Biroul Executiv al Consiliului de Administratie al Universitatii ''Alexandru Ioan Cuza'' din Iasi transmite un mesaj important legat de cei care promoveaza imaginea falsa asupra activitatii UAIC
Intr-un comunicat oficial al Biroului Executiv al Consiliului de Administratie al Universitatii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iasi (UAIC), se arata faptul ca asociatia studenteasca LS Iasi creeaza o imagine falsa asupra activitatii UAIC.
''Biroul Executiv al Consiliului de Administratie al Universitatii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iasi (UAIC) se delimiteaza de actiunile recent promovate de asociatia studenteasca LS Iasi, care, prin intermediul presiunilor exprimate in spatiul public, proiecteaza o imagine falsa asupra activitatii UAIC.
LS Iasi a implicat Universitatea in 19 litigii, printre care si unul ce vizeaza neacordarea bursei de performanta stiintifica unui membru al acestei asociatii, in pofida situatiei academice precare a acestuia. Solutiile instantelor au fost, in majoritate covarsitoare, de respingere a cererilor formulate de catre respectiva asociatie studenteasca. Este de notorietate activitatea sa sicanatorie, inclusiv la adresa altor institutii de invatamant superior din Iasi sau din tara, fiind inregistrate in acest sens 150 de dosare la organele judiciare.
Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iasi sprijina activitatea tuturor asociatiilor studentesti care isi desfasoara activitatea conform regulamentelor institutiei, in anul 2018 fiind aprobate 730 de solicitari depuse de astfel de organizatii. LS Iasi este una dintre cele 27 de asociatii studentesti care au printre membri si studenti ai UAIC'', se arata in comunicatul Biroului Executiv al Consiliului de Administratie al Universitatii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iasi (UAIC).
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
O echipa de cercetatori de la "Cuza" a reusit sa dezvolte o noua metoda de depistare si caracterizare în timp real a fragmentelor mici de ADN
In cadrul Laboratorului de Biofizica Moleculara si Fizica Medicala al Facultatii de Fizica, echipa de cercetatori a reusit sa dezvolte o noua metoda de depistare si caracterizare în timp real a fragmentelor mici de ADN, ce sunt utile în investigatii criminalistice sau, deseori, constituie biomarkeri ai unor boli grave
O echipa de cercetatori de la Universitatea "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" (UAIC) din Iasi, formata din prof. univ. dr. Tudor Luchian, coordonator, conf. univ. dr. Loredana Mereuta - Facultatea de Fizica, CS II dr. Alina Asandei si CS III dr. Irina Schiopu - Institutul de Cercetari Interdisciplinare - Departamentul Stiinte, a realizat cercetari inedite, rezultatele fiind recent publicate în prestigioasele jurnale stiintifice afiliate la American Chemical Society (Analytical Chemistry si ACS Sensors).
În cadrul Laboratorului de Biofizica Moleculara si Fizica Medicala al Facultatii de Fizica, echipa de cercetatori a reusit sa dezvolte o noua metoda de depistare si caracterizare în timp real a fragmentelor mici de ADN, ce sunt utile în investigatii criminalistice sau, deseori, constituie biomarkeri ai unor boli grave (diferite forme de cancer, hepatita C, diferite infectii virale etc.) sau indicatori foarte specifici ai infectiilor bacteriene (de exemplu, infectarea diferitelor produse alimentare de catre bacteria E.coli sau alti agenti patogeni).
"Am reusit demonstrarea unei noi metode de analiza a urmelor de ADN monocatenar, prin utilizarea unor tehnologii ce permit investigarea materiei la nivel de singura molecula, cu ajutorul nanoporilor proteici. Mai mult, rezultatele noastre demonstreaza rezolutii de detectie de singura nucleotida. Cu alte cuvinte, sistemul nostru poate diferentia între doua tipuri de ssADN (short, single-stranded DNA's - acizi nucleici monocatenari, scurti, de 10-15 nucleotide), care sunt distincte doar în ceea ce priveste identitatea unei singure baze nucleotidice. În viitor, aceasta calitate poate fi exploatata în testari de tip single nucleotide variation-SNV, în medicina moleculara personalizata, stiut fiind ca numeroase conditii patologice sunt generate de prezenta unei singure asemenea mutatii. Asadar, detectia si caracterizarea în timp util a unor asemenea mutatii reprezinta deziderate esentiale pentru elaborarea unor protocoale optimizate, atât de recunoasterea imediata a bolilor generate de aceste SNV-uri, cât si de a oferi tratamente personalizate asociate acestor maladii", a declarat prof. univ. dr. Luchian, coordonatorul echipei de cercetare.
Comparativ cu metodele curente folosite, metoda demonstrata de cercetatorii UAIC presupune costuri financiare mult mai mici.
Studiile realizate împreuna cu cercetatorii Chang Ho Seo, Jonggwan Park, Universitatea Nationala din Kongju si Yoonkyung Park, Universitatea Chosun din Gwangju, Coreea de Sud, au fost finantate prin proiecte nationale si internationale: Global Research Laboratory (GRL-Republic of Korea) (NRF-2014K1A1A2064460), UEFISCDI PN-III-P4-ID-PCE-2016-0026, PN-IIIP1-1.1-TE-2016-0508 ?i PN-III-P1-1.1-PD-2016-0737, precum si prin grantul institutional "Dezvoltarea capacitatii de inovare si cresterea impactului cercetarii de excelenta la UAIC".
"Apoi, daca într-o investigatie criminalistica se pune problema identificarii dintr-un cerc de suspecti a unor faptuitori, prin analiza comparativa a urmelor de ADN de la locul crimei cu a probelor de ADN prelevate din grupul de suspecti se pot identifica persoanele vinovate. În acest caz, analiza ADN se reduce la posibilitatea identificarii precise a existentei unor secvente de acizi nucleici cunoscute dintr-un amestec heterogen, într-un mediu dat. Traditional, în acest scop sunt folosite metode ce amplifica urme (cantitati extrem de mici) de ADN (de exemplu, echipamente ce au la baza tehnica reactiei de polimerizare în lant), dar care prezinta costuri de exploatare relativ mari, necesita infrastructura scumpa si personal specializat în utilizarea respectivelor echipamente. Metoda noastra, pe langa atributele de sensibilitate a detectiei (aproximativ o singura nucleotida diferenta între ssADN-uri distincte) si viteza analizei (secunde-minute), prezinta costuri de exploatare de aproximativ 10-15 ori mai mici", a mai precizat prof. univ. dr. Tudor Luchian.
