Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilTous les volumes30TestimoniesQuestioning Academia: Testimonies...

Testimonies

Questioning Academia: Testimonies for an International Comparative Perspective

Anonyme

Texte intégral

1These first publications of the year are particularly atypical and original for the journal. Indeed, these are colleagues’ testimonies about their professional environment and, by extension, the evolution of the academic field in their respective countries. They are the result of the long-term discussions initiated within the journal scientific committee after the interbranch mobilization in France against the pension reform project in 2019-2020 as well as the then announced and now partly implemented transformations of the public service of higher education and research. In relation to the strike action of the French academic journals, Champ Pénal/Penal Field had expressed its solidarity whilst modifying the usual course of its activities to contribute to this movement in various ways. As a bilingual and international journal, we wanted to take a collective stand in support of the defense of rights that were and still are under attack not only in France, starting with working conditions and scientific autonomy in academia. The idea of gathering testimonies from scholars with various status outside of France was precisely part of this collective approach in order to shed another light on these critical issues. While these publications have been delayed several times, it seems to us more than appropriate to give them the place they deserve, especially in the light of a new ongoing mobilization. This also provides us the opportunity to thank again our dear colleagues who have agreed to participate in this needed exercise.

Testimony 1

“Can you describe your current professional situation and the milestones in your career, including issues related to the financing of positions held?”

Following 7 fixed-term contracts (3 or 5 years) in two different private research institutions and several fellowships in the public sector (short-term fellowships or invitations), I have been working now for 8 months, i.e. 19 years after my thesis, on an open-ended position as a researcher in sociology. My position is financed by mezenate.

The 7 contracts were determined by my research projects which were, in the case of the first 5, part of the scientific project of a private research institution. They allowed me to pass my habilitation in a German university and obtain the Privatdozentin status. In order to keep this status, which in my situation was the prerequisite to be able to apply for university professorships (generally of indefinite duration), I taught for 5 years at this German university without being paid (a 28-hour seminar each academic year). Free teaching is the rule for people with accreditation (Habilitation) who want to remain employable in the academic field in Germany. Already a few years ago a journalist pointed out the absurdity of this rule by transferring it to the economy: “Imagine that companies such as Siemens or Deutsche Bank refuse to pay the salaries of a third of their highly qualified engineers or economists on the pretext that it is an honor to work for their company.”1

After a change of management at the private research institution, I had two research contracts in a foundation that now funds my work as a sociologist-researcher on an open-ended contract. Although linked to a research project, these two contracts were almost entirely devoted to finding a stable job or at least predictable funding in the fields of teaching and research. I applied, in vein, to about 5 academic faculty positions in two countries and, with mixed results, to about 10 calls for projects in collaboration with fellow researchers.

My professional situation and the possibility of being able to work today as a sociologist-researcher in comfortable conditions are based on two decisive elements: firstly on the decision of a sponsor to put an end to the precarious instability of my fixed-term jobs and secondly on the collaboration and solidarity with fellow teacher-researchers, whom I have met through my research activities and who were not necessarily in better employment situations than I was, and their solidarity.

“Can you go back over the reforms and other transformations or developments in higher education and research in the country concerned in recent years?”

In Germany during the 1990s, several discourses and strategies mutually enriched each other; firstly, the desire to make university training more effective (shorter) and research more competitive in terms of the market; secondly, the idea that stable structures and jobs at the university prevent innovation and that scientific production does not sufficiently meet economic and social needs; finally, the desire to involve economic players more closely in the financing of public research. In this last respect, third-party funding (Drittmittelfinanzierung), which is traditionally anchored in the German scientific landscape, in particular through foundations set up by political parties, companies and trade unions, gained in importance in the 1990s and has been upgraded to such an extent that today the number of third-party-funded projects and their amount have become criteria for assessing an application. In some cases, the extension of a postdoc or professors contract depends on the success in acquiring third-party funding  a success which, as is well known, depends not only on the scientific quality of the research project, but also on the composition of the juries, thematic and methodological conjunctures (or fashion effect), the amount of grants to be shared, etc. Responding to calls for projects is part of the daily work of all university professors in Germany to obtain fixed-term positions for doctoral students and post-docs who do the research proposed in the projects. University professors no longer have the time to carry out the research themselves, being absorbed by teaching, faculty management, peer review, fundraising etc.

