29 februarie 2020
Alegeri pentru șefia celei mai vechi universități moderne ale României! Profesorul Tudorel Toader, principalul favorit la câștigarea unui nou mandat
Ieri, 28 februarie 2020, a fost ultima zi pentru înscrierea candidaților pentru poziția de rector al Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” – UAIC din Iași! Astfel, principalul candidat pentru această poziție este actualul rector, prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader. Pe de altă parte, conf. univ. dr. Adrian Muraru de la Facultatea de Filosofie și de Științe Social-Politice este un alt candidat. Curios, fostul student al Facultății de Istorie, respectiv absolvent al celei de Drept, Silvian Emanuel Man a candidat și el. Având în vedere faptul că dosarul de candidatură al acestuia nu a îndeplinit condițiile legale, candidatura sa a fost invalidată. Desigur, candidaturile conferențiarului Muraru, respectiv ale fostului președinte al Ligii Studenților de la UAIC sunt simple acte de imagine, fără un suport managerial sau administrativ real
După finalizarea înscrierilor candidaților pentru poziția de rector al Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” (UAIC) din Iași, principalul candidat pentru această poziție este actualul rector, prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader. Pe de altă parte, conf. univ. dr. Adrian Muraru de la Facultatea de Filosofie și de Științe Social-Politice este un alt candidat. Curios, fostul student al Facultății de Istorie, respectiv absolvent al celei de Drept, Silvian Emanuel Man a candidat și el.
Desigur, candidaturile conferențiarului Muraru, respectiv ale fostului președinte al Ligii Studenților de la UAIC sunt simple acte de imagine, fără un suport managerial sau administrativ real. Întrebat de reporterii Cotidianului Bună Ziua (BZI) Iași de ce candidează, ce program managerial are, universitarul Muraru nu a fost în stare să ofere un punct de vedere de bun simț. Pe de altă parte, absolventul Man a confirmat candidatura fără a oferi alte detalii. Urmează ca în intervalul 2-6 martie să aibă loc dezbateri publice ale candidaților. E clar că, foarte puțin probabil ca Silvian Emanuel Man sau conf. univ. dr. Muraru să aibă proiecte concrete, viabile și consistente legate de un plan managerial pentru poziția de rector. La „Cuza”, alegerile pentru poziția de rector (Turul I – n.r.) sunt programate pe 11 martie.
Universitatea „Cuza”, în topul celor mai bune din România
În aceste condiții, profesorul Toader are cele mai mari șanse să obțină un nou mandat. Acesta este un magistrat român care a ocupat funcția de ministru al Justiției în guvernele Grindeanu, Tudose și Dancilă din februarie 2017 până în aprilie 2019. Prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader a deținut două mandate succesive de judecător al Curții Constituționale a RomânieI, din 2006 și până în 2016. Toader este autorul mai multor lucrări de drept penal.
În perioada 2004–2016 a fost decan al Facultății de Drept la care, de-a lungul carierei sale universitare, a predat criminologie, drept penal român și drept penal european. Interesant este că, sub mandatul său de rector, Universitatea „Cuza” a crescut, pe plan național și internațional, la nivel instituțional și academic. Spre exemplu, la Admiterea din 2019, „Cuza” a fost cea mai căutată în rândul absolvenților de clasa a XII-a, din toată România. În plus, sunt poiecte de investiții de peste 150 milioane lei, a fost securizată mare parte din suprafața Grădinii Botanice.
S-au pus bazele unor colaborări de top
De asemenea, UAIC este pe locul I la nivel de mobilități Erasmus, a atras din ce ce mai mulți studenți străini, instituția având și un proiect de 20 de milioane de euro ce vizează o investiție în Cercetare și Inovare. Și procesul de internaționalizare a fost unul reușit, inclusiv oficiali ai celor mai mari universități britanice ajungând la „Cuza”. Astfel s-au pus bazele unor colaborări aparte. Acesta a anunțat că va merge, și în noul mandat pe actualii prorectori. Tot el, pentru decanatele celor 15 facultăți, a anunțat că va propune ca actualii ocupanți ai acestor funcții să activeze și în următorii patru ani.
Vezi AICI Procesul-Verbal-BEC-privind-validarea-candidaturilor-la-funcția-de-Rector
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
EXCLUSIV! Cine ar putea fi noul președinte al Senatului Universității Tehnice Gheorghe Asachi din Iași
Astăzi, 27 februarie 2020, noul Senat al Universității Tehnice (TUIAȘI) Gheorghe Asachi se întrunește pentru a valida alegerile pentru acest for respectiv pentru mandatul de rector, în intervalul 2020 – 2024. Aici, actualul rector al instituției de învățământ superior, prof. univ. dr. ing. Dan Cașcaval a fost reales. Pe de altă parte, se pregătesc momentele academice ce țin de numirea noilor prorectori respectiv cele legate de alegerea decanilor celor 11 facultăți politehniste. Nu în ultimul rând, este posibil ca, pentru președinția Senatului de la Universitatea Tehnică să candideze prof. univ. dr. ing. Iulian Aurelian Ciocoiu – Facultatea de Electronică, Telecomunicații și Tehnologia Informației (ETTI) de la TUIAȘI. El ar urma să o înlocuiască pe conf. univ. dr. arh. Tania Hapurne, cea care a ocupat această funție până acum.
