Abstracts on entomology

  http://vz.ru/society/2013/2/5/619001.html
pay attention to the indicators of this parameter for elibrary - 4 articles with the same title each. Guys, I'm shocked. The country is dead. Now a lot is clear with the surge of entomological science in Dagestan. I wonder how the guy got a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences with an H-Index of 1, and with such a volume of great articles. I think that the Higher Attestation Commission has lost all the points that still remained in the eyes of the population.

No, he has a Hirsch-3 , but it's all the same. Yes, and he became famous (quoted) mainly for his textbooks for universities (I counted 3-4 titles), and not for articles.
There is an interesting picture with his brother - odnoinitialets-Ferid. Elibrary didn't give him a single job, and the indicators are the same as Felix's. It seems that the brothers share the same glory for two (or rather multiply), or the system is buggy from namesakes.

This post was edited by scarabee - 06.02.2013 22: 16

Pictures:

__________.JPG — (14.56к)

here is an article from the Vakov magazine. lovely

Anyone who wants to join my review - please in the personal account or on the soap grappa (af!)list.ru. Waiting for those who want 1 week. Publication of the review in print is not yet part of the plan - I want to send it to the editorial office of BSU (1 copy) and the Higher Attestation Commission (2 copies), by registered mail with the notification.

According to the review , everything is correct, BUT:
1. After mentioning M. Namkhaydorj's monographs, the years of publication (1968, 1995) should be put in parentheses. It turns out that Tsetsegbadam relies on primary sources that Chikolovets and many other researchers in Mongolia do not know "to their shame".
2. On the second article: the author's maxims in bad English were perfectly understood by me, since I was learning another language, but I never learned English. Apparently written for readers of the same level, "practicing Esperanto".
3. Everything that is written above can be perceived as thick trolling, I support the review.

This post was edited by scarabee - 07.02.2013 11: 29

You can change the review as the play progresses. This is not the final version, but a working proof. If you want to support "officially "(i.e. co-authors of the review) - write your full name and regalia in PM, I will add .

That's it. Unfortunately, for the Higher Attestation Commission, regalia is much more important than the text itself. So you need to take in a team of settled down friends, it will be more effective

I'm looking for...

...Overclocking the HAC is half the solution. What's next?

And then - to follow the path of those countries where the Higher Attestation Commission does not exist and, perhaps, never existed, but there are academic titles, and there are many worthy people among their holders. That is, in these countries, the absence of the Higher Attestation Commission does not affect the quality of holders of academic titles.
But there may also be an option with the preservation of the Higher Attestation Commission, but on condition that dissertations are considered not by advice from absolutely random and 99% incompetent people, but by a community of specialists on the topic of the dissertation. (For example, from the recent past: Mr. Gr-l is considered a specialist in ground beetles and is writing a dissertation on them. But he should do it not with the help of two near-Vakov scammers who are not karabidologists, but in contact with the community of karabidologists. And reviews of his work should be primarily from them, and not at all from friends and groveling Okolovakov scammers).
In this case, it will be necessary to abolish dissent councils in their current completely untenable form and transfer their functions to the scientific community, and on the principle of narrow specialization.

If necessary, I can join (Candidate of Biological Sciences, senior researcher, head of the Department). department of training of scientific teachers. university staff), but the review needs to be revised. It should be a very strict letter, short and specific. In the current version, even the names of institutions are written inaccurately, which reduces the weight of the letter. I'm fully loaded right now. If someone else can edit the text, I am ready to join in the final stages.

If necessary, I can join (Candidate of Biological Sciences, senior researcher, head of the Department). department of training of scientific teachers. university staff), but the review needs to be revised. It should be a very strict letter, short and specific. In the current version, even the names of institutions are written inaccurately, which reduces the weight of the letter. I'm fully loaded right now. If someone else can edit the text, I am ready to join in the final stages.

absolutely everything is editable. the text hasn't been verified yet - it was just written.

