MENINGER:
 LESERBREV:
  Brynjulf Owren: Tidskrifter og papirforbruk
  Ivar A. Bjørgen: Retten til arbeid. Tanker omkring Brevik-saken
  Rigmor Austgulen: Morsmelk – over og ut?
  Soilikki Vettenranta: JULEGAVE MED BISMAK
  Odd W. Andersen: Smelting i Antarktis
  Berit Kjeldstad og Mads Nygård: ”Mens vi venter på NTNU”
  Allan Krill: For mappa mi
  Greta Aune Jotun: Jøder og arabere, hvem okkuperer hva?
  Bjørn K Alsberg: Å koke suppe på en spiker
  Bjørnar T Kvernevik: Svar: Læresteder i klemme
 

  NYHETSKLIPP
  Stempling: Tromsø innfører ikke
  Sett denne ørnen før?
  Fant jernalderens “missing link”
  130 universitetsansatte kan miste jobben
  Nytt forskningssenter for stamceller
  Skriver Svalbardbok
  Ny mastergrad i bærekraftig arkitektur
  To nye erstatningssaker
  Jerusalem Post: Boikottforslag vekker internasjonal fordømmelse
 

  BILDESERIER
  Immatrikuleringen 2009
  Festmøtet 2009
  Kreator 09
  Bildesymfoni
  Finanskrisen i pepperdeig
  Rocke-Pelle, Rocke-Olsen, swingskjørt og kvinnelige forelesere
  Badekarpadling 2008
  Karrieredagen 2008: Mett på twist
  Immatrikulering 2008
  Shell Eco-Marathon
  Se alle bildeseriene

 REDAKSJONEN:
Tips oss på:
tips@universitetsavisa.no

Ansvarlig redaktør:
Tore Oksholen

Kildehenvisning må benyttes ved kopiering av alt innhold fra dette nettstedet.
Avisas retningslinjer og redaksjon

 

Ua 16: Om konflikten ved Idrettsvitenskap (2.11.00)

I write to correct a number of factual errors that appeared in an article, written by Tore Oksholen, in the Universitetsavisa on 19th October under the title Alvorlig konflikt ved Idrett.

In this article Oksholen refers to letters sent to the Faculty of Social Sciences (September 1998) and to the Rector of the University (on 22-03-99) and signed by myself and a colleague in the Institute. In these letters we were purported to have made accusations about the validity of a Ph.d submission by a member of the academic staff of the University. For the record, we never made such accusations! In those letters we simply raised polite questions about a matter that, as members of the academic staff of the University, gave us cause for concern and asked the University to reassure us that our concerns were ungrounded. While your reporter might be forgiven for this error, as he was not one of the addressees of the letter, the Dean, as Faculty representative, was in a different position.

Now, some two years later, we have still not received that reassurance, or for that matter any response to our letters. It would not be surprising, therefore, if we were lead to the conclusion, particularly given the fact that in the interim period the thesis has not been approved, that our worst suspicions had been confirmed.

HTA (John) Whiting Department of Psychology University of York