23 May 2025

Open letter to the president of University Canada West

To be sure, every generation suffers from what Daniel Pauly identified as the shifting baseline syndrome (1). In the 1990s, universities shifted from being cultural institutions to being big businesses. Students from being students to being customers. Academic standards from being informed by intellectual rigour to being at the mercy of administrative expediency (2). Publications from being contributions to the shared knowledge of humankind to being vehicles in the rat race to tenure and promotion. Most academics today are millennials. They have never experienced any other condition. That is their baseline.

I usually don't care what the clowns are doing when the day is long. It is not my responsibility. Unfortunately, when they start making collective decisions that undermine the Academy, I am forced to respond. 


NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) D. Pauly (1995), Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 430.
(2) F. Furedi (2004), Where have all the intellectuals gone? 

01 May 2025

Civilized society, stupid!

With every election, I hear the following foolish, foolish question, and I always wonder why I don't get used to it.

"What do I get for my taxes?"
"Civilized society, stupid!" (1) 

But the fool probably needs a list. 

Legislation
Law enforcement
The courts of law
Prisons
Ambulance services
Health care
Hospitals 
Public health services
Drug approval
Public housing
Water supply
Sewage treatment
Garbage disposal
Public utilities
Fire protection
Road construction 
Road maintenance
Schools 
Universities
Libraries 
Museums
Medical research
Fundamental research
Arts programming
Community centres 
Public swimming pools
Parks 
Playgrounds
Monetary policy
Money printing
Economic development 
Subsidies 
Management of the commons
Environmental protection 
Wildlife conservation
National defence 
Border security
Weather service
Coast Guard
Search and Rescue
Public safety
Licensing 
Public news 
Public mail services
Public transport
Social security
Elections
Food inspection
Citizen services
Tax auditing
...

Keep in mind that all these services and operations require people, buildings and furniture, construction and maintenance, equipment and consumables, and management. And all that is paid for by -- you guessed it -- taxes. 

In addition, if you are a private sector employee, a portion of your salary may just come from government contracts, because governments do not themselves build hospitals, develop computers for air traffic controllers, or bake bread for their school lunches. And if you are a public employee complaining about taxes, you are an even bigger fool. Where do you think your salary, vacation pay, extended health benefits, and pension contributions come from? 

I think, this foolish, foolish question angers me so much, because the answer should be obvious even to a selfish prig. Besides, more often than not this selfish prig belongs to the top 10% of earners. It makes me wonder: If you cannot figure out what you get for your taxes, why do they pay you so much money?

My wife and I pay taxes so that even the selfish prig feels safe at home, has clean water, receives medical care when he needs it, can send his children to public school and university, can participate in fair elections, and will receive social security should he fall on hard times. 

In 1971, moral philosopher John Rawls published his book A Theory of Justice (2). In it, he argues for a society with equal basic liberties, equal opportunity, and a dignified level of wellbeing for the least advantaged members. 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) Justice Holmes formulated it more gently in 1927: "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society[.]" (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/275/87/. Accessed: 30 Apr 2025) I like to think that today he would put it in my words.
(2) J. Rawls (1971), Theory of Justice.

25 July 2024

Problems in funding biological conservation research


I am neither a good ecologist nor a good environmentalist. But this is about research funding and conservation, so bear with me.

My wife and I enjoy walks around Deer Lake. If somebody were to ask me "Why are there so many mallards but so few wood ducks?", all I could do is some handwaving. It's survival and reproduction, it's the niche, it's all very complicated. I know, I know. Coexistence is one result of the Lotka-Volterra competition model (1), but to ask Platt's famous question (2): "But [Madam or] Sir, what experiment would disprove your hypothesis?" Causality is hard to establish in the historical sciences (3).

I am also not sure about conservation. As I have asked before (4): Why is biodiversity worth protecting? More than that. When I see the family-tent-sized rubber sheets rolled out around Deer Lake to combat the invasion of the yellow flag iris, I wonder how well these rubber sheets work. Looking at the sizeable populations next to the rubber sheets, my response is: Not well. 

Of course, you may say I am an idiot, and indeed I know very little. But if we cannot come up with good explanations for the abundance and the distribution of organisms, if the only reasons for protecting biodiversity we can name are vague notions of ecosystem stability and aesthetics, if the outcomes of our conservation efforts are uncertain at best and pathetic at worst, and if the timescales governing our objects of interest is decades to centuries, it is half a miracle that we do get funding at all. 

The question is this: How can we convince the average citizen that ecological research is important? (5)

I am not sure if education is the answer. I teach ecology and evolution at a fourth-rate university. I do have students who think that humans are the cause for the extinction of dinosaurs, a belief that would have gotten me thrown out of middle school. And a couple of months ago, I visited the Beaty Biodiversity Museum at U.B.C. with four questions in mind (4): How much biodiversity is out there? Why are there so many species, or why are there so few? Why is biodiversity worth protecting? How should we manage biodiversity? The only question that was somewhat answered is the first.

But maybe I am expecting too much from us humans. 

(An afterthought: When I was a postdoc at U.B.C. in the late 1990s, I dreamt of an independent research institute for ecology (6), where researchers could focus on hypotheses and evidence. I even imagined the funding. Not from the public, because it requires the writing of grant proposals that may not get funded and the publishing of papers that nobody reads. Not from "philanthropists", because it may require sycophancy, compromise, and possibly hypocrisy (7). The funding I envisioned was achieved through -- hold on to your seats -- sports betting. If we are as good at data analysis as we think we are, this should be a piece of cake. I even trained an artificial neural network on about a thousand baseball games. The trouble was that it never converged.)

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) C. J. Krebs (2009), Ecology (Sixth Edition).
(2) J. R. Platt (1964), Strong Inference. Science 146: 347 - 353.
(3) My comment on https://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~krebs/ecological_rants/the-two-ecologies/.
(4) My comment on https://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~krebs/ecological_rants/biodiversity-science/.
(5) If the average citizen is not convinced, the average politician will not act. That said, it is still a mystery to me how the physicists get their particle accelerators or the astronomers their space telescopes. 
(6) What the Institute for Advanced Study used to be to mathematics, the Santa Fe Institute to complex adaptive systems, the Oregon Research Institute to psychology.
(7) Who would you NOT accept money from? 

06 June 2024

Antibiotic resistance in bacterial species

If you ever suffered from a serious bacterial infection, your doctor probably prescribed antibiotics as a treatment. And you were probably directed that even if you feel better, you must complete the course of treatment. Why? Because if you fail to do so, you may promote antibiotic resistance. 

We do know better (1): Dosage and duration of antibiotic treatment must be customized to the bacterial species and the individual host. In order to avoid antibiotic resistance, ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT MUST BE AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE. The explanation comes from evolutionary biology, and the distinction between target selection and collateral selection.

Target selection works like this: A malign bacterial species is targeted for antibiotic treatment. There is variation in the population. Some of the individuals are less susceptible to the antibiotic. They reproduce and develop mutants that are resistant to the antibiotic. The mutants spread through the population and kill the infected host.

But target selection occurs only in relatively few infectious diseases (e.g. tuberculosis, gonorrhoea, typhus). The predominant driver of antibiotic resistance is collateral selection. 

Collateral selection works like this: Many bacterial species live around us, or on us, or inside us. Most of the time they are benign, and many are even beneficial. When you get an infection from a malign species, you will treat them with antibiotics. This treatment exposes the malign species AND the benign species to natural selection. Because the malign species is the target of the antibiotic treatment, it will eventually be eliminated from your body. 

What stays behind are antibiotic-resistant strains of benign species. The longer the duration of the antibiotic treatment, the stronger the antibiotic resistance. These antibiotic-resistant strains are transmitted between healthy people through normal interaction. Worse, because bacteria exchange genes even between species, other benign species may acquire antibiotic resistance. 

Once in a while, a now antibiotic-resistant benign species (e.g. Escherichia coli) develops mutants that become opportunist pathogens. If you treat them with antibiotics, no effect.

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) M. J. Llewelyn et al. (2017), The antibiotic course has had its day. The British Medical Journal: BMJ 2017;358:j3418 doi: 10.1136/bmj.j3418.

25 April 2024

The calculator and artificial intelligence

A group of university administrators has made the following foolish argument (1).

OBSERVATIONS
O1: The introduction of the calculator in the classroom was opposed by many who predicted a decline in academic standards. 
O2: The introduction of the calculator in the classroom DID NOT result in a decline in academic standards. 
O3: The introduction of A.I. in the classroom is opposed by many who predict a decline in academic standards.

ASSUMPTION
A1: The introduction of A.I. in the classroom IS equivalent to the introduction of the calculator in the classroom.

CONCLUSION
C1: The introduction of A.I. in the classroom WILL NOT result in a decline in academic standards.

Here are my objections.

