How to improve your GPA in Macedonia

A new law was  passed today in Macedonia to help students improve their grade point average. Namely, if you graduated from a university long time ago with a GPA of, let's say, 7.5, and your employer requires you to have a GPA of at least 8.0, worry not! You can go back to your former professors and ask that you take a final exam to improve your grade. You can do this for a maximum of five courses. Remember, you can do this long after you have graduated and you have already received your diploma.

Why this new law? Well, apparently if you want to apply for a position of a judge or a public prosecutor, you need to attend an Academy, and you can't apply with a GPA below 8.0. Too many positions went unfilled for a long time because there weren't enough candidates fulfilling the GPA requirement, and the government felt this was the best of all possible solutions. Unfortunately, this law is not limited to those candidates. Since former graduates have nothing to lose one should expect thousands of them to start hitting the books and going back to college. Can you imagine the chaos this might cause at the universities? Is there anything of this sort possible anywhere else?

On the firing of foreign professors at UIST Ohrid

Right before the beginning of the new school year (2011) three foreign professors were fired at the University for Information Science and Technology in Ohrid. The news media got hold of it, a meeting held by two of the dismissed professors and a couple government ministers was secretly recorded by someone and posted on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz3c1Nnv9R8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mro-B7KWdHI

The true circumstances for the firing of the foreign professors will probably be never be made public. Let these facts be known, however.

During its first year of operation (2009/2010), the university hired six foreign professors and one Macedonian professor. By the end of the second year every single one of this group of foreign professors was fired. No one was given a reason beyond being informed that their contract would not be renewed. This actually happened after each one of them went through the legal process of being selected by a committee formed by the university, and after being confirmed by the university senate at the request of the university Rector. By the end of the second year (2010/2011) additional five foreign professors left the university. Four were fired, one left willingly.

During 2010/2011 the university had 10 foreign professors and one Macedonian on its staff. Of the ten foreign professors, eight did not continue their employment at the university into the next academic year. Whichever way you look at it, this does not speak well for the university.

In this posting I would like to present few documents related to the firing of the current batch of three foreign professors, and readers can make up their minds as to the circumstances and the justification for the firing.

Below is a letter from professor Musgrave addressed to the Minister of Education regarding the circumstances of his firing.

From: Musgrave Dr Clyde <drclyde@me.com>

Date: September 16, 2011 2:17:40 PM CDT

To: minister@mon.gov.mk

Friday, September 16, 2011

Minister Pance Kralev

Minister of Education & Science

st. Mito - Jasmin bb

1000 Skopje

Macedonia

Dear Minister:

My friends and associates have told me that you are a gentleman and an honorable man with great integrity and great leadership skills.  While working as a USAID volunteer, I very quickly grew to love the country of Macedonia and its people. When I was offered the opportunity to help the fledgling University of Information, Science and Technology (UIST), and teach your young people, I made a very difficult decision to live away from the USA, so that I could help your country again. As you can understand, this decision was not made lightly, so it is with deep regret that I write to you to tell you that I have found egregious abuse of power within the university system. 

During the last days, I have written and re-written this letter several times; I hope this version shows you that I want you to succeed, I want UIST to succeed, I want the students at UIST to succeed and I want the Macedonian people to succeed in the global marketplace.  From my experience and those of other professors with whom I have worked, the University’s success is in danger from within.

This letter is divided into several parts; 1) an overview from our perspective (former foreign professors, students, associates of the University, associates of other Macedonian Universities, and certain government officials), 2) a summary of what happened in my particular case as well as others 3) what we would like as far as a peaceful, equitable resolution and finally, 4) what we are prepared to do if an equitable solution can not be reached

1. Overview

It appears to all of us that many laws regarding the administration and operation of a University are being broken.  Blatant revenge and intimidation were too common under the previous Rector, and are now being used regularly at UIST by the new Rector and his new consultants. I will not go into more detail at this time, but we have documentation from the past two years to support our claims.  

2. Summary of actions against us

a) On September 1, 2011 (Thursday), during a legal Senate meeting, the Rector brought up for discussion the addition of three new Senate members. Two of these candidates were legally ineligible to be Senate members because they were not members of the faculty.  When Professor Zemon advised Rector Davcev of this technicality, the Rector formed a committee, usurping the power of the Senate, and demanded that we vote to accept. We suggested that it would be better to follow the law and appoint Deans of the faculty and then let the Deans appoint new Senate members. At this point, when the vote was a tie of three for and three neutral, Rector Davcev asked his legal advisor if there was an issue with the legality of my employment. She replied that my diploma was not on file. Rector Davcev then asked me to produce a diploma.  I said I would very gladly give it to his staff by Monday or Tuesday the 5th or the 6th of September (even though I had already produced my diplomas prior to the time of my hiring, and my contract does not require me to submit diplomas). The Rector asked me to excuse myself from the Senate meeting until I produced my diploma.  He then held the vote, which of course passed with his majority. I have sent transcripts for all four of my degrees prior to being hired; transcripts are used in the EU, and the USA and are the official authentication of attendance and graduation and are in accordance with the Bologna accords - not diplomas. 

On the 2nd of September I received a letter, by email dated the 1st of September, from Jordan who was not then an employee of the University stating that I was fired as of the 1st of September for not producing my diploma. I would agree that terminating me for poor performance would be perfectly valid, but that was not alleged. I did ask verbally and by email if the foreign professors could be paid on time rather than waiting two or more months to be paid. Although the Rector assured us all that he was taking steps to correct this late payment situation, nothing happened. Perhaps asking to be paid properly caused me to be terminated. There are several instances of contract violations on the part of UIST, the Rector, Ustijana, her husband and Jordan for my contract as well as the other foreign professors. The contract violations are not small issues; these are fundamental to any large University and would represent a violation of the spirit if not the actual Bologna accords. If my contract does not require a submission of my diplomas, then why was I dismissed from the Senate meeting and summarily fired for not submitting a diploma? This is the legal issue in my case.

b) Dr. Matthew Ager is one of the finest Math teachers I have met in my career; he was illegally terminated verbally by a consultant to the Rector; Kosta Mitrevski without the Rector's signature, Others have been threatened that if they voice an opinion against the present administration of Danco, Ustijana, her husband and Kosta, they would possibly be terminated illegally. The legal issue here is this administration has neither the experience nor the awareness of how to conduct themselves legally in the administration of a University.

c) Events according to Dr. ****** (name blocked at the request of the individual): At the Senate meeting of September 1, 2011, after Rector Davcev dismissed Dr. Clyde Musgrave, several items of the agenda were discussed and voted upon. Then the item of the promotion of Dr. ****** was presented to the staff. The rector mentioned that during the last senate meeting (in July 2011), a committee was set up to evaluate the application of Dr.  ****** to a position of Associate Professor, which was set by the former administration. This committee was composed by: Dr. Clyde Musgrave, Prof. Dr. Danco Davcev, Dr. Radmil Polenakovik. Dr. Clyde Musgrave was nominated, by the Rector, to be the president of the committee. Dr. Musgrave collected all the information and in less than two weeks made a report, signed it a, and sent that report to Dr. Radmil Polenakovik for signature, with a copy of the signed report to the rector and the administration of the university. On the Senate meeting of the September 1st, the Rector, in front of the Senate members, declared that Dr. Clyde Musgrave, as president of the committee didn't do a thing, which was a blatant lie. The legal issue here is that a promotion was promised, determined according to Macedonian law and summarily removed without legal justification.

d) In addition, we believe there can be substantial charges against present and past members of the administration including; sexual harassment, ethnic discrimination, falsifying grades, flagrant plagiarism (I attach the first document that was sent by the new Rector - a document that was claimed as his own but which has been totally plagiarized). This flagrant plagiarism is not just limited to the Rector. 

e) Certain teaching assistants who have been given authorization to take leave and finish their PhD studies have been told that their efforts in this regard will be cancelled. The issue is that this will jeopardize both larger university and their employment careers

f) Lastly, there are contract violations of former foreign professors for which we have complete documentation.

