- Email: [email protected]
The academic in the University of Excellence: The need to construct the ‘paraversity’ using the web
Nurse Education Today 35 (2015) 638–640
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Nurse Education Today journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/nedt
Contemporary Issues
The academic in the University of Excellence: The need to construct the ‘paraversity’ using the web Keywords: Paraversity Education University of Excellence Web 2.0 Scholarship
Introduction Higher Education institutions across the globe are changing and changing fast. Several writers have expressed dismay in response to what has been called the ‘University in Ruins’ (Readings, 1996). Gary Rolfe (2013), picking up on Reading's work addressed ‘scholarship in the corporate university’ and suggested that academics must ‘dwell in the ruins’ in an authentic and productive way through the development of a community of philosophers who will dissent, subvert and challenge the ‘corporate university’ from within. Tools for subversion are at hand and give academics new ways to reach students, and indeed anybody, way beyond the physical confines of their campus. Accepting that there are issues of peer review and hence quality, these tools allow free access and may facilitate dialogue in ways unheard of just few years ago. First the idea of the paraversity will be outlined, and importantly a central notion of dissensus highlighted. This is compared to the ‘University of Excellence’ and the question raised about academics' role. I will also refer to the work of C Wright Mills' on ‘intellectual craftsmanship’. Finally I suggest that constructing the paraversity can start with using web 2.0 technologies. This paper is overtly provocative and political based on a notion that nursing is locked into a matrix of social systems that are oppressive and marginalising, and that Higher Education itself, in the guise of the ‘University of Excellence’ is increasingly commodified, losing its way as it tries to meet the needs of the ‘Knowledge Economy’ in the production of ‘Cognitive Capitalism’. What is the ‘Paraversity’? (Rolfe, 2013) Gary Rolfe suggests that the ‘paraversity’ runs alongside the visible University, going unnoticed or unseen. The paraversity is a ‘mental space’ of dissensus, seeking no unity of thought or acceptance of any grand narrative. As such, the paraversity may well throw up an antithesis to this thesis. It is invisible, subversive and a virtual institution. It is not owned by corporate interests, it is not influenced directly by research bodies, funding streams or research programmes or corporate management strategies. The national student survey is irrelevant to its continuance. There will be no physically identified building or faculty — it exists in the form of a community of philosopher scholars exploring and deconstructing and reconstructing ideas.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.01.008 0260-6917/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
In the paraversity there is no need to arrive at consensus or agreement or a system of unified thought. It does not exist to fulfil the corporate university's aims and objectives, it is the ‘pursuit of difference’ to keep open debate and discussion and not to shut it down. It also operates to call the ‘University of Excellence’ to intellectual account. The social context of health care, inequalities in health and the health effects of climate change are part of a ‘world problematique’ and are thus ideas to be debated by nursing scholars. The ‘University of Excellence’ It might be argued that during the ‘Enlightenment’, the historic missions of Universities focused on ‘truth’ and ‘emancipation’. Now, this narrative has been replaced with that of the neoliberal capitalist narrative of efficiency, effectiveness and profitability, i.e. the narrative of the market towards which today's intellectuals might be too obedient. Thus have we arrived at the phenomenon of the corporate University based on a business model focused on market position in order to fulfil strategic directives often based on workforce development and meeting the needs of a local or a national economy. Readings (1996) argued that the ‘pursuit of excellence’ within this narrative is a legitimising idea for the corporate University. However, ‘excellence’ refers more to administrative processes in which ‘excellence’ is a unit of measurement, devoid of qualitative content, which we now measure through such metrics as attrition, the number of firsts, impact factors, the number of research grants awarded and student perception questionnaires. An excellent nursing degree is one with low attrition, satisfied students, high employability and high numbers of firsts. Who would disagree with that? Rolfe (2013) suggests that this view of excellence is one of quantity rather than of quality and brings us into the realms of “efficiency, profitability and administration” (p. 9). He goes on to argue “The vision and mission of the University has shifted from the production and dissemination of thought and ideas to the generation and sale of facts and data”. [Rolfe (2013 p 81)] This suggests that the role of Universities now is often that of contributing to the local and the national economy and to train graduates for the job market, and I would suggest that in many nursing departments that is the sole ‘raison d'etre’. As a result, Alec Grant refers to the privileging of ‘adminstrivia’, to describe the activities undertaken by nurse academics that are getting in the way of their critical engagement with scholarship. What is being lost is the notion of ‘intellectual craftmanship’ in favour of the search for empirical certainty, data and hard facts to
Contemporary Issues
guide practice and the need to meet contracted workforce targets. Perhaps many nurse scholars themselves have lost the ability to engage in this activity, and thus to be role models, buckling under the pressure to deliver clinical skills and other diverse teaching while also delivering empirically based research which provides facts and answers to practical questions. What we end up with is the pressure to produce ‘denotative’ writing — the telling and informing process through powerpoints and scientific reports as the dominant discourse of knowledge production and dissemination.
