https://www.feministisktperspektiv.se/2015/02/26/stoppa-nedlaggningen-av-nordiskt-sommaruniversitet/
”Stoppa nedläggningen av Nordiskt sommaruniversitet!”
2 thoughts on “”Stoppa nedläggningen av Nordiskt sommaruniversitet!””
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
what is the reason given for stopping the funding support?
The reasons are more. I will cut+paste from the report, summarize in English and add comments.
The officials conclude: “Mot bakgrund av ett antal brister i NSU:s verksamhet, vilka tydligt framgår i utvärderingsrapporten, anser ad hoc-gruppen att nuvarande styr- och finansieringsmodell inte är ändamålsenlig och att NSU i dess nuvarande form inte har en relevant roll i den nordiska forskningspolitiken.” According to the evaluation made, NSU has a number of shortcomings and the current form of organization and funding are not relevant in the Nordic research politics. They refere to an ad hoc-group that made recommendations based on the evaluation. These are many, I make a selection.
“Samtidigt verkar NSU inom några förhållandevis avgränsade områden. Måluppfyllelsen skulle öka om också andra områden inkluderades, såsom områden inom naturvetenskap, för att verksamheten inte ska stagnera samt för att rikta uppmärksamhet mot nya små områden där det eventuellt föreligger ett behov av att bygga vetenskapliga nätverk och samarbeten.” (NSU is narrow and not clear in scope and intention and should include also natural sciences).
Comment: One can always discuss whether the intention of NSU is clear, and as the evaluation and officials fundamentally misunderstand NSU there may be a point, or the point that NSU wishes to experiment with forms different from the established institutions have here been prooved. NSU wish to include also natural sciences and is open to it, but we work bottom up and can only invite, not organise it.
“De administrativa processerna upplevs, med vissa undantag, vara välfungerande. Emellertid är det lång tid mellan idé och beslut på grund av de noggranna demokratiska processerna. Verksamheten är i detta avseende trögrörlig” (The administrative processes are largely well-functioning though due to the strict democratic process it takes long time from idea to decision).
Comment: NSU is fundamentally democratic and can only regret that the conclusion is democracy is not an appropriate form of administration in the Nordic countries. NSU is a summer university, i.e. one meeting a year, and if processes should be speeded up, it would require more activity (and funding).
“Kvaliteten på publikationerna i NSU Press är bristfällig enligt de sakkunniga experterna. Bland annat är publikationerna inte granskade av ämnesexperter innan de publiceras” (The scientific quality of the publications are insufficient – one reason is the lack of review process.)
Comment: NSU publications are reviewed and in Denmark acknowledged as such. We have made clear this is a factual error, but this has been ignored. Among the publications reviewed by experts for the evaluation are contributions from Harmut Rosa, Robert Brandom and Axel Honneth. To conclude the scientific quality is poor seems either very biased or ignorant.
“Forskning som produceras genom NSUs aktiviteter men som inte ges ut via NSU Press kan inte spåras (avhandlingar, artiklar osv. som utgivits på andra förlag och i andra tidskrifter). Det finns därmed en svårighet med att bedöma vad NSU faktiskt bidrar till i form av forskningsresultat.” (Research from NSU published elsewhere cannot be found and makes it difficult to evaluate NSUs contribution).
Comment: This may be true, however the evaluation group never contacted people in the research fields NSU contribute to for interviews but has based the evaluation solely on numbers and figures one could look up on the internet (google is names as a mane source).
“Den tvärvetenskapliga profilen är inte på något sätt (längre) unik” (The cross-disciplinary profile is not longer unique).
Comment: It is true there are cross-disciplinary studies to be found everywhere, but does it make experiments with cross-disciplinary studies obsolete?
Also, NSU is not a traditionally research organisation, the participants are senior researchers, research students, independent researchers, researchers in other businesses, and students. NSU has been evaluated as an ordinary research program as NSU explicitly is not. Partly this is a false premiss expecting different results, partly this is also to be cross-disicplinary but obviously in a form the officials, stating cross-disciplinarity is established, cannot handle.
There are more arguments given, and also arguments we fully agree to and already work on. The evaluation concludes that NSU still has a role to play, a conclusion ignored by the officials.
Carsten Friberg