Cine este profesorul Iulian Ciocoiu
Profesorul Ciocoiu are 57 ani și s-a născut la Vaslui. Are o activitate de 12 ani în calitate de secretar științific/prodecan activitate de cercetare al ETTI. El face parte din Departamentul de Bazele Electronicii. A fost președintele Comisiei de cercetare, inovare și parteneriat public-privat a Senatului Universității Tehnice. Este editor al Buletinului Institutului Politehnic Iași, secțiunea Electrotehnică, energetică, electronică, membru în comitetul de organizare al IEEE International Symposium on Signals, Circuits & Systems, coordonator/responsabil partener a patru granturi de cercetare, membru în echipa pentru zece granturi de cercetare naționale și internațional. Activitatea sa didactică cuprinde: curs la disciplinele: Circuite integrate pentru prelucrarea semnalelor, Prelucrarea numerică a semnalelor, Proiectarea circuitelor integrate la nivel de sistem. Are competențe și pe segmentul: Aplicații ale rețelelor neurale artificiale în prelucrarea semnalelor și transmisiuni de date, Bazele electrotehnicii, dispozitive și circuite electronice, semnale, circuite și sisteme, circuite integrate analogice și digitale, radioreceptoare, transmisiuni digitale.
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
How the humanities became the new enemy within
The current British government looks on them with disdain, putting an entire infrastructure of culture under threat
The strain of conservatism that has now taken up residence in Downing Street is tireless in its identification of enemies. The BBC and Channel 4 were put on notice during the latter stages of the election campaign, and the government is now openly pursuing the termination of the BBC licence fee. Dominic Cummings’ long-harboured resentment towards civil service mandarins is driving Whitehall reform, imperilling its independence.
The vanguard of rightwing thinktanks and newspapers is redoubling its attacks on universities, with a pitifully thin Policy Exchange report on the topic this week earning a Times headline decrying these “sneering” institutions. Meanwhile, a bogey-ideology known as “wokeness”, constructed by conservative commentators and “free speech” advocates, now serves as an all-purpose bin into which any form of activism, complaint or critical theory can be thrown.
These various hostilities are often lumped together as symptoms of a culture war, in which the demographic and educational divisions that came to light around Brexit are amplified and exploited for political gain. But we can be more specific than that. The new conservative ideology coalesces around one theme in particular: hostility towards the modern humanities, and their elevated status in British public life.
The 20th century witnessed a distinctive model of interlocking political, educational and artistic institutions, with the humanities at their core. Public bodies such as the British Academy and the BBC set the template for the optimistic, post-1945 era of public investment in the arts and humanities. The state actively supported their expansion after the war via such icons of mass cultural modernity as the Arts Council, BBC2, the Open University and the new redbrick universities. By the 1980s, this project had borne such fruits as the South Bank Show, the Birmingham School of Cultural Studies and Channel 4. Threaded through all of this was the principle that there was a public interest in understanding ideas, artefacts and events.
Cummings has never hidden his contempt for humanities subjects, forged partly out of his own experience of studying history at Oxford. He has been a long-term advocate for an expansion of Stem (science, technology, engineering, maths) in the school curriculum, and for attracting more Stem graduates into the civil service. His notorious blog-cum-recruitment ad, which sought to attract data scientists and “weirdos” to Whitehall, was also notable for its dismissal of “Oxbridge English graduates who chat about Lacan at dinner parties with TV producers”.
More fundamentally, the humanities play a pivotal ideological role for contemporary conservatism: they sit in the crosshairs of both Thatcherite neoliberals and nationalists. It is often difficult for free marketeers to find common ground with nationalists, especially on issues such as immigration. The possession of a shared enemy provides coherence to an otherwise unwieldy coalition. The figure of the publicly funded humanities graduate, whose cultural privilege grants them access to the London elite, fuels a paranoid fantasy that is now central to conservative ideology.
The neoliberal position is that a humanities degree is a simple waste of money, as revealed in the earnings of graduates. To people of this mindset, the benefit of the post-2010 tuition fee regime, allied to a host of league tables and audits, is that it exposes latent inequalities in higher education that were previously concealed by public funding. If somebody chooses to study art history (and not, say, computer science), then this is a high-risk investment, which they should be personally liable for. The recent announcement by the University of Sunderland that it would be terminating all its history, languages and politics courses, and replacing them with vocational alternatives, therefore represents progress.
The nationalist concern is very different, and stems especially from the perceived influence of continental philosophy over the past 50 years. For those who buy into rightwing conspiracy theories about “cultural Marxism” or the milder anxiety surrounding postmodernism, humanities graduates are an enemy within, a segment of the liberal elite that lacks national loyalty.
Opposition to public institutions such as the BBC has been incubated by Rupert Murdoch and his newspapers for many years. More recently, Brexit has given nationalists the confidence to cast suspicions upon a wide array of independent public bodies, from universities to the Bank of England. One thing that neoliberals and nationalists can agree on is that anyone whose education and career has been spent in publicly funded liberal institutions, telling a story about “the public interest” is a fraud. The popular appeal of Johnsonism lies in its antipathy to this elite.
But in favour of what exactly? The Cummings plan is for esoteric forms of rationalism to topple the humanities: not just data scientists but game theorists, cognitive scientists, software developers and “people who never went to university” should shape government thinking. This is a vision of society as a programmable machine, a form of post-humanism, which denies that culture or history require any specialist interpretation, but merely provide more data to be fed into predictive mathematical models. The social sciences and humanities will eventually be taken over by physicists.
