Great. That's a wonderful justification for paying the majority of their actual instructors less than minimum wage with no benefits at all - then they can attract that guy to raise more money than they pay him.
Sooner or later, America will have to start funding its research and its education as two separate services; the current model isn't working. It's just taking a very long time to be obvious.
It's not a "justification": the pay of instructors and the pay of university presidents are just two very different things. I don't really see what the point of comparing the two is.
Sooner or later, America will have to start funding its research and its education as two separate services
Well, this is at least partly the case today: NSF, NIH, and similar funding bodies support research. At most top research schools, very little (if any) of the money from undergrad tuition goes to support research.
BTW, what about this is specific to the American education system? As far as I know, non-tenured instructors teach classes in many countries, and are usually poorly paid.
At most top research schools, very little (if any) of the money from undergrad tuition goes to support research.
But a large amount of the money devoted to research goes to support education/administration. Most universities will take about half of a grant as overhead.
Sooner or later, America will have to start funding its research and its education as two separate services; the current model isn't working. It's just taking a very long time to be obvious.