3. Potential Resolution

a) Suggested Resolution: I suppose I can really only make suggestions about the three above named individuals and the Rector. If I were advising you, I would suggest you either - move the four to some other University with NO administrative responsibilities or terminate them for illegal activity. Then I would ask the Senate to convene as it was formally constituted, without these four individuals, have the Senate nominate a new slate of Rectors (with input from your office), bring in leadership that is proper, and let the Senate do what it is good at doing; following Macedonian Law and eliminating the approaches to managing UIST that are presently in place. This will have to be your decision. 

b) Background on my case and proposed resolution: My 12-month contract ran thru February 2012 and I was not paid for July and August. This means I did not and will not receive 8 months of salary plus my return ticket to the USA (1,250 Euros) to get my diploma and get my Work Visa papers from the Macedonian Embassy in Washington DC; this amounts to almost 30,000 Euros. I would love to be reinstated and come back to Ohrid and UIST to teach, but without the four individuals mentioned above involved in UIST. Further, I realize you may not have that flexibility especially if the four cannot be moved or terminated. Further, the present Rector offered me a contract extension to June 2012 in front of several people and in an official meeting. My proposed resolution, (and my lowest bottom line) is a discussion about a settlement for significant compensation considering the illegal termination of my contract with a deposit into my Tutunska bank account in Ohrid. Ana Smakoska, the finance manager at UIST, has all the details to make the transfer. I am already owed 7,000 Euros from July and August plus the 1,200 Euros of the plane ticket (8,200 Euros) based on my 12-month contract and I am willing to discuss the details of a financial settlement as a gesture of good faith.

c) Background on Dr. Matthew Ager's case: Matthew Ager's contract was for two years at a salary of 2,400 Euros per month for 24 months; that amounts to 48,000 Euros plus a total of 1,000 Euros for the return plane tickets (one for each year); total 49,000 Euros total. Dr. Ager would love to be reinstated if the four are moved or terminated and the decision-making is returned to the lawfully constituted Senate. If no reinstatement is possible, he is prepared to discuss a settlement with you. Ana Smakoska has his banking details as well. 

e) Dr. ****** was promised a new title (Associate Professor) and only wants justice; to see the four above individuals removed from UIST and the Senate takes its proper place 

f) Certain former foreign professors were illegally terminated and were owed money as well. They have given witness statements, and they have been or are being deposed by a law firm even as I type this email.

4. What we are prepared to do

a) For the past two years, we have been accumulating documents and evidence of the crimes committed by the four individuals mentioned above as well as the previous people involved. I have been contacted by people who want to see UIST fail as well as some members of the Press who smell a scandal and by certain Macedonian authorities. I have NOT responded to any of them and will not if we can reach an equitable resolution

b) The Court of Public Opinion is much stronger than the Courts of Law in Macedonia and the International Courts are even stronger. We are prepared to discuss the details of everything we know with the press and the Courts, but I assure you we will not if there is a peaceful resolution. Simply the violation of the rights of the foreign Professors at UIST would be a huge scandal in the EU. 

c) We are talking with law firms, inside Macedonia and outside about all the charges we might bring to the press, to the Macedonian Courts and International Courts 

5. Final thoughts

a) What confuses us all is that if the present Rector had come to us and said, "We are running out of money" or "Can we work out a way so that you can leave before the semester starts" I think I for one would have said of course. This would have allowed a graceful exit, a time for the students to say goodbye, it would have built goodwill with the students and preserved the integrity of the University. The way it was handled by the four was unprofessional, immoral and illegal.

b) I hope you can read this email as a dispassionate description of what really happened, what we want and what might happen if we do not reach an equitable resolution. If we cannot reach an equitable agreement, I will send this letter with amplifying data to Secretary Hilary Clinton and a copy to the US Embassy in Skopje.

 c) There is a real opportunity to demonstrate democratic principles here for you and to make a legacy of doing what is right not what is politically expedient and catering to the whims of the few; but creating true and lasting value for the many. 

d) Some of the students want to voice negative opinions about the recent firings and other events (they have already lost four superb foreign professors just this year) and they wish to put the University back on a path to excellence and away from the intimidation and heavy handedness. But they are very afraid. UIST is not a positive learning environment for the young people of Macedonia, foreign students and this needs to be corrected. 

Please let me know your thinking about this email by the 26th of September 2011. Can you reach an equitable agreement with us? If so, we will remain silent as the four are replaced, titles are changed, reinstatements are made and the monies are transferred. If not, we will proceed as stated above.

Thank you for your immediate attention to this urgent legal matter.

Sincerely,

Clyde Musgrave

DrClyde@me.com

Cc: Dr.  ******, Dr. Matthew Ager, Ms. Biljana Maksimovska, Dr. Rubin Zemon, Dr. Danco Davcev

Professor ****** apparently sent a similar letter to the Minister of Education and to a number of other government officials and foreign diplomats. I don't have a copy of that letter.

The decision for the dismissal apparently came from the university senate. It is signed by Jordan Shikoski, who is the husband of the Vice Rector, and not a member of the senate.

The Rector of the university, professor Danco Davcev, felt obliges to respond to the accusations by professor ****** by sending a reply to the Minister of Education and the other officials. Below is a copy of that letter.

To H.E. Prime Minister of R. of Macedonia, H.E. Ministers, H.E. Ambassadors and colleagues,

With respect to the message sent to you by Mr.  ****** concerning his personal view of the situation at University of Information Science and Technology (UIST) in Ohrid, it is my duty to give you some explanations based on facts of the current state at UIST from my point of view.

