Caramel peanut butter ice cream cake
November 17, 2008
Caramel peanut butter ice cream cake
This ice cream cake combines the rich flavors of vanilla Oreos, peanut butter and caramel. It’s easy to make and great for parties. It uses simple ingredients and can be made in advance and then frozen. Even beginner cooks will be able to handle this recipe.
New Opportunities at The University of Sydney (lecturer)
The School of Mathematics and Statistics is a large School with diverse research strengths. We invite applications for two positions in* ** Statistics* (Ref No. 139797) and one position in *Financial Mathematics* (Ref No. 139804). These are opportunities to contribute to the growth of the School and its international research standing in these areas.
The current areas of research in Statistics and Probability are asymptotic approximations and limit theorems, applied probability, including applications in financial mathematics, time series, extreme value theory, generalized linear models, bioinformatics and biological models. Current research interests related to Financial Mathematics include asymptotic methods, computational mathematics, dynamical systems, ordinary differentialequations and partial differential equations.
For more information or to apply online, please visit:
- Statistics (Ref No. 139797) -http://positions. usyd.edu. au/steam139797em ail
- Financial Mathematics (Ref No. 139804) - http://positions. usyd.edu. au/steam139804em ail
*Closing Date:* 24 October 2008
Warm Regards,
*Natalia Rosa*| Junior Researcher
*SYDNEYRECRUITMENT*
The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006
Level 3 | The Box Factory| 1-3 Ross St
P 61 2 9561 9117 | 9351 5880
File #58647C190C2E25
You are receiving this email because you are a member of our private contact database. If you do not wish to receive similar email messages in the future and to see our contact information please click here< http://www.maxhire. net/services/ optout.aspx? id=5E6A7E19092C2 31051752D33521B6 96B2D10352E00294 A4525>. We respect your privacy. This email fully complies with the CAN-SPAM Act.
Administrators define the field
November 15, 2008
Administrators define the field
A panel of deans and directors from Kansas City educational institutions met at the School of Education Monday evening, affording students interested in college administration careers a chance to discuss the field’s challenges and opportunities.
The conversation was sponsored by UMKC’s Career Services Center and featured four panelists with extensive credentials in higher education administration including: UMKC’s Vice Provost for Academic Programs, Mary Lou Hines-Fritts, William Jewell College’s Assistant Dean of Students and Director of Residence Life, Ernie Stufflebean, Rockhurst University’s Assistant Dean of Students, Sean Grube, and Metropolitan Community College-Penn Valley’s Dean of Administrative Services, Thomas Walker.
LiveScience: Era of Scientific Secrecy Near End
Era of Scientific Secrecy Near End / By Robin Lloyd, LiveScience Senior Editor / posted: 02 September 2008 11:30 am ET
Secrecy and competition to achieve breakthroughs have been part of scientific culture for centuries, but the latest Internet advances are forcing a tortured openness throughout the halls of science and raising questions about how research will be done in the future.
The openness at the technological and cultural heart of the Internet is fast becoming an irreplaceable tool for many scientists, especially biologists, chemists and physicists — allowing them to forgo the long wait to publish in a print journal and instead to blog about early findings and even post their data and lab notes online. The result: Science is moving way faster and more people are part of the dialogue.
[snip]
Open Science
The open science approach forces researchers to grapple with the question of whether they can still get sufficient credit for their ideas, said physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, co-organizer of a conference on the topic set to begin Sept. 8 at the Perimeter Institute in Ontario, Canada.
[BTW: I Will Be Attending This Unique Conference Science in the 21st Century: Science, Society, and Information Technology [http://tinyurl.com/6ll8fb] / Look For Conference-Related Postings on the _Scholarship 2.0_ Blog [http://scholarship20.blogspot.com/] within the next two weeks]
[snip]
Open science is a shorthand for technological tools, many of which are Web-based, that help scientists communicate about their findings. At its most radical, the ethos could be described as “no insider information.” Information available to researchers, as far as possible, is made available to absolutely everyone.
Beyond email, teleconferencing and search engines, there are many examples: blogs where scientists can correspond casually about their work long before it is published in a journal; social networks that are scientist friendly such as Laboratree and Ologeez; GoogleDocs and wikis which make it easy for people to collaborate via the Web on single documents; a site called Connotea that allows scientists to share bookmarks for research papers; sites like Arxiv, where physicists post their “pre-print” research papers before they are published in a print journal; OpenWetWare which allows scientists to post and share new innovations in lab techniques; the Journal of Visualized Experiments, an open-access site where you can see videos of how research teams do their work; GenBank, an online searchable database for DNA sequences; Science Commons, a non-profit project at MIT to make research more efficient via the Web, such as enabling easy online ordering of lab materials referenced in journal articles; virtual conferences; online open-access (and free) journals like Public Library of Science (PLoS); and open-source software that can often be downloaded free off Web sites.
