32 items | 8 visits
Mare BV's List: Science Policy, Higher Education Policy - and Research
-
Jul 25, 14
Ovih dana stižu dopisi vezani za HRZZ natječaj za doktorande. I ono što vidim bi trebalo ići pod rubriku nevjerojatno, no prije nekoliko postova je taj naslov već netko iskoristio. Naime, u dopisu stoji doslovno: “Doktorandi će biti zaposleni na
-
Sep 02, 13
"It is so bad that the worst part of all has gone under the radar: it basically ratifies the idea (last seen in the UK a couple years ago) that the quality of education is strictly equal to how much money you make after you graduate."
-
Mar 01, 12
The issue for me is the tightly bundled nature of the current hierarchical ranking of journals with employment hierarchies within the academy. It’s as if the journal system has been hijacked by the audit culture of the academy, one that requires that we place a “value” on everything. Higher education is on a slippery slope rushing to a place of ignoring the quality of the actual ideas in a journal article, instead assuming that a particular article must be “good” because it is published in a “ranked” journal. I find this kind of Group Think distressing — it stunts creativity and privileges those who are already at the top
-
-
Jan 03, 11
"Some UK universities are considering awarding students in all subjects extra marks to their degrees if they can show "corporate skills" or experience in the jobs market, the Guardian has learned."
-
-
Subject inventions
A subject invention "means any invention" that is "conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the performance of work under a funding agreement." This definition covers a wide range of research activities that are either partially or completely federally funded. The CFR notes two questionable scenarios that do not give rise to subject inventions.
The first happens where an invention is created in closely related research outside the scope of the federally funded research. In this case, it must be shown that the non-government research did not "diminish or distract from" the federal research.
The second scenario occurs when research is wholly outside the scope of federally funded research, but may utilize some government funds (like equipment purchased for another research project). In this case, it must be shown that the research was done "without interference with or cost to the government-funded project."
Nevertheless, this definition is so broad, and it is very difficult to prove that research did not diminish, distract from, interfere with, or cost the government funded program. As such, many institutions assume that where federal funds have been used anywhere in a lab, a subject invention exists.
-
-
Nov 09, 09
Abstract: It is no secret that links between the commercial sectors and science and technology are increasing. Many policy-makers, business leaders and members of the science community argue that this is positive for both science and society. But there is growing evidence that the science commercialisation agenda brings with it a wide range of detrimental effects, including bias, conflicts of interest, a narrowing of the research agenda, and misrepresentation of research results. This report takes an in-depth look at the evidence for these effects across five sectors: pharmaceuticals; tobacco; military/defence; oil and gas; and biotechnology. Its findings make disturbing reading for all concerned about the positive role of science and technology in our society.
-
-
-
-
List Comments
(0)
List Info