昨天科学网置顶的两篇博文都与英国帝国理工的 Stefan Grimm 教授不幸事件有关。一篇是刘洋博主的【 Publish or perish 下教授之殇 】，另一篇是激光戴的博文【 帝国理工 Stefan Grimm 教授事件的一点背景和真相 】 帝国理工在英国是仅次于牛津、剑桥的世界名校。帝国理工医学院毒理学教授 Stefan Grimm 今年 9 月去世，终年 51 岁。在去世大约数周之后，他的一封延迟发送的电子邮件群发给了同事和世界其他地方的同行。邮件的主题是 How Professors are treated at Imperial College （伦敦帝国学院如何对待教授）。 他在信中讲述了自己的经历——将在一年内被解雇，原因是他虽然成功发表了许多篇论文，但没有取得多少研究收入。发表或毁灭的研究文化被发表和毁灭的大学企业化管理所替代。 Grimm 教授称，他今年 3 月收到了最后通牒，要求每年有 20 万英镑的研究收入。 我没有资格评价西方大学的评价体制，因为国内正在亦步亦趋向西方学习。也许把人逼死属于个例，和制度无关。 去年曾经看到一个采访报道，是《俄罗斯报》记者采访纽约州立大学教授阿尔乔姆·奥加诺夫（ Artem Oganov ）。 Artem R. Oganov 是一个挺牛的教授， 75 年的， 2010 年就是正教授了。国际晶体学联合会（ IUCr ）材料晶体学委员会主席，一堆的 NS 、 PNAS 、 PRL 文章。 采访报道的网址： http://tsrus.cn/keji/2013/06/28/25531.html Artem Oganov 教授 1997 年毕业于莫斯科大学， 2002 年在英国伦敦学院获得博士学院， 2002-2007 年执教于瑞士苏黎世联邦理工学院， 2008 年起执教于美国纽约州立大学石溪分校， 2010 年晋升正教授。 在这篇采访报道中， Artem Oganov 教授对西方特别是美国大学的科学体系进行了点评，当然是一家之言了，摘录如下： 1、关于在西方工作的体会， Oganov 教授说 ： 【 认为西方总是敞开怀抱欢迎所有人的想法是完全错误的。西方的科学体系极为严酷，会将你的全部能量吸干。举例来说，助理教授任期为六年，这期间人要一直承受巨大的压力，因为你不知道最后是否会永久保住这个职称。如果不能，就会被辞掉，也就会失业。因此，需要和所有人交好、像奴隶一样工作、为高校赚钱、获得资助金，高校则会从中提取一定的比例。如果你不这样做，就会被淘汰。】 2、关于美国的科学体系， Oganov 教授的评价： 【 美国的科学体系离“最佳”相差甚远，特别是这一体系将教授都变成了职业经理人和官僚。当然，教授要为自己挑选博士和博士后研究生、给他们课题并对成果进行讨论，但却已经几乎不做任何具体的科研工作了。工作都是由最年轻的、几乎没有任何地位的助手来做，我们前面说过，他们就像半个奴隶一样地工作。】 正如已经去世的这位帝国理工的教授在邮件里写到的：他认为大学不再是大学而是企业了，研究人员就是挤出钱的奶牛，他的一位同事对此评价说，“ 他们对待我们就像是一坨屎 。”（ One of my colleagues here at the College whom I told my story looked at me, there was a silence, and then said: “Yes, they treat us like sh*t”. ）
位于英国伦敦的世界名校，帝国理工的Stefan Grimm教授，在无尚高贵典雅的令人尊敬尊重和敬仰的英国女王-伊丽莎白二世的眼皮子底下（帝国理工校园到英国国会和皇宫是散步距离），因为近期科研经费达不到他所在院系的考核要求，受到挤兑穿小鞋甚至威胁开人的心灵折磨，最终采取行动：在家中（自杀）身亡。在无限可爱的带着无数糖果精美礼物的圣诞老人来临前夕，此事超过一颗重磅核弹，在国际科学界的中心爆炸，引起超级风暴，目前正在第一波，随后会有第二波、第三波热潮。本博将持续关注，并加上自己的点评和解说。 先前两篇博文： 刘洋， Publish or perish下教授之殇 帝国理工Stefan Grimm教授事件的一点背景和真相 今天看到最新（昨天）的帝国理工的一封官方声明（全文附在最后），非常重要的文件，里面有几点需要强调： 1。提到对Stefan Grimm教授的开人程序中还处于非正式的召见过程，in formal review，没有到达正式开人的 formal review，并且这个过程是帝国理工进行绩效考核的标准程序。 not under formal review nor had he been given any notice of dismissal. It is standard practice at Imperial to conduct both informal and formal performance management. 2。提到对Stefan Grimm教授提供的可能帮助。我个人的理解就是要赶你走的意思。 Professor Grimm’s line manager met with him on a number of occasions to see how the College could help him to develop more competitive grant applications, for example through internal peer-人eview, collaborations and letters of support. Discussions included talking about the best place for him to do his science, both inside Imperial and outside, and, with Professor Grimm’s permission, his line manager made enquiries about opportunities on his behalf. 3。副校长发话，暗示对待员工不够好。 P rofessor James Stirling CBE FRS, Provost of Imperial College London, said:“Imperial seeks to give every member of its community the opportunity to excel and to create a supportive environment in which their careers may flourish. Where we become aware that the College is falling short of this standard of support to its members, we will act.” 帝国理工的副校长 James Stirling 说：帝国理工致力于提供每位员工好机会让他们施展才华，给员工创造一个支持性环境使得他们的职业生涯能够辉煌。如果我们认识到做得不够之处——达不到支持标准，我们会采取行动。 这句话说得非常政治非常天衣无缝，放之四海皆准的大道理，解读很费脑筋：首先，要开Stefan Grimm教授说明对员工支持不够，妨碍施展才华；第二，也可以理解为已经对Stefan Grimm教授尽力支持了，学校已经做到了最好。 顺便八卦下，看到副校长 James Stirling的名字很熟悉，所以好奇地去网站上看了一下介绍，面孔很熟悉，原来是这个哥们。他跳槽到剑桥大学去了以后，剩下的办公室曾经被南京来访问的小周用过一段时间。结果去年（2013）年8月份从剑桥跳槽到了帝国理工。 4。帝国理工正在开始进行内部审查，然后看看能够吸取教训。这些话感到很套话。 the College conducts appropriate reviews in order to see whether wider lessons may be drawn. Last month, following Professor Grimm’s death, Imperial’s Provost tasked the Director of HR and one of the College’s senior elected academic representatives to review relevant College policies, procedures and the support available to staff. Their report will be considered by a senior group led by the Provost and the College will move swiftly to implement any recommendations. 