Un opozant al regimului Fidel Castro, care a stat 16 ani în închisoare, va conferenţia la UAIC
Pedro Fuentes-Cid, purtător de cuvânt al Presidio Politico Cubano, considerat a fi unul dintre oamenii cheie în negocierea cu privire la viitorul Cubei, va conferenţia vineri la Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi. La invitaţia Facultăţii de Filosofie şi Ştiinţe Social Politice, acesta va vorbi la Iaşi despre „Spre o primăvară politică central şi sud-americană? Dezvoltările politice din Cuba şi Venezuela şi atitudinea comunităţii internaţionale din Statele Unite ale Americii şi Uniunea Europeană”.
Evenimentul va avea loc vineri, 12 aprilie 2019, ora 12.00, în Sala Senatului, etaj II, Rectorat, Corpul A al universităţii. „Conferinţa va prezenta nu doar experienţa personală a disidentului cubanez, ci va prezenta (după o importantă dezbatere la Bruxelles zilele trecute) şi evalua situaţia actuală din Cuba şi Venezuela, încercând să ofere o prognoză şi o predicţie pentru tensionata situaţie din cele două state central şi sud-americane”, au precizat reprezentanţii UAIC. Aceştia au mai specificat că Fuentes a participat la revoluţia împotriva generalului Batista şi că a încercat să îl răstoarne, fără succes, pe Fidel Castro, petrecând 16 ani în închisoare şi apoi refugiindu-se în America.
„Pedro Fuentes-Cid este un foarte cunoscut avocat în Florida, activist civic şi, în acest moment, unul dintre oamenii-cheie în negocierea viitorului Cubei. După încercarea eşuată de răsturnare a Guvernului de la Havana în anii ’50, Pedro Fuentes a fost condamnat la 30 de ani de închisoare politică, ispăşind fără drept de apel 16. Cooptat ulterior în structurile de putere ale liderului Castro, conferenţiarul şi-a continuat studiile în Drept, Studii americane şi Ştiinţe politice în cadrul universităţilor din Paris, Miami şi Havana. În prezent, Pedro Fuentes susţine cauza cubaneză prin intermediul mass-media, fiind un obişnuit al emisiunilor de radio şi televiziune”, au specificat reprezentanţii UAIC
Publicație : Ziarul de Iași
Un ordin de ministru îi obligă pe unii studenţi să facă două facultăţi
O situaţie bizară legată de organizarea referendumului a fost semnalată de Alianţa Naţională a Organizaţiilor Studenţeşti din România (ANOSR). Aceştia reclamă faptul că, în urma unui ordin de ministru aflat în dezbatere publică, s-ar îngreuna foarte mult situaţia studenţilor care se află deja înmatriculaţi la Facultăţile de Medicină Dentară, mai concret, în cazul programelor de studii Medicină şi Medicină Dentară, şi trebuie să susţină rezidenţiatul în noiembrie 2019. Studenţii argumentează că cei care ar dori să aleagă specializarea Chirurgie orală şi maxilo-facială ar trebui de fapt să fie dublu licenţiaţi pentru a putea fi rezidenţi în acest domeniu: să aibă şi medicină, şi medicină dentară.
„Chirurgia maxilo-facială este o specializare care necesită o dublă licenţă, în Medicină şi Medicină Dentară, aceasta fiind studiată în cadrul ambelor programe de studii. Până în prezent, absolvenţii unuia dintre programele de studii de Medicină sau de Medicină dentară aveau posibilitatea de a-şi alege această specializare la Examenul de Rezidenţiat, fiind ulterior obligaţi să îl finalizeze şi pe celălalt până la susţinerea examenului de medic specialist. Modificarea propusă prin proiectul de ordin de ministru menţionat mai sus solicită ca specializarea Chirurgie orală şi maxilo-facială să poată fi aleasă doar de absolvenţii deja dublu-licenţiaţi (Medicină şi Medicină Dentară) şi doar prin susţinerea Examenului de Rezidenţiat de la Medicină, fapt care ar defavoriza major licenţiaţii în Medicină Dentară”, au precizat studenţii.
