RES Congress No. 14

Community and Forum → Offline events → RES Congress No. 14

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

27.01.2012 22:57, Sergey Didenko

I think we've gone a little off topic. Postdocs, pichducks, and other Western terms are not yet our reality. And our reality is as simple as calico underpants: Russia doesn't need science. Expensive. Science in Russia is now 70% surviving, 20% existing, and only 10% thriving. Fundamental science, alas, occupies the most important and honorable place in the same 70 %.

Entomology is only a VERY small part of science. Not everywhere is so bad. Since 2009, the situation with funding for scientific research has improved significantly and only a very lazy scientist-physicist or technician could not get funding for their research. Entomology as a science is probably not really needed in Russia. So you need to consider it as a hobby, since there are enough enthusiasts.

28.01.2012 12:02, Sergey Didenko

Can I use figures, statistics, and official documents? Otherwise, nuclear institutes are being overclocked, and we have physics in high esteem. Somehow I can't believe in this "well-being".

It is not a question of faith, it is a question of knowledge and facts. I, due to the fact that I work in this field, own this issue. Do you want any confirmations? Well for example:

http://www.fcpir.ru/catalog.aspx?CatalogId=406
http://fcp.economy.gov.ru/cgi-bin/cis/fcp..../View/2011/246/
http://www.fasi.gov.ru/fcp/nano/pasport-nano.doc

But there are other programs (personnel, technological bases, a lot of analytical departmental programs, etc.). That's hundreds of billions of pupaars. rub per year.

What kind of nuclear institute do you have in mind? INP MSU, MEPhI, Dubna, Sarov (RFNC-VNIIEF) and other leaders in nuclear technologies are doing well.

You can believe it or not, but funding for priority areas of science and technology, starting in 2009, is quite decent. I am not ready to talk about the effectiveness of these investments, time has not passed yet, but if the trend in financing continues for another 5-10 years, then no one will have questions about "physics in high esteem". This is an optimist's view

But you can't look for negativity everywhere.

28.01.2012 13:21, rhopalocera.com

It is not a question of faith, it is a question of knowledge and facts. I, due to the fact that I work in this field, own this issue. Do you want any confirmations? Well for example:

http://www.fcpir.ru/catalog.aspx?CatalogId=406
http://fcp.economy.gov.ru/cgi-bin/cis/fcp..../View/2011/246/
http://www.fasi.gov.ru/fcp/nano/pasport-nano.doc

But there are other programs (personnel, technological bases, a lot of analytical departmental programs, etc.). That's hundreds of billions of pupaars. rub per year.

What kind of nuclear institute do you have in mind? INP MSU, MEPhI, Dubna, Sarov (RFNC-VNIIEF) and other leaders in nuclear technologies are doing well.

You can believe it or not, but funding for priority areas of science and technology, starting in 2009, is quite decent. I am not ready to talk about the effectiveness of these investments, time has not passed yet, but if the trend in financing continues for another 5-10 years, then no one will have questions about "physics in high esteem". This is an optimist's view
But you can't look for negativity everywhere.

I can write such programs ... Eh

.
And the numbers are, for example, information that 100 nuclear physicists have left to live and work in the States over the past 2 years. Probably, they are all like a selection-patriots of America

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

28.01.2012 15:22, Sergey Didenko

Are you talking about megaprojects?

Or scientists from the former USSR?

Discussing it is boring and disgusting. If you believe in a bright future , I envy you. I don't see this future from the trenches. And I have many acquaintances in various fields of science, including physicists.

I hope that the moderator will move everything that is not related to the topic.

You know, I was recently in LETI. Excellent, fast-growing university. With the funding of scientific activities is very, very significant. But I have no doubt that it, like our university, has employees who think the same way as you do. Moreover, when it was really shitty 10-12 years ago, it was understandable. When it was just bad 5-6 years ago, this could also be tolerated. But when now, these same employees, earning 50-70 thousand a month, continue to say the same thing, I feel sorry for them. The period of collapse and looting of the country completely broke them psychologically, despite this, their professional competence is still not in doubt.
Over the past 5 years, about 10 professors from the West (our scientists who fled to the west in the early 90s) have returned to my university on a permanent basis. We also invited several foreigners to work for us (absolute foreigners who don't even speak Russian). Our employees (mostly young people) go to the west (and to the east to Japan, Korea and China too) exclusively for internships (for a period of 2 weeks to 2 years).