Next, we should follow the path of those countries where the Higher Attestation Commission does not exist and, perhaps, never existed, but there are academic titles, and there are many worthy people among their holders. That is, in these countries, the absence of the Higher Attestation Commission does not affect the quality of holders of academic titles.
But there may also be an option with the preservation of the Higher Attestation Commission, but on condition that dissertations are considered not by advice from absolutely random and 99% incompetent people, but by a community of specialists on the topic of the dissertation. (For example, from the recent past: Mr. Gr-l is considered a specialist in ground beetles and is writing a dissertation on them. But he should do it not with the help of two near-Vakov scammers who are not karabidologists, but in contact with the community of karabidologists. And reviews of his work should be primarily from them, and not at all from friends and groveling Okolovakov scammers).
In this case, it will be necessary to abolish dissent councils in their current completely untenable form and transfer their functions to the scientific community, and on the principle of narrow specialization.

As I understand it, there are two ideas. First: There is no Higher Attestation Commission, but there is a scientific community that awards degrees/titles. It is not clear how – after all, formal administrative structures are needed to document the award (for example, the degree is awarded by the academic council of such and such a university – quite a European practice). The second one: The Higher Attestation Commission exists, but its activities depend entirely on the scientific community. In this case, the HAC's business is just paperwork. Thus, everything depends on the quality of the scientific community. In this case, the example given by L. V. Bolshakov works against him. There are dozens/hundreds of ground beetle specialists in the country. What prevented them from speaking out? After all, no one threatened the life and health of their children ... they didn't speak out. And what prevents respected people from Makhachkala and Stavropol from agreeing and speaking out about each other? The scientific community can't do anything at all, because it's a typical guinea pig. I have already written about this: a specialist in our time and place is primarily concerned with providing for himself and his family, and secondly, with developing himself as a specialist. He doesn't have the energy and time for social activities. Of course, the population is polymorphic and there are a certain number of good specialists who write reviews on the essence of their work, work conscientiously on the editorial board and in the same Higher Attestation Commission … But their units and weather they do not do. And the scientific COMMUNITY (not in general, but here and now) is those who do not strain themselves with scientific work, but show social and administrative activity. And so they make the weather. And there are also amateurs who, because of their amateur status, may not strain themselves with scientific activities, but they have their own opinion and do not hesitate to express it. Therefore, both ideas seem utopian to me – at present, the opinion of experts will either not be heard, or will be arbitrarily interpreted and will still be lost.
Since the letter turned out to be long, I will comment on one more thing. I read the review written by S. K. Korb with sympathy. In fact, it is correct. But this is a blank shot. Who is the email addressed to? Formally, to the editorial office of the journal and the Higher Attestation Commission. I do not presume to judge how the editorial staff will react, but you can speculate about VAK. So, the letter came to the expedition of the Higher Attestation Commission. The official lady opened it, made sure that it was not an anonymous letter*, registered and tapped out the standard response " ... Your letter from ... has been received and will be considered ...". And then? The Higher Attestation Commission receives appeals – there is a special shelf for them, complaints (there is a shelf), but not for reviews. What will happen to the email? The obvious option is to put it in a distant dusty folder "for later" and this will be the end of the matter. Another option (incredible) – a conscientious lady will take this letter and go to ask for advice. And what advice can they give her? Put this letter in a folder that will be read if entomologist G. Tsetsegbadam defends his dissertation and includes these works in the list of his publications. That is – again in a distant dusty folder. Yes, and now, as VAK lives like on a volcano.

* By the way, the concept of" anonymous " in the Higher Attestation Commission is interpreted quite broadly. If the last name and signature are included at the end of the letter, then such a letter can be considered anonymous. Who is this Sidorov? Where will the WAC look for him? Ah, the address was on the envelope … And the envelope was torn during registration ... Anonymous letters are not considered in principle. If you want to avoid such a fate, write EVERYTHING at the end of the letter: Full name, address, place of work, phone numbers. At the very least, make life difficult for the official.

Oh, I'm sorry - I wrote to someone else's Masha and didn't log in. Post from guest frCrb93cq2dEU = - from me

colleagues, if you scold the Higher Attestation Commission, at least find out who awards degrees. Not the Higher Attestation Commission, but a Dissertation Council of 19+ doctors of sciences at a university or institute. WAC approves degree only....

