<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://pinboard.in">
    <title>Pinboard (kellyramsey)</title>
    <link>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/public/</link>
    <description>recent bookmarks from kellyramsey</description>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/academics-are-to-blame-for-the-woke-wreckage-at-universities-27ht2xdjc"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://archive.ph/2024.12.29-141113/https://www.chronicle.com/article/we-asked-for-it"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://stoneageherbalist.substack.com/p/transgender-skeletons"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.thefp.com/p/stanfords-war-against-its-own-students"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://reason.com/2022/07/15/professor-sues-university-of-washington-over-land-acknowledgment-investigation/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://quillette.com/2022/02/22/expelled-from-a-progressive-think-tank-for-the-crime-of-denouncing-antifa-violence/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/why-i-am-suing-ucla"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/07/05/time-to-assume-that-health-research-is-fraudulent-until-proved-otherwise/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.gleech.org/psych"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033062021000670"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-happens-when-doctors-cant-speak"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://reason.com/2021/04/07/microaggressions-uva-student-kieran-bhattacharya-threat/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.city-journal.org/american-campus-as-a-factory"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/12/an-internal-medicine-doctor-and-his-peers-read-the-pfizer-vaccine-study-and-see-red-flags.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1317955669656588288.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wokeademia.html?m=1"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://carcinisation.com/2020/01/27/ignorance-a-skilled-practice/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://beallslist.weebly.com/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/2019-03-27-childress"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-mechanical-turk-bot-panic/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://sappingattention.blogspot.com/2018/07/mea-culpa-there-is-crisis-in-humanities.html?m=1"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.statnews.com/2018/04/02/nih-rejected-alcohol-advertising-study/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/07/curious-blindness-among-peer-review-initiatives/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://quillette.com/2017/11/17/pursuit-injustice-adventures-title-ix/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-49?source=ra"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.alicolleenneff.com/blog/2017/11/8/on-academic-precarity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/28/adjunct-professors-homeless-sex-work-academia-poverty?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/cia-torture-psychologists-compare-themselves-nazi-poison-gas-manufacturer-defense"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2017/07/another-tenure-track-scientist-bites-dust"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n01/corey-robin/dragon-slayers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://dianeravitch.net/2012/05/25/what-is-campbells-law/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://markcarrigan.net/2017/01/27/the-sociology-of-predatory-publishing/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.sciencealert.com/80-of-the-data-in-chinese-clinical-trial-is-fabricated"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.thesociologicalreview.com/blog/the-rise-of-the-trump-academic.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nature.com/news/is-science-only-for-the-rich-1.20650"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/21/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-pace-trial/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/sep/21/cut-throat-academia-leads-to-natural-selection-of-bad-science-claims-study"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/09/academic-penury-adjunct-faculty-as-the-new-precariat.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/citation-needed"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://bjoern.brembs.net/2016/01/even-without-retractions-top-journals-publish-the-least-reliable-science/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.psychiatrie-und-ethik.de/infc/en/Shrink_from_Hell.htm"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/bad-apple-or-bad-orchard-a-narrative-of-alleged-individual-research-misconduct-that-sidestepped-the-pharmaceutical-corporate-context.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://gizmodo.com/experts-held-a-secret-meeting-to-consider-building-a-hu-1776538323"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nature.com/news/power-of-positive-thinking-skews-mindfulness-studies-1.19776"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.firstthings.com/article/2016/05/scientific-regress"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/the-dissidents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/psychologists-shielded-us-torture-program-report-finds.html?referrer="/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://harvardmagazine.com/2015/01/the-wild-west-of-academic-publishing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/06/crapification-of-biomedical-research.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/why-climate-scientists-are-inherently-conservative.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/colleges-flunk-mental-health.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/318-part-time-professing-it-s-not-all-gloom-and-doom"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://evanstonnow.com/story/business/bill-smith/2014-01-30/61300/neighbors-said-to-fear-transient-academics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://yaledailynews.com/weekend/2014/01/24/we-just-cant-have-you-here/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nickysaeun.com/whats-wrong-with-tenure-protecting-the-powerful/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/292-an-alarming-snapshot-of-adjunct-labor?cid=VTKT1"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of-love/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-03/can-t-get-tenure-then-get-a-real-job.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/anthropology-inc/309218/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/cf3e13e4f103"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/91-off-track-adjuncts-are-addicts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.plos.org/speakingofmedicine/2012/06/25/less-research-is-needed/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.chroniclevitae.com/articles/give-it-all-you-ve-got/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kauffman.org/research-and-policy/the-rise-of-fractional-scholarship.aspx"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/09/25/the-adjunct-crisis-and-the-free-market/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/death-of-an-adjunct-703773/"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
  </channel><item rdf:about="https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/academics-are-to-blame-for-the-woke-wreckage-at-universities-27ht2xdjc">
    <title>Academics are to blame for the woke wreckage at universities (John Maier, Daniel Kodsi | The Times)</title>
    <dc:date>2025-08-25T15:18:00+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/academics-are-to-blame-for-the-woke-wreckage-at-universities-27ht2xdjc</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>wokeism academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:6f8dc8e8108c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://archive.ph/2024.12.29-141113/https://www.chronicle.com/article/we-asked-for-it">
    <title>We Asked for It (Michael W. Clune | Chronicle of Higher Education)</title>
    <dc:date>2025-08-19T14:37:04+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://archive.ph/2024.12.29-141113/https://www.chronicle.com/article/we-asked-for-it</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>wokeism academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:3200bfc05ad7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://stoneageherbalist.substack.com/p/transgender-skeletons">
    <title>Transgender Skeletons? (Stone Age Herbalist)</title>
    <dc:date>2023-03-31T19:32:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://stoneageherbalist.substack.com/p/transgender-skeletons</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>trans academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:96287d013ae7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:trans"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.thefp.com/p/stanfords-war-against-its-own-students">
    <title>Stanford’s War Against Its Own Students (Francesca Block | The Free Press)</title>
    <dc:date>2023-03-23T20:34:38+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.thefp.com/p/stanfords-war-against-its-own-students</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" One year later, in 2012, Ottilie and two other alumni lawyers formed a group focused on Stanford’s disciplinary proceedings called the Student Justice Project, and set up a website for the organization, saying it was “born out of. . . the failure of University officials and Trustees to protect our students.” They published a detailed report of the cheating case on the site, and listed multiple allegations of mistreatment, including ignoring prejudicial information, giving students false or misleading information regarding their rights, and excluding evidence in favor of the students. "

...

" Stanford now has more than 10,000 administrators who oversee the 7,761 undergraduate and 9,565 graduate students—almost enough for each student to have their own personal butler. (There are about 2,290 faculty members.) "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:63cc63040c3d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://reason.com/2022/07/15/professor-sues-university-of-washington-over-land-acknowledgment-investigation/">
    <title>Professor Sues University of Washington Over 'Land Acknowledgment' (Emma Camp | Reason)</title>
    <dc:date>2022-07-18T03:10:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://reason.com/2022/07/15/professor-sues-university-of-washington-over-land-acknowledgment-investigation/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" In an email to Reges, the director of the engineering school, Magdalena Balazinska, claimed that the problem wasn't Reges' opinion, it was that he used language outside the exact phrasing recommended by the University.