Since 1999, the Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz (the law on fixed-term employment contracts in the scientific field) has allowed universities and scientific institutions to employ academic and artistic (university-educated) staff on a temporary basis without special reasons. Legally, a person can be employed up to the age of 12 years without a permanent contract (doctors 15 years). At the end of this period, this person is no longer “employable” under a fixed-term contract. Only open-ended positions, such as university professor or director of a Max-Planck Institute, remain open to him/her on the academic market.

“To what extent do these changes articulate or echo (or not) other reforms outside the academic world within this country?”

Developments in the academic field and science policy in Germany are combined, firstly, with the policy of employment flexibilization. Secondly, they reflect the tendency to assess innovation, progress and productivity primarily in a quantitative and financial manner. Finally, they refer to the exclusive responsibility of the individual for his or her own career path. As the company using temporary workers, the university or research institution in Germany not only takes no responsibility for the conditions under which academic staff carry out their work, but also excludes all persons with third-party funding contracts from negotiations on collective agreements. Furthermore, it promotes a counterproductive form of competition between lecturers and researchers working on fixed-term contracts. For example, keeping empirical material (interviews, archive documents, etc.) collected as part of a collective project for oneself so that it can be used again in the framework of a future contract, or involving researchers more on the basis of their influence on the job and funding market than on the basis of their expertise. Collective work, which is constitutive for research as for other fields, tends to be drowned out by the need to capitalize on points for the next contract or the race for professorships.

“In your opinion, what are the effects of these changes on the daily lives and career prospects of colleagues, doctoral students, young PhDs seeking a position and statutory professors/teacher-researchers?”

Conducting research projects on the basis of contracts imposed the following conditions in my case (and I stress once again that my contracts were those of a private institution, fully integrated into the public research landscape in Germany):

Firstly, my contract research (which I was able to carry out under very comfortable conditions compared to the conditions at German universities; easy and quick reimbursement of expenses, no teaching obligation, great latitude in determining my activities, bibliographical research service) had to be combined with the scientific interests of the research institution and to justify itself against the hierarchy of this institution, especially when the end of a contract was near. Indeed, a contract extension or a new contract was only possible if my research corresponded to the scientific interests of the hierarchy.

Secondly, the terms of my contracts provided for my participation in the public missions that this research establishment was undertaking. A very large part of my working time (during certain periods more than 70%) was then devoted to the activities of this establishment: organization of public conferences, preparation of interventions, participation in internal commissions on the scientific conception of the establishment etc. This participation in internal life and public missions weighed heavily in decisions on the renewal of a contract. The criteria for its evaluation remained, however, opaque and strongly subject to the balance of power between the members of the institutions hierarchy.

As the series of contracts progressed, I formulated my research projects, increasingly both according to the scientific interests and language of the research establishment and according to my assessment of the power relationships between the members of the hierarchy. This does not necessarily represent a problem of scientific production, but becomes a career problem if it does not lead to a permanent contract (moreover, in my case, the chain of contracts was accompanied by vague promises of tenure). When the scientific management of the institution changed, I was not able to renew my contract. However, I had worked at the same institution for 16 years, including 12 years as a postdoc and 4 years as a qualified researcher.

Thirdly, research work under contract requires the researcher to be particularly available; her/his career path and her/his life outside work must be constantly adapted to new conditions (for example, being prepared to move, possibly with a family, or to travel regularly on long journeys). This demand for availability has led me to settle down in a permanent emergency, in particular because of the fear of not finding another contract or of becoming unemployable (Wissenschaftszeitarbeitsvertraggesetz). Contrary to what one might think, this emergency led me to abandon all training courses that could have helped my research work, for example training in the fields of computer science, linguistics or statistics.

At the end of the day, I dont know whether a research career is a career path to be advised. The question I often ask myself is why the German system of academic education and scientific research does not implode. The German daily newspaper, the FAZ,2 reported on 27 March 2018: “Between 2005 and 2015, the number of temporary academic staff increased by 59.2% (from 91,046 to 144,928). In contrast, the number of professors employed on a permanent basis increased by only 17.7 per cent over the same period (from 18,649 to 21,153). By 2015, this figure was even lower than in 1995, when there were 21,860 indeterminate faculty positions. Since 2005, an increase of 2,504 tenured faculty positions has been offset by an increase of 53,882 term researchers in mid-level academic positions, where the proportion of tenured staff has dropped to a historically low level of 14.7%.”

