Conferinta "Competentele de maine la Iasi", gazduita de Universitatea "Cuza" din Iasi. Au fost prezenti zeci de oficiali ai unor mari companii din Franta
Ieri, 5 martie 2019, Universitatea "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" (UAIC) din Iasi a gazduit conferinta intitulata "Competentele de mâine la Iasi". Aceasta a fost organizata de Camera Franceza de Comert si Industrie din România (CCIFER), în parteneriat cu Institutul Francez, Agentia Universitara a Francofoniei (AUF) si UAIC.
Manifestarea si-a propus o reflectie si o dezbatere în jurul nevoilor companiilor, programelor academice si modului in care se poate crea o punte intre lumea de business si cea a educatiei. Totul cu scopul ameliorarii procesului de angajare al tinerilor care sa poata face fata provocarilor pietei muncii.
Pe lânga reprezentantii organizatorilor au mai participat si delegati din peste 40 de companii, institutii si organizatii, majoritatea din Franta. Evenimentul a fost deschis de prof. univ. dr. Mihaela Onofrei, rectorul Universitatii "Cuza", care a punctat importanta organizarii unei astfel de conferinte la Iasi.
"Suntem bucurosi sa fim parteneri în organizarea evenimentului. De ce UAIC? Pentru ca suntem în serviciul comunitatii si pentru ca suntem un spatiu propice dezbaterii si schimbului de idei. De ce Iasi? Pentru ca e capitala culturala a României, un centru universitar de referinta si pentru ca evolutia orasului din ultimii ani îl fac din ce în ce mai atractiv pentru investitori.
De asemenea, este in interesul nostru sa vedem care sunt cerintele angajatorilor de la studentii nostri", a transmis, in esenta mesajului, profesorul Onofrei.
În deschiderea conferintei au mai luat cuvântul Francois Coste, Presedintele Camerei Franceze de Comert si Industrie din România (CCIFER), Radu Gradinaru, Consul Onorific al Frantei la Iasi si Vincent Lorenzini, directorul Institutului Francez din Iasi.
"Ne bucuram ca a doua editie a conferintei are loc în prima universitate a României, va multumim pentru gazduirea acestui eveniment. Exista o nevoie reala de a dezvolta o sinergie între universitati si companii, iar noi ne propunem sa gasim noi oportunitati pentru a raspunde mai bine nevoilor de pe piata muncii", a reliefat acesta.
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
Editie BZI LIVE cu teme PROVOCATOARE pe segmentul CERCETARII, STIINTEI si EDUCATIEI cu profesorul Ovidiu Caltun de la Universitatea Cuza din Iasi
Marti, 5 martie 2019, incepand cu ora 15.00 si doar in lumina reflectoarelor Studioului BZI LIVE a fost programata o editie pe o tema ce ne FASCINEAZA si ne INTRIGA pe TOTI! • Invitat la un DIALOG interesant, proaspat si riguros a fost prof. univ. dr. Ovidiu Caltun - Facultatea de Fizica a Universitatii Alexandru Ioan Cuza - UAIC din Iasi • Acesta are o vasta activitate stiintifica nationala si internationala • Este implicat in interesantele manifestari din proiectul "Seratele Procopiu la Palat" alaturi de muzeograful Camelia Teodora Cristofor, expert, Muzeul Stiintei si Tehnicii Stefan Procopiu din cadrul Complexului Muzeal National Moldova - CMNM • Prof. univ. dr. Ovidiu Caltun este presedinte ESTEEM Romania - Asociatia "Aliance of Educators for Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics" • Dialogul din emisiunea BZI LIVE a avut ca tematica universul fascinant al Fizicii, proiectele sale, munca alaturi de studenti, realitati educationale si stiintifice • In prezent are calitatea de profesor si conducator de doctorat, coordonand Laboratorul de Materiale Magnetice pentru Aplicatii Tehnologice - LMAT de la Facultatea de Fizica a UAIC • Activitatea sa de cercetare are doua directii principale: Magnetismul substantelor ferimagnetice cu structura fina si ultrafina; Studiul proceselor de magnetizare si modelarea acestora. Influenta nanostructurarii, compozitiei chimice si rutelor de sinteza asupra proprietatilor electrice si magnetice ale materialelor ferroice proiectate pentru aplicatii medicale si tehnologice • De-a lungul anilor a publicat in domeniul acesta peste 100 de articole cotate ISI • Emisiunea completa cu universitarul Caltun poate fi urmarita AICI: https://www.facebook.com/cotidianul.bzi/videos/vl.2347061055524366/258497735077301/?type=1