[BTW: Several Of These Innovations Have Been Profiled In My SciTechNet(sm) Blog [http://scitechnet.blogspot.com/] and/or The Scholarship 2.0 Blog [http://scholarship20.blogspot.com/]
The upshot: Science is no longer under lock and key, trickling out as it used to at the discretion of laconic professors and tense PR offices. For some scientists, secrets no longer serve them. But not everyone agrees.
Networked Cyborgs
Just a few decades ago, as a scientist, here is how you did your work: You toiled in obscurity and relative solitude.
[snip]
However, today, more and more scientists, as well as researchers in the humanities, operate like transparent, networked cyborgs. Background research is mostly done online, not in the library. Some data and preliminary research might be posted online via a blog or open notebook. Early write-ups of the work might be announced to the public, or at least discussed online with peers. And these early write-ups might also be posted to an online publication that is not peer-reviewed in the strict sense.
[snip]
“In areas like my own subfields of theoretical physics,” said MIT physicist David Kaiser, “the only constraint [on how rapidly one generates research papers] is, ‘Did you have more coffee that day?’ We aren’t usually held up trying to get an instrument to work, or slogging through complicated data analysis.”Most people think faster is better, but there are other issues.
Is It A Good Thing?
There is “no question” that all efforts to make science more open are positive for the progress of science, says open science proponent and chemist Jean-Claude Bradley at Drexel University in Philadelphia, who posts his lab notebook online and started a blog in 2005 called UsefulChemistry where he and his colleagues regularly discuss chemistry problems as well as Web 2.0 tools and the technical and philosophical issues they raise.His online notebook and blog definitely make it easier to communicate with colleagues, he said. Such sharing also makes it easier for others to “replicate” scientists’ work — try it themselves and convince themselves that you are right. And this replication issue is one of the principles behind scientific research. Anyone who has written down a recipe for a friend knows that we all tend to spell things out more clearly when sharing them than we would if we were just taking notes for ourselves in our own shorthand.
Open science also has the potential to prevent discrimination in access to information. Arxiv, the site for posting pre-print physics papers, was started in 1991 by Cornell physicist Paul Ginsparg, then at Los Alamos National Laboratory, to help provide equal access to prepublication information to graduate students, postdocs and researchers in developing countries.
[BTW: Paul Ginsparg will be one of several Major Players attending/presenting at The Conference [http://science21stcentury.org/abstracts.html]]
[snip]
And open science benefits the public, Bradley said. He tries to keep his posts fairly accessible (although this is not the case for all open notebooks and open science blogs).
[snip]
“It’s not clear to me that professional scientists or people in academic institutions have a monopoly on good ideas,” he said. “There are very smart people outside of academia, for example hobbyists or people in industry who could contribute, and having more contributors can only help. The same applies to interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary approaches.”
[snip]
Drawbacks of Open Science
One of the biggest fears of nearly all researchers is that someone else hears what you’re doing and beats you to publication. That means you wasted a lot of time (and most researchers work extremely long hours, so loss of productivity is especially painful and can also harm one’s chances for getting a job or promotion or funding for the next research project). Once you publicly reveal your thoughts, data or experimental results, some say, you lose control over ownership of that information. This topic is covered by an area of law called intellectual property, as well as patent law, and there can be significant money to be fought over when it comes to patents.
Hossenfelder, the conference organizer, says she knows of several examples in which scientists have had an idea for something, talked about it openly and then somebody else has published the fleshed-out idea first without giving any credit beyond an acknowledgment to the original idea-holder. Acknowledgments don’t advance careers.
However there are solutions to this, she said. For instance, the prominent scientific journal Nature encourages authors to include brief summaries of which author contributed what to a project. Some say that online posts provide a time-stamped record of when an experiment was documented. Those stamps can easily be arbitrarily altered after the fact, but it might also be possible to “lock” posts at a certain date after which they could not be changed without some sign-off permission to break the lock, Hossenfelder said. [snip]
Fear of Losing Peer Review
Another drawback of open science can be that results go public before they should. In science, experimental results are frequently proven wrong by subsequent work. Yet even peer review cannot ensure against this, nor can it prevent outright fraud, as proven by a 2005 case involving a South Korean scientist who claimed to have achieved the first cloning of a human embryo. A later examination of his work showed he had fabricated his results.
[snip]
“The social system of science has become so complicated, unregulated and dispersed in terms of geography and disciplines, so peer review has been elevated to a principle that unifies a fragmented field,” Biagioli said.
[snip]
And today, Arxiv, one of the most frequently cited examples of open science, has no peer review for individual papers, but it has begun to add in some constraints on allowable authors. The site used to allow anyone with email addresses associated with academic institutions to post their papers. Now, authors of research papers who post in Arxiv are vetted before they can post for the first time. In some ways, things are tightening up when it comes to openness in physics, Kaiser said. In any case, the function of print journals, in physics at least, is changing.
“Ease of sharing everything prior to peer review is flourishing, and in my opinion very few physicists are reading journals for information these days,” Kaiser said. “Journals have largely lost their information function.”
[snip]
For The Good Of Truth, Humanity, Economies?