声明全文如下： http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_4-12-2014-18-0-17 Statement on Professor Stefan Grimm by Caroline Davis 04 December 2014 Members of Imperial's community may be aware of media reports of the tragic loss of Stefan Grimm, professor of toxicology in the Faculty of Medicine. Professor Grimm’s work identified genes and proteins that regulate the survival of cells, and may in the future help improve our understanding of cancer. He was a valued member of the Faculty of Medicine, highly respected by colleagues and students. The news of Professor Grimm’s death at the end of September came as a great shock to the College community. Senior colleagues have offered their deepest condolences to Stefan’s family on behalf of the College, and extend those to everyone affected by this tragedy. The statutory authorities are investigating Professor Grimm’s death and the College will continue to provide all the assistance it can. Contrary to claims appearing on the internet, Professor Grimm’s work was not under formal review nor had he been given any notice of dismissal. It is standard practice at Imperial to conduct both informal and formal performance management. Professor Grimm’s line manager met with him on a number of occasions to see how the College could help him to develop more competitive grant applications, for example through internal peer-review, collaborations and letters of support. Discussions included talking about the best place for him to do his science, both inside Imperial and outside, and, with Professor Grimm’s permission, his line manager made enquiries about opportunities on his behalf. As with all serious and tragic events involving staff or students, the College conducts appropriate reviews in order to see whether wider lessons may be drawn. Last month, following Professor Grimm’s death, Imperial’s Provost tasked the Director of HR and one of the College’s senior elected academic representatives to review relevant College policies, procedures and the support available to staff. Their report will be considered by a senior group led by the Provost and the College will move swiftly to implement any recommendations. Members of the community will be informed of the outcomes of the review in early 2015, and comments will be invited on the College’s proposed response. Professor James Stirling CBE FRS, Provost of Imperial College London, said:“Imperial seeks to give every member of its community the opportunity to excel and to create a supportive environment in which their careers may flourish. Where we become aware that the College is falling short of this standard of support to its members, we will act.” Staff and students are reminded of the resources available to them offering support with personal or work issues – please see details in the sidebar (right). Reporter Caroline Davis Communications and Public Affairs CONTACT DETAILS Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 6699 Email: c.davis@imperial.ac.uk