Pe 5 martie 2019, incepand cu ora 15.00 si doar in lumina reflectoarelor Studioului BZI LIVE a fost programata o editie pe o tema ce ne FASCINEAZA si ne INTRIGA pe TOTI! Invitat la un DIALOG interesant, proaspat si riguros a fost prof. univ. dr. Ovidiu Caltun - Facultatea de Fizica a Universitatii Alexandru Ioan Cuza (UAIC) din Iasi. Acesta are o vasta activitate stiintifica nationala si internationala. Este implicat in interesantele manifestari din proiectul "Seratele Procopiu la Palat" alaturi de muzeograful Camelia Teodora Cristofor, expert, Muzeul Stiintei si Tehnicii Stefan Procopiu din cadrul Complexului Muzeal National Moldova (CMNM). Prof. univ. dr. Ovidiu Caltun este presedinte ESTEEM Romania - Asociatia "Aliance of Educators for Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics". Dialogul din emisiunea BZI LIVE a avut ca tematica universul fascinant al Fizicii, proiectele sale, munca alaturi de studenti, realitati educationale si stiintifice. In prezent are calitatea de profesor si conducator de doctorat, coordonand Laboratorul de Materiale Magnetice pentru Aplicatii Tehnologice - LMAT de la Facultatea de Fizica a UAIC. Activitatea sa de cercetare are doua directii principale: Magnetismul substantelor ferimagnetice cu structura fina si ultrafina; Studiul proceselor de magnetizare si modelarea acestora. Influenta nanostructurarii, compozitiei chimice si rutelor de sinteza asupra proprietatilor electrice si magnetice ale materialelor ferroice proiectate pentru aplicatii medicale si tehnologice. De-a lungul anilor a publicat in domeniul acesta peste 100 de articole cotate ISI.
"Ce se va intampla daca vom deveni doar consumatori de Stiinta si tehnologie?"
Dincolo de toate acestea, in cadrul productiei BZI LIVE, universitarul Caltun a lansat urmatoarele PROVOCARI: Ce ar trebui sa fie un om (o natiune)? Un (o) creatoar(e) de plus valoare sau un consumator (platitor) a plus valorii create de altii? Ce se va intampla daca vom deveni doar consumatori de Stiinta si Tehnologie? Ce se intampla cu literatia stiintifica si tehnologica a tinerei generatii. La nivelul preuniversitar si universitar. Unde ne aflam si ce s-ar putea face. Unde gresim si ce s-ar putea schimba in modul de recrutare al studentilor din invatamantul superior stiintific si ingineresc. Cu ce competente ar trebui sa intre in invatamantul superior acesti studenti, la ce nivel de competenta profesionala ar trebui condusi! Are vreun rost sa discutam despre integritate academica si etica? Ce se intampla cu o diploma eliberata care nu este "recunoscuta" de piata muncii! Ce facem pentru justitie sociala si prima generatie la Universitate? De ce Stiintele, Ingineria si Informatica nu-i mai intereseaza atat de mult pe tineri pentru o cariera? Ce a facut Romania pana acum si daca mai poate face investitii care sa dea rezultate. Unde gresim cel mai des. De ce un oras universitar precum Iasul nu traieste cu adevarat din destinul academic. Cat de lung e drumul pana la un Consortiu Universitar. Ce inteleg unii prin strategic leadership sI incluziune. Ce nu face Primaria si Prefectura pentru studentii pe care universitatile ii atrag cu greu la Iasi si ce ar putea face. La toate acestea, profesorul Catun a oferit raspunsuri ce pot fi urmarite AICI: https://www.facebook.com/cotidianul.bzi/videos/vl.2347061055524366/258497735077301/?type=1
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
Cambridge opens up extra places for disadvantaged students who perform better than expected in their A-levels
Cambridge University is opening up extra places for disadvantaged students who perform better than expected in their A-levels, in a bid to improve diversity.