Publicație : Bună Ziua Iași
How far should the indigenisation of university teaching and research go?
Western ‘settler’ nations such as Canada and Australia are wrestling with how to redress historical injustices visited on their native populations. One proposal is for universities to embrace Indigenous knowledge. But what does that mean in practice? Will it achieve its aims? And where does it leave science? Matthew Reisz considers the arguments
A goanna is a kind of Australian monitor lizard that can grow up to 1.7 metres in length. However, such dinosaurian dimensions are no protection against the lethal consequences of eating a particular kind of cane toad that is spreading throughout tropical Australia and decimating or even obliterating local lizard populations.
But all is not lost. A recent research project involved catching the goannas and exposing them to smaller, unpleasant-tasting but non-lethal toads so they acquired an aversion to them and, thereby, learned to avoid the deadly ones, too. Tracking their survival rates, via radio transmitters attached to their bodies, indicates that the technique has great promise: by the end of the study, 56 per cent of trained lizards had lived beyond 110 days, compared with only 3 per cent of untrained lizards.
To carry out the project, a team of researchers based primarily at the University of Sydney joined forces with rangers from the Balanggarra Aboriginal Corporation, which administers land on behalf of the Balanggarra People at the northern tip of Western Australia. The rangers, it turned out, could spot the lizards at a greater distance than the Sydney researchers could. That was particularly true for the “shyer” goannas, which proved to be better learners and, therefore, crucial to the success of the project. These tended to hide in the long grass, invisible to the academics.
The resulting paper, “Sharper eyes see shyer lizards: Collaboration with Indigenous peoples can alter the outcome of conservation research”, published in March in Conservation Letters, concludes that “Indigenous collaboration is central to this conservation intervention” – which is now being implemented on a larger scale
A similar lesson is suggested by a study from the other side of world, which examined ways to mitigate the effects of climate change on the basin of the Näätämö river in Finnish Lapland, and to restore habitats that had been damaged by dredging, forestry, boat access and other human impacts between 1950 and 1980.
The project incorporated input from teams of Sámi people – the original inhabitants of Lapland. The research drew on their “traditional knowledge observations of the basin, including weather and star lore events” to “point to sites and drivers of change and their implications for salmon in the context of climate change”, according to a review paper, “How traditional knowledge comes to matter in Atlantic salmon governance in Norway and Finland”, published in December in the journal Arctic.
The Sámi were also given digital cameras, and became the first people to report the arrival in the basin of a beetle species usually found further south. This observation "was then published in peer-reviewed science journals, leading to the establishment of visual-optic communal histories as a method to detect change in a subarctic basin”. The overall result of “Indigenous participation at all levels” of the project was “a concrete impact on sustainability”, the paper says.
George Nicholas, professor of archaeology at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, sees evidence of a wider trend. In a February article in The Conversation, provocatively titled “It’s taken thousands of years, but Western science is finally catching up to traditional knowledge”, Nicholas cites the excitement greeting recent research showing that kites and falcons intentionally carry and drop burning sticks to spread fires and flush out insects, rodents and reptiles – something the Indigenous peoples of northern Australia have known about for thousands of years.
“Employing traditional knowledge-based observations and explanations within multiple working hypotheses ensures consideration of a variety of predictive, interpretive or explanatory possibilities not constrained by Western expectation or logic," he writes. "And hypotheses incorporating traditional knowledge-based information can lead the way toward unanticipated insights.”
Traditional knowledge, the article adds, has much to teach us on topics ranging from “medicinal properties of plants and insights into the value of biological diversity to caribou migration patterns and the effects of intentional burning of the landscape to manage particular resources”. Asked by Times Higher Education about the implications for teaching, Nicholas mentions “opportunities for side-by-side approaches”, involving both traditional and Western knowledge – notably within “wildlife biology or ecology courses”.
Such incorporation of Indigenous knowledge into mainstream research and teaching is very high on the agenda in countries whose Indigenous peoples suffered at the hands of Western settlers. In Canada, the epicentre of the movement, the touchstone is the landmark, seven-year investigation by Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission into the history and impact of the country’s notorious system of “Indian residential schools”. These were government-funded and church-run boarding schools that, until the 1990s, sought to forcibly assimilate Indigenous people into the Canadian mainstream by cutting them off from their own culture, in a brutal process that the commission concluded in its 2015 report amounted to “cultural genocide”. Ontario’s Algoma University is actually on the site of one of the schools, and incorporates a cemetery containing the graves of more than 100 students and staff from the school.
The commission report includes 94 “calls to action” regarding Canada’s relationship with its Indigenous people. As part of this, Nicholas argues that university curricula must be indigenised to “make the larger population aware of the colonial history of the land, of the disenfranchisement of the first peoples and what ensued”.
But some advocates argue for indigenisation to go much further. They call for a wholesale blending of “Indigenous knowledge” into teaching curricula and the conceptual frameworks informing research – and not only in the “obvious” subjects that are the frequent focus of demands for curricula to be diversified and “decolonised”, such as history, literature or the visual arts, but also the social and even the natural sciences.
Are such goals realistic? Are they wise? And will they achieve their desired goal of redressing historical injustice and boosting the status of Indigenous peoples?
One obvious issue of social justice afflicting Indigenous populations is higher education admission rates. In New Zealand, says Joanna Kidman, an associate professor in the Faculty of Education at Victoria University of Wellington, “Māori tertiary student enrolments have been a focus for successive governments and all New Zealand universities have policies and support services in place for Māori students”. Yet none of them managed to meet the enrolment targets and pass rates for 2018 set by New Zealand’s Tertiary Education Commission in 2012.
