Tuesday, 9 October 2012

Females Still in Need of Better Access to University Education

By Dene-Hern Chen - October 8, 2012

Women’s advocates and officials at the Ministry of Women’s Affairs yesterday celebrated the U.N.’s International Day of the Girl in Phnom Penh and called for greater access to higher education for girls in Cambodia so they can avoid falling into exploitative jobs.


“Girls who start an adult life with an education handicap step into a life that is characterized by a weak status and horizons,” Undersecretary of State Prak Channay said at the Harpswell Dormitory and Leadership Center, which takes young women with little means in the provinces and supports them in pursuing post-secondary studies.

“Their ability to negotiate a better salary, better social protection benefits, to claim their rights and get promoted to better and more secure jobs is more limited than those who are prepared with a higher education diploma,” Ms. Channay said, adding that girls who are uneducated can be lured into informal channels of the economy.
According to the U.N., gender parity is “slightly off-track” for females going into university education in Cambodia, which currently scores 57.5. A score of 100 is equal to complete parity. The target number for Cambodia under the U.N.’s millennium development goals is to reach a score of 61.5 by 2015.

Though progress has been made in terms of encouraging girls to attend primary and secondary school, a third of Cambodian adult women are still illiterate, Ms. Channay said.

Chheng Sivgech, 21, a fourth-year law student at the Royal University of Law and Economics, said the biggest obstacle for her was that her parents did not have the money to send her to school, and that they were worried about her safety in Phnom Penh. However, the Harpswell program has provided her with all the support she needs in order to gain access to a full education.

“Harpswell also teaches me to be confident, about how to be a good student and how to have good communication [skills],” said Ms. Sivgech. “These things can help me a lot even if they cannot help me directly to be a lawyer; it can prepare me to be independent.”
(Additional reporting by Len Leng)

Civil engineering students on the rise in Cambodia

Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Makes a Correction over a Xinhua’s Report

AKP Phnom Penh, October 08, 2012 

The Spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation on Saturday last week made a correction over a Xinhua News Agency’s report concerning the number of countries, which vowed to support Cambodia for non-permanent member of the UN Security Council.
According to the Spokesperson’s statement, on Oct. 5, 2012 Xinhua News Agency published a false information, by misquoting him that “… So far, over 100 countries out of the UN’s 193 member countries have voiced their supports for us, Koy Kuong, spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, told reporters”.

“I wish to completely reject this exaggerating information issued by Xinhua News Agency. I did not mention such information at the Ministry on Oct. 5, 2012,” said the Spokesperson.

“In fact on Oct. 5, 2012, in response to questions relating to the upcoming election of the Cambodia’s candidature for the non-permanent member of the UN Security Council, I stated that, ‘We simply hope in the election but we cannot make any conclusion on the number of countries that will vote for us. Importantly, we have to wait for actual result of the upcoming election at the UN on Oct. 18, 2012. Each candidate shall be supported by at least two-third majority votes out of all 193 UN member states. Permanent representatives of the 193 countries at the UN will cast their votes,” he said.

By KHAN Sophirom

MFA-IC’s Clarification over Mr. Mom Sonando’s Case

AKP Phnom Penh, October 08, 2012

The Spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (MFA-IC) has issued a statement in response to some adverse reactions concerning the case of Mr. Mom Sonando, President of the Association of Democrats of Cambodia and Director of the Beehive Radio and his accomplices.

According to the statement dated last Friday, the Spokesperson of the MFA-IC made a clarification as follows:

“1-The case of Mr. Mom Sonando and his accomplices is not about the freedom of expression or the independence and impartially of the court in Cambodia. It is also not a politically-motivated case, as some have falsely alleged. Cambodia is a democratic and an open society, and respects the due process of law.

2- Mr. Mom Sonando is the Mastermind of the SECESSIONIST movement, as some key witnesses have testified against him before the court. At the same time, the court has convicted him based on evidence beyond any reason of doubt.

3. The case of Mr. Mom Sonando is completely a separate, individual case, which has nothing to do with the overall freedom of expression. To be sure, his radio station (The Beehive Radio) remains functioning, while his Association of the Democrats of Cambodia continues to be operational.

4. However, it is easy and tempting for outsiders to make sweeping unsubstantiated statements on the case of Mr. Mom Sonando. Those statements have attempted to influence the Court of Law in Cambodia, which undermines the independence and impartibility of the Court.

5. As a State of Law, Cambodia must implement its legal process and will not allow any secession to take place in the country.”

Mr. Mom Sonando was arrested on July 15, 2012 in connection with a so-called secessionist plot in Kratie, a northeastern part of Cambodia and in early this month, Phnom Penh Municipal Court convicted him for 20 years in jail and fined 10 million Riel (about US$2,500).

By KHAN Sophirom

Criticism of Sonando verdict blasted by government

ទិវា​គ្រូ​បង្រៀន​ឆ្នាំ​នេះ​ក្រសួង​សន្យា​ដំឡើង​ប្រាក់​ខែ​២០%​បើ​សេដ្ឋកិច្ច​រីកចម្រើន

ហេតុ​អ្វី​មនុស្ស​មួយ​ចំនួន​ធំ​មិន​ខំ​សម្អាត​ចិត្ត​ឲ្យ​ស​ដូច​សម្អាត​កាយ?

ផ្កាយ​ពីរ​យោធា​ម្នាក់​កំពុង​ត្រូវ​តុលាការ​សាកសួរ​បន្ទាប់​ពី​ចាប់​ខ្លួន

Sunday, 7 October 2012

UNITED STATES: Misconduct behind most journal retractions – Study

October 1, 2012, 3:01 pm
Research misconduct, rather than error, is the leading cause of retractions in scientific journals, with the problem especially pronounced in more prestigious publications, a comprehensive analysis has concluded.

