where do many of these “students” come from, who are they, how do they get into Harvard, or even into our country—and why is there so much HATE? These are questions that must be answered, among many more, but the biggest question of all is, why will Harvard not give straightforward answers to the American public?

Does Harvard have to answer these questions to get funding restored? It’s unclear.

From there, the letter changes topic so often that it gets difficult to remember that billions of dollars of funding to some of the world’s most prominent researchers is at stake. On the first page alone, the letter complains that a math class Harvard set up to handle COVID-driven gaps in incoming students’ math skills is a remedial course that shouldn’t be needed, given the university’s supposedly high standards. The resignation of Harvard’s former president, as well as its faculty hires, also make appearances. (Said hires being compared to “Hiring the captain of the Titanic to teach navigation.”)

Trump administration cuts off all future federal funding to Harvard Read More »

harvard-sues-to-block-government-funding-cuts

Harvard sues to block government funding cuts

First Amendment, Harvard, lawsuit, Policy, research funding, Science, Title VI, trump administration / /

The suit also claims that the funding hold, made in retaliation for Harvard’s letter announcing its refusal to accept these conditions, punishes Harvard for exercising free speech.

Separately, the lawsuit focuses on Title VI, part of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits the government from funding organizations that engage in racial discrimination. It’s Harvard’s alleged tolerance for antisemitism that would enable the government to put a hold on these funds. But the suit spells out the requirements for cutting funding—hearings, a 30-day waiting period, notification of Congress—that the law requires before funding can be cut. And, quite obviously, the government has done none of them.

Harvard also alleges that the government’s decision to hold research funds is arbitrary and capricious: “The Government has not—and cannot—identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen.”

Finally, the court is asked to consider an issue that’s central to a lot of the questions regarding Trump Administration actions: Can the executive branch stop the flow of money that was allocated by Congress? “Defendants do not have any inherent authority to terminate or freeze appropriated federal funding,” the suit claims.

Remedies

The suit seeks various remedies. It wants the government’s actions declared illegal, the freeze order vacated, and prohibitions put in place that will prevent the government from accomplishing the freeze through some other means. Harvard would also like any further reactions to allegations of antisemitism to follow the procedures mandated by Title VI and to have the government cover its attorney’s fees.

It also wants the ruling expedited, given the potential for damage to university-hosted research. The suit was filed in the District of Massachusetts, which is the same venue that has been used for other suits seeking to restrain the Trump administration’s attack on federally funded research. So far, those have resulted in rapid responses and injunctions that have put damaging funding cuts on hold. So, there’s a good chance we’ll see something similar here.

Harvard sues to block government funding cuts Read More »

researchers-craft-smiling-robot-face-from-living-human-skin-cells

Researchers craft smiling robot face from living human skin cells

AI, Biz & IT, foreskin, Harvard, human skin, human skin cells, PromoCell, robot, Science, skin cells, slimy, Tech, University of Tokyo / /
A movable robotic face covered with living human skin cells.

Enlarge / A movable robotic face covered with living human skin cells.

In a new study, researchers from the University of Tokyo, Harvard University, and the International Research Center for Neurointelligence have unveiled a technique for creating lifelike robotic skin using living human cells. As a proof of concept, the team engineered a small robotic face capable of smiling, covered entirely with a layer of pink living tissue.

The researchers note that using living skin tissue as a robot covering has benefits, as it’s flexible enough to convey emotions and can potentially repair itself. “As the role of robots continues to evolve, the materials used to cover social robots need to exhibit lifelike functions, such as self-healing,” wrote the researchers in the study.

Shoji Takeuchi, Michio Kawai, Minghao Nie, and Haruka Oda authored the study, titled “Perforation-type anchors inspired by skin ligament for robotic face covered with living skin,” which is due for July publication in Cell Reports Physical Science. We learned of the study from a report published earlier this week by New Scientist.

The study describes a novel method for attaching cultured skin to robotic surfaces using “perforation-type anchors” inspired by natural skin ligaments. These tiny v-shaped cavities in the robot’s structure allow living tissue to infiltrate and create a secure bond, mimicking how human skin attaches to underlying tissues.

To demonstrate the skin’s capabilities, the team engineered a palm-sized robotic face able to form a convincing smile. Actuators connected to the base allowed the face to move, with the living skin flexing. The researchers also covered a static 3D-printed head shape with the engineered skin.

Enlarge / “Demonstration of the perforation-type anchors to cover the facial device with skin equivalent.”

Takeuchi et al. created their robotic face by first 3D-printing a resin base embedded with the perforation-type anchors. They then applied a mixture of human skin cells in a collagen scaffold, allowing the living tissue to grow into the anchors.

Researchers craft smiling robot face from living human skin cells Read More »

lawsuit-opens-research-misconduct-report-that-may-get-a-harvard-prof-fired

Lawsuit opens research misconduct report that may get a Harvard prof fired

Harvard, Human behavior, lawsuit, psychology, research misconduct, Science / /
Image of a campus of red brick buildings with copper roofs.

Enlarge / Harvard’s got a lawsuit on its hands.

Glowimages

Accusations of research misconduct often trigger extensive investigations, typically performed by the institution where the misconduct allegedly took place. These investigations are internal employment matters, and false accusations have the potential to needlessly wreck someone’s career. As a result, most of these investigations are kept completely confidential, even after their completion.

But all the details of a misconduct investigation performed by Harvard University became public this week through an unusual route. The professor who had been accused of misconduct, Francesca Gino, had filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit, targeting both Harvard and a team of external researchers who had accused her of misconduct. Harvard submitted its investigator’s report as part of its attempt to have part of the suit dismissed, and the judge overseeing the case made it public.

We covered one of the studies at issue at the time of its publication. It has since been retracted, and we’ll be updating our original coverage accordingly.

Misconduct allegations lead to lawsuit

Gino, currently on administrative leave, had been faculty at Harvard Business School, where she did research on human behavior. One of her more prominent studies (the one we covered) suggested that signing a form before completing it caused people to fill in its contents more accurately than if they filled out the form first and then signed it.

Oddly, for a paper about honesty, it had a number of issues. Some of its original authors had attempted to go back and expand on the paper but found they were unable to replicate the results. That seems to have prompted a group of behavioral researchers who write at the blog Data Colada to look more carefully at the results that didn’t replicate, at which point they found indications that the data was fabricated. That got the paper retracted.

Gino was not implicated in the fabrication of the data. But the attention of the Data Colada team (Uri Simonsohn, Leif Nelson, and Joe Simmons) had been drawn to the paper. They found additional indications of completely independent problems in other data from the paper that did come from her work, which caused them to examine additional papers from Gino, coming up with evidence for potential research fraud in four of them.

Before posting it on their blog, however, the Data Colada team had provided their evidence to Harvard, which launched its own investigation. Their posts came out after Harvard’s investigation concluded that Gino’s research had serious issues, and she was placed on administrative leave as the university looked into revoking her tenure. It also alerted the journals that had published the three yet-to-be-retracted papers about the issues.

Things might have ended there, except that Gino filed a defamation lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada team, claiming they “worked together to destroy my career and reputation despite admitting they have no evidence proving their allegations.” As part of the $25 million suit, she also accused Harvard of mishandling its investigation and not following proper procedures.

Lawsuit opens research misconduct report that may get a Harvard prof fired Read More »