{"id":98321,"date":"2019-05-01T13:59:55","date_gmt":"2019-05-01T11:59:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=98321"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:23:18","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:23:18","slug":"phd-network-calls-evaluation-of-groningens-phd-student-experiment-slanted","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2019\/05\/01\/phd-network-calls-evaluation-of-groningens-phd-student-experiment-slanted\/","title":{"rendered":"PhD network calls evaluation of Groningen\u2019s PhD student experiment ‘slanted’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Promovendi Netwerk Nederland (PNN), which represents the interests of PhD students in the Netherlands, says that the University of Groningen has sought to influence the interim evaluation of an experiment with PhD scholarship students.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Groningen University\u2019s Academy Building in Broerstraat in Groningen. <\/span><\/p>

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tWutsje \/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

The experiment with PhD scholarship students started in 2016. These doctoral candidates aren\u2019t employed by the university but are offered a grant \u2013 which means they are less expensive for the institution. The reception was underwhelming: the only university to prove enthusiastic about the scheme was the University of Groningen, which appointed 850 PhD scholarship students. Erasmus University Rotterdam appointed 15.<\/p>\n

Education Minister Van Engelshoven asked the CHEPS research bureau to evaluate this PhD education scheme. But even before CHEPS published its interim report, she decided not to extend<\/a><\/u> the experiment. There wasn\u2019t enough interest, according to the Minister. This decision was criticised in the House of Representatives, by coalition partners CDA and VVD, among other parties.<\/p>\n

\u2018Research far from solid\u2019<\/h2>

The interim evaluation has since been received by the Ministry \u2013 although it hasn\u2019t been published yet. According to PNN, CHEPS\u2019s research was far from solid. The bureau mainly based itself on the findings offered by the University of Groningen. \u201cWhen you\u2019re conducting an independent study, you shouldn\u2019t largely base yourself on data supplied by a direct stakeholder, which moreover wants to extend the experiment,\u201d says PNN Chair Anne de Vries. It has become clear from a self-evaluation conducted by the University of Groningen, which was discussed in its University Council, that the institution wants to expand the experiment with another batch of 800 PhD scholarship students.<\/p>\n

While CHEPS did speak with the administrators and students involved, PNN also doubts whether this was a completely objective process. A share of the respondents had actually been selected by the university, which had taken the initiative to contact them. In the invitation to these interviews, the university encouraged them to show the scholarship education scheme in a positive light. One of the University of Groningen\u2019s administrators wrote: \u201cWe hope that a positive interim evaluation will inspire the political establishment to greenlight the expansion of the existing quota that we would like to put through. [\u2026] I know the current Minister seems to hold a negative view of the scholarship education scheme launched by her predecessor. That makes it even more important that this interim evaluation runs as intended.\u201d This e-mail was forwarded to PNN by parties involved.<\/p>\n

Very curious<\/h2>

In their interviews with CHEPS, the PhD scholarship students indicated that they were pressured to handle teaching tasks \u2013 even though they are not obliged to do so, in contrast with doctoral candidates with regular employment contracts. \u201cComplaints of this kind merit a more widespread investigation. It is very curious that the bureau refrained from this\u201d, says De Vries.<\/p>\n

In addition, prior to the interviews, the university sent policy officers and administrators a list of subjects to help them prepare. But many of the potentially critical PhD students and their representatives were denied this opportunity, according to PNN.<\/p>\n

According to the network for doctoral candidates, the researchers\u2019 objectiveness was \u201chighly questionable\u201d. PNN contacted CHEPS a number of times to voice its concerns, but says that the bureau brushed aside its criticisms. PNN was asked to help organise a roundtable meeting. According to participating PhD scholarship students, CHEPS played a very guiding role in the discussions.<\/p>\n

CHEPS doesn\u2019t see what the fuss is about. Their research method was approved by the Ministry. CHEPS researchers Ben Jongbloed informs us via e-mail that PNN was allowed to review the draft version of the report. \u201cAt the time, they had the opportunity to offer confidential feedback (at our request), which they also did. As the research team, we have included PNN\u2019s comments in the final version of the report.\u201d Apart from this point, CHEPS declines to comment until the report has been officially published.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

De redactie<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t