昨天一天很忙没有太光顾科学网，晚间稍微注意到刘洋博主的， Publish or perish下教授之殇 ，也没有认真想。睡前发现谢力博主公开问讯我的看法，于是回头认真看了一遍刘洋的博文，给了谢力博主一些认真的回复。现在发现谢力博主隐藏了那篇博文，希望他能重新把我的评论贴出来。 总的来说，这篇博文只是一面之词，里面太多疑点，更重要的是，信中描述的情况根本不符合英国的 和谐社会 现实。 搜索到更多情况，全部英文贴在最下面，这里给出一点细节。 英国近年来受到世界科研风气的影响，明显有点追逐论文数量之嫌，但是还是很照顾质量的，简单的说：1。高引用指数的论文希望多发，2。高质量的重要重大突破工作依然鼓励（这样论文发表的期刊引用指数可能不够高），3。最看重从外面拿钱（基金）的实力。 实际上，几乎所有大学都有一些人混日子的，一辈子到退休都没有拿到过一个基金，这一点都不奇怪。 但是，很强的大学中很强的系/学院，强手如林，都有自己的小圈子文化，混日子很可能是不行的。 帝国理工应该不是一个容易混日子的大学，特别作为一个小领域的教授，可能没有椅子教授（chair professor）的名，但是要有椅子教授的实：你自己的课题组要做得好，还要带领小领域的团队，包括讲师到教授的一帮兄弟哥们的课题组，都要做得不错。如果只是一个个体户（单个的课题组）恐怕在帝国理工这样的环境中，多乎哉，不多也！ 一位这样的教授，通常把好几个组组织起来联合申请一个课题（科研团队托拉斯），这样更容易拿到，并且是大船，有了大风大浪也比较平稳。有了这样的结构，系/学院领导也很难去动其中一个小课题组，也不会那样做。因为这个集体中总会有弱的，但是总体很强，这足够了。 我本人不知道Stefan Grimm教授的课题组是怎样的，他那里是不是有大船我也不清楚，如果他是一个个体户，被人抓到小辫子整一把，也是可以理解的。但是要知道，50岁的年龄是黄金时期（具体这里不说了，超过55岁也有真正的危险），好几年拿不到基金，是不可想象的，特别是在帝国理工这样的环境。 关于开人，英国的开人过程绝对不是粗暴的，这点国内的绝大多数是根本不了解的，两国文化杂这里很冲突。 参考下面的英文资料和常识，大概过程这样： 1。好几年都没有达到要求，系里会注意到，可能开会或者群发邮件中会提醒所有人，请大家注意满足条件； 2。下一步，可能有专意的提醒。如果有正常反应让系里了解目前的情况，后面的步骤就没有了。 3。系里举行一个非正式的面对面召见， informal interview，讨论严峻情况，要求对策。如果反应正确，系里清楚了解并理解，后面的步骤就没有了。 4。3 中的过程没有效果，那就是一个 formal interview，管理方很严肃告诉你，你达不到工作要求，需要考虑被开。这时候还有很多机会和时间抗辩，并采取行动改善工作，完全可能扳回来，参见5。 5。4过后一段时间，会看实际进展如何，可能继续走程序，也可能收回开人的意愿。 6。正式发出通知，你被开了，你的工资到什么时候结束，教授估计最少6个月。到了这个地步，就算有机会也没有人有心情扳回来了，树挪死人挪活。 看了下面的英文资料，得出的印象： 系里发现Stefan Grimm教授好几年没有外来资助，而Stefan Grimm教授也递交出去很多申请，但是都没有中。 帝国理工的这个系要求每位教授平均每年进帐基金20万镑，要求不算高，相信对该系讲师应该不是这样。就这样的学科这样的牛校，才要求平均每年进帐基金20万镑，有点偏低。 比如我所在的物理学科，一项国家基金一般略微超过30万镑三年，平均就是10万镑每年。如果一个像样大学的教授就靠这样的收入，不算丢人，但是真的没有足够的脸面在大家面前晃。50岁左右的教授一般能得到一个项目大于50万镑三年期（平均就17万镑），同时还有小项目。 再举个例子，中国科学院的北京物理所，大概60个课题组（每个课题组最少一个研究员一个副研博后学生若干），如果某一年某个课题组没有重点项目和重大项目在研，只有几个面上项目，很明显，该课题组长真的没有足够的脸面在大家面前晃，还是等人少的时候低头快速走路，少让大家看见。如果连续几年都这样，所长或者学术委员会的头头就会找你喝茶了，嘿嘿，意思大家都知道。如果谈话过后，某位50岁的课题组长就像帝国理工Stefan Grimm教授这样整点事情，结果也是这样。 希望现在大家明白些了吧？ 下面英文的信息，两条很重要，就是系主任说，Stefan Grimm教授打算跳槽，他会尽力支持。 “You have previously initiated discussions in our meetings regarding opportunities outside of Imperial College and I know you have been exploring opportunities elsewhere,” he adds. “Should this be the direction you wish to pursue, then I will do what I can to help you succeed.” 这里说，系主任准备组织同事帮助他，通过内部评审，合作或者写推荐信等方式帮助他的项目申请，这些大家都应该很熟悉了。 As part of the informal review process, “Martin Wilkins met with on a number of occasions to see how the college could help him to develop competitive grant applications, for example, through internal peer-review, collaborations and letters of support,” the spokesman said. 以下英文原文： Imperial College professor Stefan Grimm ‘was given grant income target’ Emails with manager reveal details of review placed on academic found dead in September A researcher at Imperial College London who was found dead in September had been told he was “struggling to fulfil the metrics” of a professorial post at the institution. An email sent in March to Stefan Grimm, formerly professor of toxicology in the Faculty of Medicine at the university, who died on 25 September, outlines the details of his “informal review process”, which include bringing in an “attributable share” of ￡200,000 per year in research funding and being awarded at least one programme grant as principal investigator in the following 12 months. Professor Grimm was found dead in Northwood, Middlesex, in September, and an inquest was opened and adjourned at the West London District Coroner’s Court on 8 October. The email, sent by Martin Wilkins, professor of clinical pharmacology and head of the division of experimental medicine at Imperial (published in full below), states that any “significant funding” attributable to Professor Grimm had ended, and that although applications for “many grants” had been submitted, Professor Grimm had “been unsuccessful in persuading peer-review panels that you have a competitive application”. “Your dedication to seek funding is not in doubt but as time goes by, this can risk becoming a difficult situation from which to extricate