Stanislav, if you think Moscow is another Russia, then yes. But in Vladik, in the Far Eastern Federal University, in Irkutsk (IrSTU), in Tomsk (Polytech), the situation is very similar to ours. I gave these universities as an example, because I recently visited them. I think there will also be universities in Nizhny Novgorod with good funding, I just don't know it, and I don't say what I don't know about (unlike you)

28.01.2012 15:58, rhopalocera.com

I hope that the moderator will move everything that is not related to the topic.

You know, I was recently in LETI. Excellent, fast-growing university. With the funding of scientific activities is very, very significant. But I have no doubt that it, like our university, has employees who think the same way as you do. Moreover, when it was really shitty 10-12 years ago, it was understandable. When it was just bad 5-6 years ago, this could also be tolerated. But when now, these same employees, earning 50-70 thousand a month, continue to say the same thing, I feel sorry for them. The period of collapse and looting of the country completely broke them psychologically, despite this, their professional competence is still not in doubt.
Over the past 5 years, about 10 professors from the West (our scientists who fled to the west in the early 90s) have returned to my university on a permanent basis. We also invited several foreigners to work for us (absolute foreigners who don't even speak Russian). Our employees (mostly young people) go to the west (and to the east to Japan, Korea and China too) exclusively for internships (for a period of 2 weeks to 2 years).

Stanislav, if you think Moscow is another Russia, then yes. But in Vladik, in the Far Eastern Federal University, in Irkutsk (IrSTU), in Tomsk (Polytech), the situation is very similar to ours. I gave these universities as an example, because I recently visited them. I think there will also be universities in Nizhny Novgorod with good funding, I just don't know it, and I don't say what I don't know about (unlike you)

well, at least they found the differences.

that's why my classmate plows in the field of science (and not a biologist-lawyer!) and gets 15 thousand rubles. where is there from 50 to 70? I would advise him to send a summary.

28.01.2012 17:28, Zlopastnyi Brandashmyg

You know, I was recently in LETI. Excellent, fast-growing university. With the funding of scientific activities is very, very significant. But I have no doubt that it, like our university, has employees who think the same way as you do. Moreover, when it was really shitty 10-12 years ago, it was understandable. When it was just bad 5-6 years ago, this could also be tolerated. But when now, these same employees, earning 50-70 thousand a month, continue to say the same thing, I feel sorry for them. The period of collapse and looting of the country completely broke them psychologically, despite this, their professional competence is still not in doubt.

I consider broken people to be those who are still afraid to raise their heads and face reality. You can get a good grant / funding, there are such people and laboratories, I know them, stick your head under the blanket and try to believe that everything is fine. Fortunately, a TV with bad news from everywhere but us will help. This is a standard stress response.

You probably misunderstood me, I don't complain about life. I have so far (thank God!) everything is fine with finances. Because since the 90's, I've been used to looking for funding myself, and not waiting for the citizen boss to remember me (

), well, they invite me for now. It's scary to see the band playing on deck and the water already in the holds. In the end, maybe the country still has a chance, if you try to make a diagnosis, and not close your eyes.

I know teachers from LETI and Polytech - yes, you can stick out a business agreement and get a salary of at least 100,000. but this is against the background of a catastrophic drop in the level of education, the Unified State Exam, etc.

PS. I apologize for clogging up the topic, the conversation should be taken out to the smoking room! We'd better stop, because we can't convince each other."

This post was edited by Zlopastnyi Brandashmyg - 28.01.2012 17: 29

Likes: 3

29.01.2012 7:06, Sergey Didenko

Oh, although not on the topic of the congress, the conversation was more constructive. In order.
I didn't understand about the lawyer. I don't consider lawyers to be a science, although I've heard

that there are legal sciences.

"I consider broken people to be those who are still afraid to raise their heads and face reality"

I didn't understand the wording. So, when 10 years were shitty and everyone was yelling about it, even the lazy ones, and then, when the situation changed and began to normalize, you need to continue yelling? I didn't understand about raising my head at all. Do you think that those with their heads up are those who are in eternal opposition? We probably have different ideas about reality and dignity.

