Education minister Eppo Bruins. Photo: ANP HH / Peter Hilz The cabinet wants to attenuate competition within tertiary education. Universities and colleges will be legally required to collaborate, a letter written by minister Eppo Bruins reveals.
Fewer students, significant budget cuts, small programmes that are being terminated, shortages in the employment market, young researchers under pressure; ‘strategic choices’ are needed to address these issues, Minister Bruins writes in a letter addressed to the House of Representatives. He details his vision for the future of tertiary education and scientific research in a lengthy letter.
Bruins wants a system that is less market-oriented. Education institutes should cease to offer trendy programmes to attract as many students as possible but determine the range of study programmes together. That will enable the government to step back.
Conflicts
Education institutes will not naturally fall in line, especially in times of austerity. Maastricht University has started recruiting international students again, and the university colleges are arguing over support for contracting rural regions.
Bruins is aware of this. He sees an increase in competition, his letter shows. ‘More programmes were launched than were terminated in recent years’, he argues. Still, he aims to get the institutes to the table.
Legislative amendment
His solution is a legislative amendment. He aims to force the institutes to collaborate. In the future, universities and colleges will not be permitted to launch or terminate programmes without consulting other institutes.
Such consultations are not entirely new. Self-management and mutual consultation occur in many forms. The minister: ‘That is a positive development which I wholeheartedly support and aim to galvanise.’ But he wants to make it more binding.
The details have yet to be established. He aims to discuss what form this consultation should take with the universities and colleges. Small and unique programmes that are of value to society as a whole or the region must be preserved, which means that a programme in, for example, Dutch, cannot be terminated just because too few students have enrolled.
On the other hand, he wants universities and colleges to cash in on opportunities for the economy and society through their range of programmes. The system must encourage this, but how precisely is unclear.
Less intervention
At the same time, the minister wants to have less direct involvement with the institutes. He prefers not to focus is issues such as work pressure, scientific integrity, diversity, inclusion and social safety. That falls within the institutes’ responsibility, despite a lack of funds and regulation from The Hague.
Or, as Bruins puts it: ‘I will reduce the ad hoc stimulating role the government plays in these issues step by step in the coming years.’ He also wants to reduce the administrative burden of the institutes, which he claims also calls for a different type of funding. Bruins wants to consider ‘the entire mechanism of how the government budget is determined.’ He is particularly interested in “predictability, stability and collaboration”.
Accessibility
A footnote shows this could impact the accessibility of education. You may not be able to continue studying as easily as before if you want to. Bruins will ‘consider the upward pressure and financing of ‘those moving up from college education to university education and dropouts.’
The political conviction that many students aim for the highest attainable degree is the foundation behind the term “upward pressure”. The idea is that students prefer a university degree over a college degree and would rather have a college degree than a secondary professional degree. The previous minister of education, Robbert Dijkgraaf, wanted to transform this ladder into a spectrum and stressed that secondary professional education, college education and universities are equally valuable.
That is also how Bruins sees it. In his letter, he states that ‘it would benefit students if there was less focus on maximising self-development and upward pressure.’ A significant difference is that Bruins aims to implement this change through the funding of tertiary education without, however, detailing precisely how.
Postdocs
Despite the budget cuts and the fact that he states he wants less involvement in the institutes’ policies, Bruins also discusses young researchers’ careers in his letter. ‘They are the next generation of elite scientists working on research and innovation for societal challenges.’
Critics may respond by saying: ‘If that is the case, don’t cut their budgets.’ But he does not anticipate such criticism. He states that postdocs have a particularly tough time with uncertain career perspectives and ‘too many temporary contracts.’
According to the minister, it is up to the universities. They must find a satisfactory solution for young researchers during the collective labour agreement negotiations. However, it is one of the few topics for which Bruins earmarks specific budgets.
Sums
Forty million euros is earmarked for PhD students, postdocs and first-time assistant professors. The previous cabinet introduced starter grants to reduce work pressure and create ‘peace and space’. Bruins takes a different approach. ‘I will not install a specific instrument to distribute these funds’, he writes.
In other words, the universities may apply the funds as they see fit. ‘That limits the administrative burden for universities’, the minister argues. He wants the universities to inform him how they will apply the funds towards improving the position of young researchers.
Universities will also receive an extra 25 million euros annually until 2028 to address work pressure. Those funds are added to what remains of the slashed starter and stimulus grants: 78 million euros per year until 2031.
Received
How Bruins’ plans are received remains to be seen. These are significant changes, even just in terms of funding. The opposition is sure to clamp down on the issue, but not everyone in the coalition is positive either.
The VVD, for example, has always petitioned for stricter control and performance agreements in tertiary education. This party just recently critically questioned the minister over the fact that some colleges have abandoned the binding study advice. Moreover, the liberal party has always favoured competition among the institutes. These issues are the exact opposite of what the letter suggests. The PVV also favours a tighter grip on the universities’ policies, particularly regarding such things as diversity, climate change and prayer rooms. Or when an undesirable speaker visits the campus.
Many of Bruins’ proposals still require consultation, exploration and study. He will likely be able to convince the coalition partners to await the outcome thereof.