Tim Unwin's Blog

March 30, 2010 · 8:38 pm

The surreal world of England’s railways

It was a grey, cold, miserable afternoon today – in case anyone hadn’t noticed…

We arrived at Huntingdon station soon after 16.00, only to discover that we had just missed the 15.59 train to King’s Cross! Buoyed by a fine lunch (at The Old Bridge) and some strong coffee we prepared to sit out the wait until the next train at 16.33. But then something must have shifted in the planetary alignments, and we entered a world that even the best imaginations could scarcely conjure up.

Over the loudspeaker an announcement came that northbound trains had been delayed at Sandy because of a trespasser on the tracks. Oh well, the indicator board showed that the 16.33 was still scheduled, so that should be fine – or so we thought! Unfortunately, a very helpful railway employee then told us that the train that would form the 16.33 from Peterborough was actually the train that was stuck at Sandy, still waiting to go north through Huntingdon on its way to Peterboroough. It would be at least 40 minutes before we could catch it on its way back south, even once it had arrived at Huntingdon on its way north!

While looking if there were any alternative solutions, we heard another announcement over the speakers that the 16.33 would shortly be arriving. So, through the ticket barriers and out onto the platform we went. Imagine our surprise when the kindly railway employee came out and apologised that this was an automated message that bore no resemblance to the truth – or words to that effect. He had no idea when a train might actually come.

Time for Plan B! The thought of staying on Huntingdon station for what could be well over an hour did not fill us with excitement. So, we decided to take a taxi south to Stevenage, where there were at least trains on different lines that could then take us on our way. Taxi rides are always interesting – and this one was no exception with the driver waxing eloquent about the deficiencies of the potential Chancellors on the televised debate last night, Tottenham Hotspur’s current footballing success, and the UK’s social benefits system.

And then we arrived at Stevenage – to see a train pulling away as we rushed over the footbridge and onto the platform. That’s where the adventure really began. Fast – very fast – train after train rushed by on the tracks without stopping, and every time the indicator board suggested that a train might actually take us on to King’s Cross, it was either cancelled or the clock simply added minutes to its expected time of arrival as we watched. The cold wind chilled us as we waited patiently on the platform. Surely a train must come soon. We put our hope in the 17.34, which somehow seemed to be likely – not least because its expected arrival time did not change. Bang on 17.34 a train whisked past – without stopping! Dismay! But then, not long afterwards, a train did stop, and some of us eagerly boarded. What could be wrong with this? Imagine our dismay when we were told to get off the train because it was only dropping off passengers – and no one was allowed to get on! But many of the other trains had been cancelled – and there were many of us waiting to get to King’s Cross! Surely they would let us stay on board. The train had after all stopped, and we had got on. Some of us stood our ground. The announcements over the train’s speakers got more aggressive; the train would not leave until we got off. The anger on the faces of the other passengers was visibly rising. Some of us stuck our ground. But then most people left, and fearing we might be ‘shopped’ by the other, now really quite irritated, passengers on the train we gave in and left the train. This was not, though, to be the end. We pleaded with the rail officials – but to no avail. I pleaded with other travellers to take communal action and board the train – but no-one moved. They must have thought me a revolutionary firebrand! Eventually, after an unexpectedly long delay at Stevenage, that train departed. Talking with the kind RMT official on duty at Stevenage afterwards, he told us that the conductor on the First Hull Trains train had simply refused to consider letting other delayed passengers on board, because this train was only meant to let passengers alight.

Back into the cold, damp, darkening environment of dismal Stevenage railway station. The 17.39 seemed the most promising new bet, but it was going to be at least 30 minutes delayed because of a faulty train at Royston. The indicator’s kept us amused as trains were scheduled on time well after they should have left; others were cancelled. One of the best messages was “Delayed due to earlier train running late”

Eventually, a train did arrive to take us onwards – at 18.08. Just beforehand, a kindly announcer stated that “The train may be full” and that another one was to follow on behind shortly. Fortunately, we were all able to squeeze on board, and eventually arrived at King’s Cross by about 18.45. To be fair, this was only an hour later than the time that the 16.33 from Huntingdon would have arrived in London, but our surreal experiences made it feel very much longer! Thanks Siobhan and Robin for the adventure!

‘Collective’ reflections on plagiarism and the production of knowledges

Participating today in a very interesting seminar organised by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) at Woburn House in London, made me reflect on actually why plagiarism is becoming such a ‘problem’, and on ways in which we might create alternative ideas about this.

The first question I wish to raise is whether ‘scientific ideas’ or ‘individual careers’ matter most? As a starting point, let me suggest that actually it should be the ideas that are of most importance. Yet, we always tend to associate ideas with people – hence, we have Nobel prizewinners who are individuals. It is authors’ names that are on articles.

