Coin, only with two sides

The lack of dialogue is what makes us functional deaf people.

It is like wearing pirate’s eyes patches: we don’t see. Does it matter the rough pride in terms of pure eyeballs? We don’t see.

The academic system has, as many things in life, virtues and flaws. In virtue, one can count on freedom of speech, like in no other. But in flaw there’s the lack of listening. Listening and talking are two sides of the same coin, and the coin can only be valued when it is in one piece, intact, indivisible. Listens and talks? It has value. Doesn’t listen? It’s worthless.

With the new evaluation process of the R&D units, FCT introduced two interesting facts of behaviour induction, and they have not been revealed. So, lets rehearse its dissection.

Firstly, the requirement for settlements signatures between R&D units and schools: it is a basic hygiene action. If Mariano Gago ruptured with the old structure and gave life to the independence of such units, who can criticize nowadays? The outcome is at plain sight, an unbelievable progress of Portuguese science. The space it needed to breathe was given. But the efficiency of this system and the construction of a much more valuable win-win situation demands that the two sides of the system match up and become one single coin. Only by talking – and this action obliged them to talk.

The other two sides of the coin in the same piggy bank demanded adhesion. What’s the point of FCT (the Nation) investing millions in financing a research structure based on R&D units and, then, not allow them to say a word in the choice of indispensable manpower to their existence, which is PhD students? In many cases, the doctoral programmes (not all, for sure, but let us see the most representative scenario) exist with a life of their own, and not as an articulated piece of a global strategy. In many cases, with its own logic, and not as an instrument of school’s science and technology policy that has sheltered them, formally articulated with the R&D units.

Once again, two perspectives of the system in which there was a lack of dialogue. The placement of scholarships’ packages in R&D units, with the obligation to indicate the doctoral programmes in which they will be invested, requires talking – converge, build, in an organised and explicit way, the win-win picture. The doctoral thesis and the research in the R&D units are two sides of the same coin. But, from the management point of view, they were loose coins, begging a counterpart. So, now, if they don’t talk, they will face some problems – therefore, the incentive is, once again, a perfect shot.

Each Doctoral Programme Coordenation knows now what to do in order to give stability to the student’s flow to its course of studies – talk to the R&D units. And listen. And vice versa.

Talks and listens? The coin is valuable. Doesn’t talk? It’s worthless.