Author: Vice-Chancellor’s Blog (Page 2 of 24)

Yesterday the Public Health Agency of Sweden issued local advice for Uppsala aimed at curbing the spread of infection, now that the pressure on health services has begun to increase in our region. Last week we wrote here in the blog that we need to take a step back in the current infection situation; now even greater discipline is required of all of us to help. Over the next two weeks, we must be extra careful to follow the recommendations. These recommendations are not actually completely new; it is more a matter of applying existing rules and guidelines even more strictly.

During the spring and autumn we have developed and applied effective solutions in our activities and infection rates at the University have not given cause for concern. However, we need to be equally careful away from work.

There is a striking need to reduce the burden on public transport. In accordance with the stricter advice, over the next two weeks it is particularly important to give everyone at the University who can work from home the opportunity to do so, especially those who are dependent on public transport for getting to work. In this way, we will make room for those who really do have to take the bus to their job or studies.

If everyone who can makes room in local transport, keeps their distance in shops and minimises social contact with people outside their own household, this will yield results.

The University’s activities will continue as before in formats that are adapted for infection control. We will not close our premises to students or staff, but we will make an even greater effort to keep our distance and avoid crowding.

Infection rates are increasing in Uppsala and we need to be particularly careful right now and in the coming weeks when we choose to meet physically. After all, in many cases digital alternatives work extremely well. However, sometimes meeting in well-planned and orderly ways helps us to keep going now, when we know that this situation is going to last longer than we thought at first.

We decided quite early on in the pandemic not to routinely postpone or cancel activities, but to try to adapt instead. Many events have necessarily been almost completely digitalised – and have far surpassed expectations. Others have been adapted with spacing to enable us to meet anyway, sometimes in combination with online streaming.

This past week we have participated in several adapted events of this kind. Being able to meet in somewhat more formal ways to celebrate important occasions and initiatives gives an energy boost and new momentum, and creates memorable moments.

One example is the recent inauguration of the interdisciplinary research project AI4Research. This is a five-year project designed to reinforce, renew and further develop research in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. We are delighted to have received generous support from the Beijer Foundation and Anders Wall for the new Beijer Chair in Artificial Intelligence, held by Professor Thomas Schön, director of the new project. This is an exciting venture that will benefit the entire University and many fields of research. Another exciting project that was inaugurated this week is GlobeLife, a project for developing interdisciplinary collaborations in global health between our University and Karolinska Institutet.

It was a particular pleasure to have the opportunity as Vice-Chancellor to present the award “For Zealous and Devoted Service of the Realm” at a fine – and carefully distanced – ceremony in the University Main Building on Thursday. This award dates back to 1803 and is presented once a year to those who have been employed by the state for at least 30 years, or 25 years in connection with retirement. This year, 61 people were thanked for the important work they have done and do at Uppsala University.

It was also pleasing to have the opportunity to plant a new tree in the Botanical Garden, a gift from Akademiska Hus. My thanks for this gift, and for a good partnership over the years!

Last thursday I was invited to a roof-raising ceremony at Building 10, Nya Ångström. The building has reached the point where the facade and roof are virtually finished.

The builders had gathered on the ground floor to celebrate this milestone. We walked into the atrium at the heart of Building 10. The atrium is stunning, soaring nearly 30 metres to the ceiling. You can now begin to sense the setting taking shape, with reception, teaching premises, restaurant and offices for the IT Department.

I was invited to make a speech. The workers stood on the different floors around the atrium. It was quite a feeling to look up and see all the people involved in constructing this building. I tried to describe how important their work is. When it is all finished, Nya Ångström will have a total floor area of 100,000 square metres for education and research in technology and natural sciences. This facility will be a focal point for Swedish and international students and researchers. It will make a significant contribution to the future of Uppsala, the region and indeed the whole country. I thanked them for carrying out this important project within the planned time and budget, despite the complications caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

Finally, I had a chance to look at the placement of the Foucault pendulum, which will be 28 metres long. The bracket is already fixed in the ceiling and the circle in the floor over which the pendulum will swing is already clearly marked.

I cycled away feeling grateful and proud.

Johan Tysk, Vice-Rector of the Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology

The infection situation in Sweden, and particularly in Uppsala, is cause for concern. The number of people testing positive for COVID-19 has increased sharply in the last few weeks. Young people, not least students, have been identified as groups that are playing a major role in spreading infection.

