Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

December 13, 2022

Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Research, Funding, in, Science, and, Medicine, Compared, to, Technology

[Order Now]

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.

[Order Now]

Research Funding in Science and Medicine Compared to Technology

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.