To whom does benefit this situation? Certainly not to scientific production, nor to university professors in stable positions. The authors of the article in the FAZ point out: “Institutionalized competition and the extrinsic form of motivation through financial performance incentives and social insecurity leave little room for solidarity and stifle the freedom of thought that is vital for the survival of science. A small proportion of professors can afford to escape the daily activities of the mass university, where more and more students have to be supervised, and devote themselves to the search for excellence. The others work at the limit of their capacity and can only dream of doing research. Temporary scientific staff are largely focused on themselves, behaving discreetly, hoping for the next contract extension and competitive advantages an opportunistic but ultimately quite rational behavior, which is systemic and politically desired.”

Testimony 2

“Can you describe your current professional situation as well as the significant stages of your career, particularly with regard to issues related to the funding of positions you have held?”

  • 3 Graf A. et al., 2020: Exit, Voice und Loyalty – (Un-)Möglichkeiten kollektiven Widerspruchs im akad (...)

Currently, I am a research associate at an institute of the Humboldt University in Berlin. The stages that led to this position are actually paradigmatic of neoliberal precarization in both its economic and political manifestations. I used to work as an assistant professor at a private university in Istanbul, until I got dismissed and banned from public service for signing a political declaration back in 2016. That was a prime example of how academic labor precarization proceeds in semi-peripheral countries like Turkey: through outright political oppression. What happened since then, on the other hand, is an epitome of what’s going on with academic labor in the core countries of the capitalist world-economy: For the last 3,5 years, I have been wandering around from country to country on short-term scholarships life has been a live example of what my fellow-sociologist Peter Ullrich aptly calls “precarious mobility”3.

  • 4 İbid.

The fact that I spent most of those exile years in Germany – as many other displaced colleagues from Turkey and other conflict zones – also points to a peculiarity with regard to academic precarity. Germany’s academic labor market is actually the most precarious academic landscape throughout Europe4 – except for full professors, who make up only 7 % of the academic workforce under age 45, everybody is working on fixed-term contracts and mostly dependent on third-party funding. This is certainly not a very welcoming and promising environment. But, again for this reason, due to the labor market being dependent on the provision of short-term scholarships and, consequently, on a massive turnover, Germany attracts displaced, precarious, exiled scholars from all over the world – probably more than any other European country –, and turns into a huge reservoir of precarious academic labor force.

Can you describe the reforms and other transformations or developments in higher education and research in the country in question over the last few years?”

  • 5 On university policies, see Lindner K., 2019, Le modèle allemand : précarité et résistances dans l’ (...)

For almost over a decade now, higher education in Germany has been undergoing a significant transformation, driven to a great extent by business imperatives to keep up with the ever intensifying international academic competition. Major milestones of this process in the sphere of policy making have been the Exzellenzinitiative that promoted a financial prioritization of certain universities and research programs5, on the one hand, and the Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz (WissZeitVG) that limits the employment period of contingent mid-level faculty without granting them any future prospect for a permanent position, on the other. Both interventions remain justifiably subject to much controversy: The Excellence Initiative for undermining the traditionally egalitarian higher education structure, the Academic Fixed Term Contract Law for institutionalizing precarious work in academia. Moreover, critics argue that these regulations add to and are being maintained by the already existing – almost feudal – hierarchies of rank within the German universities such as the Lehrstuhlprinzip (chair principle) that endows full professors with immense privileges regarding income level, job security, and decision-making authority.

“To what extent do these changes articulate (or not) with other reforms outside the academic world in this country?”

I can’t say anything about that because I really don’t have the necessary legal insight into the reforms that have been introduced in other sectors.

“In your opinion, what are the effects of these changes on the daily lives and career of colleagues, PhD students, postdoctoral fellows and tenured professors and researchers?”

As a sociologist who happens to work explicitly on precarious academic labor and who is also unfortunate enough to have first-hand experience on that matter, I can say that the impact of job insecurity and lack of future prospects on individual lives is devastating. Recently, there have been several studies reporting a rise in work-related depression among early-career researchers. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany even published a report in 2017 on the situation of early researchers, which depicted how the lack of job prospects prevents the new generation of scholars from planning the future and taking decisive steps in life such as building a family and having children6.

But there are even deeper dangers that result from it. The vanishing of long-term prospects and the disappearance of even a minimum of job security in academia do not only lead to personal frustration, but actually to an overall devaluation and dis-empowering of the academic workforce in general.

