The week in higher education ā 21 July 2016
The good, the bad and the offbeat: the academy through the lens of the worldās media
Search
-
-
Grant winners ā 21 July 2016
A round-up of recent recipients of research council cash
-
Laurie Taylor ā 21 July 2016
The official weekly newsletter of the University of Poppleton. Finem respice!
-
All change in Whitehall can mean positive change for HE
The sector must exploit machinery of government changes to boost science, social mobility and teacher education, argues Sir David Bell
-
The public should help academics to define āimpactā
Many more of the general public should help to plot the course of research, argue Christiaan De Beukelaer and Jan Baetens
-
Donāt get hacked off; get your message out there
Talking to the media isnāt a minefield, says Fern Riddell, but a manageable opportunity and a civic duty
-
Support: money well spent
The director of fair access to higher education, Les Ebdon, is right to highlight the fact that not enough evaluation is carried out into the effectiveness of the money that institutions spend on...
-
Positive steps
Brexit was a shock result for many and after weeks of negative discussion about the possible impact on higher education, it was a relief to read a pragmatic response by Nick Hillman, director of the...
-
Whoās celebrating?
Frank Furediās piece on how the post-Brexit response suggests an out-of-touch scholarly class is strangely post-factual (āBrexit pity parties show how out of touch academia isā, Opinion, 14 July)....
-
The bare facts
I read with gusto Randy Malamudās piece, particularly the suggestion of nudologia (boredology) as the new disciplinary descriptor (āOne big yawn? The academics bewitched by boredomā, Features, 14...
-
Candid camera
Interesting that the guidelines published by the University of Huddersfield accompanying its decision to record teaching sessions refer to the āethical and practicalā problems but not the legal ones...
-
The Chilcot report: who is equal to this epic?
The gargantuan report with its scholarly focus raises questions over who will digest its intellectual arguments