The first discussion night of New University Tilburg can be called a
success. Approximately twenty people, students and staff, joined in
critical thought. The burning question of the night was a simple one:
shouldn't the problems broached by the protesters in Amsterdam also
be a topic of discussion in Tilburg?
Before the floor was opened for debate, anthropologist Paul Mutsaers
gave an autobiographical account of the academic system in the
Netherlands. The main point of Mutsaers` account was that academia in
its current form seems to be nothing more than a land of waste.
Where, cumulatively speaking, years of labor are wasted every year on
applications for research grants which have minimal success rates. In
other words, the terms 'efficiency' and 'return on investment' –
fondly used by the managerial class – went flying out the window.
Related to this organized waste that takes place in academia, is the
pressure of this system on researchers, especially in their roles as
teachers. Teachers are more and more evaluated on their financial
merits whilst their educational merits play only a minimal role. And
this is where it becomes concretely relevant for students: more time
spent on grant applications leaves less time for proper education.
With this being said, the debate could start. A number of students
and staff discussed the statement: 'we do not need a New University
here in Tilburg, there is a healthy relationship between on the one
hand students and staff, and on the other hand the executive board.
As the discussion progressed two major problems of Tilburg University
were identified.
Firstly,
there seems to be aculture of silence at Tilburg
University; one should not disturb the status-quo. One of the
participants of the discussion stated that this can be demonstrated
for instance by the cordon sanitaire placed upon the petition Put
Researchers First, For a Better Tilburg University. This
petition, which was initiated last summer by six full professors,
addressed the major flaws of the Strategic Plan (2014-2017) put forth
by the executive board of TiU (1). Despite the fact that it was signed by
161 researchers and others, the entire petition was treated like the
elephant in the room: present, but certainly not to be discussed at
length. Some staff didn't even sign the petition out of fear of
negative repercussions (2). Currently, a similar cordon sanitaire seems
to surround the topic of the new university and rethink movements. Is
this really the kind of atmosphere the executive board wants to
nurture at Tilburg University? An uncritical university? Are we
speaking in oxymorons?
Secondly, there seems to be a general lack of will present within
the student factions (SAM and Front) to effectively and meaningfully
represent the entirety of the student-population. 'Why is it that
these factions are still, after all this time, campaigning for more
workspaces for students?' One former student asked his fellow
participants. Is the right of say merely ceremonial? Or is it simply
the case that the chronic lack of workspaces are merely the outward
manifestation of a systematic defect in the organization of Tilburg
University? And why are the factions only addressing minor 'problems'
like for instance the opening hours of the library? The factions are
supposed to be the most critical members of the University Council:
this organ offers one of the rare opportunities for students to
actually influence University policy, and not merely influence the
décor.
Due to the enthusiasm and engagement of the participants, which was
absolutely wonderful, the remaining two debate-statements could not
be discussed in the time allotted. Therefore, a second discussion
event is in order. Keep an eye on our Twitter or Facebook account, we
will notify you all shortly of an upcoming event.