I’ve just taken over as the new leader of the alumni board here at UiB, and am busy finding out more about the ongoing work with alumni here and thinking about what the potentials are. Our alumni work only started up a few years ago, and the idea is still very new to most people here – not just at UiB but in Norway in general. Our universities are publicly funded, so the goals of alumni work are different from in countries like the US, where universities rely on donations. Here alumni work is organised as part of the University’s mission to improve our contact with the world at large and share our knowledge and research. (In 2010 the University released an action plan for contact with society). In addition, it’s hugely valuable to us (and to students!) to understand more about what people do after their degrees. And it’s fun and satisfying to stay in touch. Last November I organised an alumni evening for Digital Culture and I must say I hadn’t fully anticipated how satisfying it felt to meet all those wonderful students of yore, and the alumni themselves clearly enjoyed the reunion as well. I’m glad we’re in touch again.

UiB has its own alumni portal, which is great in many ways and has problems in others – chief among them that there’s no way for alumni to share news with each other on the portal. There’s currently a call for bids out for an upgrade, so hopefully many of the annoyances will disappear. There are obvious advantages to having our own portal, chief among them that we actually own the data. The way it works is that all alumni are in the portal, but their profiles only become visible to non-administrators when they log in and activate them. So administrators can find names and (old) addresses of everyone, which is useful for re-establishing contact. But there are only 1286 alumni registered as of today in UiB’s own alumni portal, though the number is steadily growing, with a handful of new registrations each day. There are about 40,000 alumni in total.

Unfortunately, the image above is not from our own portal, but from LinkedIn. Last October, LinkedIn started generating its own alumni information. It currently has 8,587 UiB alumni in its database, and look at the lovely statistics that LinkedIn can provide that the UiB portal can’t (yet…):

You can even search specifically for UiB alumni who work in a particular company, as the blog Alumni Futures notes in their review. You can do that in the UiB portal too, actually, although it only finds 23 people working at Statoil, while LinkedIn obviously knows about many more.

Mashable writes about how some universities have ditched their own portals and are only using LinkedIn. I think that’s a risky strategy if we want to still have a strong alumni network in 20 or 50 years time. I’d say there’s a better chance of the University of Bergen being around in several decades time than of LinkedIn still running, though you never know. But I’m wondering how we could combine the forces of existing social media with our own portal. There must be good ways! I’d love to hear any ideas or experiences you may have.

(Oh, and if you’re a UiB alumni: we’d love you to activate your profile in our alumni portal and get news about events, find your classmates, and there’ll be more as our network grows.)


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.