Aceştia precizează şi faptul că cel de-al doilea program de studii universitare poate fi urmat doar în regim de taxă în România, prin urmare, cum nu pot fi rezidenţi, studenţii care vor să se specializeze în chirurgie orală şi maxilo-facilă ar trebui să mai treacă iar prin facultate, cu taxe de peste 6.500 de lei pe an, din fonduri proprii sau pe banii părinţilor. „Prin implementarea modificării încă din acest an, s-ar produce o îngrădire a libertăţii de alegere a actualei generaţii care urmează să îşi finalizeze studiile universitare, întrucât aceştia au considerat Chirurgia orală şi maxilo-facială încă de la momentul începerii studiilor drept o specializare pentru care pot opta pentru dezvoltarea lor profesională”, au mai precizat cei din ANOSR. Ei spun că ministerul a argumentat alinierea la cerinţele europene existente în acest domeniu încă din 2013, dar că o astfel de măsură ar trebui să se ia doar pentru cei care intră acum în sistem şi care au timp să se pregătească în planificarea carierei.
Publicație : Ziarul de Iași
Participare record la Congresul pentru Studenţi şi Tineri Medici
Astăzi debutează la Iaşi lucrările “Congressis 2019 - Congresul Internaţional pentru Studenţişi Tineri Medici”, la ediţia de anul acesta înregistrându-se un număr record de participanţi: peste 1.000 de studenţi de la universităţi de medicină din ţară şi străinătate. Aflată la cea de-a XVI-a ediţie, manifestarea organizată de Societatea Studenţilor Medicinişti Iaşi (SSMI) şi UMF “Gr. T. Popa Iaşi” se desfăşoară în perioada 11-14 aprilie, sub motto-ul “Lead your way to innovation”.
“Cei peste 1.000 de participanţi vor asista la conferinţe inedite susţinute atât de cadrele didactice ale UMF Iaşi, cât şi de invitaţii speciali din străinătate. Mai mult, fiecare participant va avea oportunitatea de a participa la una dintre cele peste 20 de conferinţe şi la unul dintre cele peste 70 de workshop-uri practice incluse în program, pentru a oferi fiecărui student sau rezident ocazia de a dobândi experienţă în domeniul de activitate de care este pasionat”, a declarat Ana Marina Rădulescu, membru al comitetului organizatoric SSMI.
Deschiderea oficială are loc astăzi la Palas Congress Hall, după cuvântul de deschidere al prof. dr. Viorel Scripcariu, rectorul UMF Iaşi, fiind programată o conferinţă extraordinară -“Opportunities in Medical Education” susţinută de unul dintre invitaţii speciali ai Congresului, dr. Zeshan Quereshi, afiliat Spitalului King’s College din Londra. “Zilele de vineri şi sâmbătă vor fi pline de activităţi didactice variate destinate mediciniştilor începând cu primii ani de studiu, până la medici rezidenţi. Participanţii vor prezenta în aceste zile, sub formă de postere sau lucrări ştiinţifice, rezultatele cercetării şi documentării realizate personal în ultimul an, sub coordonarea unui cadru didactic universitar. Cele mai bune lucrări de cercetare sau analiză a cazurilor clinice vor fi premiate”, a spus Bianca-Ştefania Profire, membru al comitetului organizatoric SSMI.
Publicație : Ziarul de Iași
A fitter rival would soon make the REF extinct
The UK’s research excellence framework is slow, expensive and disruptive. The time and technology is ripe for a better alternative, says James Tooley
As preparations for the next research excellence framework gather momentum, I fear I’m in a dwindling minority who finds it discombobulating to hear colleagues confidently asserting that they have a handful of 3* or 4* papers, and looking down upon those with only 2*s.
Colleagues, the difference between a 2*, 3* and 4* is based on subjective judgements of vague criteria. My articles have been ranked internally as 3* or 4*, so this isn’t sour grapes, but there really is not a knowable distinction between – as Main Panel C puts it – “quality that is internationally excellent” (3*) and “quality that is recognised internationally” (2*). The latter implies the former.
Nor is there a meaningful difference between research that is a “major influence” (4*) and research that is “likely to have a lasting influence” (3*). Ditto. And even if there were, the judgement is going to be made by a REF panellist who is unlikely to be an expert in your sub-field and who will probably skim-read your article over breakfast on a flight.
That, of course, has always been the problem with the REF. But back in 1986, when the first forerunner exercise was run, it was excusable to think that the only way of splitting research funding between universities on the basis of some sort of demonstrable merit was through some bureaucratic process of this sort, however imperfect.
But, hey, times have moved on. There are now numerous internet-based data sources on academics' research performance – and many of them are free. Senior academics have used some of these to come up with rankings of universities and departments that are extremely closely correlated to those produced from the REF.