If Cummings wants to accelerate away from the 20th century, then conservative traditionalists want to reverse it. If, as the economics professor Thomas Piketty argues, we are returning to a form of oligarchy last seen prior to the first world war, one can easily envisage how the arts and humanities will be sustained: via the patronage of the rich and the indulgences of their children. The brief historical period, when learning about literature or, yes, Lacan, was a gift from the state, accessible to all regardless of background, is firmly over.
It is telling that, while Cummings wants to hire people who use “analytical languages: eg Python, SQL, R”, Boris Johnson is just as likely to lapse into Latin. The liberal humanities are being caught in a pincer movement, between hyper-modern futurism and pre-modern classicism. Taken to extremes, the dream of wiping away modern culture in the name of some distant future and some primordial past has inspired the most hideous of rightwing regimes. Even at its mildest, this is a project that sees little intrinsic value in a public library, a primetime documentary or a history degree.
The 20th-century cultural establishment has plenty of failings, which are readily exposed by its opponents. It has never been as inclusive as its rhetoric pretends, and it is far from democratic. Resentment towards cultural and political elites has clearly been brewing for decades, especially among non-Londoners and non-graduates – an electoral goldmine for Johnson. Too often, these elites have reflexively countered the attacks of Thatcherites and the Murdoch press by closing ranks, relying on the power of their contact books, free tickets and charm, but only deepening the sense of metropolitan luvvies doing favours for each other. The defence of universities and the BBC is going to be an important test case for how much of that establishment survives this government.
Publicație : The Guardian
UCL eugenics inquiry did not go far enough, committee say
Nine members argue inquiry should have investigated recent meeting on eugenics
An inquiry into University College London’s historical links with eugenics has issued its final report, despite the fact that a majority of its committee refused to sign it because they felt it did not go far enough.
The report of the inquiry, which has taken a year and a half and had an independent external chair, calls for the names of scientific pioneers who supported the discredited science, including the Victorian scientist and “father of eugenics” Francis Galton, to be erased from buildings and lecture theatres at the university.
Nine members of the 16-strong inquiry team refused to sign the report, arguing that they should have investigated a much more recent secret meeting on eugenics run at the university.
The group argue that the report ignores many expert testimonies and contains scientific and historical inaccuracies. They plan to distribute an alternative set of recommendations at a UCL town hall meeting on the inquiry on Friday evening.
The inquiry did not investigate London Conference on Intelligence meetings on eugenics, which were run at the university by James Thompson, an honorary senior lecturer who has now been stripped of his title. Speakers at these meetings included white supremacists and a researcher who had previously advocated child rape.
Andrew Sabisky, the former No 10 adviser who was forced to step down last week because of a furore around his comments on race and intelligence, was listed as a speaker at an LCI meeting at UCL in 2015. Toby Young was forced to resign as a director of the government’s New Schools Network after it was revealed that he also attended one of the meetings.
Joe Cain, a professor of the history and philosophy of biology at UCL and one of the dissenting members of the inquiry committee, said: “I tried really hard to get the London Conference on Intelligence on to the agenda of that committee but I met with a brick wall. We absolutely should have talked about it – but we just didn’t.”
The university says it conducted a separate inquiry into how Thompson was able to book meeting rooms without its knowledge – which it is also publishing on Friday – and procedures have now been tightened up.
But a second member of the inquiry committee, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “We definitely should have talked about these meetings. But the big issue is not how a member of staff booked a room, but why someone with his views was a member of staff at all.”
They added: “I refused to sign the report largely because of its tendentious focus on race. I have no issue with addressing racism, but the fact is that the early eugenicists at UCL were far more focused on targeting people based on things like poverty or disability.”
Cain is also concerned that the inquiry did not probe sufficiently deeply into teaching at UCL. He says that although the report asserts that eugenics is not being taught anywhere in the university, the inquiry team did not investigate whether this was the case.
“My God, I hope that’s true, but the fact is we didn’t look. I’m sure students would let us know if the sort of crazy eugenics you see in the LCI meetings were being taught, but eugenics can also be much more subtle than that.”
Galton coined the term eugenics and endowed UCL with his personal collection, along with an endowment that funded the country’s first professorial chair of eugenics.
Cain was one of the first to call for the renaming of university buildings and already refuses to teach in the Galton lecture theatre. He said he was pleased that the inquiry has instructed the university to issue a “meaningful and effective apology” for the hurt that UCL’s involvement in eugenics had caused BME students and academics.
“The history of eugenics reminds us about stigmatisation. It says to members of our community ‘you don’t belong here and you aren’t normal’.”
Responding to the inquiry’s recommendations, UCL said it was taking action including the funding of new scholarships to study race and racism, a commitment to ensure all UCL students learn about the history and legacy of eugenics, and the creation of a two-year research post to further examine UCL’s history of eugenics.
Prof Kalwant Bhopal, the director of the centre for research in race and education at Birmingham University, said the inquiry must not be used as a sticking plaster for racial inequality. “It’s no good just ticking boxes and changing a few names. How will everyday lives change?” she said.
Dr Adam Rutherford, a science broadcaster who teaches at UCL and has just written a book on race, said: “What I’m concerned about is that the gloss of renaming buildings will overshadow the big structural issues that really matter, like why is there such an attainment gap between BME and white students? And why are there so few senior BME academics?”
