Why Arts & Culture, History and Psychology cannot do without English

What happens if Arts & Culture is forced by the law to become Kunst & Cultuurwetenschappen again?

Koen van Eijck: ‘Without international students, we would find ourselves in significant financial trouble. There would also be a problem among the staff: about two-thirds are non-Dutch. Before 2014, the number of students was already declining for several years. When we introduced the English track, not only did international students enrol, but the number of Dutch students also doubled. The question is what will happen if we abolish IBACS again.”

What does English spoken education contribute to this programme?

“Students become much more cosmopolitan because of it; they are more open to other cultures. That is an important skill in the internationally oriented cultural sector. The lecturers also benefit: it is very educational, because students bring a wide variety of perspectives that you might not have known about before. In addition, the international network it creates is also very important for research. That network is partly supported by student exchanges. The contacts we have with a hundred universities around the world would disappear without that. That means that research collaborations and inviting guest lecturers would become more difficult.”

Do you see any advantages in switching back to Dutch?

“Not really. Specific knowledge about Dutch cultural policy is still taught, but there is hardly any demand for it among students. That will not suddenly change. Sometimes guest speakers find it difficult to speak in English. So, it could be a small advantage if that could be done in Dutch, but that is happening less and less.”

How do you still distinguish yourself as a study programme if you – like many arts and culture programmes worldwide – only teach in English?

“That’s easy. We have a very specific approach. We are not heavily focused on the humanities, but have much more of a sociological and economic perspective on the art world. That is not something you see often at other universities. So, I’m not worried about that.”

What scenarios are you considering as the Wib approaches?

“We are still very busy preparing to answer questions from the ‘language test’, but that test isn’t exactly finalised yet. Hopefully, we will get through it. If not, it could be quite dramatic. Then it is uncertain whether all staff can remain.”

Why was an English track introduced in 2014?

Marjan Gorgievski: ‘Primarily for financial reasons and to create an international classroom. The politics also encouraged universities to place internationalisation at the forefront. 21st-century skills, such as cross-cultural communication skills, were deemed very important by the government. What is often forgotten now is that international students are very beneficial for society. They often stay and work in the Netherlands after their studies, and European students, according to research by the CPB, contribute an average of 17,000 euros to society, for example through taxes. Non-European students contribute 96,000 euros on average.”

Has the programme changed because of the introduction of English?

“I can imagine that that happened when there was different literature on a subject in Dutch than in English. To give an example: I previously taught the course Work and Health with an excellent Dutch textbook. It was difficult to find a similarly accessible English book, and as a prerequisite of Problem-Based Learning, I had to use more than one source. As a result, in the second year, I worked mostly with articles and chapters from textbooks. Normally, you wouldn’t do that in that phase, but it had an interesting side effect: students understood better how science works. They view textbooks as the absolute truth, while an article indicates the development of science more clearly.”

“Also, we find that we are better aligned with international research now that we are doing much more in English. I’m not sure if this is a result of English-language education; it might be the other way around, but I think they reinforce each other.”

What would you think if English were abolished?

“I would find that very regrettable. We would be going back to square one. It is so stimulating to work in an international environment, to follow discussions and hear different perspectives.”

Do you expect your programme to pass the language test?

“That depends very much on how they will calculate the theshold. If they count individual lectures and classes, we will meet the required 70 per cent education in Dutch. Our programme website is only in English, so we might have to introduce Dutch there again. But that extra work wouldn’t help with the budget cuts. Finding literature in Dutch is difficult; there is little available in Dutch.”

Suppose universities offer programmes to ‘sacrifice’ themselves, through the so-called ‘self-regulation’ that is still being discussed. Would Psychology be sacrificed on the altar?

“That is a possibility. It is a ‘translated’ programme, so not like the bachelor’s in Management or International Social Challenges for example, which was developed directly for an international audience. I think we are at greater risk.”

What would that mean for the programme? Would it be in jeopardy?

“I don’t think so immediately. We will probably still meet the intake restriction; we have between 1,600 and 2,000 applications from Dutch and international students together, for 600 places in total each year.”

What effect does the language test discussion have on the staff? Does it cause unrest?

“A number are taking a Dutch course; some already speak it well. What may happen is that we will need to deploy more Dutch staff in the first and second years of the bachelor’s programme, while the international staff would focus more on the master’s programme, which can remain in English.

“There have already been meetings where staff could express their concerns and expectations. International colleagues wondered why we were responding so passively to the developments in politics. ‘Are you really going to do what they want?’ they asked. I understand that reaction. We have a ‘polder culture’ in the Netherlands, we try to find dialogue. But the trust in that is also eroding for me.”

Why was an international track established in 2015?

Maarten van Dijck: ‘It fit the nature of the programme, as we were one of the few programmes focusing on non-Western history for decades. Also, internationalisation was the norm at that time, and we saw an opportunity to attract more students this way.”

How did the transition go?

“The shift to English was not difficult for most staff members; there was one who was not pleased with it. This person emphasised the linguistic aspect of history, but I don’t think that is accurate for us. This is not a faculty of arts; we are more focused on sociology. As far as I know, we didn’t receive complaints from students back then. History now offers English-language lectures and language-separated work groups. Exams were initially all in English to ensure the questions were truly the same; however, at the request of the programme committee, this has been adjusted to separate Dutch and English versions.”

What impact has internationalisation had on the content of the programme?

“I believe the quality has improved. We now have more diverse examples and a more diverse student group. In history, multiperspectivity is very important. For example, the Indonesian War of Independence was viewed in the Netherlands at that time as ‘police actions’ to restore order, while for Indonesians, it was a fight for freedom, for Americans an anti-colonial struggle, and the Brits were unhappy because other countries might have wanted to become independent too. You now have those different perspectives gathered in one classroom.”

Do you think the programme will survive the Wib?

“We have good arguments, but it remains to be seen. The frameworks of the law have also been adjusted recently, so there is much uncertainty. It feels more like a budget cut to me than a quality improvement. It is primarily a regression in that regard. It will not be cheaper with fewer students, as you miss out on economies of scale.”

Is the Dutch branch of history also at risk if English disappears?

“I really cannot answer that. That is the big problem with this discussion: what data is being used to justify these budget cuts? Who tells me it will be cheaper if we abolish the English variant?”