Next, we should follow the path of those countries where the Higher Attestation Commission does not exist and, perhaps, never existed, but there are academic titles, and there are many worthy people among their holders. That is, in these countries, the absence of the Higher Attestation Commission does not affect the quality of holders of academic titles.

However, in Germany, the HAC is not, but, nevertheless, "in the family is not without a freak":
http://radiovesti.ru/articles/2013-02-06/fm/81329

Makarov is right.
Probably the right decision is to publish a review! A country should know its "heroes"!

The issue with the publication is also open. It is also possible.
Who will join it?
So far, only 1 person has joined - Dmitry Musolin.

As for anonymity , the final version of the text, which will go to the Higher Attestation Commission and the magazine, will be signed as expected. I don't want to post my addresses and phone numbers online . Who needs to know them so, and all the rest of them do not need to know-they will be tortured with spam.

Colleagues! Instead of letting off steam on reviews of "reportable" and completely irrelevant 1-2-page articles by foreign museum workers, you would rather write them on full-fledged articles by domestic applicants, especially those published in VAKOV journals. And even more so for books that may not qualify for dissertations, but can be used as another "truth". For example, we still don't see any reviews of Chikalovets ' book, which covers, among other things, Western Europe. We do not see reviews of the recently mentioned color "determinant" of Russian butterflies. And even more so, we don't see any reviews for author's abstracts. Let the dissertation councils and the Higher Attestation Commission do not care about these reviews, but their publication opens the public's eyes to the quality of applicants ' work and to some extent forces the latter to "not ask questions" or, at best, work on correcting shortcomings.

In pursuit. Publication in the VAKOV journal does not mean that the author claims to defend his dissertation quickly! For example, the MOIP Bulletin has a permanent heading "Short floral notes". Some of them take up less than half a page and are limited to clearly non-dissertable statements of individual species first found in the regions. And the EAEC regularly publishes private reports on individual areas, which are far from dissertable. And who is worse off?
In the case of the Mongolian museum worker, there are no specialists in BurSU who can verify the entomological facts presented in the article. So what? And the Moscow Zoozhurnal does not have any experts and good reviewers on diurnal butterflies, as a result of which articles by authors such as Timraleev and Susarev that are not "original" or "not published anywhere else" and are not scientific are included there. And the Ent. review often publishes articles with very outdated taxonomy and other errors. That's what you need to shout about. You can simply send comments to BurGA on an article by a Mongolian museum worker so that they can continue to send similar manuscripts for review.

Lavr is right in many ways. I also think a letter to Burga is enough. However, in Ulan-Ude there are at least two Shodotovs and two Rudykhs, who are well-known for their butterflies, who could see the work.
But reviews of abstracts are a very complex process. And very painful. I have been banned from entering the Institute of Electronic Engineering of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences for my active position, regarding one pleasant doctoral defense. With complete plagiarism in publications-100%... and many other issues discussed earlier here.

Discussions (as is often the case) went beyond the topic. Let's discuss here the author's abstracts, of which there are many in entomology.

As for publications in HAC journals for the defense of dissertation.
1. One article (from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission) is sufficient, and any article is sufficient (see point 2).
2. " the main results of the dissertation work should be published in leading specialized journals...." - this provision is not observed by every Council. Usually, this criterion is approached formally: there is an article, we accept it. And the fact that this is a short message, in which there may be nothing on the topic of dissertation at all, no one checks. In theory, this should be done by opponents, but we all know how to appoint such comrades.
In any case, the initial demand from the Council is where you first need to tighten the requirements. The Higher Attestation Commission is a hostage to the positive decision of dissenters, if there are no comments and black balls-what is there to understand at all?

This post was edited by Coelioxys-08.02.2013 13: 42

Discussions (as is often the case) went beyond the topic. Let's discuss here the author's abstracts, of which there are many in entomology.

As for publications in HAC journals for the defense of dissertation.
1. One article (from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission) is sufficient, and any article is sufficient (see point 2).