But following my logic, if it is the ideas that are of most importance, then perhaps plagiarism actually becomes less of a ‘problem’. Plagiarism is generally seen as the passing off of someone else’s ideas as being one’s own. So, if we do not attribute ideas to people, but let the ideas in a sense speak for themselves, and make them available for public scrutiny through for example the Web, then the ideas that are deemed to be of most importance might, in a sense, float to the top by popular choice.

This is particularly important right now. In the UK (as in many other countries) governments fund universities – both directly and through research councils. Governments, very literally, pay academics to produce knowledge. So, a case could be made for this knowledge to be ‘published’ under the government’s or research council’s ‘name’. Imagine a world where there were no author(s)’s names on published articles. Journal articles would just be known by their titles and the funding source. Would not this be more open and honest?

What does the individual author’s name matter – other than for their own personal careers? In a world where knowledge has increasingly become a commodity, where individual academic careers depend largely on publication records, where departmental and institutional reputations and thus funding rest on publications and grants, it is of course essential that authors are named. That is why plagiarism is so important an issue. But if we want to fragment this system, if we believe in knowledge as something so much more valuable than a commodity, if we wish to make this freely available – if we want to be a little less selfish about our own careers – then perhaps, there is some value in my proposal.

After all, as one of my former PhD students regularly reminds me, where do our ideas actually come from? We can never cite all of the influences on our writing. I am quite sure that the inspirational lectures that I listened to as an undergraduate in one of the best universities in the world have influenced my subsequent writing. The beggars I met on the street in Bihar have also influenced my ideas. I am ashamed that I do not always cite them as influences on my writing – although I do indeed try to mention them in my acknowledgements. In a sense, almost all of our written work is indeed plagiarised…

4 Comments

Filed under Ethics, Higher Education

Tagged as Ethics, Higher Education, plagiarism

March 18, 2010 · 9:47 pm

Apple iPhone insurance scam – with a happy outcome!

How’s this for an interesting scam?

My daughter’s iPhone (in fully functioning order) falls out of her pocket on the kitchen floor. The screen cracks (despite a rubber cover and a silicone protector on the front) and the ‘phone stops working
I ‘phone up our insurance company, and they say “Take it in to an Apple shop and get them to write a report – if it says it is not reparable we will refund, but you will need to pay £50 excess and lose 33% of your no-claims bonus”
So, my wife takes it in to an Apple shop in Cambridge, and they confirm in writing that it needs replacement – but they add that there is liquid inside the ‘phone.
On reading our insurance policy I note that it says that ‘phones are not covered for liquid damage. However, the ‘phone had never been submerged in liquid and was working fine before the glass broke when it fell on the floor. The reason it had stopped working was nothing at all to do with liquid. But by writing that there was liquid in the iPhone, Apple invalidates our insurance!
The Apple shop also notes that they will replace it for £139 since it is out of guarantee – which is VERY much less than a new replacement iPhone would cost (£449).
So, if we pay Apple only £89 more than the £50 we would need to pay as excess charge to our insurance company, we can get a new iPhone, and not lose our no claims bonus. Theoretically we should be happy, and Apple would get the direct benefit of our payment as well as another sale!
However, this is completely WRONG. The ‘phone had never been in contact with liquid (other perhaps than sweat) – possibly some moisture had come in subsequently as a result of the crack in the glass, but any presence of liquid was nothing to do with why the ‘phone was not working! We should be able to get a new ‘phone simply for the £50 excess on our insurance policy! But Apple invalidated our insurance claim by saying that there was liquid in it!

So, now the bright side of the story:

My daughter then took the iPhone into the Apple shop in Southampton – and persuaded them to look at the ‘phone again
Guess what? Yes, they found that the problem was nothing to do with liquid, but as we knew all along was a result of the cracked screen!
So, they repaired it (for the magical £139) and we are now sending off their report to our insurance company for the claim!

Thanks Apple Southampton!!

5 Comments

Filed under 'phones

Tagged as insurance, iPhone

March 18, 2010 · 9:47 am

Further reflections on the refereeing process

Not so long ago, I wrote about some of the issues associated with peer reviewing of research grant proposals. This morning, I received editorial comments on one of my recently submitted papers – four sets of comments were broadly supportive, usefully recommending changes that would improve the paper. However, a fifth referee clearly had not understood the purpose of the paper, which was a largely qualitative analysis of ICTs and disability in Ghana. This is what the referee wrote:

“The paper lacks a profound research method & data analysis techniques.
In order to improve the paper I suggest:
-You develop taxonomy of the various possible factors (drivers, benefits, barriers, pitfalls) related to:
ICT & Special Education Needs in Developing Country Settings.
-Make a thorough field study grounded by previously derived taxonomy
-Use statistical analysis to determine the correlations between the taxonomies & derive the hypothesis for the study. Or use grounded theory analysis if you are interested more in the phenomenon rather than the correlations.
For the time being the paper findings are scattered and cannot be granted as validated or evenaccurate or complete.
Therefore the paper is not ready yet for publishing”.