" Balazinska wrote that she would "ask any instructor who uses a land acknowledgment other than the [University of Washington] land acknowledgment to remove or replace it." However, this did not happen. As Reges' lawsuit alleges, "other faculty at the Allen School continue to include land acknowledgment statements in their syllabi that differ from the University's own statement, so long as they express a viewpoint consistent with the University's recommended version." "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia wokeism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:879fc774ed9e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://quillette.com/2022/02/22/expelled-from-a-progressive-think-tank-for-the-crime-of-denouncing-antifa-violence/">
    <title>Expelled from a Progressive Think Tank — for the Crime of Denouncing Antifa Violence (Craig McCann | Quillette)</title>
    <dc:date>2022-04-21T16:41:34+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://quillette.com/2022/02/22/expelled-from-a-progressive-think-tank-for-the-crime-of-denouncing-antifa-violence/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" In the most recent article I wrote for the CARR site (which has since been deleted, as explained below), I highlighted a recent interview conducted in late 2021, in which Talia Lavin (best known for losing her job after falsely accusing an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent of having a Nazi tattoo) advocated “brass knuckling up and flattening the nose of a Proud Boy.” I simply cannot get behind this as an effective means of responding to those with whom one may justifiably, even passionately, disagree. I argued that violence begets violence, as we have seen repeatedly when street-based protest movements converge with their opponents in cities such as Portland.

" As far back as 2006, Roger Eatwell framed this phenomenon as “cumulative extremism”—also known as “tit-for-tat radicalisation,” “reciprocal radicalisation,” and “an escalating spiral of tension.” Later, this came to be seen as a progressive lens through which to look at violence, as it provided a “welcome adjustment to the overwhelming focus on Islamist terrorism in the immediate post-9/11 context.” In other words: By applying an understanding of cumulative extremism, we can avoid making sweeping indictments of one group of people (in this case, Islamists) without at least considering the militant tactics employed by that group’s opponents. And in 2020, the associate director of CARR (now its acting director) wrote that cumulative extremism is something that his group “is keen to explore as part of an ongoing project examining radical right narratives and counter narratives going forward.” "

...

" That same day, the Founder and Director of CARR, Professor Matthew Feldman, resigned from his position. He is someone I have a great deal of respect for, and I thank him for his steadfast defense of an environment that values a diversity of views. But all that has now changed. On February 10th, a day after CARR’s steering committee met with fellows in a meeting chaired by acting director Dr. William Allchorn, I discovered that CARR had removed my article from its website (though of course, not the response to it). My profile has also been removed from the site. I learned this from friends: No one at CARR had the courage or decency to notify me of my expulsion.

" I emailed Dr. Allchorn, requesting an explanation, and he responded that a majority of fellows expressed a wish to end my fellowship and delete my post (and the CARR tweet that promoted it) with immediate effect. On February 18th, their decisions were formalized in a “CARR Reform Statement,” which declared: “We unreservedly apologise for the blog publication and to those affected in the subsequent backlash.” This is now apparently how CARR works: freedom of speech has been replaced by a system of majoritarian veto. All of this as CARR still presents itself as a “broad church.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>wokeism academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:eae1f5ef5a40/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/why-i-am-suing-ucla">
    <title>Why I Am Suing UCLA (Gordon Klein)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-10-01T07:03:21+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/why-i-am-suing-ucla</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" So, even though a university administrator made it clear the university could not take any action against me — on the grounds that there was no known cause for taking such action — Anderson’s Dean Antonio Bernardo took matters into his own hands. He apparently reasoned that a well-timed publicity stunt might distract attention away from the school’s reputation as an inhospitable place for persons of color — to say nothing of its plummeting rankings in U.S. News and World Report and Bloomberg Businessweek.

" Without any deliberation I was aware of, Bernardo suspended and banned me from campus. Then, like a well-choreographed dance, the Anderson administration started attacking my character on social media. As I documented in my legal claim, on June 3, one day after I received the first email, the Anderson School’s Twitter account sent out a message: “Respect and equality for all are core principles at UCLA Anderson. It is deeply disturbing to learn of this email, which we are investigating. We apologize to the students who received it and to all those who have been as upset and offended by it as we are ourselves.” This implied I didn’t believe in equality for all — when that was exactly what I believed and continue to believe. Judson Caskey, who oversees the accounting program at Anderson, was tasked with monitoring my outgoing emails. I had been deemed radioactive.  "]]></description>
<dc:subject>wokeism academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:e8a22054d13f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/07/05/time-to-assume-that-health-research-is-fraudulent-until-proved-otherwise/">
    <title>Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise? (Richard Smith | The BMJ)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-07-07T15:26:24+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/07/05/time-to-assume-that-health-research-is-fraudulent-until-proved-otherwise/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" In her book Research Misconduct Policy in Biomedicine: Beyond the Bad-Apple Approach she argues that research misconduct is a systems problem—the system provides incentives to publish fraudulent research and does not have adequate regulatory processes. Researchers progress by publishing research, and because the publication system is built on trust and peer review is not designed to detect fraud it is easy to publish fraudulent research. The business model of journals and publishers depends on publishing, preferably lots of studies as cheaply as possible. They have little incentive to check for fraud and a positive disincentive to experience reputational damage—and possibly legal risk—from retracting studies. Funders, universities, and other research institutions similarly have incentives to fund and publish studies and disincentives to make a fuss about fraudulent research they may have funded or had undertaken in their institution—perhaps by one of their star researchers. Regulators often lack the legal standing and the resources to respond to what is clearly extensive fraud, recognising that proving a study to be fraudulent (as opposed to suspecting it of being fraudulent) is a skilled, complex, and time consuming process. Another problem is that research is increasingly international with participants from many institutions in many countries: who then takes on the unenviable task of investigating fraud? Science really needs global governance. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:434b45e089fd/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.gleech.org/psych">
    <title>Reversals in Psychology</title>
    <dc:date>2021-06-28T21:42:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.gleech.org/psych</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:bba0a03af80f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033062021000670">
    <title>The obesity wars and the education of a researcher: A personal account (Katherine M. Flegel | Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-06-20T20:13:23+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033062021000670</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Our article attracted attention because it appeared to be inconsistent with the dramatic conclusions of the 2004 Mokdad et al. article.8 I fielded dozens of press calls as soon as our article was published. To my surprise, after the first few hours, many of the journalists who called me had already spoken to a professor, Walter Willett, (let's call him Professor 1) from a prestigious school of public health (PSPH). He was not a statistician and had no expertise in estimating the number of deaths associated with obesity. Our article was not intended to have anything to do with his work. He had apparently begun pre-emptively contacting the press, inserting himself into the discussion, positioning himself as an expert, and providing negative and antagonistic comments on our article before reporters had spoken to me. He used strong language to disparage our article, describing it as “really naive, deeply flawed and seriously misleading”.9 At a scientific conference, a little over a week after our article appeared, Frank Hu (let's call him Professor 2), another professor from PSPH, took the unusual step of pre-empting a planned presentation by someone else to take the stage and deliver a critique of our just-published article. When I presented a seminar at UC Berkeley a week after our article appeared, an unidentified young woman stood at the door giving out a handout of 4 pages of faxed and photocopied material that included an abstract from PSPH and several news articles that discussed PSPH research on obesity. "

...

" Both our 2005 article and our 2013 article were straightforward and transparent. Both are still cited frequently in the scientific literature. We presented our findings objectively and even-handedly, without cloaking them in any spin43, 44, 45 designed to obscure possibly inconvenient results (sometimes called “white hat bias”45); indeed, this lack of spin may have been one of the reasons why our findings were considered to be surprising. Our articles drew only on data that were free and readily publicly available and could easily be checked. The controversy was something deliberately manufactured, and the attacks primarily consisted of repeated assertions of preconceived opinions. Nonetheless, these attacks were surprisingly effective. A small number of vocal critics succeeded in raising considerable doubt about our work while concealing major errors in the estimates that they preferred. One result was that unlike other researchers who had published articles on the same topic, we ourselves were sometimes treated as though we were advocates, not scientists striving to be objective.

" At first, I was startled, but eventually I came to expect partisan attacks masquerading as scientific concerns. I had expected some modest interest in our findings, pursued through normal channels of scientific discussion. I had not expected an aggressive campaign that included insults, errors, misinformation, behind-the-scenes gossip and maneuvers, social media posts and even complaints to my employer – many more instances than I have space to describe here. It seemed that some felt that our work should be judged not on its merits but rather on whether its findings supported the goals and objectives of the interlocutors. I saw first-hand the antagonism that can be provoked by inconvenient scientific findings. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:27571340507e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-happens-when-doctors-cant-speak">
    <title>What Happens When Doctors Can't Tell the Truth? (Katie Herzog | Substack)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-06-03T17:48:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-happens-when-doctors-cant-speak</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" “Whole research areas are off-limits,” he said, adding that some of what is being published in the nation’s top journals is “shoddy as hell.” 