1. I took the position of Rector in July 2011 during the summer holidays when just a few foreign professors were at UIST, among them Mr.  ****** offering me immediately and aggressively to act as vice- rector for academic affairs asking for additional payment of 500 EUR (in addition to his salary of 2500 EUR per month).  Taking into account that such a position is not only for scheduling of the lectures, but many other activities like negotiations and communication with potential new foreign and Macedonian professors and students, acting according to Macedonian law etc., I couldn’t accept this offer. In addition, according to all surveys by the students, they were not satisfied by his work at all (Please see the attached documents).
2. Before leaving for the holidays, I have requested from all professors still present at UIST, to prepare till the end of August 2011 an extended abstract of the project proposal for possible application to FP7 program in Brussels. Unfortunately, only Mr. Clyde Musgrave presented me on one page an idea about possible project. I didn’t receive anything from Mr.  ******.
3. During the summer holidays I hired with temporal contracts two Macedonian professors as consultants for development and investing at UIST (Mr. Jordan Sikoski) and for financial affairs, IT infrastructure and support, tenders etc. (Mr. Kosta Mitreski). The only available person at UIST with Ph.D. in ICT (in the process of election for professor), Mrs. Ustijana Reckoska – Sikoska was appointed to act as vice- rector without any additional payment (with idea to be elected as vice- rector after her election in assistant professor at the beginning of September 2011). All three persons together with me worked during the holidays very hardly with great enthusiasm. They managed to reconstruct the current building and the student dormitory, to put in function and control the laboratory equipment, to establish the proper IT infrastructure at UIST, to provide a suitable library functioning, to make arrangement with IT Company for complete information system as a support of student services, financial work at UIST, digital library support and achieve work. (We plan to include our students later for updating of this software together with the IT Company which is officially in charge of proper maintenance of the software). In addition, many other students, financial and academic services were established for the first time at UIST. The promotion of UIST for the new students via news papers, TV, radio, Internet etc. was one of the most important work during July and August.  It was especially important to communicate the candidates for new professors at UIST and as a result of this, for the winter semester we have FIVE (5) foreign professors and we expect at least SEVEN (7) new foreign professors for the spring (summer) semester. In the mean time, we decided to engage temporarily few Macedonian professors  (visiting foreign professors are expected during the current semester to give some lectures within the current courses). As an example of very good collaboration with foreign universities, I would like to emphasize the visit to UIST of the Dean and one professor from the Norwich University (USA). During this visit from August 18-22, 2011, we agreed for close collaboration, exchange of students and professors, work on joint projects starting the next semester. We are continuously in contact with them on distance by using WebEx and we already signed the MoU between the two Universities. We organized an ICT conference at UIST from September 1-3 with active participation of me and my consultants and assistants. As a result of these activities, we managed to provide new 110 students, among them about 30 foreign students. We are still in process of negotiation for new foreign students.
4. Unfortunately, at the very beginning (July 2011), we found a lot of problems. The first one was the inappropriate MANAGEMENT for finishing the laboratory part of the UIST building in the past. The current Minister of education stopped any further activity (although UIST has enough money for this). Mr. Jordan Sikoski was engaged to prepare a complete new documentation for a new tender (on the meeting with me and the Minister), but nevertheless the decision of the Minister was still negative.
5. The salaries for July and August 2011 for foreign professors couldn’t be paid because there was no transfer of money from the responsible financial institutions. The received new laboratory equipment is still not paid because of slow financial procedures. I have received the requests by mail almost every day from few professors (among them Mr. ******) to pay the salaries for July and August 2011, but it was not up to me to do this.
6. What is the specific problem with assistant professor ******? He maid his doctoral thesis defense in December 2004 (titled as “A Middleware Approach for Dynamic Real-Time Software Reconfiguration on Distributed Embedded Systems”). In addition, according to DBLP available on Internet, he has six (6) papers presented on conferences for 10 last years (mostly connected to the research done in his doctoral thesis), he has no journal papers at all, and he is only in one paper a first author (published in 2004 on the 1^st Doctoral symposium on Middleware). According to Macedonian standards (law) similar to many other countries all over the world, it is very poor research record. Macedonia is a small country, but we have very well established academic standards. Any assistant professor in Macedonia has at least one journal paper and more than ten (10) research papers on different conferences at the time of the doctoral thesis defence. For ten years they have much more then six publications and incomparable better research records. In addition, according to our current law, each professor must have at least two journal papers with impact factor! It is requested for advisors of doctoral thesis as well.   
7.  Nevertheless, assistant professor ****** asked in July 2011 from me to be promoted to associate professor. According to this request, on the Senate in July we elected the review committee for assistant professor ****** (Mr. Clyde Musgrave as chair, me and associate professor Radmil Polenakivic). I emphasized that the procedure must be according to the Macedonian law meaning that assistant professor ****** should submit all diplomas, one copy of each paper etc. on the basis of which the review committee will write the review which must be published in the UIST Bulletin at least 15 days before the next meeting of the Senate when election could be done. On contrary, nothing happens as I recommended. Mr. Clyde Musgrave contacted associate professor Radmil Polenakivic by mail asking from him positive vote for election of assistant professor ****** to associate professor without any evidence in any documentation and without writing any review. He also sent a message to me, telling me that associate professor Radmil Polenakivic already voted “yes”, so they already have majority! On the Senate on the September 1^st I informed that this procedure is not done according to Macedonian law and I proposed to change the first member of the committee with Academic Ljupco Kocarev, but still asking from assistant professor ****** to submit the necessary documentation to the Administration of UIST. Nothing is done and the status of assistant professor ****** is undefined. In Macedonia in such case, the person under the procedure of election can’t work and give the lectures to the students (till the end of procedure). By the way, we found that a contract for 24 months that was signed in the past with assistant professor ****** is without the date of signature, without amount of salary etc.
8. Under these circumstances, all legal documents to work in Macedonia for assistant professor ****** are at least questionable and we decided to postpone his engagement till the spring (summer) semester expecting to finish with his election and all other legal procedures according to Macedonian law. (I was informed by the administrative service at UIST that his working visa expired on September 1^st, 2011).
9. Just to compare, on the same Senate meeting in July we elected the review committee for Dr. Ustijana Reckoska Sikoska (me, associate professor Clyde Musgrave and assistant professor ******). As a first reviewer, I wrote the review, I have sent it to both other reviewers and on the joint meeting we decided to sign the review. The review was published in the UIST Bulletin and after one month and a half on the Senate meeting on September 1^st, Dr Ustijana Reckoska Sikoska was elected as assistant professor. In conclusion, everybody at UIST was informed and provided with clear evidence about the legal procedure for election of professors according to the Macedonian law!
10. Concerning the Senate legality, I would like to emphasize the fact that UIST is under development meaning that we still couldn’t have Deans and professor’s councils at each Faculty because we still expect to provide more academic staff at UIST. According to the UIST Statute, each Faculty has to give two delegates for the Senate, but we have no such a number of professors which are permanently employed at UIST, so as temporal solution we decided to run the Senate with less members (instead of 14, we decided that temporally the Senate is consisted of all Macedonian ICT professors plus one representative from foreign ICT professors plus the representative from the students and the Rector). Taking into account that the Senate must decide about the promotion of the professors, acceptance of new visiting professors, administrative and financial decisions according to Macedonian law, it was decided that it is absolutely necessary to elect as members of the Senate (just in this limited period) Macedonian professors who are temporarily engaged at UIST. I believe that this is the only way to go further in providing more professors and to run the University as a very complex institution properly. By the way, we started the procedure for updating of the UIST statute to adopt it to the real needs.
11. Concerning the assistants, I provided a very good relationship with all of them including the assistants willing to leave the UIST for one year. I have explained to them that their doctorate is very important for UIST, but it is very unusual to go abroad for one year and to be paid by UIST during this period. In addition, what is more important for me, they were the only ICT assistants at UIST providing no appropriate replacement during their stay abroad. Nevertheless, the Senate decided (with my recommendation) to propose to the assistants to continue with their doctoral work abroad, but without salary from UIST (according to the Macedonian law, as suggested from UIST administrative service). It was up to the assistants to decide what they will do.
12. Concerning my vision, it is old as idea for many years, but it was announced since beginning of 2008. It is in accordance with all best practices all over the world for similar Institutions. I have put in the document more than 10 references (URLs on Internet) to indicate that I propose something that already exist (nothing new, no authorship was asked from me and I can’t believe that such general, public and well known information needs any authorship). I would like to be compatible with the best Universities, especially emphasizing the research work that is strongly connected to the lectures and other academic work as well as the connection with the industry. But, what is really important, it is the plan and content of the courses. It is worth to mention that I was a co- author of postgraduate study plans and programs (including the detailed contents) for all ICT studies at the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies (FEIT) and a new Faculty of Information Science and Computer Engineering (FINKI) at UKIM in Skopje, as well as the first version of similar documents for the University in Ohrid since 2008.
13. As much more important activity at UIST, I consider the work on research international projects. Unfortunately, nothing was done about this at UIST. The professors didn’t even know about the EU FP7 ICT working program for 2011/12 (document created in Brussels for international projects). As a Macedonian delegate nominated as ICT expert I participated in creation of this document. Having in mind the importance of this document, I have sent to all professors at UIST the EU FP7 ICT working program for 2011/12 to help them for possible proposal of research projects in Brussels. As I explained in item 2, nothing happens.
14. Concerning the other two professors, I would like just to give two facts: The Administration at UIST found that there is no evidence about the PhD diploma of Mr. Clyde Musgrave, so he was asked to provide it as soon as possible, but he didn’t do that after more than one month. Instead of this, he used Facebook to post anti – Macedonian propaganda to the students. The second fact connected to mathematician Mr. Matthew Ager is that he was asking the salary for 12 months instead of 10 (I agree with the ex-rector that the contracts should be signed for 10 months). The Senate offered to him (with my recommendation) to sign immediately a new contract– just for one academic year (10 months). He refused the offer asking for solution on the Court, engaging the lawyers etc. What is probably most important, according to all surveys by the students, they were not satisfied by their work at all. (Please see the attached documents).
15. In conclusion, UIST must continue to work and the students believe that it is the right way to provide a productive environment. I expect an excellent development of this Institution in the near future for the benefits of all students, people and R. of Macedonia. I plan to establish the Faculty councils and to elect the Deans of the Faculties till the end of the current semester. As a guarantee, we have excellent collaboration with all other foreign professors, we expect new professors, good collaboration with Norwich University, Gorge Washington University, Boston University, Polytechnic University in New York, University of California San Diego (UCSD), University in Houston (USA), University in Tempe (Arizona, USA), Philips Research- New York (USA), Simon Fraser University in Vancouver –Canada, Politecnico di Torino, University of Florence, Nettuno –Rome, Politecnico di Bari, Paris- Sud University, AUP- Paris, Postgraduate School in IT in Sorbonne 1 - Paris, University of Glasgow, SBUL-London, Leuven University (Belgium), several universities in Germany (like Hochschule Wismar University of Applied Sciences Technology, Business and Design, BTU, Oldenburg University etc.), Aristotle University in Thessaloniki (Greece), Austria, Spain, Norway, Israel and many others. At least ten (10) MoU are currently prepared for signature.
16. Our collaboration with all foreign and Macedonian students is also excellent. 