For instance, in 2017, Anne-Wil Harzing, professor of international management at Middlesex University, found only small differences between the REF rankings and those created using data from Microsoft Academic. Memorably, doing so took her just “one rainy Sunday afternoon”. And, in 2013, Dorothy Bishop, professor of developmental neuropsychology at the University of Oxford, looked at the data from the REF’s precursor, the research assessment exercise, and found that departmental h-indices in psychology predicted the results “remarkably well”. She suggested this may be true more broadly, too.
Meanwhile, Marcus Munafo, professor of biological psychology at the University of Bristol, found in 2015 that a “prediction market” closely mirrored REF outcomes for chemistry departments. Prediction markets arrive at the probability of an outcome occurring based on individuals betting on what they believe the outcome will be.
I’ve also had a go, with my colleague Barrie Craven. We found that university rankings compiled using ResearchGate, Google Scholar and Webometrics (which creates scores based on “link analysis”, looking at each university’s presence and impact on the web) were, again, extremely closely correlated with REF rankings compiled by both Times Higher Education (based on quality) and Research Fortnight (based on quality and volume).
Importantly, two of the approaches described, prediction markets and Webometrics, have nothing to do with citation indices. These sometimes get a bad press from those, especially in the humanities, who are reluctant to let go of the REF; in the sciences, by contrast, the case is more accepted that citation by colleagues who presumably are experts in the relevant field is a better mark of quality than the approval of stressed, non-expert REF panellists. Either way, it is hard to endorse the conclusion of the 2015 government-sponsored independent review that subjective judgement based on ambiguous criteria remains “the least worst form of academic governance we have” in the 21st century.
Let’s spell this out. The REF delivers data extremely slowly and infrequently, at great expense (the official estimate is £246 million) and with huge disruption to university life, resulting in rankings very similar but, arguably, inferior to those obtained simply and cheaply using a range of methods that don’t disrupt anyone.
Clearly the government is not going to replace the REF any time soon. An elephantine beast like this develops a life and purpose of its own, and loyalty to match. But there is a clear market opportunity for a sympathetic thinktank to create parallel league tables using the alternative, freely available resources. Because there are many of these, it would be easy to experiment to find an optimum combination of data that can’t be gamed and that offers no perverse incentives. A handful of supervised interns could easily handle it.
Regularly updated tables will be much more attractive to consumers of higher education – students and funders – than the quickly stale and out-of-date REF rankings. Hence, as Friedrich Engels might have put it, the demand for the REF will wither away. The interference of state power in research excellence will become superfluous. Universities will cease to see the need to participate. And, with that, the minister’s pen will easily do the needful and consign the REF to history.
All that universities would then need to do would be to make sure that their academics published high-quality research articles. Then they could stand back and let the private sector do the heavy lifting.
Publicație: The Times
Grief at the death of colleagues is nothing to be ashamed of
The recent death of politics academic David Held left Alix Dietzel shocked and guilty. Why did no one warn her she could feel like that?
David Held, professor of politics and international relations at Durham University, died on 2 March, but I found out two days later on Twitter.
This tells you a lot about the nature of our relationship. We weren’t friends, exactly. I certainly was not part of his innermost circle. I didn’t even know he had been unwell; he only briefly mentioned feeling under the weather in an email a few weeks before his death. Nevertheless, he had a profound impact on my life – something I did not fully appreciate until his passing.
I was shocked by the despair I felt at David’s death. It literally knocked me over. I sat on the floor of my kitchen and wept. But that grief was accompanied by another unexpected and unwelcome feeling: guilt. I asked myself why I, of all people, should be so affected. Shouldn’t this level of grief be reserved for David’s family and friends? Was it even appropriate to feel this way?
I found these feelings very uncomfortable and hesitated to express them to my academic friends. I barely spoke of my grief, let alone the guilt I felt about it. But now, after having had some time and space to think about the nature of academic grief, I feel ready to speak up. I want to spark a conversation about an aspect of academia that rarely gets discussed, despite the fact that it must be common – many of us have mentors, and mentors do not live for ever.
David was, of course, no ordinary academic. His contributions to the field are unparalleled, as his obituaries have attested. And yet, to me, he was extraordinary in ways these tributes do not capture. He was kind, inspiring and, above all, a fierce supporter of others’ work, including my own.
I met David on the day of my PhD viva. He didn’t know this (and I never got the chance to tell him), but I was extremely insecure about my academic work. I was not at all convinced that I would “make it” as a scholar even though I had my first job lined up, so I was very nervous as I walked into the room. Trying to stay calm, I sat down and opened the viva by thanking David for taking the time to examine my thesis.