" Here, he was referring in part to a study published last year in the Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. The study was covered all over the news, with headlines like “Black Newborns More Likely to Die When Looked After by White Doctors” (CNN), “The Lack of Black Doctors is Killing Black Babies” (Fortune), and “Black Babies More Likely to Survive when Cared for by Black Doctors” (The Guardian).

" Despite these breathless headlines, the study was so methodologically flawed that, according to several of the doctors I spoke with, it’s impossible to extrapolate any conclusions about how the race of the treating doctor impacts patient outcomes at all. And yet very few people were willing to publicly criticize it. As Vinay Prasad, a clinician and a professor at the University of California San Francisco, put it on Twitter: “I am aware of dozens of people who agree with my assessment of this paper and are scared to comment.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>wokeism academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:5a95562d5f98/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://reason.com/2021/04/07/microaggressions-uva-student-kieran-bhattacharya-threat/">
    <title>A Medical Student Questioned Microaggressions. UVA Branded Him a Threat and Banished Him from Campus. (Robby Soave | Reason)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-04-08T15:11:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://reason.com/2021/04/07/microaggressions-uva-student-kieran-bhattacharya-threat/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" But Nora Kern, an assistant professor who helped to organize the event, thought Bhattacharya's questions were a bit too pointed. Immediately following the panel, she filed a "professionalism concern card"—a kind of record of a student's violations of university policy. "

...

" Meanwhile, the Academic Standards and Achievement Committee met to to discuss the concern card. This committee voted to send Bhattacharya a written reminder to "show mutual respect" to faculty members and "express yourself appropriately." The committee also suggested that he get counseling.

" On November 26, this suggestion became a mandate: The student was informed that he must be evaluated by psychological services before returning to classes. Bhattacharya repeatedly asked university officials to clarify what exactly he was accused of, under whose authority his counseling had been mandated, and why his enrollment status was suddenly in doubt, according to the lawsuit. These queries only appear to have made UVA officials more determined to punish him: Bhattacharya's mounting frustration with these baseless accusations of unspecified wrongdoings was essentially treated as evidence that he was guilty. At his hearing, he was accused of being "extremely defensive" and ordered to change his "aggressive, threatening behavior." "]]></description>
<dc:subject>wokeism academia cults</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:bef4f2c52e3e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:cults"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.city-journal.org/american-campus-as-a-factory">
    <title>The Campus as Factory (Jacob Howland | City Journal)</title>
    <dc:date>2021-03-10T22:59:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.city-journal.org/american-campus-as-a-factory</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" What does the reengineered education promoted by organizations like HLC, EAB, GKFF, and the Lumina Foundation look like in practice? TU’s 2017–22 strategic plan answers this question. Titled “Building the Foundation for a Great Story and a Greater Commitment,” the plan is a classic of postmodernist, therapeutic, progressivist, and consumeristic jargon. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia capitalism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:62c8c502bec6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:capitalism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/12/an-internal-medicine-doctor-and-his-peers-read-the-pfizer-vaccine-study-and-see-red-flags.html">
    <title>An Internal Medicine Doctor and His Peers Read the Pfizer Vaccine Study and See Red Flags [Updated] (Naked Capitalism)</title>
    <dc:date>2020-12-15T02:40:49+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/12/an-internal-medicine-doctor-and-his-peers-read-the-pfizer-vaccine-study-and-see-red-flags.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" We get the Pfizer ad glossy editorial treatment from Eric Rubin MD, the editor-in-chief of the NEJM. And Dr, Longo, an associate editor. Dr. Longo is an oncologist. Dr. Rubin is at least a recognized infectious disease doctor, but his specialty based on my Google search is mycobacterium, not virology. Again, one would normally anticipate for a paper of this importance, the editorial would be from someone with directly on point expertise.

" Why would this fact been important to my mentor? (and I had the privilege of hearing him trash a paper in an open forum about a very similar issue, a paper introducing a drug to the world that later was the disaster of the decade, Vioxx) Why is this important to me and all the other physicians in my review group here in flyover country yesterday?

" Because the choice of authorship of the editorial leads you to one of only several conclusions:

"    • Pfizer would not release the source data because of proprietary corporate concerns and no self-respecting expert would review without it
    • Pfizer knew there are problems and did not want anyone with expertise to find out and publicize them
    • The editors could not find a real expert willing to put their name on a discussion
    • Drs. Rubin and Longo are on some kind of journey to Vanity Fair and wanted their names on an “article for the ages”
    • This is a rush job, and no one had time to do anything properly, and so we just threw it all together in a flash

" Readers, pick your poison. If anyone can think of a sound reason, please let me know. I am all ears. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia &gt;public-health</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:abac168d584b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:&gt;public-health"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1317955669656588288.html">
    <title>Campus Reform (thread by Asha Rangappa)</title>
    <dc:date>2020-10-19T20:02:53+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1317955669656588288.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Campus Reform is a project of The Leadership Institute, which is funded by the Koch donor network. It's essentially, in intelligence terms, a PERCEPTION MANAGEMENT OPERATION designed to delegitimize the academy. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>conservatism political-organization academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:7aee09d6c551/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:conservatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:political-organization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wokeademia.html?m=1">
    <title>Wokeademia (John H Cochrane | The Grumpy Economist)</title>
    <dc:date>2020-01-31T18:45:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wokeademia.html?m=1</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Why is it a political test? Politics are a reflection of how you believe society should be organized. Classical liberals aspire to treat every person as a unique individual, not as a representative of their gender or their ethnic group. The sample rubric dictates that in order to get a high diversity score, a candidate must have actively engaged in promoting different identity groups as part of their professional life.... Requiring candidates to believe that people should be treated differently according to their identity is indeed a political test...The idea of using a political test as a screen for job applicants should send a shiver down our collective spine.... "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia wokeism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:7d25f46bdb5a/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:wokeism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://carcinisation.com/2020/01/27/ignorance-a-skilled-practice/">
    <title>Ignorance, a skilled practice (birguslatro | Carcinisation)</title>
    <dc:date>2020-01-28T13:24:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://carcinisation.com/2020/01/27/ignorance-a-skilled-practice/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" “Word laundering” is the term that comes to mind with survey instruments in general.

" These survey instruments, these facts, these studies are not special or unique – at least, I have no reason to suspect so. Domains that widely rely on survey instruments – depression inventories in mental health, happiness studies, education, nutrition – seem particularly vulnerable to taking words wrongly seriously.

" And you can’t tell from looking just how bad a survey instrument is. A lot of the badness is how the instrument is used. Unwarranted inferences, suspicious groupings of unlike things, and layers of other tricks and malfeasances can be buried along the path from survey instrument to Fact. The problem is not the survey instrument itself. The problem is the expectation that this kind of knowledge can be had, and confidence that a survey is the way to get it. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>social-epistemology academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:f10d9780e5fb/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:social-epistemology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://beallslist.weebly.com/">
    <title>Beall's List of Predatory Journals and Publishers</title>
    <dc:date>2019-04-03T23:00:18+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://beallslist.weebly.com/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:164688a429aa/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/2019-03-27-childress">
    <title>This Is How You Kill a Profession (Herb Childress | Chronicle of Higher Education)</title>
    <dc:date>2019-04-02T15:19:25+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/2019-03-27-childress</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" We discarded college faculty in the same way that we discarded medical general practitioners: through providing insane rewards to specialists and leaving most care in the hands of paraprofessionals.

" We discarded college faculty in the same way that we discarded cab drivers: by leveling the profession and allowing anyone to participate, as long as they had a minimum credential and didn’t need much money.