This summer the university will give out up to 100 additional places which will be earmarked for pupils who have either spent time in local authority care, or those with a combination of characteristics including attending a state school and living in a deprived household or area.
It is the first time that Cambridge will take part in the Ucas “adjustment” system, where students who do better than expected in their A-levels are able to “trade up” for a better university place.
While many Russell Group universities offer places through this system, Oxford and Cambridge have traditionally abstained from doing so on the basis that they fill all their places in advance.
Dr Sam Lucy, director of admissions for the Cambridge Colleges, said that move is aimed at admitting more talented students from disadvantaged background who have already applied and had an interview, but “narrowly missed out” on an offer.
“Students have to apply almost a year before they start their course, and some may be on an upward academic trajectory and not demonstrating their full academic potential at the point of interview,” she said.
“Adjustment provides those students who go on to achieve highly with an opportunity to be reconsidered as soon as they have their final results, rather than having to make a reapplication the following year.
Universities are under increasing pressure to increase the number of students they admit from poor backgrounds.
Last year Russell Group universities spent £254 million on “outreach” activities, aimed at encouraging more students from disadvantaged background to apply, with a further £270 million due to be spent in the year ahead. Initiatives include bursaries, extra tutoring and support, and giving lower offers to those coming from state schools.
Last year, 63.4 per cent of Cambridge’s undergraduate intake came from state schools, compared to 58.2 per cent at Oxford.
The higher education watchdog has said that institutions must "eliminate" the gap in admissions between wealthier students and their less well-off peers within 20 years But the Office for Students has admitted that top universities will need to accept fewer middle class students in order to meet diversity targets.
Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of the Sutton Trust, said that Cambridge's announcement is a “step in the right direction”, adding that he welcomed any new initiatives aimed at closing the “stubbornly wide” gap between rich and poor students at top universities.
"However, our research has shown that many poorer pupils with the grades to get into Oxford or Cambridge don’t apply, or have their grades under-predicted," he added.
“We also want to see universities like Cambridge giving poorer students a break by taking into account such factors as their school and parental background.”
He said universities should all move to post-qualification applications, where students apply only after they have received their A-level results.
Publicație : The Telegraph și The Guardian și The Independent
Oxford dean accused of trying to remove tutors from salary committee after pay rise request was refused
An Oxford dean is accused of trying to remove tutors from the salary committee after his demand to increase his £90,000 salary was refused.
The Very Rev Professor Martyn Percy, who presides over both Christ Church College and Cathedral, was suspended last November – a move with led to an outcry from alumni who felt he had been treated unfairly.
The College, which was founded by Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, said he had committed “immoral, scandalous or disgraceful” conduct, prompting speculation about the nature of his alleged offences.
Under pressure to clarify the nature of the allegations, the College later wrote to thousands of alumni to clarify that Dr Percy’s suspension related to a dispute over pay.
Under Christ Church’s statutes, the dean can only be removed from office under specific circumstances. These include being convicted of an offence that renders the dean unfit for office, conduct that constitutes persistent failure or neglect of duties, physical or mental incapacity — or behaviour of an “immoral, scandalous or disgraceful nature”.
Now it has been claimed that Dr Percy, the first dean to be democratically elected in the College’s 494 year history, attempted to have members of the College’s salaries committee removed from their post when his request for a pay rise was blocked.
He reportedly took umbrage with the head of the salaries committee’s long tenure and questioned whether this was appropriate under governance guidelines for charities.
The row between the dean and members of the College’s governing body escalated, with both sides exchanging legal letters. This culminated the Dr Percy being relieved from his duties, pending a tribunal which will be conducted later this year by a retired High Court judge.
“The data is clear - he was low paid by head of house standards or well paid by clerical standards,” a source told The Daily Telegraph. “You can see how it’s all got very bitter. £90,000 does look low – but it’s more than the Arch bishop of Canterbury.”