What Role for Academics in the Paraversity? Following on from Antonio Gramsci's notion of the organic activist academic and Noam Chomsky's entreaty that it is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies, Brock (2014) argued the role of the social movement academic is to “to debunk the knowledge on which the powerful rest”. This might apply to nurse academics interested in for example the social determinants of health. Although written many decades ago, Gramsci's archetype may well be seen within the corporate university which supports and encourages the traditional and ignores the activist, and if Inglis (2014) were correct, too many are far too obedient to the established order of the corporate university. To engage in debunking requires ‘intellectual craftsmanship’ and is important for critical enquiry in the paraversity. This assumes that nurse academics see themselves as engaged in critical transformative pedagogy with their students and communities, as much as some sociologists do (McKenzie, 2014).
On Intellectual Craftsmanship (Wright Mills, 1959) In the appendix to ‘The Sociological Imagination’ Wright Mills outlined his view on ‘doing’ social science in which he suggested that ‘Scholarship’ is more important than empirical research for the social scientist. He considered that Empiricism was the ‘mere sorting out of facts and disagreements about facts’, something he wished to avoid if he could possibly do so. The task of social science is thus to critically engage in the real world, joining personal experience and intellectual life through critical reflective reason as the “advance guard in any field of learning” (p. 205) He argued: “It is the political task of the social scientist — as of any liberal educator — continually to translate personal troubles into public issues, and public issues into the terms of their human meaning for a variety of individuals”. (p. 187). Nurse educators might read this and think, actually, no it is not my political task at all! Nurse students do not need to think about their personal lives and the lives of others as they relate to wider social and political issues…they need to be able to deliver care — to provide pain relief, comfort and explanations to vulnerable people, to interpret cardiac rhythms and administer medications, to assess wounds and decide upon management plans….that is the stuff of nursing and the rest of this is mere frippery or intellectual posturing which belongs in pseuds corner. In this they might be supported by the Corporate University which, in response to the demands of its customers, industry, commerce and the economy, has shifted the emphasis of the role of the academic from raising questions to providing answers, from problematizing to problem solving. Many nursing students come into nursing to provide care or want education that is focused on developing practice, not to raise questions. Thus empiricism and the tenets of positivistic science have been dragooned to support this mission. This is in opposition to various pedagogic notions regarding education for personal and social transformation.