Skopje, Oct. 12, 2011                                     Prof. Danco Davcev, PhD and Rector

Professor Davcev in his reply states that the one of the reasons that the professors in question were dismissed was that they did not fulfill their duties competently, and for that as proof he attached student evaluations conducted by the student parliament. Below are copies of the so-called student evaluations.

Below is the content of the letter I sent as a response to the letter of the Rector professor Davcev.

Respected colleagues, professors and government officials.

The letter from professor Danco Davcev directed to you regarding a letter from professor ****** was forwarded to me, and as a former professor at UIST I felt it was my responsibility to respond.

First of all, I too sufferd the same fate at UIST as professor ****** and all of the other professors hired during the first year at UIST. Namely, I was fired without any warning with a single sentence that simply read  "The Rector told me to inform you about his decision that he cannot sign the contract with you for the next academic year 2010/2011". Ironically, this happened only after the rector himslef requested that I sign the contract and after he request taht I take a leave of absence from my home institution in USA. I am bringing up this point simply to point to the fact that this seams to be the accepted policy and procedure at UIST.

I am not familiar with the circumstances for the firing of Ager, Musgrave and ******, so I don't feel that it is appropriate to comment on that matter. However, I would like to comment on the current rector's justification for firing these individuals based on the documents that he submitted to you.

1. Professor Davcev in his letter states: "****** offering me immediately and aggressively to act as vice- rector for academic affairs asking for additional payment of 500 EUR (in addition to his salary of 2500 EUR per month)." I don't know of a single institution, and especially a government institution, where simply asking for a promotion and an increase in salary is considered grounds for dismissal. In fact, here in the US I do that every single year. Sometimes I am successful, other times I am not. But I have never been threatened with dismisal for asking. At most institutions in the west this is nothing more than part of normal negotiations.

2. Professor Davcev mentions the lack of scholarly publications by professor ******. Was UIST not aware of the amount of his publications at the time he was hired? Why was he hired in the first place? His two year contract was signed by an authority of the university, regardless of the fact that that authority is no longer at UIST.

4. Regarding the lack of publications by professor ******, has anyone looked very, very seriously at the list of publications by the rector Davcev? In his list he does not distinguish between papers delived at conferences, publications that are part of conference proceedings, and TRUE publications in peer-reviewed journals. Notice in how many of his so-called publications he is one of four co-authors. Also notice how many of the publications are actually duplicates of one and the same article sumbitted in two different places. Also notice in how many of the publications he is the advisor of a doctoral student, which seems to be a very common practice in Macedonia.

5. Regarding professor Musgrave, professor Davcev states "he used Facebook to post anti – Macedonian propaganda to the students." Can this trully be a cause for dismissal? Have you heard of any other Macedonian professor at any other Macedonian university being dismissed for making negative remarks about Macedonia? Is preofessor Davcev familiar with the concept of "freedom of speech"? Was it part of professor Musgrave's contract that he is not permitted to make negative remarks about Macedonia? Professor Davcev in his letters lists a number of US universities with which he hopes UIST will have some sort of cooperation. Will he require an agreement from professors from these universities that they don't make negative remarks about Macedonia? I can guarantee you that there is not a single US university that will agree to send a professor to Macedonia under the condition that they don't make any negative remarks about the country.

6. Regarding professor Ager, professor Davcev took into consideration student remarks that he used to drink beer in public and was seen drunk on several occasions. Again I ask, did UIST require professor Ager to sign an agreement that he will not drink in public if he wants to keep his job? Is this a requirement for ALL university professors in Macedonia? They can't drink in public, otherwise they get fired? Do you know of any professor who was fired because he was drinking in public?

7. My next comment is in regard to the letters from the student parliament. Professor Davcev states, "What is probably most important, according to all surveys by the students, they were not satisfied by their work at all. (Please see the attached documents)." In my mind and in my opinion, having taught for 28 years at several universities in the US, this is the most disturbing and unethical behavior by UIST that I found during my one year teaching there, and I see it is still continuing. Professor Davcev claims that the letters from the parliament reflect a survey of students. At my home institution the univerity is required to do a survey of students every semester. So, regarding the survey conducted by the student parliament at UIST I would like to ask the following questions:

1. What was the process by which the student parliament conducted the survey?

2. On what date was the survey conducted?

3. Who (which individuals) initiated the survey?

4. What was the format of the survey? What questions were asked? Who selected and composed the questions?

5. Approximately how many students responded to the survey?

6. Was the survey anonymous? Was it conducted on paper, or orally?

7. What were the exact results of the survey questions (negative and positive)?

8. Who, which individual or individuals, composed the letters to the rector?

9. Were the students given a chance to read over the letters before they were submitted to Davcev?

10. Was the survey directed only at the individuals who were eventually dismissed, or was the survey conducted for all professors and assistants at UIST?

11. Did UIST make comparison of the results of the dismissed individauls with the rest of the professors?

12. Why is there no name of the author attached to each of the letters?

I personally was curious to know the answers to these question, so I contacted one of the students at UIST, and this is the reply I received: 

"There was no student meeting. Students from the student parliament were asking people randomly and unofficially, on Facebook and Skype; certain people, obviously. I was never asked about anything, for example, nor was any of the good students. Reading the answers, however, it's easy to conclude who are the people that were asked.

