The fight for control of CIDE

In the midst of the controversy over the disagreements between the community of the Center for Economic Research and Teaching (CIDE) and its acting director, José Antonio Romero Tellaeche, the selection process to officially appoint its director continues. After the times were fulfilled, only two candidates registered: Vidal Llerenas Morales and paradoxically so did the now interim.

The process for the appointment of the new director general of CIDE, who will replace Sergio López Ayllón after his resignation in August of this year, consists of various stages, which have made it possible to observe the tensions that have been present in this academic and educational institution. investigation. In his report on the process of appointing the new director, José Antonio Caballero Juárez, professor at the CIDE Legal Studies Division and an observer appointed by the Academic Council of said institution, reveals these differences within the two stages in which he is has allowed to participate.

In the first stage, the presence of Dr. José Alejandro Díaz Méndez stands out, representing María Elena Álvarez-Buylla Roces, director of the National Council for Science and Technology (Conacyt), an entity to which this research center is attached. From the outset, it is striking that “the main person responsible for defining the procedure will not listen personally to the CIDE community in the process of selecting its director.”

Subsequently, he noted that during the meeting many questions remained in the air and underlines some that in his opinion were relevant if it is considered that both candidates are external and that have shown profound discrepancies within the community. “At times, I had the feeling that this session was more focused on complying with the form than on getting background information.”

Vidal Llerenas, questioned pointer

Regarding the results of this internal auscultation, the results of the process were favorable to Dr. Vidal Llerenas in all the categories that were evaluated (profile of the candidate, and work plan) except in the area related to experience as a researcher, where he had better evaluation by Dr. José Antonio Romero. The final average of all the evaluated items resulted in 8.98 points in favor of Llerenas against 7.29 points in favor of Romero. The members of the External Monitoring Committee pointed out that the participation of the community had been low and they were struck by the overwhelming preference of the community there represented by Llerenas Morales.

The second session of the process was held on Friday, November 19, with the objective that the candidates presented their plans to the external evaluation committee, made up of María Teresa Aguirre Covarrubias, Edmundo Antonio Gutiérrez Domínguez, Lorenzo Francisco Meyer Cossío, José Cruz Pineda Castillo , Alicia Puyana Mutis and Samuel Schmidt Nevdvedovich. The result was contrasting.

The committee’s deliberation was relatively brief, they recognized both candidates as viable, however, the general consensus was that Romero’s plan and capacities to assume the position of CIDE director were far superior to those of Llerenas. Some pointed out that the divergence of this position with what was expressed by the CIDE community is because “probably that community has vested interests and seeks to defend them” and that it is natural that there is resistance within the institutions.

In this sense, during said meeting Caballero Juárez, when making use of his voice, expressed that Romero’s relationship with the community was very deteriorated, he even made reference to the demonstration whose sound was heard in the meeting room, since coincidentally students, staff The teacher and CIDE supporters were gathered outside the Conacyt facilities. He also asked that an “imminent governance problem within the institution” be recognized.

For Caballero Juárez, the little knowledge that the members of the auscultation committee have about the CIDE was relevant. “They seem to observe an institution with a uniform thought in all its divisions. An institution completely ideologically aligned and focused on consulting. An institution with significant deficiencies in teaching.”

In the end, the consensus of the committee was due to the need for a structural transformation of the institution, however, not even Romero’s proposal poses this with such extremes. It raises important changes, but it also indicates that many activities and dynamics have to remain.

Caballero Juárez adds that their positions seemed much more the result of dogmas, prejudices and oversimplifications than the result of an analysis of the institution. However, confidence in their dogma seems to give them complete certainty about the medicine to apply. Ironically, the show took place on a site charged with promoting science.

The visions of the candidates

Vidal Llerenas has highlighted his positions regarding the need to strengthen CIDE’s collaboration with the government. Although he made the distinction between the subjects that are of the State and those that are of the government, he did not elaborate further on the matter. He spoke of the renewal and consolidation of the lines of research in the institution. He expressed the need to increase student enrollment. He also referred to the challenge involved in exercising CIDE resources in the post-trust environment.

Romero Tellaeche has expressed the need to review the neoliberal vision that has prevailed on the public agenda in recent years and that has influenced the economic, legal and public administration schools. He expressed the need to rethink and renew agendas at CIDE. In Teaching, he stated that students do not pay tuition. He pointed out the convenience of diversifying the profile of admitted students. He stated that CIDE’s challenge is to influence public policies again. Initiate research on priority issues.

[email protected]

rrg



Reference-www.eleconomista.com.mx

Leave a Comment