One reason that has been suggested for the low participation of Indigenous students in higher education is the lack of reference to their cultures in university teaching and research. For Kidman, the key is to increase the proportion of Māori academics – which is currently less than 5 per cent of the total in New Zealand. As a result, she says, curricular change has so far been “patchy and very slow”, with medical schools, for instance, still “very entrenched in Western medicine”. Yet “increasingly, where Pākehā [non-Māori] scientists are working in the field in Māori communities, they’re starting to involve Māori in their teams or labs, and that has triggered a slow kind of transformation but potentially a very exciting one”.
Moreover, in research, there are “small numbers” of Māori scientists who are adopting approaches deriving from Māori knowledge and worldviews in their fieldwork, Kidman says. One example is Dan Hikuroa, an earth scientist and senior lecturer in Māori studies at the University of Auckland, who brings Māori perspectives on the natural world to bear on his study of rivers. Another is Pauline Harris, an astrophysicist and senior lecturer in science in society at Victoria University of Wellington, who is “dedicated to revitalising Māori star lore in her academic teaching and research”.
Meanwhile, all incoming students to Australia’s La Trobe University must take a one-hour module on Indigenous history, culture and customs, known as Wominjeka (or Welcome). The university has also introduced a leadership programme and entry pathway for Indigenous school students, “focused on cultural immersion, peer mentoring and an academic boot camp”, according to Andrew Harvey, director of the university’s Centre for Higher Education Equity and Diversity Research. And the School of Education employs “an Indigenous practitioner in residence”, who “works part-time in the community and part-time at the university, overseeing Indigenous subjects and participating in broader subject design and supporting other lecturers”.
The university seeks to promote what Harvey calls “inclusive excellence”, whereby “the presence of Indigenous perspectives across all disciplines can enable non-Indigenous students to be challenged, to question their assumptions and to experience deeper learning through rich conversations”.
In Canada, meanwhile, issues around Indigenous communities have been “a priority for over 10 years”, says Paul Davidson, president of Universities Canada. But he admits that institutional minds were concentrated by the Truth and Reconciliation Committee’s calls to action, and he believes that universities recognise “their unique responsibility in the reconciliation process”. Questions around access are “very urgent”, given that the Indigenous population is growing at three times the national average, while proportions going to university are only a third as high. And in research, too, things are starting to change. Universities are rethinking the old models of research on Indigenous communities – which involved “going up North for the summer” and never sharing any of the knowledge generated – and are now examining how to “work in partnerships in a way that is sustainable”. Nonetheless, Davidson acknowledges, “the heavy lifting is still ahead of us”.
One institution that is arguably ahead of the curve is the University of Toronto. According to Jonathan Hamilton-Diabo, its director of Indigenous initiatives, the institution now has “a rather robust Indigenous story”. In response to the 94 calls for action, a steering committee delivered a report in early 2017 requiring that all major events at the university include a statement acknowledging that the campus is located on what had been – as the statement puts it – “the traditional land of the Huron-Wendat, the Seneca and, most recently, the Mississaugas of the Credit River”. Moreover, Hamilton-Diabo and an Indigenous personal librarian were both appointed as part of a wider push to employ more Indigenous faculty. Mentoring programmes offer potential Indigenous students a taste of life on campus. And a new Indigenous “hub” has been created, featuring a medicine garden and “the opportunity to meet with Elders and traditional teachers for support, guidance and teachings”.
Toronto had also responded to specific calls to action by integrating (or planning to integrate) more Indigenous material into courses on social work, nursing, law, education and journalism. Asked about other disciplines, Hamilton-Diabo responds that the university’s Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering has appointed a special adviser to its dean. Jason Bazylak, an associate professor in the teaching stream of mechanical engineering, will be “assisting with the implementation of strategies for incorporating Indigenous content into the curriculum”, Hamilton-Diabo says. “Thus far, first-year design projects include engineering challenges related to Indigenous communities.”
Given that Indigenous thought and philosophy fall outside “a Westernised ideological and methodological framework”, the university needs to find ways of “combining [the two traditions] in ways that are synergistic” and could expose “the limitations of Westernised scientific methodology”.
On the implications for medicine – where Toronto degrees now include “one full course-worth of content focused in Indigenous health” – Hamilton-Diabo points to the example of an independent community health centre in Toronto “where one can receive pharmaceutical-based medical care for diabetes, [plus mainstream services in] dentistry and counselling, while also having the option to engage with traditional approaches to healing”. These include “fasting ceremonies”, “plant-based medicines” and a “sweat lodge”: a hut in which Elders carry out purification ceremonies.
Meanwhile, the University of Alberta announced last November that it was eliminating a quota system that limited to just five the number of Indigenous applicants admitted to its medical degree via its “Indigenous Health Initiatives Program”. From autumn 2020, the school – which admits 165 students a year – will admit all Indigenous students who meet the eligibility requirements. As well as satisfying the academic standards required of any medical student, the shortlisted Indigenous applicants are “invited to undergo an additional interview with a panel comprised of elders and Indigenous community members and physicians”. This, according to the programme’s director, Tibetha Kemble, is “an opportunity for Indigenous candidates to reaffirm their cultural connection to community and reflect back to us that they are entering the medical school wanting to contribute to the Indigenous community through the special place they would hold as a health professional”.
This has already led to a noticeable increase in interest from potential Indigenous applicants, Kemble says. Given that “returning to community is where the greatest health needs are: where Indigenous people need to see an Indigenous physician across the table”, she hopes that the programme will help “build a critical mass of Indigenous health professionals”.
In terms of the curriculum, Kemble refers to the Truth and Reconciliation Committee’s 24th call to action, which exhorts medical and nursing schools “to require all students to take a course dealing with Aboriginal health issues, [involving] skills-based training in intercultural competency, conflict resolution, human rights and anti-racism”. In response to this, a working group at Alberta has produced a 12-module course on Indigenous health. The first half of this, examining the health issues faced by Indigenous populations, was introduced this academic year; the second half, to be introduced in October, will consider “traditional and Indigenous ways of being in relation to health”.