ON O2
The introduction of the calculator DID result in a decline in academic standards.

Perform the following long division by hand: 123456 ÷ 789. 

Did you find it easy? No? Why then should students be exposed to this avoidable tedium?

Because long division does train the mind NOT ONLY in long division. It also teaches students to break a big unsolvable problem into smaller solvable ones. And it exercises the mind in the consistent application of a simple set of rules, a procedure, an algorithm. And it teaches students perseverance and resilience. 

Not exactly irrelevant transferable personal qualities, transferable social behaviours, and transferable cognitive skills to have in life and in the workplace (2).

ON A1
The introduction of A.I. in the classroom IS NOT equivalent to the introduction of the calculator.

Calculators are primitive tools. They are about arithmetic, the processing of numbers. Calculators are not smarter than humans, they are just faster. 

Of course, mathematics also deals in algebra and calculus, the processing of variables and equations, respectively. We have invented tools to make us faster and more accurate in those areas as well (3). But using these tools requires knowledge about what you are doing. 

Even using the calculator: What exactly is it that you want to calculate? 

Conversely, much of today's "A.I." is based on Large Language Models, artificial neural networks that process complex symbols. These provide easy access to products of analysis and synthesis. Using them doesn't require the discipline of acquiring knowledge. An idiot can use ChatGPT and look smart (4). 

ON C1
Prompted with the observations (O1, O2, O3), the assumption (A1), and the conclusion (C1), the ChatGTP artificial neural network responded (5): 

"The key to this conclusion lies in the assumption that the introduction of A.I. is fundamentally similar to the introduction of calculators in terms of the context and scope of use. If this premise holds true, then the positive outcome from calculators can be reasonably extended to A.I., supporting the conclusion that the impact on academic standards will not be adverse."

Not bad. A machine displaying more intellectual rigour than the authors of the article. (And yes, I see the irony here: Had the authors used ChatGTP, they could have made a stronger argument.) Still, I am somewhat disappointed. I expected the machine to have more of an agenda. 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) M. M. Crow, N. K. Mayberry, T. Mitchell, and D. Anderson (2024), AI Can Transform the Classroom Just Like the Calculator. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-can-transform-the-classroom-just-like-the-calculator/ (Accessed: 24 Apr 2024).
(2) https://www.citizenbaumann.ca/2019/07/selection-criteria-in-labour-market.html (Accessed: 24 Apr 2024).
(3) E.g. Mathematica, MATLAB, Maple. 
(4) You want to give a presentation on say 17th century French literature? Just sign up to ChatGPT and enter the following prompt: "Can you provide me with the text for ten PowerPoint slides on 17th century French literature?" Hey presto! 
(5) ChatGTP 3.5 (Prompted: 25 Apr 2024). ChatGTP gave a variety of responses to the same prompt. All consistent with each other. 

07 March 2024

Biodiversity science


(I know, I know, too long again. I always seem to drag myself into a swamp of thoughts.)

How much biodiversity is out there?
Why are there so many species (1), or why are there so few (2)?
Why is biodiversity worth protecting?
How should we manage biodiversity?

These are the questions of biodiversity science, of course, but I am afraid that we will fail at the first one. Answering how much biodiversity is out there does require taxonomists.

It is not a secret that around the time of the Watson and Crick paper in 1953 (3), a chasm opened in biology, a chasm between molecular biology and organismic biology. Molecular biology received faculty positions, research funding, research castles, and journals (4). Organismic biology received a kick in the groin. 

In their classic paper from 1979 -- 1979!! -- Gould and Lewontin quote Rupert Riedl (5): 

"[T]he whole of the huge and profound thought collected in the field of morphology, from Goethe to Remane, has virtually been cut off from modern biology. It is not taught in most American universities. Even the teachers who could teach it have disappeared."

(I received my undergraduate training under Rupert Riedl at the University of Vienna. A lot of courses in morphology and comparative anatomy, a lot of Linnean tables and classification keys, nothing on cladistics, very little biochemistry. But even as zoologists we had to be able to identify at least 125 plant species (6).)

The situation wasn't helped when in 1988 Nobel laureate Luis Alvarez disparaged the scientists who try to understand species (7): 

"I don't like to say bad things about paleontologists, but they're really not very good scientists. They're more like stamp collectors.'' 

Except, of course, Alvarez did say a lot of "bad things" about other scientists. 

Taxonomists used to be respected as collectors of historical evidence to test hypotheses on the origins of species, disparity in body plans, biodiversity, variation within species, and, more recently, invasive species (8). There is no comfort in the irony that the profession that can tell us whether a species is going extinct is going extinct itself.

Maybe I don't know enough, or maybe my judgement is too harsh. I am wondering, Charley, how do you see recruitment and training in biodiversity science?

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) G. E. Hutchinson (1959), Homage to Santa Rosalia or Why Are There So Many Kinds of Animals. The American Naturalist 93(870): 145 - 159
(2) J. Felsenstein (1981), Skepticism Towards Santa Rosalia, or Why Are There So Few Kinds of Animals. Evolution 35:124 - 138
(3) J. D. Watson and F. H. C. Crick (1953), Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids. Nature 171: 737 - 738
(4) Have a look: https://www.nature.com/siteindex#journals-N (Accessed: 7 Mar 2024). How many Nature journals cover molecular biology, how many organismic biology?
(5) S. J. Gould and R. C. Lewontin (1979), The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 205: 581 - 597
(6) Of course, there are some good identification apps out there (e.g. Pl@ntNet for plants, Merlin for birds), but they are for hobbyists. Besides, who is going to produce the data required to train the artificial neural networks? 
(7) M. W. Browne (1988), The Debate Over Dinosaur Extinctions Takes an Unusually Rancorous Turn. The New York Times (19 Jan 1988): C1 + C4, 
(8) Currently there are 110 known invasive species in British Columbia alone. See: https://bcinvasives.ca/ (Accessed: 7 Mar 2024).

15 February 2024

Higher education: The things we do and fail to do

The original title of my article was "Higher education: The things we do and fail to do". The editors changed it to "Preparing good citizens and workers means treating students as adults", which is lame.



25 January 2024

What to read in the ecological literature


Three thoughts, but a caveat first. 

"In our times, we would only publish when we felt we had something to say. Today, if you don’t have anything to say, you do that in at least two or three papers." Dennis Chitty said that (1). That was in 1996, when Chitty was 84 years old, and I was 31. I have lived by his standards ever since. 

I never had much to say, and even fewer things that hadn't been said before. (I remember one time I discovered something interesting about probabilities, and it turned out to be Bayes's theorem (2). About 250 years too late.) Consequently, I never believed that reckless publishing would move society forward. 

And yes, as was pointed out to me frequently: "Publication is the currency of our success." (3)

1: During my grammar school years and undergraduate studies, I wish my teachers had taken the time to expose me to the original books rather than some child's play version of them. Euklid, Newton, Darwin, and Einstein, come to mind.
2: During my Ph.D. years, I rated every book and paper I read. It turned out that about 90% of the books I read were worth my time and 90% of the papers were not. So, I focused on books and classic papers (4). But even here I wish I had had better guidance (5).
3: There is normal science and there are scientific revolutions (6). During periods of normal science, scientists work within a framework of beliefs and accumulate facts that strengthen the framework. Who is challenging the frameworks today?

And of course, there is the story of the newly hired professor at U.B.C. who only reads the abstracts, because reading doesn't get you tenure or grants, writing does.

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) D. Chitty (1996), pers. comm.
(2) T. Bayes (1763), An Essay towards solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances.
(3) L. M. Ward (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006), pers. comm.
(4) F. Courchamp and C. J. A. Bradshaw (2018), 100 articles every ecologist should read. Nature Ecology and Evolution 2: 395 - 401. This publication lists only six papers that were published after 2000. 
(5) It was years after I completed my Ph.D. in 1998 that I discovered: E.g. T. C. Chamberlin (1890), The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses; A. Szent-Györgyi (1960), Introduction to a Submolecular Biology; J. R. Platt (1964), Strong Inference. 
(6) T.S. Kuhn (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Second edition. 


25 May 2023

The two ecologies


[This got a little longer than intended. Forgive me, Charley.]

"A dominant disposition to find out what is, should precede and crowd aside the question, commendable at a later stage, "How came this so?" First full facts, then interpretations." (1)

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist the facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." (2)

All my professional life, I have tried to make sense of how we humans acquire knowledge. The trouble is that we have only limited direct access to observable phenomena and no direct access to the causes that cause the observable phenomena (3). By necessity: Facts first, causes later.

Consequently, reading The Two Ecologies, the two questions came to mind:

1: Is the existence of two varieties of ecology a fact?

