Studenta a Facultatii de Litere, de la Universitatea "Cuza" din Iasi, castigatoarea bursei de studiu "Loredana Battaglia"
Ruhama Frunza, studenta în anul al II-lea, specializarea Limba si literatura italiana - Limba si literatura germana din cadrul Facultatii de Litere a Universitatii "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" (UAIC) din Iasi, a fost desemnata câstigatoarea bursei de studiu private "Loredana Battaglia" din acest an.
Daniele Battaglia, presedintele Asociatiei ALBA, a oferit aceasta bursa în cadrul unei ceremonii care a avut loc luni, 27 mai 2019, în Sala Senatului a UAIC, în prezenta prof. univ. dr. Mihaela Onofrei, prorector pentru activitati studentesti si parteneriate cu mediul economic si sectorul public, conf. univ. dr. Ioan Lihaciu, decanul Facultatii de Litere, lect. univ. dr. Sorin Mocanu, prodecan în cadrul aceleiasi facultati, cu participarea extraordinara a Consulului Onorific al Italiei la Iasi, Excelenta Sa (ES), dr. Enrico Novella, alaturi de studenti si profesori.
Bursa "Loredana Battaglia" ofera studentei posibilitatea de a participa la un Curs de Vara de Limba si cultura italiana, timp de o luna, la Universitatea pentru Straini din Perugia, Italia.
De 12 ani, familia Battaglia si Asociatia ALBA acorda burse studentilor Universitatii "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" din Iasi în memoria Loredanei Battaglia, fost lector italian între anii 2004 si 2007, la Catedra de Limbi clasice, italiana si spaniola din cadrul Facultatii de Litere a UAIC. Pâna în prezent, 25 de studenti din cadrul UAIC au beneficiat de aceasta bursa de studiu în Italia.
Publicație: Bună Ziua Iași
Şcoală de vară cu 150 de elevi la Facultatea de Chimie
Facultatea de Inginerie Chimică de la Politehnica ieşeană organizează o şcoală de vară la care sunt aşteptaţi 150 de elevi din clasele terminale de liceu, elevi care provin din familii cu situaţii financiare precare. Şcoala de vară se va desfăşura în perioada 30 iunie - 14 iulie 2019, Universitatea Tehnică urmând să ofere cazare şi masă.
La Şcoala de vară „Reacţionează Chimic cu Mediul de la TUIASI“ - RCM TUIASI, parte a Schemei de Granturi pentru Universităţi, finanţată prin Proiectul privind învăţământul secundar (ROSE), elevii vor putea vedea, timp de 14 zile, cum se desfăşoară activitatea unui student de la Politehnica ieşeană, dar vor beneficia şi de prezentarea ofertei educaţionale a facilităţilor, vor participa la cursuri şi ateliere, dar şi al activităţi de consiliere şi orientare în carieră. Proiectul de vară se va desfăşura pe parcursul a trei ani, în perioada 2019 – 2021. Elevii care se pot înscrie la această activitate trebuie să fie elevi ai unuia dintre liceele eligibile în cadrul Poiectului ROSE, să fi absolvit cel puţin de clasa a IX-a şi să aibă acordul unuia dintre părinţi sau al tutorelui legal. În weekend, participanţii vor participa la diferite activităţi culturale.
Publicație: Ziarul de Iași
Give worse-off students £3,000 to stay in education, says report
In turnaround from Cameron’s scrapped maintenance grants, May says move ‘has not worked’
Disadvantaged students in England could receive grants worth £3,000 a year to encourage them to remain in education after leaving school, according to proposals from a government-commissioned report backed by Theresa May.
The report into post-age 16 education and funding would, if accepted by a future government, see a shift in funding from universities to further education (FE) and vocational training. Universities would lose income for “low value” courses while their graduates would be making higher student loan repayments until the brink of their retirement.
At the launch of the report, May is to say: “My view is very clear: removing maintenance grants from the least well-off students has not worked, and I believe it is time to bring them back.”
May’s remarks are an admission that the decision by David Cameron to scrap student maintenance grants in 2015 was a mistake, with the then chancellor George Osborne calling the support for students from poor backgrounds “unaffordable”.
The report, headed by Philip Augar, was commissioned by May to look at high student debt and tuition fees following a pledge she gave to the Conservative party conference in 2017. But the report’s publication was delayed multiple times, overshadowed by the Brexit negotiations and technical issues.
Among the report’s proposals are:
- cutting undergraduate tuition fees to £7,500
- extending student loan repayments from 30 to 40 years
- a single, lifelong learning loan allowance for all adults
- maintenance loans for students taking sub-degree qualifications
- rebranding student loans as “student contributions”
- funding boost for FE colleges and vocational training
Angela Rayner, Labour’s shadow education secretary, said: “The report alone does nothing to address the burning injustices facing our education system.
“With no formal government response, no extra funding and no guarantee that the recommendations will be implemented by her successor, the Augar review epitomises May’s legacy as prime minister and this shambolic Tory government; all talk, empty promises and very little action.”
Shakira Martin, president of the National Union of Students (NUS), said: “This announcement is too little too late, given that Theresa May’s legacy in higher education will always be the deportation of thousands of our international student friends and colleagues.”
The report calls for greater government intervention in the funding and types of courses offered by universities, while its proposal for undergraduate tuition fees in England to be cut from £9,250 to £7,500 a year would likely mean reduced income for humanities and social science departments.
Reduced undergraduate tuition fees in England could mean less income for humanities departments. Photograph: Myron Standret/Alamy
The panel declared that “some students are charged too much for their degrees and the substantial taxpayer subsidy could be better directed …. to courses which cost more to deliver and offer better value to students and taxpayers.”
The report also recommended that the government could impose number controls and a minimum entry threshold for degree courses with poor student retention and graduate employment records.
University leaders were quick to push back against the funding proposals, with some fearing that it would also affect universities in Scotland and Wales.
