Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #BrokenAcademia
Most recents (5)
Lack of transparency & accountability in universities cause immense harm to people, which for many has long-lasting consequences
This thread lists data & stats to show the scale of wrongdoing in unis
It makes for grim reading & it is only the tip of the iceberg
#BrokenAcademia
This thread lists data & stats to show the scale of wrongdoing in unis
It makes for grim reading & it is only the tip of the iceberg
#BrokenAcademia
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
💢70% female students (= >1 million students) experienced sexual violence while at uni
💢26% male students (= ~283k students) experienced sexual violence
💢40% students (=1 million students) had at least 1 experience of sexualised behaviour from uni staff
2/
💢70% female students (= >1 million students) experienced sexual violence while at uni
💢26% male students (= ~283k students) experienced sexual violence
💢40% students (=1 million students) had at least 1 experience of sexualised behaviour from uni staff
2/
Millions of students experience sexual misconduct. Yet unis fail students over & over:
💠>50% students believed that their uni did not respond adequately to their complaint.
💠50% of students believed that the uni had denied their experience or made reporting difficult
3/
💠>50% students believed that their uni did not respond adequately to their complaint.
💠50% of students believed that the uni had denied their experience or made reporting difficult
3/
when it comes to engaging #STEM #academics (an essential task in order to gain max momentum to tackle problems like #casualisation), i think 1 difficulty is that #activism uses a lot of logical fallacies. this makes taking action appear irrational 1/15
#AcademicChatter #ucu
#AcademicChatter #ucu
examples:
people going on #strike = potential bandwagon fallacy
stories of injustice = anecdote, appeal to emotion
statistics = potentially cherry picked
calling out management = potential ad hominem
quoting/critiquing management = potential strawman
2/15
people going on #strike = potential bandwagon fallacy
stories of injustice = anecdote, appeal to emotion
statistics = potentially cherry picked
calling out management = potential ad hominem
quoting/critiquing management = potential strawman
2/15
identifying an issue (e.g. casualisation) and claiming it impacts other issues (e.g. mental health problems) = potential false cause, and/or hasty generalisation fallacy
making broad statements (e.g. gender pay gap is a real problem) = ambiguity fallacy
3/15
making broad statements (e.g. gender pay gap is a real problem) = ambiguity fallacy
3/15
i promised in this thread i'd offer an idea of an alternative #academic #publishing model, so here it is. be prepared, changing to this would require some seriously radical change... 1/17
#AcademicChatter #academicpublishing #academicjournals #peerreview #ecrchat #openaccess
#AcademicChatter #academicpublishing #academicjournals #peerreview #ecrchat #openaccess
i outlined in the thread linked above MANY flaws with academic publishing, so let's completely get rid of the current system.
in its place we have one global central database, funded by governments/unis collectively 2/17
in its place we have one global central database, funded by governments/unis collectively 2/17
everything gets uploaded to this database. this is our new single journal.
articles can be rolling, so they can be registered reports, the final piece, or you can add new data if you analyse more stuff. its flexible. 3/17
articles can be rolling, so they can be registered reports, the final piece, or you can add new data if you analyse more stuff. its flexible. 3/17
so now ive published my paper on a #preprint (osf.io/preprints/nutr…), its worth comparing my experience with typical #peerreview publishing, mainly to highlight how much time & energy we waste with a system that offers very little added value
1/9
#openscience #AcademicTwitter
1/9
#openscience #AcademicTwitter
il do this comparison with the last paper i got formally accepted to a journal as these 2 co-occured so there's no "time effect" or anything as a confounder. (JP = journal publishing; PP = preprint publishing) 2/9
JP: rejected 6 times (i think); 3 were editorial rejections *explicitly* mentioning the null findings as a reason for rejection
PP: paper is out there open for anyone to openly critique and i welcome this 3/9
PP: paper is out there open for anyone to openly critique and i welcome this 3/9
why i am no longer publishing (my own) #research in #academic journals - a (long) thread 1/38
#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #academicpublishing #academicjournals #peerreview #ecrchat #OpenScience #publicationbias
(some references at the end of the thread)
#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #academicpublishing #academicjournals #peerreview #ecrchat #OpenScience #publicationbias
(some references at the end of the thread)
(i still have a few collaborative papers to write and these will be published properly for the benefit of my co-authors)
i will soon publish a paper on a pre-print server, with no intention of submitting to an academic journal. my reasons for this are manifold 2/38
i will soon publish a paper on a pre-print server, with no intention of submitting to an academic journal. my reasons for this are manifold 2/38
1. #academia is inherently corrupt & the publication model facilitates this:
- unpaid labour (editors, peer-reviewers,& authors [ok, they do get paid by the uni which oft = public funds yet journals privately profit & we see none of this unlike other forms of publishing]) 3/38
- unpaid labour (editors, peer-reviewers,& authors [ok, they do get paid by the uni which oft = public funds yet journals privately profit & we see none of this unlike other forms of publishing]) 3/38