This will include questions of “intercultural competency”, such as “working safely and respectfully with Indigenous women in birthing practices”, Kemble says. But it will also aim to “balance out a one-sided view of education generally, based on a biomedical model”. More specifically, “if students are looking at some content on cancer or any other condition, there’s always a case study that examines how Indigenous peoples are affected, how we might respond and how an Indigenous worldview might approach this. It’s becoming embedded as a core part of the course. I can’t guarantee this will span every single medical condition, but for the conditions that disproportionately affect Indigenous people there will be some balanced content and students will learn about different forms of treatment for the same condition.”
Such statements and policies, however, ring alarm bells for some observers. One is Rodney Clifton, an emeritus professor of education at the University of Manitoba. His wife is Indigenous, but, for all its faults, he believes that “the Western scientific method is the best way of testing the effectiveness of medical interventions”. To illustrate his point, he tells a story.
“A few years ago, an Indigenous friend of ours had a grandson who had cancer in his leg,” he recalls. “The oncologist said there was a good chance of…saving the child if surgery [to remove the cancerous tissue] was performed soon. Rather than follow this advice, the family decided to go to Indian healers around North America for alternative treatments. A beautiful child died because the cancer spread.”
As Clifton sees it, “Indian medicine is being accepted in universities on faith alone. Moreover, those making the claims for the faith-based [treatments] are not generally open to testing the outcomes in a controlled experimental, scientific, way…I do not think that universities should embrace the idea that knowledge is not open to debate and scientific investigation.”
In his Conversation article, Simon Fraser’s Nicholas notes that “Indigenous peoples don’t need Western science to validate or legitimate their knowledge system”. However, “some do appreciate the verification”. And “although hypothesis testing is not a feature of Traditional Ecological Knowledge, rigour and replicability are not absent”.
Speaking to THE, he cites research by Kelly Bannister, co-director of the POLIS Project on Ecological Governance and an adjunct professor in the Faculty of Human and Social Development at the University of Victoria, which “demonstrated [the] anti-fungal and anti-microbial properties” of balsam root, long used medicinally in the interior of British Columbia. Just as “Western scientific medicine” is fallible but uses laboratory testing to make progress, “there was essentially a comparable kind of testing reflected in [traditional knowledge] of plant properties as to what had positive (or negative) effects, based on hundreds/thousands of years of observing what happened when used”.
But Clifton is not convinced. In a 2017 article in THE, he laments that “current political thinking” in Canada holds that “respectful people” cannot “legitimately question” Indigenous Elders, the holders of traditional knowledge. Hence, “scholars are afraid to publicly question the indigenisation of knowledge for fear of being labelled neocolonialist or even racist”.
He believes that “there is a lot of lip service being paid to indigenisation, and this is generating considerable [heat] with very little light. Universities are doing it because they must…Most professors and administrators are smart enough to realise it is a scam, but they will not say that out loud.”
Someone who is willing to be publicly equally sceptical about many aspects of the indigenisation agenda is Frances Widdowson, an associate professor in the department of economics, justice and policy studies at Mount Royal University in Calgary.
In September 2018, she argued on Twitter that a document given to faculty members by her university's Office of Academic Indigenization, called “Indigenizing Mount Royal’s Curricula: A Call For Engagement”, contained “serious flaws” and constituted “an unprecedented threat to academic freedom, freedom of inquiry and academic standards”.
In a blog posting for the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship in April, she takes exception, for example, to the fact that the university’s biology department is “working with numerous community Elders and Knowledge Keepers” to ensure that students will obtain “a diverse knowledge base that includes the traditional Indigenous knowledge”. And she deplores the stated goal of building a “culture of celebration” at Mount Royal “rather than one that encourages critical thinking and rigorous methods. Even worse, it is tacitly assumed that anyone who has reservations about indigenisation is not an ‘ally’ of Indigenous people. This has created huge difficulties for faculty who question the hype. My criticisms of indigenisation, for example, have resulted in accusations that I am a ‘pathetic racist’ with a ‘hateful perspective’, who is damaging Mount Royal University’s reputation.”
Speaking to THE, Widdowson suggests that some of the things that go on in the name of “indigenisation” can harm those they are supposed to help: “I talk to a lot of scientists who say ‘This is not beneficial to Indigenous people.’ They should be encouraged to become scientists like everyone else and not have a separate stream of ‘Indigenous science’, which is, at best, opinion and, at worst, unverifiable spiritual beliefs. That’s not to say [that such beliefs] shouldn’t be studied, just like Christianity and Islam, but this is about saying that spiritual belief is actually a form of knowledge, which is a whole different question and extremely condescending. The people who will suffer are Indigenous.”
Although Widdowson acknowledges that traditional plant remedies may have therapeutic value, “the difficulty comes with denying the huge amount of scientific progress that has unfolded. Willow bark is not the same as aspirin, even though it’s the same root substance. The amount of understanding and technology that went into creating aspirin is at a much higher level.”
The notion that “Indigenous people have a separate way of knowing and doing things”, Widdowson continues, can lead to claims that “it is inappropriate for a non-Indigenous person to speak honestly with them. People say I am disrespectful, when I see it as ‘This is how I am respectful, because I am letting people know my honest opinion and not pretending to believe something that I do not think is true.’”
Where the limits of indigenisation lie remains very much up for grabs. Nicholas, for instance, says its manifestation in the curriculum is “still unfolding”, and is likely to “take different forms in different contexts”.
But it does seem reasonable to expect a continuation of the trend for Indigenous involvement in research – particularly where local knowledge and understanding has indisputable benefits. The goanna lizards paper notes that “the integration of Indigenous knowledge into natural resource management has been criticised as a fashionable trend, at times amounting to little more than an exercise in ‘box‐ticking’. In an era of political correctness, ‘cultural diversity’ is often valued through the lens of ideology (sometimes bordering on tokenism). In contrast, our study shows direct scientific advantages to cultural diversity in research teams and to genuine collaboration among people from differing races and backgrounds.”
Georgia Ward-Fear, the paper’s corresponding author and a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Sydney, tells THE that although it is crucial to acknowledge the differences between different Indigenous cultures, incorporating “Indigenous perspectives on learning, understanding and observing living systems” into scientific courses could form the basis for “a really well-rounded, progressive curriculum”. For instance, she thinks that Indigenous practical skills such as tracking, hunting and “gaining ecological information” could be incorporated into a “more nuanced” course in field skills.