His current salary of £90,000 makes him one of the best paid clergymen in the country, but it is lower than the heads of some other Oxford colleges.
Writing to alumni January, Prof Richard Rutherford, Christ Church’s “Censor Theologiae”, or acting chair of the governing body, said: “It is worth stressing that the current dispute does not concern safeguarding. Neither does it concern supposed gender bias in the College, or a lack of commitment to access initiatives, or the pay of academic staff.
“We are not able to discuss the detailed basis of the complaint except to say that it related to issues surrounding the Dean’s own pay and how it is set.”
In a nod to the fallout from alumni over the College’s handling of the debacle, Prof Rutherford added that anyone who had “generously supported” Christ Church through donations “should be reassured” that no money raised will be spent on legal fees.
A spokesman for Church Church said they have nothing further to add. Dr Percy declined to comment.
Publicație : The Telegraph
Students: don't let rising rents drive you out of university
University rent hikes are tuition fee rises in disguise. We demand that managements treat student tenants fairly
What’s happening?
On 6 March, students from all over the UK have called a national day of action against the student housing crisis. We’re calling on students to join us at Bristol, Cambridge, Durham, Goldsmiths, King’s College London, Liverpool, Oxford, Reading, Surrey, Sheffield, University College London and elsewhere, and take action against university management who treat us like tenants rather than students.
A widening divide
University is expensive. Students – including some of the poorest – are leaving university with £57,000 of debt. Tuition fees stand at £9,250 a year, and a reported 40% of students worry about how they will finance their studies. Faced with these facts, one has to ask: why, when tuition fees are frozen, is studying at university becoming more and more expensive every year? The answer is rent.
Rent hikes are tuition fee rises in disguise. In 2018-19, the national average weekly rent in university halls was £147 – a 5% increase from the year before, and a 31% increase from 2012. Seven years ago, rents on average cost 58% of the maximum financial support offered by the government; that statistic now stands at over 73%.
That figure is even more shocking when you take into account how few students are eligible for the maximum student loan. At some universities the situation is even more dire – the average rent at the University of Liverpool is 110% of the average maintenance loan, and in Yorkshire and Humber, the average rents at university-owned accommodation are now more expensive than the private sector equivalent. Through such exploitatively high rents, more and more students are being priced out of higher education.
Terrible accommodation
For those students who do manage to afford to make it to university, the situation is bleak. In recent years it has been reported that 77% of students have to work to fund their studies, and there are reports of students working multiple jobs just to make ends meet. Students work these jobs to come back to rodent-infested halls with no water or heating, and sewage leakages and collapsed ceilings are becoming increasingly common.
On top of this, more than 17,000 students in university accommodation fell into rent arrears in 2017-18, and drop-out rates are increasing every year, especially for those from already marginalised backgrounds. This is the product of a higher education system that imposes sky-high rents, forces students to live in appalling conditions and then refuses to provide adequate mental health services.
Poor management of university accommodation has led to the most oppressed in society getting even worse treatment. Lack of investment and upkeep means many halls fail to have proper access for disabled students. Poor security investment has led to cases of strangers walking into halls and harassing female, LGBTQ and BAME students. And that’s without mentioning how high rents already structurally disadvantage students from these backgrounds.
The housing crisis on our campuses does not exist in a vacuum. It is a product of marketisation: a project that is destroying higher education, and has left staff casualised, workers outsourced and students out of pocket.
What can students do about it?
We are not hopeless in all this. In 2016, 1,000 students at UCL went on rent strike. They were swiftly followed by students at Goldsmiths, Courtauld Institute of Art and Roehampton. University management caved, and striking students took to the streets to celebrate the millions of pounds in compensation and rent cuts they’d won through organised radical action.
Further strikes have followed at universities such as Bristol and Sussex, as well as every year since 2016 at UCL, and have won millions more. Meanwhile, Cut the Rent campaigns have popped up everywhere from Aberdeen to Surrey. Student tenants are showing that if their universities act as scumbag landlords, they’re going to fight back.
Be realistic – demand the impossible. You might just win.