I do not know the literature as well as you do, Charley, not by a very, very long shot. (I doubt I know anybody else who could cite a recent philosophical paper published in Portuguese.) But from what I have seen over the last quarter of a century, I agree with you but would go one step further: There are three ecologies: Scientific ecology, natural history ecology, and bleeding hearts ecology.

2: What working hypotheses can explain the emergence of these varieties of ecology and the divergence of character?

Unsurprisingly, this question is trickier, not least because we cannot conduct proper experiments and are left with only the methods of historical science (4). I won’t get into proximate causes and ultimate causes, necessary causes and sufficient causes, et cetera, but I give it a shot.

WORKING HYPOTHESIS #1: From scientific ecology to natural history ecology.

Establishing facts is hard work. (In the boreal forest ecosystem, some mammal species show population cycles.) Establishing causes is A LOT MORE hard work. (What are the causes for the population cycles?)

As Levins and Lewontin wrote in 1985(!): "The harder problems are not tackled, if for no other reason than that brilliant scientific careers are not built on persistent failure." (5)

Or Chitty in 1996: "In our times, we would only publish when we felt we had something to say. Today, if you don’t have anything to say, you do that in at least two or three papers." (6)

Not reading, writing gets you tenure. (And possibly ingratiating yourself to the right people.)

WORKING HYPOTHESIS #2: From scientific ecology to bleeding hearts ecology.

Ecology has a recruitment problem. Who wants to go into ecology? With the exception of my wife, I know nobody outside the subject area who could give me a satisfactory definition of ecology.

If you are good with numbers, you go into math or AI. If you are fascinated with biology, you go into biomedical engineering. Who's left? The bleeding hearts. Climate change, composting and recycling, save the whales.

WORKING HYPOTHESIS #3: The decline of academia.

In the 1990s, universities shifted from being cultural institutions to being big businesses (7). Most of the faculty members today have never experienced any other condition. Every generation suffers from what Daniel Pauly correctly identified as shifting baseline syndrome (8).

"The difficulty is that disproof is a hard doctrine. If you have a hypothesis and I have another hypothesis, evidently one of them must be eliminated. The scientist seems to have no choice but to be either soft-headed or disputatious." (9)

Disputatiousness seems to have disappeared, agreeableness and groupthink are ubiquitous. Not an intellectual foe, a friend you must hire. (He or she may put your name on his or her publications.)

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) T. C. Chamberlin (1890), The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses. Reprinted: Science 148: 754 - 759.
(2) Sherlock Holmes to Dr. Watson in A. C. Doyle (1892), A Scandal in Bohemia.
(3) M. Baumann (in prep.), The Elements of Truth.
(4) S. J. Gould (1989), Wonderful Life.
(5) R. Levins and R. Lewontin (1985), The Dialectical Biologist.
(6) D. Chittty (1996, pers. comm).
(7) F. Furedi (2004), Where have all the intellectuals gone?
(8) D. Pauly (1995), Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 430.
(9) J. R. Platt (1964), Strong Inference. Science 146: 347 - 353

16 March 2023

Belief versus Evidence


If we assume two things …

Assumption 1: Knowing facts increases fitness -- survival and reproduction, "success".
This seems reasonable. Imagine the life expectancy of zebras that believe "There is a tree with a leopard tail." rather than "There is a leopard lurking behind the tree.".

Assumption 2: The function of higher education is two-fold: First, the development of competent citizens. Second, the training of a skilled workforce.
This also seems reasonable. What else are we doing?

Consequently, the distinction between fact and fantasy must be of vital importance in higher education.

It is not. I am somewhat old now, but in the 70 university courses I took in my younger more vulnerable years, not a single one formally dealt with this problem. And from my informal observations I must say that most people are rather confused about the distinction between facts, beliefs, preferences, and opinions.

I teach introductory biology and introductory ecology at an unnamed university. The formal distinction between facts, beliefs, preferences, and opinions is the first thing I teach the students. At the end of the semester, most of them have forgotten already.

25 August 2022

On M.B.A. programs

A couple of days ago, I was sitting in the faculty lounge at the place where I work, having my lunch, minding my own business. That's when I overhear the following conversation between two faculty members in the M.B.A. program.

Faculty #1: I just planted a cedar tree in my garden. I hope it will stay alive.
Faculty #2: Do you talk to your tree?
Faculty #1: What do you mean?
Faculty #2: Have you not heard about the famous rice experiment (1)?
Faculty #1: No, what's that?
Faculty #2: A researcher in Japan had three jars in which he grew rice. He talked very nicely to the first jar. He was neutral to the second. And he frowned at the third.
Faculty #1: What happened?
Faculty #2: The rice in the first jar grew very quickly. The rice in the second jar grew normally. And the rice in the third jar got mouldy.
Faculty #1: Really?
Faculty #2: You see, it's the positive energy from humans that helps the rice grow.
Faculty #1: I certainly will talk to my cedar tree at home. And I will also use the rice experiment to start today's class. You know, if students want to open an agri-business, they should know these things.

For their M.B.A. courses, this university likes to hire "business people with experience".

There was another permanent faculty member in the M.B.A. program who sheepishly admitted to me that before teaching business ethics, he never even cracked open an ethics book. To be fair, I am not an expert in business ethics. Maybe basic knowledge about philosophy is not required to teach business ethics. After all, the university is charging students $2,000 for courses given by laypeople who read the textbook a week before they did.

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaru_Emoto

11 August 2022

Socrates on CoViD

The original title of my article was "Socrates on CoViD". The editors changed it to "The Pandemos".


It is really a dialogue on thinking -- I could have picked any hard problem humankind is faced with, from climate change to the Downtown Eastside. Maybe the way to deal with corruption, injustice, and stupidity is this: One clown at a time.

07 April 2022

How I am

"How are you?" somebody recently asked me. It is a perfunctory question, of course, and what is expected is a perfunctory answer: "Thank you, I am fine."

But life is more complicated than this, more layered, and so I started thinking about it.

On a personal level, I couldn't be happier -- or luckier, because I am not sure that I deserve what I have got. I have a lovely wife. We are both healthy as far as anyone can know. We own a nice little apartment in a decent neighbourhood. We can afford to travel once a year. We enjoy the same things: A walk in the park, a good discussion, a nice dinner, a good bottle of wine, sex, foreign films, reading. Yes, we are getting older, but that's life. And yes, a warm relationship with my two daughters would be nice, but that's life too.

The career level is next. In my younger and more vulnerable years, I had the privilege of a good education -- although how good it was, I didn't know until much later. An Austrian grammar school, the University of Vienna, the University of British Columbia. I did hope for a faculty position at a research university, but it never came. It was my own fault, really. I am not an agreeable person, and I didn't think that agreeableness was a necessary or even useful characteristic for an academic (1).

I now make a living teaching ecology and evolution to some uninterested students at a fourth-rate university. Why do I love it? Because I spent a lost decade as a mid-level university bureaucrat at a fourth-rate university. The only thing missing in my professional life today is good discussions with smart people. (But maybe the days of the smart people are over.) That and benefits would be nice.

Which brings me to the last level, the human level. The war in Ukraine, starving people in Afghanistan, thug nations, CoViD, climate change, the fall of democracy, continued class privilege, plastic pollution, the effects of social media, the decline of education, real estate speculation -- I am sure I am forgetting a few things.

These problems are infuriating, not because "somebody" should solve them, but because some of them cannot be solved until people change. And we won't change. As Hemingway said in my favourite book (2): "The only thing that could spoil a day was people[.]"

People who insist on being heard but refuse to listen. Absolute democrats who forget that the average person is an idiot. Pseudo democrats for whom democracy means holding power by any means. People who confuse facts and opinions. People who insist on diversity but are offended by any opinion but their own. Antivaxxers who demand a rabies vaccine when bitten by a dog. Pro-lifers who love every embryo unless it turns out to be gay or Muslim. Monster truck drivers whose transportation needs are indistinguishable from those of SmartCar drivers. People who demand government action but start complaining as soon as the government does act. Bullies who cry foul as soon as someone is hitting back. People who drive to the U.S. to buy gas or milk. Tax evaders. People who think that money is more important than principles. 

I know that it is not the goal of humankind to spoil my day. But if it were, humanity would be rather successful at it.

But other than that: Thank you, I am fine. 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) "The difficulty is that disproof is a hard doctrine. If you have a hypothesis and I have another hypothesis, evidently one of them must be eliminated. The scientist seems to have no choice but to be either soft-headed or disputatious." J. R. Platt (1964), Strong Inference. Science 146: 347 - 353.
(2) E. Hemingway (1964), A Moveable Feast.

17 June 2021

National Indigenous Peoples Day

21 June is National Indigenous Peoples Day.

As an immigrant to this country, I have always been appalled by the often blatant discrimination and always dumb prejudice against our Indigenous neighbours (1). As an academic, I have always been infuriated by the complicity and the hypocrisy of Canadian universities.