639
Nursing, and nurse academics, have a question to address. Are we engaged in the development of a practice based discipline, interested only in the ‘sorting out of facts and the disagreements of facts?’ Do we accept the requirement to speak truth and expose lies? Are we liberal educators? Are we traditional and/or organic academics? Justification for the ‘discovery of facts’ may be founded on its usefulness for policy and clinical practice and of course should be foundational knowledge for clinical nursing practice, after all we do not want the wrong drug to be administered because we have not sorted out the ‘facts’, but has this need crowded out critical scholarship and free intellectual inquiry? If we accept the latter, nurse scholars need to write, and to write essays or blogs and not just research reports; to engage in discussion and not just to tell; write to invite commentary, to clarify one's thoughts, to learn about oneself as well as to explore ideas and investigate one's area of interest. As the current debates regarding the future of the NHS shows, nursing operates in a socio-political context and is not just an applied set of techniques; and as such requires critique, understanding, discussion, reflexivity and transformation. The corporate university may not be interested in these ‘outcomes’, fixated as it may be on contracted commissioned targets, workforce development, league tables, SPQ results, attrition rates and ill-defined notions of the ‘student experience’. The early career nursing academic will be faced by a host of external constraints on their intellectual development and their ‘success’ or performance development reviews may rest on targets and values not of their own making. What may be ignored by ‘impact metrics’ is any of their writing, which is created over and above the research ‘write up’ focused on answering an empirical question according to a matrix of methodological imperatives. Graham Scambler (2014) makes the point that he benefitted from the freedom to engage in intellectual activity: “I have encountered several ‘young’ sociologists…who have played significant roles in facilitating as well as contributing to virtual networking and innovation but whose pioneering expertise in social media remain institutionally unrecognized and unrewarded” (my emphasis). C Wright Mills recognised that intellectuals can play a crucial role in ideological warfare against the dominant hegemonic discourses that create obedient and subservient subjectivities in ourselves and our students. The paraversity may assist in this by creating what Slavoj Žižek has called ‘liberated territories’ which are “havens of thinking into which thinkers can migrate and from which thoughts can proliferate and social change can reify”. What Might the Paraversity Begin to Look Like? Web 2.0, according to Anderson (2007), incorporates 6 ideas for web usage which move us beyond it being store of information and towards ideas of user generated content, harnessing the power of the crowd, using data on an epic scale, participation, network effects and openness. Space precludes a more detailed discussion, however see Anderson (2007) for a good start. The examples below of course are only mere beginnings, it is up to the community of scholars to construct the paraversity and if it is based on dissensus, it may look very different and take on a dynamic nature. If the idea is to create a dialogue, to share ideas, to critique, and to go beyond the physical confines of the Corporate University, the web 2.0 technologies might assist in this process. Blog: http://www.bennygoodman.co.uk/ or http://www. grahamscambler.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/NursingSCC/ Researchgate: http://www.researchgate.net/ Wikis, Tagging, Multimedia sharing, Audio and Video Blogging, Podcasts, RSS and syndication, Twitter, Facebook and academic sites such as academia.edu and researchgate provide examples where critical
640
Contemporary Issues
thought and the sharing of ideas are accessible by anyone, anywhere and at anytime. They provide platforms for commentary and feedback, both synchronously and asynchronously. Their credibility may be built upon already established reputations and research outputs and/or by the clarity and force of the arguments. They will stand or fall by the community wanting to engage and share and the commitment and enthusiasm by the creator.
Conclusion Critical education and challenging taken for granted assumptions are part of the foundations for human progress, if we still believe in progress. Nursing education exists to provide a workforce for mainly the UK's NHS and as such operates in a largely instrumental fashion to do so. Thus its ‘raison etre’ may be foundationally antithetical to dissensus in a paraversity. Universities generally may not provide the fertile soil for critical enquiry and discourse, but we do not have to wait for this to occur. We can right now live in the ruins of the University and engage in scholarship that is subversive, critical and potentially engaging and do so in the full knowledge that traditional rewards and recognition may not be forthcoming.
