Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Campus

The road to downsizing

A decision to downsize or restructure in higher education has a big impact or stress on both the faculty and students involved in that particular track.

Moreover, while such a decision is being made, students and sometimes even faculty members, are neither consulted for an opinion or vote nor are they furnished with complete information on what is being planned or what is the worst to be expected.

Most recently, the Energy & Society track of the faculty of Technology, Policy and Management (TPM) is going through such an uncertainty of whether the current expertise and capacity can remain in its current form in the following years. The stated reason for this is that the TPM professors responsible for this track are not generating sufficient revenue through research-related projects, focusing too much on the actual education of students. The Energy & Society track provides scope for students to carry out their projects with companies, so such a decision can have serious consequences on everybody interested in the track.

In general, when a decision is made by higher authorities, students are not asked for their inputs in how to make things better for them and for everybody else. Is it fair to deprive students of their right to pursue the career path of their choice just because the staff members involved do not generate sufficient money? There could be many alternatives to reductions in workforce and elimination of courses. Early planning sessions involving representatives from all those concerned could help arrive at the right decisions to be implemented at the right time, instead of suddenly within just a year. While a decision is being made, the progress in decision-making processes should be communicated very clearly to both students and staff. When kept in the dark, unnecessary fears and frustrations can hinder effectiveness, since not all tracks going through the question of downsizing are idle; rather, many tracks remain extremely busy, like TPM’s Energy & Society track. Further, students desiring to pursue their higher education abroad usually plan well in advance as to what track they want to pursue and in which university. Therefore, such an immediate decision when not communicated immediately can have a big impact on future students as well.

Why can’t long-term approaches for retaining productivity and maintaining morale be planned well in advance? Why can’t certain staff members be moved to different divisions at such times, so that students can still pursue their projects under the professors of their choice? Why can’t creativity and flexibility in options aimed at achieving reductions be encouraged through the involvement of those directly affected? What is fair? These questions remain unanswered.


Do you agree or disagree with the points raised in this week’s Talking Point? Let us hear your opinion: start or join the discussion in the website’s Comments section at www.delta.tudelft.nl

Redacteur Redactie

Heb je een vraag of opmerking over dit artikel?

delta@tudelft.nl

Comments are closed.