As a socially conscious (which does NOT mean Marxist-Lenninist) grad student living in an ever-"rightening" world, I often get discouraged at the rampant individualism and denial that surround me. Yet I was touched this week when a group of students from a specific research lab agreed to accompany me to dinner after a departmental conference. Essentially, our Student Association (of which I am president) had tried to plan an after-conference cocktail, but, due to midterm overload and poor planning, I was pretty much the only participant. Since I didn't know if others were waiting for us there or not, I had to go, but feared that I would be there alone. Out of student solidarity, and because 2 of the 3 had been association members in the past and understood my dismay, they decided to join me. I was so touched! My day had started off rockily but I went home with a smile.
Thursday was really the high point of the week. I attended the Undergrad Conference and the speakers were very well chosen. The topic: Gen Y. Yup, that's me. Restless, prone to rebellion, and ever-educated. Instead of bitching about us like some Boomers tend to do (and, let's face it, we like to bitch about them too around here), Carol Allain (reputed author) told us we were going to change the world. I know it was more of a motivational speach than anything, but it showed me that some people believe in us, and that if we work hard, we can be very successful.
The other highlight of the conference: Two professors from my department (one of which is my advisor) presented a project they are involved in: http://www.economieautrement.org . Essentially, it is an attempt to show how having public, open debates about different economic perspectives can help us come up with more and better solutions in terms of public policy. I know my advisor is awesome, but somewhere during his speech, I knew he had to be my PhD advisor (provided I get through my master's first...). He and his collegue are both economists educated in France, which may help explain their openness to paradigms other than the neo-classical model. We are not communists. We are not idealists. We just want to participate in the discussion. That's what I get from it anyway. And when I become a professor, I want to be like them. They have a funky sense of humour and they just want to provoke, get you to think...
The awesome conference was followed a generous cocktail (open bar + red wine = jackpot). What more could you ask for on a thursday ? :)
Next up: The 3 hour interview we had with the next department head. In June the current department head's mandate comes to an end, and only one candidate has been nominated to be his successor. Obviously the contents of the interview are confidential, but I must say I was inspired by the meeting. I learned a lot about how a department works, what a professor's job consists in, and why I really really made the right choice in deciding to continue my grad students in hopes of becoming a Professor. The man is renowned for being a man of discussion and consensus. He is discrete but gets things done. He is awesome. I can't wait to see how it goes. I also have another scoop but I don't think I can talk about it, which is eating me up inside!! (It's good news though, I think!)
And finally, University governance. After the UQAM fiasco, the education minister is working on a law changing how universities are governed. Essentially, if the law gets adopted, the board of directors would be constituted mostly of external, independent members (read: business leaders) which means the people who work at the university will not be the ones running it. Those who know how a university works will not be the ones running it. I don't know if my point is clear... basically business leaders will decide the fate of universities even though they know almost nothing about what running a university is or means. So much for "teaching, research and service to the community"... it's time for a new mission of "training workers, financing research that serves the business community's interests and service to the rich." I KNOW I am exaggerating. I know business is not the devil. I know we need business to prosper. I just don't think Academia is a business. Knowledge is biased enough without the Government handing over the Universities to the business community.
Obviously this all fits with the direction the conservatives want the SSHRC to take with their new focus on "business-related degrees" http://nikiashton.ndp.ca/sshrc
I know what some people may be thinking. With "the economy" in such a mess, we need to encourage businesses. But we also have to encourage consumption (see Keynes or macroeconomics).
I leave you with this food for thought: In the occidental world, most businesses perish after less than 10 years. Most humans live to be over 70. You and I will probably live to be over 90. Our kids, even longer. So, in the long run, what's most important: the 7-year company, or your kids' 90-year lifespan?
Thursday was really the high point of the week. I attended the Undergrad Conference and the speakers were very well chosen. The topic: Gen Y. Yup, that's me. Restless, prone to rebellion, and ever-educated. Instead of bitching about us like some Boomers tend to do (and, let's face it, we like to bitch about them too around here), Carol Allain (reputed author) told us we were going to change the world. I know it was more of a motivational speach than anything, but it showed me that some people believe in us, and that if we work hard, we can be very successful.
The other highlight of the conference: Two professors from my department (one of which is my advisor) presented a project they are involved in: http://www.economieautrement.org . Essentially, it is an attempt to show how having public, open debates about different economic perspectives can help us come up with more and better solutions in terms of public policy. I know my advisor is awesome, but somewhere during his speech, I knew he had to be my PhD advisor (provided I get through my master's first...). He and his collegue are both economists educated in France, which may help explain their openness to paradigms other than the neo-classical model. We are not communists. We are not idealists. We just want to participate in the discussion. That's what I get from it anyway. And when I become a professor, I want to be like them. They have a funky sense of humour and they just want to provoke, get you to think...
The awesome conference was followed a generous cocktail (open bar + red wine = jackpot). What more could you ask for on a thursday ? :)
Next up: The 3 hour interview we had with the next department head. In June the current department head's mandate comes to an end, and only one candidate has been nominated to be his successor. Obviously the contents of the interview are confidential, but I must say I was inspired by the meeting. I learned a lot about how a department works, what a professor's job consists in, and why I really really made the right choice in deciding to continue my grad students in hopes of becoming a Professor. The man is renowned for being a man of discussion and consensus. He is discrete but gets things done. He is awesome. I can't wait to see how it goes. I also have another scoop but I don't think I can talk about it, which is eating me up inside!! (It's good news though, I think!)
And finally, University governance. After the UQAM fiasco, the education minister is working on a law changing how universities are governed. Essentially, if the law gets adopted, the board of directors would be constituted mostly of external, independent members (read: business leaders) which means the people who work at the university will not be the ones running it. Those who know how a university works will not be the ones running it. I don't know if my point is clear... basically business leaders will decide the fate of universities even though they know almost nothing about what running a university is or means. So much for "teaching, research and service to the community"... it's time for a new mission of "training workers, financing research that serves the business community's interests and service to the rich." I KNOW I am exaggerating. I know business is not the devil. I know we need business to prosper. I just don't think Academia is a business. Knowledge is biased enough without the Government handing over the Universities to the business community.
Obviously this all fits with the direction the conservatives want the SSHRC to take with their new focus on "business-related degrees" http://nikiashton.ndp.ca/sshrc
I know what some people may be thinking. With "the economy" in such a mess, we need to encourage businesses. But we also have to encourage consumption (see Keynes or macroeconomics).
I leave you with this food for thought: In the occidental world, most businesses perish after less than 10 years. Most humans live to be over 70. You and I will probably live to be over 90. Our kids, even longer. So, in the long run, what's most important: the 7-year company, or your kids' 90-year lifespan?