The conflict is likely to be over how Indigenous involvement in research is conceptualised. The Scandinavian paper notes that while the Näätämö co-management project was successful, the expectations of international policymakers regarding the integration of traditional knowledge with science are “at times unrealistically high, and hard to meet at local levels and in national policy contexts”. It also notes “fish biologists’ tendency to consider Sámi knowledge as a source of data on specific factors related to salmon rather than a knowledge system” that positions salmon in a larger ecological context of relationships. And it notes that the projects that “seem to fulfil [Sámi] expectations of traditional knowledge co-production with science…seem to have the least impact on policy, and vice versa". This creates “questions of legitimacy” among the Sámi participants.
“To achieve social robustness,” the paper suggests, “projects need to balance scientific credibility with legitimacy among local and Indigenous rights holders. This balance might entail giving up on expectations of integrating traditional ecological knowledge with science and embracing the undefined spaces within Arctic and Indigenous knowledge production.”
As “settler countries” wrestle with their dark histories and continuing inequalities, the question of how far the indigenisation process should go is likely to put the relationship between community and reparation on the one hand and research, knowledge and science on the other into ever sharper relief.
Publicație : The Times
University leaders must be free to air views that challenge their communities
The controversy over a Harvard dean’s defence of Harvey Weinstein is no reason to disregard the core academic mission, says Sandro Galea
Harvard University’s recent announcement that law professor Ronald S. Sullivan Jr would no longer remain faculty dean of one of its undergraduate houses raises profound questions for all university senior leaders.
The reasons for Harvard’s decision are complex, involving long-standing complaints about Sullivan’s administration of the house. But the recent focus on his leadership was precipitated by an outcry over his time on the legal defence team of Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. Some members of the Harvard community felt that Sullivan’s willingness to defend Weinstein, who has been accused of multiple sexual crimes, compromised his ability to provide a safe, supportive environment for students. Sullivan’s advocates, on the other hand, have said that although Sullivan no longer represents Weinstein, his willingness to do so is testament to the fact that even people accused of heinous offences still have the right to the best legal defence they can access. Some have even cited John Adams, a Harvard alum, who, in 1770, defended the British soldiers accused of carrying out the Boston Massacre, despite his personal sympathies for American independence.
The Sullivan controversy highlights the challenge leaders of schools and universities face as they navigate the conversation around difficult issues. As the dean of a school of public health, I have long pondered when and how academic leaders should take public positions on issues they feel are important. To my thinking, they must do so. But Sullivan’s case raises the fraught question of what happens when that position runs counter to the views held by many in the institution (since choosing to represent Weinstein has been perceived, rightly or wrongly, to amount to taking a position).
The case for avoiding such scenarios is compelling. Controversial stands can lead to outcry, with members of the school or university community wondering if the leader shares their values. It may indeed be reasonable for them to question whether a leader should be public about values that conflict with community norms. All communities are united by their values and the culture that emerges from them, and it is the job of academic leaders to create an environment where all individuals are comfortable and empowered to voice their perspectives. It is not a stretch to think that if a leader takes positions that are at odds with community norms, the members – faculty, staff, students, alums – may wonder if their differing positions will be accorded the appropriate place in the conversation.
On the other hand, universities have endured through countless epochs because of their commitment to free enquiry and open debate – even if that leads, at times, to uncomfortable places. Guided by these values, universities give students the tools to learn and grow throughout life. In some ways, it is an abdication of this value if leaders do not take positions that they feel strongly about – backed by reason and, where appropriate, evidence – simply because it is at odds with what they think the community wishes. If leaders cannot take positions themselves, what confidence will members of the community have that they can do so? If leaders do not engage in the imperative to freely think, does that not deny to academic communities the very core of the aspiration to engage with the world in all its complexity; to parse different ideas and perspectives; to think for oneself?
This would suggest that universities should create a space for all their members, including their leaders, to think and speak freely, and engage the public conversation in a manner consonant with their scholarship and ideas. But can they? The Sullivan controversy shows what can happen when a school community’s norms seem to conflict with the academic values that drew it together in the first place. The rights of the accused are indeed core to the principles a law school exists to impart. At the same time, the feelings evoked by Sullivan’s defence of Weinstein, particularly among students, were real – and, in these politically fraught times, increasingly familiar.
The question is whether academic institutions remain capacious enough to include the full range of human experience, including our areas of deeply felt divergence. It seems to me self-evident that they must include everything – the hard as well as the easy, the offensive as well as the enlightened, protest as well as pedagogy. Allowing for this means allowing for times when academic leaders take positions that may be out of sync with their communities. When these moments occur, it is a chance for schools and universities to listen, with compassion, to the concerns while remaining committed to the core academic values that allow that community to exist.
This is not easy, as the Harvard case has shown. But neither are the values that academic institutions are designed to uphold. Schools and universities are unique among our institutions in that we have designed them specifically to host these encounters. If such meetings cannot happen here, where can they happen?
Publicație : The Times
Ex-ministers warn Treasury will not make up funding if fees cut
Augar review’s call to replace lost income ‘not credible’, says Lord Willetts, while Jo Johnson warns that any such funding stream could be ‘slush fund’ for ministerial projects
The Augar review’s call for the Treasury to replace in full the university income lost through cutting tuition fees in England to £7,500 is “implausible”, meaning that there is a risk that the fee cut could happen independently and universities must fight to avert that, according to former minister Lord Willetts.
Jo Johnson, who fiercely opposed Theresa May’s plan to review sector funding in his time as universities minister, agreed that there would be “real doubt” that the Treasury would provide extra direct funding for universities. And if such resources were provided, they could end up as a politicised “slush fund for the ministerial project du jour” rather than a sustainable funding stream for universities, he warned.
The comments from the two most influential recent Conservative universities ministers, in interviews with Times Higher Education, emphasised the scale of political opposition to the post-18 education review panel’s plans on higher education funding. Lowering the fee cap to £7,500 would require a vote in the House of Commons, where the Tories lack a majority.
