The classical idea of \u200b\u200buniversities, now seen at sunset, revolves around the principle of freedom of research and certain corollaries: that neither the political nor private interests interfere in research and education of students, that only scientists judge the scientists, and universities are also accountable to society for the way he uses his freedom.
This is the spirit that reigns in a real university. The role that students play traditional social and political opposition (from May 68 until the Tehran of today) up to the vagaries in the field of clothing and lifestyle of the teachers, academic freedom is a luxury that a democratic and developed society should readily provide forward-looking, recognizing the positive effects. Whether it's algorithms, or discoveries, literary or legal interpretations, new treatments and new technologies, what the university produces freely back in the form of value added knowledge, civil and cultural society which has made it possible.
The privilege has naturally academic counterparts. The teachers must earn their position, which means that only their skills and productivity (to be determined on the basis of what they do, according to evaluation criteria inevitably conventional, but applied universally) justify their position, they are accountable to the community rather than what they seek, but the money they spend in research and, above all, have a duty to make public and transparent criteria and procedures used by those who promote or co-opt them one day replace.
In other words, the university may be free only if it is responsible. On this level, sorry to say, not only the governments of the center-right and center the last two decades have proved disastrous, but the class has given its academic contribution to effective disaster. I'll make an example of connivance objective. Even stones know by now that the reform failed because Berlinguer imposed by academic lobbies that have found an ideal mechanism to multiply places and powers. Beyond the purely verbal protests of the Conference of rectors to the incessant cutting of funds between the governments of recent years and large groups of academic power has always been a match for amorous feelings.
But the connivance between barons and ministers go further. After the appearance of free tracks and effects of incompetent people as Moratti and Mussi, the minister Gelmini - University of questions that probably do not chew much, but it must have consultants who have very clear objectives - gives further interventionist steering not only by imposing all universities the same structure of government, while dramatically increasing the power of the rector are empowered to elect the "full professors employed by Italian universities have proven expertise and management experience, including at international level, in higher education, research or cultural institutions" (Article 2, paragraph 2, Section c ). In other words, only a small group of barons will elect the rector, and because of that count under the rectors are doctors and engineers, anyone who understands what the interest groups, academic and otherwise, involved in the actual governance of the university.
In accordance with the principles of freedom and responsibility set out above, some points of the bill are totally unacceptable, while others, on paper, could be discussed. Among the first is the forty per cent of seats in the Board of Directors reserved for "private", with no constraint of funding (with the private law that contribute to decisions on academic life do not give contributions?). And the same goes for an independent assessment by the contours indefinable, but visibly open to individuals and subject to the empire of the minister. Not to mention the rules on recruitment. Beyond the 'rating' of the national student teachers, which incorporates ideas as old as the world and at the bottom of the ancient university teaching, the composition of committees is obviously cumbersome, as always, and is based on a principle, the draw, replacing in part the mere chance to the old national divisions. In scientific areas organized, namely those who have real power, it is easy to predict that the draw will not change things much.
The principle of the evaluation of individual research in principle is sacrosanct and can not understand why so many encounters resistance on the left (or better you understand very well). Who is old craft known that the Italian university carries at each hierarchical level, a pocket of teachers who, if they have done research on young people, at some point they stop or vivacchiano, making your own business or an interest only their micropowers. That taxpayers pay the salary similar to "teachers" - and there are many - who are employed plus that could be reserved for young people is a disgrace the Italian university. And I do not find anything scandalous in the fact that they are no incentives for the most deserving, those who work harder and better. Rather, what is lacking is the sense that the incentive funds are managed by the Minister of Economy: This just means that the minister will dictate to the academic evaluation criteria that will be anything but scientific. As for the fact that these funds will be derived (in words) from the proceeds of the infamous shield Tremonti, the equation of money and illegal financing of the science speaks for itself.
Even temporary research in theory could be acceptable (if only to test them and to avoid entering a university and his work is not valued anymore). But since we are in Italy and "reform" is at no cost, it is clear that fixed-term contracts are only a precarious again, plus with no indication on future openings.
seems to me that the Bill Gelmini manipulate more or less skillfully diventati.nel some principles that are good and bad common sense University (evaluation, merit, efficiency, etc...) But I have the impression that its purpose is primarily to strengthen the Italian university in top-down way, by giving all power to the alliance between rulers, baronial groups and external actors. In fact, the bill control over what teachers actually do is completely random and smoky, the assessment is a chimera and the simplification of structures in the service of a more despotic than before but as bureaucratic in the past.
Taking into account that the funds have steadily declined and that the structural defects are not scratched in any way, the result of the bill will be a university Gelmini culturally modest, much less competitive on the international stage and subject to political power. In short, a reform but gattopardesca bombastic style of the Italian right, so everything is like before or maybe worse.
Alessandro Dal Lago, "the manifesto," November 6, 2009
0 comments:
Post a Comment