UL drops out of top 500 universities

first_imgWhatsApp University of Limerick appoints first ever woman president of an Irish university Email Breaching the gender barrier at UL The main building at the University of LimerickThe University of Limerick has dropped out of the world’s top 500 universities.The 2016 World University Rankings, published last week, ranks UL in the 501-550 band, a significant fall from its previous position of 471.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up The Irish Universities Association (IUA) has responded to this news by referring to a decade of austerity and its “corrosive effect” on our higher education system.Stating that the “continued slide” of the Irish Universities should be “greeted with alarm” the IUA said that positive strides in research and the internationalisation of the staff and student cohort was being “undermined by the negative impact of underfunding on key indicators such as the student:faculty ratio.”IUA Chief Executive, Ned Costello said: “We can no longer hide from the corrosive effect which years of cutbacks are having on our higher education system. At a time when we are more dependent than ever on the talent of our people for our economic future, we simply must invest in our universities.”“An immediate injection of funding is required in the upcoming Budget and Estimates to fund more lecturers, deliver smaller group teaching and restore quality in our system,” Mr Costello concluded.Between 2007 and 2014, state funding for universities in this country fell by 28%, from €722.8m in 2007 to €522.2m in 2014.Conversely there was an increase in full-time enrollment in Irish universities of 18%, from 78,577 in 2008 to 93,023 in 2014.Reacting to these figures, the General Secretary of the Irish Federation of University Teachers (IFUT), Mike Jennings, said, “It is shocking to realise that student to academic staff ratios were worse in 2011 than those described in the report of the Commission on Higher Education (1967) and increased from 19:1 in 2007 to 23:1 in 2011.”Mr Jennings echoed the need to address this issue in this year’s budget, “The forthcoming Budget must address this crisis as a priority. The government must provide adequate funds to enable universities to recover from a decade of what now seems like deliberate neglect and downgrading of third-level education,” he said.All but one of Ireland’s universities have dropped in the listings, with only National University of Ireland in Galway improving upon last year’s position by rising from 271st to 249th.Trinity College Dublin remains Ireland’s highest ranked university in 98th place. For the fifth year running the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been rated as the world’s best university.Out of the 32 OECD countries featured in the rankings, Ireland’s expenditure on third-level institutions was the fourth lowest. Linkedin Twitter Previous articleSocials – Press Ball 2016 LaunchNext articleLimerick councillors fobbed off by transport authority Editor Advertisement Limerick Post Show | Careers & Health Sciences Event for TY Students center_img Print NewsEducationUL drops out of top 500 universitiesBy Editor – September 8, 2016 995 TAGSUL Facebook University of Limerick came out on top at this years Smedia Awards Intermediate Care Facility patients benefiting from holistic healthcare model RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Limerick Post Show | CSSI 2020last_img read more

Congressman Responds to House Subcommittee Bill, Says GSE Funds Should Go To Reduce Deficit