He listened graciously, a wry smile on his face, before responding: “No, thank you. This work is brilliant, and it is my pleasure to have read it.”
The tension in my shoulders dissipated and I suddenly felt much more present. The viva proceeded in an almost dream-like fashion. David’s intellectual engagement was curious, passionate and, above all, kind. At the end of our discussion, he gave such a wonderfully supportive speech about my future in academia that it left my internal examiner almost embarrassed. “I am not sure how to follow that,” he said as David fell silent – and he joked in the pub afterwards that I should have recorded his speech so that I could play it in front of the mirror every morning. How I wish I had!
David’s support did not end there. He encouraged me to publish my PhD as a book, even pushing for publication at his own press, Polity. When that was unsuccessful, he urged me to try other presses and celebrated with me when I was offered a contract. Within months of the viva, he invited me to speak at Durham Castle, which was an extraordinary experience for a young scholar, and my very first invited talk. Looking back at our correspondence, he was always enthusiastic, wishing me well every step of the way.
What David did for me, and for my career, can never be repaid. He built up my confidence, encouraging me to believe in myself, not just as a scholar but as a person. He was truly a mentor in every sense of the word. Without this support, I am not sure whether I would have been confident enough to advocate for a contract extension in my first short-term teaching job, or to apply for a permanent lectureship so soon after completing my PhD. I honestly don’t know where I’d be if we hadn’t met.
Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that I felt such a profound sense of grief when he died. David was a key figure in my life. He leaves behind a hole that no one else could fill – because I met him when I needed him most. On top of this, I mourn for the loss to the field, both academically and in terms of all the additional personal impacts he could have made.
And yet, academic grief is not something I have ever heard anyone else discuss. No one warned me that I would feel such a deep sense of loss. This is a shame, because grief is, in a way, an echo of the esteem you felt for someone when they were living. It’s a beautiful, universal human experience that we should speak about openly, even in the academic context.
I’ll certainly never “move on” from losing David. The loss will become like any other, ingrained into the very fibres of my being. But I know now that that is nothing to be ashamed of. And as I continue to go through the process of grieving, I would encourage all academics to be open about their grief at the death of important colleagues.
After all, isn’t the best way of honouring them to acknowledge the pain that their absence causes us?
Publicație : The Times
UK universities issue 11K non-disclosure agreements in five years
Institutions becoming increasingly reliant on agreements that silence departing staff, according to freedom of information responses
UK universities are becoming increasingly reliant on non-disclosure agreements in negotiations with staff, issuing nearly 11,000 in the past five years, according to data gathered by Times Higher Education.
Responses to freedom of information requests by 98 higher education institutions show that they issued 2,600 non-disclosure agreements in 2017-18 alone, up from 2,020 in 2014-15. These institutions have issued 1,355 non-disclosure agreements so far in this academic year.
Debate about the increasing use of non-disclosure agreements focuses on concern that they can prevent departing members of staff speaking out about allegations of bullying or harassment.
According to the data collected by THE, London Metropolitan University has relied most heavily on non-disclosure agreements, signing 473 non-disclosure agreements in the past five years. The University of Central Lancashire signed 431, while London South Bank University agreed 413.
Among the prestigious Russell Group, the most prolific users of non-disclosure agreements included the University of Sheffield (335), University of Oxford (256) and Cardiff University (220).
Emma Chapman, a member of the 1752 Group, which campaigns against sexual misconduct in higher education, said that “this level of NDA use shows how universities have long prioritised reputation management above the safety and well-being of their students and staff”.
The 1752 Group is lobbying for heavy regulation or a ban on the use of non-disclosure agreements in cases of sexual misconduct.
“NDAs can have a place, for example in a mutually agreed redundancy package, but they are currently being used to exploit vulnerable parties who have been the victim of misconduct, discrimination and bullying,” said Dr Chapman, a Royal Astronomical Society research fellow at Imperial College London.
According to THE’s data, the 98 institutions issued 10,918 non-disclosure agreements between 2014-15 and 2018-19 to date. The information given by universities did not include details of why the agreements were used and some are incorporated into staff’s standard termination of employment, meaning that there is no suggestion that any of the universities named are silencing victims of harassment or bullying.
London Met said that the university “does not ask staff to sign specific NDAs and we take steps to protect their rights to speak out by incorporating specific safeguards for disclosures required by law or made in accordance with the university’s whistleblowing policy in our settlement agreements”.
“These agreements do include provisions protecting information about the university’s business, prospective business, technical processes, training and/or teaching materials, computer software, intellectual property rights and finances,” London Met added.