OK – at one level, I accept that there are indeed different approaches to intellectual enquiry, but it seems quite clear that this referee fails to see the value of qualitative approaches, and is seeking to impose one particular view of the research process.

At least the other referees found something that they liked in the paper:

“This article addresses a particularly important issue very well. The authors understand the problem deeply and support their case with relevant evidence and clear writing.”
“This manuscript addresses an important and inadequately addressed topic. Data presented is valuable in informing programs and policy needs related to ICT for people with disabilities in educational settings in Ghana and other low-resource communities.”

I am tempted entirely to give up sending papers to academic journals – let’s face it, few people read them anyway – and instead simply put out material on the Internet and see what readers themselves make of them!

At the very least, I will try in future to submit papers to journals where I have greater faith in the quality of the refereeing process!

———————————————

Following correspondence with the journal’s Editor in Chief, I am delighted to say that my co-author and I are resubmitting our paper, and will include with this a commentary of exactly what we think of the referee’s comments above. Let’s see what happens!

7 Comments

Filed under Ethics, Higher Education

Tagged as Ethics, Higher Education, refereeing

March 12, 2010 · 3:54 am

ICTs and Development: workshop at IIT Delhi (Day 2)

Welcome back to the second day of the ICTs and development workshop at IIT Delhi.

We got underway with Jonathan Donner’s (Microsoft Research India) invited lead talk on The changing roles of mobile phones in development: some examples from Africa

Emphasised amazing growth of mobile ‘phones – but rightly noted that this is neither universal not homogenous
We need to focus on the people rather than the technology – M4D is the tip of an iceberg of uses that people make of mobile ‘phones
Uses of mobiles for agriculture: use of mobiles for ‘traditional’ extension; creating platform mobile services including new market systems such as Manobi, or lean market places such as Google Trader
Homegrown services: M-PESA and MXIT – low barriers to adoption, affordable and compelling relative to existing alternatives, woven into everyday life, network effects. They do well because they are so simple.
Both of these offer real possibilities for scale – albeit not yet for the poorest of the poor – and do things that traditional voice cannot do
Importance of unintended consequences
We need more evidence; we need to distinguish between mobility and connectivity; and we need to take the long view
We should also resist the use of “M4D” as a research term so as to de-fetishise it – moving the emphasis to the people not the technology; if we keep the term, we need to focus on the “4”

MOBILES AND MICRO-ENTREPRENEURS

Parveen Pannu (University of Delhi, India) Mobiles and socio-economic life of press workers in Delhi

Focus on urban growth in India and the rapid adoption of mobiles, especially among informal sector workers
Having clothes ironed is a central part of urban middle class India – the ironing business depends a lot on personal contact and good will (but there is also a press workers union)
Survey of households who did ironing work: c.65% had a family mobile ‘phone; cost of ‘phones was major factor influencing price (some received them from their customers); users of mobile ‘phones earned more than non-users, but cause/effect not known; usage – 38% social, 29% work related; most calls were received from the lady of the house who arranged collection/delivery of clothes and finding new companies; 50% were not into texting SMS messages (not comfortable because of English language texting)

Ishita Shruti (IIT Delhi) Remittance behaviour and doing business among Indian rural salesmen in Cambodia

New ICTs have played an important role in remittances (both economic and social) – focus of this ethnographic research is on rural salesmen mostly from UP
Internet based ‘phone calls are the cheapest means of communicating – so people use internet cafés/’booths’
‘Agents’ are used to deliver remittances – informal network enabled through ‘phone calls (social capital plays an important role in delivering remittances)
Mobile ‘phones have also facilitated business, enabling salesmen to interact with family but also to make decisions about their businesses

ICTs, CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE STATE

Jean-Yves Hamel (UNDP) Public interests, private costs: civil society and the use of ICTs in Timor Leste

Placed emphasis on the notion of freedoms and the capability approach
Highlighted role of FDI from Telstra – supported by UN – and subsequent problems associated with its monopoly position. Monopolies are associated with high costs of ICT provision; regulators are unable to challenge these.
Noted the early use of ICTs from 1994 to enable communication of civil society ‘opposition’ with the rest of world
Key role of deep women’s networks – links to health organisations, scholarships, women’s rights groups
ICTs provide an important window on the world

