Category: Uncategorized (Page 15 of 34)

(Original Swedish post)

The Humanities Theatre is one of the University’s new meeting places for boundary-crossing dialogue and discussion. It was also the venue for the spring semester’s deans meeting. This is an occasion that brings together the University management, all the deans, vice-deans, student representatives and senior officers for mutual exchange of information and strategic discussions about the future. We – the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy Vice-Chancellor – started proceedings by presenting results for 2017 from the annual report and the budget documentation for 2019–2021, as well as current national inquiries on higher education. We also reminded those present of our general strategic priorities: quality, career and professional development, internationalisation and infrastructure.

The morning’s programme continued with Eva Tiensuu Jansson, who talked about EIT Health. This is a major European collaboration project ranging from education and training to collaboration and innovation, linked to the societal challenge of health for an ageing population. The activities so far are impressive. We saw film clips from the student EIT Health projects Innovation Day and Innovation Game on Gotland. We’re sure this opened the eyes of many in the auditorium to new possibilities for cooperation.

One of the most urgent issues facing all universities globally is confidence in research and how to tackle and prevent research misconduct. The chair of our own Board for Investigation of Misconduct in Research, Erik Lempert, described how we currently deal with alleged misconduct at the University. Our new Adviser to the Vice-Chancellor on Good Research Practice, Stefan Eriksson, presented current research in the area. These days it is possible to buy co-authorship and citations – an alarming development. The academic environment can be both competitive and stressful, which can lead to a temptation to take shortcuts. How can we prevent this? Many questions came up and the discussion will continue in various ways, among the deans and at departments, as well as in the seminar series on this topic that will start in the autumn.

Our three vice-rectors told us what’s in the pipeline in their disciplinary domains. It’s pleasing to see how everyone is processing the results from Q&R17 and hear about exciting development projects and new ventures in education, collaboration and innovation. It’s good for everyone to know what’s going on, even in areas other than their own. After that it was the students’ turn to raise their focus issues for this semester. Some of the important issues for our students’ unions are housing dialogues with the municipality, an analysis of how course reports are used, and preparations for student participation in upcoming educational evaluations.

After lunch, we heard about the work on Development Plan 2050, which is being led by Vice-Rector Johan Tysk, assisted by Annika Sundås-Larsson from the Buildings Division. They were accompanied by representatives from Uppsala Municipality and Akademiska Hus. We divided into groups to discuss student housing, safety and security, the physical environment, artificial intelligence, regional collaboration and much more besides.

It is almost five years since Campus Gotland was established through the merger with Gotland University College. Therese Iverby Gardell and Olle Jansson summed up what has happened and took the opportunity to dismiss a few myths. They looked both backwards and forwards. We have achieved a great deal, we have more students, stability in terms of resources and quality assurance, and there’s a feeling of confidence. Much remains to be done, however, and the full potential has not yet been realised. Just as the Q&R panel observed, the point of Campus Gotland is not to be a miniature version of Uppsala University, but to be a place for renewal, multi- and interdisciplinarity, internationalisation and regional collaboration.

Some of the new research initiatives at Campus Gotland concern the changeover to new energy sources, cultural heritage, sustainable marine development and water supplies, children’s health, digitalisation, and tourism and hospitality. Many of these involve collaboration with the region.

The programme for the day concluded with a presentation by Mats Larhed on the University’s work on Charter & Code. This is important to ensure that Uppsala University continues to be an attractive work environment and to facilitate international recruitment. In the future, it could become a requirement for EU funding. Eighteen of nineteen universities in The Guild are certified – all except Uppsala University. Certification leads to the ‘HR Excellence in Research’ award, and to achieve this we have to comply with 40 principles. We already comply with many of them, but some work remains to be done.

As the day came to a close, we agreed we had had a really good day. A packed programme with good discussions and dialogue, on matters that are important in the immediate future as well as in the really long term. We have a fantastic university full of people with constructive ideas who are eager to participate in discussions on the future of our university both in Uppsala and on Gotland.

(Original Swedish post published 21 February.)