To some extent, students have been unfairly singled out for criticism. There are examples of social gatherings among students leading to the spread of infection, but the figures do not really show that students differ from other groups of young people, according to Johan Nöjd, infection control doctor in Uppsala. Our impression is that students’ unions and student nations in Uppsala are continuing to act responsibly.

Nevertheless, the situation right now gives cause for concern. We certainly do not want to end up in the same situation as in the spring, when the universities had to move all their education online.

That is what makes it particularly important that we continue to follow the general advice to keep our distance, wash our hands and avoid gathering in large groups. The longer the pandemic goes on, the more we relax. Now it is time to concentrate again and make sure that we really do keep our distance.

Time to step back a pace, in other words. This applies to our students of course, but it also applies to all the rest of us!

The autumn deans’ away days at home on Thursday to Friday were a welcome physical meeting. We had fewer participants than usual this time and used spacious rooms in the Castle. Meeting in real life and letting the conversation flow in the room was invigorating and sparked new ideas in a way that is difficult to achieve digitally.

We started off with an absorbing debate about leadership during the coronavirus crisis. The balance between collegial management and line management changes in crisis situations, which affects the role of leader. Some participants were keen to have clear messages and more decisions from the top, while others thought that the decisions allowed welcome scope for adaptation to the local circumstances in each part of the organisation. There are many lessons to be learned. In a crisis, there may be good reason to deviate from normal procedures and take quick decisions, but it is important to be able to return to previous principles when the urgent danger is past and to find a way to restore functional normalcy. The pandemic started suddenly and as a crisis but has now moved into a more chronic state, and we need to find sustainable models that can work as long as the pandemic continues.

At present, the solutions vary somewhat between different parts of the University. Some differences are well-motivated, but perhaps not all. Those who feel the inconsistencies most are our students. We are receiving clear signals from them that coordination needs to improve. Certain programmes have all students on campus, others none.

This autumn, it is essential for everyone to focus on the established priorities: it is particularly important that teaching for first-year students, students with special needs, practical tasks and exams can be scheduled on campus to a sufficient extent. Our focus must be on the quality of our activities, and meeting physically in seminar rooms and laboratories is inspiring and enhances the quality of education for our students.

Our message is:

• This is going to take a long time – keep going, stay strong and remain alert.
• Act swiftly and resolutely when infection is discovered.
• Help one another so that everyone manages to give campus-based education to the prioritised groups and components (as set out in the Vice-Chancellor’s decision):

1. Courses for new students and the first semester of educational programmes.
2. Students for whom special educational support has been approved.
3. Practical tasks that cannot be performed digitally.
4. Examinations that are difficult to carry out digitally.
5. Final exams and mandatory components in the final year of educational programmes.

We also found time for other issues during the away days, such as implementation of the University’s Mission, Goals and Strategies document, the upcoming HEI audit of our quality assurance procedures and – not least – an overview of what’s going on in the students’ unions and disciplinary domains. Listening to one another and drawing inspiration from one another is an important part of finding new ways to make the most of the entire breadth of our comprehensive University.

Finally, we had a productive session on the ongoing inquiry on research infrastructure. This session included two entertaining features: we had to react to radical scenarios to test the positions we take and we took part in a photo competition “Guess which infrastructure”. Vice-Rector Mats Larhed won the competition – congratulations!

We have written previously about developments in the pipeline at European level in the area of research, education and innovation that will affect us in Sweden. A great deal has happened since then, both in Brussels and in Sweden.

Yesterday there was a digital hearing on the proposed national strategy for Sweden’s participation in the upcoming EU framework programme for research and innovation (Horizon Europe). The proposal has been drawn up by the coordinating group EU-SAM, which is led by Vinnova. Uppsala University welcomes this initiative, though we wish it had been in place a year ago. That would have given us a shared national platform from which we would have had better prospects of influencing the contents of the framework programme to align more with Swedish wishes and priorities.

One obvious trend is that in its initiatives, the EU is seeking engagement and co-financing from the Member States. The goal is to guide the countries, by various incentives, towards shared strategies for increasing effectiveness and interplay between their various systems of research, innovation and education. The initiatives stem from policy discussions that reach the higher education institutions all too rarely, despite the fact that universities and other HEIs account for more than half of Sweden’s participation in the framework programme. Thanks to our membership of The Guild, we now have insight into the processes and can participate in the discussion.