first_img Brian Honea’s writing and editing career spans nearly two decades across many forms of media. He served as sports editor for two suburban newspaper chains in the DFW area and has freelanced for such publications as the Yahoo! Contributor Network, Dallas Home Improvement magazine, and the Dallas Morning News. He has written four non-fiction sports books, the latest of which, The Life of Coach Chuck Curtis, was published by the TCU Press in December 2014. A lifelong Texan, Brian received his master’s degree from Amberton University in Garland. The Week Ahead: Nearing the Forbearance Exit 2 days ago Share Save Tagged with: Congressman Ed Royce GSE Funds House Committee on Appropriations THUD Appropriations Subcommittee Home / Daily Dose / Congressman Responds to House Subcommittee Bill, Says GSE Funds Should Go To Reduce Deficit Sign up for DS News Daily in Daily Dose, Featured, Government, News The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Congressman Ed Royce GSE Funds House Committee on Appropriations THUD Appropriations Subcommittee 2015-04-30 Brian Honea Previous: GSEs Would Need Up To $157 Billion Bailout in Economic Downturn Next: Credit Trends in Mortgage Insurance Drive Strong Q1 for Radian Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Related Articles Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days agocenter_img Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Congressman Responds to House Subcommittee Bill, Says GSE Funds Should Go To Reduce Deficit Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago About Author: Brian Honea  Print This Post April 30, 2015 1,175 Views The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago U.S. Representative Ed Royce (R-California) responded to the FY 2016 Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations Subcommittee funding bill released earlier this week by saying money from the GSEs should be used to reduce the national deficit instead of being allocated to housing groups.The new THUD Appropriations bill would essentially eliminate the Housing Trust Fund but would instead direct GSE money into the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which is a federal block grant that provides states and localities with a flexible funding source to meet their diverse affordable housing needs.Royce and other Republicans were highly critical of Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Mel Watt’s decision in December to lift the suspension of GSE funds into housing groups such as the Housing Trust Fund and Capital Magnet Fund, saying the diversion of GSE money to those groups violates the 2008 Housing and Economic Recovery Act and puts taxpayers at risk.In January, Royce responded to Watt’s action by introducing the Pay Back the Taxpayers Act of 2015, which states that no funds from the GSEs can be used to fund the housing groups while the GSEs are in conservatorship or receivership and requires that any payments already allocated or set aside should instead be used to reduce the deficit.”While I’m supportive of keeping money siphoned away from the GSEs out of the hands of ideological housing groups, I’m concerned about the precedent set by redirecting money from the Trust Fund to other housing programs,” said Royce, who is a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee and a member of the Capital Markets and GSEs Subcommittee and the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee. “A better solution would be passage of the Pay Back the Taxpayers Act, which requires any money diverted from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac go to paying down our federal deficit.”The Housing Trust Fund and Capital Magnet Fund were created in 2008 as part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act, but funding of the groups was suspended shortly after the government seized control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in September 2008. The government provided the enterprises with a combined $187.8 billion bailout shortly thereafter. Current law requires FHFA to suspend the allocation of GSE funds to housing groups if payments would contribute to the financial instability of the GSEs, cause the enterprises to be undercapitalized, or prevent the enterprises from successfully completing a capital restoration plan.Watt’s decision to lift the suspension of GSE funds from those housing groups was met with mixed reactions. While many Republicans vehemently opposed the move, many progressives praised Watt’s decision, saying it created more homeownership opportunities, especially for low-income Americans. Subscribelast_img read more