The review panel, led by Philip Augar, said in its report to the government that the maximum tuition fee that universities can charge students should be cut from £9,250 to £7,500 by 2021, with the Treasury replacing the lost fee income “in full”. However, the extra public funding should be targeted at subjects that cost more to teach and have greater “social and economic value”, the panel said.
Lord Willetts praised the review for looking at the post-18 education system “as a whole” and for recommending the return of maintenance grants.
But he said the idea that the Treasury would provide full replacement funding to cover a fee cut was “implausible”. “I just don’t see that as credible,” he added.
That could raise the prospect of a future government seeking to implement the fee reduction without the replacement funding, delivering a huge cut for universities.
“We mustn’t be complacent,” said Lord Willetts. “There is a risk that it [the fee cut] happens.”
There has been “a loss of public and political trust in universities”, meaning that universities must “build links and create understanding with their local MPs, their local councils, with local employers”, countering “classic mistakes” such as the view that “technical education doesn’t happen in universities”, Lord Willetts continued.
Lord Willetts warned that there was a “narrative” espoused by a small number of people within the Conservative Party that holds that the party’s “problem” at the 2017 general election “was not Brexit and wasn’t the quality of the campaign…but it was Corbyn trumping Conservatives on fees”. In this narrative, “cutting fees is the way to win younger voters”, said the peer.
He added: “There might be [Tory] leadership candidates who decide that they should endorse Augar.”
But the potential implementation of a fee cut was “not something to predict now, it’s something where universities’ own behaviour in the next 12 months is going to be important in winning the public battle”, he said.
On tuition fees, Mr Johnson said the Augar report raised “the issue of the level of tuition fee” but then only “tinkers around the edges”.
“If you think tuition fees are a problem, lowering them by [£1,750] isn’t a solution,” he added.
But this plan then “creates issues of what’s going to happen to the lost funding for universities”, Mr Johnson continued. “I don’t think Philip Augar can really bank on any Treasury assurance he receives that the money will be backfilled.”
Although the Augar panel coupled together the fee cut and replacement funding, Mr Johnson said it was “highly unlikely they would go in tandem” in reality. He added: “Any government that implemented this – and I think there’s a big question mark over whether any government ever would – would leave the Treasury to fill in the spaces, but…I think there’s a real doubt as to whether the money would be found.”
Even if such funding were found, there would be “a real risk that it ends up being a slush fund for the ministerial project du jour”, Mr Johnson continued. “It would not be a sustainable stream of funding that would enable universities to plan programmes [and] plan hiring across departments,” he said.
If the fee cut plan proves too problematic for the next prime minister to implement, could it end up in the Tory manifesto for the next general election?
Mr Johnson, whose brother Boris is a front-runner to be the next leader, said that should not be “taken for granted”.
The Augar report was “a contribution to a debate, but there will be many other perspectives on this question”, he added. “I don’t think we can assume it will become party policy – but that’s a matter for whoever ends up leading the party.”
Publicație : The Times
Growing PhD funding shortfall ‘requires national debate’
V-c who chairs financial sustainability group warns that deficit on doctoral training raises major questions
A vice-chancellor has called for a “national debate” on the future of PhD funding in the UK after new data suggested a growing financial shortfall in the training of doctoral students.
Figures published by the Office for Students show that universities in England and Northern Ireland recovered only 47 per cent of the full costs of training and supervising postgraduate research students in the last academic year.
Although it was already known that PhD training was one of the most heavily subsidised activities in universities, the shortfall has been growing: 52 per cent of the full costs of postgraduate research were recovered in 2015-16 and 50 per cent in 2016-17.
The figures come from Transparent Approach to Costing (Trac) data, which attempt to estimate the “full economic costs” of research, teaching and other university activity.
Estimates for full costs are based on allocating direct expenditure on elements such as staff and buildings to each activity while also attempting to adjust for the costs of keeping universities financially sustainable into the future.
According to the Trac data, universities in England and Northern Ireland received about £1.05 billion in income for doctoral training in 2017-18 but the full economic costs were estimated to be £2.24 billion, a deficit of £1.18 billion.
The PhD training deficit was a significant contributor to the overall shortfall in funding research, which was estimated to be £3.7 billion last year. This meant universities recovered 69.4 per cent of the full costs of research, down from 70.8 per cent the year before.
Mark Smith, the Lancaster University vice-chancellor who chairs the UK’s Financial Sustainability Strategy Group, said Trac data had “for some time” shown a deficit for postgraduate research and “that trend is worsening”.
“There is a need for a national debate about the causes of this and the solutions,” he said.
Professor Smith also stressed it was a question that went much wider than universities given that the government’s industrial strategy relied on increasing capacity in high-tech industries that needed people qualified to PhD level.
Sarah Main, executive director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, echoed this by emphasising that government plans to boost the UK’s research intensity to 2.4 per cent of GDP over 10 years meant “investing in skills” as well as infrastructure.
“We can’t achieve that kind of 10-year growth without growing the ranks of researchers significantly, and that needs to include PhD students,” she said.
Trac data suggest that shortfalls like those for doctoral training are typically funded through university activity that returns a surplus, such as teaching overseas students.
However, the deterioration in the funding gap may raise questions for universities without ready access to such surpluses. Trac data by university type suggest that the more teaching-focused institutions tend to recover less than a third of the full costs of PhD training on average.
A report published earlier this year by the FSSG contained an anonymous case study of an institution where ending postgraduate research might be an “unexplored option” to deal with any financial crisis.
However, Douglas Halliday, vice-chair of the UK Council for Graduate Education and director of Durham University’s Multidisciplinary Centre for Doctoral Training in Energy, said that although the data suggested a shortfall on PhD training, institutions provided it “because of the wider benefits that it offers to their institutions, to the sector and to society in general”.
“Many universities recognise that whilst the costs of doctoral education are not clear, the importance of this activity to universities and to the UK more widely will ensure that it continues,” he said.
Publicație : The Times
Quelles sont les universités et grandes écoles les plus influentes sur Twitter en 2019?