Another argument in favor of open science is sort of a big picture issue for humanity, scientific truth and economies, Neylon said.
“Making things more open leads to more innovation and more economic activity, and so the technology that underlies the Web makes it possible to share in a way that was never really possible before, while at same time it also means that kinds of models and results generated are much more rich,” he said.
This is the open source approach to software development, as opposed to commercial closed source approaches, Neylon said. The internals are protected by developers and lawyers, but the platform is available for the public to build on in very creative ways.
“Science was always about mashing up, taking one result and applying it to your [work] in a different way,” Neylon said. “The question is ‘Can we make that as effective as samples data and analysis as it does for a map and set of addresses for a coffee shop?’ That is the vision.”
[http://www.livescience.com/culture/080902-open-science.html]
Thanks to Sabine Hossenfelder For The HeadsUp !
[http://friendfeed.com/rooms/science21]
SPARC Webcast: The Right to Research: Engaging Students on the Topic of Access to Research
November 14, 2008
SPARC Webcast: The Right to Research: Engaging Students on the Topic of Access to Research
“Today’s students have come of age in the Internet era. Access to knowledge is the norm for them, rather than the exception. Students recognize how the lack of access is detrimental to research and education, and how the subscription-only model can conflict with the ethic of the academy, which is to share knowledge with everyone. I hope this guide will engage students and help them become more active participants in the campus conversation.”
(Gavin Baker, author of The Right to Research) / [http://www.arl.org/sparc/students/]
The Right to Research: Engaging Students on the Topic of Access to Research
August 6, 2008 / Wednesday / 1:00PM – 2:30PM (Eastern)
With: Gavin Baker, Graduate, University of Florida and SPARC Outreach Fellow ; Nelson Pavlosky, Law Student, George Mason University, and SPARC Summer Intern ; Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC.
Moderator: Jennifer McLennan, Director of Communications, SPARC
Today’s college students – both undergraduate and graduate –possess tremendous potential for shaping the future of scholarly exchange. Appreciating student perspectives on information sharing and access to research can help to advance library outreach programs. In partnership with student leaders, SPARC has developed The Right to Research – a campaign that encourages student engagement and provides a suite of materials to help libraries connect with students on the topic of access to research. The goal of The Right to Research is to explore ways that libraries and students might advance new opportunities to work together in creating a more open system of scholarly communication.
Please join us for the latest installment in The Right to Research campaign. At this online event, student leaders Gavin Baker and Nelson Pavlosky will lead a discussion on: why working with students is critical to advancing the discussing of access to research; how to effectively engage students on campus and what resources are available; and specific actions to take next semester – including an announcement of our next nationwide on-campus event to raise awareness.
This invitation is open to SPARC members and other libraries only. You’ll need access to a phone and a Web browser to participate. Access details will be sent to registrants. Limited to 100 participants. Register by end of day, Friday, August 1, 2008 at [http://www.arl.org/sparc/meetings/event_registration.shtml]
Questions and comments may be directed to Jennifer McLennan (jennifer@arl.org).
Source [http://www.arl.org/sparc/media/08-0722.shtml]
Webcast Slides [http://www.arl.org/sparc/bm~doc/student_engagement_v3_08-aug.pdf]
New Opportunities at The University of Sydney (lecturer)
The School of Mathematics and Statistics is a large School with diverse research strengths. We invite applications for two positions in* ** Statistics* (Ref No. 139797) and one position in *Financial Mathematics* (Ref No. 139804). These are opportunities to contribute to the growth of the School and its international research standing in these areas.
The current areas of research in Statistics and Probability are asymptotic approximations and limit theorems, applied probability, including applications in financial mathematics, time series, extreme value theory, generalized linear models, bioinformatics and biological models. Current research interests related to Financial Mathematics include asymptotic methods, computational mathematics, dynamical systems, ordinary differentialequations and partial differential equations.
For more information or to apply online, please visit:
- Statistics (Ref No. 139797) -http://positions. usyd.edu. au/steam139797em ail
- Financial Mathematics (Ref No. 139804) - http://positions. usyd.edu. au/steam139804em ail
*Closing Date:* 24 October 2008
Warm Regards,
*Natalia Rosa*| Junior Researcher
*SYDNEYRECRUITMENT*
The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006
Level 3 | The Box Factory| 1-3 Ross St
P 61 2 9561 9117 | 9351 5880
File #58647C190C2E25
You are receiving this email because you are a member of our private contact database. If you do not wish to receive similar email messages in the future and to see our contact information please click here< http://www.maxhire. net/services/ optout.aspx? id=5E6A7E19092C2 31051752D33521B6 96B2D10352E00294 A4525>. We respect your privacy. This email fully complies with the CAN-SPAM Act.