Sandy Ogundele, the black and minority ethnic officer at UCL students’ union, said the report’s recommendations were “a significant first step in a long-term process for UCL to make amends for its deeply troubling ties to eugenics.”
Prof Michael Arthur, UCL’s provost, said: “We acknowledge that UCL has a problematic history with eugenics which has, and continues, to cause significant concern for many in our community. This past should not be hidden but openly and critically discussed.”
Publicație : The Guardian
Coronavirus: la galère de Skema pour réintégrer ses étudiants revenus de Chine
Des centaines de jeunes partis étudier sur le campus chinois de Skema reviennent précipitamment. Leur prise en charge est un vrai défi.
Shanghai, Suzhou, ou encore Pékin, les écoles de commerce comme Skema l’Essca, l’Idrac ou l’EM Lyon sont nombreuses à proposer à leurs étudiants de passer un semestre sur l’un de leurs campus délocalisés en Chine. Coronavirus oblige, ces campus sont aujourd’hui fermés. Peu de temps après le début du deuxième semestre, un grand nombre d’étudiants partis étudier dans ces établissements ont fait le choix de revenir en France, ou n’ont tout simplement pas pu partir. Pour les écoles concernées, proposer une alternative de dernière minute à ces étudiants sans nuire à la qualité de leur formation académique est un challenge. Jusqu’à poser, dans certains cas, la question du remboursement des frais d’inscription, ou susciter des poursuites judiciaires.
Chaque semestre, le campus de Skema à Suzhou, dans la province de Jiangsu, accueille plus de 500 étudiants, dont une bonne partie sont Français. Suivant les recommandations du gouvernement, l’école a «fortement recommandé» à ses étudiants de quitter la Chine pour revenir en France. Au total, au sein du parcours «grande école», ils sont 330 étudiants à avoir fait ce choix. À ce chiffre s’ajoutent les effectifs, plus restreints, des étudiants des masters spécialisés, ou «masters of science» que proposent Skema.
Des cours en ligne pour un semestre de substitution
Trois possibilités ont alors été proposées aux étudiants revenus en catastrophe: suivre un «semestre de substitution», avec 50% de cours dispensés en classe, et 50% en ligne, faire une année de césure composée de deux stages de six mois en entreprise, ou bien tout simplement faire une année blanche, sans cours ni stages, pour reprendre leur deuxième semestre en janvier 2021. Selon Sophie Gay, une grande majorité des étudiants concernés ont choisi de suivre le semestre de substitution et donc de passer par les cours en ligne.
En revanche, ceux qui choisissent de réaliser une année de césure pour ne reprendre les cours qu’en janvier 2021 n’auront pas à repayer de frais de scolarité pour l’année qui suit. «Comme si c’était un avoir, nous considérerons qu’ils auront déjà payé», assure la responsable du programme grande école.
Mais tous les étudiants ne sont pas satisfaits des alternatives qui leur sont proposées. C’est le cas de Laure, étudiante en master of science, dont la famille a engagé une procédure judiciaire contre Skema. «Suivre des cours par correspondance ne me semble pas sérieux, notamment pour les langues», regrette son père, qui réclame une réduction de 20% des frais de scolarité du deuxième semestre pour la gêne occasionnée.
«Trop de décalage» pour réintégrer le cursus français
D’un point de vue logistique, Skema a eu du mal à anticiper l’organisation du retour de ses étudiants, explique Sophie Gay, responsable du parcours grande école. D’abord, parce que les retours des étudiants étaient échelonnés dans le temps. Si certains jeunes ont fait ce choix dès le début du mois de janvier, d’autres ont préféré attendre le mois de février. «Enfin, pour prendre en compte la difficulté des jeunes pour se loger au dernier moment, nous avons laissé nos étudiants choisir le campus français sur lequel ils souhaitaient revenir: Paris, Lille, ou Sophia Antipolis», poursuit Sophie Gay. Dans ces conditions, difficile de prévoir combien d’étudiants rapatriés iront dans tel ou tel campus.
D’après l’école, c’est aussi une question de calendrier qui empêche Skema de laisser ses étudiants rapatriés rejoindre le parcours français classique. «Il y a trop de décalage. À Skema, le deuxième semestre commence très tôt. Dans les parcours français, certains cours sont même déjà terminés», avance Sophie Gay. Peu convaincu, le père de Laure espère faire valoir son point de vue. Verdict le 3 mars.
Publicație : Le Figaro
2 martie 2020
Mai sunt câteva zile până la alegerea rectorului Universității „Cuza” din Iași. În aceste zile sunt programate momente importante
Alegerile pentru noul rector al celei mai vechi instituții moderne de învățământ superior a României – „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași au intrat în linie dreaptă. Astfel, vineri, 28 februarie 2020, a fost ultima zi pentru depunerea candidaturilor oficiale pentru această poziție. Au fost trei membri ai comunității care s-au înscris în cursă. Este vorba de prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader, actualul rector, respectiv conf. univ. dr. Adrian Muraru – Facultatea de Filosofie și de Științe Social-Politice. Dosarele acestora au fost validate. De asemenea, și drd. Silvian Emanuel Man a fost unul dintre cei care și-au depus candidatura, dar dosarul său a fost respins
Zile importante pentru alegerea rectorului celei mai vechi universități moderne a României. Concret, de astăzi, 2 martie, și până vineri, 6 martie 2020, sunt programate dezbateri publice pe baza programelor manageriale ale candidaților. Urmează ca pe 11 martie să aibă loc primul Tur al alegerilor. Pentru a fi validat Turul, la urne trebuie să se prezinte două treimi dintre cei cu drept de vot. În total, la „Cuza” sunt 781 de electori cadre didactice și cercetători la care se adaugă cei 18 studenți – senatori, respectiv studenții care fac parte din consiliile fiecărei din cele 15 facultăți.
