Created in 2016, the Individual Monitoring Committee (CSI) is both a forum for discussion and scientific advice for doctoral students and a tool for preventing conflicts and harassment. He “ensure the smooth running of the course (…). He evaluates (…) the conditions of his training and the progress of his research. It makes recommendations, stipulates on the one hand the decree of May 25, 2016. It also ensures “to prevent any form of conflict, discrimination or harassment”.
→ TO ANALYSE. “I don’t want to go through the same hell once more”: research, fertile ground for harassment
The modalities of its composition are entrusted to the doctoral schools. The thesis director cannot be part of it but, in fact, one sometimes finds his friends or close colleagues there, thus reducing the independence of the CSI. “This clearly poses a problem of conflict of interest, because the CSI has a strong advisory role and can give an opinion, favorable or not to the continuation of the thesis”, underlines Adèle B. Combes, author of the book How the’university grinds young scholars (Ed. Otherwise). In addition, if the members of the CSI are scientifically competent, they are not trained in conflict management and management.
From a prevention tool to a sanction body
However, the correction of this defect does not seem to be on the agenda. On the contrary, a draft decree drawn up by the General Directorate for Higher Education and Professional Integration (DGESIP) of the Ministry of Higher Education, to which The cross has had access, reinforces the role of evaluation and sanction of the CSI. This decree might thus entrust it with the tasks of evaluating doctoral students before they enroll in the second year and of issuing an opinion on their ability to continue their thesis or not. Previously, this notice was only given from the third year of registration.
“There is a risk of going from a CSI aimed at helping doctoral students to a body whose goal will be first of all to assess and sanction. And this, from the second year of the thesis, which will not help to start his first year of research calmly, when it takes time to appropriate a thesis subject and build an object of study. », regret Karim , a postdoctoral fellow in the humanities and social sciences, who also points to the desire to reduce the duration of theses to align with what is practiced abroad. Furthermore, worries Karim,
“one can wonder if the CSIs will be able to play their official role of preventing discrimination: if they are responsible for giving an opinion on the continuation of the thesis, one can fear that the doctoral students will not really want to go there to explain their possible problems. » When contacted, the DGESIP did not respond to questions fromThe cross