Computational Linguistics: PhD Student, University of Potsdam, Germany
November 14, 2008
Computational Linguistics: PhD Student, University of Potsdam, Germany
Institution/ Organization: University of Potsdam
Department: Department of Linguistics
Web Address: http://www.ling. uni-potsdam. de
Level: PhD
Specialty Areas: Computational Linguistics
Description:
We invite applications for the position of a Research Assistant / PhD student to work within the Dialogue Group at the Department of Linguistics, University of Potsdam, Germany. The position is initially for one year, with the possibility of extension for an additional two years.
The successful applicant will work in the context of the project “InPro: Incrementality and Projection in Dialogue Processing’, which aims to investigate incremental processing methods for spoken dialogue systems. The main resposibility for the incoming RA / PhD student will be in the area of dialogue management. The team comprises one other PhD student and one Post-Doc.
Ideal candidates for the RA / PhD position have an excellent degree in Computational Linguistics, Linguistics, or Computer Science, and have shown ability for conducting original research. Prior work on dialogue systems and especially dialogue management would be a definite plus. Good programming skills are important, a keen interest in problem solving and research is essential. The successful candidate is encouraged to work towards a PhD degree in Computational Linguistics from the University of Potsdam.
The working language of the project is English.
We offer
- a competitive salary with all benefits (German TV-L 13 / BAT IIa payscale * 3/4, the actual salaries vary depending on age and family situation, currently between 2000 and 2600 E per month)
- a dynamic and international working environment. (Computational Linguistics is a growing part of Linguistics in Potsdam, which already is one of the larger linguistics departments in Germany; there are also established inter-disciplinary connections to e.g. computer science and psychology.)
- a nice (and affordable) living environment (Potsdam is a beautiful mid-sized city just on the outskirts of Berlin, from where, if desired, Potsdam is in easy commuting distance).
The position is open from December 1st, 2008 (or earlier), so candidates are encouraged to apply ASAP and reviewing of applications begins immediately; however, we are looking for the best candidate, so later starting dates may be negotiable as well.
To apply, please send
- a statement of research interests;
- a cv, including details of research experience;
- if applicable, (links to) sample publications; and
- addresses of at least two referees to Dr. David Schlangen ( das@ling.uni- potsdam.de ).
If you need further information, please don’t hesitate to contact us.
Web:http://www.ling. uni-potsdam. de/~das
Application Deadline: 27-Oct-2008
Mailing Address for Applications:
Attn: Dr David Schlangen
Institut fuer Linguistik, Uni Potsdam
Karl Liebknecht-Strasse 24-25
Potsdam 14476
Germany
Contact Information:
Dr David Schlangen
das@ling.uni- potsdam.de
Follow up on Duke’s Motion and Two Other Items
November 14, 2008
Follow up on Duke’s Motion and Two Other Items
The Administration’s Motion Denied
As predicted, the judge in the civil suits denied the Duke administration’s motion to sanction opposing counsel for an alleged violation of Rule 3.6. (See previous post.) Here are details from the News and Observer and the Chronicle.
I wrote a letter to the Chronicle in which I call the actions by Duke’s counsel unprofessional. Understand that this motion was not a request for relief from any alleged harm. The administration’s lawyer denied in court that the motion was a request for a gag order. The motion was solely an attack on the integrity of Charles Cooper and his colleagues and, as I suggested in the previous post, one that had no basis in law. A bar complaint is a very serious matter touching on both the character and professional qualifications of an attorney. It should not be made lightly and certainly not to try and score a rhetorical point.
The administration’s motion is also a mean spirited cheap shot against the players who were also specifically targeted. Although Rule 3.6 only applies to attorneys, the motion requested that the court make a finding that “Plaintiffs and their counsel” violated Rule 3.6 and the local rule incorporating it. It accuses them of violating one of the same rules that their tormentor and the administration’s erstwhile codefendant, Mike Nifong did.
While the administration’s attorneys were rummaging through the Rules of Professional Conduct, perhaps they missed Rule 3.1:
A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2) has a similar requirement.
It is hard to see the administration’s motion as a good faith argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law. Interpreting a statute or rule is a matter of reading the text, which is entirely controlling, and there was no suggestion that the language used is vague or ambiguous. Duke’s argument that the spirit of the rule was violated, even if it were true, is utterly beside the point. Moreover, Rule 3.6(b)(2), the public documents exception, appears specifically intended to operate as a safe harbor rule for lawyers trying to comply with the general rule stated in Rule 3.6(a). Finally, even if the court did announce a new rule, it could not give it retroactive effect.
What we are left with the administration is attempting to try the case in the media under the guise of upholding the exact opposite principle. For the administration, appearances have always been the only thing that mattered. Still, this is a new low.
Elmo a Citizen
Congratulations to Moezeldin Elmostafa, or “Elmo” as he affectionately came to be known to supporters of the accused players, who recently became a US citizen. He was also recently named “Hero of the Year” by Reader’s Digest magazine. Durham needs more citizens like him.
Elmo was the taxi driver who picked up Reade Seligmann from the party and was able to help document Reade’s alibi. After Reade’s alibi came to light, Mike Nifong sent two detectives working on the lacrosse case to arrest Elmo on a stale warrant. When they arrested him, they asked him if he “had anything new to say about the lacrosse case.” When he said no, they then took him to a magistrate. He was eventually found innocent at trial.