Aceștia sunt peste 60. Votul este programat între orele 8:00 și 20:00. Dacă prezența este de două tremi, este ales rector candidatul care a obținut cele mai multe voturi, obținând majoritatea simplă din numărul voturilor valabil exprimate. Dacă nu se întrunesc aceste condiții, urmează un al II-lea Tur (programat pe 18 martie – n.r.), unde este ales candidatul cu cele mai multe voturi valabil exprimate. Aici participă primii doi candidați care au obținut cele mai multe voturi. Au fost trei membri ai comunității care s-au înscris în cursă. Este vorba de prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader, actualul rector, respectiv conf. univ. dr. Adrian Muraru – Facultatea de Filosofie și de Științe Social Politice. Dosarele acestora au fost validate.
„Nu a făcut dovada prestigiului științific și didactic. Nu are grad didactic sau de cercetare”
De asemenea, și drd. Silvian Emanuel Man a fost unul dintre cei care și-au depus candidatura. Aici, Biroul Electoral Central a invalidat, în unanimitate, candidatura. Aceștia au constatat că: „nu sunt îndeplinite dispozițiile art. 8, alin. (2) și art. 9, aliniatele (2) și (4) coroborate cu dispozițiile Anexei III din Metodologia de organizare a alegerilor pentru structurile și funcțiile de conducere academică la Universitatea „Cuza”.
Decizia a avut la bază faptul că:
„nu a făcut dovada prestigiului științific și didactic, care presupune recunoașterea publică oficială a activității științice și didactice” și „nu are grad didactic sau de cercetare și nu este titular în cadrul unui Departament al unei facultăți de la «Cuza» sau al Institutului de Cercetări Interdisciplinare”.
„Nici Declarația de candidatură depusă nu este conformă cu modelul prezentat în Anexa III din Metodologie”. Pe de altă parte, conferențiarul Muraru (candidat și în urmă cu patru ani unde a obținut abia 37 de voturi – n.r.) nu a putut oferi un punct de vedere decent, respectiv motivația gestului său și ceea ce-și propune, în esență, în planul managerial. E o dovadă a faptului că acesta nu face decât un exercițiu de imagine. Mai mult, inclusiv colegii de facultate ai acestuia îl consideră o persoană care nu comunică și mereu implicată în situații tensionate.
Investiții de zeci de milioane de euro, securizarea patrimoniului! Universitatea „Cuza”, cea mai căutată din țară
Având în vedere toate acestea, profesorul Toader are cele mai mari șanse să obțină un nou mandat. Acesta este un magistrat român care a ocupat funcția de ministru al Justiției în guvernele Grindeanu, Tudose și Dăncilă din februarie 2017 până în aprilie 2019. Prof. univ. dr. Tudorel Toader a deținut două mandate succesive de judecător al Curții Constituționale a RomânieI, între 2006 și până în 2016. Toader este autorul mai multor lucrări de drept penal.
În perioada 2004–2016 a fost decan al Facultății de Drept la care, de-a lungul carierei sale universitare, a predat criminologie, drept penal român și drept penal european. Sub mandatul său de rector, Universitatea „Cuza” a crescut, pe plan național și internațional, la nivel instituțional și academic. Spre exemplu, la Admiterea din 2019, „Cuza” a fost cea mai căutată în rândul absolvenților de clasa a XII-a, din toată România. În plus, sunt poiecte de investiții de peste 150 de milioane de lei, a fost securizată mare parte din suprafața Grădinii Botanice.
De asemenea, UAIC este pe locul I la nivel de mobilități Erasmus, a atras din ce în ce mai mulți studenți străini, instituția având și un proiect de 20 de milioane de euro ce vizează o investiție în Cercetare și Inovare. Și procesul de internaționalizare au fost unul reușit, inclusiv oficiali ai celor mai mari universități britanice ajungând la „Cuza”. Astfel, s-au pus bazele unor colaborări aparte. Acesta a anunțat că va merge și în noul pe actualii prorectori. Tot el, pentru decanatele celor 15 facultăți, a anunțat că va propune ca majoritatea dintre actualii ocupanți ai acestor funcții să activeze și în următorii.
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
Alegeri pentru noul președinte el Senatului de la Universitatea Tehnică din Iași
Mâine, 3 martie 2020, noul Senat al Universității Tehnice (TUIAȘI) „Gheorghe Asachi” se întrunește pentru alegerea noului președinte al importantului for academic. Aici, cel mai probabil, principalul candidat este prof. univ. dr. ing. Iulian Aurelian Ciocoiu – Facultatea de Electronică, Telecomunicații și Tehnologia Informației. El ar urma să o înlocuiască pe conf. univ. dr. arh. Tania Hapurne, cea care a ocupat această funcție până acum. În total, Senatul Politehnicii ieșene are 60 de membri. Profesorul Ciocoiu are 57 de ani și s-a născut la Vaslui. Are o activitate de 12 ani în calitate de secretar științific/prodecan activitate de cercetare al ETTI. El face parte din Departamentul de Bazele Electronicii.