" We discarded college faculty in the same way that we discarded magazine and newspaper writers: by relabeling the work “content” and its workers “content providers.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:90cf4d1c2092/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/">
    <title>Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship (Helen Pluckrose, James A. Lindsay, Peter Boghossian | Areo)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-10-03T13:35:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Our paper-writing methodology always followed a specific pattern: it started with an idea that spoke to our epistemological or ethical concerns with the field and then sought to bend the existing scholarship to support it. The goal was always to use what the existing literature offered to get some little bit of lunacy or depravity to be acceptable at the highest levels of intellectual respectability within the field. Therefore, each paper began with something absurd or deeply unethical (or both) that we wanted to forward or conclude. We then made the existing peer-reviewed literature do our bidding in the attempt to get published in the academic canon.

" This is the primary point of the project: What we just described is not knowledge production; it’s sophistry. That is, it’s a forgery of knowledge that should not be mistaken for the real thing. The biggest difference between us and the scholarship we are studying by emulation is that we know we made things up. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:93724d01cece/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">
    <title>Top Cancer Researcher Fails to Disclose Corporate Financial Ties in Major Research Journals (Charles Ornstein, Katie Thomas | New York Times)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-09-08T20:10:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/health/jose-baselga-cancer-memorial-sloan-kettering.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" One of the world’s top breast cancer doctors failed to disclose millions of dollars in payments from drug and health care companies in recent years, omitting his financial ties from dozens of research articles in prestigious publications like The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet.

" The researcher, Dr. José Baselga, a towering figure in the cancer world, is the chief medical officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. He has held board memberships or advisory roles with Roche and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among other corporations, has had a stake in start-ups testing cancer therapies, and played a key role in the development of breakthrough drugs that have revolutionized treatments for breast cancer.

" According to an analysis by The New York Times and ProPublica, Dr. Baselga did not follow financial disclosure rules set by the American Association for Cancer Research when he was president of the group. He also left out payments he received from companies connected to cancer research in his articles published in the group’s journal, Cancer Discovery. At the same time, he has been one of the journal’s two editors in chief. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:ebde28b0ee8e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-mechanical-turk-bot-panic/">
    <title>A Bot Panic Hits Amazon Mechanical Turk (Emily Dreyfuss | Wired)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-08-18T22:45:53+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-mechanical-turk-bot-panic/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" He said he had to throw out nearly half of the data in his most recent survey, a sharp increase from what he was used to seeing. His Facebook post garnered 181 comments, with other researchers describing similar signs of low-quality data in their own recent work. A number of them wondered if the culprit was bots—automated programs mimicking human behavior, not the actual human labor MTurk is supposed to supply.

" The discussion soon spread over Twitter and email, until it appeared the whole field was worried about MTurk. By Friday, New Scientist ran an article with the headline “Bots on Amazon’s MTurk Are Ruining Psychology Studies.” One psychology professor mused on Facebook, “I wonder if this is the end of MTurk research?”

" If that were the case, it would be a pretty big deal. Thousands of published social science studies use MTurk survey data every year, according to Panos Ipeirotis, a data scientist at New York University’s Stern School of Business. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:bf57b7c16b52/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://sappingattention.blogspot.com/2018/07/mea-culpa-there-is-crisis-in-humanities.html?m=1">
    <title>Sapping Attention: Mea culpa: there *is* a crisis in the humanities (Benjamin Schmidt)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-07-27T21:07:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://sappingattention.blogspot.com/2018/07/mea-culpa-there-is-crisis-in-humanities.html?m=1</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The last five years have been brutal for almost every major in the humanities - it's no longer reasonable to speculate that we are fluctuating around a long term average. So at this point, I want to explain why I am now much more pessimistic about the state of humanities majors than I was five years ago. I'll show a few charts, but here's the one that most inflects my thinking. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:9312a2882d26/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.statnews.com/2018/04/02/nih-rejected-alcohol-advertising-study/">
    <title>NIH rejected study of alcohol advertising while pursuing industry funding (Sharon Begley, Stat)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-04-02T13:35:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.statnews.com/2018/04/02/nih-rejected-alcohol-advertising-study/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" He never imagined, however, that at the 2015 meeting the director, George Koob, would leap out of his seat and scream at the scientists after their PowerPoint presentation on research the agency had eagerly funded on the association between alcohol marketing and underage drinking. “I don’t f***ing care!” Koob yelled, referring to alcohol advertising, according to the scientists.

" Koob also made clear that NIAAA would pull back from such research, recalled Siegel and his colleague, David Jernigan of Johns Hopkins University, who described the previously undisclosed meeting in Bethesda, Md., in separate interviews with STAT. Shocked by the encounter, they retreated to an NIH cafeteria, asking each other what had just happened — and why.

" It would take them three years to figure it out: In 2014 and 2015, Koob’s agency was quietly wooing the alcoholic beverage industry to contribute tens of millions of dollars for a study on whether drinking “moderate” amounts of alcohol was good for the heart. Those efforts were brought to light by recent reports in Wired and the New York Times. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:e37b2bc57c2c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/07/curious-blindness-among-peer-review-initiatives/">
    <title>A Curious Blindness Among Peer Review Initiatives (Tim Vines @ The Scholarly Kitchen)</title>
    <dc:date>2018-03-07T14:53:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/07/curious-blindness-among-peer-review-initiatives/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Put simply, the main role of the Editorial Office is to catch problems before they derail the peer review process. There are an astonishing number of ways in which authors, editors, and reviewers can make mistakes, and it takes an experienced and dedicated eye to catch them. A few examples: spotting missing or corrupted figures, noticing that the authors shared a dataset with raw patient data, seeing that ethics board approval isn’t mentioned, spotting that a potential handling editor has a serious Conflict of Interest, and removing ad hominem language from reviewer comments. Once a mistake gets through, peer review can be delayed by weeks or months while the issue is fixed and everyone’s attention is subsequently dragged back onto the manuscript. Big mistakes and big delays make everyone unhappy; lots of these will leave your reputation in tatters. The hope that AI-based automation could fulfil these functions greatly underestimates their range and subtlety of issues encountered during peer review: AI needs to come a long way before it can replace anyone in the Editorial Office. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:88131ce55e06/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://quillette.com/2017/11/17/pursuit-injustice-adventures-title-ix/">
    <title>Pursuit of Injustice: Further Adventures Under Title IX (Nicholas Wolfinger | Quillette)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-11-26T05:22:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://quillette.com/2017/11/17/pursuit-injustice-adventures-title-ix/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" So, how did the Dear Colleague Letter turn universities into star chambers? It lowered the burden of proof for a guilty finding in sex cases, and stripped the accused of due process. Perhaps more importantly, it established a system of perverse incentives that fueled the witch hunt. Colleges deemed insufficiently vigorous in ferreting out sexual misbehavior could now be shamed by their inclusion in a federal registry. Furthermore, they were threatened with compliance reviews that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete. Colleges now had a strong incentive to pursue every case brought to their attention, no matter how frivolous. Despite the recent retraction of the Dear Colleague and new federal guidelines, the Title IX machine continues to hum along, perhaps motivated by higher education’s broad hostility to the Trump administration. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:d1443171d4bf/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-49?source=ra">
    <title>GAO-18-49, Contingent Workforce: Size, Characteristics, Compensation, and Work Experiences of Adjunct and Other Non-Tenure-Track Faculty, October 19, 2017</title>
    <dc:date>2017-11-20T21:04:59+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-49?source=ra</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:478f8ca6ed58/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.alicolleenneff.com/blog/2017/11/8/on-academic-precarity">
    <title>On Academic Precarity (Ali Colleen Neff)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-11-12T19:13:33+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.alicolleenneff.com/blog/2017/11/8/on-academic-precarity</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Precarity is a holding zone that entails more overwork, more debt, and the expiration of passionate graduate research for the day-to-day tasks we take on in order to show our department that we are worthy of a good recommendation, even as they treat us as day laborers. Precarity is hope that sustains past the promise of hope and into the immediacy of survival. Precarity is humiliating. Precarity quickly becomes a stigma when we are not-good-enough for too many semesters in a row. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:6c4228d5107c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/28/adjunct-professors-homeless-sex-work-academia-poverty?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other">
    <title>Facing poverty, academics turn to sex work and sleeping in cars | US news (Alastair Gee | The Guardian)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-09-28T13:48:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/28/adjunct-professors-homeless-sex-work-academia-poverty?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" She first opted for her side gig during a particularly rough patch, several years ago, when her course load was suddenly cut in half and her income plunged, putting her on the brink of eviction. “In my mind I was like, I’ve had one-night stands, how bad can it be?” she said. “And it wasn’t that bad.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>stratification academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:7b94b4675b98/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/cia-torture-psychologists-compare-themselves-nazi-poison-gas-manufacturer-defense">
    <title>CIA Torture Psychologists Compare Themselves to Nazi Poison Gas Manufacturer as Defense (Dror Ladin | American Civil Liberties Union)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-07-25T17:26:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/cia-torture-psychologists-compare-themselves-nazi-poison-gas-manufacturer-defense</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" This Friday in federal court in Spokane, Washington, Mitchell and Jessen’s lawyers will argue that they can’t be held responsible for their actions. In an extraordinary legal filing, Mitchell and Jessen claim they aren’t legally responsible to the people hurt by their methods because they “simply did business with the CIA pursuant to their contracts.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>torture academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:c24075d44e7e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:torture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2017/07/another-tenure-track-scientist-bites-dust">
    <title>Another tenure-track scientist bites the dust (Adam Ruben | Science)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-07-21T15:03:07+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2017/07/another-tenure-track-scientist-bites-dust</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Having his grants not discussed, his tenure-track position therefore lost, and no career to show for 2 decades of hard work, Matthew felt emotionally ready. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:96e2755d825c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n01/corey-robin/dragon-slayers">
    <title>Dragon-Slayers (Corey Robin @ London Review of Books)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-07-08T16:15:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n01/corey-robin/dragon-slayers</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Eichmann was a careerist of the first order. He had ‘no motives at all’, Arendt insisted, ‘except for an extraordinary diligence in looking out for his personal advancement’. He joined the Nazis because he saw in them an opportunity to ‘start from scratch and still make a career’, and ‘what he fervently believed in up to the end was success.’ Late in the war, as Nazi leaders brooded in Berlin over their impending fate and that of Germany, Eichmann was fretting over superiors’ refusing to invite him to lunch. Years later, he had no memory of the Wannsee Conference, but clearly remembered bowling with senior officials in Slovakia.