The wilful blindness towards "Truth and Reconciliation", like the Germans running the Nuremberg trials. The traditional land acknowledgements that sound like dishwasher warranties read by Prince Charles. The patronizing adoption of Indigenous rituals. The mindless "Indigenization" workshops with not a single Indigenous person in attendance.

Imagine if we actually did something meaningful to stand up for our Indigenous neighbours.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

29 April 2021

In defence of government

Start with a particle so small that 100 million of them fit on the head of a pin. Each of these particles can replicate inside the human body, disable you, kill you. Each of them can mutate and become nastier. A lot nastier. 

Add to this an array of professional politicians, administrative bureaucrats, health officers, statisticians, ecological modellers, epidemiologists, vaccination experts, drug regulators, welfare economists, financial experts, experts on trade agreements, on constitutional law, on law enforcement, ... This is your government. All imperfect people, all with imperfect information.

Add their constituents -- children, students, senior citizens, citizens informed, half-informed, misinformed, disinformed, people who fell ill, people who lost family or friends, ... Throw in different interest groups -- ethnic communities, congregations, small business associations, the nurses' union, the teachers' union, First Nations, doctors' associations, ... 

Add actors from areas that are suffering economically -- face-to-face retail, restaurants, the travel industry, tourism, oil and gas, sports, concerts, theatres, ... Add actors from areas that are benefitting -- pharma big and small, e-commerce, streaming services, food delivery, hot-tub installers, ... Be sure to add some actors who are uncertain where they stand -- banks who suddenly see no need for expensive downtown office towers, credit card companies who see an explosion in credit card usage, universities who can operate at lower cost using blended course contents delivery, ... 

Don't forget to add a few anarchists and archconseratives who share in their delusion that the best government is no government, some anti-vaxxers who think that the government is out to get them, some loud pundits trying to make a name for themselves, and a few people who are simply nasty for no particular reason.

Now, consider the demands on the government to fulfil the varied goals of all the different stakeholders. Consider that government actions are always limited. Consider that outcomes are always uncertain. Consider that indicators are often ambiguous. Consider that data are always incomplete and often inconsistent. Consider that no government action occurs in isolation.

Hey presto! The CoViD crisis.

I don't know where people like Dr. Henry and Mr. Horgan find the strength to get out of bed in the morning. But I for one thank them that they do.

(After I had finished my article, my wife and I had a discussion over dinner what it is that you can demand from your government. That they be honest with us and that they give it their best effort towards the public good, not less, not more. In Canada, we sometimes forget how lucky we have been. Think anything Trump, think Brazil, Russia, India, and China, think W.M.D.s in Iraq, think Iran-Contra, think Chernobyl, ...)

25 March 2021

The price of your soul

The Faustian bargain. Yes, you can put a monetary value to it. Here is the thought experiment.

1: Think of the evilest person that comes to mind -- Hitler, Stalin, Mao, more contemporary equivalents.
2: Imagine this person approaches you at a meeting. He hands you a suitcase with the words: "Here is a present for you. Money. You can use it for personal purchases -- properties, cars, yachts, ... You cannot use it for charity or for political purposes -- saving children from poverty, supporting democracy, equality, ..."
3: What is the lowest amount of money that you would accept -- any amount, $10, $1,600, $9 million, ...?
4: Hey presto! That is the price of your soul.

Does your soul have a price? Does the price vary over time? If the price is made public, does it change?

11 March 2021

On lunatics


Lunatics are gaining legitimacy. And here is my hypothesis.

In the past, if there was 1 lunatic in 1,000 people, lunatics had great difficulty finding each other. Today, thank you very much social media, lunatics can easily form groups.

Lunatics form groups. Groups shout louder. Loudness attracts publicity. Publicity legitimates lunacy.

We cannot control lunacy, or the forming of groups, or the shouting for that matter. The question is: Can we control publicity?

Unfortunately, in the evolution of democratic society, we have reached a stage where ignoring an opinion is considered an undemocratic act. Consequently, we patiently listen to even the most lunatic ideas, ideas that not only lack evidence but that often go against massive evidence to the contrary.

This practice has had dire consequences: The reinforcement of the lunatic's confidence that his conviction represents a legitimate position. The conclusion by the underinformed that facts are fewer and less certain than they in fact are. The folly to take the lunatic's confidence as a measure of the strength of his claims. The abuse of our good will by people with nefarious agendas. The catering of desperate politicians to lunatic superminorities. The adoption of the fear-and-anger business model in the media. The readiness of governments to disinform their own citizens and those of foreign nations. ...

And so, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, 9 - 11 conspiracies, birtherism. And so, holocaust denial, climate change denial, mass shooting denial, CoViD denial. And so, QAnon, the "stolen" 2020 U.S. election, anti-vaccine delusion.

But here is the thing: NOT ALL TRUTH PROPOSITIONS ARE EQUALLY PROBABLE.

And, yes, I am shouting this.

Would we give television time or newspaper space to someone who claims electricity does not work, or antibiotics, or bridges across rivers? To someone who believes water, or food, or gravity are social constructs? (Admittedly, the number of gravity deniers must be small, not because the evidence is literally just a stone's throw away, but because their lives must be so short.)

Yes, I do realize the irony of dedicating a couple of hundred words to lunatics. But let us just stop giving intellectual space to the perpetual re-examination of lunatic ideas. And let us use it to solve actual problems.

Now, about the U.F.O. that landed on my hiking boot ...

11 February 2021

Almost nothing you know ...

Almost nothing you know or believe about the world is based on your own experience. Almost everything you know or believe about the world you know on trust.


26 November 2020

On fairy tales


Last weekend my wife and I had a discussion about fairy tales. We came to the conclusion that it would be a strange child indeed that sided with the witch in Hansel and Gretel, or the wolf in Little Red Riding Hood, or Rumpelstiltskin. And yet by the time we reach adulthood, many of us have turned into nasty kings or evil queens, or at least vote for them.

What is it that changes the ethics of a child into the ethics of an adult? Is our education system failing us? Is it all caused by ill-conceived reward structures in our society? Is there something fundamentally wrong with us human beings?

01 October 2020

Deconstructing the new workplace

In 2014, Jacob Morgan painted a naive optimism into a pictograph he called THE EVOLUTION OF THE EMPLOYEE. By 2018, university administrators were mindlessly adopting his ideas, acting as if humanity had no choice in its fate and universities had nothing to do with it. Consequently, I amended Morgan's graphic. 

Why am I alerting you to this?

Because CoViD-19 has accelerated changes in the workplace. Many executives have recently figured out that maintaining corporate towers, office buildings, and lecture halls does cut into profits. (Bewildering, I know.) And they have started to move. 

My advice is trite: Be careful what you wish for, be wise what you ask for.


11 July 2019

Selection criteria in the labour market

Modified: 8 May 2025

Apart from the quality of your education and the quality of your experience the following knowledge-based selection criteria may apply. 

Knowledge can be divided into four categories, each category containing many components. 

1: Transferable personal qualities: Values, self-discipline, initiative, perseverance, diligence, resilience, flexibility, confidence, sense of responsibility, sense of humour, ability to work alone, ...

2: Transferable social behaviours: Ethics, honesty, respect, sensitivity, courtesy, compliance, obedience, confidentiality, conflict resolution, reliability, sense of justice, trust, understanding of hierarchies, ability to work with others, willingness to co-operate, ...

3: Subject knowledge: Terminology, conventions, facts, cause-and-effect relationships, concepts, methodology.

4: Transferable cognitive skills: Self-reflection, intelligence (analytical, synthetic, creative, practical), learning ability (retention, mastery, potentiality), literacy (reading comprehension, writing ability), numeracy (evaluation, numerical comprehension, calculating, modelling), communication (listening, questioning, expressing ideas, presenting ideas), critical thinking (curiosity, judgement, scepticism), problem solving (abstraction, resourcefulness), management skills (goal setting, forecasting, planning, co-ordination, decision making, resource acquisition, resource control), technology use, ... 

09 May 2019

University of the Fraser Valley: Michael's version (Part 3 of 3)


Continued from 2 May 2019 (1) ...

Baumann "stands in the way of innovation or change". But does he?

It is true, I do stand "in the way of innovation or change" if change leads to a loss of honesty and transparency, of freedom and justice (2), of equality and happiness (3). When it leads to a loss of intellectual rigour (4). Or when an idea is just a fad (5).

What do you do? 

But let me ask a different question: How often were my initiatives stonewalled by higher-ranking administrators? Three examples.

