5,669
edits
Difference between revisions of "Barone (Italy)"
no edit summary
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
image:‘Narcisismo e cecità dei baroni uccidono l’accademia italiana’ (The Narcissism and blindness of Barons is killing Italian academia), Corriere della Sera, 28 January 2015. | image:‘Narcisismo e cecità dei baroni uccidono l’accademia italiana’ (The Narcissism and blindness of Barons is killing Italian academia), Corriere della Sera, 28 January 2015. | ||
As is typical of systems of corruption, the dynamic flows ‘from the top to the bottom’, spreading and choosing the network on the basis of pragmatism, to then further move upwards and create a system of ‘complicity of interests’ (Della Porta 1997: 35-36)<ref>Della Porta, D. 1997. ‘The vicious circle of corruption in Italy’, in D. Della Porta and Y. Mény (eds.) Democracy and Corruption in Europe. London: Pinter, pp. 35-49.</ref>. The further the system spreads, the lower the costs and the more probable network opportunities become. Italian Professor Francesco Gazzoni’s volume ‘Cooptazioni: Ieri e oggi’ (‘Co-optations: Yesterday and today’) | As is typical of systems of corruption, the dynamic flows ‘from the top to the bottom’, spreading and choosing the network on the basis of pragmatism, to then further move upwards and create a system of ‘complicity of interests’ (Della Porta 1997: 35-36)<ref>Della Porta, D. 1997. ‘The vicious circle of corruption in Italy’, in D. Della Porta and Y. Mény (eds.) Democracy and Corruption in Europe. London: Pinter, pp. 35-49.</ref>. The further the system spreads, the lower the costs and the more probable network opportunities become. Italian Professor Francesco Gazzoni’s volume ‘Cooptazioni: Ieri e oggi’ (‘Co-optations: Yesterday and today’) describes this network of interests as a mafia system of organisation. Gazzoni suggests that co-optation does not necessarily lead to damage, although co-opting relates to conservatism and perpetuates the professors’ paradigm. One of the main weaknesses of this system is that it is unable to fully renew itself. Another shortcoming of the baronia system, which he highlights, is that the selection criteria are generally independent of the profile and requirements of the candidates and the curriculum. He compares the situation to the appointment of Incitatus, Caligula’s favourite horse, to the position of consul in the Roman Empire. | ||
Further reforms, named after the Minister of Education, Mariastella Gelmini, and implemented in 2010 introduced, among others, a system of national scientific abilitazione (‘National Scientific Qualification’, MIUR ud) – which called for the submission of a CV, publications, and the research profile of candidates applying for the position of Associate or Full Chair in the Italian Academia. It was contested. In 2012, the first round of abilitazioni sparked a wave of protests. Approximately 60,000 candidates submitted their applications; of which almost 24,000 attained the abilitazione as Associate and/ or Full Chair. But it is estimated that about 8,000 appeals were submitted to TAR (Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale, the Administrative Court, which deals with proceedings in which individuals consider themselves wronged. A further review of policy by the Ministry was requested. In November 2015, while this entry was being written, a new scandal came to light (ROARS 2015)<ref>ROARS 2011. ‘In Italia qualcuno sta truccando i ranking QS? E che succeed se ti beccano? ’, Return On Academic Research, 22 November, http://www.roars.it/online/in-italia-qualcuno-sta-truccando-i-ranking-qs-e-che-succede-se-ti-beccano/</ref>. It was alleged that a baron asked university staff members to recruit colleagues as reviewers for the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). This body, founded in 1990 has been responsible for providing the rankings of higher education institutions globally since 2004. It was apparent that the colleagues (who would be fully aware of the importance of rankings for universities) would unfairly review the university in a positive light. | Further reforms, named after the Minister of Education, Mariastella Gelmini, and implemented in 2010 introduced, among others, a system of national scientific abilitazione (‘National Scientific Qualification’, MIUR ud) – which called for the submission of a CV, publications, and the research profile of candidates applying for the position of Associate or Full Chair in the Italian Academia. It was contested. In 2012, the first round of abilitazioni sparked a wave of protests. Approximately 60,000 candidates submitted their applications; of which almost 24,000 attained the abilitazione as Associate and/ or Full Chair. But it is estimated that about 8,000 appeals were submitted to TAR (Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale, the Administrative Court, which deals with proceedings in which individuals consider themselves wronged. A further review of policy by the Ministry was requested. In November 2015, while this entry was being written, a new scandal came to light (ROARS 2015)<ref>ROARS 2011. ‘In Italia qualcuno sta truccando i ranking QS? E che succeed se ti beccano? ’, Return On Academic Research, 22 November, http://www.roars.it/online/in-italia-qualcuno-sta-truccando-i-ranking-qs-e-che-succede-se-ti-beccano/</ref>. It was alleged that a baron asked university staff members to recruit colleagues as reviewers for the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). This body, founded in 1990 has been responsible for providing the rankings of higher education institutions globally since 2004. It was apparent that the colleagues (who would be fully aware of the importance of rankings for universities) would unfairly review the university in a positive light. | ||