A few times a year, we as a university (and public authority) communicate formally with the government. One of these occasions is the annual report, when we report on how we have responded to the tasks given us in our appropriation directions, another is the budget documentation in which we present a forecast for the coming years along with the University’s considerations and budget requests. Both these documents are adopted by the University Board at its February meeting, which was held today.

The annual report summarises the past year in nearly 100 pages of text, tables and figures. A few samples of the contents:

Last year the University had 42,549 students. We admitted the first students to the preschool teacher education programme at Campus Gotland. A total of 5,391 students took degrees and are now moving on to jobs or further studies and research. More than 800 students came to Uppsala from non-EU countries and paid tuition fees. The new system of quality evaluations for educational programmes got off the ground, with ten of the University’s programmes conducting pilot evaluations.

Last year we also carried out Quality and Renewal 2017 (Q&R17) – a major review of all our research environments. The results are now being digested and acted on at all levels of the University. The University’s researchers published more than 6,000 articles and books. Uppsala University secured EUR 18 million from the EU’s research programme Horizon 2020. Since 2014, 57 of the University’s researchers have received prestigious grants from the European Research Council (ERC), and several researchers have won similarly prestigious Wallenberg Academy Fellows awards.

The rapid expansion of recent years continued, though at a more moderate pace. Turnover is approaching SEK 7 billion (an increase of SEK 800 million over the past five years), and the number of staff is approaching 7,000. However, in some areas developments are slower than we would like. The proportion of professors who are women is creeping up but is still too low, at 29 per cent.

In the budget documentation we look ahead. Some of the issues the University particularly highlights are the need for increased basic appropriations for research and higher (restored) compensation per student in educational programmes; the difficulties of finding enough practice placement opportunities in certain programmes; the need for a national scholarship fund for third country students; and of course the issue of guaranteeing universities’ autonomy and freedom of action, and the freedom of research and education.

Researcher and physician Ahmadreza Djalali has been sentenced to death by a court in Iran. When an academic and colleague is threatened in the course of their professional activities, the entire academic community is threatened. We therefore join Karolinska Institutet, the Association of Swedish Higher Education, Amnesty International and other organisations in demanding that the death sentence be quashed and that Ahmadreza Djalali be released immediately.

Dr Ahmadreza Djalali is affiliated with Karolinska Institutet and the University of Eastern Piedmont in Novara, Italy. His work focuses on improving the capacity of hospitals in countries affected by extreme poverty, armed conflicts and natural disasters. He completed a doctorate at Karolinska Institutet in 2012, is resident in Sweden and has a permanent residence permit in our country.

Along with many other higher education institutions and organisations, we protest against this treatment of a colleague and fellow human being. We want to show our support for Ahmadreza Djalali’s family, we condemn the death penalty in all circumstances and we demand that the government of Iran release our colleague promptly.

(Original Swedish post.)

The Swedish Migration Agency is threatening to force fee-paying students who have too little money in their bank account to leave the country. The fact that they are getting on well with their studies and meeting their financial commitments to the University is irrelevant. This is completely inconsistent with the aspiration to increase the internationalisation of higher education and it damages Sweden’s reputation. The rules must be changed immediately; the changes in practice brought in at the end of January are not enough.

The government inquiry on internationalisation has just presented an interim report which proposes that “the Swedish Migration Agency should be instructed to consider, in consultation with higher education institutions, how procedures can be improved so as to simplify the processing of applications for residence permits for students, visiting researchers and other employees, and to shorten processing times” (SoU 2018/3).

This is important, but it is even more crucial that those who have received a residence permit and started their programme in Sweden are guaranteed the opportunity to complete their education. At Uppsala University we have had several cases when motivated students from the United States, South Korea and other countries have fallen foul of the regulations. It has just happened again. One of our students, who has been with us for one-and-a-half years, is to be sent home because she does not have enough money in her bank account. (The local paper wrote about the student’s situation on unt.se on 8 February 2018.) The rules say that students staying in Sweden on a student visa must have over SEK 80,000 per year available in their account. A student admitted to a two-year programme has to be able to demonstrate they have twice that amount. This in itself is an unreasonable demand. As a student one often lives with little margin, as many of us know from experience. Many students are financed by their parents, who can be relied on to send money every month but cannot always tie up large lump-sums. As many people are aware, students can also improve their financial situation by working on the side. In Uppsala, for example, many students have jobs at the student associations. That is the reality of student life.

