Happy #McGill200! Some of you may have heard that @mcgillu is opposed to a vaccination mandate... this is not true! McGill University is a research and learning community of students, faculty, and staff who've all been worn pretty thin by the pandemic. 1/5
So it's no surprise that McGill University--from our health scientists and legal experts to our faculty (@maut_apbm) and student (@theSSMU) associations--is in fact strongly in favor of a vaccine mandate that would allow us to teach, learn, and work as safely as possible. 2/5
However, a small group of employees who have been entrusted with a lot of power--power intended for the promotion and support of our academic mission--refuse to act. Perhaps in order to avoid political discomfort, but we don't know. No credible reasons have been given. 3/5
Maybe they've mistaken an imaginary entity--a legal fiction called the Royal Institution for the Advancement of Learning--for McGill University, which is made up of real people who can get sick. Maybe they lack the moral sense to know which of these is the higher priority. 4/5
So I'm proud of McGill University, but have lost confidence in those we entrusted with the power to govern our academic lives, who are failing to act in the interest of our wellbeing or our mission--a mission that is about knowledge and service to society. #McGill200 5/5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@maut_apbm@CAUT_ACPPU Our policies predate the existence of the technology to teach remotely. They simply don't address it--so they will need to at some point. But McGill spent the last year arguing remote teaching is a great substitution for in person (to support enrollment).
@maut_apbm@CAUT_ACPPU So basically this memo is instructing deans to instruct chairs to bully faculty who are at risk or have at risk family members into endangering themselves and their family members.
And for what? It think you get like a $5k salary bump to be department chair here?
Gender disparities exists in many aspects of science: a fact. The question--or argument--is why. Many causes have been proposed. Almost all of them are non-mutually exclusive, and many of them are difficult if not impossible to separate. /1
Let’s say for a given cause, the weight of that cause on disparate outcomes can be anywhere from 0 to 100. What we are ostensibly arguing about is these weights. /2
There are some causes that I think have run their course and zeroed out, like the “early pipeline” explanation—it states that girls and/or young woman aren’t interested in or don’t pursue science for some reason. Its primary appeal was that research institutions can't fix it. /3