03/28/14

From Microsoft: Digital Citizenship

Digital citizenship is usually defined as the “norms of behavior with regard to technology use.” It encompasses digital literacy, ethics, etiquette, online safety, norms, rights, culture and more. Microsoft recognizes that good digital citizenship, when you use computers, gaming consoles, or mobile devices, promotes a safer online environment for all.

The visual whitepaper, “Fostering Digital Citizenship,” discusses why digital citizenship matters and outlines the education young people need as they explore, learn, and essentially “grow-up” online. This paper also addresses the three types of risks you might encounter in online activities: Content, Contact, and Conduct.

Managing your online behavior and monitoring your reputation are important elements of good digital citizenship. Microsoft recently surveyed teen and parental attitudes, awareness of, and behaviors toward managing their online reputations.

  • Teens share considerably more information online than their parents and, as a result, expose themselves to more risk; they also feel more in control of their online reputations.
  • Teens believe the benefits of sharing information online outweigh the risks, with the exception of sharing a physical location.
  • Teens and parents worry about different things. Teens are most concerned about getting into college (57%), landing a job (52%,) and being embarrassed (42%). Parents worry about fraud (54%), being embarrassed (51%,) and career (43%).

The encouraging results suggest that American parents and teens are actively managing their online reputations—and with an eye toward good digital citizenship.

Read more here.

03/27/14

The Bittersweet Truth of Award Adjudication

One of the hardest things to take as a student and an academic (forget that – for all of us) is the bitter taste of rejection and denial.  It’s hard to hand out rejections too, but receiving them is way harder.  We all know that.  It’s part of the price that is paid for supporting and being part of the neo-liberal market economy where competition and excellence rule the day (you can find my critique of the university of excellence online in New Proposals)

Recently I read a comment about how a student found the process of fellowship award adjudication unfair.  I appreciate that feeling.  It was sincere and heartfelt. Oh, and yes, I do sometimes read what students post online – it’s a public place- I don’t go looking for these things, but it is amazing what one stumbles across on a causal jaunt through the blogosphere.   That said, I think that some of the conclusions and information that the student had been provided with aren’t quite accurate. 

The student’s concern was over what they had been told about the granting process and the likely outcome of this process.  Then, to make matters worse, the explanation for why their file didn’t actually get sent up to the next level of decision making was even more innervating!

You should know that over the course of a couple of decades I have sat on local, national, and international adjudication panels for graduate students and faculty.  I was a member of the doctoral fellowship national adjudication panel in Canada for about 6 years and even chaired the committee one year.  I’ve also reviewed faculty grant applications (as both a member of adjudication committees and a peer reviewer on behalf of granting agencies) for a range of national and international grant awards.

So here’s my gloss on the local process for grant awards . 

The faculty of graduate studies gives each department a quota of how many applications for each award that can be sent forward to the university-level selection committee.  This quota will vary from year to year, but this year (for example) the department in question was only allocated one space for international student applications for affiliated awards and eight spaces for Domestic & Permanent Resident applications to  SSHRC MA fellowships.  Departments have nothing to do with setting the quota.

The selection process involves each member of the departmental committee individually ranking all applicant files.  We are provided with clear criteria (as are students when they fill out the forms) for assessing each file. I personally create a quantitative rubric that includes research proposal, student record (i.e. publications, presentations, employment history, and consider that relative to stage of career), reference letters, and transcripts.  I personally tally up those scores and then rank applicant files accordingly. Other committee members may have different approaches, but we are all expected to follow the criteria set by the granting agency and/or UBC (as the case determines).  Then the rankings from each individual committee member is combined and tallied up to created an overall ranked list of applications.  The outcome thus involves  a combination of factors and no one factor can be singled out as ‘the’ main factor.

[Note, I am very deliberately saying applications, files, etc.  These are rankings of the FILES, not the STUDENTS.  Semantic point?  I don’t think so.  To be fair and honest rankings should look only at the material in the files that we are provided with.  That’s the application, that’s the data we have to work with.]

The SSHRCC MA fellowship applications are considered separately from the MA affiliated award applications and are not compared against each other. The department in question had 20+ applications for the SSHRCC. Our quota to send up to the university level committee was 8. Perhaps 2/3 of those will ultimately be funded. The Affiliated pool was much smaller and only 1 space was allocated to be sent up. Only when there are cases in which the number of applicants equal the quota set by the university would all applicants be sent up.

I also know that no amount of explanation or empathy will make a difference as to how one might feel about the outcome.  Say what one might, rejection is always a bitter pill to swallow.

03/4/14

#Fatmatters – as tweeted March 3 from SFU Harbour Centre

Just a note: to read in chronological order, scroll to the bottom and then read up! Enjoy 🙂 

  1. THANKS TO THE BIG RAD CROWD AT — goodnight!

  2. The Canada food guide influences nutritional recommendations but who influences the food guide? Dairy, wheat industries etc

  3. to the person from public health, a book recommendation probes concept of “public” in colonial context

  4. Tweet about obesity, get weight loss and diet spam bots immediately

  5. are we embodying the worst effects of capitalism? Can refusing processed food be seen as a site of resistance?Favorite

  6. but what about the weight loss industry, diet books, quick fix pills and the immense amount of money they generate?

  7. Can the hyper-slender body also be understood as a symptom of capitalism and of the “food-substitution” industry?

  8. Charles Menzies: “food-substitution industry.” Origins in anti-masturbation and fibre-intake (for pooping).

  9. “Very few democracies use the criminal justice act to control fisheries, but in Canada we do…” Charles Menzies,

  10. First Nations foodways made illegal — Charles Menzies telling important stories.

  11. Why are we so committed to the idea that obesity is purely an individual matter? Who’s interests are being served?

  12. Challenging ourselves to look at the context that conditions individual choices re: health

  13. Carmen, any chance you have your image avail. online to share? Best explanation I have seen of this.

  14. Much more accurate! “: Refreshing to hear a clinician say that there is an epidemic of insulin resistance…

  15. Refreshing to hear a clinician say that there is an epidemic of insulin resistance rather than obesity

  16. what was the cost of the Big Fat Diet? Was it sustainable past the year in the film?

  17. Loving this big crowd at ! And they’re hungry too — salmon was first to go!

  18. Looking forward to meeting you tonight at , Charles! Thanks so much for joining us.

  19. See you tonight at ! Looking forward to hearing you speak!

  20. Shout out to Vancouver kids launching a feminist event series called Fat Matters tonight?

  21. Tune in tonight at about 8 PM PST (midnight EST) for live tweeting of the fist FAT MATTERS Q&A & discussion. Ask a Q by tagging: ite