Eight institutions, including the University of Manchester and Brunel and Lancaster universities, said that they never used such agreements.
A further 16 universities refused to supply the requested information, meaning that the real number of non-disclosure agreements used in the past five years is likely to be even higher than 11,000.
The figures emerged as the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee launched an inquiry into the use of non-disclosure agreements, amid claims that the Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein sexually harassed women and then silenced them using non-disclosure agreements.
MPs on the Commons Science and Technology Committee have previously raised concerns that some universities were using non-disclosure agreements to prevent allegations of research misconduct being raised.
Last month, the UK government proposed legislating against non-disclosure agreements being used to stymie reporting of harassment or discrimination to police across all sectors. The action was taken to prevent “the misuse of these agreements to silence victims, and there is increasing evidence that this is becoming more widespread”, said business minister Kelly Tolhurst.
“Silence serves to hide justice when it does happen, allowing perpetrators to claim false innocence and equivalently insinuate falsehood on the part of the victims, who cannot speak out to protect themselves,” said Dr Chapman.
“Silence also serves to hide mishandling of cases, removing accountability from institutions and preventing any reform: without exposing the problem we cannot learn from the mistakes of the past.”
The University and College Union expressed concerns that senior members of staff were receiving “disproportionately large payoffs” when they left their posts.
“Where universities use a non-disclosure agreement it should be beneficial to both parties and not enforced so the university abdicates responsibility to deal with any issues that have arisen. Robust action to tackle problems is always welcome, but it is much better if institutions invest in creating a healthy culture at work in the first place,” the union said.
Publicație : The Times
Chinese university presidents complain over lack of autonomy
Candid interviews with Chinese university presidents and government officials reveal widespread doubt that institutional freedom has increased
Chinese university presidents have described themselves as “dancers with chains on our legs”, warning that the influence of government-appointed party secretaries leaves them with little real autonomy.
Fifteen presidents who offered rare interviews for a new study said that much-heralded reforms ostensibly designed to loosen Beijing’s grip on higher education institutions were “largely symbolic” and have had “little real impact” on the ability of institutions to self-govern.
The leaders of five national top-tier universities and 10 provincial universities, quoted in China Quarterly, complained about an “absence of genuine autonomy” because any moves to enact “devolved powers would be viewed by superiors as disrespectful or as a betrayal of the [Communist] Party and party ideology”.
This led to “institutional inertia” because university presidents were concerned “about being seen as unnecessarily ‘rocking the boat’”, with institutional heads comparing themselves to “dancers with chains on our legs”, the paper says.
“To be honest, we don’t want to stir things up,” explained one university president quoted in the paper, who said that any reform “tends to affect employees negatively, [meaning] I could be criticised and [the government] could cut the amount of government funding we receive”.
“It’s safer to do nothing,” admitted another university leader, who said that his “official career may come to an end, or I may get demoted” if someone complained about reforms “disrupting the university”.
“Those who take the initiative tend to be punished…and those who do nothing get promoted,” observed another president.
Ten of the 15 presidents interviewed admitted that they were reluctant to initiate new proposals because it could affect their career. Many cited the influence of government-appointed party secretaries based in each university.
One president said that his plans to use more original English-language textbooks were blocked by government officials and that he was warned “not to go against mainstream ideology”.
Another’s proposals to introduce peer review in research, rather than rely on the judgement of internal university administrators, was also rejected.
“We are servants and subordinates and the government is our master,” concluded one university president.
Party secretaries at the 15 universities also offered interviews, with one referring to the party’s “absolute leadership” over institutions. Another insisted that party control was vital because an “ideological war between us [and the US] is always on, and can be a matter of life and death for our regime”.
Frank Mols, senior lecturer in political science at University of Queensland, who co-authored the paper with Hu Jian, from Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, said the interview indicated that an “impressive series of official reforms to increase the autonomy of Chinese universities…have had remarkably little impact on everyday practices”.
“Our research revealed that university presidents are hesitant to enact the authorities that have been devolved to them, out of fear this might be regarded by their superiors as going against party ideology, or challenging established informal norms and expectations,” said Dr Mols.
Publicație : The Times
Willetts: grade threshold for loans risks ‘two-tier’ system
Former universities minister says that, while parents of students with poorer A-levels could pay fees up front, less affluent families could not
Restricting access to student loans in England by prior attainment or graduate outcomes risks creating a “two-tier” higher education system in which the rich can “buy” places but the poor miss out, a former universities minister has warned.