A fost președintele Comisiei de cercetare, inovare și parteneriat public-privat a Senatului Universității Tehnice. Este editor al Buletinului Institutului Politehnic Iași, secțiunea Electrotehnică, energetică, electronică, membru în comitetul de organizare al IEEE International Symposium on Signals, Circuits & Systems, coordonator/responsabil partener a patru granturi de cercetare, membru în echipa pentru zece granturi de cercetare naționale și internaționale. Activitatea sa didactică cuprinde: curs la disciplinele: Circuite integrate pentru prelucrarea semnalelor, Prelucrarea numerică a semnalelor, Proiectarea circuitelor integrate la nivel de sistem. Are competențe și pe segmentul: Aplicații ale rețelelor neurale artificiale în prelucrarea semnalelor și transmisiuni de date, Bazele electrotehnicii, dispozitive și circuite electronice, semnale, circuite și sisteme, circuite integrate analogice și digitale, radioreceptoare, transmisiuni digitale.
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
Universities brace for government scrutiny after Policy Exchange report
Rightwing thinktank says higher education is seen as a ‘sitting duck’ for the government
Universities in England, still reeling from Brexit, are bracing themselves for unprecedented scrutiny as the government turns its attention to how the sector can deliver on the prime minister’s so-called “levelling up” agenda.
After No 10’s recent assault on the BBC and criticism of the civil service, there are fears that universities, which overwhelmingly supported the campaign to remain in the EU, could find themselves next in the line of fire.
A recent report by the rightwing Policy Exchange thinktank, founded by Michael Gove and seen as close to government thinking, said the higher education sector was seen as “out of touch” and “a sitting duck” for the new government.
It claimed universities had lost “the faith of the nation in some critical areas” and flagged familiar ministerial concerns about failures to protect freedom of speech on campus, so-called “low quality” degrees that offered poor economic returns for students, excessive vice-chancellor pay and degree grade inflation.
Sir Steve Smith, the vice-chancellor of Exeter University, told colleagues it was no longer business as usual for universities. The sector had escaped the worst of austerity during the last decade, he said, but “the zeitgeist has changed”.
Smith, who contributed to the Policy Exchange report, said: “By any account universities have had it phenomenally easier than other bits of anything publicly funded. We’ve been at least protected against the tremendous cutbacks that have come through austerity elsewhere.
“There’s a kind of view that we’ve been relatively well dealt with and therefore now it’s our turn. Universities fit Dominic Cummings’s view of the establishment. Nearly all of us were pro-remain. We were seen as on the losing side of that argument. But much more importantly, the effects of marketisation have resulted in a system that has got some excesses that have to be sorted out.”
Although universities have received negative press in the last three years, with numerous stories about “fat cat” pay, “Mickey Mouse degrees”, a crisis in student mental health and unconditional offers, many in the sector believe worse may be to come as the new government flexes its muscles.
At the moment the government is mulling its options, not wanting to tarnish the reputation of England’s universities, which attract billions of pounds in research funds and students from overseas. But domestically it remains keen to curb the sector’s growth in recent years, especially in courses that offer graduates only weak career boosts.
Several vice-chancellors who spoke to the Guardian said it was uncomfortable finding themselves on the losing side of the Brexit debate but denied they were out of touch.
Nick Petford, the vice-chancellor of Northampton University, said: “Universities are getting criticised in some quarters for supporting agendas that don’t seem to be in line with the popular direction of the country.
“These get picked up in the rightwing press as evidence that universities are out of touch. I am absolutely convinced that is not the case. It’s up to universities to put forward counterarguments.”
Nick Hillman, the director of the Higher Education Policy Institute thinktank, said: “Some people in universities feel under the cosh but in a way universities are just getting the scrutiny that other institutions have long had.”
On freedom of speech, the government has threatened to legislate. Critics, however, have challenged the claims of a crisis, dismissing it as largely concocted and part of a broader culture war.
The Policy Exchange report is being seen as a shot across the bow of the sector, in an attempt to bring universities on board with the government’s “levelling-up” policies, which are supposedly designed to boost the economy in left-behind regions and deliver benefits for local communities.
It says: “Following a very vocal and at times highly partisan participation in the Brexit debate, as well as an increasing number of unnecessary rows over freedom of speech, there is a growing risk that some on the right may begin to see the sector as actively and irredeemably opposed to conservative and British values.
“The sector needs to build bridges, not dig in, and demonstrate that it is a national asset, prized by the whole nation and capable of engaging with the values of those outside the educated metropolitan elite.”
Apprehension in the sector is not helped by the fact that university staff are currently on strike over pay, pensions and working conditions for the third time in three years. The situation is being closely monitored by the government, whose chief concern is mitigating the impact on students.
Jo Grady, the University and College Union general secretary, said it was a vital time for the higher education sector, with reform of tuition fees and admissions still in the offing. She said: “Vice-chancellors do look out of touch when they are enjoying massive salaries and all sorts of perks and their staff are forced to take industrial action to fight for fair pay, working conditions and pensions.
“Universities must ensure they work with staff and students to ensure a sustainable future for the sector and, post-Brexit, ensure they remain open to the international community.”