Publicație : The Guardian
IFS’ English loans report ‘builds pressure to cut tuition fees’
Treasury officials will find it harder to ignore the deficit pressures caused by subsidising lower-earning creative arts students after analysis, researcher argues
Analysis that highlights how more public money is spent on creative arts students than those taking subjects such as engineering could increase pressure to cut England’s tuition fees in the post-18 review, according to one of its authors.
In a report published on 6 March, the influential Institute for Fiscal Studies outlines for the first time how much students in each subject group are costing the Treasury in terms of student loan write-offs. With the government's review of post-18 education – whose panel is led by banker Philip Augar and is thought likely to recommend a fee cut – ongoing, the report is likely to draw further significant criticism of England’s £9,250 tuition fees system and how it channels higher education funding.
Universities fear that the Treasury would not adequately replace lost fee income with public money – and that a drastic cut in their funding would result.
The IFS report also highlights how different types of institution have fared since fees were trebled and direct public funding was slashed in 2012. At Russell Group universities, government spending per borrower is about £6,000 lower under the new system than in 2011, while it increased for post-1992 institutions and other groups by £2,000 per borrower.
In terms of subsidy across subject areas, the IFS study shows that creative arts students who take out full tuition fee and living cost loans will, for example, cost the Treasury roughly £37,000 each because of their lower-than-average lifetime earnings – about £10,000 more than an engineering student.
Meanwhile, economics students will cost the Exchequer £11,000 each on average.
These write-offs for creative arts students will, in future, add about £1.2 billion a year to the government deficit following a recent Office for National Statistics review of the treatment of student loans, up from £25 million under the old accounting treatment, the IFS report states. In comparison, only about £500 million will be spent on engineering and £800 million on social sciences after the ONS revision.
Lowering the fee cap from £9,250 to £6,000 could save the Treasury about £7,000 per borrower, with most of the savings coming from lower-earning subjects, the IFS says. That would allow the government to target priority subject areas more directly via grants, rather than see subsidies follow student demand, the report suggests.
Jack Britton, senior research economist at the IFS, who co-authored the study with Chris Belfield, Laura van der Erve and Neil Shephard, said that the report highlighted a “relatively badly understood area of the reforms since 2011”. Thanks to these changes, the subsidy to creative arts degrees has increased by £6,000 per student, while it has decreased by £9,000 per student for engineering degrees, the IFS says.
“Our report highlights some of the unintended consequences of those reforms which have hugely benefited certain areas – and I’m not sure the distribution [of subsidy] is what many would want,” said Dr Britton.
With the Treasury aware of the deficit pressures of student loan write-offs in certain subjects, it may seek to make savings in the upcoming Spending Review, he added, predicting that the report will “raise questions about whether the current spending is an appropriate use of government money.”
Reducing tuition fees significantly could “put several universities at risk of failure”, while a “cut in fees for non-STEM courses may unintentionally reduce the amount spent on the more-expensive-to-teach science courses,” the report warns.
Andy Westwood, professor of government practice at the University of Manchester, said the report was significant as "many choices before Augar and Treasury, especially after ONS reclassification of student loans, amount to choices between subsidies”.
Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said that the IFS’ analysis was a “welcome report filling in some of our gaps in knowledge" , but it is also "extremely tentative because the numbers are based on heroic assumptions on things like future earnings”.
He added that it “obsesses about the loan write-off costs, which fall on taxpayers, but ignores the extra tax and extra economic growth produced by the UK having more well-educated graduates”.
Meanwhile, The Sunday Telegraph reported that the post-18 review panel is set to recommend blocking student loan access to those with three D-grades at A level or worse – a move that has been mooted before, and which universities minister Chris Skidmore again publicly opposed after publication of the story.
Publicație : The Times
« Démontrez-nous, Frédérique Vidal, que vous ne généraliserez pas les frais d’inscription à l’université ! »
Pour les universitaires David Flacher et Hugo Harari-Kermadec, l’absence de signaux clairs dans la politique de la ministre de l’enseignement supérieur est de nature à entretenir un climat de doute sur ses réelles intentions.