I hope that the recent renewed publicity will focus attention on one loose end that remains in making Nifong fully accountable for his conduct. Attempting to alter the testimony of a witness is obstruction of justice. While Nifong’s ethical misconduct was addressed by the North Carolina Bar, he has never been made to account for his criminal conduct. Also suspicious was Nifong’s conduct in relation to another witness, the second dancer Kim Roberts. The same day that Nifong personally intervened to have her bail reduced on an unrelated criminal charge, she started giving an account that contradicted her earlier statement to police that no rape had occurred.
Elmo’s case also should be instructive to those who saw Nifong as some sort of champion for social justice because he was targeting affluent or supposedly affluent people. As an immigrant looking to become a citizen, Elmo was one of the most vulnerable people in our society. A criminal conviction of any kind could have resulted in his deportation and permanent exclusion from the United States. Yet, Nifong was as willing to maliciously prosecute him for his own purposes as he was Reade, Collin and David. Indeed, given the fact that Elmo refused to change his story when pressured by police, Nifong’s decision to prosecute him anyway was purely vindictive.
Amended Complaint
Bob Ekstrand who is representing three of the players in the civil suits recently filed an amended complaint which contains additional allegations and information. It also contains embedded audio and video exhibits. Warning! It is a huge file (121 MB). Such is the extent of the misdeeds of Duke and Durham’s leaders.
Duke Settles With Indicted Players
Breaking News: The Chronicle is reporting that Duke University reached a financial settlement with formerly indicted lacrosse players. Here are more details:
Women’s b-ball stomps Rockhurst in season debut
November 14, 2008
Women’s b-ball stomps Rockhurst in season debut
Junior guard Chazny Morris led UMKC’s women’s basketball team to a resounding victory over the Rockhurst University Hawks, 96-61, in an exhibition game Saturday afternoon at Swinney Rec. The match displayed some of the Roos’ key strengths, weaknesses and new additions for the upcoming season opener.
Nifong Trial Verdict
Breaking News: Durham DA Michael Nifong was found guilty on 27 of the 32 ethical charges brought against him by the NC Bar. An AP report indicates the following:
Mike Nifong broke numerous rules of professional conduct during his disastrous prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players falsely accused of rape, committing “deceit and misrepresentations,” a disciplinary committee ruled Saturday.
Selected Videos:
David Evans Sr. State Bar Testimony
Mary Ellen Finnerty State Bar Testimony
Nifong Says He should Be Disbarred
Disciplinary Board Disbars Nifong
Duke Lacrosse Defense Attorneys News Conference
Selected articles:
Comments of Disciplinary Panel’s ChairmanThe New York Times
Bar Accepts Nifong’s Offer to Surrender Law License WRAL
N.C. panel disbars Duke prosecutor AP
Former Duke Prosecutor Nifong Disbarred June 18, ABC News
Bar strips Nifong of his law license Newsobserver
Findings KC Johnson
Duke prosecutor: He should be disbarred AP
Nifong Accepts Disbarment KC Johnson
Committee: Duke prosecutor broke rules AP
Verdict KC Johnson
PhD positions in Reproductive Biology Research - University College Dublin
November 14, 2008
PhD positions in Reproductive Biology Research - University College Dublin
2 PhD Positions
Reproductive Biology Research Cluster, School of Ag, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine
Veterinary Sciences Centre
PhD Projects available include the regulation of MHC-1 expression during preimplantation embryo development and molecular analysis of mammalian oocyte maturation
Dr Trudee Fair
The Reproductive Biology Research Cluster (RBRC) was established in UCD in 2007. The Cluster comprises a group of highly motivated, internationally recognized scientists from UCD and Teagasc whose research interests focus on fertility in domestic animals using cutting edge technologies, established animal models, in vitro tissue culture and bioinformatic tools for the analysis of reproductive tissues (follicles, oocytes, embryos, uterus). Sample collection and initial processing will be carried out at UCD’s Lyons Research Farm.
The Cluster has recently been award a multi-million Euro grant from Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) to address specific aspects of female infertility focusing on events in the days immediately before and after fertilization. The overall objective is to identify genes, proteins and other complex molecules, and their expression patterns, in bovine ovarian follicles, oocytes, embryos, cervix and uterus that are responsible for, or are markers of, infertility.
Project Descirption
PhD Projects available include the regulation of MHC-1 expression during preimplantation embryo development and molecular analysis of mammalian oocyte maturation. The endpoint of these experiments is to increase our understanding of the factors, which control the developmental potential of mammalian oocytes and embryos, ultimately leading to the establishment of pregnancy.
Lab work will include mRNA and protein analysis of mammalian reproductive tissues using a range of both standard biotechnology tools such as sequencing, PCR, immunohistochemistr y, western blotting and more innovative bioinformatic dependent methods such as RNASEQ, FAIRESEQ and X-ChIP analysis.