"I know teachers from LETI and Polytech - yes, you can stick out a business agreement and get a salary of at least 100,000. but this is against the background of a catastrophic drop in the level of education, the Unified State Exam, etc."

First of all, it is IMPOSSIBLE to "stick out" the household agreement. Hozdogovor - this is not the sovereign's money, but the money of a specific organization for a specific job. You probably meant Grant. You can partially agree with the second part of the phrase. Yes, the level of education, first in secondary schools, and consequently in higher education institutions, is falling. But everything has its reasons. In high school, they destroyed a well-established system, and now they are trying to create a new one. Let's see, while the children from schools come weak. Although, in the last two years, against the background of the continuing demographic decline, we have recruited quite good students. Having done a GREAT job of finding them in the regions.
About the Unified State Exam - the Unified State Exam itself does not mean anything bad. Moreover, we have been correlating our USE scores with academic performance in the first semester for two years now. The correlation is complete. Those who have more than 230 points on the Unified State Exam study without problems. 200-230 have some problems, but they come up. Less than 200 is usually deducted. It is clear that there are isolated outliers from these statistics, but in general everything works. It is bad when in the final grades of the school they stop teaching the subject, but prepare only for passing the Unified State Exam. However, as one teacher told me - what's wrong with that? in the Unified State Exam, the entire program for the discipline is stuffed.

Denis, you are right, it is the American system that we have introduced.

"there is a caveat: there are few grants, many applicants. therefore, almost all grants are deposited in research centers, and nothing is left to the periphery - which also, despite its periphery, does science"

I'll agree and disagree. There are quite a few grants and a lot of applicants, but not always. Quite a large number of lots for grants passed without competition. And in 2009, I remember in general, there were fewer applicants than there should have been winners. This is a pebble in the garden of the lazy. References to the lack of information on the periphery are not rolled in our time. And yes, science is done on the periphery, but not in high-tech areas. And in high-tech industries, science can only be done in research centers where this high-tech (matbaza) is available.

This post was edited by sdi - 29.01.2012 07: 08

29.01.2012 10:08, PVOzerski

When it was shitty 10 years ago, they also yelled, only in their own narrow circles, and therefore it was not so audible. And now, in addition to scientists and other state employees, office workers also screamed, who, by our standards, from a material point of view, seem to have no need to yell because of the presence of horseradish with horseradish - so no, they also wanted the constitution to work for some reason. Well, in the general chorus, it's easier to yell, so we started to speak louder. By the way, until about the mid-90s it was very shitty, but we didn't yell, because the top people were talking about a transition period in the economy, and some of us also believed them. And even when Chernomyrdin started telling lies about how everyone in Russia was getting better in about ' 95, they didn't yell right away. I kept waiting for the president and the government to finally get their hands on science and education, right up to the spring of 2010, and only occasionally whined. But when they, these very hands, finally reached (a murderous project of educational reform was announced, which surpassed even my most pessimistic forecasts) - from now on, I scream without ceasing.

This post was edited by PVOzerski - 29.01.2012 10: 10

19.03.2012 16:34, Grichanov

About crises in REO
Dear forumchane! I only recently learned (at the VISR Academic Council) about this chaotic and fleeting discussion about "what's wrong" and "what to do" in REO. I would not like the opinion of the entomological forum public to be ignored by the REO congress (it seems that the members of the Presidium did not register here).

I summarize the statements of the forum members "what's wrong":
- REO has lost its appeal for the majority of Russian and Russian-speaking foreign entomologists, primarily amateurs and applied scientists;
- With the passing away and aging of generally recognized luminaries, the Presidium of the REO turned from a working body of congresses into the "Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR" with a vague system of appointment and functions of many of its members, "widely known in very narrow St. Petersburg circles";
- The absence of a normal REO website with the current Charter and other documents, a forum for entomologists, discussions on reports, draft documents, etc.;
- Entomological Review has turned from a REO organ into ZIN's home magazine, with a 10-fold decrease in circulation, no updated website, and no progress in printing.
- The lack of financial support for REO from the state and business has naturally led to an increase in the cost of membership in the society, registration fees, and the cost of the magazine, which will cause a further reduction in the number of REO members and the circulation of EO.