On 15 Jan 2013, I (and somebody at Queen's University) watch the same webinar on the development of Major Maps at Georgia State University. (Major Maps are visual representations of academic, extra-curricular, and career-related activities intended to help students on their journey.)  I alert the Dean of Arts and the Dean of Science to this idea, but nothing happens. Then more of nothing happens. On 26 Nov 2014, I have a meeting with the Associate Dean Students to discuss the creation of Major Maps for U.F.V.. On 2 Feb 2015, Queen's announces to be the "first Canadian university to develop 'major maps'" (6). On 5 Jun 2015, yet another meeting with the Associate Dean. A couple of days later Queen's wins the Canadian Association of Career Educators and Employer (CACEE) Excellence in Innovation Award (7). Sometime in early May 2017, the Associate Dean finally produces two Major Maps, one for Philosophy, one for Psychology. To say they are awful would be a compliment. Sometime in 2018, after five years, the Associate Dean cancels the project. 

Yes, U.F.V. could have been first at something, but as so often the opportunity was squandered. 

In May 2016, at the CACEE National Conference in Montreal, a speaker from Western University presents HireWesternU.ca (8), a campaign intended to cultivate industry/university collaboration. The campaign was a great success, e.g. contributing to an increase in co-op placements from 800 in 2014 to 1,200 in 2015. Once back at U.F.V., I bring the initiative to the attention of Senior Administration and request approval of the top-level domain name hireUFV.ca. My request is denied (9).

(Note that in Oct 2017, Senior Administration approved a top-level domain name for "Academic Integrity Matters" (10), a campaign reminiscent of South Park's Sexual Harassment Panda, except that it is not a satire (11). If my daughter's alma mater likened their students to an arboreal mammal noted for its slowness and then treated them like idiots, I would strongly advise her to seek her postsecondary education elsewhere.)

In October 2017, University Affairs publishes my opinion piece on the consequences of exam scheduling at Canadian universities and the benefits of change (12). (Let's just say not exactly an irrelevant topic considering the state of student mental health.) I choose to publish with no affiliation. The article makes it into Academica Top Ten (13). My piece was mentioned to me by one -- that is, one -- higher-ranking administrator. How come?

That said, it would not surprise me if soon Senior Administration did implement some of my ideas and initiatives and sell them as their own -- U.F.V. programming for local prisons, an Aboriginal Access Graduation Coach, Project EduSim, the FutureSkills Lab, hireUFV.ca, a university-wide Employer Advisory Board, a proper Work-Integrated Internship Program, a central U.F.V. Career Resources website, the WORK 101 course, the "Don't cancel your class" initiative, an experimental exam schedule, ...

If this should happen, remember where you read about them first. 

Baumann "appears to be disengaged". You tell me.

It is true, as an introvert I naturally spend more time thinking than talking, but I do take detailed notes. And yes, there is much more to talk about, so much more. But it would be a waste of time. 

Why?

Because in my life, I have learned three things about people: First, we do not like to stick to facts, we like to stick to whatever it is we believe. Second, even if we know nothing or only parts of the story, we still judge and choose. And last, we have two standards, one which we apply to ourselves, family, and friends, and another that we apply to everybody else.

So, you can read the "Evaluation Report" and believe that Michael Baumann is "unhelpful, negative and difficult to work with", that "he appears to be disengaged and be overly negative in meetings" (14), that "he stands in the way of innovation or change". Yes, you can believe that he single-handedly ruined the Career Centre (15). ... 

Or you can believe that he is a magnificent bastard, that he is indeed the only person who can resuscitate the academic system, make politics ethical, save the global ecology and the global economy, bring world peace, and end world hunger. ...

Or you can believe anything in between. 

But whatever you choose to believe, please, base it on facts, not fantasies. 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ufv-michaels-version-part-2-michael-baumann/ (Accessed: 2 May 2019) 
(2) 90% of employers prefer to hire candidates with work experience (e.g. http://www.naceweb.org/job-outlook/2017-nace-job-outlook-full-report.pdf; Accessed: 2 May 2019). 82% of first-year students at U.F.V. are either working or looking for work (Canadian University Survey Consortium 2013 First-Year Student Survey: Table 22). U.F.V.'s response to this is not to encourage B.A. students to take advantage of paid work within Co-operative Education, but to force them into 120 hours of civic and intercultural engagement exercises, plus four portfolio courses.  (https://www.ufv.ca/calendar/current/ProgramsA-B/ARTS_BA.htm; Accessed: 2 May 2019). 
(3) E.g. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lAtjYjROZ1PB4VYTpkeVykc65lG3EX17/view (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(4) The keynote presentations of both the 2017 and the 2018 U.F.V. Professional Development Day come to mind. I remember the Provost and the A.V.P. Teaching giving standing ovations to a blizzard of long-debunked myths and factual errors. 
(5) MOOCs, nano-credentials, micro-degrees, the "Digital Hub" -- the "Digital Hub" -- the "Digital Hub" come to mind. Or, if you were running a Tech firm, would you recruit somebody whose only interest in Tech so far has been a "5-Week Coding Bridging Program" (https://blogs.ufv.ca/science/2017/10/05/coding-bridgin-program/; Accessed: 2 May 2019). Or, do a quick test: Ask a random U.F.V. faculty member how many "Institutional Learning Outcomes" Senior Administration has prescribed (https://www.ufv.ca/ilos/; Accessed: 2 May 2019). ... Exactly.
(6) https://www.queensu.ca/gazette/media/news-release-queens-first-canadian-university-develop-major-maps (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(7) https://www.cacee.com/2014-2015_Award_Recipients.html (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(8) http://hirewesternu.ca (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(9) Senior Administration at the University of the Fraser Valley: I am the owner of the domain https://hireUFV.ca (Accessed: 2 May 2019). If you are interested in acquiring this domain, here are the costs: $1 + an apology. 
(10) http://www.ufv-aim.ca/ (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(11) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQnNH7I07RY (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(12) https://www.universityaffairs.ca/opinion/in-my-opinion/need-seriously-rethink-concept-final-exams/ (Accessed: 2 May 2019)
(13) https://www.academica.ca/top-ten/it%E2%80%99s-time-rethink-scheduling-final-exams-bauman (Accessed: 2 May 2019) 
(14) I have yet to meet the person that can be both at the same time, "disengaged" AND "overly negative".
(15) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KKVGoL4P9EyqS5AXcLUfL0emeU5cTfb7/view (Accessed: 2 May 2019)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you, my lovely wife, not only for enduring my principles, but also for being the toughest editor a writer can have. I don't know how often you threw out what I considered "pretty good stuff", but it certainly made my argument better. 

Thank you to those who dared to "like" my trilogy, few as you are. Even in the free world it takes courage to show where you stand, especially in the "free" world. (The road to Auschwitz was not paved by indifference, Sir Ian, it was paved by silence.)

And to those without courage: I always wonder why so many of you are so willing to throw away your Constitutional Rights and Freedoms. ... I wish you could swim. Like dolphins. 

02 May 2019

University of the Fraser Valley: Michael's version (Part 2 of 3)


As I said, I had responsibilities beyond putting benevolent smiles on the faces of higher-ranking administrators (1). 

As a public servant, my duty was to the public. As an intellectual working at a university, I was responsible for putting students out into the world that do things competently. Here is the fundamental conflict of any mid-level bureaucrat at a university: You often find yourself in situations where your duty to the public and to students clashes with your interest of self-preservation. 

The sound of no hands clapping

On 15 Apr 2016, I write an email to the Provost in response to his Education Plan. I make three points, one of which is this: "In the Education Plan draft you are referencing Halpern and Hakel (2003). The paper is a good summary of research in various psychological fields, and I agree with all but one statement in it. Yes, faculty members could do better at teaching and learning. But does that mean that universities should [-- here comes the Provost's bizarre idea --] hand "the locus of control for learning" to students who, being students, know even less? In fact, I would argue that some of Halpern and Hakel's suggestions would be rejected by the average student."

On 24 Mar 2017, a day after the approval of a questionable program proposal at the Senate Budget Committee, I write a letter to the V.P. Administration (2): "My point is that committees do serve an important function, namely to protect the institution as a whole against excessive risk and missed opportunity. ... Yet, what I observe in many committees is excessive congeniality. ... It is this excessive congeniality that poses a great risk for the university."

On 20 Jul 2017, I write an email to the V.P. Students: "As you know the Senior Administrator Retreat on U.F.V. Culture will be held on 24 Aug 2017 at Harrison Hot Springs Resort. Ironically the retreat itself is a reflection of the current organizational culture, and the outside perception will be this: Fifty exempt administrators, sequestered at a resort, discussing culture for a day, passing judgements, setting a future direction for everyone. All this while a whole university sits empty, neither faculty nor staff nor union are invited, and no money is available to academic departments to even hold something as simple as a hotdog luncheon for their students." (3)

Whatever the case, I do not enjoy being in a superminority, but I did take my duties seriously, even when higher-ranking administrators did not. If they had done their job, I wouldn't have been obliged.

But as one high-ranking administrator once put it to me: 

"Nobody gets fired at U.F.V. for NOT doing their job."

