tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5168446943555931790.post5740205830426632835..comments2022-08-19T13:51:53.470+02:00Comments on Forskningsfrihed?: Evalueringspanelet har barsletCurt Hansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18371112676165103629noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5168446943555931790.post-54230581845499575962009-12-11T14:36:35.558+01:002009-12-11T14:36:35.558+01:00Jeg håber at Claus er kommet længere frem i rappor...Jeg håber at Claus er kommet længere frem i rapporten, men synes lige vi skal konstatere at evalueringspanelet på et centralt punkt udtrykker sig helt klart:<br />"In the Danish university sector the topic ‘freedom of research’ is a complicated issue that has various legal, political and economic dimensions. One of the core dimensions with legal<br />and political connotations concerns article 17.2 of the 2003 University Act. This article is seen by many academic staff members of the universities as a major symbol of the controversies<br />around the Act, as it gives the institutional leadership the formal power to tell individual staff members which academic tasks to perform. The article could be regarded<br />as an intrusion into traditional values and rights of academic university staff.<br />During the university visits the Panel heard very strong views on this article from many members of academic staff. These are mainly driven by a fear of possible infringements<br />of the individual staff members’ traditional freedom to determine the nature and focus of their own teaching and research activities. On the other hand, many academic staff<br />members did not view article 17.2 as a real problem. In their view practically all university staff members can in practice determine their own research agenda and choice of<br />methodology within the specific strategic, scientific quality and financial frameworks of their institution.<br />Although the Panel has heard about only a few examples of the explicit use of the article in practice, we find that the question can be raised whether article 17.2 in all its details<br />fits the Danish and European traditions with respect to academic freedom. In addition, the strong controversies around the article, even though the issue may be mainly symbolic,<br />have a negative impact on the intra-university governance relationships and the effectiveness of the university leadership.<br />Taking these considerations into account, the Panel recommends the Parliament to remove or reformulate the article 17.2." jvf p.39 i rapportenLeif Hansenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15434806868981692336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5168446943555931790.post-84452392271329521372009-12-11T14:28:11.023+01:002009-12-11T14:28:11.023+01:00Denne kommentar er fjernet af forfatteren.Leif Hansenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15434806868981692336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5168446943555931790.post-31282896424832323342009-12-04T00:19:05.100+01:002009-12-04T00:19:05.100+01:00Bestemt, vi er klar. Jeg er kun nået til et af de ...Bestemt, vi er klar. Jeg er kun nået til et af de indledende afsnit, kapitel 3, "The Wider Context". Det slår mig her hvor helt vildt politiserende et dokument det kapitel gør rapporten. Læseren skal åbenbart indskoles i regeringens globaliseringsstrategi, der som bekendt ser Danmark som en koncern (altså ikke først og fremmest en nation blandt andre nationer i et internationalt samarbejde, fx om løsning af regionale og globale problemer, men en virksomhed der konkurrerer med andre virksomheder), og som anskuer universiteterne som et middel til at styrke denne koncerns konkurrenceevne, så det skal stå krystalklart, at den målestok, evalueringen foretages efter, er om universitetsloven af 2003 og fusionerne i 2007 tjener hensigterne i denne strategi. Autonomi forstås derfor som autonomi for universitetet som virksomhed (for ledelsen, om man vil), ikke autonomi i forhold til videnskaberne og selve uddannelserne. Det er den præmis, som læseren af evalueringsrapporten bedes tage for pålydende. Problemet er, at dette billede af hvad globaliseringens udfordringer er, og hvad et universitet er, langt fra er så entydigt.<br />Så ja, det er da godt at der er kritiske ting i rapporten og jeg glæder mig til at læse mere om dem.<br /><br />Nå, det minder mig om at jeg fra en deltager i bloggens netværk for kort tid siden modtog denne overvejelse:<br /><br />------ citat:<br />Jeg er ikke mindst spændt på at se, hvad der siges om den akademiske frihed. Som det har været fremme, var to af de aktuelle evaluatorer, Elaine El-Khawas og Abrar Hasan, jo med i undersøgelsespanelet til OECD-rapporten om danske univ. fra 2004, hvor begrebet "freedom" også var oppe at vende. Og som jeg vist engang skrev til dig, var det eneste, der blev udtrykt bekymring for, <b>bestyrelsernes</b> frihed i forhold til <b>udviklingskontrakterne</b>! Om "freedom" i relation til forskning stod kun: "The examiners heard a number of references about the importance of freedom for universities in determining their own research. The examiners endorse the point in principle but do not believe that this is a significant problem in Denmark. More important perhaps is the need for universities to settle how much priority should be given to strategic research and contract research alongside basic research [...]" <br />------ citat slut<br />(fra p.22 §85 i "REVIEWS OF NATIONAL POLICIES FOR EDUCATION: UNIVERSITY EDUCATION IN DENMARK – EXAMINERS’ REPORT" of 6. jan. 2004; <a href="http://en.vtu.dk/publications/2004/reviews-of-national-policies-for-education-university-education-in-denmark" rel="nofollow">here</a>)Claus Emmechehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15178622978617417914noreply@blogger.com