--"not exactly. Or rather, by Position, yes. But the Dissertation Council decides on the COMPLETENESS of the dissertation reflection in the published articles when accepting a job (a commission of 3-5 members of the Dissertation Council should be created). There are councils where you can find answers to doctoral dissertations - 2 monographs + 7 articles (for humanitarians). And it's ironclad... For cand., for example, 3 articles from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission.

3 articles - you can do this in St. Petersburg. there are a lot of tips where one is enough, and 20-year-old

Purely offhand

PS not about beetles, of course, but there are a lot of such examples. I haven't read the abstract myself, and I have no complaints about the applicant.

File/s:



 Pronkevich_24.12.2008.doc

size: 1.59 mb
number of downloads: 851

In Ukraine, you now need 5 articles for a candidate's thesis, and one of them must be in a foreign journal, or a Russian one, but indexed in Web of Science or Scopus, and the rest - in journals of the Ukrainian "VAKOV" list.

"The Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science revealed falsifications in these theses.

Among those who have been stripped of their academic degrees is the former head of the Moscow State University School of Mathematics, Andrey Andreyanov.

The new head of the Higher Attestation Commission, Vladimir Filippov, said that the work on detecting fraud will continue.

In the near future, the commission will consider about ten more dissertations.
"

Lavr is right in many ways. I also think a letter to Burga is enough. However, in Ulan-Ude there are at least two Shodotovs and two Rudykhs, who are well-known for their butterflies, who could see the work.
But reviews of abstracts are a very complex process. And very painful. I have been banned from entering the Institute of Electronic Engineering of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences for my active position, regarding one pleasant doctoral defense. With complete plagiarism in publications-100%... and many other issues discussed earlier here.

Roma, write to the same commission that deprived Muscovites of their degrees. I think that on this "wave" and the ISE will shake. You iron it, which will change. I am ready to support you.

Go to hell with them. The main thing is that they have lost their reputation and everyone knows about the idiocy of one doctoral thesis, for which they wrote 7 negative appeals to the Higher Attestation Commission, including the ZIN and IMAGE. Where a series of dissertation articles repeats my articles (WORD FOR WORD) word FOR WORD. The names of the dissertation candidate and the people who for strange reasons licked him are known. And this is the most important thing. By the way, I think the young professor will soon start training graduate students.

I am ready to support you.

Stas, I think your vote will not be counted - you are not yet settled down...

Stas, I think your vote will not be counted - you are not yet settled down...

Yes, it would have been settled down - it would hardly have been taken into account )

Purely offhand
PS not about beetles, of course, but there are a lot of such examples. I haven't read the abstract myself, and I have no complaints about the applicant.

I really liked the wording from the announcement:
"The main technology for collecting material was walking route counts of birds on permanent, but not strictly fixed routes (Ravkin, 1967).
"!?

You can now contact Sergey Parkhomenko for help.

"NEXT CUSTOMER

Well, then. In the meantime, it's time to pull off the next customer.

The search group of Rock Diggers, which I joined here with great pleasure, took an interest in IGOR VLADIMIROVICH LEBEDEV's doctoral dissertation. Do you remember who he is? This is the native son of Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky.

Kro-wi-no-chka...

And concurrently — a long-term deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation: first elected in 1999. That is, he has been a deputy for an eternity: for THIRTEEN YEARS now. Always and invariably-according to the LDPR lists, of course. At one time, he was even a faction leader. Now an ordinary deputy, a member of the State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Construction.

And so. In 2006, Igor Vladimirovich defended his doctoral dissertation on "The evolution of the ideological foundations and strategies of political parties in the Russian Federation in 1992-2003".

THIS DISSERTATION IS STRIKINGLY-LITERALLY CONFUSINGLY-REMINISCENT OF SOMEONE ELSE'S PHD THESIS: Kornev Mikhail Olegovich, "The dominant factors of party building in modern Russia" defended a year earlier.

Borrowings (of course, without any quotation marks and references), start right from the first lines of the abstract of the dissertation. Immediately after the standard subtitle "Relevance of the research topic", the phrases stolen by Lebedev from M. I. Kornev's dissertation begin without the slightest changes. Just a naked copy paste. Selected the mouse-click, then moved the mouse-click... And you're done. He became a doctor of philosophy.