“On the face of it, the fee-level recommendations may look good for students, but unless the government gives a cast-iron guarantee on full replacement funding, it could prove to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” said Alistair Jarvis, chief executive of the Universities UK lobby group.
“Cutting fees without replacement funding would be a political choice which hurts students, limits opportunity, damages universities, decreases the number of highly-skilled employees that business needs, and reduces our international competitiveness at a time when modern Britain needs it most.”
While students would leave university with lower overall debt, the proposals would see graduates making higher total repayments for longer than under the current structure, with the student loan period being extended from 30 to 40 years and coupled with a lower starting threshold for repayments.
The extended repayment period would see most graduates paying off their student loans until they reached their 60s, rather than having the remainder of their student debt wiped in their early 50s as now.
There was surprise that the panel made few recommendations on changes to the high rates of interest charged on student loans.
Andrew McGettigan, an independent expert who specialises in the student finance system, said: “The government would do well to ignore this and lower interest rates to inflation only – it’s the key contributor to misunderstandings over the student loan system.”
But the big winners under the report would be the further education and vocational training sectors, which would see additional funding of around £3bn a year and a one-off £1bn capital funding boost for a national network of FE colleges.
Damian Hinds, the education secretary for England, said: “This report acknowledges fully the key truth that our further education colleges also play a vital role in performing these functions.
“Too often we have had in our country a bias towards higher education, but we need to recognise equally the opportunities in both.”
Describing further education as “the Cinderella sector,” Augar said: “Our work revealed that post-18 education in England is a story of both care and neglect, depending on whether students are amongst the 50% of young people who participate in higher education or the rest.
“The panel believes that this disparity simply has to be addressed. Doing so is a matter of fairness and equity and is likely to bring considerable social and economic benefits to individuals, employers and the country at large.”
Chris Husbands, the vice-chancellor of Sheffield Hallam University, welcomed the encouragement for part-time and flexible study but said he feared that much of it would not survive the current political instability.
“My big worry is that this report is going to get cherry-picked by politicians and we will end up with something that doesn’t work,” Husbands said.
Publicație: The Guardian
The Augar review could be a watershed moment
The panel have skilfully avoided some potential elephant traps and have come up with a sensible and wide-ranging view that deserves political attention – even if it doesn’t get it, says Nick Hillman
The report that universities and colleges have all been waiting for has finally landed. The immediate focus will be on the proposed reduction in the undergraduate tuition fee cap. But, while important and of particular concern to smaller and specialist institutions, it is just one recommendation among many. The lower fee cap was leaked weeks ago and the recommendation is that the funding shortfall should be made up by taxpayers. So the income spent on each student may not necessarily change much – at least on average and to begin with – even if fees do come down.
When the experienced review panel started their work, we at the Higher Education Policy Institute said that their eventual conclusions should be judged in the round against a list of specific criteria – for example, whether they offered more support to part-time students, helped with the living costs of students from poorer backgrounds or were likely to lead to improved alternatives to full university degrees.
The recommendations aim to address these points in sensible ways. There are worked-up and evidence-based proposals on part-time and second-chance students, including a lifetime learning loan allowance. The panel members, quite rightly, propose the return of maintenance grants so that the poorest students no longer have to graduate with the biggest debts. Their report also discusses improving sub-degree (Level 4 and 5) and college provision, so that full honours degrees at traditional universities do not look like the only game in town. It remains unclear, though, whether such changes are likely to prove sufficiently appealing to lure people away from the traditional university experience, which may be more attractive than the panel hope. The idea of removing the real interest rate on student loans while studying is likely to remove a running sore, even though it comes at the cost of a much longer repayment term.
The panel have skilfully avoided some potential elephant traps. They have not recommended an immediate minimum entry standard, such as the much-rumoured 3Ds at A level, but, rather, call on England’s autonomous universities to put their own house in order in terms of student recruitment. They have avoided building big new walls between further and higher education and opted instead for the maintenance of a more fluid post-18 education system. They have also accepted that the residential model of higher education, whereby students move away to study, is so entrenched in England that it cannot easily be reversed. One area that may not turn out to be so sensible is the recommendation to end financial support for nearly all foundation years, and we need to understand a little more about why that is being proposed.
Overall, this is a coherent report that is notably more wide-ranging than the predecessor Browne report of 2010. There is plenty for us to get our teeth into and the further and higher education sectors will want to engage deeply with all the recommendations. We do not know if it will lead to any immediate changes, however, because of the wider political environment into which it lands. The Labour opposition are wedded to an entirely different university funding model, with no fees, and regard the Augar exercise as more partisan than earlier reviews. Meanwhile, contenders for the Tory crown searching for a new domestic agenda could in theory find what they need in the pages of the Augar report, but the electoral saliency of higher education issues is often exaggerated. The jury is out on how much of the report will be swiftly accepted.
Whether or not it lands on fertile soil now, the report is an important and thorough document that is likely to be referred back to for many years to come. Just as we still talk about the Robbins (1963), Dearing (1997) and Browne (2010) reports, we may well come to talk about the Augar report as a watershed moment.
Publicație: The Times
Are these the dying days of genuine liberal arts education?
Consumerism, technology and the culture wars threaten to render critical thinking an unwanted skill, worries Victor Ferrall
For those who believe that a liberal arts education is a good road to critical thinking and effective communicating, the past 50 years have been discouraging.
Demand for post-secondary education in the US exploded after the Second World War, led by returning military veterans seeking a better life for themselves and their children. Liberal arts majors had traditionally come from college-educated families; higher education was simply the next step for them after finishing high school. Most of the first-generation matriculants, however, had the specific goal of getting a better job, and did not share the expectations of a guaranteed comfortable income regardless of major. So while liberal arts colleges shared in the initial surge, demand for their programmes began to decline in the 1960s.