" This aspect of Arendt’s treatment of Eichmann is often overlooked in favour of her account of the bureaucrat, the thoughtless follower of rules who could cite the letter of Kant’s categorical imperative without apprehending its spirit. The bureaucrat is a passive instrument, the careerist an architect of his own advance. The first loses himself in paper, the second hoists himself up a ladder. The first was how Eichmann saw himself; the second is how Arendt insisted he be seen. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:3204fcee52ba/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://dianeravitch.net/2012/05/25/what-is-campbells-law/">
    <title>What Is Campbell’s Law? (Diane Ravitch)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-02-02T01:19:31+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://dianeravitch.net/2012/05/25/what-is-campbells-law/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”  "]]></description>
<dc:subject>quantified-self brain-race academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://apple.com/iphone/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:1c915f3b642a/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:quantified-self"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:brain-race"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://markcarrigan.net/2017/01/27/the-sociology-of-predatory-publishing/">
    <title>The Sociology of Predatory Publishing (Mark Carrigan)</title>
    <dc:date>2017-02-02T01:18:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://markcarrigan.net/2017/01/27/the-sociology-of-predatory-publishing/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The case is a fascinating one because it illustrates how metricised evaluation and predatory publishing cannot simply be regarded as imposed from outside, leaving academic victims with no choice but to adapt or be left behind. Strielkowski is an extreme example but his case illustrates how the opportunities these systems create for advancement are drawn upon and engaged with knowingly by scholars, in a way that is always implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) orientated to the others embedded within them. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://apple.com/iphone/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:918a87744a8b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/">
    <title>What has happened down here is the winds have changed (Andrew Gelman)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-11-05T01:09:24+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" I bring this up not in the spirit of gotcha, but rather to emphasize what a difficult position Fiske is in. She’s seeing her professional world collapsing—not at a personal level, I assume she’ll keep her title as the Eugene Higgins Professor of Psychology and Professor of Public Affairs at Princeton University for as long as she wants—but her work and the work of her friends and colleagues is being questioned in a way that no one could’ve imagined ten years ago. It’s scary, and it’s gotta be a lot easier for her to blame some unnamed “terrorists” than to confront the gaps in her own understanding of research methods.

" To put it another way, Fiske and her friends and students followed a certain path which has given them fame, fortune, and acclaim. Question the path, and you question the legitimacy of all that came from it. And that can’t be pleasant. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>data-analysis academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:a0eb16f8cbf2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:data-analysis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.sciencealert.com/80-of-the-data-in-chinese-clinical-trial-is-fabricated">
    <title>80% of data in Chinese clinical trials have been fabricated (Fiona MacDonald | ScienceAlert)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-10-03T00:35:31+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.sciencealert.com/80-of-the-data-in-chinese-clinical-trial-is-fabricated</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The report uncovered fraudulent behaviour at almost every level, and showed that some pharmaceutical companies had hidden or deleted records of potentially adverse side effects, and tampered with data that didn't meet their desired outcomes.

" In light of the findings, 80 percent of current drug applications, which were awaiting approval for mass production, have now been cancelled.

" The investigation, led by the Chinese State Food and Drug Administration (SFDA), looked at data from 1,622 clinical trials for new pharmaceutical drugs currently awaiting approval. The applications in question were all for Western medicine, not traditional Chinese medicine. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:2ca21618d784/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.thesociologicalreview.com/blog/the-rise-of-the-trump-academic.html">
    <title>The Rise of the Trump Academic (Liz Morrish @ The Sociological Review)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-10-02T16:49:50+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.thesociologicalreview.com/blog/the-rise-of-the-trump-academic.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The more that regimes of top-down interference chip away at academic authenticity and integrity, the further we are from that perennial pretension of ‘excellence’. We risk becoming a profession of self-regarding hustlers, changing our game plan at each new behest from above. Let’s count them: contract renewal, tenure, promotion, student evaluations, research selectivity, impact, employability. I was reminded of a recent article in The Guardian, a profile of former Chief Inspector of Prisons, Nick Hardwick, who, on leaving the post said, “You shouldn’t do this job for too long because you get used to things you shouldn’t get used to”. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:eee8a7717226/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nature.com/news/is-science-only-for-the-rich-1.20650">
    <title>Is science only for the rich? (Nature News &amp; Comment)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-22T19:21:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nature.com/news/is-science-only-for-the-rich-1.20650</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Few countries collect detailed data on socioeconomic status, but the available numbers consistently show that nations are wasting the talents of underprivileged youth who might otherwise be tackling challenges in health, energy, pollution, climate change and a host of other societal issues. And it's clear that the universal issue of class is far from universal in the way it plays out. Here, Nature looks at eight countries around the world, and their efforts to battle the many problems of class in science. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:61ed85d1adcd/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/21/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-pace-trial/">
    <title>How bad science misled chronic fatigue syndrome patients (Julie Rehmeyer | Stat)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-22T13:07:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/21/chronic-fatigue-syndrome-pace-trial/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Before the trial of 641 patients began, the researchers had announced their standards for success — that is, what “improvement” and “recovery” meant in statistically measurable terms. To be considered recovered, participants had to meet established thresholds on self-assessments of fatigue and physical function, and they had to say they felt much better overall.