My friends and I had a strong argument with most of the students in our generation when we heard about the "survey". Few days after that, we were called by the prorector because "students were complaining that we are making problems".

- The student organization never had any meeting with the students, in fact. We were not even asked to choose the members of that organization. It is not a surprise that these things happen now. Students voted for the president, but not for the other 8 or 9 members."

Gentlemen, you need to ask professor Davcev these same questions if you want to be certain of the validity of the so-called survey that professor Davcev refers to. What to me is most disturbing, however, is that a group of students was called in by the pro-rector beacuse they did not agree with the opinion of some other group. You need to be aware that this is not an isolated procedure, students have been called in and threatedn by university officials on several occasions when those officials were not happy with student complaints. Here is one example of a message sent to students on July 6, 2010 on behalf of a former rector of UIST:

"If  this unofficial meetings (*of students) are used to spread lies about the functioning of the University in general or lies about  employees of the University, this meetings will be considered as meetings against the interests and well being of the University and will be sanctioned according Universities honor codes and State Laws."

Respected gentlemen, I think you really need to be aware that the aim of the majority foreign profesors at UIST has always been to contribute to an improvement in the Macedonian educational system. Those who manage UIST really need to be aware that managing foreign professors is not the same as managing employees at a textile factory in Stip. We are used to certain academic standards and respect for collegiality and for academic freedom of speech and exchange of ideas. We are also used to a certain system of employer-employee relations that may not be very common at Macedonian institutions of higher education. It's simply immoral and unethical to fire a professor without first discussing issues and without first giving due notice. If a professor is incompetent, first you try to discover that out before you hire him. If you discover the incompetency later, then you make the professor aware of it so that he will have time to improve in due time. Professor Davcev says ****** and Musgrave were fired because they were incompetent (based on the so-called student survey). Did anyone previously sit down with either of them to discuss their incompetence? Are you aware that in the past two yearsthe interviews with foreign candidates for professor at UIST were conducted  almost exclusively by teaching assistants and by a secretary with a high school degree? If students had a problem understanding professor ******'s English, wouldn't have it made more sense to have one of the English professors at UIST conduct the interview? If his English was really so poor, why was he hired in the first place?

If UIST in the future intends to establish exchange programs with professors and students form US universities, it is to its benefit to resolve these issues and to be ready to provide a collegial atmosphere. UIST has fired ALL of the professors that were hired during the first year two years ago, and 3-4 that were hired this past year, and all of them under the same unethical, if not illegal circumstances. This really does not speak well for the university. Any professor who intends to seek employment at UIST in the future will most likely know about the university's record of hiring and firing its professors.

Lastly, professor Davcev in his letter mentions that during the summer he hired Mr. Jordan Sikoski and Mr. Kosta Mitreski, but he failse to mention if either one is a family relation to any administrator at UIST. Wasn't there a law passed just last spring that was supposed to eradicate the problem of employing relatives at the same institution?

With greatest respect,

============
Below is a letter sent by a group of students from the university who disagree with professor Davcev's accusations against the foreign professors.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anonymous Student <uistanonymous@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 5:14 PM
Subject: Scandal at the University for Information Science and Technology - Ohrid
To: nikola.gruevski@primeminister.gov.mk, pancekralev@yahoo.com, ivo.ivanovski@mioa.gov.mk, martin.protuger@primeminister.gov.mk, christopher.yvon@fco.gov.uk, blagojas@gmail.com, jean-claude.schlumberger@diplomatie.gouv.fr, jean-yves.lavoir@diplomatie.gouv.fr, dancodavcev@gmail.com, pbock@gwu.edu

Dear Sirs,

Recently someone leaked the documents which contained some 'opinions' from a group of students about the three sacked professors at UIST (Prof. ******, Prof. Ager and Prof. Musgrave). 

We would like to let you know that:

1. The survey was not official. The student organization members only contacted a few students and they contacted them using Facebook and/or Skype. 

2. The things said about the professors are NOT TRUE at all. 

About Professor ******, he never missed any lectures or labs. There aren't any problems with his written or spoken English. The students that are complaining about his English should check their knowledge of the English language before blaming others. Most of the students understood and communicated with him frequently, it is not possible for one group to understand him and one group not to understand his English. 

Moreover, he was the only professor in the university who wanted to bring people from the IT Sector and give us presentations. He managed to bring a Software Engineer who works at the medical department of Siemens in Germany (of course the costs were covered by the university, but Professor ****** took the initiative to do things like these). 

He was the one responsible for getting few robots for the Machine Intelligence and Robotics faculty.

About his grading, most of the students that failed his courses were the ones who were caught cheating during the exams. The grading bounds are clearly stated on the beginning of every course. If the professor thinks a student deserves 0.3 points, he will give them those points, if not, he won't. That is his right.

About Professor Ager, he is quite good in Maths. Some of the students do not understand the difference between a lecture and tutorial/lab sessions. Even though he has the right to continue with the lecture if he gets interrupted (consultations are mainly for questions), he always stopped and explained the concept (again and again) if someone from the students asked him to do so. He always accepted criticism (good or bad) and he always tried to improve. 

About his drinking that was mentioned in the letter, that is his private life and his business. As long as his contract does not say "You cannot drink alcohol." he can do whatever he wants and as long as he is not drunk in classes, that does not concern anyone. 

The same thing about attending lectures/lab sessions applies to him also. He always attended the classes and lectures.

Professor Clyde, on the other hand, apart from the teaching job, organized a club for entrepreneurs and always offered support to students who needed help. Also, it is very unclear how is it possible that he had a diploma when he was hired, but suddenly, someone says that he does not have it. That also sounds very suspicious.

3. After we saw those letters, we contacted the President of the student organization, Dejan Stefanoski, who said that there was pressure on him by Jordan Shikoski to sign those documents. 

We hope that after you finish your investigations on these matters you will do the right thing.

Yours Sincerely,

Group of Worried UIST Students

Access to scholarly journals in Macedonia

The Ministry of Education in Macedonia announced that it had signed an agreement with a British company to make fifty international journals with "impact factor" available, or electronically accessible to Macedonian scholars. The list of journals can be found here: http://www.mon.gov.mk/novosti/741--impact-factor. First, I would like to applaud the Minister for his effort to make accessible to Macedonian scholars literature on which all scholars rely on for their research. I looked at the list, and many of the titles are familiar to me. I still would like to raise some questions about this project.

1. Why only fifty? Is it a matter of cost? How did the Ministry decide on which fifty journals were needed by Macedonian scholars. 
2. Did the Minister conduct a survey of Macedonian scholars and based his selection on what they needed, or did he simply look at some list of journals that were rated with the highest impact factor? Does anyone remember the fiasco with the project to translate hundreds of textbooks into Macedonian? The project still continues, but a word of mouth tells us that hardly any of these textbooks are actually used in Macedonian universities. The list of textbooks to be translated was put together by the Ministry without consulting the professors in the field. Some have suggested that the Ministry should conduct a survey to find out where in fact these books are used, and the Ministry has refused to do this. In my opinion, because they may not want to see the results. Will these journals suffer the same fate?
3. All of the journals on the list are in English, most likely because they are publish in an English speaking countries. Are there no scholarly journals with "impact factor" published in other languages? Should scholarly research published in other languages not be considered by Macedonian students and scholars? Is the Ministry assuming that all scholars in all fields in Macedonia are fluent in English? 
4. Will this effort not lead to more plagiarism, something that the Ministry wants to abolish with it's recently announced software? Will this not give students and scholars easier opportunity to simply translate research into Macedonian and submit it as their own? Is the plagiarism software capable of detecting translated plagiarized texts?