At first, the colleges’ administrators (perhaps distracted by Vietnam War protests and the Age of Aquarius) largely overlooked this. When they finally pegged on, they kept quiet, possibly hoping it would go unnoticed by high school seniors and their parents. During the final quarter of the 20th century, the decline became impossible to ignore, but college leaders opined that while a few under-endowed schools might suffer, the liberal arts ship would weather the storm.
When it became apparent that the decline in demand was accelerating, leaders had no choice but to act. Instead of jointly promoting the value of their services, however, they began an all-out war to attract students. They discounted tuition fees, lowered admissions standards, removed graduation requirements, adopted easier grading, built fancy new dorms and sports facilities, and loudly proclaimed that their college was unique and better than its competitors.
The result was increased costs and decreased revenues. Worst of all, it didn’t prompt increased admissions. Students wanted more practical, vocational majors. So liberal arts colleges resolved to give them what they wanted, devising a vast range of specifically job-related majors, in areas such as firefighting, homeland security, law enforcement, public administration and social services.
In my 2011 book Liberal Arts at the Brink, I examined 225 high-ranking liberal arts colleges. Of those, all but 12 increased the number of vocational major graduates between 1987 and 2017, with their proportion of the total rising from 10.6 per cent to 35 per cent over that period. At 71 of the colleges, more than half of 2017 graduates were vocational majors, and only nine colleges graduated no vocational majors. Since 2011, several have closed their doors and many are under severe financial duress. Most attempted to meet their financial needs by admitting more students, and the average graduation class size increased by more than 75 per cent between 1987 and 2008, to 386. But from 2008 to 2017, it fell by 10 per cent.
Nearly 20 years ago, former liberal arts college presidents Michael McPherson and Morton Schapiro worried that there were “not even 50” such colleges with “the financial power and the reputation to remain in control of their own destiny through almost any plausible future”. Today, “not even 25” would be more accurate. And those institutions recognise that they, too, need to attract students.
Supplementing or replacing liberal arts majors with vocational majors may yet save liberal arts colleges from going under. But one thing is certain: it will not save liberal arts education.
It is becoming accepted wisdom that students will learn less if they are not at the best college. Responsibility for their success rests on what they are taught, not what they learn themselves. It is a “give a man a fish, rather than teaching him how to fish” perspective. Hence, parents are driven to ensure that their children have every advantage to get them into the best college – including, we now know, paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to disguise them as volleyball players.
It is increasingly advocated that the challenges faced by educationally disadvantaged students should be addressed by lowering admissions standards, rather than supporting them in meeting higher standards. New York City mayor and Democratic presidential candidate Bill de Blasio has proposed increasing minority enrolment at the City’s two premier college prep high schools by doing exactly this.
Technology is revolutionising communications and research. Writing and speaking are being degraded by texting and tweeting. And if you need to know something, just ask Google or Siri. No one can begin to assimilate all the information now available. Hence, shortcuts are a must. Quick “group identity” assessment replaces laborious critical thinking. “She is a liberal.” “He supports Trump.” That is all one needs to know.
To top it all off, a kind of arrogant, consumer entitlement has taken hold on campuses, insisting that it is students’ right to boycott an unpopular professor, disrupt a controversial lecture or demand that an offending work of art be taken down.
To think critically requires questioning the accuracy of one’s own beliefs and searching opposing beliefs for insight. Yet in the stridently contentious world in which we now live, can it be that critical thinking is becoming an unwanted skill? If so, the prospects for liberal arts education are grim indeed.
Publicație : The Times
Augar review: call for £7.5K fee cap but loan access bar deferred
England’s post-18 education review panel says replacement public funding should be targeted to courses with most ‘social and economic value’
The maximum tuition fee English universities can charge students should be cut to £7,500 from 2021, with replacement public funding targeted at subjects that cost more to teach and have greater “social and economic value”, the panel for the government’s major review of post-18 education recommends.
Meanwhile, plans considered by the panel to reduce the number of students entering universities by cutting off access to loans for those with lower grades – fiercely opposed by the sector and the universities minister, Chris Skidmore – do not feature as a direct recommendation. Instead, the panel, led by former banker Philip Augar, says such a plan should be among the options considered by the government if universities have not addressed problems such as “poor long-term earnings benefits” on some courses by 2022.
Other key recommendations include those calling for the return of student maintenance grants – abolished by the Conservative government from 2016, the widening of access to tuition fee and maintenance support to students on vocational education courses, a lifelong learning loan allowance to help adults upskill in which “equivalent or lower qualifications” (ELQ) restrictions would be ended, a cut in loan interest rates while students are studying, and the extension of loan repayment terms from 30 to 40 years.
The panel also recommends scrapping student finance support for foundation year courses – which will anger many universities.
The report costs the total package of recommendations at between £300 million and £600 million a year in England, with Barnett formula funding for devolved nations taking this to £1.2 billion to £1.5 billion UK-wide. But it says ongoing work to calculate the cost of changes to the treatment of student loans in government accounts add “significant uncertainty” around the cost of the panel’s package.
Treasury concern about funding additional direct spending on universities could put a block on implementation of the fee recommendations, Westminster sources have previously told Times Higher Education.
While the higher education sector focus will be on the recommendations on tuition fees, much of the panel’s focus is on trying to increase funding for students in further education and level the playing field between them and their counterparts at universities.
The panel – which also included Baroness Wolf, an academic expert on vocational and higher education, and Nottingham Trent University vice-chancellor Edward Peck – writes: “Our core message is that the disparity between the 50 per cent of young people attending higher education and the other 50 per cent who do not has to be addressed.”
But the review faces an uncertain political future: it was personally announced and pushed through by Theresa May, who will soon step down as prime minister; while the Conservatives are unable to command a majority in the House of Commons, where legislation would be required to lower the fee cap and make changes to university funding.
There has been no announcement on when the government will respond to the review.
However, the broader philosophical shifts called for by the review panel – for universities to “bear down on low-value degrees” and prioritise “courses better aligned with the economy’s needs”, with a warning that post-18 education “cannot be left entirely to market forces” – could prove influential.