Here are the first three verbatim fragments stolen by Igor Vladimirovich Lebedev, a deputy of the State Duma of Russia, one of the leaders of the Liberal Democratic Party, from someone else's dissertation:

"Political parties have become an integral part of a democratic society. Representative democracy by its very nature cannot function without them, since they serve as intermediaries in society's relations with the authorities, articulate political demands and interests of social groups."

"Historically, parties appeared precisely as carriers of certain ideologies, defending conservative, liberal, religious, socialist, nationalist and other values. However, ideologies, like any socio-political phenomenon, are subject to significant evolution."

"The tradition of explaining the origin of parties by the ideological diversity of society is clearly traced in the works of K. S. Gadzhiev, B. L. Grushin, B. G. Kapustin, I. M. Klyamkin, S. G. Klimova, I. A. Vasiliev, Z. M. Zotova, O. Yu. Malinova, A. I. Demidov, V. M. Dolgov and others. These scientists assign an important role to the spiritual factor in the formation of Russian political parties. The content of their works shows that the multi-level nature of post-Soviet society was reflected in the complex party system of the new Russia."

Such pieces can still be rowed with a shovel.

We leave the reader to practice this simple art on their own.

Here is Lebedev's abstract: dissercat.com

And here is the Root source: dissercat.com

The full text of Igor Vladimirovich Lebedev's dissertation is, of course, available to Dissertators. It is currently being developed in detail. The results will be presented to the interested public.

But maybe Igor Vladimirovich Lebedev will have time to run to the Higher Attestation Commission himself and voluntarily hand over his doctoral diploma there? This, of course, will not cancel the upcoming publication of the entire impressive picture of plagiarism committed by him. But to some extent, it will allow him to count on our generous leniency."

This post was edited by amara - 02/16/2013 09: 20

Until one o'clock in the afternoon (Moscow time), there is still an opportunity to ask a question to the new chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission.

Well, and then listen to the program with his answers:

http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/kulshok/1011318-echo/q.html

From questions already asked:

"Vladimir Mikhailovich,
do you plan to take into account not only the total number of publications in which you need to publish results for obtaining an academic degree, but also their quality? For example, take into account the impact factor of the journal in which the scientific publication is published? Currently, 6 articles in Higher Attestation Commission journals, including those that do not have any impact factor, are sufficient for obtaining the degree of Doctor of Science, but 5 articles in Nature-level journals are not enough."

"Mr. Filippov, to what extent will the examination of diplomas be a systematic and long-term work, and not just another company? Are the results already available?Will high-ranking officials who obtained their academic degrees while holding high positions be checked?For example, will they check Mr. Zhirinovsky's doctoral degree?"

"do you seriously think that a person can write a high-quality scientific work as a part-time graduate student or a job seeker?

would you like to check out Tuleyev's doctoral thesis?

when I was studying at Kemsu, people whispered that his dissertation was written at the local department of political science.. (I don't want to give the person's last name, because I had a good relationship with him)"

"Will the Higher Attestation Commission skip the second defense of O. Kazheva's dissertation? Don't you think that this incident (probably very modern) is unacceptable in the scientific community and requires a public assessment of the Higher Attestation Commission?
Previously, people were deprived of their degree, even if they deserved it, for writing someone else's dissertation. Doesn't the story of the lawsuit filed by this "dissertant" against a member of the dissertation council who called plagiarism plagiarism deserve the same?
Why does dissetration removed by a dissertation student after being accused of plagiarism and misappropriation of other people's data after voting (i.e. in violation of the requirements of the Higher Attestation Commission) in Chernogolovka "suddenly" get 20 votes " for " (out of 25 present) in Irkutsk? "

This post was edited by amara - 02/16/2013 10: 26

A. Tuleyev:
"SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITY

A. G. Tuleyev is actively engaged in scientific work, is the author of more than two dozen books and brochures, hundreds of publications and speeches in foreign, Russian, Kuzbass electronic and print media.

On March 2, 1999, A. G. Tuleyev defended his dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Political Sciences on the topic: "Political Leadership in Regional Conflicts in modern Russia". The defense was held in Moscow, at the Russian Presidential Academy of Public Administration, at the Department of Political Science. Scientific supervisor-Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor Komarovsky.