References Anderson, P., 2007. What is web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards watch (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ 20140702233839/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf). Brock, T., 2014. What is the Function of the Social Movement Academic? The Sociological Imagination. http://sociologicalimagination.org/archives/15545. Inglis, F., 2014. Today's Intellectuals: Too Obedient? THES August 28th. McKenzie, L., 2014. Being a Link Between the Academic World and Local Communities (Online). http://sociologicalimagination.org/archives/15127/commentpage-1#comment-126350 (accessed 6th October 2014). Rolfe, G., 2013. The University in Dissent. Routledge, London. Readings, B., 1996. The University in Ruins. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Scambler, G., 2014. A 100th Blog: A Reflexive Interlude. http://www.grahamscambler. com/a-100th-blog-a-reflexive-interlude/#respond. Wright Mills, C., 1959. The Sociological Imagination. 40th Edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Benny Goodman Knowledge Spa, RCH Treliske, Truro TR1 3HD, United Kingdom Tel.: +44 01872 255111; fax: +44 01872 256451, +44 07886 933 346 (mobile). E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. 19 January 2015
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Nurse Education Today journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/nedt
Contemporary Issues
The academic in the University of Excellence: The need to construct the ‘paraversity’ using the web Keywords: Paraversity Education University of Excellence Web 2.0 Scholarship
Introduction Higher Education institutions across the globe are changing and changing fast. Several writers have expressed dismay in response to what has been called the ‘University in Ruins’ (Readings, 1996). Gary Rolfe (2013), picking up on Reading's work addressed ‘scholarship in the corporate university’ and suggested that academics must ‘dwell in the ruins’ in an authentic and productive way through the development of a community of philosophers who will dissent, subvert and challenge the ‘corporate university’ from within. Tools for subversion are at hand and give academics new ways to reach students, and indeed anybody, way beyond the physical confines of their campus. Accepting that there are issues of peer review and hence quality, these tools allow free access and may facilitate dialogue in ways unheard of just few years ago. First the idea of the paraversity will be outlined, and importantly a central notion of dissensus highlighted. This is compared to the ‘University of Excellence’ and the question raised about academics' role. I will also refer to the work of C Wright Mills' on ‘intellectual craftsmanship’. Finally I suggest that constructing the paraversity can start with using web 2.0 technologies. This paper is overtly provocative and political based on a notion that nursing is locked into a matrix of social systems that are oppressive and marginalising, and that Higher Education itself, in the guise of the ‘University of Excellence’ is increasingly commodified, losing its way as it tries to meet the needs of the ‘Knowledge Economy’ in the production of ‘Cognitive Capitalism’. What is the ‘Paraversity’? (Rolfe, 2013) Gary Rolfe suggests that the ‘paraversity’ runs alongside the visible University, going unnoticed or unseen. The paraversity is a ‘mental space’ of dissensus, seeking no unity of thought or acceptance of any grand narrative. As such, the paraversity may well throw up an antithesis to this thesis. It is invisible, subversive and a virtual institution. It is not owned by corporate interests, it is not influenced directly by research bodies, funding streams or research programmes or corporate management strategies. The national student survey is irrelevant to its continuance. There will be no physically identified building or faculty — it exists in the form of a community of philosopher scholars exploring and deconstructing and reconstructing ideas.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.01.008 0260-6917/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
In the paraversity there is no need to arrive at consensus or agreement or a system of unified thought. It does not exist to fulfil the corporate university's aims and objectives, it is the ‘pursuit of difference’ to keep open debate and discussion and not to shut it down. It also operates to call the ‘University of Excellence’ to intellectual account. The social context of health care, inequalities in health and the health effects of climate change are part of a ‘world problematique’ and are thus ideas to be debated by nursing scholars. The ‘University of Excellence’ It might be argued that during the ‘Enlightenment’, the historic missions of Universities focused on ‘truth’ and ‘emancipation’. Now, this narrative has been replaced with that of the neoliberal capitalist narrative of efficiency, effectiveness and profitability, i.e. the narrative of the market towards which today's intellectuals might be too obedient. Thus have we arrived at the phenomenon of the corporate University based on a business model focused on market position in order to fulfil strategic directives often based on workforce development and meeting the needs of a local or a national economy. Readings (1996) argued that the ‘pursuit of excellence’ within this narrative is a legitimising idea for the corporate University. However, ‘excellence’ refers more to administrative processes in which ‘excellence’ is a unit of measurement, devoid of qualitative content, which we now measure through such metrics as attrition, the number of firsts, impact factors, the number of research grants awarded and student perception questionnaires. An excellent nursing degree is one with low attrition, satisfied students, high employability and high numbers of firsts. Who would disagree with that? Rolfe (2013) suggests that this view of excellence is one of quantity rather than of quality and brings us into the realms of “efficiency, profitability and administration” (p. 9). He goes on to argue “The vision and mission of the University has shifted from the production and dissemination of thought and ideas to the generation and sale of facts and data”. [Rolfe (2013 p 81)] This suggests that the role of Universities now is often that of contributing to the local and the national economy and to train graduates for the job market, and I would suggest that in many nursing departments that is the sole ‘raison d'etre’. As a result, Alec Grant refers to the privileging of ‘adminstrivia’, to describe the activities undertaken by nurse academics that are getting in the way of their critical engagement with scholarship. What is being lost is the notion of ‘intellectual craftmanship’ in favour of the search for empirical certainty, data and hard facts to
Contemporary Issues
guide practice and the need to meet contracted workforce targets. Perhaps many nurse scholars themselves have lost the ability to engage in this activity, and thus to be role models, buckling under the pressure to deliver clinical skills and other diverse teaching while also delivering empirically based research which provides facts and answers to practical questions. What we end up with is the pressure to produce ‘denotative’ writing — the telling and informing process through powerpoints and scientific reports as the dominant discourse of knowledge production and dissemination.
