The air exploded in a flash of bone and steel and blood. The clash of metal rang through the forest. An arrow pierced through the darkness, its barbed head tearing through flesh and muscle. A roar echoed off of the mountains far to the west. A cry broke through soon after. Then silence. Char stood over a pile of black fur and red blood. He held a curved sword, jagged half way down the wide blade and hilted in bone. He held a large thick bow in the other. Lorfel and Ranur stood behind him, panting. Lorfel, a short man of twenty six held a large axe in both hands and still prepared to swing it hard. Ranur, the largest of the three held a pike in one hand, its tip hanging low towards the ground. He buried his other hand in his gray tunic. "Did it get either of you?" Char's voice rasped low in the silence of the night. "No" Lorfel said. He planted his axe head on the ground with a thud and leaned on the tall handle. There was a pause. Char turned towards Ranur. "Are you hurt?" "Mm...My hand." Ranur took his hand out of his tunic. Moonlight gleamed red off of the ragged wound. Char thought he saw a glimmer of bone. "Did he claw you or bite you?" Char's voice held an urgency that set both Lorfel and Ranur on edge. Ranur paused and then spoke low. "He bit me." Char picked Lorfel and Ranur as his hunting partners for their speed and sharpness in battle. They had hunted beasts of the deep woods all of their lives. They hunted the beasts that hunted men. They all knew the risks of battling such creatures. The old man dropped his curved sword, drew his bow, and fired. The arrow hammered into Ranur's chest, burying itself in his heart. Lorfel saw the gleaming arrow head sticking almost a foot out of his companion's back. Ranur fell face first to the ground. What was the color of the beast's fur? A. white B. black C. not enough information D. brown
D

Just minutes after Donald Trump fired Rex Tillerson on Tuesday, the president was blunt about his long-standing differences with his former secretary of state. "We disagreed on things," Trump told reporters outside the White House, specifically pointing to friction over the Iran nuclear agreement. "I wanted to either break it or do something, and he felt a little bit differently," Trump said. "We were really not thinking the same." Trump reportedly had considered firing Tillerson for months. But the decision - and the abrupt way it was executed - represents a dramatic end to a strained relationship. Tillerson learned of his firing by an early-morning Trump tweet, according to Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state. White House officials disputed that notion, and promptly fired Goldstein. The move left some of Trump's staunchest defenders with mixed feelings. "It's all very Trumpian," said James Carafano of the conservative Heritage Foundation, who helped staff the State Department as a member of Trump's transition team. "When the president makes changes, he just abruptly makes them." During his 14 months at the State Department, Tillerson had numerous policy differences with Trump - and the friction frequently played out in public. The animosity peaked in October, when news surfaced that Tillerson reportedly called Trump a "moron" following a July Pentagon meeting. Tillerson never explicitly denied the account. Tillerson also publicly disagreed with Trump's decision to pull out of the Paris climate accord. He reportedly opposed Trump's decision to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And Tillerson sometimes took a tougher stance than Trump on Russia including this week, when he blamed Moscow for a suspected nerve agent attack in Britain. In return, Trump on numerous occasions publicly undermined his top diplomat, including in October when he tweeted Tillerson was "wasting his time" trying to negotiate with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. When Trump ultimately made his decision last week to... what did Tillerson think of his firing? A. was long overdue B. not enough information C. Was unfair D. was welcome
B

As academic work is becoming arguably more precarious and competitive, shorter contracts are becoming the norm, and the number of people completing PhDs in the UK is increasing, the risks associated with researching academia are high. This post discusses and explores my experiences of being a PhD student researching women's lived experiences of research evaluation in the UK, and my thoughts on and experiences of interviewing very senior and esteemed academics as a junior researcher. My PhD study explored research evaluation in the form of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) a weighty force in UK academia the outcomes of which, I argue, hold the potential to alter the course of an academic career considerably, as well as playing a role in the type of work that some academics do, particularly given the REF impact agenda. There is currently an international trend towards research evaluation with programmes such as the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA), the Performance-Based Research fund in New Zealand (PBRF), and equivalents in countries including Denmark, Switzerland and the Netherlands. What is clear is that there is not enough qualitative, exploratory research into the effects of research evaluation on academic careers, especially for women, and so my PhD study was born. My findings suggest that research evaluation in the UK actively contributes to the continuance of gender inequality regimes in the academy, and that the ability to negotiate managerial control and be politically savvy is increasingly important in the academic world. Before embarking on my PhD, I was acutely aware of the sensitivity of my research, as well as my own positionality with regards to my participants. Reflection is and was an important element in the research process for me, as it allowed me to reflect on the effects of the self on the research process and, ultimately, also on the data, as well as the various power dynamics discernible during interviews for my study. I was continually taken aback by participants'... What does the author likely believe? A. That a PhD is worthless. B. That men are the better gender. C. not enough information D. That women deserve equal treatment.
D