oneself,” Professor Wilkins writes. “In other words, grant committees can become fatigued from seeing a series of unsuccessful applications from the same applicant.” It continues: “I am of the opinion that you are struggling to fulfil the metrics of a Professorial post at Imperial College which include maintaining established funding in a programme of research with an attributable share of research spend of ￡200k and must now start to give serious consideration as to whether you are performing at the expected level of a Professor at Imperial College.” Professor Wilkins says that he is “committed to doing what I can to help you succeed and will meet with you monthly to discuss your progression and success in achieving the objective outlined”. “You have previously initiated discussions in our meetings regarding opportunities outside of Imperial College and I know you have been exploring opportunities elsewhere,” he adds. “Should this be the direction you wish to pursue, then I will do what I can to help you succeed.” The email constitutes the “start of informal action in relation to your performance”, Professor Wilkins states, and adds that should Professor Grimm “fail to meet the objective outlined, I will need to consider your performance in accordance with the formal College procedure for managing issues of poor performance”. Professor Wilkins’ email - shared with Times Higher Education by Imperial - was distributed to a number of associates of Professor Grimm, and was sent from an email account in Stefan Grimm’s name. The email also contained what appear to be the final thoughts of Professor Grimm ahead of his death. The text of this section of the email has already been published in a blog by David Colquhoun, emeritus professor of pharmacology at University College London. The message was sent on 21 October, several weeks after the death. But a spokesman for Imperial College said he had no reason to believe that the email, in Professor Grimm’s name, was not genuine. It claims that Professor Grimm had been told he was to be dismissed by Imperial, and gives more detail about the terms of his informal performance review (the email is published in full below). It also suggests that a PhD student that Professor Grimm had been planning to take on was to be told there was no longer a place available. “He waited so long to work in our group and I will never be able to tell him that this should now not happen,” the email says. “What these guys don’t know is that they destroy lives. Well, they certainly destroyed mine.” A spokesman for Imperial said that, contrary to assertions elsewhere, Professor Grimm was not under formal review nor had he been given any notice of dismissal. “It is standard practice in higher education institutions to conduct both informal and formal performance management. In this tragic case, the process was at the informal stage,” he said. He added that all recipients of the message ostensibly sent by Professor Grimm had been contacted within 24 hours of receipt, and that the email had been shared with the authorities. As part of the informal review process, “Martin Wilkins met with on a number of occasions to see how the college could help him to develop competitive grant applications, for example, through internal peer-review, collaborations and letters of support,” the spokesman said. “Discussions included talking about the best place for him to do his science, both inside Imperial and outside, and it is a fact that, with Professor Grimm’s permission, Martin made enquiries about opportunities on his