My advice to the Minister on this and other similar topics is that if he truly wants to improve scholarship in Macedonia first he needs to liberate himself from the "impact factor" myth. To do so, first someone needs to enlighten him that "impact factor" in scholarship is nothing but a myth. There are many, many scholars in the world who conduct extremely significant research in a field where there are perhaps only couple of dozen other scholars doing similar research. Their research is published in journals with very small circulation. Should their work be considered as any less significant simply because the journal doesn't have the impact factor of Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, Psychology Today, etc.?

Relying on the "impact factor" myth to improve education and scholarship can only result in a myth that once Macedonia imports journals with "impact factor", the country will begin producing educational institutions and scholars with "impact factor".

The Minister of Education needs to be aware that generally speaking Macedonian scholarship and the Macedonian system of higher education is in terrible, terrible shape. Before even thinking about putting the system on the "impact factor" track, many other political, organizational, ethical and social changes have to take place first. The system needs changes from the ground up with the effort of all stakeholders, not just the ministry of Education

Can the problem of plagiarism in Macedonia be fixed with software?

Today (May 9, 2011)  Minister of education Nikola Todorov announced that the Ministry has commissioned new software to detect and fight plagiarism at Macedonian universities. I discussed the issue of plagiarism in Macedonia in another post. Here I would like to comment on the Minister's approach to the problem.

First, there has not been a public announcement or discussion about the nature of this software, such as who is developing it, what standards will be used, etc. As an aside, I am familiar with many information technology projects in Macedonia that received wide media coverage, and at the end they never saw the light of day, or the end result was totally useless. My personal opinion is that this new software will suffer the same fate, mainly as a result of the government's total ignorance of the root causes of the problem.

Here is how the Minister describes the project. The system will work with texts written in Macedonian, Albanian, English and other languages. So far so good. All scholarly works in the possession of the Ministry of Education will be archived in the system. The system will also include all student seminar papers, final graduation papers, masters theses, dissertations, textbooks, and all other scholarly research papers and projects. The system will become functional in six months! GOOD LUCK!

First, let me address the technological hurdle. I assume that whoever received the grant to design this system has convinced the Minister that they can duplicate Turnitin, the most well known plagiarism detection system. Is the Minister really so naive to believe that duplication of Turnititin is possible based on the available experience and resources in Macedonia? Here are some statistics from Turnitin:

• 150+ million archived student papers
• 90,000+ journals, periodicals & books
• 1+ million active instructors
• 14+ billion web pages crawled
• 10,000 educational institutions
• 20+ million licensed students
• 126 countries

All of this can be duplicated in just six months and at the cost of only twenty-thousand euros?

There are three forms of plagiarism prevalent in Macedonia: copying form previously published texts, paying someone to write the paper, and submitting an entire work (paper, thesis, dissertation, etc.) that has already been submitted by someone else. Although plagiarism of the second and third type is quite rare in most western country, it is quite prevalent in Macedonia. I think probably the Minister's aim was to fix the problem with the third type of plagiarism, which does nor require enormous technological knowhow. However, is the Minister really aware of what kind of resources are needed to archive ALL electronic media? Is he really not aware of the kind of resources available for such projects to Google and Turnitin? Twenty-thousand euros just ain't gonna do it!

Let's assume that the initial archive will consist only of texts in the possession of the Ministry of Education, and the archive will be continuously built up with new texts (seminar papers, scholarly papers, etc.). As far as I know, currently there is no legal basis in Macedonia to require authors to submit their works to this plagiarism detection system. Although this Minister would probably have no qualms about proposing such an amendment to the current law on higher education, even though such a law will most likely be in conflict with the law on copyrights. Let's suppose such a law is passed. Is the Minister not aware of the practical hurdles in archiving such documents?

The Ministry of Education probably has some good statistics on the number of theses, dissertations and scholarly papers published in Macedonia and has figured that it won't take much of an effort to archive them. But let's talk about student seminar and graduation papers. I don't know how many students are enrolled in universities in Macedonia, but 80,000 is probably a conservative figure. Let's say each semester about 20,000 are required to write a seminar or a graduation paper. 

1. How will the submission of their papers be handled practically?
2. Will each professor be legally required to require students to submit their paper?
3. Will there be a fine for professors who don't obey?
4. Will there be a fine for students who don't obey?
5. Who will be in charge of controlling students and professors to make sure they have obeyed, and what kind of resources are needed to do so? Will each faculty need to hire an individual responsible for controlling and maintaining the paper submission process?
6. Will there be seminars and workshops for students and professors where they can get instructions on how to submit papers?

As envisioned, this software will probably be quite capable of discovering exact, or almost exact copies of papers in its database. At my home institutions, as well as at other universities in the US plagiarism also includes:

1. Quoting another person's actual words, complete sentences or paragraphs, or an entire piece of written work without acknowledgment of the source; 
2. Using another person's ideas, opinions, or theory, even if it is completely paraphrased in one's own words without acknowledgment of the source;
3. Borrowing facts, statistics, or other illustrative materials that are not clearly common knowledge without acknowledgment of the source

More complete definition of plagiarism can be found on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism). I'm just not convinced that a twenty-thousand euro software can be capable of detecting all of these types of plagiarism.

Here are few more important questions.

1. What happens when an individual has submitted and is discovered that he has plagiarized a thesis or dissertation? Is he simply told to go back and write another one? And what if it is discovered that the second, and third, and fourth versions have been plagiarized as well?
2. What happens if it is discovered that a professor had plagiarized a paper, thesis or dissertation 5, 10, or 20 years earlier?
3. What happens to a student who has plagiarized a seminar paper? I noted in a previous post that I had the experience at a Macedonian faculty where ALL students in a seminar had plagiarized their seminar papers. Remember, according to the system of student assessment in Macedonian universities, students don't "fail" a course, they pass or fail exams, which they can retake as often as they please until they pass them. There is no legal procedure where a professor can say to a student, "Your paper is plagiarized, you fail the course, you must repeat the entire course." There is also no legal way for a faculty to punish repeat offenders by dis-enrolling them from the faculty for a period of time. So, students risk very little if they plagiarize, and at the end the risk is really worth it.

In his announcement Minister Todorov also says, "With the development of this software this decades long problem in higher education should stop." Minister Todorov and all educator in Macedonia should be aware that plagiarism is not a problem only in institutions of higher education in Macedonia, but for decades it has been part of Macedonian educational culture. It's prevalent from pre-school, first grade, and so on. If there is an easier way to write a paper, and if the person responsible for assigning and controlling the written project doesn't really care much, and if there are really no significant consequences, then why bother putting in the effort to write something original. My personal opinion is that all this is a result of the fact that generally speaking in Macedonian culture there is very little respect for knowledge and self-improvement. Parents, who should be most responsible for educating and enlightening their children, are also most responsible for promoting a culture of favoritism, cheating, and plagiarism.

My point above is to point to the fact that, contrary to the Minister's statement, plagiarism is not a problem only in institutions of higher education. The seeds of plagiarism are planted by the parents, and teachers in primary and secondary schools don't make much of an effort to weed out the problem. This is the reason why by the time a student enters the university the problem is really too large to handle with a 20,000 euro software. 

So, do you really want to fix the problem with plagiarism in higher education? 