Writing in Times Higher Education, David Willetts, who was universities minister between 2010 and 2014, says that, if students with low grades were barred from accessing student finance, “the children of wealthier parents could still go to university even if their grades were very low”.
This is because their parents would be able to pay their university fees up front. Families from poorer backgrounds are unlikely to have this option, and would in effect be barred from entering higher education.
Restricting access to student loans by prior attainment – potentially setting the threshold at DDD A-level grades or equivalent – is expected to be among the recommendations of the review of post-18 education in England.
But, Lord Willetts adds, this “would be a big barrier to mature students and pretty much destroy the rationale of the Open University unless the policy only applied below a maximum age – in which case it would seem tough on younger people”.
THE has reported that proposed exemptions for students from disadvantaged backgrounds with lower grades are said to have been under consideration by the review panel, led by Philip Augar, in response to concerns about the impact of a threshold on social mobility.
The idea of restricting access to loans to students on courses that can demonstrate good graduate earnings in the government’s Longitudinal Education Outcomes dataset has also been seen as an option that could be considered by policymakers.
But Lord Willetts, who ordered the creation of LEO data when he was in government, warns that this would be “a misuse of the data and a major policy error”.
He emphasises that the dataset was originally designed to determine how much universities would be required to contribute towards their students’ loan write-offs, under a never-adopted proposal of the Browne review of higher education under which the cap on tuition fees would have been removed.
But further research had revealed the shortcomings in the data – for example, how it undervalues graduates who work in areas with lower average salaries, or in professions such as nursing or teaching.
Lord Willetts argues that a better option would be to lower the loan repayment threshold so graduates start repaying when they earn £21,000, not £25,000, and extend the repayment period, to “make the system both financially sustainable and more politically acceptable without having to constrain the autonomy of universities”.
Publicație : The Times
Careers intelligence: how to deal with a new boss
Robert MacIntosh considers how university staff should approach the management merry-go-round of vice-chancellors, pro vice-chancellors and department heads
Academic leadership roles are typically tied to a three- or five-year tenure, meaning that new bosses come around on a fairly regular basis.
Add the fact that individual academic staff are often accountable to different individuals for their teaching, their research and their administrative duties and it might feel that you’re under new management more frequently than a Premier League footballer. How should you handle a new boss?
Incumbent leaders are usually keen to make their mark. After all, few careers are enhanced by a CV narrative that reads “2017-present: minded the shop and kept things ticking along”.
Rather, your new boss is likely to want to demonstrate that they improved, streamlined or transformed the activities for which they are responsible. Such career narratives are the reason your new boss is unlikely to be the same as your old boss.
Recognising this will help you cope with the inevitable trauma that comes when tried and trusted systems and processes are changed under the new regime.
Do your homework
Academia is a relatively closed community. Somewhere in your network will be colleagues who knew your new boss when they were a PhD student or who worked under them at a previous university. Ask around and find out what makes them tick. At the more experienced end of the leadership spectrum, your new boss may have fulfilled the same role in more than one institution.
If so, it might be possible to spot a pattern in their tendency to centralise or decentralise or to adopt particular structures. In the corporate world such characters develop brand names such as Fred the Shred and Deadly Doug. Of course, the more refined world of academia is above such nonsense. Isn’t it?
Control-Alt-Delete
A new boss can offer those of longer standing in your current university the opportunity to press reset and get things back to “normal”. Finally, they’ll cry, we can abandon the folly of X and get back to Y.
In a shifting political landscape, you might want to get in early and make sure that your new boss is fully briefed on what they should prioritise.
Stand a little further back from the detail, however, and you might see a pattern. Radical and ambitious entrepreneurs tend to be followed by consolidators; dictators tend to be succeeded by advocates of participative democracy and so forth.
A brief examination of the outgoing boss and the recruitment process might give valuable clues as to the priorities that your new boss was recruited to deliver. You can then judge how well these match your own and to assess the potential for career-limiting consequences when ridiculing the old regime. It would be a shame to discover after the fact that your new boss and your old boss were in fact former colleagues and remain close friends.
Actions speak louder than words
In the early days of their appointment, your new boss will be suffering from information overload. So many new faces, names to remember and issues to address.
You face a choice between shouting first and loudest or being patient. Your long-term credibility might best be served by simply getting on and delivering.
If the new regime wants more interdisciplinary research, focus your attention on how you can help. Academic freedom is so deeply embedded in our culture that doing what we are asked doesn’t always come naturally but maybe, just maybe, there might be merit in some of the new initiatives.