behalf. During this period, at Professor Grimm’s request, members of the Faculty of Medicine provided extra help with grant applications and other support.” He added that, as previously stated, “Imperial’s provost has asked the director of HR and one of the college’s senior elected academic representatives to review the relevant college policies and procedures.” The report will be “considered by a senior group led by the provost and the college will move swiftly to implement any recommendations” he said. chris.parr@tesglobal.com Emails sent by Martin Wilkins to Stefan Grimm Email 1 Date: 10 March 2014 Dear Stefan I am writing following our recent meetings in which we discussed your current grant support and the prospects for the immediate future. The last was our discussion around your PRDP, which I have attached. As we discussed, any significant external funding you had has now ended. I know that you have been seeking further funding support with Charities such as CRUK and the EU commission but my concern is that despite submitting many grants, you have been unsuccessful in persuading peer-review panels that you have a competitive application. Your dedication to seek funding is not in doubt but as time goes by, this can risk becoming a difficult situation from which to extricate oneself. In other words, grant committees can become fatigued from seeing a series of unsuccessful applications from the same applicant. I am of the opinion that you are struggling to fulfil the metrics of a Professorial post at Imperial College which include maintaining established funding in a programme of research with an attributable share of research spend of ￡200k p.a and must now start to give serious consideration as to whether you are performing at the expected level of a Professor at Imperial College. Over the course of the next 12 months I expect you to apply and be awarded a programme grant as lead PI. This is the objective that you will need to achieve in order for your performance to be considered at an acceptable standard. I am committed to doing what I can to help you succeed and will meet with you monthly to discuss your progression and success in achieving the objective outlined. You have previously initiated discussions in our meetings regarding opportunities outside of Imperial College and I know you have been exploring opportunities elsewhere. Should this be the direction you wish to pursue, then I will do what I can to help you succeed. Please be aware that this constitutes the start of informal action in relation to your performance, however should you fail to meet the objective outlined, I will need to consider your performance in accordance with the formal College procedure for managing issues of poor performance (Ordinance -D8) which can be found at the following link.http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/secretariat/collegegovernance/provisions/ordinances/d8 Should you have any questions on the above, please do get in touch. Best wishes Martin Email 2 Date: 18 September 2014 Dear Stefan We need to find a time to discuss PhD students. I gather that you have one in post and have plans for a second. I know that you have been seeking external funding but I have concerns about running a research programme based on students. Perhaps we can find a time to discuss tomorrow or Monday, so that I can understand how these students will be looked after. Best wishes Martin http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/imperial-college-professor-stefan-grimm-was-given-grant-income-target/2017369.article
标签: 帝国理工