1. Start fixing the problem with the parents.
2. Start fixing the problem from pre-school and first grade. Educate teachers on how to recognize plagiarism. Don't require individual teachers to be responsible for punishing offenders. That will most likely lead to bribery. Rather have each school organize a committee consisting of teachers, director, parents, etc., decide on the punishment. Make it clear at the beginning of every school year what the rules and consequences for cheating and plagiarism are and really stick by them.
3. Have the Minister assign someone at the Ministry of Education to gather documents form US universities on how they handle issues with plagiarism. You'd be surprised how well the rules work. I can tell you this from my own personal experience. I teach literature courses where students are required to write papers, and almost every semester I get one or two students who have plagiarized their papers. But after the plagiarism is discovered, and the student's parents (who are paying tens of thousands of dollars for their education) find out, and the student is forbidden to attend classes during the following semester, you can be certain that, that student will never plagiarize a paper again.

Plagiarism at universities can be rooted out within one year if professors and administrators really want to put in the effort. With the help of Google it takes me no more than five minutes to detect if a text has been plagiarized from some online resources, which is the most prevalent way that students plagiarize. Universities must have very strong and enforcible policies against plagiarism. Students should NEVER be given a second chance to write a paper in place of one that has been plagiarized. The minimum punishment should be repeating a course in which plagiarism has occurred. The next level should be dis-enrolling the student for one semester and for one year. The highest level of punishment should be dis-enrolling the student from the university forever. Plagiarizing a thesis or dissertation should require the highest level of punishment. The student should be dis-enrolled from the university forever, and the offence should be noted in the student's records. After one of these happens to one or two students, you can be sure that it won't take too long for others to realize that plagiarizing is just not worth the effort.

Finally, Minister Todorov should be commended for recognizing the problem and for trying to do something about it. I have yet to read any practical and successful solutions proposed by educators or by educational institutions. It is just unfortunate that the minister is attempting to solve this problem in a way that is certain to lead to failure. Rather than focusing all resources in detecting plagiarism, more effort should be put in making sure that it doesn't take place, or at least is reduced substantially.

Response to article by Ferid Muhic on the law on higher education

In a recent article by Professor Ferid Muhic titled "Што не разбираат граѓаните на Македонија, а Министерството се „прави на Тошо“? published in the Magazine Forum (http://forum.com.mk/#_tools%2Farticle%2F249960%2Fview) the author focuses on two main issues: the government's manipulation of public opinion regarding the recent laws on higher education, and he also tackles the question of the relationship between the government and institutions of higher education. Here I would like to comment on the second question.

In his article Professor Muhic blames the government for not telling the truth about the relationship between the government and educational institutions, which according to him is the reason why the government's actions have garnered 80% of public support. He also states that had the government informed the public of the fact that institutions of higher education in Macedonia are independent social entities the public would have recognized the government's attempt at manipulation and the percentage of support would have been reversed. Next, he compares the autonomy of the university with the autonomy of the church, and he suggests that just as the government has no business in meddling with the autonomy of the church it also has no business in meddling with the autonomy of the university. In other words, he equates the relationship of the government with the church to that with the university.

What the relationship between a government and publicly financed institutions should be has been an issue of discussion since the establishment of the very first publicly financed institutions. The other point is that there is no such a thing as a universally accepted standard for the relationship between the two. In countries with long democratic traditions this relationship is set in a democratic process with the participation of both entities. This relationship may also change periodically to reflect changes in the society. What is unfortunate about the situation in Macedonia regarding this issue is that Macedonian professors and Macedonian institutions of higher education lack any tradition of democratic management of themselves. From my personal teaching experience in Macedonia I am totally convinced that if the government were to have a hands off policy toward universities the authoritarian form of governing would simply pass onto the Rectors and the Deans, and professors would be in no better position.

There is no question that the new laws on higher education are absurd and mostly impossible to implement. There is also no question that individual professors are personally responsible for the failure in the quality of higher education in Macedonia. If they disagree with this point, or if they think that this refers only to a few renegade professors, then they are really lying to themselves, or as Professor Muhic would say, "се прават на Тошо". I have yet to hear from the professors their own initiatives and statements like, "This is where we have failed, and this is how we plan to improve." I have yet to read initiatives for changes in the laws on higher education that are initiated by professors. In the absence of such initiatives they give a free hand to the Ministry of Education., and the Ministry responds with a knee-jerk reaction. If the professors want to have greater impact in the educational system and greater influence in the legal system first they need to empower themselves and organize themselves into a truly professional organization capable of managing their own affairs. Knowing the current mentality of the academic community in Macedonia I doubt very much such a thing could happen in the very near future.

Now to the point regarding the church-state relationship. Professor Muhic states:

Ниту еден орган, па ни Министерството за вери, не може да менува ни една буква во доктрините на религиите, како што не може ни да наметнува мерки со кои ќе ги регулира и одредува внатрешните односи, кои согласно законот, остануваат во компетенција на црквата. ... како што црквата не може да определува кои политички акти да се гласаат, а кои да се отфрлат во Парламентот.

I cant's speak about the laws on church-state relationship in Macedonia, but let me explain in short the situation in the US. Churches in the US are tax free institutions, and to keep the tax free status they may not engage in political campaigns. But there is nothing that forbids them from campaigning to pass or defeat certain laws. The church does have a social role in society, and it should not be prevented from participating in the implementation of laws that benefit society. Two prominent examples are laws on abortion and gay marriage.

Comparison between church-state and university-state relationship is not valid because the former is financed independently, while the later is financed by the government. Should the entity that is financing the university have anything to say about how the university is run? Professor Muhic further states:

како што Универзитетот не може легитимно да ја евалуира работата на Парламентот, квалитетот на работата на министерот или на службениците во ресорното министерство, така, сосема истото важи и обратно!

Two issues are raised here. Do professors have a legitimate right to evaluate the functioning of the government? Does the government have a legitimate right to evaluate the functioning of the university? Professor Muhic states that neither has the right to evaluate the other. Does that mean that I as a professor don't have the right to publish or state publicly anything that puts in negative light anyone in the government? (I once was told by a Rector of a Macedonian university that anything negative I say about he university will be considered as slander against the Ministry of Education and of the Macedonian education system and a grounds for legal action against me). I don't have the right to campaign for the removal of the Minister of Higher Education if I am critical of his policies? In a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education the Republican Party of Wisconsin is seeking, under the state's open-records law, to obtain e-mail sent by a Madison professor who has publicly criticized that state's Republican governor, a move the professor is denouncing as an assault on his academic freedom. (http://chronicle.com/article/Wisconsin-GOP-Seeks-E-Mails-of/126911/). As you can see, this is an important issue even in the US. In my opinion, as soon as you take away to right to be critical of government you can no longer call yourself a democracy.

The second question is should the government have the right to control and evaluate educational institutions. Professor Muhic states:

Законски е регулирано дека содржината на наставните програми, реформа на универзитетот, оценка и евалуирање на работата на наставниот кадар, никако не може да го врши ниту министерот, ниту Министерството за образование, туку сето тоа останува законско право и обврска исклучиво на Универзитетските органи!

The law does state that university organs are responsible for regulating the content instructional programs, reforms in the university, faculty evaluations, etc. Universities and professors need to ask themselves an important question. How effective have we been in the past twenty years in regulating programs, in reforms, in faculty evaluations, etc.? What have we done to improve the quality of higher education in Macedonia? I don't mean here to justify the government's approach. In fact, I believe the damage resulting from the new laws will be felt for many decades to come and will be almost impossible to reverse. I am only pointing to the fact that universities and professors need to bear more responsibility for allowing the state of higher education in Macedonia to reach this level.

