End for the Radboud Excellence Initiative and the Science Education Hub. The Executive Board is also cutting back on many other projects and organisations, such as the Teaching and Learning Centre, the sustainability programme and the collaboration with Maastricht. Members of the central participational bodies regret not having been consulted on the measures.

He was ‘pretty much caught off guard’ by the news, says Jan van Baren-Nawrocka, science education adviser at the Science Education Hub (WKRU), an organisation dedicated to projects for primary school students and the professionalisation of (prospective) teachers. Last Thursday, Van Baren-Nawrocka and his colleagues were informed that the plug would be pulled on the WKRU at the end of this year.

‘We have the expertise to enable children in primary schools to experience science. We reach children who will not necessarily get that opportunity. And that’s very important in this day and age.’ Radboud Kids was one of the events organised by the Science Education Hub.

However, the Executive Board was required to make ‘painful choices’ and yesterday announced an austerity programme that affects WKRU, among others. The two permanent staff at the Science Education Hub will be given careful guidance and offered alternative positions where possible, according to the university announcement.

General activities

The measures will eventually save €2 million annually. These are funds from General University Activities (AUA), a pot of money directly under the responsibility of the Executive Board.

The austerity measures are in response to declining student numbers, higher wage costs, inflation and government policies. ’This is obviously painful, particularly for those directly involved,’ vice chair Agnes Muskens said in the online message. Unfortunately, it is also necessary to stay financially healthy, in the interests of our teaching and research.’

Funding for two projects will eventually stop altogether. Besides the WKRU, the other project involved is the Radboud Excellence Initiative, which brings top international researchers to Nijmegen.

Other organisations and initiatives which will receive less funding include the Christine Mohrmann Fund, the Radboud Teaching & Learning Centre, the Profiling Fund, the Radboud Sustainability programme, the development of technical courses and the collaboration with Maastricht University.

Uncertain future

The position of Inge Eijkhout, hospitality officer at the Radboud Excellence Initiative, will also eventually be abolished. ‘The researchers who have already started and the fellows from the last nomination round will be able to finish their work. But from 2027, the programme will stop for good. I will therefore soon be meeting my supervisor and a personnel advisor to see if there is other work for me within the university. The outcome is uncertain – I won’t be out on the street immediately, but I’ll be facing some challenges in the near future.’

A key objective of the Radboud Excellence Initiative was to attract good people, establish international partnerships and thus raise Radboud University’s profile. Eijkhout: ‘In our experience, these collaborations continue for years. That’s good for the brand awareness of the university. And the visiting scientists usually had very good output. These are all things we’ll now lose.’

Participational bodies not involved

The university’s central participational bodies were not involved in the austerity plans for the university-wide activities. That’s something that Sven Braster, chair of the University Student Council, regrets. ‘A few hours before the announcement was posted online on the university’s website, the text was sent to me and the chair of the Works Council,’ he says. The Representative Council of Radboud Services was informed in advance, however.

In principle, the central participational bodies only have the right of consent on the main lines of the budget. ‘Last December, we gave positive advice,’ says Braster. ‘But these particular cuts were not mentioned at that time. Surely, if the Executive Board is implementing such extensive austerity measures, you want to create sufficient support.’

‘As USC, we would like to be more actively involved in the choices being made’

Braster says that it’s good that the Executive Board is not just taking money away from faculties and support services, but is also critically reviewing its own spending. ‘But as USC, we would like to be more actively involved in the choices being made. So now the Profiling Fund is being cut, making it more difficult for students to study abroad. I also wonder whether it is smart to cut back on the Radboud Sustainability Programme at times like these.’

Reorganisation

Max Visser from the Works Council is also disappointed. ‘These cuts in university-wide activities raise many questions. Is this move part of a bigger plan or is it an emergency measure? What are the strategic thoughts behind ending the collaboration with Maastricht University?’

‘We will definitely be challenging the Executive Board on this’

Visser explains that the participational bodies and the Executive Board previously held discussions on a strategy regarding the cuts. ‘For example, more interdisciplinary cooperation and downsizing and optimisation of support services were chosen. But I don’t find that strategy reflected in these cuts.’

According to Visser, who is also a business economist, a €2 million cut has a huge impact. ‘75 percent of the cuts at the university involve staff,’ he says. ‘If you cut 2 million, you save 1.5 million on employees. If you know that 1 FTE costs on average around 100,000 euros a year, you know that roughly 15 FTE have to go. In that case, you have a formal reorganisation. As participational bodies, that’s something we need to be involved in. We will definitely be challenging the Executive Board on this.’