Category: News

MASA is concerned about meeting the standards that would allow the lifting of the suspension of the National Accreditation Body (NAT) within the European Higher Education Association (ENQA). NAT is a key body in the Serbian higher education system, because it monitors the quality of studies and approves study programs at all faculties and higher schools.

In 2012, this body received the status of a full member of ENQA, thus Serbia received confirmation that the accreditation system is in accordance with European standards. Unfortunately, at the beginning of 2018, the membership of NAT was suspended and placed under observation. ENQA has informed the management of NAT that it is not satisfied with the way in which it awards accreditations to Serbian faculties and higher schools.

The main objection raised is that the same people do the evaluation and make decisions about accreditations. Another complaint is the excessive number of local reviewers compared to external reviewers. The third is that evaluation reports do not reflect the teamwork of reviewers. ENQA gave NAT a two-year deadline to correct the perceived failings and placed it under observation. That deadline expires on March 22, 2020.

The Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development informed the public that all observed deficiencies have been eliminated and that NAT will once again become a full member of ENQA. It is in the interest of the entire academic community that this process ends successfully and that all doubts about the accreditation process are removed. MASA asks the Ministry to inform the public about concrete steps taken in accordance with ENQA's objections.

The establishment was welcomed by the academic community Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia (Fund), which should encourage the development of scientific research and the application of their results for the sake of faster social, technological, cultural and economic development of the Republic of Serbia. In this context, the news that the Fund will use the best comparative experiences and practices, such as those used in Horizon 2020, in the evaluation of project proposals within its programs, met with the undivided support of the academic public.

How is it Program for excellent projects of young researchers (PROMIS) is the first program of the Fund, it establishes standards, and it is certain that the experiences in all phases of its implementation will determine the way in which the Fund will lead subsequent programs. At this point, it is necessary to point out the following shortcomings of the current process of project selection within PROMIS.

Reviewers play a key role in the evaluation of received projects. The standard in similar European calls is for the list of reviewers to be publicly available before the call is published, which was not the case with PROMIS. A publicly available list of reviewers removes doubts about the review process and contributes to transparency in competitive research funding programs. Therefore, publication of the complete list of reviewers, their names, titles, and affiliations, as well as review instructions, is required.

During the first stage of evaluation, the reviewers rate the projects, and the reviews and comments of the reviewers are known only to the project managers. The second level of evaluation foresees that the Program Board of the Fund gives up to 35 points to the projects from the preliminary list of projects, which completes the selection process. Considering that the distance between the worst and the best placed project from the preliminary ranking list is only 10 points (55 to 65 points), it is clear how important the evaluation of the Program Board is for the final outcome. That is why we believe that it is of crucial importance that this stage of evaluation be transparent, and we request that the evaluations of the Program Board be clearly indicated in the final balance of points for each project that has entered the second stage of evaluation.

This is especially important considering that Act on procedures for the preparation of the Program and selection of Science Fund project proposals publication of the preliminary ranking list in the second stage of evaluation is not foreseen. We believe that it is necessary for the Science Fund to clearly demonstrate how the scoring of project proposals was carried out at all evaluation stages so that all registered researchers and the entire academic public can clearly, unequivocally and transparently make sure that the entire process was carried out in accordance with Act. We invite the Fund to publish on its website not only the final ranking list for PROMIS and all future programs, but also:

1) a complete list of reviewers, their names, titles and affiliations;

2) review instructions;

3) the final list of all proposals that have passed the evaluation with a clearly indicated structure of points won.

These are crucial and minimal steps for establishing and maintaining trust between the academic community and the Science Fund, a body that will play a key role in the system of financing scientific research in the Republic of Serbia.

MASA welcomes decision of the Committee for Professional Ethics of the University of Belgrade which established non-academic behavior, i.e. plagiarism, of the current Minister of Finance of the Republic of Serbia, Siniša Malog, during the preparation of his doctoral dissertation. 

This has not yet put an end to the affair that seriously shook the credibility and integrity of the University of Belgrade, but it has set a clear framework for the further struggle against the collapse of its autonomy and dignity. In accordance with the mentioned Decision, we expect a quick reaction of the Senate of the University. We believe that this Decision will contribute to other joint efforts to stop non-compliance with the rules, procedures and ethical standards that are the basic guarantors of the institutional independence of our academic institutions. 

The entire academic community in Serbia, as well as the general public, expected the Committee for Professional Ethics of the University of Belgrade to make a decision on the validity of Sinisa Malog's doctorate on November 4, 2019.

This date is fixed by agreement of 24.09.2019. between the administration of the University of Belgrade and the students who blocked the Rector's office, demanding that the issue of the disputed doctorate of Sinisa Malog, which has been threatening the reputation of the University of Belgrade for more than five years, be finally resolved.

Extension of the deadline for the final decision until November 22, 2019. it's an unpleasant surprise.
Rector of the University of Belgrade, prof. Ph.D. Ivanka Popović explained that, due to an oversight in the interpretation of the regulations, and considering the newly created circumstances after the decision of the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, it is necessary to extend the deadline in order to comply with the appeal procedure of 15 days.

