Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

I would like to write an article (possibly would be posted in LinkedIn) on how Science and Medicine are given less importance over Information Technology in the recent years. This article is just for sharing my experience with the people. In this article, I wanted to share and highlight my real time experience.

I experienced the research life in the past as a scientist and experiencing the software industry as a Cloud Architect now. I wanted to take an opportunity to appreciate scientist’s contribution, and encourage their dedication (life in the lab, many times food and bed). I got my Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy) degree in Chemistry in 2007 and then worked as a Post-Doctoral Fellow (Scientist) for eight years in various countries like Taiwan, Portugal, and Canada.

I worked in various departments including Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering and Department of Surgery (worked on Pregnancy Blood). Throughout my career as a scientist, I was always under the impression that why the research had been neglected in the recent years by the society/intellectual community in all countries (Less Funding, poor salaries/stipend etc.). Though the scientists are highly qualified, but poorly paid.

Majority of the innovations and inventions were in the beginning of the 19th Century where there was not enough technology! but great progress in research in Science and Medicine. Later, I realized that the funding agencies are not allocating sufficient funding to research in Science and Medicine.

Therefore, I was inspired by my students (who have been working as Software Engineers in Information Technology) and developed my skills in the field of Information Technology. Currently, I stepped into Information Technology and working as a Cloud Architect, gaining way higher salaries and leading a satisfactory life than was a scientist before.

So, I would like to encourage and honor the great research and innovations being conducted by the Scientists all over the world (Even they have been poorly paid and been struggling for the lack of sufficient equipment for their experiments).

Also, I wanted to appeal/request the research funding agencies  to increase funding for the good research and increase salaries/stipend to the scientists. Furthermore, it is the time for the top tech (technology) companies/leaders like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon Web Services etc. and wealthy persons to contribute/adopt a research project in support of the research so that the whole world can equally advance in Science and Medicine.

Can you please understand the importance of this information and help to re-write and re-phrase the attached article?

Note: NO CITATIONS REQUIRED. THIS IS GOING TO BE A REAL ARTICLE.

Science and Technology

Compared to information technology, science and medicine are less funded by the companies, various organizations, and governments in all the countries I have worked. Information technology is allocated vast amounts of money for advancement and improvement, while science and medicine departments are allocated fewer funds. Scientists thrive on finding medications that can cure emerging and untreatable diseases that are ever on the rise.

With less funding in medicine, finding a cure to emerging and untreatable diseases is limited because fewer funds will not fully equip laboratories that scientists work in. On the other hand, engineering and technology are fully equipped with modern, advanced, and intelligent technologies that simplify engineering.

Although scientists struggle due to lack of equipment for their experiments and poor pay, they do good research and innovations. Scientists working tirelessly with a tone of challenges is a source of inspiration for many who want to create solutions and cure diseases in the science and medicine department.

Finally, I want to appeal to the intellectual community on revenue allocation to increase the funds directed to science and medicine. This will motivate the scientists to work more and advance more in medicine. Advancement in treatment results in finding methods to cure different diseases, and as scientists say, a healthy nation is a working nation.

Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!