The long processing times are another problem. A student who does not have a residence permit and is waiting for a decision can stay in the country but cannot do a degree project in another country. The bureaucracy gets in the way of their studies. A residence permit should therefore be granted for the whole of the programme applied for at once.

The Swedish Migration Agency’s inflexible rules are not just unnecessary, they are counter-productive. They are damaging for students, for internationalisation and, ultimately, for the development of higher education in Sweden. The exaggeratedly strict interpretation of the regulations is out of tune with reality. Change cannot wait. This issue is urgent.

(Original Swedish post published 4 February.)

Early on Thursday morning the Management Council defied the snow and set off for Brussels to combine this semester’s overnight conference with a study visit. A change of perspective provides inspiration for strategic discussions.

We had a packed programme, starting with an introduction to the Swedish government’s work in Brussels. At the Permanent Representation of Sweden to the European Union we met Ambassador Åsa Webber and Daniel Sjöberg, who works with Swedish MEP Cecilia Wikström (who was unfortunately unable to attend) at the European Parliament. Åsa, Daniel and Cecilia all happen to be Uppsala alumni.

Åsa Webber

The European Commission led by Jean-Claude Juncker is coming to the end of its period in office. They are trying to follow up and highlight the issues the EU has been working on. Right now, the big issues for the future are Brexit, the negotiations ahead of the EU’s multiannual budget and the run-up to the elections to the European Parliament in May 2019.

Naturally, we wanted to focus on developments in the area of research and education. Negotiations are now in progress on the next framework programme, the seven-year research programme that will replace Horizon 2020 and is provisionally referred to as FP9 (Framework Programme 9), and on the future of Erasmus+. In many ways, Brussels is one great negotiating machine, which is now firing on all cylinders. Johannes Jarlebring, Uppsala University’s EU strategist, gave us a thorough briefing on how decisions are made in Brussels, and how we can get involved, provide input and influence decisions.

As you probably know, Uppsala University is a member of The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities. In the afternoon we went on to the Guild Office. This is a kind of home office for us when in Brussels, so it’s both convenient and relaxing to be able to hold meetings there.

The Management Council meeting at the Guild Office

On Thursday afternoon we met Secretary-General Jan Palmowski, who talked about the most important issues on The Guild’s agenda. After that, Thomas Midtgaard, expert at the European Commission, talked about the Commission’s work on FP9 and President Macron’s call for European Universities. Dan Andree from Vinnova and Ana Beramendi from the Swedish Research Council told us about their work. Vinnova and the Swedish Research Council have a joint office in Brussels these days.

A busy day ended with further discussions over an enjoyable dinner.

On Friday morning we continued with a programme that had a greater focus on education issues, beginning with a talk by Thomas Jørgensen, policy officer at the European University Association (EUA), another network of which we are a member. What will happen to the Bologna Process in future? How will Erasmus+ develop?

Thomas Jørgensen, EUA

We also learned more about the European Research Council (ERC), one of the most successful and prestigious parts of the EU framework programme for research. Anna Lönnroth told us more about how it works and about plans for the future. The final guests in our programme were representatives of the Commission working with the European Institute of Innovation and Technology’s Knowledge Innovation Communities. Uppsala University is involved in three of them: InnoEnergy, Health and Raw Materials. They also talked about plans ahead of the new framework programme FP9.

We concluded with a regular Management Council meeting which also gave us a chance to sum up our impressions. How can we equip ourselves and prepare for the new research programme? What do we need to work on more at home? Can we benefit from experiences from the projects in which we have been involved? How do we conduct and use analyses? Should we draw up an EU strategy? Uppsala University is a member of several European networks: The Guild, EUA, Coimbra and U4. It’s important for us to be aware of how we can best use each of these networks.

(Original Swedish post published 30 January.)