ICTs AND ECONOMY

Nimmi Rangaswamy (Microsoft Research India) The PC aided enterprise and recycling ICT

Role of ICTs in expanding small and micro-enterprises in Mumbai slums
ICTs can help promote skill building; business are organic and self-sustaining
Nice business ecology coming into play – capital, space, skills, hardware
Not simply assimilating technology for business, but also creating new systems and processes
“There is no ‘for D’ in it, because they are doing it themselves” – not sure I agree with this, surely this is itself a form of development

Jack Linchuan Qiu (Chinese University, Hong Kong) Working-class information society? Open questions about China and ICTs

Focused on the “information have-less”
Some statistics from China: internet users 2 m in 1998, but 298 m in 2008; 49% of internet users are now not college-educated – so Internet is being used much more widely across different sectors of the population
Private sector now accounts for more than half of urban population employment – so people have to find jobs, and this has been associated with a rapid increase in ICTs: does macro-empowermnet lead to (seemingly) micro-empowerment
Measuring information needs is complex; fundamental differences between information needs and wants.
Bottom of pyramid innovations are firstly social and only secondarily technological
Developing a new class analysis based on horizontal networking among workers
Chindia as a new path to development – a re-evaluation of labour-centred production

INTERNET AND SOCIAL CHANGE

Otgonjargal Okhidoi (Educational Channel Television, Mongolia) Can technology level the inequality in education delivery? Blended technology based education program in Mongolia

Mongolian democritisation and economic liberalisation created freedom for flourishing media companies, mostly for profit commercial broadcasting – mostly focus on imported programmes (soaps, sumo…)
Educational Channel TV began only three years ago for public sector broadcasting (4-6 hours airtime a day on academic subjects; not for profit and one of only 2 nationwide broadcasters). Then Internet service and cellphone messaging added on to make it more interactive and provide feedback (focus of project on English language and IT)
93% of total population of Mongolia names TV as the key source of information
Inequality of access to education and quality of content – 66% of children live outside Ulaanbatar, and are poorly served by education
Almost all schools have computer labs set up by donor funding, and all are connected to the Internet – but there is not much good content available. So, they used 20 minute TV programmes and followed up with work in class on Internet. Reported that impact on knowledge acquisition was positive, and it enhanced self-learning

S. Subash (National Academy of Agricultural Research Management) Knowledge empowerment of farmers through interactive web-module on dairy innovations

Use of ICTs for technology transfer agricultural extension in the field of dairying focusing particularly on web-module (Haryana and Tamil Nadu case study)
Training in ICT centres given to farmers; needs of farmers identified and web-based learning module given to them
Reported that farmers in Haryana has a 16% knowledge gain as a result of the intervention, and 28% gain in Tamil Nadu – although some concerns were expressed in questions about the impact of experimental design
Benefits also gained by extension workers
Users requested more interactivity and provision of real-time information; it is important to ensure that content is regularly updated; mobile alerts for farmers should also be introduced

Murali Shanmugavelan (Panos, London) Telecentres and public spaces

Substantial amount of recent support for telecentres in India – but “what information is reaching what communities?”
How do telecentres interact with village communities – are they reinforcing or changing social structures? Study of 12 telecentres of different kind.
ICTs can constrain or expand public spaces (four layers of public: physical, management, human as public, and services) – communication practices can create a chaos in traditional systems
Key factors: location influences accessibility; telecentres specifically designed for particular underprivileged groups such as dalits are exclusionary rather than ‘public’; management layer is very influential (recruiting women increases inclusivity); type of service delivery influences usage (and real needs of excluded users are not necessarily delivered); social and cultural factors constrain usage (discrimination against women and dalits; low participation of elderly and disabled communities)
There is a real need to map non-users and understand more about why they do not use ICTs – traditional hierarchies

ICTs and Development: workshop at IIT Delhi (Day 1)

It is good to be back in Delhi – and to have an opportunity to reflect on the use of ICTs in development practice with colleagues from across the world. Thanks to Vigneswara Ilavarasan and Mark Levy for bringing us all together at IIT Delhi.