The projects will form part of well structured and carefully supervised PhD programmes according to the University’s postgraduate training policy.
Terms and conditions
All PhD candidates must hold a minimum of a First or 2.1 honours science degree in, biochemistry or another relevant life science discipline.
All enquires to:
Dr Niamh Mc Loughlin
Project Manager
Reproductive Biology Research Cluster
Phone 00353 1 716 6017
E mail: reproduction@ ucd.ie
Closing Date 24th October 2008
Start Date 01 Dec 2008
Police blotter
Oct. 31
3:52 a.m. Noise Disturbance - A student at Oak Place Apartments was notified of a noise complaint and agreed to keep it down.
Nov. 1
1:27 a.m. Noise Disturbance - Police responded to numerous noise complaints at 53rd and Charlotte streets.
PhD Position in Accounting - University of Amsterdam
November 14, 2008
PhD Position in Accounting - University of Amsterdam
PhD Position in Accounting
University of Amsterdam Faculty of Economics and Business / Amsterdam Business School
Amsterdam, 1018WB (Noord-Holland) , hours per week
Job description
The project is entitled: The Construction of Assurance Expertise on Sustainability
The past decade has seen the emergence of practice in assurance on sustainability reports (‘sustainability assurance’) with high profile professional accountancy bodies such as the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, placing the development of a sustainability assurance standard near the top of its strategic agenda. This in-depth longitudinal field study aims to enhance our theoretical and empirical understanding of the processes surrounding the emergence of sustainability assurance. Empirically, the study will examine the role and focus of key actors in the emergence of assurance concentrating on: how competing claims to professional expertise in sustainability assurance have been constructed and legitimised; the dominant and shifting assurance discourses; and how target audiences have reacted to these discourses. Theoretically, the study will draw on frameworks derived from Actor Network Theory and neo-institutional theory. The study calls for a broad range of research methods competencies, particularly in qualitative methods, an excellent ability think conceptually, competence in research liaison with organizations and high level individuals, and excellent external presentation skills.
Requirements
Required education/skills: University Graduate
* Master’s (MSc) in the area of accounting (or equivalent) with excellent examination results in both course work and the MSc thesis component;
* Interest and experience in field research (for example, in the MSc thesis);
* Demonstrated Mastery of both written and spoken English;
* Conviction to complete the requirements toward a PhD degree within four years.
Job type: Research / Advising
Workfield(s) :
- Teaching & Research(Scientific discipline: Economics)
Organization
University of Amsterdam
Faculty of Economics and Business / Amsterdam Business School
The University of Amsterdam (UvA) is a university with an internationally acclaimed profile, located at the heart of the Dutch capital. As well as a world center for business and research, Amsterdam is a hub of cultural and media activities. The University of Amsterdam is a member of the League of European Research Universities.
The Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB) at the Universiteit van Amsterdam (UvA) provides academic courses in accounting, finance, management, marketing, economics, and econometrics. It also conducts international research in these areas. The Amsterdam Business School and the Amsterdam School of Economics form part of the FEB.
Conditions of employment
Employment basis: Temporary for specified period
Duration of the contract: see below
Additional conditions of employment:
The appointment will initially be for 18 months, to be extended to a total of 4 years upon excellent performance (an evaluation will be held after 14 months). The salary will be in accordance with the University regulations for academic personnel, and will range from € 2,000 (first year) up to a maximum of € 2,558 (final year) gross per month. The collective employment agreement of the Dutch universities will be applicable. The PhD thesis should be finalised within four years. In this period, the candidate will also be expected to do some teaching (20% of the time).
Additional Information
Additional information about the vacancy can be obtained from:
Professor Brendan O’Dwyer
Telephone number: 31 20 525 4260
E-mail address: b.g.d.odwyer@ uva.nl
Or additional information can be obtained through one of the following links:
* About the organization (http://www.uva. nl/start. cfm/la=en/ th=main)
* About the department (http://www.abs. uva.nl/)
* About the function (http://www.uva. nl/vacatures/ vacatures. cfm/6FFD1F92- 1321-B0BE- 6890350BCDF7D43B)
Application
You can apply for this job before 21-11-2008 (dd-mm-yyyy) by sending your application to:
University of Amsterdam Business School, Personnel Department
Bernadette Clemens
Roetersstraat 11
1018 WB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
E-mail: applications- feb@uva.nl
When applying for this job always mention the vacancynumber AT 08-5037.
Follow up on Duke’s Motion and Two Other Items
The Administration’s Motion Denied
As predicted, the judge in the civil suits denied the Duke administration’s motion to sanction opposing counsel for an alleged violation of Rule 3.6. (See previous post.) Here are details from the News and Observer and the Chronicle.
I wrote a letter to the Chronicle in which I call the actions by Duke’s counsel unprofessional. Understand that this motion was not a request for relief from any alleged harm. The administration’s lawyer denied in court that the motion was a request for a gag order. The motion was solely an attack on the integrity of Charles Cooper and his colleagues and, as I suggested in the previous post, one that had no basis in law. A bar complaint is a very serious matter touching on both the character and professional qualifications of an attorney. It should not be made lightly and certainly not to try and score a rhetorical point.