Today we have appointed a new Adviser to the Vice-Chancellor on Good Research Practice. Stefan Eriksson has long taught on and taken an active interest in issues of research ethics and will now assume a more prominent role in preventive efforts at the University. Good research demands good research practice. The University’s risk analysis has identified a loss of confidence in research as a significant risk. We must take responsibility ourselves, both for detecting and dealing with deficiencies and for preventive action in the sphere of quality and research ethics. We must persistently promote an internal culture that includes an ongoing discussion of research ethics issues. When something goes wrong, we must have a clear, legally certain system to manage complaints, both at university level and nationally. The establishment of a national authority by no means absolves the scholarly community or individual institutions of responsibility. On the contrary.

Since the Macchiarini case, higher education and research institutions around the country have experienced increased complaints of misconduct. To a great extent, the interest of society at large in research misconduct has been beneficial and has prompted more intensive internal discussions on research ethics at higher education institutions. The issue of confidence in research has also become a political issue and Minister for Higher Education and Research Helene Hellmark Knutsson recently announced plans for a new government authority to manage complaints of misconduct. The previous week, a sudden decision was announced authorising government research funding bodies to freeze grants during misconduct investigations. Here, however, it is important to consider the consequences. Research grants often support several researchers. This means there is a risk of affecting third parties and ultimately entire areas of research.

In the light of accumulated experience of cases of misconduct, it is clear that several areas need to be considered to achieve the result we want: to eliminate cheating in research, while respecting due process and without hurting innocent people. It is important that politicians, public authorities and research funding bodies also act responsibly. To be sure, dealing with suspicions of misconduct is a matter of protecting the credibility and integrity of research, but it must be possible to do this without wrecking research careers and, in the worst case, entire research fields. The consequences of decisions therefore require careful consideration. Here are some important issues to bear in mind:

1. Investigate promptly. Currently, the process takes too long. It is unsatisfactory when an offence becomes time-barred because the investigation has taken too long. And it is not acceptable that an innocent person should be forced to endure prolonged exposure to suspicion from the community.
2. Investigate carefully. This requires taking account of all the individuals involved in a joint project. Research is often a cooperative exercise conducted by a large or small group, with different individuals taking responsibility for different aspects. If all are tarred with the same brush when one has done wrong, the result is a work environment characterised by suspicion and control instead of trust and collaboration. In that kind of environment, creativity wanes.
3. Reasonable consequences. The consequences must be reasonable based on what has happened, and must be decided by the right authority. The combined ‘penalties’ from disciplinary boards, research funding bodies, the scholarly community and the media may otherwise grow out of proportion to the fault committed. As mentioned above, the consequences for third parties of the government’s decision to allow research funding bodies to freeze grants during an investigation need to be studied.
4. Consider degrees on the scale. The current system is a blunt instrument, it is a question of either/or, black or white. A careless unintentional mistake is regarded as misconduct, just like deliberate fabrication of false research results. In our opinion, the possibility of assessing degrees of seriousness should be discussed.
5. Differentiate between misconduct and scholarly disputes. Being suspected of and investigated for misconduct is a great strain and often takes place in the full glare of publicity, since the media have quite reasonably shown great interest in these issues. But the open digital landscape can leave an individual defenceless, so that they risk having their name dragged through the mud before their guilt has been proved. It is important that accusations of misconduct do not become a substitute for thorough – and critical – scholarly discussion. Sometimes suspicions ultimately turn out to be a matter of scholarly disputes or, in the worst case, personal conflicts. If accusations of misconduct are used as a weapon in debate, we have taken a wrong turning. Then scholarly scrutiny and discussion turn into law, and then what becomes of science?

(Original Swedish post published 24 January.)

The annual meeting between Minister for Higher Education and Research Helene Hellmark Knutsson and university vice-chancellors, organised by the Swedish Higher Education Authority, has just ended. As usual, it took place at Steningevik. Obviously we are heading for an election, and the Minister’s speech was clearly influenced by this. She looked back on what it had been like the first time she stood before this group of vice-chancellors and gave the impression that this was the last time in this context.

What issues will be important in the election campaign? The issues the voters care most about, we were told, are health care, refugees, and law and order – not university issues. The Minister went on to talk about the security issues affecting the sector, such as the threat against Malmö University and the shooting in Uppsala. Then she took up the research bill and the investments made by the government during this electoral period. She particularly emphasised that the 25,000 additional places are permanent, unlike the temporary measures taken by the previous government. In general, she praised the sector and stressed that Sweden as a whole has a fantastic higher education landscape. And then came the “whole country – lifelong – worldwide” line as the setting for policy.