CLASSEMENT - Pour la quatrième année d’affilée, le cabinet de conseil spécialisé dans l’enseignement supérieur Headway Advisory publie son classement des institutions et personnalités de l’éducation les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Quelles sont les écoles et universités qui travaillent le mieux leur réputation sur les réseaux sociaux? Quelles sont les personnalités les plus influentes sur le web, dans l’enseignement supérieur? Pour la quatrième année consécutive, Headway Advisory, le cabinet de conseil spécialisé dans l’enseignement supérieur, publie son classement* des établissements et personnalités de l’enseignement supérieur les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Le classement des écoles et universités les plus influentes
Le top 20 des institutions d’enseignement supérieur les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Cette année, au classement des institutions d’enseignement supérieur les plus influentes sur le réseau social, les établissements qui arrivent en tête sont Sciences Po Paris (1er) et HEC Paris (2ème). Ils dépassent l’université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, l’école Polytechnique et l’université de Lorraine, toutes les trois troisièmes à égalité. L’Iéseg et Audencia, deux écoles de commerce, sont sixièmes. Skema, autre école de management, occupe la huitième place du classement.
«Toutes catégories confondues Sciences Po l’emporte largement, six points devant HEC Paris, en capitalisant notamment sur ses 107 000 abonnés. Mais sans pavoiser: avec seulement 16 %, son taux de retweet est faible. Très loin de l’Université de Lorraine qui prend une très belle troisième place grâce à ses 48 % de retweet portés par 13 000 abonnés beaucoup plus impliqués que ceux de Sciences Po ou d’HEC Paris», analyse Headway Advisory.
Le classement des écoles de commerce les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des 20 écoles de commerce les plus influentes sur Twitter.
L’an dernier, HEC avait perdu la première place. Cette année, elle la récupère, devant l’Iéseg et Audencia, deuxièmes ex aequo. Skema (4ème) et l’Essec (5ème), complètent le top 5. Les autres écoles de commerce à entrer dans le top 10 des plus influentes sont l’EM Lyon (6ème), Grenoble EM (7ème), Neoma BS (8ème), Kedge BS (9ème), l’EM Normandie et l’Essca, dixièmes à égalité.
Le classement des écoles d’ingénieurs les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des 20 écoles d’ingénieurs les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Du côté des écoles d’ingénieurs, c’est Polytechnique qui tire son épingle du jeu et domine largement le classement. Suivent les Mines Saint-Etienne et l’ESPCI ParisTech, deuxièmes ex aequo, et les Arts et Métiers ParisTech, quatrième. L’Isae Supaéro (5ème ex-écho), Grenoble INP (5ème ex-écho), Mines ParisTech (5ème ex-écho) et Centrale Supélec (8ème), complètent le top 5 des écoles d’ingénieurs les plus influentes sur le réseau social Twitter.
Le classement des universités les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des 20 universités les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Comme l’an dernier, l’université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne figure en tête de ce classement. En revanche, cette année, elle est accompagnée par l’université de Lorraine, première ex aequo. L’université de Nantes (3ème), l’université Paris Est Créteil (4ème) et l’université de Lyon 1 (5ème). D’autres écoles font bonne figure dans ce classement de l’influence sur Twitter: c’est le cas de l’université de Rennes, de celle de Reims, de l’université Bordeaux Montaigne, du Cnam, de l’université Paris-Nanterre et de Paris-Dauphine, toutes sixièmes ex aequo.
Le classement des écoles d’art les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des écoles d’art les plus influentes sur Twitter.
Cette année, le classement des écoles d’art les plus influentes ne réserve pas beaucoup de surprises. «L’école du Louvre est la plus influente dans cette catégorie devant Strate Ecole de design - qui n’est donc pas tout à fait une école d’art mais n’entre dans aucune autre catégorie - et l’Esmod», commente Headway Advisory. Les Gobelins terminent troisièmes ex aequo et l’Ensad occupe la cinquième place de ce classement.
Le classement des Comues les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des Comues les plus influentes sur Twitter.
«En attendant leur mutation qui fera classer la plupart des Comue (communautés d’universités et d’établissements) au sein des universités, le classement des Comue donne la victoire à l’université Grenoble-Alpes devant Paris Sciences et Lettres (PSL) et Paris Saclay», commente Headway Advisory.
Le classement des institutions et des médias les plus influents sur Twitter
Le classement des institutions et des médias les plus influents sur Twitter.
«Le ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur, de la Recherche et de l’Innovation (MESRI) l’emporte cette année dans cette catégorie devant un média, Le Figaro Étudiant, et un syndicat étudiant, l’Unef», commente le cabinet Headway Advisory. Suivent la Conférence des présidents d’universités (CPU), quatrième, Campus France et Le Monde Campus, cinquièmes ex-aequo.
Le classement des personnalités de l’enseignement supérieur les plus influentes sur Twitter
Le classement des personnalités de l’enseignement supérieur les plus influentes sur Twitter
«Toutes catégories confondues Jean-Michel Blanquer s’impose très largement en surfant notamment sur ses quelque 138 000 abonnés. Certes il est ministre de l’Education et pas de l’enseignement supérieur mais son influence s’exerce très largement au-dessus de ce strict environnement, notamment avec la réforme du bac - premier diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur - qu’il porte», explique le cabinet Headway Advisory. «Derrière s’imposent des «professeurs influenceurs» (Laurent Bouvet, Yann Bisiou ou encore Thomas Piketty) et des communicants de l’enseignement supérieur (Benoît Anger pour Neoma et Frank Dormont pour Audencia)», ajoute le cabinet.
Le classement des influenceurs de l’éducation les plus présents sur Twitter
Le classement des influenceurs de l’éducation les plus présents sur Twitter.
«Cette catégorie récompense en priorité des professeurs stars qui tweetent très peu sur l’éducation et au premier rang d’entre eux Laurent Bouvet. Le très médiatique Thomas Piketty finit deuxième en s’appuyant sur ses quelque 85 000 abonnés (pour seulement… 15 abonnements)», commente Headway Advisory. Suivent Yann Bisiou (deuxième ex aequo), Philippe Mérieu (4ème), François Taddei, Claude Lelièvre et Philippe Watrelot, cinquièmes ex-aequo. À noter la présence dans le top 10 de Marie-Estelle Pech, journaliste pour le Figaro, et de Louise Tourret, journaliste à France Culture.