What Role for Academics in the Paraversity? Following on from Antonio Gramsci's notion of the organic activist academic and Noam Chomsky's entreaty that it is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies, Brock (2014) argued the role of the social movement academic is to “to debunk the knowledge on which the powerful rest”. This might apply to nurse academics interested in for example the social determinants of health. Although written many decades ago, Gramsci's archetype may well be seen within the corporate university which supports and encourages the traditional and ignores the activist, and if Inglis (2014) were correct, too many are far too obedient to the established order of the corporate university. To engage in debunking requires ‘intellectual craftsmanship’ and is important for critical enquiry in the paraversity. This assumes that nurse academics see themselves as engaged in critical transformative pedagogy with their students and communities, as much as some sociologists do (McKenzie, 2014).
On Intellectual Craftsmanship (Wright Mills, 1959) In the appendix to ‘The Sociological Imagination’ Wright Mills outlined his view on ‘doing’ social science in which he suggested that ‘Scholarship’ is more important than empirical research for the social scientist. He considered that Empiricism was the ‘mere sorting out of facts and disagreements about facts’, something he wished to avoid if he could possibly do so. The task of social science is thus to critically engage in the real world, joining personal experience and intellectual life through critical reflective reason as the “advance guard in any field of learning” (p. 205) He argued: “It is the political task of the social scientist — as of any liberal educator — continually to translate personal troubles into public issues, and public issues into the terms of their human meaning for a variety of individuals”. (p. 187). Nurse educators might read this and think, actually, no it is not my political task at all! Nurse students do not need to think about their personal lives and the lives of others as they relate to wider social and political issues…they need to be able to deliver care — to provide pain relief, comfort and explanations to vulnerable people, to interpret cardiac rhythms and administer medications, to assess wounds and decide upon management plans….that is the stuff of nursing and the rest of this is mere frippery or intellectual posturing which belongs in pseuds corner. In this they might be supported by the Corporate University which, in response to the demands of its customers, industry, commerce and the economy, has shifted the emphasis of the role of the academic from raising questions to providing answers, from problematizing to problem solving. Many nursing students come into nursing to provide care or want education that is focused on developing practice, not to raise questions. Thus empiricism and the tenets of positivistic science have been dragooned to support this mission. This is in opposition to various pedagogic notions regarding education for personal and social transformation.