So far universities have made little serious attempt to settle the strikes, with mixed signals over pay negotiations, suggesting a gap between negotiators and vice-chancellors.
Prof Martin Rees, the astronomer royal and a fellow of Trinity College Cambridge, defended universities’ record on Brexit and said it should not be held against the sector. “University teachers (like schoolteachers) are more imbued than those in many other careers with the public service ethos; they (and the institutions they work in) are also more likely to have an international outlook.
“So it’s not surprising – and surely not a reason for criticism – that they tend to favour public services, public expenditure, and international contacts to a greater extent than the present government.”
On pay, however, he said the “Himalayan” salaries of vice-chancellors and certain senior administrators had fostered discontent among staff, as well as damaging the reputation of universities among the general public.
Even without the change of government, universities were facing a turbulent time with outstanding proposals by the Augar review to reduce tuition fees and the prospect of a huge surge in the number of 18-year-olds applying to universities because of a baby boom in the 2000s.
Sir David Bell, the vice-chancellor of Sunderland University, which hosted Boris Johnson and his cabinet on Brexit day, said it was a pivotal moment for the sector. “We have all soaked up and absorbed what’s happened over recent years.
“I think it’s a really critical moment for the sector not to go into defence mode, even if government decides to take some quite challenging positions with universities. This is the moment for us to be confident, to be open to potential criticism, but not to be so overwhelmed by it that we are not prepared to stand up and talk about all the really good things we do.”
Publicație : The Guardian
La bataille de l’apprentissage 2.0 : les tutos font
ENQUÊTEA l’heure de la digitalisation croissante de l’économie, l’éducation n’échappe pas au mouvement. L’enseignement en ligne à distance avec les MOOC semblaient avoir une longueur d’avance. Mais, moins académiques, les tutos sont bien plus populaires.
Dans son salon perché au premier étage, avec vue sur la mer, Steven Huitorel, un prof d’anglais de 38 ans installé à Morieux, près de Saint-Brieuc (Côtes-d’Armor), déploie son attirail pour tourner sa prochaine leçon d’anglais sur YouTube. Appareil photo numérique posé sur pied, écran d’ordinateur, micro-cravate, réflecteur : en moins de dix minutes, tout est en place. « Hello my friends – bonjour mes amis », lance l’enseignant d’un ton enjoué devant l’étagère en bois pleine de livres qui lui sert de décor. « Welcome to a new lesson – bienvenue à cette nouvelle leçon ». Au menu du jour : apprendre à donner son opinion. Au total, 138 vidéos didactiques sont ainsi disponibles gratuitement sur sa chaîne Les tutos de Huito. La plus populaire – Comprendre tous les temps en anglais en quinze minutes – enregistre 962 000 vues. Une audience digne d’une émission télé qui témoigne de la place qu’ont pris les tutoriels dans notre quotidien.
Satisfaction immédiate
Fini le temps où l’on devait s’attacher les services d’un professionnel ou se coltiner des pages et des pages de modes d’emploi indigestes pour savoir comment nettoyer son lave-vaisselle, monter un meuble de salle de bains en kit ou faire une queue-de-cheval twistée. Aujourd’hui, on se rue sur les tutos vidéo plus ou moins bien faits, mis en ligne par M. et Mme Tout-le-monde. C’est particulièrement vrai des jeunes générations qui « sont dans une approche du savoir de l’ordre du process et de la satisfaction immédiate », constate Sophie Pène, professeure en sciences de l’information et de la communication à l’université Paris-Descartes. « Quand ils sont confrontés à un problème, ils ne cherchent pas à en comprendre les causes ni les conséquences mais à savoir comment faire pour le résoudre. »
Leur première alliée dans les moments d’apprentissage ? YouTube, qui réunit plus de 2 milliards d’utilisateurs mensuels dans le monde dont 39 millions en France, âgés, pour 29 % d’entre eux, de 18 à 34 ans. « Ces dernières années, les contenus pédagogiques marchent très bien, que ce soit dans les matières classiques de l’enseignement scolaire ou dans la beauté, la cuisine, le bricolage ou la musique », assure Charles Savreux, le porte-parole de YouTube France. C’est ce que confirme une étude menée en mai 2018 par BVA pour SOxH factory : 75 % des Français se disent d’abord intéressés par les vidéos qui leur permettent de s’instruire ; 21 % regardent d’ailleurs souvent des vidéos sur des sujets d’enseignement ou de culture générale ; 20 % des tutoriels sur des produits, des services et des conseils pratiques.
Publicație : Le Monde
Enseignement en ligne : « Il faut construire un espace de connaissance collaboratif »
Le sociologue Dominique Boullier promeut la mise à disposition de cours gratuits sur Internet que chacun pourrait suivre et enrichir, à l’instar de ce qui se fait sur Wikipédia.
Professeur des universités en sociologie à Sciences Po Paris et chercheur au Centre d’études européennes et de politique comparée, Dominique Boullier est l’auteur de Sociologie du numérique (Armand Colin, 2019).
Comment expliquez-vous l’engouement actuel pour les tutos ?
Avec les tutos, nous sommes dans un apprentissage du concret. Grâce à la vidéo, nous voyons la transformation en train de se faire. Et puis le savoir n’est pas produit par les autorités académiques certifiées, mais par des gens qui ont rencontré les mêmes problématiques que nous et témoignent d’une vraie culture pratique. Ces derniers ne sont pas forcément les meilleurs dans leur domaine, mais ils parlent notre langue, et c’est précisément comme cela qu’on s’approprie un savoir.