Before summing up "what to do", I will focus on the problematic moments in the history of REO. The first crisis of the society broke out shortly after its formation. Here is an excerpt from an article by E. M. Shumakov (1910-1997). Formation of agricultural entomology in pre-revolutionary Russia. Bulletin of Plant Protection, 2010, 2: 64-68, 3: 61-64, 4: 61-67 (publicly available on the site www.vestnik.iczr.ru/:

"Organized in 1859 at the Zoological Museum of the Academy of Sciences, the Russian Entomological Society paid great attention to the study of harmful insects from the very first steps. It even organized a special department of applied entomology, which lasted until 1866, but later the Society moved away from practical issues, dealing almost exclusively with issues of taxonomy and faunistics of insects. Subsequently, when it became necessary to unite a noticeably larger cadre of applied entomologists, the Russian Entomological Society was unable to fulfill this task, as a result of which a completely independent and independent "Russian Society of Figures in Applied Entomology" (1915) emerged."

Little is known about the first REO crisis (1866). About the second crisis, you can learn in detail from the article by Shumakov. Surprisingly, all the signs of the second pre-revolutionary crisis are present in the last decade of our time:
- Independent (in isolation from the REO management) formation and development of regional entomological organizations (departments);
- Holding regional entomological fairs, exhibitions, seminars and councils that have gradually developed into all-Russian entomological congresses without the participation of REO (for example, the 6th International Congress of the Entomological Forum and the 4th International Entomological Fair, which will be held in Moscow on September 8-9, 2012);
- The appearance of a number of serial and periodical entomological publications in parallel with the Entomological Review (today these are: the Russian Entomological Journal, the Eurasian Entomological Journal, the Far Eastern Entomologist, the Caucasian Entomological Bulletin, Eversmannia, etc.);
- The formation of a second entomological society in Russia without financial and organizational support from the center (practically, today it already exists, but not yet officially issued).

As a result of the misfortunes of the First World and Civil Wars, but mainly as a result of the energetic actions of the leadership of the USSR Academy of Sciences, by the 1930s there was only one entomological society and one entomological journal left in the country. What awaits us in the 21st century? The answer lies in the history of our entomology at the beginning of the XX century. Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with the existence of alternative entomological societies and journals, as it has developed in many countries. What should I do with REO to develop it and raise its credibility? The forum has written little and vaguely about this.

Still. The first thing that suggests itself is to change the Charter. But this is difficult to even discuss. According to some sources, the Charter of the 1992 model posted on the website of the Stavropol branch was edited long ago, and later it was discussed (and adopted?) there are two more statutes, but they have not been published.
The public can take over the discussion of the principles that will be included in the new REO Charter, the Regulations on Council Elections and the Administrative Regulations for the Work of the Presidium (the latter two documents seem to be missing from the REO).
The main thing is to finally get away from the Soviet system of elections and appointments, starting with the rejection of Soviet ballots for voting, which do not require not only brain effort, but even a fountain pen. I hope that young people will not be shocked again by the absence of the usual squares with the words "yes" and "no"in the ballots.

It may be necessary to limit the age of members of the Board, after which it automatically receives the status of "honorary" and frees up a place for a new member. For example, this figure is clearly spelled out in the Charter of the Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences (I haven't read any other charters).