The administration’s motion is also a mean spirited cheap shot against the players who were also specifically targeted. Although Rule 3.6 only applies to attorneys, the motion requested that the court make a finding that “Plaintiffs and their counsel” violated Rule 3.6 and the local rule incorporating it. It accuses them of violating one of the same rules that their tormentor and the administration’s erstwhile codefendant, Mike Nifong did.
While the administration’s attorneys were rummaging through the Rules of Professional Conduct, perhaps they missed Rule 3.1:
A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2) has a similar requirement.
It is hard to see the administration’s motion as a good faith argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law. Interpreting a statute or rule is a matter of reading the text, which is entirely controlling, and there was no suggestion that the language used is vague or ambiguous. Duke’s argument that the spirit of the rule was violated, even if it were true, is utterly beside the point. Moreover, Rule 3.6(b)(2), the public documents exception, appears specifically intended to operate as a safe harbor rule for lawyers trying to comply with the general rule stated in Rule 3.6(a). Finally, even if the court did announce a new rule, it could not give it retroactive effect.
What we are left with the administration is attempting to try the case in the media under the guise of upholding the exact opposite principle. For the administration, appearances have always been the only thing that mattered. Still, this is a new low.
Elmo a Citizen
Congratulations to Moezeldin Elmostafa, or “Elmo” as he affectionately came to be known to supporters of the accused players, who recently became a US citizen. He was also recently named “Hero of the Year” by Reader’s Digest magazine. Durham needs more citizens like him.
Elmo was the taxi driver who picked up Reade Seligmann from the party and was able to help document Reade’s alibi. After Reade’s alibi came to light, Mike Nifong sent two detectives working on the lacrosse case to arrest Elmo on a stale warrant. When they arrested him, they asked him if he “had anything new to say about the lacrosse case.” When he said no, they then took him to a magistrate. He was eventually found innocent at trial.
I hope that the recent renewed publicity will focus attention on one loose end that remains in making Nifong fully accountable for his conduct. Attempting to alter the testimony of a witness is obstruction of justice. While Nifong’s ethical misconduct was addressed by the North Carolina Bar, he has never been made to account for his criminal conduct. Also suspicious was Nifong’s conduct in relation to another witness, the second dancer Kim Roberts. The same day that Nifong personally intervened to have her bail reduced on an unrelated criminal charge, she started giving an account that contradicted her earlier statement to police that no rape had occurred.
Elmo’s case also should be instructive to those who saw Nifong as some sort of champion for social justice because he was targeting affluent or supposedly affluent people. As an immigrant looking to become a citizen, Elmo was one of the most vulnerable people in our society. A criminal conviction of any kind could have resulted in his deportation and permanent exclusion from the United States. Yet, Nifong was as willing to maliciously prosecute him for his own purposes as he was Reade, Collin and David. Indeed, given the fact that Elmo refused to change his story when pressured by police, Nifong’s decision to prosecute him anyway was purely vindictive.
Amended Complaint
Bob Ekstrand who is representing three of the players in the civil suits recently filed an amended complaint which contains additional allegations and information. It also contains embedded audio and video exhibits. Warning! It is a huge file (121 MB). Such is the extent of the misdeeds of Duke and Durham’s leaders.
PhD Position in Accounting - University of Amsterdam
November 14, 2008
PhD Position in Accounting - University of Amsterdam
PhD Position in Accounting
University of Amsterdam Faculty of Economics and Business / Amsterdam Business School
Amsterdam, 1018WB (Noord-Holland) , hours per week
Job description
The project is entitled: The Construction of Assurance Expertise on Sustainability
The past decade has seen the emergence of practice in assurance on sustainability reports (‘sustainability assurance’) with high profile professional accountancy bodies such as the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, placing the development of a sustainability assurance standard near the top of its strategic agenda. This in-depth longitudinal field study aims to enhance our theoretical and empirical understanding of the processes surrounding the emergence of sustainability assurance. Empirically, the study will examine the role and focus of key actors in the emergence of assurance concentrating on: how competing claims to professional expertise in sustainability assurance have been constructed and legitimised; the dominant and shifting assurance discourses; and how target audiences have reacted to these discourses. Theoretically, the study will draw on frameworks derived from Actor Network Theory and neo-institutional theory. The study calls for a broad range of research methods competencies, particularly in qualitative methods, an excellent ability think conceptually, competence in research liaison with organizations and high level individuals, and excellent external presentation skills.
Requirements
Required education/skills: University Graduate
* Master’s (MSc) in the area of accounting (or equivalent) with excellent examination results in both course work and the MSc thesis component;
* Interest and experience in field research (for example, in the MSc thesis);
* Demonstrated Mastery of both written and spoken English;
* Conviction to complete the requirements toward a PhD degree within four years.
