The possible retention problems could at least partially explain why Lauri Törhönen’s script sailed through the entire process with all its flaws, writes HS’s culture editor Samuli Tiikkaja.
University of Lapland the Faculty Council of the Faculty of Arts made the only correct decision on Thursday when it dismissed the film director Lauri Törhönen the manuscript Film director in Finland. Now. Finnish film director’s work processes; ethics, morality, technology and social relationsand therefore did not accept it as an academic dissertation.
The very fact that the manuscript made it this far in the process shows serious deficiencies in the quality control of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Lapland. Törhönen’s text does not have many of the hallmarks of an academic text, such as a proper table of contents or reference practice. Still, it progressed through guidance, pre-examination and the dissertation conference, where at all stages its acceptance was advocated.
Therefore, rejection at the last stage, i.e. at the faculty council meeting, is a serious loss of prestige not only for the faculty and the university itself, but also for the supervisors, pre-examiners and the opponent – not to mention, of course, the debater himself.
Size the episode casts a shadow over the University of Lapland, but that shadow is much smaller and gentler than it would have been if the dissertation had been accepted.
In the end, it turned out that quality does matter after all, and that any stream of consciousness does not qualify as an academic dissertation. If it had been valid, the University of Lapland would no longer have any reason not to accept texts of the same level from other degree holders.
Next stage are two notifications of violations of Good Scientific Practice, which are related to public doubts about, for example, the retention of pre-inspectors. Based on the reports, a preliminary investigation has been started, which may lead to the actual investigation later.
If freezing problems are detected, they could at least partly explain why Törhönen’s script sailed through the entire process with all its obvious flaws.
But the core of the problem is precisely those shortcomings, regardless of where they come from. And the fact that the university was powerless to intervene in them for so long.