Giving it your best shot might be invigorating and it will certainly give you something to talk to your new boss about.
Just ask
All this is good advice if your new boss has been clear and directive in the early days of their appointment. If, however, they have been somewhat more enigmatic about their new priorities, what should you do?
Deceptively simple though it may seem, you could just ask. Bear in mind that the tone of your enquiry will matter. Consider the subtle shift in object and emphasis in the following: “Boss, do you have any idea what you’re doing?” or “Boss, what should I be prioritising?” The latter is the less entertaining but probably more sensible approach.
My favourite variant of such questioning however, arose in the context of a leadership programme and was “how do you get the best out me?”
Working through that simple question in both directions will provide a good foundation for your new working relationship. Incidentally, part of my answer to that question was never, under any circumstances, call me Bob.
Publicație : The Times
Hacking Life: Systematized Living and Its Discontents, by Joseph M. Reagle, Jr.
Btijah Ajana on a critical overview of a movement that promises freedom yet makes even the simplest of tasks more labour-intensive
Life hacking has become a ubiquitous trend in recent years. Everyday culture is now awash with self-help books, articles, blogs and an endless stream of social media posts on how to live a happier, fitter and more productive life. We are also witnessing the proliferation of a wide range of smart technologies that allow individuals to self-track in order to improve sleep, perfect diet, enhance fitness, optimise performance and micromanage almost every aspect of their lives.
Much of the allure of life hacking lies in its promise that it will make life easier with less effort, by freeing up time on everyday tasks so we can devote more time to activities that make us happier and more fulfilled. In fact, the growing cultural interest in life hacking is partly born out of a desire to reclaim some autonomy and leisure time from the boundless demands of work and everyday responsibilities. Yet life hacking seems to have turned living itself into a job, a task to be managed at every turn by subjecting even the most mundane tasks of daily existence to managerial, systematic and metric methods that can also be labour-intensive.
This is the paradox that lies at the heart of the life-hacking culture and one that is captured throughout Joseph Reagle’s Hacking Life. He traces the history of life hacking, highlighting some of its key figures and developments: from Benjamin Franklin’s Poor Richard’s Almanack to the “quantified self” and minimalism movements. He surveys the different hacks adopted by the “geeks” and “gurus” discussed in the book as well as the various spheres that have been penetrated by hacking practices, including sleep, time, motivation, health and, even, dating and intimate relationships.
Reagle describes life hacking as a philosophy of self-help that is “steeped in American culture” and its neoliberal ethos of rational individualism, self-reliance, self-optimisation and entrepreneurialism. At the same time, life hacking is not only about the self or the individual but involves a web of relations, some of which can be exploitative in nature. Reagle interrogates, for instance, the ethics of the outsourcing of tasks to Asian workers (one famous life hacker employed a Filipino villager to remind him to floss his teeth). He also critiques some of the relationship hacks and seduction techniques adopted by “pick-up artists” for the way they objectify women and treat others as quantifiable “wet machines”. The life hacker, he warns, “should be careful to hack the system, not the other people caught up in it”.
These are but some of the many complex issues that Reagle grapples with as he sets out to reveal the benefits and downsides of living with the hacking mindset. He does an excellent job in articulating, through myriad examples, the nuances and contradictions inherent in life-hacking culture. A small but not insignificant criticism is that Reagle over-relies on online sources and pop literature to build up his arguments without sufficient engagement with relevant and more robust academic work. Still, Hacking Life is to be welcomed as a useful meditation on the neoliberal culture of our time and the kinds of selves we are rapidly becoming in this digital age.
Publicație : The Times
L’association «Une couverture pour l’hiver» manque de produits adaptés aux besoins des sans-abri
REPORTAGE - Notre journaliste a participé à une maraude avec les étudiants de l’association «Une couverture pour l’hiver». Ces jeunes abordent les SDF parisiens pour leur proposer un thé, un café, une brosse à dents...Mais faute de moyens, les produits dont ils disposent ne sont pas toujours adaptés à la vie dans la rue.
«Tout le monde a bien du thé et du café?», demande Clara, présidente de l’association Une Couverture pour l’hiver, devant la fontaine de la place Saint-Michel à Paris. À ses côtés, une quinzaine d’étudiants s’affairent autour de sept grands cabas. Ils répartissent les affaires qu’ils s’apprêtent à distribuer aux personnes sans abri qui occupent durant la journée ce quartier très touristique: sacs de couchage, couvertures de survie, produits d’hygiène, vêtements d’occasion... Très vite, un homme s’approche d’eux et leur fait comprendre qu’il a besoin de nouvelles chaussettes, puis enfile immédiatement la paire que lui tendent les étudiants. Par petits groupes, les jeunes s’éparpillent ensuite dans des directions différentes, cabas à la main.
