Starters TiU petition ‘disappointed’
The reaction that the board gave on the petition that top scientists at Tilburg University started, is ‘really disappointing’. The board is avoiding a substantial discussion. “The letter holds no details. The reaction shows the inability or unwillingness to make choices,” the professors write in a letter to the the board.
The professors started a petition to ask the board to change the university’s policy. They say that the board’s biggest priority is profit maximization. No clear choices are made by the directors en the interests of scientists are not taken into account, in their opinion. The petition has been signed 161 times and was handed to Koen Becking Thursday afternoon.
This Friday, the board published a reaction, which reads: “Tilburg University is constantly striving for improvement, and the petition hands some useful suggestions regarding the action the university has to take to submit to that strive. (…) the human intellect is our most important value, and the academic norms and achievements determine our ambition. (…) At the same time, an answer needs to be found to the declining public financing.”
The petition has been initiated by Eric van Damme (TiSEM), Cyrille Fijnaut (TLS), Marc Groenhuijsen (TLS), Arjen van Witteloostuijn (TiSEM), Siegwart Lindenberg (TSB) en Aart de Zeeuw (TiSEM). They answered to the board: “We asked for a discussion on content, and you promised that you would invite us. You, however, did not and still do not follow up on that promise. Rather than engaging in face-to-to-face discussion, you seem to evade it. (…) The response is disappointing since it neglects the fact that the petition has not only been initiated, but has also been signed by 161 persons. Your response also neglects that several persons did not sign because they feared negative repercussions if they would.”
“As said, we are disappointed by your response as it does not go to the heart of the matter. We believe that it also sends the wrong signal to the university community, and will be interpreted as such. When differences of opinion exist, there are two possible responses: pretend that they are not there and continue; or discuss them, in order to sharpen the view on the merits and weaknesses of the different points of view. In your response, you have chosen the first option. In our view, the latter is more rational and the only one fitting for a university.”
The board now stated that they will invite the group of scientists soon.