I noted that a government bill on higher education admissions will be presented in March, with a government decision due in June, taking effect in the autumn semester 2022, to allow time for those just entering upper secondary school to complete their programme. Otherwise there was little that was new, many issues were postponed for future attention, for the most part assigned to ongoing government inquiries on internationalisation and on governance and resources. But research infrastructure is so important and complex that it will be tackled by a separate inquiry, the Minister said, though not before the election. And the inquiry on internationalisation will probably deliver its interim report during the spring. Good to know in advance so we can plan and be prepared. As usual, it was worthwhile to meet colleagues and exchange experiences, and to get some idea of what’s coming up. The fact that it’s an election year was obvious.

(Original Swedish post published 21 January.)

The spring semester has kicked off and we have welcomed old and new students to our University. On Friday, we will hold our Winter Conferment Ceremony, at which our nine faculties honour new PhDs and honorary doctors. The people of Uppsala notice the day because cannon salutes are fired as early as seven in the morning and during the actual ceremony. Along with the doctoral degrees, the University gives out some of its most prestigious prizes and awards. Most of the honorary doctors give lectures or seminars during the week – have a look on the University’s events page.

Last week we visited Malmö, where Sweden’s latest university celebrated its establishment. The theme of the day was “Knowledge in collaboration: a seminar on inclusive and sustainable societies”. Minister for Higher Education and Research Helene Hellmark Knutsson started proceedings by talking about the government’s research bill, which was presented just over a year ago. Nothing new, in other words, but it was interesting to hear what she emphasised and highlighted.

Last week ended with a state visit, when Uppsala welcomed the President of Iceland, Guðni Thorlacius Jóhannesson, accompanied by his wife Eliza Jean Reid and a delegation, together with the King and Queen of Sweden. The programme at Uppsala University began at Ångström Laboratory, with presentations by researchers on sustainable energy and natural disasters. After that the delegation was received at the University Main Building, where researchers gave a short introduction to the links between Uppsala and Iceland’s cultural heritage. The visit to the University concluded at the library, with a showing of Icelandic manuscripts including the Uppsala Edda. The visit to Uppsala ended with lunch at the castle, hosted by County Governor Göran Enander.

In between all the ceremonies and state visits, we’re hard at work on the University’s annual report for 2017 and the budget documentation we have to send to the Ministry ahead of the round of annual dialogues between the Ministry and its subordinate agencies, including universities. Eva will take part in the traditional meeting between the Minister and vice-chancellors at Steningevik, we’ll have to see what the Minister takes up then. Anders is off to Davos to take part in a side event at the World Economic Forum, where Maria Strömme will speak on the incredible possibilities opened up by new materials. Being vice-chancellor and deputy vice-chancellor is full of variation and never boring. We hope you had a chance to enjoy the glorious winter weather at the weekend.

(Original Swedish post published 7 January.)

We hope you have enjoyed the holidays. Now we’re back and it’s time to get set for a new semester at our University. Many of you are already busy with research, exams, teaching, services and support so that everything goes as well as possible.

Our Monday starts with a meeting of the Management Council at which we will discuss strategic issues, priorities and projects for the years to come. Together with the vice-rectors and the students, we will decide on the way ahead. Though we have already put in a lot of work on many of the issues – research infrastructure, internationalisation and career paths, for example – they still demand planning and priority setting.

• How can we best follow up on Q&R17 and how can we take the results of educational evaluations forward?
• How can we adapt our services and administration to give the most appropriate support in an increasingly international research and study environment?
• How can we keep our programmes fresh and forward looking to equip Uppsala students for an increasingly unpredictable future?
• How can we become an even better employer and create more attractive workplaces?

The #MeToo discussion has reminded us how important it is that we always treat one another with respect and responsibility, irrespective of our role and position. How can we become better at this? And what should we in the university management be doing to prevent misconduct and promote good research practice?

As you see, we have many important issues that we are eager to get to grips with on Monday. We hope you are all happy to be back and look forward to a new semester with you!

With Christmas and the New Year upon us, it is time to sum up and assess a busy year, and to look ahead.