Tribune. Frédérique Vidal,ministre de l’enseignement supérieur est-elle sincère lorsqu’elle affirme da ns Le Journal du dimanche du 24 février qu’elle va garantir, par décret, la stabilité des droits d’inscription à l’université pour les Français et les Européens ? La réponse à cette question est d’autant plus cruciale que notre modèle social est en jeu et, avec lui, les perspectives d’accès aux études des générations qui entreront dans les toutes prochaines années dans l’enseignement supérieur.
La mission de concertation mise en place par la ministre sur la réforme en cours a rendu son rapport il y a quelques jours. On y lit que « la hausse différenciée des droits a très majoritairement suscité de vives oppositions » au sein du monde académique. Nous faisons partie des auditionnés, en tant qu’experts du domaine, et avons noté avec satisfaction que la mission développait, dans son rapport, l’ensemble des arguments qui devraient amener le gouvernement à renoncer à la hausse des frais d’inscription. Le gouvernement compte maintenir l’essentiel de sa réforme, tout en soutenant qu’elle ne constitue pas les prémices d’une généralisation des frais d’inscription à tous les étudiants.
Comment la ministre peut-elle affirmer qu’elle garantira la stabilité des droits d’inscription pour les Français et les ressortissants de l’Union européenne par un décret… qu’un autre décret pourrait annuler aussi simplement ? Si le gouvernement n’a pas l’intention de généraliser ni de relever fortement les frais d’inscription pour tous, deux signaux clairs peuvent être envoyés.
Augmentations considérables
Tout d’abord, il semble crucial que la ministre décrète que les montants actuels de 170 euros pour une inscription en licence et de 243 euros pour un master soient appliqués à tous les établissements d’enseignement supérieur publics, pas seulement aux universités. Les frais d’inscription ont fortement augmenté ces dernières années dans de nombreuses écoles d’ingénieurs publiques, par paliers successifs : un étudiant (français ou étranger) qui payait, il y a quelques années, autour de 500 euros à l’Ecole centrale ou au Mines de Paris paie désormais 3 500 euros (s’il est français ou européen) et 5 500 euros (s’il est non européen). A Polytechnique, le tout nouveau Bachelor (équivalent d’une licence) coûtera 12 000 euros à un Français et 15 000 euros à un non-Européen ! A l’évidence, Français et Européens ne sont pas épargnés !
Publicație : Le Monde
Dans les écoles d’ingénieurs, la pédagogie de la compétition
Challenges et compétitions, interécoles, nationaux ou internationaux, obligent les étudiants à mieux communiquer et remettre en cause leurs certitudes.
Ce jeudi de février, l’atelier de l’Ecole supérieure des techniques aéronautiques et de construction automobile (Estaca), à Montigny-le-Bretonneux (Yvelines), ressemble à une ruche. Ils sont une douzaine d’apprentis ingénieurs à s’activer dans l’atelier sur le châssis d’un futur bolide. Clé anglaise en main, l’un règle l’échappement, un autre étudie des données sur ordinateur, plusieurs travaillent sur le bloc-moteur et un groupe peaufine l’aérodynamique de la calandre en carbone de la voiture de course. A la passion s’ajoute un additif puissant : la compétition. L’engin concourra, en juillet, à la Formula Student sur le circuit anglais de Silverstone. Des équipes du monde entier y participeront.
Challenges, compétitions, défis… Une martingale pédagogique utilisée dans de nombreuses grandes écoles ou universités, qui conduit les étudiants à se surpasser, étudier, rechercher, communiquer, sans que cela soit perçu comme une contrainte. Jadis réalisés sur le temps libre des étudiants, les projets de compétition automobile sont intégrés depuis la rentrée 2019 dans le cursus de l’Estaca, et rapportent aux participants des crédits ECTS nécessaires à l’obtention de leur diplôme.