The analysis, described on Monday in PNAS, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, challenges previous findings that attributed most retractions to mistakes or inadvertent failures in equipment or supplies.

The PNAS finding came from a comprehensive review of more than 2,000 published retractions, including detailed investigations into the public explanations given by the retracting authors and their journals.

The project was intended to explore the types of errors that typically lead to retractions, said one author of the PNAS paper, Arturo Casadevall, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine.

“And what we got blown away by was the fact that the retraction notices are wrong, in a lot of the cases,” said Dr. Casadevall, who produced the study along with Ferric C. Fang, a professor of laboratory medicine and microbiology at the University of Washington.

Research misconduct was found more prevalent in articles published by leading journals, including Nature, Science, and Cell, and its unexpectedly high rate should be taken as yet another warning that universities and grant-writing agencies are relying far too heavily on publication rates as a measure of scientific performance, Dr. Casadevall and Dr. Fang said.

“Right now we’re incentivizing a lot of behavior that’s not actually constructive to science,” Dr. Fang said.

Some hints have emerged on the size and scale of the fraud problem, as confirmed by Dr. Casadevall and Dr. Fang. Their other co-author, R. Grant Steen, a freelance writer and former associate professor of psychiatry at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has done work showing a surge in retraction rates in recent years.

But Mr. Steen had largely been attributing the rise to instances of plagiarism, which is now more easily found through the growing use of text-comparison software. Although a type of fraud, plagiarism doesn’t necessarily mean faulty data. And other recent studies—such as an April 2011 analysis in the Journal of Medical Ethics and an August 2006 study in the Medical Journal of Australia—showed error as the leading cause of retractions.

For their PNAS analysis, Dr. Casadevall and Dr. Fang combed through all 2,047 biomedical-research articles listed this past May on PubMed, a federally managed database, as having been retracted. Through that process, they found 158 instances where the reason for the retraction was listed as an error, but where other sources—such as court proceedings, media investigations, or inquiries involving the federal Office of Research Integrity—revealed an underlying instance of research misconduct.

The result is that of the 2,047 retractions, 67 percent were attributable to misconduct, Dr. Casadevall, Dr. Fang, and Mr. Steen wrote. Only 21 percent of the retractions were attributable to error, they said. The cases of misconduct often involved leading scientific journals, they said, matching previous research that suggested a correlation between fraud and a journal’s impact factor, which is a measure of how often its articles are cited by subsequent articles.

The risks to public health were illustrated this year by a report in Nature in which the pharmaceutical company Amgen described its attempts to independently verify a collection of 53 published studies concerning cancer drugs. The Amgen scientists found they could confirm the scientific findings in only 11 percent of the articles.

“This was a shocking result,” wrote the authors, C. Glenn Begley, an Amgen consultant, and Lee M. Ellis, a professor of surgery and director of the Colorectal Cancer Translational Research Program at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston.

For Dr. Fang, the amount of misconduct in high-profile journals is a clear sign that researchers are facing far too much pressure from statistical measures such as publication rates and impact factors when seeking job promotions and grant money.

Rather than taking the time to use qualified experts to assess a researcher’s scholarship, Dr. Fang said, universities and grant-writing agencies too often use the statistical measures as easy proxies. That creates an enormous incentive for researchers to cut corners, or even fabricate study data, jeopardizing the reliability of the entire research enterprise, he said.

As an example, Dr. Fang said his department at the University of Washington recently had a job opening where all five of the finalists had a first-author byline in either Cell, Science, or Nature while working as postdoctoral students. “This was the price to get into the door, and then you have maybe a 20-percent chance of getting that job offer,” he said. “So this is too high a bar.”

Researchers seeking grant money and promotions feel that kind of pressure, exacerbated by budget cuts, throughout their careers, Dr. Fang said. By comparison, Dr. Fang said, he didn’t have any first-author papers in those leading journals during his postdoctoral career, “and I had four job offers at good universities.”

The medical journals, as a general rule, don’t deserve blame, Dr. Fang said. “They don’t exist to reshape the scientific enterprise,” he said. “They exist to publish high-quality science in an interesting and engaging way, and to publicize that, and I think they do a great job of that.”

Dr. Casadevall was more critical, saying that the misconduct discovered through their study was “the tip of the iceberg” and that journals needed to develop better standards. As an example, he cited the Journal of Biological Chemistry, which accounted for 27 of the 158 examples where a retraction attributed to an error was discovered by Dr. Casadevall and his team to actually involve misconduct. Part of the problem, he said, is that the journal has a policy of allowing retractions without giving any public explanation of the reason.

In such a setting, Dr. Casadevall said, “the misconduct is going through the roof because the rewards are disproportionate.”

The editor in chief of the Journal of Biological Chemistry, Martha J. Fedor, a professor of chemical physiology at the Scripps Research Institute, said she was confident that authors involved in retractions were held accountable through the journal’s practice of notifying the author’s institution.
“We have not had a policy of publishing statements about the source of errors in a manuscript that we are not able to verify conclusively,” she said.

GLOBAL: Hackers target student records of 53 universities

The 2024 Workshops for Foreign Confucius Institute Directors on June 13-21, 2024 at Sichuan Province, China

My sincere thanks and gratitude go to my respectful Rector, H.E. Sok Khorn , and the Chinese Confucius Institute Director, Prof. Yi Yongzhon...