On the review’s key recommendations, the call for a £7,500 fee cap to be introduced by 2021-22 is followed by a recommendation that “government should replace in full the lost fee income by increasing the teaching grant, leaving the average unit of funding unchanged at sector level in cash terms”.
The panel adds that the fee cap “should be frozen until 2022-23, then increased in line with inflation from 2023-24”.
The panel also says in its recommendations: “Government should adjust the teaching grant attached to each subject to reflect more accurately the subject’s reasonable costs and its social and economic value to students and taxpayers.”
In the chapter on higher education, the panel says it judges that the “distribution of funding between subjects is out of line with teaching costs causing over and under funding of many subjects”.
Government “should have more say in how the state subsidy for higher education is spent”, the panel also says.
The panel recommends that the Office for Students “carry out a review of the funding rates for different subjects, to include an examination of the reasonable costs”.
It adds: “We expect that this study should rebalance funding towards high-cost and strategically important subjects and to subjects that add social as well as economic value. We would expect some subjects to receive little or no subject specific teaching grant over the £7,500 base rate but that the OfS would consider separate arrangements to support those specialist institutions offering the highest quality provision that might otherwise be adversely affected by these recommendations.”
The report judges that a fee cap of £7,500 “is fair”, adding that although “commentators stress that the level of debt is irrelevant given the income-contingent character of the loan system, perception is reality for many prospective students”.
On the minimum grade threshold for loan access, the panel says that it considered the introduction of a minimum entry threshold for under-25s to access student finance. Sources previously suggested the panel wanted to set the bar at DDDs at A level or equivalent, effectively barring most students who fell short of that from entering higher education.
The panel outlines argues that, based on modelling conducted by Ucas of potential “contextualisation” of scores for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, such a threshold could stop students from enrolling when they have a limited chance of significant social mobility on graduation. The panel also says it considered an “alternative or complementary option” which would allow the government and OfS to impose a cap on the number of students admitted to courses “that persistently manifest poor value for students and the public”, in terms of graduate earnings and loan repayments.
The panel conclude that the sector should be given more time to address the problem of “students being inappropriately recruited onto low value courses”, but does not rule out the introduction of such limits later down the line.
“Unless the sector has moved to address the problem of recruitment to courses which have poor retention, poor graduate employability and poor long term earnings benefits by 2022-23, the government should intervene. This intervention should take the form of a contextualised minimum entry threshold, a selective numbers cap or a combination of both,” the report says.
Universities will be pleased that the minimum entry tariff plan has been downgraded to a vaguer, more distant threat.
It remains to be seen whether Ms May’s successor would seek to steer through any legislation on university funding.
Publicație : The Times
Augar review: return of maintenance grants and loan shake-up urged
Post-18 funding review calls for minimum grants of £3,000 annually for poorest and extending loan payment period to 40 years
The review of post-18 education funding in England has recommended the return of maintenance grants for the poorest students, alongside a shake-up of the student loan system designed to boost the repayments of loans.
The review, led by Philip Augar and published on 30 May, calls for students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds to be entitled to a minimum grant of £3,000 to help cover their living costs.
The report says that the continuing gap in entry rates between the richest and poorest students “partly arises from the fact that it is the disadvantaged who are most likely to be deterred by loans”. Critics have pointed out this group has also ended up borrowing the most in student loans, after maintenance grants for the most disadvantaged were replaced by access to additional loans in 2016.
Combined with the proposal to cap tuition fees at £7,500, it would mean the maximum debt for a disadvantaged student would decrease from £60,000 to £45,000.
While the exact amount of grant would be determined by the government, the panel envisages a sliding scale of grant eligibility alongside a sliding scale of continuing loan access, with explicit recognition that parents of students from all but the poorest background will be expected to make a contribution.
The total amount of maintenance funding – from grants, loans and parents – should be tied to the national minimum wage for 21 to 24 year olds, on the basis of 37.5 hours per week, 30 weeks a year, the panel says. This is currently around £8,700, slightly lower than the maximum maintenance loan currently available.
On loans, the report says that income contingent loans remain the fairest way to collect students’ contributions towards higher education, but expresses concern that 70 per cent of borrowers will not pay back their full loan within the 30-year payment period, and 45 per cent of the value of loans will be written off, and covered by the government.
The review therefore recommends extending the payment to 40 years, covering graduates’ fifties, when they are likely to be earning more. “We believe borrowers should continue to repay their loan for as long as they benefit,” the report says.
The report also recommends that the repayment salary threshold – currently £25,000 – should be reduced to the level of median non-graduate earnings. Since the changes would not come into force until 2021-22, the threshold is likely to stay roughly the same that year, but should then continue to rise in line with average earnings.
The report also recommends that interest charged on loans while students are still studying should be tied to inflation only, not inflation plus 3 per cent as is the case currently.
However, the report rejects suggestions that the additional 3 per cent should also be removed post-graduation, arguing that it would be “imprudent and wasteful” for the government to provide “entirely costless finance”.
A final recommendation – which, uniquely, could apply to existing borrowers – would cap repayments at 1.2 times the initial loan amount in real terms, which should be applied to current borrowers. It would mean that those who earn less, such as teachers and civil servants, would not end up paying back higher loans than those immediate high earners who pay back their loans quicker and so incur less interest.
Taken together, the changes would mean that around 70 per cent of the value of loans were paid off, the panel says. However, the reintroduction of grants means that the total public contribution would remain at around 50 per cent.
The review also recommends new language for the system to make it clearer how the system works. Referring to it as a “student contribution system” would reduce the focus on debt, and this is justified since much borrowing is written off, the report says.
Publicație : The Times
Conference organisers urged to take action against harassment
Academics call for development of clear policies on misconduct, and lifetime bans for offenders
Academic conference organisers have been urged to do more to protect attendees from sexual harassment and assault, following a torrent of reports of misconduct at events across the sector.