This high-performance/low-security environment essentially tends to endorse ruthless competition and award sociopathic behaviors that are necessary to keep up with that competitive drive. On the one hand, this leads to an over-exploitation of those in the lower ranks of the academic ladder by their seniors, but also to self-exploitation and obsessive work-centrism affecting all. And most of the time, this obsession with work has little to do with scientific devotion or intellectual interests, if at all. It is rather a result of the market-induced anxiety over publishing more and getting more funding. In an intellectual environment like this, where quantity prevails over quality, people become willing to do anything in order to get their papers published or their projects going. And this results in unethical conduct like data stretching, plagiarism, bullying of peers etc., i.e. in an overall erosion of academic ethics.

The loss of job security and the erosion of work ethics in academia also lead to a general compliance. A striking example of that for me in the last years was of course the university crisis that I had to witness in Turkey, where our colleagues just stood by and watched as hundreds of dissident academics were getting fired – and this, just because they were too afraid to lose their jobs. But even in other contexts, where there is no overt political oppression as in Turkey, system-conformity is still imposed through market mechanisms. Research ideas that are not likely to fetch immediate material results have a hard time to get funding; non-profitable degree programs, which are usually in the critical end of the social sciences and humanities spectrum, are getting closed due to under-funding and so on and so forth.

On the other hand, more importantly, pervasive precarity and contingent employment also have devastating effects on knowledge production. Not only is the activity of knowledge production reduced to assembly-like paper-fabrication as I mentioned earlier, but also the lack of future prospects make it increasingly harder to focus on long-term substantial research for early-career researchers. People who do not know where they are going to be even in a year or 6-months from now, who do not know whether they will be able to pay their rent, cannot come up with and concentrate on long-term research agendas. Scientific work requires high levels of clarity of mind and mental concentration. If you are constantly worried about the immediate future, how are you supposed to keep that clarity of mind? Moreover, the relatively high levels of turnover caused by contingent employment practices is also detrimental to academic supervision, which typically requires lasting relationships of mutual trust and personal guidance between the “master” and the “apprentice”.

In today’s academic world, along with the job security of the knowledge producing workers, the bare minimum of work ethics, collegial solidarity, and critical thinking – short: the very foundations of knowledge production – are corroding.

Testimony 3

“Can you describe your current professional situation and the milestones in your career, including issues related to the financing of positions held?”

I am currently employed in year two of a five-year contract as a part-time professor at a university in Ottawa, Canada. The position entails the teaching of 6 courses and administrative support work where I currently serve on two committees/councils. I am paid significantly less than full-time professors as I am part of a different union and my position (despite essentially being a full-time workload) is based on a fixed yearly salary. Prior to attaining this position in 2018, I had been working as a part-time professor at this University since 2008. Over the past 12 years of teaching, I have held several additional short-term/contract jobs to increase my income including: working as a qualitative researcher and working as a clinical addiction counsellor and program developer for a community based residential facility for ex-prisoners. I have also worked as a sessional instructor for various departments (Psychology, Sociology and Criminology) at a different university in the city of Ottawa.

During this time, I was also completing a PhD (part-time in law) at a university in the United Kingdom. Given this, I was often traveling overseas several times a year to complete the various stages of my qualitative research project. As I was self-funding my PhD, I had to keep teaching a full course load in order to pay for the yearly travels, cost of conducting the dual jurisdictional research project and tuition. After completing my PhD in 2017, I continued to teach upwards of 7-9 courses across two universities as I was unable to attain a permanent position at a college or university (despite applying to several institutions).

In 2018, I applied to a posting for a 5-year long term appointment (which was teaching based not research). Although not a permanent position, it was going to be an improvement than the yearly contracts I was used to applying to. I was also aware of the continued difficulties I would face in securing permanent employment, particularly given that many PhD graduates are in similar situations where attaining contract sessional teaching positions (even semester by semester) is sometimes the only viable employment that can be attained within the university setting. I had also acquired seniority and familiarity with this particular university given that I had already been teaching there for a decade. Although this 5-year position, is essentially a full time course load to teach, due to the very low pay I receive, I have continued to pick up the odd contract for sessional teaching at the other university in Ottawa as well as reviewing manuscripts and more recently, I have developed a program proposal for a residential substance abuse treatment facility for ex-prisoners. In addition to these commitments I have a contract with a UK publisher to write a book based on my dissertation.

“Can you go back over the reforms and other transformations or developments in higher education and research in the country concerned in recent years?”