Following introductions from Prof Amrit Srinivasan (Head of the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT Delhi), Prof. Balakrishnan (Deputy Director, IIT Delhi) and Phet Sayo (Senior Program Officer, IIT Delhi), we got underway with the real business. Below are some of my reflections on some of the presentations:

Rohan Samarajiva (Chair and CEI Lirneasia, Sri Lanka) Invited Lead Talk 1

Highlighted the key importance of bringing mobile prices down which led to expanded usage
Competition played an important part in this – he argues that this will actually lead to greater use by the poor
Implications for broadband and internet connectivity – will this follow the same path as with mobiles?
Policy implications: role of regulation (must deregulate); need to bring prices down; need for ‘fat pipes’ (international broadband connectivity); problems associated with rent seeking; need to go gentle on quality of service regulation (he commented that “I am a lapdog of the capitalists, but I prefer to work for the bottom of the pyramid”); in the end, customers pay taxes that governments impose on companies, so we need to phase out universal-service levies (companies show they do not need to be persuaded to work in rural areas).
Competition will find its level – he is a strong believer that the market will provide the right solutions. My experience does not confirm this – I do not accept that the market will indeed serve the interests of the poorest and most marginalised.

ICTs AND SMEs

Vigneswara Ilavarasan (IIT Delhi) and Mark Levy (Michigan State University) ICTs and micro-enterprises

Used a probability sampling strategy of small/micro enterprises in Mumbai
Fundamental conclusion was that there is a mis-match between the rhetoric and reality of ICT-use for business purposes
Mobile phones are used for contacting employees and some business contacts, but they are used much more for social purposes with family and friends
Fewer enterprises have computers than mobile ‘phones, but those who have computers do use them more extensively for business purposes (using them for stock inventories, employee records, and tracking business processes)

Khalid Rabayah (Arab American University, Palestine) ICT use among Palestinian enterprises

Survey of just under 3000 Palestinian enterprises
Most business owners do not see much use for computers or Internet for their enterprises
Those who do use the Internet primarily use it for e-mail and searching for information; main reason for using Internet is to save time
They primarily use the communicating aspect of ICTs, and therefore especially use mobile telephony
Internet is not used much for business – mainly for cultural reasons; 50% prefer doing business face-to-face

Godfred Kwasi Frempong (Science and Technology Policy Research institute, Ghana) Mobile ‘phones and micro/small enterprises in Ghana

Reported the high usage of mobile ‘phones by businesses in Ghana. Most used voice and only 21% used SMS as a business tool. Key issue why SMS is not used more is because people have to be literate to read a SMS message
Missed calls (flashing) are very important – some 65% of enterprises use them as an important business tool
Only 1% of the sample used mobile ‘phone banking (although 13% knew about this)

ICTs AND WOMEN
Shikoh Gitau (University of Cape Town) Job-seekers in Khayelitsha

Highlighted the growing importance of mobile Internet
Reported on training scheme for a small group of young women in Khayelitsha – main use was to explore ways of accessing the Internet for gaining jobs
Other reasons why people were using mobile Internet included gospel music, news and information, Facebook and MXit
Knowledge among other people that they knew how to use the Internet raised their social capital

S. Nandini (Working Women’s Forum, India) ICT and women in the informal sector

Survey of usage by group of women in the Working Women’s Forum
Emphasised that women had an unfilled real need for communication, and mobile ‘phones can indeed now provide this. Women in the informal sector has facilitated them in juggling multiple roles (social, business, etc.)

ICTs AND AGRICULTURE
Mokbul Morshed Ahmad (Asian Institute of Technology) Mobiles in Kampong Thom, Cambodia

Mobile ‘phones are mainly used for social purposes, but farmers can save some costs in terms of time spent travelling; that having been said, they need to find the means to pay for them
Traders generally use ‘phones more than the farmers

Surabhi Mittal (Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations) Mobile ‘phones as a catalyst for agricultural growth in India

Mobile ‘phones can help linkage between agricultural extension services and farmers, and this can improve farm profitability
Farmers subscribe to customised services – mainly seeking information on weather, market prices, inputs, government services…
Knowledge of better input prices and information do indeed enable higher productivity and thus enhanced farm profitability going up between 5 and 25%

3 Comments

Filed under ICT4D

Tagged as Conferences, ICT4D

March 4, 2010 · 6:11 pm

Dumbing down in UK higher education – what’s new?

Three Appeal Court judges ruled on 24th February that Paul Buckland, a professor at Bournemouth University, who resigned in 2007 in a row over the alleged dumbing down of degrees, was treated unfairly. In essence, Professor Buckland had given fail marks to a number of students, whose papers were subsequently remarked and permitted to pass (for a detailed summary of the case, see the University and College Union News). He had complained, and subsequently resigned as a result of the university’s investigatory process. As UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: “This is an important victory for everyone who values high standards and probity in our universities. Dr Buckland’s defence of academic standards and examination procedures must be congratulated. However, we are deeply concerned about the events that led to this tribunal. Staff need the confidence to be forthright and honest in their comments and assessment of work”.