One good example of an important policy discussion of this kind is the agenda-setting initiative European Research Area (ERA ), which the European Commission presented today. The Commission’s communication proposes a ‘relaunch’ for the ERA through a ‘pact’ for research and innovation in which the Member States commit themselves to developing prioritised measures together. A good deal of the contents was as expected, for example, the call to Member States to concentrate on major societal challenges, particularly economic recovery and the digital and green transitions. One new goal is that within ten years, the Member States will devote five per cent of public funding for research – a proposed 1.25% of GDP – to the EU’s joint programmes and partnerships. The idea is for Member States to adopt the goals of the document voluntarily. To some extent, this reflects what The Guild has called for (read the document from the Guild here), although we would have liked to see the UN Global Goals as the foundation, rather than the needs of industry, as well as higher targets for public investments.

On the home front, we need national coordination and transparency in the Swedish process of developing positions and input. To be able to participate in EU-level conversations, we need to become clearer about what we want in Sweden and able to communicate this in our dialogue with European partners. This is our hope of the national strategy for Sweden’s participation in the EU research programme, which is now being prepared. We have given our input to the strategy, in which we emphasise that our priorities should be based on excellent science, stress the importance of basic research in the value chain and of infrastructure for research, and highlight the potential for integrating research and education at our comprehensive universities.

The new Commission has chosen to place education, research and innovation under the same commissioner, Mariya Gabriel – a clear signal of the link between research and education, which we consider self-evident – while the Swedish Government has chosen to limit itself to a strategy for the research programme alone. This is a shame when so much is now happening at the interface between education and research at the initiative of the Commission, for example, digitalisation, the career system and the transformation of our sector. This applies not least to the Commission’s latest European Universities Initiative, in which eleven Swedish higher education institutions are taking part in various alliances, in our case ENLIGHT. This has been called a ‘testbed’ for Vision 2030 on the Future of Universities, another Commission initiative targeting our sector.

After nine years as deputy vice-rector, this summer I stepped up as Vice-Rector of the Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy (Medfarm). This is an exciting challenge that I am very much looking forward to. It’s the first time Medfarm has chosen a vice-rector with roots in the Faculty of Pharmacy. I feel I enjoy strong support from the entire disciplinary domain and the first few months have more than confirmed my positive expectations of the role!

As in all parts of the University, in our disciplinary domain too, the spring was dominated by the coronavirus pandemic. I am very pleased and proud that all the staff were so committed, flexible and pragmatic in their approach at a time that brought new challenges and demanded changes in the way we taught, did research and studied. By our combined efforts, we managed to reorganise our activities in a short space of time and were able to carry out our teaching and assessment remotely. We learned plenty of lessons at Medfarm, which we will take forward as we move ahead.

A great deal is happening at Medfarm and things are moving fast. One obvious example are the new opportunities offered by this autumn’s budget bill, which increases direct government funding for education and research. A larger budget than usual shows that the government has confidence in what we are doing.

Medfarm has drawn up a joint goal for collaboration between Region Uppsala and Uppsala University, focusing in particular on arrangements for carrying out student placements. The new six-year medicine programme will start in autumn 2021 with new funding from the government, and we are launching a completely new occupational therapist programme in response to requests from the health services to meet the region’s needs.

To provide motivation and obtain a clear picture of where we are heading and why, we need a vision. The vision will build up a picture of our future aspirations that we have courage and passion enough to believe in. As early as 5–6 October, I will be gathering the domain’s staff and students for a series of workshops to work together on our vision. The challenge will be to raise our sights and aim for what is best for the entire organisation – and by that I mean both Uppsala University and the Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy. All students and staff will have a chance to make their voice heard and everyone is invited to participate actively, whether in physical meetings or virtually. The workshops will be led by an English-speaking facilitator with extensive experience of similar processes at other universities in Europe.