  • 7 See MacNell et al., 2014, What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching, In (...)

From what I have experienced and observed in 12 years of teaching in two Canadian university settings is that reforms have been made to cut down on secure (permanent/indefinite) and higher paying academic positions. Part of this has been austerity measures imposed by the Ontario government where there has allegedly been less funding given to Universities. In response to this, there has been an increase in part-time and precarious contracts for teaching and/or research. Indeed, many undergraduate courses are taught by sessional instructors who are also approached by students and asked to write reference letters for work or academic purpose. Sessional instructors do not get paid for this but often feel obliged to write them regardless. Unique to sessional and contract instructors, is the particularly high weighting given to teaching evaluations that comes directly from students. In fact, these “benchmarks” are often used to determine if the instructor should be hired again in the future. For example, at the university I currently work at, if I receive student evaluations for a course I had taught that falls below a certain score, I can have my seniority point taken away for that course and potentially be banned from teaching it in the future. Naturally, this creates an extreme amount of pressure on instructors to attain high evaluations to maintain any semblance of job continuity. As a women instructor, I am also disadvantaged as there is often gender bias against woman professors which results in lower evaluations7. Adding to these dynamics, higher education including the university where I presently work at has placed increasing emphasis on professors (sessional/contract/part-time/full time) and PhD graduates to be engaging in funded research and/or publishing regularly. However, support and working conditions to attain these high standards and expectations is thin and for contract instructors, quite simply out of reach with all the other demands they are dealing with.

“To what extent do these changes articulate or echo (or not) other reforms outside the academic world within this country?”

Having completed my PhD in the United Kingdom, I was able to speak with other researchers, PhD students, graduates and those under short-term teaching contracts and there was a consensus that permanent academic positions are very difficult to attain. Even for those with lengthy publications, community involvement linked to their area of expertise, funding and teaching experience this was often not enough to attain one of the very few permanent academic positions available. This subsequently leaves many people feeling discouraged and ‘stuck’ in a cycle of endless contract work.

“In your opinion, what are the effects of these changes on the daily lives and career prospects of colleagues, doctoral students, young PhDs seeking a position and statutory professors/teacher-researchers?”

I believe the effect is profoundly challenging as many are growing aware of the increasing difficulties of attaining secure and meaningful employment in academia. Many (including myself) are having to take on multiple jobs in order to make financial ends meet. There is also no sense of security in a precarious work climate and because of this, long-term planning is unrealistic. Subsequently, this can cause stress and strain on people impacting their emotional and physical wellness, family and personal lives. With career prospects being limited due to austerity measures and reforms, many individuals end up staying in limited contract-based teaching positions because it is the only link to the academic setting they can sustain. Without adequate compensation, fair hiring practices and secure positions available, short term, contract-based research and/or teaching will continue to be the norm not the exception.

Testimony 4

Can you describe your current professional situation and the milestones in your career, including issues related to the financing of positions held?

I completed my PhD in law in 1996 at the University of Sheffield where I had studied first as a psychology and sociology student then worked as a researcher on fixed annual contracts also hourly teaching. I left academia and moved to Italy in 1998 having had nothing but these rolling contracts and research project funding since 1991. I was invited back to Keele University in 2000 again on a fixed one year contract as a temporary lecturer. Despite promises of permanence, promotion and sabbaticals I got nothing and left in 2004 returning to London. I joined the University of Greenwich and have been working there ever since. I have a permanent, what Americans would call a tenured, position and I am now a Principal Lecturer in Criminology. I am in a fortunate position, despite the fact that I have been blocked at the top of my pay scale and with limited options of promotion without significant research publication. A recent study by the TUC shows what we all knew which is that more than a third of teaching is now delivered by precariously employed staff – fixed term, temporary, hourly paid or even zero hour contract. Many of these staff, in both teaching and research, are dependent on research project funding or are filling staffing gaps. This compounds the precarious nature with exploitation and insecurity – staff often work across multiple institutions and on contracts which massively undervalue the marking, preparation and student contact required.

Can you go back over the reforms and other transformations or developments in higher education and research in the country concerned in recent years?