Job type: Research / Advising
Workfield(s) :
- Teaching & Research(Scientific discipline: Economics)
Organization
University of Amsterdam
Faculty of Economics and Business / Amsterdam Business School
The University of Amsterdam (UvA) is a university with an internationally acclaimed profile, located at the heart of the Dutch capital. As well as a world center for business and research, Amsterdam is a hub of cultural and media activities. The University of Amsterdam is a member of the League of European Research Universities.
The Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB) at the Universiteit van Amsterdam (UvA) provides academic courses in accounting, finance, management, marketing, economics, and econometrics. It also conducts international research in these areas. The Amsterdam Business School and the Amsterdam School of Economics form part of the FEB.
Conditions of employment
Employment basis: Temporary for specified period
Duration of the contract: see below
Additional conditions of employment:
The appointment will initially be for 18 months, to be extended to a total of 4 years upon excellent performance (an evaluation will be held after 14 months). The salary will be in accordance with the University regulations for academic personnel, and will range from € 2,000 (first year) up to a maximum of € 2,558 (final year) gross per month. The collective employment agreement of the Dutch universities will be applicable. The PhD thesis should be finalised within four years. In this period, the candidate will also be expected to do some teaching (20% of the time).
Additional Information
Additional information about the vacancy can be obtained from:
Professor Brendan O’Dwyer
Telephone number: 31 20 525 4260
E-mail address: b.g.d.odwyer@ uva.nl
Or additional information can be obtained through one of the following links:
* About the organization (http://www.uva. nl/start. cfm/la=en/ th=main)
* About the department (http://www.abs. uva.nl/)
* About the function (http://www.uva. nl/vacatures/ vacatures. cfm/6FFD1F92- 1321-B0BE- 6890350BCDF7D43B)
Application
You can apply for this job before 21-11-2008 (dd-mm-yyyy) by sending your application to:
University of Amsterdam Business School, Personnel Department
Bernadette Clemens
Roetersstraat 11
1018 WB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
E-mail: applications- feb@uva.nl
When applying for this job always mention the vacancynumber AT 08-5037.
Research Doctoral Fellowship - University of Teeside
Research Doctoral Scholarships
The University of Teesside is offering three full-time Research Doctoral Scholarships across the broad theme of business applied to any area of the public, private or voluntary sectors or partnership working between them. Key areas of research strength within Teesside Business School (TBS) are around public sector management, public governance, HRM, urban and rural regeneration, leisure and tourism, marketing, organisational learning, leadership and strategy. Applications in these areas would be particularly welcome. The award/s will be for a period of three years and include fees (home/EU or international rate) and an annual stipend of £12,940. It is anticipated that the successful candidates will, through their research, also contribute to the delivery of business and/or business-related programmes within TBS for a maximum of 6 hours a week. Successful applicants should be in a position to take up the scholarship by November 2008.
For an informal discussions about these studentships please contact Dr Tom Mordue, Assistant Dean (Research), Teesside Business School: T.Mordue@Tees. ac.uk. Phone: +44 (0)1642 342808.
Research Doctoral Scholarships applicants should have at least an upper second class honours degree or equivalent qualification and ideally a postgraduate qualification. The minimum English language entry level is IELTS 6.5 with no grade below 6.0 or equivalent.
To apply for a scholarship you must contact the Graduate Research School for an application form:
University of Teesside Research Doctoral Scholarships
Graduate Research School
University of Teesside
Middlesbrough
Tees Valley
TS1 3BA
UK
Email: graduateresearchsch ool@tees. ac.uk or tel: +44 (0)1642 738033
Closing date: 27 October 2008
Postgraduate Scholarships in Theology and Religious Studies - Mary Immaculate College
November 14, 2008
Postgraduate Scholarships in Theology and Religious Studies - Mary Immaculate College
Mary Immaculate College
Postgraduate Scholarships
in Theology and Religious Studies
Department of Theology and Religious Studies
Applications are invited immediately for postgraduate scholarships in theology at Mary Immaculate College, commencing Spring Semester 2009. The scholarships, which are valued at ca €16,000 p.a., will be awarded on a two or three year basis depending on whether candidates satisfy university requirements for registration as fulltime MA or PhD students.
Of particular interest to the Department of Theology & Religious Studies are graduates with expertise not only in theology but preferably also in history or sociology, and who are interested in researching in ecclesiology, particularly where this interfaces with pastoral theology and canon law, with a view to exploring issues of participative leadership that have historical precedents.
Applications consisting of CV, two academic referees, and a covering letter detailing research experience and interests should reach Deirdre Franklin, Department of Theology & Religious Studies, Mary Immaculate College, Sth Circular Rd Limerick, by November 7th, 2008 (Tel. + 353 61 204507, deirdre.franklin@ mic.ul.ie).
Academic Enquiries may be addressed to:
Dr. Eugene Duffy, Lecturer in Theology and Religious Studies
Tel.+353 61 204968 Email: eugene.duffy@ mic.ul.ie
Further information: www.mic.ul.ie/ theology