Groupthink ...

As uncomfortable as situations sometimes were under President Evered, critical voices were at least tolerated as part of the discussion. Under MacLean's regime, even I gave up. Again, three examples:

On 11 May 2018, MacLean is installed as the next president of U.F.V.. I hold a naive hope and consequently attend the ceremony (4). Looking around I notice that although third-level delegates from other universities were given seats on stage, the preceding president, Dr. Evered, was not. What's going on, I wonder (5). And then come MacLean's inaugural words: "Through my experiences, I have learned the value of team work and respect for others[.]"(6) Empty words, humanity's worst scourge.

On 30 November 2018, during a discussion on office space problems the A.V.P. Teaching gets up from her chair and -- hoisting her laptop high above her head -- pronounces: "I'll tell you what an office is today ... THIS IS AN OFFICE!" (7) I know, I know, how can such blatant display of ignorance about basic human needs go unchallenged in a room packed with educated people? Beats me (8).

On 14 Jan 2019, in order to provide feedback on U.F.V.'s visioning process (9), I draft an email to visioning@ufv.ca that I never send. 

"I am struggling to write this. You see, over the years I have been trying to engage with university senior leadership; it has been an exercise in futility. But it is my professional duty, and I will keep my comments short. 

"1: The visioning process -- to move from government mandate, to values, to mission, to vision, to goals (and indicators, and actions) -- is both rational and systematic. The process is not immune to cognitive biases. 

"2: The values identified in the visioning process -- community, excellence, inclusiveness, integrity [(10)] -- are obvious, or should be. This is easily revealed by stating the opposite: What academic institution would state to be anti-community, striving for mediocrity, discriminatory, and ambiguous on integrity? 

"3: The mission as stated so far -- Engaging minds; Building community; Transforming lives -- is not university-specific and may in fact apply to a dance troupe or an old-folks home [(11)]. 

"4: Both values and mission are noble goals, but far from status quo realities at U.F.V.. Words must give way to actions, and senior leaders must be held accountable."

Or fearthink?

A revealing anecdote comes to my mind: A few weeks before my sacking, one high-ranking administrator asked me: "If you could keep your job by going over to MacLean's house and telling her what a great president she is, would you do it?" My answer: "Are you insane?" I then asked her whether she would do it. Her answer: "I AM doing it."(12)

So, remember my spineless accusers from Part 1 of this trilogy? (1) I don't blame them for their cowardice. I am sure their decade-long neglect of both student academic performance and post-graduation professional life could have made them targets (13), and what is easier than blaming a mid-level director? 
 
As for Senior Administration, there are two possibilities: Either they believed the spineless accusers, which would indeed shock me. Or they found me dispensable (14) and thought it useful to "hit the goat to scare the sheep." (15)

There is a lot of self-glorification and empty flattery going around at U.F.V.. Yet what this university oh so desperately needs is critical voices, not in the hallways, but in the room (16). 

To be continued ... 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ufv-michaels-version-part-1-michael-baumann/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019) 
(2) https://drive.google.com/file/d/19CBh3-cn_3HDovTcDqePBVRX1WWor5JD/view (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019) 
(3) Consider that in fiscal year 2018 the U.F.V. Administration spent $39,000 at Harrison Hot Springs Resort & Spa (https://ufv.ca/media/assets/finance/SOFI--Year-Ended-March-2018.pdf; Accessed: 25 Apr 2019). 
(4) It's true, I never considered MacLean an intellectual. But I was sure as an openly gay woman, she has experienced her unfair share of discrimination, as have I, for completely different reasons. I expected an embrace of Humanism, not the abandonment of civility. As I said, I was naive. 
(5) I have asked Dr. Evered about this incident; he never responded. I don't think that he would publicly embarrass MacLean, but I also don't think that he would lie. (To be sure, there never was much love lost between President Evered and me. But if I had found myself being installed as the next president, I would certainly have paid respect to his eight years in office. That is what good leaders do.)
(6) https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2018/05/ufv-welcomes-dr-joanne-maclean-to-presidency-with-installation-ceremony/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019) 
(7) Maybe instead of hoisting her laptop up, she could have used it to look things up, e.g. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/04/airpods-open-plan-offices/588112/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019).
(8) William Boyd (2002) has an interesting hypothesis: "I descended into a form of tolerable apathy -- which I believe all prisoners experience. You surrender your individual spirit to the routine of the institution." A more nefarious thought by other administrators could have been: "If the A.V.P. Teaching is stupid enough to believe what she is saying, she won't put up much resistance when we take space away from her staff."
(9) https://blogs.ufv.ca/visioning/2019/01/11/town-hall-values-and-mission/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019)
(10) I am always suspicious of people who point out their own integrity, and for two reasons: First, integrity is the default; you don't need to point out that you are NOT a liar, a thief, or a murderer. Second, integrity manifests itself in your actions, not in your own judgement of yourself.  
(11) A few will remember that in 2017, after the failed search for a new U.F.V. president in the previous year, I applied for the position and wrote a "draft manifesto". In it I laid out the four simple goals every university should have (https://www.citizenbaumann.ca/2017/08/university-presidency-draft-manifesto.html#Chapter4; Accessed: 25 Apr 2019).
(12) This may explain both attendance and atmosphere at MacLean's townhall meetings. 
(13) E.g. http://news.yorku.ca/2019/04/25/study-finds-more-than-half-of-university-students-feel-they-need-better-basic-skills-to-succeed/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019)
(14) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trust-michael-baumann/ (Accessed: 25 Apr 2019)
(15) Tenzin Gyatso, His Holiness the Dalai Lama (1990, 1998), Freedom in Exile.
(16) Again, MacLean's words ring hollow: "I also look forward to open, honest, and fair discussion that is about ideas, practices, and goals and not about individuals, or at least not ad personam: attacks made on opponents' character as opposed to their arguments." (https://blogs.ufv.ca/announce/files/2018/09/UFV-Part-2-A-university-is-its-people.pdf; Accessed: 25 Apr 2019)

25 April 2019

University of the Fraser Valley: Michael's version (Part 1 of 3)


(With thanks to the late Mr. Richler for motivating this article.)

It is unfortunate, really. 

You see, U.F.V. Senior Administration failed to complete my performance evaluation before they sacked me without cause on 22 Jan 2019 (1,2). So, I had to insist on its completion, and on 7 Feb 2019 I received a summary -- two-and-a-half months late and not even signed. I asked for a meeting to clarify things, but they refused (3).

I know, I know. Can there be anything more boring than somebody else's performance evaluation? I certainly don't want to bore you with my accomplishments and failures (4) or with the "Evaluation Report" (5), but there is the problem of truth and justice. And as the saying goes: A lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets halfway out of bed.

Moreover, performance evaluations tend to crop up IN OTHER PLACES, LATER, and if not literally, at least in spirit: "It's bad. It's really really bad." (Think Trump's voice here, or better, think Mr. Baldwin doing Trump.) This is the fundamental asymmetry in most workplaces: Your supervisor can be vindictive, but what are your options? (6) 

You can hide and pray. Or, if you have a habit of taking good notes, you can set the record straight.

Of course, this is my side of the story. 

The "Evaluation Report"

There are a few things to note about the "Evaluation Report" (5): 

First, it was written by a person who was appointed my SUPERVISOR ONLY ON 1 JUN 2018, unburdened by knowledge of Career Centre operations or the labour market, and with a history of non-co-operation on Career Centre initiatives (7).

Second, there is NO VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE (e.g. datasheets, attributed quotes) attached to the "Evaluation Report". One would assume that a person with a Ph.D. in History from a decent Canadian university knows more about standards of proof.

Third, I named FOURTEEN MEANINGFUL EVALUATORS in my original Statement of Accomplishments and Failures, yet "[t]hirty evaluators received this survey; 14 responded." Webb never informed me which evaluators she had chosen. In fact, I warned against blindly soliciting every Tom, Dick, and Harry quoting Bertrand Russel: "I would rather be reported by my bitterest enemy among philosophers than by a friend innocent of philosophy." (8) So the names of my spineless accusers remain anonymous, and as you know, anything can be taken out of context.  

Fourth, Webb states that "over 12 individuals in total requested individual meetings to provide feedback". (She does sound like Sarah Sanders and her "countless" F.B.I. agents, doesn't she?) Now if "14 responded" and 13 is "over 12", does this mean that only one person filled out the survey? Do Webb's actions constitute A POLICY VIOLATION or is it all just bad writing?

Fifth, the judgement Webb presents is SHARPENED IN THE NEGATIVE INTERPRETATIONS and levelled in the positive, a counting of misses while ignoring the hits (9). In short, Webb is cherry picking.

Sixth, consider that the "Evaluation Report" was completed TWO WEEKS AFTER I posted my "Good bye and good luck" on LinkedIn (1), an article that led Senior Administration to have one of their lawyers call me in what seemed a clumsy attempt at intimidation.