" But after the unblinded trial started, the researchers weakened all these standards, by a lot. Their revised definition of “recovery” was so loose that patients could get worse over the course of the trial on both fatigue and physical function and still be considered “recovered.” The threshold for physical function was so low that an average 80-year-old would exceed it.

" In addition, the only evidence the researchers had that patients felt better was that patients said so. They found no significant improvement on any of their objective measures, such as how many patients got back to work, how many got off welfare, or their level of fitness. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia data-analysis</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:da782ab1badf/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:data-analysis"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/sep/21/cut-throat-academia-leads-to-natural-selection-of-bad-science-claims-study">
    <title>Cut-throat academia leads to 'natural selection of bad science', claims study (Hannah Devlin, The Guardian)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-21T22:27:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/sep/21/cut-throat-academia-leads-to-natural-selection-of-bad-science-claims-study</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" To thrive in the cut-throat world of academia, scientists are incentivised to publish surprising findings frequently, the study suggests – despite the risk that such findings are “most likely to be wrong”.

" Paul Smaldino, a cognitive scientist who led the work at the University of California, Merced, said: “As long as the incentives are in place that reward publishing novel, surprising results, often and in high-visibility journals above other, more nuanced aspects of science, shoddy practices that maximise one’s ability to do so will run rampant.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:f5e255366f28/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/09/academic-penury-adjunct-faculty-as-the-new-precariat.html">
    <title>Academic Penury: Adjunct Faculty as the New Precariat (Roslyn Fuller | naked capitalism)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-21T15:55:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/09/academic-penury-adjunct-faculty-as-the-new-precariat.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" As an adjunct, Wangerin is employed on a casual basis and earns somewhere between half and one-third of what a tenure-track professor would make for teaching the same courses. That is significant, because non-tenure track teaching staff – commonly referred to as adjuncts and contingent faculty – now make up approximately 70% of all teaching staff in American higher education. This means that roughly three out of every four courses a student takes are taught by someone without job security who is working on minimal pay.

" When Wangerin conducted a survey at the College of Staten Island, a CUNY-affiliated institution, she discovered that one-fifth of adjuncts had no health insurance and that half of all respondents were seeking full-time employment but were unable to attain it. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:e636e3832d3b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/citation-needed">
    <title>Citation Needed (Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-12T20:57:37+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/citation-needed</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>humor academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:6daa5b7c3ad2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:humor"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://bjoern.brembs.net/2016/01/even-without-retractions-top-journals-publish-the-least-reliable-science/">
    <title>Even without retractions, ‘top’ journals publish the least reliable science (Bjoern Brembs)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-09-09T20:40:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://bjoern.brembs.net/2016/01/even-without-retractions-top-journals-publish-the-least-reliable-science/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Not a single study we know of (there may be some we missed! Let me know.) shows the third option of higher-ranking journals publishing the most sound experiments. It is this third option that at least one analysis should have found somewhere if there was anything to journal rank with regard to reliability.

" Hence, even if you completely ignore the highly scattered and confounded retraction data, experiments published in higher ranking journals are still less reliable than those published in lower ranking journals – and error-detection or scrutiny has nothing to do with it.

" In that view, one may interpret the observation of more retractions in higher ranking journals as merely a logical consequence of the worse methodology there, nothing more. This effect may then, in turn, be somewhat exaggerated because of higher scrutiny, but we don’t have any data on that. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:de78173eb690/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.psychiatrie-und-ethik.de/infc/en/Shrink_from_Hell.htm">
    <title>The Shrink From Hell (Raymond Tallis)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-08-27T13:05:52+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.psychiatrie-und-ethik.de/infc/en/Shrink_from_Hell.htm</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Lacan published few further cases of his own. Instead, he recycled some of Freud’s well-known cases, in pursuit of his avowed aim of restoring the truth of Freud’s ideas which he believed had been traduced by Freudians. Unfettered by data, he was free to soar and to promulgate those large, untestable and obscure ideas—they were too difficult even for Melanie Klein to understand—that made him into an international superstar and which were cherished by his followers and are foundational for theorrhoeists. His doctrines—a magpie muddle of often unacknowledged expropriations from writers whose disciplines were alien to him, cast in borrowed jargon and opaque neologisms—were Rorschach ink-blots into which anything could be read. Lacan’s ideas were insulated against critical evaluation by his writing style, in which, according to Roudinesco, ‘a dialectic between presence and absence alternated with a logic of space and motion’. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>DNR academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:70a943562be6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:DNR"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/bad-apple-or-bad-orchard-a-narrative-of-alleged-individual-research-misconduct-that-sidestepped-the-pharmaceutical-corporate-context.html">
    <title>Bad Apple or Bad Orchard? - A Narrative of Alleged Individual Research Misconduct that Sidestepped the Pharmaceutical Corporate Context (Lambert Strether | naked capitalism)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-07-10T05:50:26+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/bad-apple-or-bad-orchard-a-narrative-of-alleged-individual-research-misconduct-that-sidestepped-the-pharmaceutical-corporate-context.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" We have been writing for years about massive problems with manipulation of clinical research to increase the likelihood that the results would satisfy vested interests, and suppression of research whose results remain unsatisfactory after such manipulation.  The vested interests are most commonly pharmaceutical, biotechnology or device companies and those working with them.  Such suppression and manipulation may make treatments that do not work look efficacious, and treatments that are dangerous look safe, and may lead to excess costs, and worse, harms to patients.  This kind of research misconduct may be facilitated by individual researchers seeking fame and fortune, but is hardly an individual sport. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia capitalism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:26a226d50c35/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:capitalism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://gizmodo.com/experts-held-a-secret-meeting-to-consider-building-a-hu-1776538323">
    <title>Experts Held a Secret Meeting to Consider Building a Human Genome From Scratch (George Dvorsky | Gizmodo)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-05-13T22:04:08+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://gizmodo.com/experts-held-a-secret-meeting-to-consider-building-a-hu-1776538323</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" According to George Church, a professor of genetics at Harvard medical school and a key organizer of the proposed project, the whole thing is an unfortunate misunderstanding. Church says the meeting wasn’t really about synthetic human genomes, but rather it was about efforts to improve the ability to synthesize long strands of DNA, which geneticists could use to create all manner of animals, plants and microbes. Church was quoted in the NYT as saying: “They’re painting a picture which I don’t think represents the project. If that were the project, I’d be running away from it.”

" This is all very interesting because, as Pollack points out, the original name of the project was “HGP2: The Human Genome Synthesis Project.” What’s more, an invitation to the meeting clearly stated that the primary goal would be “to synthesize a complete human genome in a cell line within a period of ten years.” Later, the organizers changed the name of the meeting to “HGP-Write: Testing Large Synthetic Genomes in Cells.” The reason for the change, they said, was that the original name was meant to be headline-grabbing. Which is a super strange thing to say given that the meeting was closed to the press. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>biotechnology academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:a1a57807f5b9/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:biotechnology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nature.com/news/power-of-positive-thinking-skews-mindfulness-studies-1.19776">
    <title>Power of positive thinking skews mindfulness studies (Anna Nowogrodzki | Nature News &amp; Comment)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-04-21T23:34:44+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nature.com/news/power-of-positive-thinking-skews-mindfulness-studies-1.19776</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Researchers at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, analysed 124 published trials of mindfulness as a mental-health treatment, and found that scientists reported positive findings 60% more often than is statistically likely. The team also examined another 21 trials that were registered with databases such as ClinicalTrials.gov; of these, 62% were unpublished 30 months after they finished. The findings — reported in PLoS ONE on 8 April1 — hint that negative results are going unpublished. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>mindfulness academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:c1991eb09032/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:mindfulness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.firstthings.com/article/2016/05/scientific-regress">
    <title>Scientific Regress (William A. Wilson @ First Things)</title>
    <dc:date>2016-04-13T19:02:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.firstthings.com/article/2016/05/scientific-regress</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" But, and there is no putting it nicely, deliberate fraud is far more widespread than the scientific establishment is generally willing to admit. One way we know that there’s a great deal of fraud occurring is that if you phrase your question the right way, ­scientists will confess to it. In a survey of two thousand research psychologists conducted in 2011, over half of those surveyed admitted outright to selectively reporting those experiments which gave the result they were after. Then the investigators asked respondents anonymously to estimate how many of their fellow scientists had engaged in fraudulent behavior, and promised them that the more accurate their guesses, the larger a contribution would be made to the charity of their choice. Through several rounds of anonymous guessing, refined using the number of scientists who would admit their own fraud and other indirect measurements, the investigators concluded that around 10 percent of research psychologists have engaged in outright falsification of data, and more than half have engaged in less brazen but still fraudulent behavior such as reporting that a result was statistically significant when it was not, or deciding between two different data analysis techniques after looking at the results of each and choosing the more favorable. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:d591ed767df5/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/the-dissidents">
    <title>How Six Rebel Psychologists Fought A Decade-Long War On Torture — And Won (Peter Aldhaus | Buzzfeed)</title>
    <dc:date>2015-08-08T18:36:03+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/the-dissidents</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The coalition came together in the wake of the APA's Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS), which issued the 2005 report that has thrown psychology into crisis. Arrigo was a member, but quickly came to the view that the task force was a sham.

