After a short notion of the results of the elections for the new board of Student Party Dante for the next academic year, the faculty board started with answering the questions we proposed for this meeting. First of all, we wanted to know more about the development regarding the digitalization of TSHD (such as videolectures). The board did not prepared an answer, so this will be postponed to the next council. Besides this, the teachers asked a question regarding Stuvia, because they noticed that students sell lecture slides and summaries on this website. They think that students may not do this, due to the copyright of the teachers. The board will contact other universities that managed this problem, to ask what they can do about this. The last general question, a proposal to let Student Party Dante and the study associations of TSHD help to make sure that students will fill in the course evaluations, was conceived positively by the board. In addition, the board told us that there are faculty- and university-wide initiatives to increase the number of course evaluations filled in by students. A new system should be in place within a year.


Suggestions for the Education and Examination regulation

We asked the board about the general applicability of the education and examination regulation (EER) and they responded that the EER is apliccable to students who start in the academic year of the specific EER of that year. Some changes can be made, but if the student student will be disadvantaged, the change in the regulation does not apply to him/her.

Some proposals for the EER of next year that we discussed:

  • one of the articles about the exams states that the first opportunity and the resit of a course may differ in the way of examination. We think that this is unfair to students because all students should be assessed equally and similar. This is in line with the question we asked regarding exceeding the grading period. The board will look into this.
  • A completely new article is proposed by the board, which states that students, who participate two bachelor programs, may not use the courses of one program for the minor of the other program. When we look at the regulations at other universities, we see that they have other regulations for this which allows the interchange of minors. Therefore we think that we need a better motivation and more information to make sure that we do not differ from other universities.


Conditional consent to the EER

Although we had some comments regarding some of the proposed changes to the EER, we think that most of the changes are solid and justified. Therefore we did consent with the proposals, but only with the following condition:

The proposal concerning the exemption of minors while following to programs will not be included in next year’s EER, due to lack of information. The board will look into this and we receive a concept document for our information within a few weeks, with some more information about the motivation.


Initiatives regarding the EER from Dante (suggestions)

  • Regarding the digitization of the faculty and the decision of the University council of 2016 (UR 2053), we would like to add an article which states that students should be allowed to hand in assignments digitally. We think that ‘paperless is more’ and that it will take a lot of effort for students, to hand in assignments on paper, if they have to travel to the university.
  • The current regulation for grading exams states that the teacher has 15 work days to determine the results. Unfortunately, there is no consequence whatsoever when the amount of days is exceeded. Therefore we would want to include the possibilities of students when they do not receive their grades in time (and possibly have only a few days left to prepare the resit). One suggestion, that would make sure that students still have enough time to prepare the resit, is to add an amount of days between the determination of the final exam and the resit.


Other topics

Other topics on the agenda were the annual report on education and research within TSHD. Those are factual documents that need to be approved by the faculty council. The preparation for the budget was shortly discussed. The board added a memo that contained input that program committees collected regarding the SV budget. The implications will be discussed in September.