
Credit: U.S. National Science Foundation
When people hear that I spent my summer doing research through the Laidlaw Scholars Program, they usually ask the same question: “So…what was your project about?” The short answer is bioethics. The longer answer is that I spent the summer analyzing more than 300 National Science Foundation (NSF) awards to understand how recent funding changes have affected bioethics research across the United States. My goal was to identify which projects involved embedded ethics, how administrative terminations were reshaping the field, and what those changes might mean for the future of scientific innovation. But somewhere between hundreds of grant abstracts, spreadsheets, and long meetings with my mentor, I realized my project wasn’t really about grants at all. It was about priorities.
When I first started, I assumed research existed to answer questions. As my project progressed, I realized research also determines which questions are asked in the first place. Every grant I read represented a decision. Someone decided that a project studying responsible artificial intelligence, equitable healthcare, or research ethics was worth investing in. At the same time, other projects disappeared as funding priorities shifted. Looking at hundreds of awards side by side forced me to think about something I had never considered before: funding is never just about money. It reflects what we believe is important enough to study. That realization completely changed the way I think about science.