" It came up with no firm rules to prohibit psychologists from being involved in interrogations using the harsh methods — including sleep deprivation, isolation, and painful "stress positions" — that were being used at CIA "black sites" and the U.S. military's detention camp at Guantánamo. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>torture academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:df7cfeac6ebe/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:torture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/psychologists-shielded-us-torture-program-report-finds.html?referrer=">
    <title>Psychologists Shielded U.S. Torture Program, Report Finds (James Risen | New York Times)</title>
    <dc:date>2015-07-10T21:27:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/psychologists-shielded-us-torture-program-report-finds.html?referrer=</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>torture academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:5b96637da2bd/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:torture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://harvardmagazine.com/2015/01/the-wild-west-of-academic-publishing">
    <title>The “Wild West” of Academic Publishing (Craig Lambert | Harvard Magazine)</title>
    <dc:date>2015-02-02T17:34:51+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://harvardmagazine.com/2015/01/the-wild-west-of-academic-publishing</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The current reduction in library purchases of specialized titles, for example, is squeezing monographs out of the market, and in this way affecting the academic job market. A monograph has typically been a young scholar’s first book, often developed from a doctoral dissertation. Although uncommon in academia prior to the 1920s, monographs served as a staple of tenure reviews in American universities in the second half of the twentieth century, especially in the humanities. Academic presses now publish many fewer of them, and their disappearance creates a dilemma for junior scholars already worried about the scarcity of jobs: if there is no monograph, what evidence do you adduce to support your case for tenure?

" “The monograph has been at risk for a long time,” Sisler notes. “Journals, in science in particular, have eaten up library budgets that were formerly spent on humanities and social-science monographs. As the number of units in print goes down, the price per book goes up, and you sell fewer; it becomes a vicious cycle.

" “Universities determine who is to be promoted and tenured, and how,” he continues. “Can you publish three articles instead of a book? Why crank up this expensive mechanism to sell 250 copies of a book that no one except libraries will buy, and which no one checks out of the library for 30 years? Deciding somebody’s tenure review is not why we publish these things. Our mission is to advance knowledge and scholarship.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:5de0141a64b6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/06/crapification-of-biomedical-research.html">
    <title>The Crapification of Biomedical Research (Yves Smith | naked capitalism)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-06-30T13:42:46+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/06/crapification-of-biomedical-research.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The article describes how “hypercompetition” is leading more and more effort being devoted to non-science activities (grant writing and more elaborate papers) and perversely, to less ambitious research topics and most troubling of all, exaggeration or faking of results: "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:844e9e840ff7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/why-climate-scientists-are-inherently-conservative.html">
    <title>“Erring on the Side of Least Drama” — Why Climate Scientists are Inherently Conservative (Gaius Publius | naked capitalism)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-05-22T01:43:31+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/why-climate-scientists-are-inherently-conservative.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" There are many examples of the above, where models are more conservative than observations and tend to “under-predict.” In addition, scientists also tend to throw away the more extreme conclusions (or most “dramatic,” as you’ll see below), even when those extreme conclusions are also the most likely.

" Why is that? History of Science professor Naomi Oreskes has studied that phenomenon. In a 2012 peer-reviewed paper, “Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?” (pdf), she and her colleagues put to the test the claim of climate deniers that “climate scientists are alarmists.” When they tested that conclusion by looking at actual data — climate projections and how they compare to climate outcomes — they discovered something very interesting. In fact, the opposite is true. Climate scientists tend to underplay their results. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>global-warming academia</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:d28450d33c49/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:global-warming"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/colleges-flunk-mental-health.html">
    <title>How Colleges Flunk Mental Health (Katie J M Baker, Newsweek)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-11T22:36:05+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/colleges-flunk-mental-health.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Despite that very clearly stated law, dozens of current or recent students at colleges and universities across the country - large and small, private and public - told Newsweek they were punished for seeking help: kicked out of campus housing with nowhere else to go, abruptly forced to withdraw from school and even involuntarily committed to psychiatric wards. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia mental-health</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:d6270017e1f6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:mental-health"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/318-part-time-professing-it-s-not-all-gloom-and-doom">
    <title>Part-Time Professing: It’s Not All Gloom and Doom (Kelli Marshall @ Vitae)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-07T20:50:40+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://chroniclevitae.com/news/318-part-time-professing-it-s-not-all-gloom-and-doom</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Success: Having spouse who's primary breadwinner + oblivion to lack of stability + Fitbit stickers ]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia false-consciousness</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:ddb68e7b05e0/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:false-consciousness"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://evanstonnow.com/story/business/bill-smith/2014-01-30/61300/neighbors-said-to-fear-transient-academics">
    <title>Neighbors said to fear 'transient academics' (Bill Smith | Evanston Now)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-01T02:39:09+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://evanstonnow.com/story/business/bill-smith/2014-01-30/61300/neighbors-said-to-fear-transient-academics</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Plans for an extended stay hotel in downtown Evanston are drawing fears from some that it will attract the wrong kind of academics as guests.

" The Southeast Evanston Association, in an email message to its members, says neighbors need to assure that the establishment will carry "a hotel brand that will maintain a high quality of business, and not devolve into cheap housing for transient academics." "]]></description>
<dc:subject>stratification academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:4cf4087741f5/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://yaledailynews.com/weekend/2014/01/24/we-just-cant-have-you-here/">
    <title>“We Just Can’t Have You Here” (Rachel Williams, Yale Daily News)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-28T17:05:09+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://yaledailynews.com/weekend/2014/01/24/we-just-cant-have-you-here/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" Thinking back to that welcome packet, there is a conspicuous omission: *We love you and want you and will provide for you and protect you, as long as you don’t get sick. "

" Those of us who have admitted, at some point or another, that we are legitimately not okay, have learned that there are real and devastating consequences of telling the truth. Because Yale does not want people who are not okay. Yale does not want people who are struggling, who are fighting. Yale, out of concern for its own image, wants them to leave. And Yale makes them. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia mental-health</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:98fac995bcea/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:mental-health"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nickysaeun.com/whats-wrong-with-tenure-protecting-the-powerful/">
    <title>What’s Wrong with Tenure: Protecting the Powerful (Nicky Saeun)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-27T14:53:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nickysaeun.com/whats-wrong-with-tenure-protecting-the-powerful/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[RT @readywriting: What’s Wrong with Tenure: Protecting the Powerful  Get past the title and read the whole story #highered #adjunct]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:fe6425cbb37f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/292-an-alarming-snapshot-of-adjunct-labor?cid=VTKT1">
    <title>An ‘Alarming Snapshot’ of Adjunct Labor (Sydni Dunn | Chronicle Vitae)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-24T17:18:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://chroniclevitae.com/news/292-an-alarming-snapshot-of-adjunct-labor?cid=VTKT1</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["  Contingent faculty often have low pay and few, if any, benefits. Of the 845 forum respondents, 166 supplied information on how much they are paid per course. Most respondents indicated they made between $2,000 and $3,500 per three-credit hour course. Of the 152 respondents who listed their estimated annual teaching salary, the average was $24,926.

