[Ground-station] University work, VT Advisory Board Spring Meeting, call for comments

[Bruce Perens]

So, to state the problem succinctly, the universities own the process and
ORI is a supplicant.

Turn that around. Own the process.

Internships in space communications are desirable. People want to work for
SpaceX, etc. when they get out of school. Directly solicit to the students
for internships, outside of the university, and let the students get their
advisor to approve. Start out unfunded, and once the program can show some
success, apply for grant funding and give them stipends and paid
supervisor. Lots of folks want to fund students. Not just ARDC.

Don't violate the ORI charter. We promised the state we would not be an
educational organization. We do research. These are *internships,* we
aren't teachers. The universities have their own processes for giving
credit to their students for working in internships.

    Thanks

    Bruce

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 10:34 AM Michelle Thompson via Ground-Station
<ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:

> The next Virginia Tech Space Industry Advisory Board meeting will be in
> April. I am looking for topics to bring to the meeting! Please send them to
> me.
>
> So far, I have 1) regulatory progress and 2) stating our expectations as a
> 501(c)(3) on cooperation with the University.
>
> The first is straightforward. We have ITAR and EAR results and have an
> opinion in progress. These are all great things for open source in space
> and really help education.
>
> The second is based on the experiences so far with presenting projects to
> Universities. We have done this nine times so far. None of these projects
> have worked out, so far.
>
> All were funded. In NONE of the cases, were we simply showing up expecting
> the school to foot the bill.
>
> All got a good or very good initial reaction/review. All had a phone
> conference, some email, and a set of slides.
>
> And then, in most of these cases, nothing was heard at all. I had to ask
> “what happened” and in each case “the students didn’t pick it”. In some
> cases, I was told there was some sort of “day” or “show” or “showcase”
> where “students would pick projects”.
>
> I should have asked “how many projects are there?” and “how many of those
> are in excess of student, staff, and faculty resources?”
>
> And, from now on, we will be asking those questions.
>
> If it’s a question of marketing, then not being there at the “game” or
> “showcase” means… who exactly is pitching our project? When we’re limited
> in some cases to a single slide, who benefits? I can see where non-profits
> like ORI can be used as fluff to give the students an improved illusion of
> choice.
>
> This is lopsided. These aren’t throwaway projects for ORI. To be super
> clear, I don’t know if this is what is happening, but putting myself into
> the position of essentially a PM for a rapid-turnover population of
> “workers” this would ease my workload. There may be a mismatch of
> assumptions here that we should do whatever we can to address and change.
> If the project is a “must do” for us and a distant “also ran” for the
> school, then we have to rethink the approach.
>
> In other words, if we’re going to package up parts of what we do, recruit
> people and spend time on proposals, and commit money, and if there really
> is a low or zero probability of getting “picked”, then we should stop doing
> it until we understand what the probability of “being picked by a student”
> means and how to influence it. We should also figure out really fast how to
> improve our chances, since getting the work done obviously means much more
> to us than it does to any of these Schools.
>
> I already know that insiders always win. Safe choices always win. Prior
> relationships seem to win every time, even when those partners fail to
> deliver, are not open source, or have other significant deficiencies. Life
> is not fair, etc. etc. etc. This is not the problem, this should not deter
> us. We need to figure out what we do not know that might be holding us
> back, that we can control. There are many factors that we do not control. I
> can’t do anything about those except know when to give up and spend time
> and money in other ways.
>
> Turning the lens onto ourselves: Is the work too ambitious? Is the
> non-commercial nature simply of no interest at all to Universities in any
> way? Is the work too boring? Badly described? Are the volunteers the wrong
> “type”? I’m going to be trying to get this sort of honest feedback and then
> present it back here.
>
> To me, bringing 1) funding and 2) real problems to be solved meant the
> core issues with doing work with Universities was addressed. There is a
> widespread misunderstanding about working with Universities. Over and over
> again, from amateur radio and open source and well-meaning individuals, I
> hear “free labor” or “get student help” or “students are desperate for this
> work” or “this is perfect for students” as if they will just magically
> perform for anyone that asks.
>
> Well, students are not free labor. Professors are not free labor. Ideas
> are cheap and plentiful. An idea on its own is nearly worthless. Bringing
> advisors, money, and application-oriented open source problems should have
> shown that we respect the time of our potential partners. But, so far, that
> hasn’t worked. We have to figure out why and adapt.
>
> The next step is to try to find out exactly why and then decide if it’s
> something we need to keep doing.
>
> If you have insight and advice here, then share it. Please refrain from
> directly negating the advice given by others, at least until everyone has
> had a chance to weigh in? This is a case where there are many viewpoints
> from very different starting points. A difference in base assumptions can
> result in dramatic differences. This isn’t a link budget, rooted in
> physics. It’s trying to figure out how we can get things done faster.
> Direct the advice to me. Any failures here are my responsibility.
>
> We have a limited window of opportunity here and we are doing the right
> things. If we had gotten traction with some of these University proposals,
> we’d be much further along, and there’d be some nice published student
> work. I am ready and willing to improve my skills here, delegate, promote
> others, and take direction and advice. This seems like something we’d be a
> good match for (working with schools), and the feedback for us in many
> cases has been amazingly positive… but seeing each attempt evaporate into
> nothing has me deeply concerned that I’m doing something fundamentally
> wrong.
>
> As soon as the VT Advisory Board meeting is scheduled, I’ll share the date
> and I will share the presentation in advance.
>
> -mdt
>


-- 
Bruce Perens - CEO at stealth startup. I'll tell you what it is eventually
:-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20210331/285df3cc/attachment-0001.html>