L’association compte aujourd’hui plus de 200 membres
Composée essentiellement d’étudiants de l’université Panthéon Sorbonne (Paris 1) à ses débuts en 2015, l’association Une Couverture pour l’hiver s’est progressivement élargie à d’autres universités comme celle de Nanterre. Elle compte aujourd’hui plus de 200 membres, tous étudiants et plus ou moins actifs selon les moments de l’année. En plus des maraudes, une équipe de 24 personnes est chargée depuis un an de la sensibilisation du grand public à la vie dans la rue, une autre à l’accompagnement des personnes sans abri, tandis qu’une troisième tente de nouer des partenariats et de décrocher des subventions. Mais ce sont les maraudes qui constituent l’activité principale de l’association, y compris lorsque les températures s’adoucissent.
À l’angle du boulevard Saint-Germain et de la rue Grégoire de Tours, Mathilde, Lucass et Eloi s’accroupissent à la hauteur d’une femme d’une quarantaine d’années assise contre le mur sur un matelas en mousse. «Bonjour Madame, vous voulez du thé, du café?». «S’approcher doucement pour proposer une boisson chaude permet d’établir un premier contact. C’est moins agressif que de venir s’attrouper à plusieurs autour d’eux», explique Mathilde, vice-présidente de l’association et en troisième année de licence à l’université Panthéon Sorbonne (Paris I).
Pour cette femme, ce sera un thé. À sa demande, les jeunes lui tendent ensuite un pull, des sous-vêtements, des protections hygiéniques, et des échantillons de gel douche et de shampoing. «On essaie le plus possible d’avoir des petits formats, parce que c’est moins lourd à transporter lorsqu’on vit dehors et qu’on doit souvent se déplacer» expliquent-ils. Ces produits sont essentiellement des dons d’autres étudiants, notamment pour les vêtements, mais l’association bénéficie aussi de tarifs réduits, renégociés régulièrement, sur les sacs de couchage et les couvertures de survie dans des magasins.
«Vous avez des enfants, une famille?»
«Nous avons besoin de davantage de produits qui correspondent à la réalité du monde de la rue comme du dentifrice et du gel hydroalcoolique »Valentine, vice-présidente de l’association Une couverture pour l’hiver
Les arrêts se succèdent, et les questions se répètent: «De quoi avez-vous besoin?», «depuis combien de temps êtes-vous ici?», «vous avez des enfants, une famille?» «Vous dormez seul ou avec un groupe?». Les réponses, elles, sont toujours différentes. Certains confient qu’ils vivent dehors depuis deux mois ou que leur famille ne vit pas en France, tandis que d’autres préfèrent garder le silence ou répondre qu’ils n’ont besoin de rien. Devant un magasin Monoprix, c’est à un homme à la prononciation saccadée qu’ils laissent un sac de couchage et un petit tube de parfum. Il a besoin d’une brosse à dents, mais les étudiants sont bientôt à court de produits à distribuer. «Nous avons besoin de davantage de produits qui correspondent à la réalité du monde de la rue, comme du dentifrice mais aussi des brosses à dents et du gel hydroalcoolique», souligne Valentine, vice-présidente de l’association.
Il manque un local pour stocker des produits en quantité
Faute de moyens, la logistique est en effet le talon d’Achille d’Une couverture pour l’hiver. Cela s’explique surtout par l’absence de local pour pouvoir stocker des produits en quantité et faire des inventaires. Les démarches administratives ont pourtant toutes été entamées et les mairies d’arrondissement, contactées. «On a l’impression d’être face à un mur», résume Valentine. «Pour l’instant, on utilise la cave de l’une de nos membres, mais elle part en Erasmus l’année prochaine», ajoute-t-elle.
Si les mystères de l’administration sont souvent compliqués à percer, ces difficultés sont quelquefois rythmées par des réussites. Au mois de septembre, l’association a en effet obtenu une subvention de la part du fonds pour le développement de la vie associative (FDVA) après avoir répondu à un appel à projet. «On essaie de faire le mieux possible avec les connaissances dont on dispose, et surtout d’être persévérant et de recommencer jusqu’à ce que cela fonctionne», conclut Valentine.
Publicație : Le Figaro
|