Pour gagner la Formula Student, il faut construire un bolide qui surpassera ceux des autres sur une course. Mais à la recherche de performance s’ajoute une épreuve de rentabilité. Les étudiants doivent présenter à un jury le « business plan de leur réalisation, où sera notée l’adéquation performance/coût », précise Christophe Delille, enseignant à l’Estaca – façon de rappeler que les ingénieurs ne sont pas que des techniciens. « Nous devons justifier chacune des pièces et expliquer chacun de nos choix technologiques », confirme Paul Clauzade, 22 ans, président de l’association étudiante chargé du projet. Enfin, les étudiants devront aussi prouver leurs talents en matière de prospection commerciale puisqu’ils doivent trouver des sponsors, solliciter des entreprises, établir des contrats… Un apprentissage complet que les étudiants réalisent sans voir le temps passer. « Nous sommes même obligés de vérifier qu’ils n’en font pas trop !, s’amuse Christophe Delille. Certains pourraient ne pas aller en cours pour travailler sur leur véhicule… »
Travail collectif
Joris Tillet, doctorant en robotique à l’Ensta Bretagne, une autre école d’ingénieurs, n’a pas non plus compté ses heures en 2018 pour réaliser, avec trois compères étudiants ou chercheurs, Brave, un voilier robot qui a participé au World Robotic Sailing Championship en août, face notamment à des écoles britanniques et chinoises. « Nous étions la troisième promotion à travailler dessus. Nous avons bossé dessus tous les jours. Le soir, après dîner, je retournais au club robot pour continuer… », se souvient l’étudiant. « Ils y travaillaient aussi le week-end », reconnaît Fabrice Le Bars, enseignant-chercheur. Des stakhanovistes. Mais Brave, le bateau de l’Ensta, a gagné.
Publicație : Le Monde
Università, quei punteggi che non tornano nei concorsi
L'Osservatorio indipendente chiede spiegazioni sulle valutazioni della commissione giudicante di un Dipartimento dell’Università di Bologna. Così anche atenei prestigiosi sono colti in fallo sull'attribuzione dei punti. L'Alma Mater: "Ci affidiamo al merito"
Al Dipartimento di Filologia classica e Italianistica dell'Università Alma Mater di Bologna una candidata - vincitrice di un posto da professore universitario di seconda fascia - è riuscita a prendere 9,50 punti per i titoli consegnati per la sua "attività didattica integrativa", anche se la somma delle cinque voci considerate al massimo poteva dare il punteggio di 8,25. Uno e venticinque in più, gratis. A un secondo candidato è stato invece sottratto un punto, su due titoli diversi. Addizioni e sottrazioni sbagliate, ecco. "Errori materiali", si legge nel verbale che segue le prime contestazioni.
La stessa commissione giudicante è riuscita, poi, ad attribuire alla direzione di un gruppo di ricerca internazionale metà del punteggio rispetto alla partecipazione a un gruppo di ricerca interno. Interno al dipartimento. "Perché?", si chiede l'Osservatorio indipendente sui concorsi universitari, che ha scritto al rettore Ubertini, al ministro Bussetti, al viceministro Fioramonti. La candidata (vincitrice) ha ricevuto, anche in questo caso, il vantaggio. La commissione insediata da Unibo è riuscita a superare se stessa quando ha attribuito alla direzione di una rivista un quinto del punteggio rispetto alla semplice partecipazione (spesso è solo nominale) a un comitato editoriale. Partecipare vale cinque volte dirigere. Di nuovo: perché? "Queste scelte vanno assolutamente in controtendenza rispetto alla prassi accademica (e al buon senso)", hanno scritto quelli dell'Osservatorio, "e così la discrezionalità di una commissione sfocia nell'arbitrarietà".
È interessante notare che la commissione - riconvocata dal rettore lo scorso 21 dicembre - non ha ritenuto di dover spiegare i motivi di punteggi originali e inconsueti. Nell'università italiana, la letteratura purtroppo è lunga, un modo per far vincere il candidato pre-scelto è la negazione della matematica. O della logica. L'Associazione Trasparenza e merito, anche loro impegnati sul fronte dei concorsi universitari, sottolinea come delle 196 segnalazioni ricevute nei primi sedici mesi di attività 125 riguardano manipolazioni sui punteggi da parte delle commissioni. Sono il 64 per cento delle contestazioni.