" More than 60 respondents reported salaries that would put them beneath the federal poverty line for a three-person family. Some respondents said they were on federal assistance programs like Medicaid or food stamps. One added: “During the time I taught at the community college, I earned so little that I sold my plasma on Tuesdays and Thursdays to pay for [my child’s] daycare costs.” "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia stratification</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:e2a610b787a5/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of-love/">
    <title>In the Name of Love (Miya Tokumitsu @ Jacobin)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-15T17:07:11+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of-love/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" No one is arguing that enjoyable work should be less so. But emotionally satisfying work is still work, and acknowledging it as such doesn’t undermine it in any way. Refusing to acknowledge it, on the other hand, opens the door to the most vicious exploitation and harms all workers.

" Ironically, DWYL reinforces exploitation even within the so-called lovable professions where off-the-clock, underpaid, or unpaid labor is the new norm: reporters required to do the work of their laid-off photographers, publicists expected to Pin and Tweet on weekends, the 46 percent of the workforce expected to check their work email on sick days. Nothing makes exploitation go down easier than convincing workers that they are doing what they love. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>false-consciousness academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:b8756dd75a21/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:false-consciousness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-03/can-t-get-tenure-then-get-a-real-job.html">
    <title>Can't Get Tenure? Then Get a Real Job (Megan McArdle @ Bloomberg)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-07T19:36:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-03/can-t-get-tenure-then-get-a-real-job.html</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The “tournament model” of employment, in which a lucky few win the lottery while most people scrape by on very little, is a cruel and unattractive way to run a business. But it is cruelest in glamour industries such as the arts. Growing up on the Upper West Side, before it became the exclusive province of the wealthy, I inevitably met a lot of the people this model destroyed. The worst off were the folks who’d kept getting just a taste of success -- a minor part in a Broadway show, a critically acclaimed performance at a second-tier festival. Those folks kept waiting until their late 30s or early 40s for success and security that never arrived. By the time it was clear it never would, they were broke, and trying to start another career at a time when most people are heading into their peak earnings years. And the slow crushing of hope over a process of decades often did something tragic to their souls. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:3f0896188437/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/anthropology-inc/309218/">
    <title>Anthropology Inc. (Graeme Wood | Atlantic Mobile)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-12-25T18:03:17+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/anthropology-inc/309218/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" The corporate anthropology that ReD and a few others are pioneering is the most intense form of market research yet devised, a set of techniques that make surveys and dinnertime robo-calls (“This will take only 10 minutes of your time”) seem superficial by comparison. ReD is one of just a handful of consultancies that treat everyday life—and everyday consumerism—as a subject worthy of the scrutiny normally reserved for academic social science. In many cases, the consultants in question have trained at the graduate level in anthropology but have forsaken academia—and some of its ethical strictures—for work that frees them to do field research more or less full-time, with huge budgets and agendas driven by corporate masters. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia capitalism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:d755254a850c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:capitalism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system">
    <title>I wouldn't be productive enough for today's academic system (Peter Higgs @ The Guardian)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-12-09T17:26:59+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:efd7f84a654c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/cf3e13e4f103">
    <title>Amazonian Beer Drinking Networks Revealed by Anthropologists (Physics arXiv Blog @ Medium)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-12-02T16:41:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/cf3e13e4f103</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Social network researchers decline to actually study the society about which they are collecting social network data, are then surprised by incongruence of behavior with their math. The paper is so much worse.

" But the results also throw up a puzzle: the Tsimane also host unrelated families and people from much further away than expected, at a rate that is difficult to explain. And these unexpected beer hosting favours are often, but not always, returned much more quickly than with close family or neighbours, usually within three days or so.

" Kaplan and co speculate that these events are triggered by other kinds of favours that they were unable to record in their survey—things like help in the fields, help with food preparation, mate searches or help with political matters. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>failure academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:f03df9c46150/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:failure"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://chroniclevitae.com/news/91-off-track-adjuncts-are-addicts">
    <title>Off Track: Adjuncts Are Addicts (Josh Boldt @ Vitae)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-10-29T18:19:16+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://chroniclevitae.com/news/91-off-track-adjuncts-are-addicts</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Working a shit job for low pay & no benefits is YOUR fault because you’re… addicted to exploitation? Fuck’s sake. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia conservatism DNR</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:8a28238cfec4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:conservatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:DNR"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://blogs.plos.org/speakingofmedicine/2012/06/25/less-research-is-needed/">
    <title>Less research is needed (Trisha Greenhalgh | Speaking of Medicine)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-10-22T18:57:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://blogs.plos.org/speakingofmedicine/2012/06/25/less-research-is-needed/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" On my first day in (laboratory) research, I was told that if there is a genuine and important phenomenon to be detected, it will become evident after taking no more than six readings from the instrument.  If after ten readings, my supervisor warned, your data have not reached statistical significance, you should [a] ask a different question; [b] design a radically different study; or [c] change the assumptions on which your hypothesis was based.

" In health services research, we often seem to take the opposite view. We hold our assumptions to be self-evident. We consider our methodological hierarchy and quality criteria unassailable. And we define the research priorities of tomorrow by extrapolating uncritically from those of yesteryear.  Furthermore, this intellectual rigidity is formalized and ossified by research networks, funding bodies, publishers and the increasingly technocratic system of academic peer review. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:ac0d78c4edb7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.chroniclevitae.com/articles/give-it-all-you-ve-got/">
    <title>Give It All You've Got (@ Vitae)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-09-30T18:19:07+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.chroniclevitae.com/articles/give-it-all-you-ve-got/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[“All other fields are just like humanities” *slap* “ ‘Academe’ “ *slap* “Suck it up and play” *slap* ]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia false-consciousness</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:7a208ae10549/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:false-consciousness"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kauffman.org/research-and-policy/the-rise-of-fractional-scholarship.aspx">
    <title>The Rise of Fractional Scholarship (Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-09-26T19:43:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.kauffman.org/research-and-policy/the-rise-of-fractional-scholarship.aspx</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[academic turking]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia conservatism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:aeedb539a30a/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:conservatism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/09/25/the-adjunct-crisis-and-the-free-market/">
    <title>The Adjunct Crisis and the Free Market - The Conversation (Rebecca Schuman @ The Chronicle of Higher Education)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-09-26T17:14:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/09/25/the-adjunct-crisis-and-the-free-market/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Let’s stop adjunct exploitation by framing college as “a Brazilian bikini wax, _but for the mind_” ]]></description>
<dc:subject>academia false-consciousness</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:92704e86727d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:false-consciousness"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/death-of-an-adjunct-703773/">
    <title>Death of an adjunct (Daniel Kovalik | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)</title>
    <dc:date>2013-09-18T21:33:31+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/death-of-an-adjunct-703773/</link>
    <dc:creator>kellyramsey</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[" On Aug. 16, I received a call from a very upset Margaret Mary. She told me that she was under an incredible amount of stress. She was receiving radiation therapy for the cancer that had just returned to her, she was living nearly homeless because she could not afford the upkeep on her home, which was literally falling in on itself, and now, she explained, she had received another indignity -- a letter from Adult Protective Services telling her that someone had referred her case to them saying that she needed assistance in taking care of herself. The letter said that if she did not meet with the caseworker the following Monday, her case would be turned over to Orphans' Court. "]]></description>
<dc:subject>stratification academia</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://twitter.com/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/b:7042a3c84331/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:stratification"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:kellyramsey/t:academia"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>