Unlike typical working environments, which have human relations departments and protective policies on working behaviour, conferences are “stateless, self-regulating spaces” that “lend themselves to rogue behaviour” from delegates, according to researchers and equality campaigners.
The debate came after women shared their stories of discrimination, assault and harassment at conferences, prompted by a Times Higher Education article on how to get the most professional benefit from such events. Posting on Twitter, academics said that inappropriate touching, groping, unsolicited sexting and comments on appearance were commonplace at conferences.
Meryl Kenny, senior lecturer in gender and politics at the University of Edinburgh, told THE that she had been speaking on a panel at one conference when she received a text message from a senior ex-colleague in the audience.
“He asked, when was I available for sex at the conference?” she said. “I was an early career lecturer in my first post, he was in a position of power…I was shocked at the blatantness of it, but on the other hand – and as a woman speaking to other women at conferences – I was not shocked, because I knew this kind of thing happened all the time.”
One US survey of female attendees at the 2017 Conferences for Undergraduate Women in Physics found that, of 455 respondents, three-quarters (74.3 per cent) said that they had experienced sexual harassment of some kind.
Emily Henderson, assistant professor of international education and development at the University of Warwick, who researches academic conferences, said that sexual harassment is prevalent at scholarly events “in the same way it is prevalent in universities and most other working spaces”. If anything, she explained, “it is potentially worse at conferences because people are not held responsible in the same way”.
“Conferences, especially big events across several days which involve travel, have a tourism element to them. People are often sleeping in the same hotels, and it becomes a 24-hour experience,” she explained. Meanwhile, the living and working environment “is determined by the conscience of the organising committee”, she said.
Emma Chapman, a member of the 1752 Group, which works to end sexual misconduct in higher education, agreed that “conferences, by their very nature, provide a haven for harassers, who make use of perceived blurred professional boundaries”.
At the same time, she said, “many organising committees feel paralysed in what to do” when cases are reported to them, since “organisers have no legal powers to physically escort a perpetrator from a conference, and they have little to no support from the corresponding universities or employers”.
Dr Chapman, a Royal Astronomical Society research fellow at Imperial College London, said that publishing clear anti-harassment policies was a vital first step for conference organisers. “A code of conduct is such a simple yet effective thing to have,” she explained. “It doesn’t stop perpetrators, but it does set the tone.” The 1752 Group has published an example code of conduct for events to adopt.
It was equally as important for conference leaders to enforce those policies, said Dr Henderson, including “educating staff on the ground so that they know exactly what to do if someone comes to them for help”.
When a prominent US astronomer, Geoff Marcy, was found guilty in a 2015 campus investigation of sexually harassing students, the American Astronomy Society published a strict code of conduct for all its events. Similarly, since the #MeToo movement took off in 2017, organising committees have become increasingly aware of the need to put preventive measures in place at their academic events.
But Dr Henderson said that the problem of harassment was still being “ignored” by some disciplines, and encouraged members of groups and societies without them to “put pressure on – blacklisting and boycotts have proven to be effective in the past”.
When incidents are recorded, she continued, organisers should act to ban perpetrators from future events in much the same way as football fans are banned for violence.
Dr Chapman said that planners should also consider publishing attendee lists “a week in advance, to give people time to contact their HR department if they have any concerns”.
In the US, significant debate has been generated by the circulation, at annual conferences of the American Historical Association, of a list of alleged harassers, designed to warn women about potential attackers.
But some academics remain sceptical about the value of anonymised reporting. “Academia is such a small world, the reputational damage that comes from [speaking out] is so long lasting, it makes it risky for those in precarious positions,” said Dr Kenny. “I’m not sure everyone would have faith in an anonymised system.”
While conferences organisers can and should do more to make their events safer, universities also have a responsibility to follow up allegations, said Dr Chapman, even when they occur off-campus. “I don’t think we treat it seriously enough. If research misconduct takes place, an investigation opens, and the guilty party will never get a look-in again…why is it not the same attitude with perpetrators of assault?”
Publicație : The Times
Royaume-Uni: les frais d’inscription pour les étudiants européens n’augmenteront pas
Malgré le Brexit, les jeunes européens qui entameront un cursus universitaire au Royaume-Uni à la rentrée 2020 continueront de payer les mêmes frais d’inscriptions que les étudiants britanniques.
Les jeunes européens qui envisagent d’aller étudier au Royaume-Uni à partir à la rentrée 2020 ont désormais toutes les clés en main pour se décider: ils ne seront pas impactés par le Brexit. Les frais d’inscription dont ils devront s’acquitter resteront les mêmes que ceux destinés aux étudiants britanniques, soit 9 250 livres (près de 10 500 euros) par an en licence. Pour les étudiants étrangers non ressortissants de l’Union européenne, ce montant s’élève à 15 000 livres de plus. Les jeunes européens seront également éligibles à un prêt étudiant.«Nous savons que les étudiants examineront déjà leurs options universitaires pour l’année prochaine. C’est pourquoi nous confirmons maintenant que les ressortissants de l’UE admissibles continueront à bénéficier du statut des frais de résidence et pourront avoir accès à un soutien financier pour l’année universitaire 2020-2021», a déclaré ce mardi Chris Skidmore, le ministre britannique de l’Éducation supérieure lors d’une réunion à Bruxelles, dont les propos sont rapportés dans le Guardian. En effet, dans certaines universités comme Oxford ou Cambridge, les candidatures pour l’année 2020-2021 doivent être déposées avant la fin du mois d’octobre 2019.