The omission in the interpretation of regulations is big and unpleasant both for the academic community and for the general public. However, we are of the opinion that this was not the result of the intention, because delaying the resolution of this issue cannot bring any benefit to the academic community. On the contrary!

We fully understand the dissatisfaction of students due to these circumstances. We also understand, and we're sure the students do, that the delay is really necessary for procedural reasons. If the appeal deadline is not met, we would provide an opportunity to have the Professional Ethics Board's decision overturned in court.

In other words, we are ready to wait, together with the students, for the final decision to be made within valid academic and legal frameworks. In the meantime, the teachers and researchers of the University of Belgrade will also file appeals against the FON's decision regarding Sinisa Malog's doctorate.

We express our belief that, based on the unequivocal, and publicly presented, evidence of plagiarism in Sinisa Malog's doctorate, the Committee for Professional Ethics of the University of Belgrade will make the correct decision on November 22.

We, the teachers and researchers of the University of Belgrade, stand by our students and will support any student initiative that will protect the academic integrity, reputation and autonomy of our university. The university, made up of teachers, researchers and students, represents the intellectual force on which the foundations of modern society rest. We will not allow these values to collapse.

Initiative University support #1 of 5 million
Network of Academic Solidarity and Engagement - MASA

Mreža akademske solidarnosti i angažovanosti poziva koleginice i kolege sa univerziteta u Srbiji i ostale zainteresovane, da potpišu peticiju kojom se od nadležnog ministarstva i uprave Univerziteta u Beogradu traži da stanu u zaštitu autonomije Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog fakulteta (PBF), kao punopravne članice Univerziteta. Ukazujemo da je Sinod SPC sledećim postupcima grubo prekršio i nastavlja da krši prava nastavnika i autonomiju PBF, a time i autonomiju Univerziteta u Beogradu.

1. Sinod Srpske pravoslavne crkve je mimo svih zakonskih ovlašćenja naložio dekanu Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu da oduzme pravo dvojici nastavnika ovog fakulteta da na njemu predaju. Episkop Maksim Vasiljević, redovni profesor i docent Marko Vilotić lažno su optuženi da krše Statut Univerziteta u Beogradu.

2. Sinod zloupotrebljava institut običajnog davanja saglasnosti za izbor u nastavnička zvanja predviđen članom 95. Statuta PBF, te proizvoljno tumači i povlači odobrenje nastavnicima, čime narušava radna prava i autonomiju nastavnika koji predaju na Univerzitetu u Beogradu. Nakon odbijanja dekana PBF Ignatija Midića da otpusti pomenute kolege, Sinod je izvršio pritisak na Nastavno naučno veće PBF da pokrene proceduru za smenu dekana. Sednica NNV je zakazana za 12. novembar.

3. Sinod se direktno meša u unutrašnja pitanja fakulteta i univerziteta imenovanjem svojih predstavnika kao „posmatrača i izaslanika na sednicama fakultetskih tela, a među njima i Saveta Fakulteta“, protivno Zakonu o visokom obrazovanju, Statutu Univerziteta i Statutu PBF.

4. Pritisci na kolege sa PBF traju još od istupa grupe od 12 nastavnika i saradnika koji su zajednički potpisanim Stavom ustali protiv Peticije za reviziju izučavanja teorije evolucije u obrazovnom sistemu R. Srbije. Patrijarh Irinej je 20. maja 2017. uputio dekret, koji nikada nije povučen, kojim zabranjuje javne nastupe svim nastavnicima, saradnicima i zaposlenima na PBF bez njegovog prethodnog odobrenja.

Apelujemo na Univerzitet u Beogradu i Ministarstvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja da spreče dalje proganjanje nastavnika i dekana ovog fakulteta. Takođe, tražimo da se rad PBF vrati u okvire regulisane Statutom Univerziteta i Zakonom o visokom obrazovanju i da se iz Statuta PBF ukloni odredba o davanju saglasnosti Sinoda SPC predavačima na fakultetu, koja se koristi za unutar-crkvene obračune kojima ne sme biti mesto unutar Univerziteta.

Peticiju možete potpisati na the following LINK.

The Mass Assembly will be held on Tuesday, November 5 at 4 p.m. The venue is the House of Culture (Krsmanović House), Terazije 34.

In order for the operation of the Mass to be based on democratic foundations and with the inclusion of as wide a circle of academic workers as possible, we invite you to get involved and contribute to the work of the network. In this way, we intend to lay the foundation for the mass's systemic action, which will not only be reactive but also proactive in creating an academic environment. In order to build the capacities of the Mass, it is necessary that all those who have the desire and ambition to improve the academic environment and conditions for their own work actively participate in its work.

At the assembly itself, the steps taken so far to provide capacities for the work of the Mass and support for academic workers will be presented. After the assembly, we will develop concrete action plans for each of the areas together with those who join and start implementing them. The problems we face within the academy are numerous and it is extremely important that as many colleagues as possible attend the assembly.

On the following links you can find:
1. Mass Statute, with principles, goals and planned activities.
2. Mass action plan, that is, the structure of the network that will be the basis for work in the next year.