The work on our vision is one of our most important tasks in 2020–21 and will influence our activities for a long time to come. I have invited everyone connected with the disciplinary domain to take part and get involved for Medfarm’s future! Register here: www.medfarm.uu.se/vision

Mats Larhed, Vice-Rector of the Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy

The funding and organisation of research infrastructure is an urgent and vital issue for Sweden’s future as a research nation. Like many other stakeholders we raised this issue in our input to the government’s research bill. On Tuesday the government issued a short press release announcing that funds will be allocated in the autumn’s budget bill to both research infrastructure and direct government funding for higher education. Next year, both the direct government funding and the project and infrastructure funding available to the Swedish Research Council will be increased by a total sum in excess of SEK 2.7 billion. While it is positive that our message has been understood, we will naturally read the details in the research bill that is expected this autumn very carefully.

We also look forward with great interest to the inquiry that Tobias Krantz has just begun, on the very subject of the funding, organisation and prioritisation of research infrastructure. The research infrastructure landscape presents a fragmented picture, with many international linkages. An analysis of the system and the challenges we are struggling with is something the higher education institutions have long been calling for. Tobias Krantz was at Uppsala University yesterday. He met representatives of the FREIA Laboratory and the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC) and concluded the afternoon as the opening speaker at a Vice-Chancellor’s Seminar on research infrastructure.

It was a good seminar, with around 30 sparsely placed participants in the Humanities Theatre and more than 120 participants via Zoom. Many important questions were raised. A coherent structure is needed, with a clearly formulated mandate and long-term funding for the major facilities. That said, it is important to pick up on innovative, bottom-up ideas. The needs of research must be central and the higher education institutions have to be involved and exert influence. It is not easy to combine a long-term perspective and renewal. No single model will fit all research infrastructure. SciLifeLab is a successful example of a distributed infrastructure with many interlinked platforms and facilities that encompasses both sustainability and renewal.

With regard to funding as well, there will be no single solution. Fees are appropriate for some infrastructure facilities, but not for others. Although people often say that industry can contribute financially, a glance at the international picture shows that in the best case, industrial actors cover around 10 per cent of the costs. Having said that, there is great potential to recognise shared interests leading to joint projects with industry.

Another point that needs to be discussed in detail is our outlook on the balance between investments and operations. Some infrastructure facilities, particularly in humanities and social sciences, while not requiring high initial investment costs, take years to build up. It may therefore be more constructive to think instead about a building-up phase and an operational phase for more effective funding. In general, the inquiry needs to make impact analysis a recurrent theme.

The role of large-scale national e-infrastructure is another important issue that was discussed. Access to computational and storage resources is vital to ensure that other infrastructures work effectively and support research advances. E-infrastructure can therefore be regarded as the infrastructures’ infrastructure. We need to build on what already exists and come up with a coherent organisation with long-term funding that is based on research needs. Another area that must not be forgotten is instrumentation and accelerator development, the FREIA Laboratory being one example. This vital development of technology for infrastructure, which often goes on to benefit industry, falls between the cracks in terms of funding and needs to be made visible.

Tobias Krantz has received wide-ranging terms of reference and we are more than happy to assist his endeavours. In doing so, we must focus on the essentials and not forget that we HEIs can, and should, do certain things ourselves. Krantz, who throughout showed great interest in the issues, warned about exaggerated expectations of the inquiry and we do of course realise that it will not be able to solve everything. But we hope it will at least take us a few steps forward.

The semester has started and activities are underway, with students on campus and many people very responsibly keeping their distance to prevent the spread of COVID-19. We have distancing hosts on campus to remind anyone who forgets. We had our first cases of infection in a couple of student groups this week, and the situation was dealt with quickly and responsibly by course coordinators and faculties. With so many thousand students, it would be strange not to have a single case, so this was not unexpected. However, we would like to take the opportunity to remind everyone to keep going, stay strong and comply with the restrictions so that we can avoid a return to remote education other than briefly in small groups while contact tracing is in progress. Both in Uppsala and in Visby, we are maintaining close contact and collaborating well with the health services’ contact tracing operations.

Keep up to date via the web (for employees, and for students) and follow the instructions about what to do if you personally have tested positive or have an infected student or member of staff. In Sweden we have great individual responsibility under the Contagious Diseases Act, which makes it an offence to fail to provide prompt information about infection.