Le statut des étudiants qui entameront leur cursus en 2021 encore en discussion
Attendue depuis le report du Brexit, cette déclaration a toutefois été saluée par les directeurs d’universités. Jess Cole, le directeur du groupe Russell, qui rassemble 24 universités dédiées à la recherche au Royaume-Uni, l’a qualifiée d’essentielle pour clarifier le statut des étudiants issus de l’Union européenne.«Pour rassurer davantage ces étudiants, le gouvernement devrait garantir leurs droits de migration pour la durée de leurs études. Les étudiants qui entament des cours en 2020-2021 devraient être éligibles au système de règlement européen, que le Royaume-Uni quitte l’UE ou non sans accord», a-t-il ajouté.«Des étudiants de toute l’UE enrichissent la vie sur les campus et apportent des avantages à toutes les régions du Royaume-Uni, ce qui a un impact positif sur notre économie. Nous voulons nous assurer que le Royaume-Uni reste ouvert et attrayant pour les étudiants talentueux d’Europe et plus largement après que le Royaume-Uni a quitté l’UE» a argué le ministre.
En revanche, le sort des étudiants européens qui souhaitent entamer un cursus au Royaume-Uni pour l’année 2021-2022 n’est pas encore scellé. Le ministère britannique de l’Éducation a déclaré que des discussions étaient en cours pour déterminer leur statut.
Publicație : Le Figaro
L’Université internationale de Monaco veut «faire de la principauté un campus»
REPORTAGE - L’Université Internationale de Monaco (IUM), unique école de commerce de la principauté, est reconnue par l’État monégasque. Elle accueille 20% d’étudiants français.
Le long de la mer Méditerranée, à mi-chemin entre Nice à 23 minutes de la gare de Nice environ) et la frontière italienne (Vintimille), la principauté de Monaco se dresse fièrement sur son rocher. Ce minuscule État, le deuxième état plus petit du monde après le Vatican, s’étend sur 2,02 kilomètres carrés. Réputé pour son Casino ou pour son Grand Prix Automobile, il n’est pas étonnant qu’il abrite une université.Créée en 1986, l’Université Internationale de Monaco (IUM) est en plein développement. Implantée dans les locaux du Stade Louis II depuis sa création, elle déménage, en juillet, dans de nouveaux espaces de 2000 mètres carrés, soit 25% de place en plus, situés face à la gare de Monaco. Les travaux sont en financés aux deux tiers par la principauté. «Nos nouveaux locaux seront plus conformes à ce que les gens attendent d’une université monégasque», se réjouit Jean-Philippe Muller, directeur général de l’IUM. Aujourd’hui, elle accueille 600 étudiants, de 75 nationalités différentes (20% de Français, 16% d’Italiens et 15% de Suisses).Toutefois cette université ressemble plus à une école de commerce qu’à une fac. Elle appartient en effet au groupe INSEEC U, une institution privée qui possède entre autres en France l’Inseec BS et l’ESCE. Les prix aussi ne sont pas comparables. Il faut compter 12 000 euros par an pour un bachelor (formation en trois ans après le bac).Que valent les diplômes de l’UIM? Il s’agit d’un diplôme universitaire reconnu par l’État de Monaco. Certains étudiants peuvent opter pour un double diplôme avec une école de commerce de l’Insecc, ce qui permet d’obtenir en plus un master visé en France (une dizaine d’étudiants concernés). Le programme MBA est accrédité par l’AMBA (Association of MBAs), une accréditation standard internationale. Mais les étudiants recherchent avant tout une formation internationale et l’accès à un réseau professionnel unique au monde. L’international est en effet le point fort de cette institution avec des cours entièrement en anglais et un double diplôme en partenariat avec PoliDesign, l’école de design Politecnico di Milano. en Italie. Dans cet esprit, l’IUM développe des relations avec le Luxury Business Institute, à Séoul, en Corée du Sud, et à Shanghai, en Chine. Ce qui permet d’effectuer un séjour d’études à l’étranger.
«Nous profitons de cocktails avec des professionnels»
Autre intérêt, les liens tissés entre l’université et les entreprises et les personnalités locales, forcément prestigieuses. Jean-Philippe Muller, le directeur, souhaiteen effet, «faire de Monaco un campus». Il met en relations ses étudiants avec des partenaires monégasques tels que le Yacht Club de Monaco, la Chambre Monégasque de la Mode, qui organise la Monte-Carlo Fashion Week, par exemple, ou encore l’Automobile Club de Monaco, qui assure notamment la gestion du Grand Prix de Formule 1 de Monaco. Originaire de Saint-Tropez, Amélie, étudiante en master de luxe, apprécie ce contact direct avec le monde professionnel: «Nous profitons de cocktails avec des professionnels, de meetings pour parvenir à trouver un emploi. Ekaterina, une étudiante russe du même master, confirme: «Nous rencontrons des hommes d’affaires importants et nous sommes en relation avec une start-up, la MonacoTech, avec le Musée océanographiqueet avec Manfredi Lefebvre d’Ovidio, président de Silversea Cruises, une compagnie de croisière».
■ The Mark Challenge: une compétition internationale créée par l’IUM
Les étudiants en master marketing des biens et services de luxe et ceux en master de luxe participent à une compétition internationale de business plan créée par l’Université Internationale de Monaco, The Mark Challenge. Cette année, la sixième édition, qui s’est ouverte le 15 mai, a proposé deux challenges différents: un centré sur les services et les produits de luxe et un sur le Yacht et le fashion. Elle opposait 49 écoles de commerce et universités de 17 pays. Amélie, Ekaterina et une de leurs amies, Alessa, ont remporté le prix niveau Master. Elles avaient proposé la création d’une entreprise produisant une crème solaire respectueuse des coraux, Lia Monaco.
Publicație : Le Figaro
Qu’apprend-on vraiment dans une école d’ingénieurs ?
Type de cours, organisation des études, missions… Le point sur ce qu’on apprend – et ce qu’on n’apprend pas – dans les écoles d’ingénieurs, à l’heure des choix d’orientation sur Parcoursup.
Pour Astrid, l’école d’ingénieurs était la voie toute tracée. « Quand on est bon en maths en S, on est aiguillé vers une prépa qui mène aux écoles d’ingénieurs », observe cette jeune diplômée des Arts et Métiers, qui a choisi cette filière par goût pour la physique, et grâce à son père, lui-même ancien de son école. A l’image d’Astrid, beaucoup de jeunes s’engagent dans cette voie, à la fois prestigieuse et rassurante, par évidence, ou un peu par hasard, suite à de bons résultats en sciences au lycée.