It is necessary to define the functions, powers and responsibilities of each member of the Presidium, thereby returning it to the status of a working body, rather than a list of honorary members. The list will be reduced by itself if the Rules of Procedure (or the Charter) prescribe, for example, such functional duties of members of the Presidium (accountable to the Council and Congress) as:
- president,
- vice-president,
- secretary,
- treasurer, he is also responsible for relations with business and sponsors,
- auditor,
- head. editor of the EA,
- secretary of the editorial office of the EA,
- curator of the library,
-webmaster of the website of the REO and EA,
- curator of regional branches,
- responsible for relations with foreign entomologists and societies,
AND NO ONE ELSE!!!
(for Dmitry, he is also a contact with the Internet community).
Naturally (for me), when voting for members of the Council at the Congress, the ballot should indicate who is recommended by the former Council to the Presidium and with what function (preferably with 2 candidates).
What to do with the Entomological Review, I honestly don't know (after several 3-year excerpts of my articles, I don't get published there). In my opinion, the review is the concern of the new president, who will probably also be the editor-in-chief.
It is very important to establish the work of REO and EA sites with the publication of the current Charter and other documents, a forum for entomologists, discussions on reports, draft documents, the content of the journal and abstracts of articles, etc. And do not worry about funding: a dozen VIZ.sites were created and used to function without any funding. And why not join forces (and finances)? REO and Entomological Forum activists?
So far, that's all. I hope for discussions and at least for some changes,
Igor Yakovlevich, 33 years in the REO, but it seems that he is still younger than any member of the Presidium.

Likes: 6

Likes: 1

20.03.2012 10:36, Лавр Большаков

Grichanov
yesterday, 17: 34 URL #144
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About crises in REO
Dear forumchane! I only recently learned (at the VISR Academic Council) about this chaotic and fleeting discussion about "what's wrong" and "what to do" in REO. I would not like the opinion of the entomological forum public to be ignored by the REO congress (it seems that the members of the Presidium did not register here).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When we "argued" at the beginning of the year about the poor organization of the congress and everything else, we also thought about writing proposals for the reform of the REO and publishing them, say, in Eversmannia. But the trouble is - I was completely "mired" in butterflies, then somehow I was distracted by these things, and now I "don't have the strength".
I wrote some things there , but these are drafts, so I need to edit them. But I'm not sure about Ent. Obozrenie that only REO owns it - almost all the "academic" periodicals are owned by some "brothers" from the Russian Academy of Sciences, they determine ridiculous prices from the height of their income.
In general, the next "great event" will be held in a very depleted composition, but probably with hypertrophied participation of St. Petersburg "forest defenders". But "plant protection" is not so much a science as a conjuncture. How many of them do not "protect" - still eat. And if you don't "protect" them, they still don't finish eating.

20.03.2012 14:52, Grichanov

Hmm... And what will happen?
I wrote to Sergey Alexandrovich in May 2010-just on the question of joining the REO-no answer, no greetings.
By the way, the situation is idiotic: in Moscow (at least then) it was impossible to join the REO.

In our electronic age, this problem is solved simply by creating an Electronic Department of REO. You don't even need to change the Charter. The Internet space is the same territory as any geographical region. If there is a demand (first of all for individual members, those who have stayed in the CIS, or those who have left abroad), we do the following:
- we make an appointment here (we need 10 people to start with),
- we hold an electronic conference,
- we choose the chairman-coordinator,
- the chairman collects scans of questionnaires, applications, conference minutes, if necessary (for non - members) - recommendations of members,
- everything is sent to the REO secretary.
Even in its current composition, the Presidium is required to approve a new branch. Then-we work (who wants to): we open the site, write the Regulations, pay dues (like everyone else) , etc.

If you do not offer anything , then there is nothing to discuss!
И.Я.

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

20.03.2012 16:38, А.Й.Элез

I don't see much rudeness, just a solid defense (in a good sense), especially since the REO in this topic was also not patted on the head and no one refused their righteous indignation; but the stone addressed to the unnamed bursa is completely inappropriate. Somewhere they go to exchange reports, somewhere-to communicate informally, to exchange information (which, perhaps, is no less useful than official listening to ready-made texts) and material. And then why not invite them for a walk in the park, there is also no need to buy tables there. But bursa participants do not need to strain with writing theses! Well, the mentioned organizational advantages of the REO congress (loud groans, gratuitousness (here it is still an understatement) and damage to the main activity) to the organizers of the autumn congress of the forum and the Moscow bursa are also provided.

Likes: 2

Likes: 3

21.03.2012 2:49, Coelioxys

I have great respect for Eversmannia and its editorial board, as well as for all people who make entomological journals. Often, despite many circumstances, mostly at their own expense and spending personal time on it.
But to throw out such statements, saying that "the results are better than those of ZIN and RAN combined", is not even immodest, but generally does not climb into any gates. The right word.
For NA, WOS is now the main criterion. Everything else is just tinsel. Here are a couple of figures regarding the ZIN:
For 2006-2010
Articles - 616.
Average IF-1.62
Number of citations-2403.
This is a bit out of step with Eversmannia's 5 citations in WOS in 7 years. This is not a reproach at all, it's just that they are different weight categories.