There has been a profound change in academia and in the higher education sector since I first joined as a student in 1987. These changes have been well documents in reports and research, however, it is basically a neoliberal story of the marketization of universities. Firstly, the idea of a Germanic liberal education free to all and open to the public was eroded through the introduction of measurement metrics and the pressure to publish which distorted the very meaning and purpose of British universities. Secondly, with the introduction of student tuition fees (and the abolition of central government bursaries), later tripled from £3,000 to £9,000 a year, students became customers, universities became businesses, and ViceChancellors became CEOs with all this entailed – grade inflation, replacement of ‘soft’ liberal arts and philosophy with the ‘hard’, applied, STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and medicine). Competition replaced collegiality as a series of exercises and league tables – Research Excellence Framework (REF), Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) – reframed, defined and measured research output (and later ‘impact’), teaching ‘quality’, and knowledge exchange (with business and the community) – giving rise to a host of quangos (OfS, HEA, HESA) which (re or de) professionalized staff, shifted work off the books (e.g. pastoral support and critical pedagogy), fed into league tables – along with student (or market facing) measures e.g. National Student Satisfaction survey (NSS) – which drove recruitment and thereby funding from central government. There was simultaneously an expansion in student numbers, a growth in estates (campuses, buildings and commercial investments), and an increase in workloads, staff-student ratios, precariousness, exploitation, and stress and a decrease in salary (sector average and for the majority), mental health (among staff and students) and reputation. A significant number of British universities are in financial arrears. This ‘business model’ is not working and we see the continued impact from austerity locally and the global markets internationally, resulting in a drop in international students, a demographic downturn in home students due to birthrate, and the current union action.

“To what extent do these changes articulate or echo (or not) other reforms outside the academic world within this country?”

These changes are exactly the same as has impacted on other sectors – industrial and manufacturing as well as services – also across the public sector (civil service, NHS, school etc.) namely a reduction in funding as a proportion of GDP, degrading terms and conditions of employment with an expansion of internal inequality between CEO and lowest paid staff, increased workload and reduced job security, technologicalisation/automation, managerialisation (NPM). These impacts can be traced across each aspect of UK universities – research, teaching and administration. Similar trends across the world are linked to globalization, financialisation, changes in the labour force etc.

“In your opinion, what are the effects of these changes on the daily lives and career prospects of colleagues, doctoral students, young PhDs seeking a position and statutory professors/teacher-researchers?”

The effects have, and continue to be, overwhelming on all staff and students working across the UK higher education sector from first year undergraduates to professors, library staff, cleaners and Vice Chancellors. Everyone in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) now works longer and harder, inside and outside the office, than previous generations. Not just in terms of hours (sector average is 51 hours per week), teaching contact hours, uncontracted research effort (e.g. writing, editing, conferences, projects), administration and use of technology (managing students – learning, experience, employability, attendance – and systems – VLEs, electronic admissions, registers) all with diminishing security and reward – less pay, worse pensions, ambiguous contracts. Staff are forced to work for longer and harder under these precarious and exploitative conditions in order to secure permanent contracts and only then achieve full employment rights and benefits. It is impossible to detail all the effects this has role by role – doctoral student, early career researcher, head of department, professor, contract researcher or professional support staff. Each has a variety of similar pressures and limitations which distort their effort and restrict their career progression. Competition, deadlines, performance monitoring, chasing funding, producing publications, internal markets all reduce collegiality, sociability, impair health, mental well being, increase stress and ultimately mortality but in the meantime undermine happiness and a sense of purpose and perspective.

Haut de page

Notes

1 See online article: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/forschung-und-lehre/akademischer-alltag-privatdozenten-sind-das-uni-prekariat-11657573.html.

2 See online article: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/akademischer-mittelbau-flexible-dienstleister-der-wissenschaft-15502492.html.

3 Graf A. et al., 2020: Exit, Voice und Loyalty – (Un-)Möglichkeiten kollektiven Widerspruchs im akademischen Mittelbau in Deutschland, Leviathan, 48, 2, 293-317.

4 İbid.

5 On university policies, see Lindner K., 2019, Le modèle allemand : précarité et résistances dans l’enseignement supérieur et la recherche d’outre-Rhin, Liberté de la recherche, 209-218.

6 See the online report: https://www.buwin.de/dateien/buwin-2017.pdf.

7 See MacNell et al., 2014, What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching, Innov High Educ, [online] http://www.utstat.toronto.edu/reid/sta2201s/gender-teaching.pdf.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Anonyme, « Questioning Academia: Testimonies for an International Comparative Perspective »Champ pénal/Penal field [En ligne], 30 | 2023, mis en ligne le 21 février 2023, consulté le 24 mai 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/champpenal/14215 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/champpenal.14215

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search