You can also find the Newletter and the papers for the University Council and Council committees on this website.
Follow us on
On the 7th and 8th of March a committee from the NVAO came to talk to different departments of the RUG about the self-evaluation. There was a second visit on 10-12 April which the commission used to further evaluate certain topics. Different members of the University Council were also a part of the process. The commission gave some immediate feedback that indicated that the RUG has met all the standards. The official report still needs to be published.
During the visit from the NVAO committee, the contents of the Quality Agreements was discussed alongside the ITK. The initial feedback from the committee was positive, but we are waiting for the official written confirmation of the initial feedback. The University Council voted for the plan in January after all the faculty boards and councils discussed the faculty plans and the faculty councils approved those plans.
In the previous edition you read about the KVI-CART and the then draft notification for reorganisation. After several months delay, due to, among others, the desire for more information about the possibilities from the UMCG, the University Council has finally given a positive advice regarding the draft notice. This only after there was extra information and the Board of University promised that there would not be any employees unnecessarily let go. The University Council has named a personnel committee as the discussion partner for leading the reorganisation.
After discussions with several faculty councils, the Board of University has decided to propose that a student should be added to the appointment advisory committee (AAC) for faculty directors. Currently there is no student in these AACs. The student factions were of course pleased with this proposal, but the proposal indicated that the student chosen would have to be done so by the faculty board. The student factions have said that they would rather see that this is done by the faculty councils. Sadly this is not part of the current proposal, but when the proposal is officially proposed, we can review the matter again.
In the past months the University Council has discussed the external research that was done about the hours registration Yantai. The discussion started an hour before the February University Council meeting, when Leendert Klaassen presented his research conclusion. One of the conclusions was that the RUG still had to charge 669.000 euros to private funds because there were too many publicly funded hours spent on the project. During the presentation the University Council was able to make their first remarks about this research. The members of the University Council had expressed doubts about the time registration for the Yantai project in the past and saw these doubts confirmed in the report. In March, the report was discussed with the Board of University.
Lately, the RUG office has been busy making the Financial Framework for 2020-2o23. This policy document has several goals, such as: informing the faculties about their resources to ensure the continuity of projects and activities, the allocation of financial resources to projects and the preparation for the RUG budget for 2020 that gets discussed annually in December. The Council has voting rights for expenses above 500.000 euros and real estate expenditure above 5 million euros with advice rights about the rest of the Financial Framework. During the meeting there was, among others, a lot of discussion surrounding the plan of the Board of University to spend 3.6 million euros on maintaining the number of PhD students after the currently running pilot ends. The personnel faction said that there were several faculties that were concerned about the plan, and that it hadn’t been properly discussed in the Management Council. Due to these reasons, the Council did not approve this plan and it will be discussed again in May.
On the 13th of May, the university elections will be held again. Naturally, the advertising has begun and the parties are working hard. Starting Monday May 13th it will be possible for students and personnel to vote via
until Friday May 17th. The candidates list for the University Council can be found
With representatives from many different faculties and services, from the WP to the OBP, the PF reflects the versatility of the RUG and complement each other by sharing our diverse knowledge and background information. We are, for example, in favour of a work pressure paragraph (impact analysis) by all larger plans, for example the quality agreements, and for voting right or advisory right to all aspects of the budget and not just the public parts.
Lijst Calimero has been in the University Council since 2004 with a clear goal: the improvement of the quality of education at our university. We achieve this by critically but constructively looking at different facets of education within our university. By looking at how every students studies, what every students studies, and where every student studies we are try to represent all elements of student life in the University Council. Every year we organise think tanks with different themes to hear from the students and to inform students about our activities within the University Council.
The Studenten Organisatie Groningen is the oldest student party in the University Council and is active, in different forms, in improving the daily life of all 30,000 RUG students since 1972. The policy of the SOG focusses on the following three pillars: internationalisation, sustainability, and flexibility and employability of students. With that in mind, the SOG has, among other things, had an international in our faction for the past 3 years. The SOG stands for a constructive, horizontal dialogue throughout the whole academic landscape to improve the daily life of the students that wish to get the most out of their study period.
We of the Democratische Academie Groningen (DAG) are in the Council to give fundamental criticism to the aspects of the RUG that are non-transparent, undemocratic en to focussed on profit. Besides our role in the University Council, DAG also organises protests, debate evenings, and we do research into abuses from the University.
One Man Gang’s inaugural year in the University Council has, so far, been an interesting experience. When I decided to participate, I had two platforms that I based my entire candidacy on: free hot water and a balcony for smoking. I can proudly say that hot water is now free in the UB. But I will only be satisfied when there is free hot water in every building of the university. And I am working towards this. But to achieve this I need to talk to the faculty boards because it is within their competences to realise my plan. About the balcony for smokers, I sent a 8 page memo to the Board of the University in October in which I laid out three possibilities to work on the smoking/pollution problem. I am still waiting on an answer which I can expect in February. There are two truths within the University Council: every takes time and compromises are unavoidable.
Many major Dutch companies publish extensive information about climate impact in their annual reports. However, very few companies provide concrete, detailed information about their own CO2 emissions, the impact of climate change on their business...
The University of Groningen (UG) has permanently closed the project aimed at creating a branch campus in Yantai. Discussions were held with China Agricultural University, the city of Yantai and the Province of Shandong.
Offers of cheap single train tickets through retailers such as Kruidvat or Etos have a positive impact on the number of kilometres travelled by rail. This impact is much bigger than that of more general TV, newspaper or magazine advertising. However,...