This is an important and personal case, but what surprises me most about it is that few people or reports seem to have picked up on the fundamental underlying issue, which is that universities across the country have indeed been manipulating the degrees they have been awarding in recent years to give higher marks. According to the then Department for Children, Schools and Families, between 1994/5 and 2005/6 the percentage of first class and upper second class degrees in HE institutions in the UK increased from 47% of all first degrees awarded to 56%. The latest HESA figures show that this percentage had risen to 62% in 2008/9.

Universities, just like schools, are subject to league tables, and one of the criteria they are frequently judged by is the percentage of students getting good honours degrees, usually defined as upper seconds and firsts. Is it therefore surprising that universities have sought means to maximise this figure as they compete in an increasingly competitive market? Moreover, it is perfectly possible to manipulate the percentages of good degrees gained, even without any changes in the actual rigour of the marking. Typical of such ways are the following:

changing the mechanisms for awarding degree grades by, for example, ignoring the worst 20% of marks given
discounting the first year exam marks, when students often do worst as they get used to the university system
reducing the amount contributed by terminal exams to the overall assessment, and increasing the amount of coursework at which most students usually do better

There is also some evidence that actual marking is becoming more lenient, as universities seek to encourage more diverse expressions and interpretations in response to assignments that are set. This was the issue that gave rise to the original disagreement at Bournemouth. Attention paid to the quality of written expression has, in many institutions, declined, and it is therefore scarcely surprising that employers regularly complain about the quality of these skills in apparently highly qualified graduates! The nature of assignments has also in many instances changed to make them easier. Typical of this is the expectation of what is required for an undergraduate research dissertation. Years ago, it was expected that students would spend most of the summer vacation between their second and third years undertaking their dissertations – and I indeed still expect a substantial amount of empirical work to be done for a dissertation to gain a good mark. However, on more than one occasion colleagues have berated me saying that this is completely unreasonable, because students have to gain paid employment over the summer to cover their fees, and that I should therefore be willing to accept what I consider to be paltry amounts of empirical work.

The situation is at least as bad in many Master’s degrees, especially where foreign students are concerned. Many universities rely heavily on the financial income derived from fees paid by foreign students. Despite the requirements imposed on such students to have high language scores as tested, for example, by the International English Language Testing System (IELTS), the reality is that many such students do not have sufficient language abilities to perform at a high level in written terminal examinations. Many Master’s degrees which in the past were assessed by terminal examinations that required a high degree of competency in academic writing in English, are now being assessed purely by course assignments, and even in some cases largely by oral presentations! As is well know, anyone who can use a word processor with grammar and spelling checkers can produce a half-competent piece of written work, even when their ability to do so without such support is very much less! The assessment requirements are less challenging, and therefore the pass rates remain high. Universities are too desperate for the fees that such students bring in that they cannot be seen to be failing large numbers of them; the assessment system therefore has to change to accommodate the financial realities.

To make matters even worse, this percentage increase in ‘good degrees’ is taking place at a time when many universities have reduced the amount of time academic staff actually spend teaching students so that they are able instead to concentrate on research. Across the country, class sizes have gone up, there are fewer and fewer personal or group tutorials, and undergraduates have less and less contact with academics!

This is of course not to deny that many students work incredibly hard, and get the good degrees that they deserve. However, it is to claim that university degrees taken as a whole have seen very considerable dumbing down in recent years. There is nothing extraordinary or surprising about this. Universities do have some clever people working for them, and in a competitive market place where they are being judged in part on the number of ‘good degrees’ that they award, some of them are bound to find ways of manipulating the system! There is nothing new in this.

2 Comments

Filed under Education, Higher Education

Tagged as Ethics, Higher Education

February 19, 2010 · 11:03 pm

ICTs, Citizens and the State – seminar at Michigan State University

Thanks to colleagues in the Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media Department at Michigan State University for their valuable critique of some of my thoughts on the ethical dimensions of e-government initiatives following my seminar there today. My paper examined the moral implications of the use of ICTs in e-government initiatives, focusing especially on national databases, identity cards and surveillance technologies. It suggested that in resolving debates over these, we need to reach ethical resolutions concerning notions of trust, privacy and the law. I also drew attention to the ethical problems that emerge in linking the notion of Universal Human Rights with the introduction of ICTs in developing countries.