Mais qu’apprend-on vraiment dans ces deux cents écoles publiques ou privées, qui réunissent 160 000 étudiants, et dont l’attractivité est en hausse ? Qu’on intègre une école directement après le bac ou bien à bac + 2, la formation d’ingénieurs va d’abord permettre « d’acquérir un socle de base scientifique solide », énonce Etienne Craye, de la Conférence des directeurs des écoles françaises d’ingénieurs (CDEFI).
Tronc commun et spécialités
Au programme de ces cursus, délivrés dans des écoles indépendantes ou rattachées à des universités : un tronc commun à base de maths, physique, informatique, puis une spécialisation dans un secteur donné (informatique, travaux publics, aéronautique, etc.). Et, à la fin, un diplôme de niveau master (bac + 5). Mais n’est pas école d’ingénieurs qui veut : chaque formation, pour porter ce nom, doit être accréditée par la commission des titres d’ingénieur (CTI), qui vérifie qu’elle répond à toute une série de critères de qualité.
L’une des marques de fabrique de « l’ingénieur à la française » est sa proximité avec « les besoins des entreprises », souligne Morgan Saveuse, directeur des études de CESI Ecole d’ingénieurs. Alors qu’à l’étranger il est possible de devenir ingénieur sans expérience de terrain, la formation hexagonale prévoit un minimum de sept mois de stage, et des enseignements fondés sur les compétences. En cours, les professeurs font le lien en permanence entre théorie et pratique à travers des mises en situation.
Au CESI, par exemple, la pédagogie repose sur la résolution de problèmes. Objectif : placer l’étudiant en situation d’aller chercher lui-même les solutions scientifiques ou techniques. « Dans un monde où les technologies avancent à vitesse grand V, développer la capacité d’autoapprentissage est une nécessité », relève M. Saveuse. Clément Ruscassie, diplômé en 2011 de Supélec, ingénieur chez Ariane Group, fait l’expérience tous les jours des bienfaits de cette faculté à « apprendre à apprendre », qui lui permet de se plonger dans des sujets qu’il ne connaît pas.
Le développement des « soft skills »
Parmi les atouts de sa formation, le jeune ingénieur retient aussi « les compétences en matière de gestion de projets ». « Une dimension que les écoles ont beaucoup développée ces dernières années », relève Philippe Vidal, président du cabinet de recrutement Vidal Associates. De quoi aussi travailler les « soft skills » (compétences comportementales) indispensables dans des entreprises moins pyramidales, où un ingénieur doit savoir dialoguer avec tous les services, vendre son projet, faire preuve de créativité.
Aux Mines d’Albi, les étudiants ont un semestre pour répondre à une problématique confiée par une entreprise. Très répandu, ce type d’exercice est symptomatique d’une percée de la culture entrepreneuriale dans les écoles, qui sont nombreuses à disposer de leur propre incubateur.
A tout cela s’ajoutent des séjours académiques à l’étranger, et des possibilités de doubles diplômes avec d’autres filières ou écoles. Rachid, qui a intégré l’Ecole spéciale des travaux publics après un diplôme universitaire de technologie (DUT) en mesures physiques,envisage ainsi en master un double diplôme en gestion avec l’université Paris-I Panthéon-Sorbonne pour devenir consultant dans le bâtiment.
Pas assez de RSE au goût de certains élèves
« L’ingénieur n’est plus, comme du temps de Jules Verne, celui qui n’apporte que des solutions techniques. Il est celui qui est capable d’assurer la réussite d’un projet dans toutes ses dimensions, technologiques mais aussi environnementales et sociétales », souligne François Rousseau, directeur général de Mines Nancy. Une évolution que reflète la place croissante accordée aux enseignements de sciences humaines et sociales dans les cursus. Les questions de responsabilité sociale (RSE) et environnementale des entreprises sont également abordées. Mais pas assez au goût de certains élèves. « Beaucoup d’entre nous se posent des questions d’éthique. Nous sommes de plus en plus nombreux à envisager de travailler à notre compte ou dans des entreprises plus petites, qui coïncident davantage avec nos valeurs », remarque Pierre-Yves, étudiant à l’INSA Lyon.
Les élèves ingénieurs forment une grande partie des 30 000 signataires du « Manifeste étudiant pour un réveil écologique », paru à l’automne 2018. Parmi eux, Julie, en master dans une école d’ingénieurs de l’université de Besançon spécialisée dans le génie biomédical. L’étudiante regrette la dimension « trop comptable » de sa formation au détriment de « l’humain », et le manque de prise en compte des questions environnementales : « Nous avons eu une dizaine d’heures consacrées au développement durable, mais rien d’utile pour notre futur métier, c’était trop général. Il faudrait qu’on apprenne concrètement à développer des produits qui consomment moins d’énergie fossile, dégagent moins de CO2… »
Léa, étudiante à l’ESA, approuve : « Les professeurs nous présentent les pratiques existantes, tout en se contentant de nous dire “ce n’est pas très durable, ce sera à vous d’inventer autre chose”. » Un conservatisme lié en partie, selon elle, à l’influence, au sein des écoles, de « grands groupes » qui sont aussi « de gros employeurs ». Mais les choses bougent : à l’INSA de Lyon, étudiants et professeurs volontaires « organisent des formations sur le sujet en dehors des cours et se mobilisent pour tenter de les inscrire durablement dans les programmes », relate Manon, en master dans cette école.
Moins d’un tiers de filles
La vie étudiante dans les écoles d’ingénieurs est souvent riche, avec des activités associatives et sportives variées. Mais le climat n’est pas toujours évident pour les filles. En dépit d’une progression de 45 % ces dix dernières années, elles restent minoritaires en école d’ingénieurs : en 2016-2017, elles représentaient 28 % des effectifs et moins de 10 % dans les écoles du secteur du numérique ou de l’informatique.