As usual, the week contained many meetings. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor met the groups preparing for the Swedish Higher Education Authority’s review of our quality assurance procedures. Many people have been involved in the preparations and we will be following the work with interest. This week we learned that the government is making a legislative change and has appointed Peter Honeth to assist the responsible authority, the Swedish Council for Higher Education, so that the scholastic aptitude test can be carried out this autumn. There have been many twists and turns in this issue and we now await news of what this will mean for Uppsala. The week also offered a time for celebration when the Ångström Laboratory’s new Building 9 was inaugurated at 9 o’clock on 9/9.

On Tuesday, I (Eva) had a productive meeting with some 40 young researchers from the organisation Junior Faculty. I received many questions related to the ongoing pandemic and I would like to try here to summarise some of the discussions we had on stalled research projects, isolation, our take on masks and long-term impacts of the pandemic, and in which channels to seek information about the coronavirus/COVID-19.

It is not yet possible to take in all the consequences of the pandemic for research or to see how to deal with these impacts. The situation of doctoral students has been discussed and will be assessed in connection with their individual study plans to identify any needs for extensions. Along with other university leaders in Sweden, I am drawing attention to the need to extend funding periods and other measures. The impact of the pandemic has varied. While some have been able to use this period to focus on their writing with fewer distractions, others have been delayed by not being able to travel or being unable to collect the data they need.

The pandemic has caused anxiety and uncertainty about what to do, which can be difficult to manage. This is something we all need to bear in mind. I sometimes say that academia is an environment where praise is in short supply, and I think at this time it is more important than ever to be generous and show appreciation for one another. Get in touch with those who cannot be here physically and ask how they’re getting on. When working at home a lot, it is important to sit comfortably and correctly, and to make sure to move around. We’re eager to become incredibly efficient in Zoom, but it’s important not to forget those other things. A bit of light-hearted chat about inessential things has a place in Zoom too.

Whether or not masks should be worn is a question that many people feel strongly about. We do not require people to wear masks at the University, but naturally anyone who wants to wear a mask can do so. It is important that masks are not used as an excuse for not keeping your distance or following the recommendations of the Public Health Agency of Sweden. Personally, I use a mask when I travel by train or fly. We have picked up signals from the regional health authority that they regard public transport as a major risk. We therefore call on everyone to walk or cycle as far as possible.

When we look back on this time, we will surely see that we have changed the way we do things – what is important is that we maintain our focus on quality. One positive effect we can already note is that our entire organisation at all levels has become sharper at using digital tools in our work. This will move the University forward. Some of our digital solutions are here to stay – many people attest that Zoom meetings have worked better than physical meetings and want to keep them. Having said that, we have also realised how much physical meetings mean and how much we miss them.

I was asked about the long-term consequences for international mobility. This is one point I feel certain about. International mobility is important and must continue. Knowledge knows no borders. International experience is good not only for the career, it also brings intercultural competence that increases understanding between people. In this way, the Erasmus Programmes, for example, are also a peace project. On the other hand, our travel patterns are likely to change: there will be fewer short trips to conferences and meetings that can be held digitally. This will have benefits for both health and the environment. But keep going on postdocs, field studies, exchanges!

With regard to which information from the University about COVID-19 to follow, such a large university as Uppsala needs multiple channels. General information for everyone is gathered together in the Staff Portal and for students on uu.se, but the conditions vary so much across our broad university that local information is also needed at various levels. On the Vice-Chancellor’s Blog we try now and then to explain the management’s view of the situation and how to interpret the general decision by the Vice-Chancellor from this summer which is still in effect.

One of the most essential issues for a university is to succeed in recruiting and retaining the very best researchers and teachers. This is the key to continued success, new discoveries and satisfied students. If we are to be an attractive research and education environment that will interest the best people, not just nationally but internationally, we have to develop the career paths we can offer at the University. Consequently, several projects are now in progress dealing precisely with the University’s talent recruitment, development and retention.

Today a digital hearing was organised with Ann Fust and Magnus Ödman, whose inquiry has resulted in a proposal on new Appointment Regulations, which is now being circulated for comment. It was pleasing to see so many participants in the Zoom meeting – close to 100 people – and to receive so many good, constructive comments. Many individuals have contributed ideas and opinions in the course of the inquiry, and I would now like to encourage everyone to contribute to the consultation responses too so that we can further hone the proposals. The subject involves taking a position on many difficult questions, and great commitment and boldness are needed to create the career paths that will be most advantageous for our University’s development. Many thanks to Ann and Magnus, the commentators and other participants in the seminar! To be continued.