L'Alma Mater: "Giudizi discrezionali"
Sul Dipartimento di Italianistica dell'Alma Mater è arrivata una gragnuola di lettere contestanti da parte dei diversi candidati sconfitti, i cui titoli sono stati valutati senza una spiegazione scientifica comprensibile. La prorettrice Chiara Elefante conferma che le segnalazioni sono state prese in esame, che la candidata vincitrice non ha ancora preso servizio e che gli errori materiali saranno presto corretti: "Siamo in un settore non bibliometrico in cui le valutazioni della commissione restano discrezionali", aggiunge. Meglio dodici pagine di un autore minore che trecento su Leopardi? "Non vorrei entrare in questo dettaglio, c'è un'analisi in corso, sarà attenta, ma non parlerei di criteri assurdi a priori, non vedrei a tutti i costi il dolo. I concorsi dell'Università di Bologna premiano il merito, lo dicono i fatti, le classifiche internazionali e le Valutazioni sulla qualità della ricerca".
C'è una seconda segnalazione dell'Osservatorio sui concorsi universitari e riguarda il trattamento riservato dall'Università di Firenze al professor Sandro Gelsomino, cattedra di cardiochirurgia all'Università di Maastricht. Rettore, Dipartimento e Garante d'ateneo conoscono il caso. Il professor Gelsomino, su queste basi, chiede esplicitamente al Senato accademico di Firenze di bloccare, "in via eccezionale", la chiamata di professore associato di Cardiochirurgia "per le pesanti accuse dell'Osservatorio, per i giudizi della commissione ingiustificabili e le anomalie e criticità prontamente segnalate lungo lo svolgimento del concorso". L'Osservatorio, tra le altre cose, aveva denunciato l'incandidabilità del chirurgo vincitore che per tre anni aveva prestato servizio in università (ragione di esclusione, secondo il bando).
Il cardiochirurgo che non riesce a rientrare a Firenze
Sui titoli, per spiegare il contenzioso, la commissione ha dato un giudizio "pari", licenziando il curriculum del professore emigrato all'estero come "autodichiarazione di una serie di collaborazioni come docente e come fellowship presso diverse altre sedi universitarie". Il professor Gelsomino rivendica che sotto l'autocertificazione ci sono in verità titoli (non riconosciuti, sottende) come l'insegnamento frontale al terzo anno di Medicina, la titolarità delle lezioni al PhD, la promozione di carriera "riservata solo ad alcuni full professors". Dall'altra parte - sostiene l'Osservatorio, intendendo dalla parta del vincitore - "non ci sono insegnamenti frontali, né la guida di una ricerca né la scrittura di un Grant". Anche la prova di Inglese è stata giudicata "alla pari" quando il professor Gelsomino insegna in Olanda tutti i giorni, in lingua inglese, "a studenti inglesi, americani, canadesi e australiani".
Il rettore di Firenze Luigi Dei ha firmato il decreto di regolarità degli atti e il capo Dipartimento ha proceduto a una rapida chiamata del vincitore. Lo sconfitto chiosa: "Lo stesso rettore che oggi afferma che chi ha 100 pubblicazioni non può perdere contro chi ne ha 50 come giustifica il fatto che io che ne ho presentate 240 ho perso contro un collega che ne ha portate soltanto 60?". L'Università sul caso Gelsomino preferisce attendere il giudizio del Tar della Toscana, dovrebbe arrivare a breve.
L'Ateneo di Firenze, ricordiamo, ha di recente messo il timbro di regolarità a una doppia cattedra di Storia delle dottrine politiche assegnata a marito e moglie. Ed è coinvolto in due pesanti inchieste: una riguarda Giurisprudenza e una seconda, più recente, proprio Medicina .
Due cuori e una cattedra, il gioco delle coppie all'ateneo di Firenze
Recenti sentenze del Tar del Veneto e del Lazio hanno annullato concorsi, nel primo caso, perché le valutazioni della commissione non erano state eseguite in maniera analitica e, nel secondo, per l'eccesso di discrezionalità dei giudici. Appoggiandosi ai criteri vaghi e i giudizi non poggiati su motivazioni comprensibili, l'Osservatorio ha contestato al prestigioso Politecnico di Torino la selezione per un posto di ricercatore universitario a tempo determinato in Pianificazione territoriale. E ha chiesto l'annullamento del concorso.
Publicație : La Repubblica
|