Un rapport publié en 2017 par l’association Femmes ingénieurs montrait « une banalisation alarmante du sexisme entre élèves », souvent minorée. « Tout le monde se permet de faire des blagues sexistes, c’est agaçant, sur le ton de la taquinerie », confie Manon, qui observe que la culture dominante de son école reste assez masculine. « Ce sont des préjugés d’ordre intellectuel ou physique. Dans une séance de travaux pratiques de mécanique, par exemple, les professeurs, qui sont en majorité des hommes, ont tendance à parler aux garçons de manière plus technique et aux filles de manière plus imagée. » Quant aux rémunérations, elles sont inférieures dès l’entrée sur le marché du travail pour les femmes – pour des questions de spécialités choisies, mais pas seulement. Une « dimension dont les écoles ne s’emparent pas assez », regrette Astrid.
Bonnes bases scientifiques et technologiques, apprentissage de la gestion de projets, ouverture à l’interculturalité, apprentissage des soft skills nécessaires à la vie en entreprise…, c’est un peu de tout cela qu’on apprend en école d’ingénieurs. Et cela marche : en 2017, plus de neuf diplômés sur dix ont décroché un poste dans les quatre mois, dont les deux tiers avant leur sortie de l’école. Le tout pour un salaire moyen, primes incluses, de 37 400 euros brut annuel. En outre, 10 % des diplômés démarrent leur carrière directement à l’étranger.
Publicație : Le Monde
Università di Bologna, quel concorso che non trova i commissari: 14 docenti si sono dimessi
Accade a Ingegneria. Il caso dopo il ricorso di una ricercatrice che ha portato per tre volte il Consiglio di Stato a prescrivere di rifare la valutazione. Ma ora i prof rinunciano all'incarico. La legale scrive al ministro Bussetti: "Intervenga"
BOLOGNA - C’è un concorso all’Alma Mater, tormentatissimo, che non trova la parola fine. Esattamente a Ingegneria, dove l’ultimo colpo di scena l’hanno scritto i commissari: ben 14, professori di Scienza delle Costruzioni in cattedra in tutt’Italia, hanno rinunciato all’incarico. E il risultato di quella raffica di dimissioni è che all’oggi una commissione non c’è. Tutti si dicono indisponibili a giudicare i candidati, e a rimanere bloccata è questa vicenda che si trascina da quattro anni, tra battaglie legali e sofferenze, che hanno provocato un terremoto nel dipartimento di Ingegneria civile, chimica ambientale e dei materiali (Dicam): lo stesso del rettore Francesco Ubertini. Un caso spinoso, finito ora sul tavolo del ministro all’università Marco Bussetti.
Il caso scoppia quando una ricercatrice viene esclusa dal concorso per due posti da associato nella materia di Scienza delle Costruzioni. Tre sono i candidati, vincono gli altri due, lei fa ricorso al Tar, che lo rigetta. Il Consiglio di Stato invece l’accoglie, rilevando ogni volta un comportamento delle commissioni in violazione della par condicio nella valutazione, ai danni della ricercatrice. Per ben tre volte i giudici in appello annullano gli atti valutativi della commissione e prescrivono di rifare tutto.
Nell’ultima sentenza il Consiglio di Stato fissa pure i criteri cui deve attenersi la commissione per i giudizi, pena il commissariamento. L’Ateneo si muove, dunque, secondo le indicazioni dei giudici. A marzo 2019 nomina una nuova commissione composta da tre membri, stavolta tutti esterni all’Alma Mater. Professori della materia del concorso, coi titoli per fare i commissari. Ma i primi tre docenti incaricati rinunciano, contestando il fatto che i giudici abbiano già indicato i criteri di valutazione, sempre cambiati dalle precedenti commissioni e sempre a svantaggio della ricercatrice.
L’università accoglie le dimissioni e ne nomina altri tre. Niente da fare: no grazie, ci dimettiamo. Risposte tutte uguali, nella maggior parte dei casi i professori si trincerano dietro al fatto che c’è poco tempo, 15 giorni secondo la sentenza, per una nuova valutazione. E di tre nomine in tre si è arrivati a metà maggio a ben 14 docenti che hanno rinunciato all’incarico, mentre uno declina affermando di non aver ricevuto comunicazione dall’Ateneo.
Surreale. Mai visto. Al punto che l’avvocata Lucia Annicchiarico, che segue il ricorso della ricercatrice esclusa, scrive al ministro Bussetti e al sottosegretario Lorenzo Fioramonti per chiedere "un controllo di legalità" sulla vicenda. Oltre alla lettera, inviata nei giorni scorsi, parte un nuovo ricorso in cui viene chiesto ai giudici di sostituirsi all’amministrazione universitaria: "È venuto meno il rapporto di fiducia, chiediamo che sia il Consiglio di Stato a nominare direttamente la ricercatrice nel ruolo di associata e solo in subordine un commissario ad acta", spiega la legale.
"I tre candidati interni stanno vivendo una situazione di estrema incertezza che va risolta: questo impasse ci mette in difficoltà anche nella gestione dei corsi", osserva il direttore del dipartimento Alberto Montanari. "Dopo la terza sentenza abbiamo pensato di avvalerci solo di commissari esterni: abbiamo fornito all’Ateneo una prima lista di nove nomi, poi una seconda di altri nove. Ora siamo arrivati agli ultimi tre: se si dovessero dimettere anche loro, dovremmo chiamare docenti dall’estero o di settori affini. Intanto il dipartimento ha deliberato ulteriori due posti da associato per interni, per contribuire a risolvere la situazione. Ma non sarà sufficiente se prima non si sblocca questa storia che vede coinvolti tre candidati che stimo, persone che lavorano da una vita con noi. La situazione che s’è creata è complessa e inusuale: va trovata una soluzione che garantisca imparzialità nei giudizi e tempi brevi".
Publicație : La Repubblica
|