For those of us in the management – and for many members of staff – Quality and Renewal 2017 featured prominently in the year’s work. Together, we have reviewed and analysed all of our research environments. The external review performed by more than 130 critical friends has given us constructive feedback on what works well and what needs development. During the year, we have also started on our educational evaluations. We are steadily gathering the knowledge we need to be able to move our University forward.

Exercising responsibility for quality is a core university activity and is essential if we are to attract well-qualified students, staff, teachers and researchers. It is pleasing to note that our programmes continue to attract high numbers of applicants. In fact, we have more applications than any other university in Sweden. We also perform well in the annual rankings and obtain a large share of the resources distributed by research funding bodies. However, success does not entitle us to rest on our laurels. We continue to forge ahead. Boundary-crossing research initiatives are a good example. Some of those launched this year are Circus (the Centre for Integrated Research on Culture and Society), the research school UAC (Uppsala Antibiotic Centre), Upptech and UUSI (Uppsala University Sustainability Initiatives).

International scholarship recipients.
Photo: Mikael Wallerstedt

‘Boundary-crossing’ is also an apt description of our student body. Our students are a source of inspiration and new perspectives that make us better. We are happy about our growing number of international students, our workplace is multicultural and we have taken major steps this year towards greater internationalisation. Parallel language use is one such step, and we are also endeavouring to take a broader approach to staff recruitment.

International students learning to play Bandy with Uppsala club Sirius.
Foto: Mikael Wallerstedt

The year has also involved a number of inaugurations and new investments in our physical infrastructure. The Segerstedt Building, the Humanities Theatre, the Rudbeck Laboratory, Carolina Rediviva and Ångström are major building projects that have been completed, begun or approved this year. It is exciting to see the expansion and to note how well the new buildings have turned out.

Official opening of the Humanities Theatre. Photo: David Naylor

Official opening of the Segerstedt Building.

But all is not well. We live in a troubled world. We have seen terror create chaos and political decisions cause uncertainty. An authority who was a guiding light – Hans Rosling – left us far too soon. In his absence, we must continue to fight against fact resistance and for a more equitable world.

When the world around us is shaking, it is even more important that we stand firm in our convictions and principles. We do so by continuing to promote a more open society. Networks and cooperation are important routes in the right direction and this has been a year of many meetings and many journeys. The Management Council visited partners in the United States, the Guild network gives us a stronger voice in Brussels, the Southern African–Nordic Centre (SANORD) has celebrated its tenth anniversary, the Matariki network is steaming ahead and here in Sweden we have established Lärosäten Öst (Higher Education Institutions East). The year has also been notable for the much-needed discussions on power structures and sexual harassment, on how we behave towards one another and how we protect the vulnerable. The National Centre for Knowledge on Men’s Violence Against Women and its telephone helpline have existed for 10 years and sadly are needed more than ever. The #MeToo campaign affects us all and discussions on how to move forward are in full flow.

2017 års SANORD-konferens i Zimbabwe.

At the welcome reception for new students at Campus Gotland.

At the University, 2017 has been a ‘super election year’. The University Board has a new chair and several new members. Deans and vice-rectors have been newly elected or re-elected for new terms, as have the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy Vice-Chancellor. After all the election and consultation processes, we have an experienced management team that looks forward to the years ahead. One of the things we look forward to in 2018 is celebrating that Gotland has been part of our University for five years. The cooperation is thriving and we have a new programme pointing the way ahead.

Now we would like to conclude by expressing our thanks to our staff and students for the year that has passed, for work well done and for all the enthusiasm and dedication we have encountered during conferences with heads of department and deans, Management Council meetings, visits to departments and students’ unions, student collaboration meetings, staff meetings, meetings with the unions, and more.

We are also grateful for your trust, look forward to seeing you in the New Year and hope that you all enjoy a wonderful ending to 2017.

Eva Åkesson, Vice-Chancellor
Anders Malmberg, Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Katarina Bjelke, University Director
Stellan Sandler, Vice-Rector for Medicine and Pharmacy
Torsten Svensson, Vice-Rector for Humanities and Social Sciences
Johan Tysk, Vice-Rector for Science and Technology