Le classement des présidents et directeurs d’écoles les plus influents sur Twitter
Le classement des présidents et directeurs d’écoles les plus influents sur Twitter.
Comme en 2018 c’est le directeur général adjoint de Grenoble EM, Jean-François Fiorina, qui l’emporte dans cette catégorie qui regroupe directeurs généraux et présidents d’université. «Mais cette année c’est un autre directeur d’école de commerce, Stéphan Bourcieu (Burgundi SB), qui arrive à la deuxième place d’où il détrône de peu le président de l’université Paris-Nanterre, Jean-François Balaudé, qui le dépassait en 2018 sur ce même podium», commente Headway Advisory. À noter que 12 directeurs d’écoles de commerce et dix présidents d’université dépassent ou atteignent les 50 points pour seulement trois directeurs d’écoles d’ingénieurs.
Le classement des responsables au sein d’un établissement les plus influents sur Twitter
Le classement des responsables au sein d’un établissement les plus influents sur Twitter
Ce classement est largement dominé cette année par Benoît Anger, de Neoma BS. En deuxième position, Frank Dormont (Audencia BS) est également en bonne position. Il est suivi par Bruno Dondero (Paris 1) et Philippe Monin (EM Lyon).
* Ce classement est réalisé en s’appuyant sur l’application Followerwonk à partir de laquelle HEADway Advisory calcule un score d’influence sur 100. Tout en prenant plus largement en compte le nombre d’abonnés cette année, HEADway a choisi de s’appuyer sur Followerwonk pour en nuancer l’impact. Sans parler des faux abonnés, qui sont légion sur Twitter, un compte peut en effet être très suivi par simple curiosité quand un autre compte, même beaucoup moins suivi, génère beaucoup plus d’engagement de ses followers et donc plus d’influence. Un exemple: en ne prenant en compte que le nombre d’abonnés le Prix Nobel d’économie, Jean Tirole, qui en compte 12 700, serait parmi les plus influents de l’enseignement supérieur. Oui mais voilà ce même Jean Tirole n’a tweeté que dix fois depuis son Prix Nobel.
Publicație : Le Figaro
Università, concorso a Tor Vergata: chiesto il rinvio a giudizio per presidente e vincitrice
Abuso d'ufficio e falso per la prova da ricercatore di Diritto commerciale: "Erano già in rapporti di interesse". La procura: "La commissione ha tradotto il testo della candidata". Inchiesta anche della Corte dei conti
ROMA - Sì, il presidente di commissione e la candidata vincitrice del concorso dell'Università di Tor Vergata (Diritto commerciale, ricercatore a tempo determinato), erano in una posizione "di abituale frequentazione e collaborazione scientifica". Per i due, Pietro Masi docente e la candidata Francesca Leonardi, ora c'è la richiesta di rinvio a giudizio: lui per abuso d'ufficio e falso per induzione, lei per false dichiarazioni in concorso.
L'inchiesta della Procura di Roma ha fatto emergere i particolari di una vicenda che due anni fa era arrivata all'Autorità nazionale anticorruzione di Raffaele Cantone e che "Repubblica" aveva già raccontato. L'Anac, partendo da questa vicenda, aveva aggiunto un'indicazione all'eterna questione del conflitto di interesse in campo universitario. Aveva scritto: "C'è un'incompatibilità tra un candidato a un concorso e un componente della commissione quando la collaborazione professionale o la comunanza di vita sfociano in una comunione di interessi economici di particolare intensità, tali da dar luogo a un vero e proprio sodalizio professionale". Gli uffici di Cantone, quindi, nel marzo 2017 passarono gli atti alla Procura di Roma che attivò la Guardia di Finanza e acquisì testimonianza e documenti dell'avvocato Giuseppe Cavallaro, secondo al concorso per ricercatore di tipo B e ora parte lesa. E' emerso allora il rapporto quotidiano tra presidente e vincitrice: la scrivania nello stesso ufficio, le telefonate reiterate, il legame di collaborazione consolidato nel tempo. "Un palese conflitto di interessi". E sono emersi particolari sulla prova in sé: "La candidata non sapeva tradurre un testo commerciale dall'inglese", ha messo agli atti Cavallaro, "e quando ha detto "non è la mia materia" prima il presidente l'ha zittita platealmente e poi l'intera commissione le ha tradotto seduta stante il lavoro".
La procura ha scoperto, ancora, che tra gli atti consegnati dall'università al ricorrente mancavano gli incarichi relativi all'attività didattica svolta dalla vincitrice. Quindi, una nota protocollata del direttore del dipartimento che avrebbe portato alla luce l'anomalia nel percorso formativo della Leonardi. Secondo la pm Alessia Miele, la ricercatrice al momento della candidatura avrebbe depositato un "curriculum vitae gonfiato" nei titoli e nel punteggio: non avrebbe mai tenuto lezioni all'università all'interno di un corso dedicato al Diritto commerciale farmaceutico, per esempio. I suoi pregressi rapporti con il presidente, tra l'altro, sarebbero stati noti anche al rettore Giuseppe Novelli, a processo per un'altra vicenda di concorsi a Tor Vergata. Dall'altra parte, il presidente Masi avrebbe manipolato l'esito del concorso tenendo nascosto il suo stretto rapporto con la candidata.
In un primo tempo il Tar del Lazio aveva respinto il ricorso dell'avvocato Cavallaro: nessun conflitto di interessi. Dopo l'annullamento del concorso da parte dell'ateneo, il Tribunale amministrativo è tornato sui suoi passi. Tor Vergata, però, non ha mai escluso la vincitrice e non ha bandito alcun nuovo concorso né insediato un'altra commissione. La ricercatrice Francesca Leonardi è ancora in dipartimento nonostante il bando congelato: per la Corte dei conti è partito un esposto per danno erariale nei confronti del direttore generale dell'università.
Publicație : La Repubblica
|