639
Nursing, and nurse academics, have a question to address. Are we engaged in the development of a practice based discipline, interested only in the ‘sorting out of facts and the disagreements of facts?’ Do we accept the requirement to speak truth and expose lies? Are we liberal educators? Are we traditional and/or organic academics? Justification for the ‘discovery of facts’ may be founded on its usefulness for policy and clinical practice and of course should be foundational knowledge for clinical nursing practice, after all we do not want the wrong drug to be administered because we have not sorted out the ‘facts’, but has this need crowded out critical scholarship and free intellectual inquiry? If we accept the latter, nurse scholars need to write, and to write essays or blogs and not just research reports; to engage in discussion and not just to tell; write to invite commentary, to clarify one's thoughts, to learn about oneself as well as to explore ideas and investigate one's area of interest. As the current debates regarding the future of the NHS shows, nursing operates in a socio-political context and is not just an applied set of techniques; and as such requires critique, understanding, discussion, reflexivity and transformation. The corporate university may not be interested in these ‘outcomes’, fixated as it may be on contracted commissioned targets, workforce development, league tables, SPQ results, attrition rates and ill-defined notions of the ‘student experience’. The early career nursing academic will be faced by a host of external constraints on their intellectual development and their ‘success’ or performance development reviews may rest on targets and values not of their own making. What may be ignored by ‘impact metrics’ is any of their writing, which is created over and above the research ‘write up’ focused on answering an empirical question according to a matrix of methodological imperatives. Graham Scambler (2014) makes the point that he benefitted from the freedom to engage in intellectual activity: “I have encountered several ‘young’ sociologists…who have played significant roles in facilitating as well as contributing to virtual networking and innovation but whose pioneering expertise in social media remain institutionally unrecognized and unrewarded” (my emphasis). C Wright Mills recognised that intellectuals can play a crucial role in ideological warfare against the dominant hegemonic discourses that create obedient and subservient subjectivities in ourselves and our students. The paraversity may assist in this by creating what Slavoj Žižek has called ‘liberated territories’ which are “havens of thinking into which thinkers can migrate and from which thoughts can proliferate and social change can reify”. What Might the Paraversity Begin to Look Like? Web 2.0, according to Anderson (2007), incorporates 6 ideas for web usage which move us beyond it being store of information and towards ideas of user generated content, harnessing the power of the crowd, using data on an epic scale, participation, network effects and openness. Space precludes a more detailed discussion, however see Anderson (2007) for a good start. The examples below of course are only mere beginnings, it is up to the community of scholars to construct the paraversity and if it is based on dissensus, it may look very different and take on a dynamic nature. If the idea is to create a dialogue, to share ideas, to critique, and to go beyond the physical confines of the Corporate University, the web 2.0 technologies might assist in this process. Blog: http://www.bennygoodman.co.uk/ or http://www. grahamscambler.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/NursingSCC/ Researchgate: http://www.researchgate.net/ Wikis, Tagging, Multimedia sharing, Audio and Video Blogging, Podcasts, RSS and syndication, Twitter, Facebook and academic sites such as academia.edu and researchgate provide examples where critical
640
Contemporary Issues
thought and the sharing of ideas are accessible by anyone, anywhere and at anytime. They provide platforms for commentary and feedback, both synchronously and asynchronously. Their credibility may be built upon already established reputations and research outputs and/or by the clarity and force of the arguments. They will stand or fall by the community wanting to engage and share and the commitment and enthusiasm by the creator.
Conclusion Critical education and challenging taken for granted assumptions are part of the foundations for human progress, if we still believe in progress. Nursing education exists to provide a workforce for mainly the UK's NHS and as such operates in a largely instrumental fashion to do so. Thus its ‘raison etre’ may be foundationally antithetical to dissensus in a paraversity. Universities generally may not provide the fertile soil for critical enquiry and discourse, but we do not have to wait for this to occur. We can right now live in the ruins of the University and engage in scholarship that is subversive, critical and potentially engaging and do so in the full knowledge that traditional rewards and recognition may not be forthcoming.
References Anderson, P., 2007. What is web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards watch (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ 20140702233839/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf). Brock, T., 2014. What is the Function of the Social Movement Academic? The Sociological Imagination. http://sociologicalimagination.org/archives/15545. Inglis, F., 2014. Today's Intellectuals: Too Obedient? THES August 28th. McKenzie, L., 2014. Being a Link Between the Academic World and Local Communities (Online). http://sociologicalimagination.org/archives/15127/commentpage-1#comment-126350 (accessed 6th October 2014). Rolfe, G., 2013. The University in Dissent. Routledge, London. Readings, B., 1996. The University in Ruins. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Scambler, G., 2014. A 100th Blog: A Reflexive Interlude. http://www.grahamscambler. com/a-100th-blog-a-reflexive-interlude/#respond. Wright Mills, C., 1959. The Sociological Imagination. 40th Edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Benny Goodman Knowledge Spa, RCH Treliske, Truro TR1 3HD, United Kingdom Tel.: +44 01872 255111; fax: +44 01872 256451, +44 07886 933 346 (mobile). E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. 19 January 2015