Extraordinary University Council Newsletter, edition 93
The reason for this special edition forms media coverage about participation at the university.
1. Statement by the full University Council!
1) Statement by the full University Council, integral
Groningen - 26 February 2015
Dear Members of the University Board,
Are we the Amsterdam of the North, as is sometimes suggested? In any case, we do not expect any occupations of buildings as yet, as is happening at the UVA. Yet, there are a number of issues that were duly recognised at our Groningen University. And these issues were not so much about the varied package of demands, but in the underlying considerations, expressed in the manifest of the now ex-occupiers.First of all the way politics deal with the increasing culture of accountability and the emphasis on yield. This also worries us when we think of the enormous workload in connection with the accreditations and performance agreements. In this connection we are also fearful that the exaggerated emphasis on yield (and ditto for schoolishness) poses a risk for quality. On the issue of research we talked last week about the interconnectedness between quality and quantity. Let us also not forget this in education. And what does this focus on finance mean for the transfer between HBO and WO, and for the policy of life-long learning?An immediate point of recognition is the Amsterdam observation that participation is often (too) far at the back of the process and also as a result has too little influence on policy.Now we did express the wish last year to want a more pro-active role, but that has not really happened. A good example here is the fact that the UCouncil when it comes to providing input for a strategic plan finds itself at the back of the queue, whereas, after all – as we have reiterated on numerous occasions – we do have a broad expertise! Another example is the discussion of the Bestuurs- en Beheersreglement (BBR), where we have the right of consent, but this discussion was only placed on our agenda after the regulation should have been well and truly implemented.Also, the fact that we regularly disagree about the quality of the chosen reorganisation process provides food for thought. These differences of opinion occur both during the process and afterwards at the evaluation.This month – The Examinations Regulations (de OERen)! –again we have seen that we disagree on the powers that the participation committee has on particular issues. This happens frequently. The ramshackle quality of the WHW (Higher Education and Research Act) does not help either. It really should be rewritten.
Furthermore, the University of Groningen, in its ambition, makes quite regularly big policy decisions that the participation committee receives by way of information at a time when everything is almost finalised, while definitely meaningful questions can be asked about how these plans impact on the ‘normal’ course of business management of the University of Groningen. The plan for the University Campus Fryslan (UCF) provides a good example. But also the policy on internationalisation and the development of organisational management are important issues. We ask you to consider and we remind you of the fact that subjects can be discussed in confidence also with the UCouncil.These are all signs, as far as we are concerned, that we in Groningen do actually have a number of points for improvement.Of course, things could be worse – and that means something in Groningen -, but things could also be better!Finally – last but not least – we are naturally very curious about the response of the Board in respect of the Amsterdam call for more democracy in the appointment of boards or its members. No doubt you are aware of the thoughts on this issue expressed also by the UCouncil members.In short, we like to invite the Board to a dialogue on these issues very soon and possibly other issues that affect the relation between control and participation. Stronger still and a bit more controversial: we challenge the Board to enter into this dialogue! Of course, we will conduct this dialogue in a manner becoming of members of the academic community in Groningen!And for now without occupation ;-)
Looking forward to your response. We challenge you to enter into an open dialogue on control and participation.
In the University Council meeting of 26 February three actual issues were agreed on:• The Board will more often discuss its policy intentions with the UCouncil.• The Board shall co-operate (‘enter into a dialogue’) on improving the Agreement between the Board and the UCouncil from 2011. Objective: to more clearly lay down the powers of the Board, respectively the UCouncil. In concreto: determination of which decisions the Board must submit to the UCouncil for consent or advice.• The Presidium of the UCouncil will from now on add a to-do list to the report of UCouncil meetings
The Board and the UCouncil are to enter into an open dialogue on the relation between control and participation on 10 March 2015.
UCouncil on Twitter:
Personeel U-raad RUG @PersoneelUraad
Lijst Calimero @lijstcalimero
Lijst STERK @lijststerk
All factions also have a website (http://myuniversity.rug.nl/infonet/medewerkers/organisatie/medezeggenschap/u-raad/samenstelling).
Disclaimer: The text above is an impression of topics discussed in the UC and should not be regarded as official statements with regard to decisions taken in the UC.
Dick Jager isn’t one to give up easily. Since the late 1990s, he has been working to make the University of Groningen more sustainable. His journey has been a struggle, with the road often peppered with obstacles. But now things are going his way....
The Cabinet’s decision, based on the advice of the Van Rijn committee, will have disastrous consequences for the University of Groningen as a broad-based classical university.
The University of Groningen (UG) holds the 114th place in the QS World University Rankings. The QS Ranking is an influential ranking list of almost 1,000 universities worldwide. Last year the UG held the120th place.