Les MOOC à l’inverse restent dans une relation très descendante…
Les MOOC sont un peu l’anti-Web 2.0, qui offre la possibilité à n’importe qui de diffuser son savoir sur les blogs ou les réseaux sociaux. Ils ne font que reproduire sous format vidéo un cours magistral dans une salle de classe avec une relation identique à l’étudiant. La plupart des plates-formes qui les hébergent ne sont d’ailleurs pas conçues pour permettre le développement d’un autre modèle avec des outils de coopération… On est donc loin de la révolution pédagogique annoncée.
Dès lors, pourquoi les établissements d’enseignement supérieur français ont-ils foncé dans cette voie tête baissée ?
Quand Stanford, le MIT et Harvard ont commencé à mettre en ligne des cours gratuits en vidéo, toutes les grandes écoles et les universités en France se sont senties obligées de suivre le mouvement. Pas pour résoudre la fracture éducative, ni pour attirer davantage d’élèves puisqu’elles étaient déjà submergées par les inscriptions, mais plutôt pour maintenir leur réputation et rester dans la compétition mondiale. A l’heure des classements internationaux, il est en effet devenu indispensable d’exister sur le plan médiatique, de rendre visible sa marque afin de maintenir son attractivité. On est bien plus dans une logique marketing que d’innovation pédagogique… Ce qui serait vraiment innovant, c’est d’encourager l’activité collaborative comme le faisaient les MOOC coopératifs.
De quoi s’agissait-il ?
En 2008, deux chercheurs, Stephen Downes, du Conseil national de recherches du Canada, et Georges Siemens, professeur à l’université d’Athabasca, ont mis gratuitement à disposition sur Internet le cours qu’ils dispensaient en face-à-face à 25 étudiants sur la théorie de l’apprentissage. Le but de l’opération ? Laisser à quiconque la liberté de suivre et d’enrichir le cours avec les outils de son choix et observer ce qui se passe. Au final, 2 300 élèves à travers le monde ont pris part à l’expérience, ce qui était un vrai succès. Pour moi, c’est la voie à suivre. Il faut mettre les gens dans une posture plus active et les inciter à collaborer pour construire un espace de connaissance collaboratif, un collectif apprenant. Un peu comme sur Wikipédia.
Publicație : Le Monde
Enseignement en ligne : les 1001 secrets d’un MOOC qui cartonne
Lancé par Centrale Lille, en 2013, le MOOC gestion de projet enregistre le meilleur taux de réussite du monde francophone. Un sujet qui attire aussi bien les étudiants que les professionnels.
Dans le milieu des « MOOC-makers », c’est un peu l’exemple à suivre. Avec 43 438 certifiés pour 255 223 inscrits, le MOOC gestion de projet lancé en 2013 par Centrale Lille enregistre le meilleur taux de réussite du monde francophone. Son secret ? Un sujet porteur, qui intéresse aussi bien les étudiants que les professionnels, et un modèle agile qui ne cesse de se réinventer au fil des éditions – deux par an. « Sur le Net, on est soumis à une concurrence très forte », rappelle ainsi Rémi Bachelet, l’enseignant-chercheur à l’origine du projet. « On ne peut pas se reposer sur ses lauriers. On doit se réinventer en permanence. » Depuis l’origine, son équipe et lui ont ainsi développé toute une série d’innovations : des partenariats avec des institutions aux examens surveillés certifiants par webcam, des modules de spécialisation, aujourd’hui au nombre de quinze, aux SPOC (Small Private Online Course) – ces MOOC (cours en ligne) en comité restreint à destination des entreprises.
« J’ai également mis en place un système d’évaluation par les pairs », précise-t-il. « Je demande à chaque participant qui rend un travail d’en corriger cinq autres émanant d’autres apprenants. En bout de chaîne, un algorithme vérifie si les étudiants sont d’accord entre eux pour attribuer la note. » En plus de limiter les besoins en personnel pour corriger les études de cas, cette méthode présente de vraies vertus pédagogiques. « Elle offre aux apprenants plusieurs feedbacks et elle les rend acteurs de leur formation », constate Rémi Bachelet. Son prochain objectif : permettre aux élèves de commencer le module quand ils le veulent. « Mais cela demande un énorme travail de conception pédagogique ! », reconnaît-il.
Des contraintes qui dissuadent nombre d’enseignants de se lancer dans l’aventure. « Parfois, des collègues, qui ont un projet de MOOC, viennent me voir pour me demander des conseils », raconte-t-il. « Mais lorsque je leur dis le temps que j’y consacre chaque semaine, je ne les revois pas ! » Rémi Bachelet a l’avantage, lui, d’avoir toujours eu une longueur d’avance. « Dès le début des années 1990, j’ai commencé à mettre en ligne mes cours en PDF », précise-t-il. « Puis j’ai créé un site Internet, que j’ai bientôt enrichi avec des vidéos enregistrées. Cela a débouché d’abord sur une formation ouverte à distance, puis sur un MOOC. » Passer d’un amphi d’une centaine d’étudiants à plusieurs milliers d’apprenants disséminés partout dans le monde a complètement changé sa posture. « Ce n’est plus moi qui suis au centre, assure-t-il, mais les apprenants qui communiquent entre eux. »
Publicație : Le Monde
|