In 2000, A. G. Tuleyev defended his dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Political Science on the topic: "Political leadership: regional specifics and implementation mechanisms". The defense was held in Moscow, at the Russian State Social University, at the Department of Political Science. He was awarded the academic title of professor.

He is a full member of the International Academy of Informatization and the International Academy of Engineering, Honorary Professor of Ulaanbaatar University of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences.

This post was edited by scarit - 02/16/2013 11:50 am

Pictures:

292410.png — (22.98к)

Igor Vladimirovich is not an entomologist, and I personally and most of those present do not give a damn about him, as well as about his topic.
But what was in the ISEJ - it would not hurt to add pressure. Together with the ISEJ Dissertation Council.
And I will probably remind you about the cases of three Tula combinators who defended themselves in entomology in medical and" environmental "dissertation councils, which, under the former leadership of the Higher Attestation Commission, were difficult to "search in the archives".

IN THE NEAR FUTURE, SEVERAL DOZEN UNSCRUPULOUS DISSERTATION AUTHORS WILL LOSE THEIR ACADEMIC DEGREES.

This was stated by the chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission Vladimir Filippov. According to him, most often scientific works are forged by officials and businessmen.

It is possible that soon we will hear a whole series of names of famous figures whose dissertations are plagiarized. As Vladimir Filippov told Ekho Moskvy, according to the current rules, you can only deprive an author of a scientific degree who has defended himself for the last three years. Therefore, the first step in the verification process will be for such authors. In general, Filippov noted, the Higher Attestation Commission is inclined to increase this period to 10 years. At the same time, the chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission is sure that the problem should be solved not only by punitive measures. In particular, Filippov suggested creating a separate system for awarding academic degrees to officials and businessmen.

In addition, to better control the quality of scientific papers, the Higher Attestation Commission suggests posting dissertations on the Internet before the defense. The Network also offers to create a forum where anyone can write their comments on the work. And answering the question of how to eliminate plagiarism in scientific works, Filippov said that cheating should be dealt with from childhood, but a whole campaign should be organized for this.

It is expected that the new concept of modernization of the system of certification of scientific personnel will be presented next week to the Minister of Education Dmitry Livanov.

thank you for this morning's announcement.

regardless of scandals and appointments, the FEDERAL STATE EDUCATIONAL STANDARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION POSTGRADUATE (ADJUNCT) should appear by April 5 (for the first time). In higher education institutions of the Ministry of Education and Science, there will be no correspondence postgraduate studies from 2013. The job application is questionable. Nothing is clear about doctoral studies (there is no law on science yet). Plus, there will definitely be something new in the line of the Higher Attestation Commission. In the Northern-Western Federal District, there will be 2 times fewer dissenters than there were (there was such a plan before Shamkhalov was removed).

In general: poor graduate students who will now fall under the distribution...

I believe that narrowing the doors will further strengthen monopolism (therefore, those who sit in" elite"," protected " councils can only rejoice, if only they are not personally involved in plagiarism, and somehow they can still pin down and prevent the passage of those who are not able to openly object in a scientific publication by the bellied ones-eternal motive) and will not cut off those who should be cut off for the sake of science. Another performance to eliminate disasters while preserving the causes of these disasters.

I wonder how this policy affects or will affect the possibility of publishing in higher attestation journals, for those who are not in the system. I.e., for authors without an organization? Are there any cases of refusals with such grounds?

In higher education institutions of the Ministry of Education and Science, there will be no correspondence postgraduate studies from 2013. The job application is questionable.

It's lovely that no matter what problem the authorities turn their attention to, it always gets even worse than it was before.

It's lovely     that no matter what problem the authorities turn their attention to, it always gets even worse than it was before.

Rather, the crooks who got in there. Almost every one of them.

This post was edited by Seneka - 02/16/2013 22: 42

For some reason, I was amused that Kadyrov is a candidate of sciences. The Minister said that we have many excellent dissertations in physics, chemistry and biology... I think that first of all public sciences