My July unemployment money has been put in to some bank account by my accountant using some one else's IBAN FFS
A number of things: integrity of my work, quality of the resource, lack of ownership of my expertise and content.What would you feel uneasy about, specifically?
From a copyright / commercial p.o.v there cant be many lecturers in a position to capitalise on their work (outside of the natural sciences).
Lectures have been recorded and put online for students for a few years now. At the lecturers discretion I believe. But with so many phones in big lecture theatres that's by the by.A number of things: integrity of my work, quality of the resource, lack of ownership of my expertise and content.
Certainly when I was at University the faculty would've been considered the content owner (in spite of copyright laws) and would as such control the curriculum.
I suppose I could envisage a situation where course content pre-recorded by one lecturer could be used multiple times across a number of years rather than maintain a contract with that lecturer.
Seemingly not an issue though.
Interesting. I expect had this been the norm when I was a student, there would've been a significant amount of resistance.Lectures have been recorded and put online for students for a few years now. At the lecturers discretion I believe. But with so many phones in big lecture theatres that's by the by.
File under the proletarianization of academia.A number of things: integrity of my work, quality of the resource, lack of ownership of my expertise and content.
Certainly when I was at University the faculty would've been considered the content owner (in spite of copyright laws) and would as such control the curriculum.
I suppose I could envisage a situation where course content pre-recorded by one lecturer could be used multiple times across a number of years rather than maintain a contract with that lecturer.
Seemingly not an issue though.
The university unions are constantly fighting. Over recent times there has been more and more lecturers from abroad who happy for the cash dont join the unions.Interesting. I expect had this been the norm when I was a student, there would've been a significant amount of resistance.
Because there's a very good possibility that most of those 217 didn't actually die of Covid
I have no more evidence than the government has faith in the numbers they are reporting
All of those 217 people may have had Covid at some point - They certainly didn't all die as a direct result of it
3 million people who would be better employed making things.
Become less dependent on China for things.
Brexit philosophy in a nutshell.Fair dos if you're willing to pay the extra for having a "Made In Britain" badge would probably mean, but most people are very price sensitive. Buying British to support British workers is no bad thing, but it does sound like the sort of thing that Farage would say.
I expected it to be a bigger debate. It seems to be relegated to a shrug.File under the proletarianization of academia.
It does tend to follow that price and convenience determine consumer behaviors, not origin of product.Fair dos if you're willing to pay the extra for having a "Made In Britain" badge would probably mean, but most people are very price sensitive. Buying British to support British workers is no bad thing, but it does sound like the sort of thing that Farage would say.
I still think that died with covid and died of covid haven't been divided appropriately. It removes the point that many people dying in hospital were there for another serious reason, which then reflects on the much higher numbers.They all had COVID on their death certificate, so the doctor who filled in that certificate considered it to be either a primary or a secondary cause of death. When doctors are filling in death certificates, they're not overly concerned about when they had COVID, just if it contributed to their death.
The positive to take from the fact that ~210 people were identified as having died as a result of COVID that week is that it means roughly 30 people a day died from COVID. As the daily numbers coming out now are roughly twice that number, which mean they're an overestimate ( that's the positive btw, not the actual deaths ) because, in England, they do include people who had COVID at some time in the past, regardless of whether or not it was a cause of death.
This is why Hancock was all over this a couple of weeks ago and ordered an "urgent" review. Obviously he didn't feel the need to have such a review when deaths were at their peak and, based on excess deaths and COVID certifications, the headline figures were badly underestimating the numbers, but such is life.
The only thing that isn't talked about now is that where you can say for example 30 people died a day and the focus still being on covid-19 for obvious reasons. It removes how many more die every day via preventable illnesses. A quick Google gives me 2017 results saying on average 387 a day die from preventable illnesses.
Interesting. I expect had this been the norm when I was a student, there would've been a significant amount of resistance.
Yo Marnie how are you doing today.My July unemployment money has been put in to some bank account by my accountant using some one else's IBAN FFS
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.