Finally, the question is not whether or not the government should have any involvement in the running of the university, but rather where does the government's role end and that of the university begins. There can't be a hands off policy from the government because the university is financed from public funds and to some extent the public needs to make sure that its funds are not wasted. In the current situation it is unfortunate that the country has a Minister who lacks basic understanding of the role of institutions of higher education in society, professors who are still mostly entrenched in an archaic educational management system, and students who are still afraid to demand quality in their education.

The quality of scholarly publishing in Macedonia

One change implemented in the new law on higher education in Macedonia is the requirement that Ph.D. candidates and professors going for promotion should publish some number of research articles in respectable foreign journals. I'll discuss the details of this law in another post, but for now I want to focus on the state of scholarly publishing in Macedonia. It seems obvious to me that the the reason why the Minister of Education decided to implement these changes into law was because he believed that foreign journals are much more rigorous and selective in what they publish compared to Macedonian journals, and that Macedonian journals will publish anything that's handed to them regardless of quality. Is the Minister right, and is his approach to the problem appropriate.

I am approaching this issue from my own experience teaching and conducting research in Macedonia in the humanities and in the social sciences.

First, we need to keep in mind that the reading public for scholarly articles in Macedonia is really quite, quite small. For example, if you are conducting research on the ethnography of a particular region in Macedonia, most likely there are no more than about 2-3 other scholars in the entire country who might be interested enough to read the article. Second, the concept of "double-blind" reading of articles submitted for publication does not work in a small country where everyone in a specific field knows each other. My point is, in the current situation quality control in what gets published in Macedonia is practically impossible. This is not to say that there is no high quality research in Macedonia. There is, but it's extremely, extremely rare.

While in most western countries there are professional organizations that take the responsibility for controlling the quality of research by their members, there is nothing equivalent in Macedonia. So, what gets published in scholarly journals in Macedonia? Basically, anything and everything that is written by scholars. Let me give you three specific examples.

In 2005 two authors, Tome Bosevski, an electrical engineer and member of the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and the Arts, and Aristotel Tentov, Professor at the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies in Skopje published an article in one of the proceeding of the Academy, where they claimed to have deciphered the middle text of the Rosetta Stone and concluded that the text was written in ancient Macedonian, which seems to resemble one of the contemporary dialects of Macedonian. Keep in mind that neither of these gentlemen has any background in linguistics, historical or any other sort. The article is about 90 pages long with only seven references (http://makedonika.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/bosheski-tentov-angl.pdf). Two of the references are dictionaries, two of them refer to a Slovenian high school textbooks, one refers to a text on Protoslavic, and one on a Macedonian dialects. That's it! There is not a single reference to any research on the Rosetta Stone. For almost a decade these two "scholars" have been promoting their research around the country and have received accolades by many of their colleagues. After all, this is not research by some freshman student. The Academy organized an elaborate promotion of their research findings that was attended by many scholars and political figures.

As you may guess, their research is nothing more than pure gibberish. If their research findings were truly valid one would expect there to have been organized an international conference on the subject. As it happens, no one outside of Macedonia has taken their claims seriously. So, here we have two electrical engineers conducting linguistic research on an ancient text, they come up with some truly nonsense conclusions, and all of that is quite acceptable to the Macedonian academic community. What does all this say about the ability of the Macedonian academic community to control the quality of research and publication of its members?

The next example is a gentleman named Alexander Donski, whose research focuses on tracing the history and links between Macedonians living in the Republic of Macedonia and the Macedonians of Alexander the Great. He is a member of the Institute of History and Archeology at the University in Shtip. His current "research" is on establishing a Macedonian link with the Romanovs of Russia! One of his books is titled "Jesus Christ and the Macedonians". He is also a member of the "Organization of Ancient Macedonians". There are many, many such examples of absurd links in his publications. Again, we are speaking of a member of research team at a government funded research institute that is part of a major state university. My hunch is that he has managed to place himself in the current position and is able to publish anything that he writes because his views fit quite well with the views of the current political party in power. In one of the Institute's web pages he is pictured together with the country's president (http://inisa.ugd.edu.mk/).

I pose the same question again. Why does the academic community in Macedonia give voice to individuals who obviously have absolutely no respect for academic scholarship? It's obviously clear that the government, and the Ministry of Education, have no interest in controlling the quality of research. But why do Macedonian academics tolerate them? Fine, this person was most likely hired based not on his academic qualifications but on his contributions to the politics of the government, and academics have no hiring or firing power. But why are they not shunned by their more sensible colleagues?

I had personal experience with the third example. In 2009/2010 I had an opportunity to teach at a newly established university in Macedonia, the University for Information Science and Technology in Ohrid. During that same year the Macedonian Parliament added "St. Paul the Apostle" to the name of the university. There are many institutions in Ohrid, including the airport, that have recently changed their name to "St. Paul the Apostle", and by doing so establishing a link with Paul's travels to Macedonia. By tradition Macedonian universities have "patron holiday" that is connected with the name of the university. The university in Ohrid needed to have one as well. But what date top pick? The obvious choice should have been August 13th, St. Paul's day in the Orthodox calendar. That date was not acceptable because the patron day celebration takes place when school is in session. The selection of the date was entrusted to Jane Bakreski, one of the humanities instructors. Bakreski has a Master's degree from the Faculty of Fine Arts, National Academy of Art in Sofia, Bulgaria, with a major in painting. For the university's patron holiday Mr. Bakreski selected October 22. I was curious to know how he came up with that date. His reply was that he consulted with a Macedonian monk, who informed him that the Apostle Paul was actually in Ohrid on that date! I wanted to know if he knew of any specific references to this claim. There are obviously no such references, but he did ask me to please not spread my "erroneous conclusions" among others. In addition to being an instructor at the university, Mr. Bakreski is also an icon and a fresco painter. His contribution to the university is an icon of St. Paul standing somewhere in the middle of Ohrid (http://www.uist.edu.mk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=92&Itemid=133&lang=en).

There are many maps of Paul's travels in Macedonia produced by biblical scholars, but none of them show him being anywhere close to Ohrid. So, here is a university that has entrusted the selection of a patron holiday, the most important holiday for the university, to someone who produces it from his imagination. This same individual is also entrusted to hold academic lectures to students at the university. How credible can his research and his teaching be, and why does the academic community at the university permit this type of "scholarship"?

These three examples are not atypical. The question is, is there anything the academic community, NOT the Ministry of Education, can do to prevent the publishing and spreading of such fake scholarship even when legitimate scholars are at odds with the wishes of the Ministry of Education and with the university's administration?

I think the main reason why legitimate scholarly research in Macedonia is impossible is the lack of resources. The current Minister of Education, Nikola Todorov, seems to think that there is very little research and publishing in Macedonia because professors are simply lazy. Recently he has said that the ministry will equip numerous research laboratories at all state universities, and he is also willing to pay 250 euros any professor who publishes an article in a foreign journal with an "impact factor". The Minister thinks of a laboratory in terms of a "classroom". That is, a set of equipment that any researchers can just walk in and do any sort of research. What if the government spends a million euros to equip a fancy laboratory, but the equipment can't be used for researching a specific problem? Let's not forget that the government financed the translation of first class scholarly literature that professors in the classroom don't find useful.

A modern library with current literature is essential for conducting even the most essential research in the humanities and social sciences, and none of the libraries in Macedonia fit into this category.

It is good that professors have finally decided to voice their frustration at the government's attempt to control how they teach and how they conduct their research. However, they also have to recognize their own inefficiencies and come up with their own solutions. An objection against the government's approach is not any good if it's not met with a better proposal from the academic community. The status quo is obviously not working. As I follow this conflict in the media I have yet to hear academics propose a different way to deal with the problems.