Likes: 1

21.03.2012 13:19, А.Й.Элез

And we don't care about WOS and other bureaucratic bureaucracy. We're just doing our own thing. Take any Zoozhurnal or Ent. obozrenie - and there is nothing to read in other issues. At best, there are still 2-3 articles per issue in the EO. I'm not even talking about the wave of unedited publications of incompetent applicants for academic degrees - after all, even if you want to make something useful out of them - but you see, they "don't have time". As a result, both the author is a fool, and the editorial staff is laughed at.

No matter how much the entire forum, REO congress, or even bursa might spit, the criteria for evaluating your publications in the world will still not change. Currently , this is the total and average impact factor and the number of links in WOS.

And everyone who is in the NA system has to match, otherwise you will be asked first for another position, then for a part of the rate, and then just point to the door.
For people who study entomology outside of their main job, of course, these criteria can cause anything from ridicule to disdain, but this does not change the essence of the matter.

I am afraid that the formal criteria imposed on scientists today do not quite coincide with the criterion of utility for science and for society. I know (including at the place of work) specific cases when the steepest index is found in that employee of the institute, whose positive value in science (technically, literature and the Internet are guaranteed) is zero, but who, on the other hand, is very careful about his formal "performance". The whole argument boils down to the question of who works for what. In this case, Lavr is fundamentally in favor of science, while Maxim is realistically in favor of WOS. Lavr talks about life in science, Maxim - about survival in the staff of the Russian Academy of Sciences. But the coincidence of the interests of science and the interests of the so-called Russian Academy of Sciences (with all WOS) has not yet been proven, and each of us (Ranovo scientists - first of all!)has concrete evidence of the discrepancy. above the roof. I strongly doubt that Ranov's "criteria"can cause" from a grin to a snub" in "people who are engaged in entomology outside of their main work". On the contrary, rather sympathy for those early cadres who still think about science. I assume (however, knowing the value of these "criteria" in other fields of knowledge) that these "criteria" often cause the most negative emotions not on the side, but just among those genuine scientists who are forced to dance to their tune in the Russian Academy of Sciences.

The progressive movement of science in general puts on all the formalities (convenient only in order to give the crook a formal opportunity in the division of the pie to wipe out the one who is focused exclusively on science in science) a large device. This happens in any field – in literature, for example: who will remember today that in the days of Kuprin and Chekhov there were very large-circulation and sold-out books (this is a very important criterion for today's times) Mordovtsev, Boborykin and Charskaya. As one associate professor of philosophy said in my memory (back in Soviet times), when his department was occupied for several weeks with an extraordinary attestation and everyone was mired in counting published lines: "Yes, we would not have certified Marx with his "Theses on Feuerbach"..." What successfully passed certification in this field, not only did not attract a revolutionary revolution in world philosophy, but most often it was just garbage. Well, more than enough has already been said about state entomology on this forum.

21.03.2012 13:37, Лавр Большаков

There can be no talk of WOS in Russia! A negligible percentage of Russian publications go abroad. And besides, non-Latin texts are pathologically hated abroad. However, there are rare exceptions when a specialist is normal - he will find a translator, read it, and quote it. Well, what can you do with them - let them build their fake "ratings" as they like.
But the trouble is that in Russia there is practically no comprehensive accounting of their publications. RJ copes with this by about 30%, probably due to the lack of personnel and low qualifications available - every now and then essays for one group pop up in a completely different one, sometimes with wild typos. And about 3 years after they were admitted. And also with dubbing, the same 2 numbers in a row.
As for the employees of the Russian Academy of Sciences-yes, writing is their job, so it is not surprising that they tend to get into the publications where they are ordered. To whom, if not a professional "writer" to write. But this does not mean that everything they do not do is better than we, "amateurs". In many genres, they simply do not navigate. So we have to "contribute"

Likes: 1

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9