Baumann is "unhelpful, negative and difficult to work with". Is he, though? 

As the director of the Career Centre one of my responsibilities was to understand employer decision making when it comes recruitment, retention, promotion, and termination. Career Centre staff spends a lot of time talking to employers about this, and over the years we have been able to provide students with useful insights. 

That said, when it comes to U.F.V. I have always struggled to understand the hiring. For example, U.F.V. currently has a Vice President External whose only academic credential seems to be a Post-Graduate Diploma from Athabasca University; an Associate V.P. Human Resources with a Master's degree from the University of Phoenix -- the University of Phoenix; an A.V.P. Research who has a rather uninspiring publication record and never received a Tri-Council grant; and an A.V.P. Teaching whose "Ph.D." research on academic dishonesty included 11 subjects -- eleven (10). 

Traditionally universities are meritocracies, if not by law by their own policies. U.F.V. Policy #16 declares that "Consideration of qualifications and appropriate skills to fulfil job requirements will continue to be selection criteria for the hiring or advancement of employees at UFV." (11) -- a statement so weak that it couldn't prevent the appointment of Incitatus. Why is so little expected of administrators at U.F.V.? U.F.V. either has a serious recruitment problem, or something else is going on (12,13).

But to be fair: U.F.V. has a good set of competent employees and a few excellent ones (14). They are found mostly at the faculty level and the staff level. (For obvious reasons I refrain from naming their names here.) As I said before: The University of the Fraser Valley could be a good little university. 

In any case, I grew up in a military house in Austria in the 1970s, and as a child I learned hierarchy early: We salute the rank, not the man! As a mid-level bureaucrat at U.F.V., I was being paid not to hold opinions but to execute orders. 

And I did exactly that. For over a decade. 

But I had responsibilities beyond putting benevolent smiles on the faces of higher-ranking administrators.

To be continued ... 

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/university-fraser-valley-good-bye-luck-michael-baumann/ (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019) 
(2) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trust-michael-baumann/ (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019) 
(3) For a complete timeline see: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AAG03VnlLHAVa4KTqk2qfBQSDwrcf7CE/view (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019)
(4) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KKVGoL4P9EyqS5AXcLUfL0emeU5cTfb7/view (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019)
(5) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lcDYc5QWrRqkTgz7v1H9Fl1-fkCTvDGL/view (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019).
(6) There is no reason to believe that supervisors are more accurate in their judgement about their subordinates than subordinates are about their supervisors. Still, it is OUR SOCIAL NORM that applicants must provide references for past performances, while supervisors do not. 
(7) The cancelled Major Maps project comes to mind quickly, and the cancelled central U.F.V. Career Resources website, and the cancelled Work-Integrated Internship program. On 21 Mar 2017, I recorded: "Webb interested in ARTS 280 and self-promotion." To be fair, in 2014, Webb did support our proposal for a 1-credit course, WORK 101, and although her support was only lukewarm, at least and as far as I know she didn't stonewall it.
(8) Bertrand Russell (1946), History of Western Philosophy. Interestingly this quote was struck from my original Statement of Accomplishments without my knowledge. 
(9) See Gordon Allport and Leo Postman (1947), The Psychology of Rumor. Or simply google "confirmation bias" and "selection bias".
(10) Two dangerous ideas, one from the Royal Society (1660): "On no man's word." The other from Mr. Kant (1784): "Dare to know!", the battle call of the Enlightenment. 
(11) https://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/secretariat/policies/Education-and-Employment-Equity-(16).pdf (Accessed: 18 Apr 2019 ). This policy came into effect in Nov 1993, and has its next review date set for Nov 1998, two decades ago.
(12) Some people have suggested a chumocracy, and there is some circumstantial evidence for that: E.g. the current V.P. External was appointed into his position without a competition. (https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2017/09/craig-toews-takes-on-vp-external-role/; Accessed: 18 Apr 2019); the current A.V.P. Teaching was promoted from a Director level also without a competition (https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2018/05/wideman-now-avp-teaching-and-learning/; Accessed: 18 Apr 2019). As the hiring motives of senior administrators may be diverse, I believe simple classification of governance is difficult. The Board's role in all of this remains an unknown.
(13) The current A.V.P. Teaching was promoted into her position in May 2018 (https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2018/05/wideman-now-avp-teaching-and-learning/; Accessed: 18 Apr 2019), yet in her LinkedIn profile claims to have held it since Jan 2014 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fjIii9PySs4fsighuehjhixs79HB6AL4/view; Accessed: 18 Apr 2019). She would be well-advised to read up on the basics of resume writing (e.g. https://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace/inflated-record-is-not-a-good-look-20190416-p51elf.html; Accessed: 20 Apr 2019) or to book an appointment with the Career Centre. In another of U.F.V.'s ironies, this person also oversees "academic integrity". 
 (14) There is one thing MacLean and I agree on: A university is its people (https://blogs.ufv.ca/announce/2018/09/12/a-university-is-its-people/; Accessed: 18 Apr 2019). Obviously, we interpret this statement very differently.

31 January 2019

University of the Fraser Valley: Trust


(First things first: Thank you to all those who sent their kind words; it has been a rough week, and it means a lot to me.)

Trust. It is an interesting construct. Think about it. Trust is the foundation of civil society.

You trust that your doctor is not prescribing you rat poison, that the engineer knows something about building bridges, that your pilot is not drunk. You trust that your waiter did not spit into your soup, that public servants are not petty thieves (1), that the other driver abides by the STOP sign. You trust that the lawyer is not padding the bill, that your friend is not betraying you, that the zookeeper locked the tiger cage. Even the heroin addict must trust that there is heroin in the syringe, not fentanyl.

As an employee, you trust that if your work is good, you will keep your job (2). My employment was terminated "without cause" on 22 Jan 2019. But I lost trust in my employer much earlier. But when?

It's hard to say. But looking back I would say it was in early October 2018.

On 10 Oct 2018, a trusted U.B.C. colleague and I were discussing U.F.V.'s recent purchase of the Finnegan's Pub property for $9.85 million, and the donation by the sellers to U.F.V. of $1.125 million, and that in 2017 B.C. Assessment had assessed the Finnegan's Pub property at only $3.1 million (3).

My U.B.C. colleague was adamant that the public should know about this. I told him that all the information was in the public domain (4), and that the hallways at U.F.V. were full of talk about it (5). I also told him that while as a public servant my duty is to the public, I would not want to take on this project for two reasons: First, I would be one of the first suspects. And second, I don't lie, and I wanted honest deniability on my side when I walk into my sacking meeting.

In short, by 10 Oct 2018, I already thought that a sacking was in the offing.

Other people have suggested that my head came on the chopping block the day I dared to defend my former supervisor Ms. G.. And that it is that day that I should have lost trust in U.F.V.'s administration. The day was 23 May 2018.

To be sure, Ms. G. was a tough boss, sometimes a difficult boss. But I come from a country where failure to speak up for fellow citizens has led to unspeakable tragedy. Consequently, a long time ago I decided to always speak up for the weaker party. 

On 1 May 2018, Dr. Joanne MacLean became the new president of the University of the Fraser Valley. On 22 May, she terminated the employment of Ms. G.. On 23 May, she called me into her office for a short meeting regarding bureaucratic formalities. Before I left, I handed President MacLean my letter titled "In defence of [Ms. G.]".

This was the last direct interaction I would ever have with President MacLean, except for a previously booked twenty-minute meet-and-greet two days later where the air was thick and my letter was unmentioned.

Maybe this letter did seal my fate. (Would I write it again? Of course.)

So yes, it was either around 10 October when I lost my trust in U.F.V.'s administration, or 23 May when I should have lost it.

Or was it earlier? …

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) https://www.leg.bc.ca/content/CommitteeDocuments/41st-parliament/LAMC/2019-01-21/2019-01-21_SpeakersReport.pdf (Accessed: 31 Jan 2019)
(2) I will not bore you with details, but I have assembled a formidable group of individuals at the Career Centre. Over the past ten years, we worked, we laughed, and we cried together. You will find not a single department at U.F.V. that is working together as well as the people of the Career Centre. No exaggeration.
(3) Imagine you are the Vice President, Cars and Donations at ABC University and your job is to buy cars and bring in donations. Imagine that one day you see this old Hyundai Pony, and you really like this Hyundai Pony, and you find its owner and you ask: "How much for that Hyundai Pony?" And the owner says: "$1,000." And you say: "What if I give you $100,000, and you donate $98,000 back to ABC University, and so we both win?" And the owner says: "Okay."
(4) https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2018/09/ufv-purchases-former-finnegans-property/, https://blogs.ufv.ca/blog/2018/10/esposito-family-donates-1-125-million-to-ufv-to-support-scholarships-innovation-and-entrepreneurship/, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fjVT1ehLWg3ChfPLk20aTIFTgn0DLtcX/view (All accessed: 31 Jan 2019). Direct online look-up for the Finnegan's Pub property through the B.C. Assessment website ceased some time after the transfer of the property to the University of the Fraser Valley.
(5) The mystery was not the bystander effect -- "Everybody knows; nobody acts." --, a psychological effect administrations can usually rely on. The mystery was that U.F.V.'s administration did not seem to care about the bad optics.