CSPs and Digital Transformation: Finding Signals in the Noise

first_imgThis week, I saw a Heavy Reading white paper, in partnership with the New IP Agency (NIA) entitled “CSP Attitudes Toward Digital Transformation: A Reality Check”. In a short five pages, it’s a blistering indictment of the media and vendor marketing-led hype around next-generation CSP operations.  And I agree with it wholeheartedly.The paper summarizes the challenges and opportunities in helping the industry move forward to embrace the industry buzzwords – automation, network virtualization, big data, devops, etc. – through a complementary set of technologies that are created in a community-development model (read: Open Source) or vendor-development model.I wanted to take a few minutes to share with you my views on the message, and how I internalize this for the development of the Dell EMC strategy for CSPs.A Dell EMC Perspective First, my views – the paper is exactly on-point from both my own conversations with CSP CTIOs and my own observations into what is perceived as a slow industry transformation. Noting that such massive transformations do not happen overnight, I think that CSPs are largely where they should be – recognizing the inevitability of the transformation (45.6%), but skeptical of the conflicting messaging (40.9%), concerned on locking into a specific direction so early in the transformation (43.6%) and rationalizing their own implementation plans.There has been an absolute deluge of vendor perspectives, standards, open source projects, press coverage, and analyses on transforming network operations within CSPs since 2012 when the first NFV white paper was written. While the ambitions and goals are likely pure – to help the industry move forward – in the end, the outcomes have been distracting, keeping the industry in a constant mode of evaluation and validation, and leading to growing confusion on where to start, and start again, and again.CSPs see vendors moving “up-stack” (enterprise infrastructure vendors delivering telco cloud solutions), “down-stack” (OSS vendors delivering network infrastructure solutions), and “cross-stack” (Systems Integrators moving from complex delivery to complete solutions) – all the while an ever-increasing landscape of startups are being funded in an attempt to disrupt the Network Equipment Providers (NEPs). Never mind the fact that these “stacks” that these vendors are moving within are inconsistent to begin with!More importantly – I don’t see that the barriers to entry in the CSP space have changed drastically due to the incorporation of increasingly enterprise-originated cloud technology, based on the survey results (61% think that enterprise vendors are not yet equipped to build telco-class cloud networks). At least, not yet.So – the questions that arise are really threefold:How do CSPs move forward with an investment path that is not a dead-end, and ensure that, at the very least, the infrastructure investments today are flexible enough to be re-purposed in the future? This is highly important – because, contrary to popular belief, there are indeed technical nuances at the compute, networking, and storage layer for different software stacks and use-cases.How do CSPs embrace the transformation and innovation that is happening in the Open Source and startup community in the operational and procurement frameworks that have worked for the last 100 years? Note – this is not to say that operations and procurement frameworks don’t need to adapt, but instead that we, as an industry, cannot move forward if these remain inherently linked. Transforming technology is significantly easier than transforming processes.Where is the “white space” for Dell EMC in this confusion? Maybe that’s not a question for you – but it is certainly a question for me.(An aside: I do think that the paper inaccurately discounts the importance of Open Source in the survey to garner a specific perspective that over half the respondents view open source as “ok, or has limited application.” More importantly, my read on this is that an overwhelming percentage (86.6%) see a role for Open Source – some are crisper on what that role is (44.3%) and some are still developing their own opinions on what that role is (42.3%). Less than 15% believe that Open Source has limited or no role in telecom. Maybe I am just more optimistic than Heavy Reading – or maybe there is more raw data that I don’t have exposure to.)With a logical concern that I am just professing vendor-marketing hyperbole (Note: I’m not), I’d like to share my view into how I internalize the questions above to help in the evolution of the Dell EMC CSP strategy.The Industry Call-to-Action: Build Once, Reuse ManyThe industry goal should be to build a common platform – regardless of current and/or future procurement processes, operational models, software stack selection, or technology direction – with the end goal to make infrastructure easily consumable and services easily deployable and manageable.This common underlying infrastructure platform (dare I say, “IaaS for network virtualization”?) that spans currently-accepted principles (hypervisors, network overlays, service chaining, orchestration, etc.) but incorporates a path towards currently-incubated principles (containers, micro-services, automation and DevOps) without enforcing either a specific direction or espousing a particular end-state seems to be just what the industry needs. This allows for what I expect to be near-term divergence, and eventual convergence, in industry direction to happen.The obvious need is for an infrastructure vendor who has assembled and built a set of expertise and knowledge around the vendor software stacks – both NFV and SDN – as a means of rationalizing an infrastructure deployment framework that is:Unified across disparate use-cases, vendor solutions, and standardsOpen and flexible to incorporate an increasing set of open source componentry and “DevOps-style” toolingDelivered in a release-based implementation that allows rapid innovation to be more readily consumable by CSP operationsThis is our goal.The Dell EMC ResponseBuilding a single, standard cloud infrastructure platform that has been certified by the predominant virtualization vendors, validated by the major Network Equipment Providers (NEPs), integrated with leading startups, and delivered through current trusted telco partners – namely, Systems Integrators, OSS vendors, and the NEPs themselves – for the deployment of telco cloud is a significant challenge – but it is one that Dell EMC has taken on. We’ve done it, and we have data points confirming that such an approach has merit. Now, we are focused on replicability, scalability (scaled out for higher capacity, scaled in for the network edge), and iteration.Our ability to abstract the industry confusion and create a cloud infrastructure platform that allows telecom service providers to adopt new technologies at a pace that matches their organizational readiness without forcing a specific path at initial purchase has become a key differentiator for Dell EMC. To be forthcoming, it has been a challenge to break through all the other vendor hype out there by embracing such a practical, achievable objective.last_img read more