In terms of general conclusions, the following seem particularly pertinent:

First, there are indeed many complex ethical aspects associated with e-government, and while to date the emphasis among governments of developing countries, international agencies and donors has very largely been on their positive practical benefits, I suggest that we need to pay much more thorough attention to their ethical grounding, and especially to the balance of rights and interests between citizens and the state.
Second, in so doing, I suggest that three areas warrant particular attention, namely the ethics of trust, privacy and the law. It is here that Geuss’s (2008) emphasis on existing real political contexts, rather than the imposition of some external ideal ethical solution, needs to reiterated. The fundamental point I wish to emphasise is that in each country where e-government initiatives are introduced, people need to ask about the rights and wrongs of such proposals in terms of existing ethical understandings of trust, privacy and the law.
I also sought to raise fundamental questions concerning the continuing validity of much of the human rights based policy and legislation that has dominated global agendas during the last 50 years – particularly in the context of e-government initiatives, and their implication for the rights of individuals and the responsibilities of states. We need to open up for sensible debate the value of the emphasis placed on human rights, criticism of which is all too often seen as being politically incorrect and a taboo subject. However, if people do not actually have ‘rights’ that they can give up to a state, then we need to reconsider the whole edifice upon which such arguments are built. An idealistic belief that people have universal rights has not been any protection for those who have suffered at the hands of those who do not believe in such rights. There is therefore a strong argument that we need to shift the balance away from rights, and towards the responsibilities that people and states have for each other. For example, rather than simply claiming that knowledge is some kind of human right, it might be a much more positive step to argue that states have a responsibility to enable their citizens to gain knowledge.
Capurro (2007) has argued that ‘Western’ concepts of individual privacy are very different from the ‘African’ emphasis on communal traditions. It may well therefore be that many of the existing models of e-government developed around European and north America notions of individual privacy are inappropriate in an African or Asian context, and that instead Africans and Asians should instead be designing new such initiatives around their own traditions and cultural practices
Whatever the benefits to states, individuals and communities of e-government initiatives, there is no doubt that global corporations developing the hardware and software for such systems have been very great beneficiaries. One of the difficult ethical questions that arise from this concerns how we judge whether it is better for poor and marginalised communities for such e-government initiatives to have been introduced, or whether they might actually be more advantaged if their governments did not spend vast sums of money on their implementation. Just because it is possible to implement national citizen databases, to use biodata for ID cards, and to introduce sophisticated digital surveillance mechanisms does not mean that it is right to do so.

2 Comments

Filed under Africa, Ethics, ICT4D, My Lectures

Tagged as Africa, e-government, Ethics

February 14, 2010 · 10:47 pm

Peer review – implications of ‘corruption’

Two separate events that occurred at the start of this month have made me reflect once again on the many myths surrounding the ‘hallowed’ peer review process on which so much academic credibility is seen to lie.

First, I received an e-mail from a friend for whom I had written a reference in connection with a grant application that they had submitted to one of the UK’s Research Councils. They had received the disappointing news that despite two strong references, a third referee had been highly critical of the proposal, casting aspersions on their professional expertise and on the quality of the proposed research. I was appalled by this. The research proposal was one of the best I have recently read, and from what the Research Council said of the comments of the ‘third’ referee, they seemed to me to be completely inappropriate. Either the referee was ignorant of the research field, or they had vested interests in ensuring that this research was not funded.

By coincidence, at about the same time, the BBC picked up on an open letter sent by a group of scientists last July that also criticised the traditional peer review process, but this time with respect to journal articles. As the BBC Science Correspondent Pallab Ghosh commented, “Stem cell experts say they believe a small group of scientists is effectively vetoing high quality science from publication in journals. In some cases they say it might be done to deliberately stifle research that is in competition with their own”. The 14 scientists had written that “Stem cell biology is highly topical and is attracting great interest not only within the research community but also from politicians, patient groups and the general public. However, the standard of publications in the field is very variable. Papers that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected”. To try to overcome this, they proposed that “when a paper is published, the reviews, response to reviews and associated editorial correspondence could be provided as Supplementary Information, while preserving anonymity of the referees”.

Peer review is one of the fundamental principles upon which the edifice of academic reputation – and financial reward – is based. However, the system is inherently flawed, and I find it somewhat surprising that it still retains such power. Six issues warrant particular consideration:

First, peer review is based on a belief that ‘science’ is in some way value free; that individual prejudice, political beliefs, or social agendas have no effect on academics’ judgements as to the quality of research. Whilst many academics do indeed try to reach impartial judgements about the quality of work that they review, they undoubtedly bring biases to such judgements as a result of their own lives and research practices. Moreover, editors of journals and Research Council panels exercise immense power through their choices of whom to ask to act as referees for papers or grant applications. Science is not, and never has been, value free.
Academic status is in part based upon the number of citations a paper receives. Academics thus seek to publish in the most prestigious journals that have high citation indexes. For a very long time, cartels of academics have therefore operated, deliberately citing each other’s works so as mutually to raise their profiles and status. Academics are only human, and it is scarcely surprising that they operate in this way. There is nothing exceptional about this. Some of us may not think it right, but it happens.
One way that new ideas can begin to find voice is through the creation of new journals. However, these take time to become established, and when status relies so much on having papers published in the most prestigious journals, it remains very difficult for new approaches and ideas to find widespread expression in this way; rarely do the most eminent academics deliberately choose to publish in new and ‘unimportant’ journals!
Those who run the major journals and sit on grant-giving Research Council Boards have immense power, and most do their very best to be fair in the judgements that they reach. However, by definition, the peer review system is designed more to endorse existing approaches to intellectual enquiry, rather than to encourage innovative research.
None of this would matter particularly, and could merely be dismissed as irrelevant academic posturing, if there was not so much money involved. Academic prestige and income depend fundamentally on success in publications and grant applications. The UK’s Research Councils thus invest some £2.8 billion annually in support of research, and it is crucial that this is dispersed wisely. It is therefore extremely sad – albeit typical – that in the case of my friend who had their grant application rejected, there was no right of appeal against the decision. Panel chairs and editors must have the guts to stand up and recognise when they see flawed decisions being made by referees. It is thus extremely encouraging to see that some Research Councils, notably EPSRC, are trying to create exciting new ways to support research that do not place excessive emphasis on traditional peer review processes.
Finally, there is now a good case for exploring alternative ways of judging research ‘quality’. ‘Publishing’ papers openly on freely available websites, and then assessing their quality by the number of ‘hits’ that they get would, for example, be a rather more democratic process than that through which a small number of ’eminent’ academics judge their peers. Of course this would be as open to abuse as existing systems, but at least it would present an alternative viewpoint.

We must debunk the myth that there is something ‘pure’ or ‘objective’ about academic peer review. It is a social process, just like any other social process. It has strengths and weaknesses. For long, it has served the academic community well. However, as the 14 stem biologists who raised the lid of Pandora’s Box implied, it is a system that fails to encourage the most original research, and instead supports the system that gave rise to it. After all, that is not so surprising, is it?

5 Comments

Filed under Higher Education

Tagged as Ethics, peer review, universities

February 2, 2010 · 11:31 am

Indian Visa Application Centre, Hayes

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS POST WAS FIRST WRITTEN IN FEBRUARY 2010 AND SOME OF THE INFORMATION IS NOW OUT OF DATE – from 23rd November 2010 a new online application system was introduced – details are available at http://in.vfsglobal.co.uk/. However, the information contained below may well still be of interest for those seeking to get to the Hayes office – for which the blog was originally intended!

————————————————————————————————————————

After reading some of the horror stories online about applying for a visa to visit India, I embarked on the process, and thought some tips might be helpful for others – especially about actually getting to the Centre in Hayes!

Yes, the online system is a bit clunky – and it crashed on me once without saving what I had done – which was a pain! But by automatically checking for completeness it did save time filling out the forms, perhaps incorrectly, and therefore having to redo them again.
Before embarking on completing the forms online, do check you have all the information to hand – down to the level of detail required about the place of both parents’ birth! Unfortunately, there is not an easy to find guide to completing the visa form available in the drop-down menus! One solution is to print out a hard-copy form from those available, and then use this as a guide. The trouble is that not all of the questions asked are unambiguous!
The automatic fee charging system did indeed seem to overcharge me – as least compared with the advertised fees for visas! Watch out for this!
Make sure that you submit all of the relevant required documents, or have them with you (together with two photographs) when you go to the Centre.
For those taking the application form to the Indian Visa Application Centre in Hayes, there are many comments on the Web about how difficult this is to find! It is actually very simple! The Centre is accessed on the south side of Uxbridge Road in Hayes, just by the Grand Union Canal. For those driving from the M4, take the A312 north to its junction with the A4020, and then turn east towards Southall. Don’t take the first right down Springfield Road, but watch out for the large Currys superstore just before the Fiat car showrooms. That is the best place to park! Walk a short distance (c. 100 yards) towards the canal, and turn right just beyond the Fiat garage. The entrance to the Application Centre is then through some large metal gates just after the car park behind the garage. This is just by the A4020 label next to the canal on this map!
Once inside, you will receive a numbered ticket, and will then have to wait in the large seated waiting hall. There are around a dozen service desks, and so the queue moves relatively quickly. At 08.30 in the morning, I only had to wait about 25 minutes to be ‘processed’. Opening hours for submission of passports are 08.30-14.30 Monday to Friday; passport pickup (usually withing 2-3 working days) hours are 13.00-16.30 Monday to Friday.

27 Comments

Filed under Higher Education, ICT4D conferences, Politics

Tagged as India, visa