24 January 2019

University of the Fraser Valley, good bye and good luck.


[UPDATE: 28 Jan 2019, 14:00: I just received a call from one of U.F.V.'s lawyers urging me to take down this LinkedIn article. I declined. However, in order to avoid "misunderstandings", I have changed footnote (4).]

(This is odd. In my forty or so LinkedIn articles I never mentioned my workplace even once. I deal in universals, not particulars; that's why. But the stronger party usually controls the message, which, as we have learned from the Trump White House, is not necessarily equal to telling the truth. In any case ...) 

The University of the Fraser Valley could be a good little university.

I wrote a draft of this article on 15 December last year. My annual raise didn't come through with the 14 Dec 2018 pay, and the posturing around this issue sounded very much like an overture to one of the underhanded sackings that have become the hallmark of U.F.V. (1).

Everything at U.F.V. is fine, until the day it is not. No warning, no heart, no soul (2).

And I was right. Today, my unsuspecting colleagues will receive an email stating: "Please be advised that Michael Baumann is no longer with UFV."

I was terminated "without cause", which is a euphemism for "We couldn't find anything wrong with your performance, and believe us, we tried." I was told that the termination had to do with "fit", which is a euphemism for "We don't like the way you think about things."

There is some irony here. You see, in its visioning process the U.F.V. administration proclaims (3): "Inclusivity: We welcome everyone, showing consideration and respect for all experiences and ideas." (4)

Besides, who cares what a mid-level bureaucrat thinks. I am being paid not to hold opinions but to execute orders (5).

(I do admit that my confidence in my former supervisor was never great and for good reason. In her previous position she used to be the chief stonewaller of collaborations between the Career Centre and the College of Arts. This makes trust difficult. Still, it is the job of a leader to earn trust, not the job of a subordinate to develop trust out of thin air. To be fair, she did a good job working through a major budget consolidation.)

That said, it's hard to get sacked.

It is harder still when the corporate machine forbids proper good byes between people who worked together, laughed together, and cried together for the past ten years. I am not sure that this adds a lot of credibility to a vision of "building community"(3). Enough said.

With this posting I want to thank all the competent faculty, staff, and students I had the joy to work with. You know who you are.

The University of the Fraser Valley could be a good little university.

Keep up the good fight!

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) Mr. N., Mr. B., Mr. O., Ms. S., Mr. L., another Mr. L., Mr. A., Ms. G., Dr. D., I, ..., You? Some may take comfort in the knowledge that some of the people on this list were instrumental in somebody else's sacking. It would be a false comfort.
(2) As James Comey put it in his 2018 book: "[Ethical leadership] is about building workplaces where standards are high and fear is low." From my observations I conclude that U.F.V. seems to be about the exact opposite.
(3) https://blogs.ufv.ca/visioning/2019/01/11/town-hall-values-and-mission/ (Accessed: 24 Jan 2019)
(4) To be honest, I don't know what to do with this statement -- think [other ideas and opinions that may not be aligned with acceptable social norms].
(5) Thinking back, in November 2018 I did express a strong opinion on the treatment of Indigenous peoples, stating that it is high time to do something about the injustice, not sit around in yet another workshop full of people who are NOT INDIGENOUS. This is the third betrayal of the Indigenous peoples of Canada.

17 January 2019

Leadership: Nature red in tooth and claw


I am a zoologist by training, and as such my expertise lies in animal behaviour and system dynamics. I know little about the psychology of leadership, except for a couple of decades of informal observation. That's why two weeks ago I asked this question on LinkedIn:

Given that LinkedIn is so rich in leadership wisdoms -- some good, many trite -- tell me, why is the world so poor in good leaders?

The results are disappointing. In spite of 175 or so views, few tried to answer my question. But then many employees are LinkedIn with their bosses and may therefore be reluctant to attract attention to themselves (1).

In any case, I myself must give the question a shot.

PROPOSITION #1: I AM WRONG.

This is the null hypothesis, if you will, and it is always a possibility: There is nothing interesting going on, the world is in fact not poor but rich in good leaders. And it is just I who wouldn't recognize good leadership if it hit me in the face.

But why then would the world be so rich in leadership advice (2)? If good leadership is a ubiquitous phenomenon, why are people spending time writing books, developing courses, or designing websites about it. We usually don't spend intellectual effort on things that are trivial (3).

That said, one human's dream is another human's nightmare.

PROPOSITION #2: BAD LEADERS DON'T LEARN.

I have yet to meet the bad leader who doesn't think she/he is a good leader. And if you think you are a good at something, you wouldn't pick up a book or take a course to teach you the basics. There are two forces at play, both revealed in a study by Kruger and Dunning in 1999 (4).

First: "[T]hose with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it."

Second: "[O]ne would have thought negative feedback would have been inevitable at some point in their academic career. So why had they not learned? One reason is that people seldom receive negative feedback about their skills and abilities from others in everyday life[.]"

Promotion may lead to the delusion of infallibility. True information rarely makes it up the chain of command. How many people do you know who told their bosses that they are morons, or monsters, or marionettes?

PROPOSITION #3: GOOD LEADERSHIP IS HARD.

What is good leadership, anyway? My incomplete list is this, but make your own: 

A good leader is competent and diligent in work and judgement.
A good leader is confident, self-reflective, and humble.
A good leader is honest and transparent.
A good leader is open to criticism and ideas.
A good leader is aware what is going on in the organization.
A good leader gives credit and takes blame.
A good leader is kind, and tough, and fair, and can laugh about herself/himself.
A good leader builds workplaces "where standards are high and fear is low" (5).
A good leader knows her/his subordinates and protects them when necessary.
...

Nobody is perfect, and that is all right. It takes talent, and education, and experience to get better at leadership. None of this matters, however, if your behaviour is not genuine.

And one thing is certain: If your natural inclination is to be selfish or lazy, to lie and to hide things, to be nasty or disinterested, leadership is not for you.

PROPOSITION #4: LEADERSHIP -- NATURE RED IN TOOTH AND CLAW

The question is this: How do so many bad leaders reach and maintain their positions?

This is a problem of natural selection, or rather unnatural selection: The character traits that cause people to move up the hierarchy may be very different from the character traits that make people good leaders (6).

I will leave it to you to explore which character traits and professional skills lead to promotion at your organization -- competence/sycophancy, humility/arrogance, honesty/pretence/scheming, realism/unbridled optimism, et cetera.

It may be argued that it is half a miracle that a few good people make it to the top. Not necessarily. Good leaders will hire good people and sack bad ones. Bad leaders will hire bad people and lose good ones (7). Consequently, we should expect to see in nature two extremes, meritocracies and kakistocracies.

Does that mean that we may be condemned to suffer bad leaders (8). I am not sure. Whether they like it or not, leaders usually feel obliged to agree that leaders should be held to the highest standards.

Let's start holding our leaders to the highest standards. Accountability should scare at least the worst people.

NOTES AND REFERENCES
(1) I believe it is fair to say that in the history of humankind people were usually shot for the questions they asked, not for the answers they gave. Still, silence is golden.
(2) As of 17 Jan 2019, amazon.com lists over 60,000 books for "leadership", there are an unbelievable 23,853 groups on LinkedIn that contain the word "leadership", and a Google search on "good leadership" returned "About 4,560,000 results".
(3) One should never underestimate the capacity of universities to develop programs in about anything. As Robert A. Heinlein has his protagonist say in his 1961 novel: "But when they began handing out doctorates in comparative folk dancing and advanced flyfishing, I became too stinkin' proud to use the title. I won't touch watered whiskey and take no pride in watered down degrees." 1961, Ladies and Gentlemen, 1961.
(4) J. Kruger and D. Dunning (1999), Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77(6): 1121 - 1134.
(5) "Ethical leadership … is about building workplaces where standards are high and fear is low." J. Comey (2018), A Higher Loyalty: xi.
(6) "But what we need is that the only men to get power should be men who do not love it[.]" Plato (ca. 375 B.C.E.), The Republic: The Simile of the Cave: 521b.
(7) It is the privilege of leaders to hire their subordinates. But we can also imagine a world where the workforce elects their leader. In fact, that is what we are doing in representative democracies.
(8) Is it better to have a bad leader or none at all? With the emergence of new hierarchies where everybody is a leader and few do the actual work, something to think about.