Year: 2020

The cat is out of the bag, and with it the detailed plans for a new version of the University Act. While the Independent Student Lists of Austria (FLÖ) see some good approaches, unfortunately the negative aspects that need to be criticized predominate.

First, changes to the competencies of the Senates stand out: under the University Act 2002, the Rectorate was responsible for establishing and discontinuing degree programs, for the fundamental substantive orientation of teaching based on the development plan, and for the financial viability of all degree programs. However, the design of degree programs lay solely with the Senate and its subject-specific collegial bodies. With the new regulation, the Rectorate now also receives a “directive competence” for curricula and thus even more far-reaching intervention rights than before. “The present paragraph further curtails the rights of university members and instead places them in the hands of the Rectorates. This not only makes universities less democratic, but also opens up more influence for the government over the study landscape,” says Desmond Grossmann, former deputy chair of the ÖH.

Equally problematic is the planned “streamlining” of a possible re-election of the Rector. Previously, this simplified procedure was possible if both the University Council and the Senate voted with a ⅔ majority for another term of office. Now the Senate, as the democratically elected representation of university members, is to be removed from this step. This would make it possible in the future for Rectors to continue leading the university for another four years without support within the university and without a public call for applications. Instead, legitimacy would come solely from the University Council, whose members are almost half appointed by the government. This would once again expose universities to direct political influence. This change does not live up to the claim of self-organized and free universities.

Particularly negative effects on everyday student life are expected from the proposed changes to study regulations. In recent weeks, the public debate has focused especially on the introduction of a minimum study performance requirement. The draft provides for 24 ECTS within two academic years – otherwise students face exmatriculation. While this may seem like a comparatively low number for students who can focus full-time on a single, well-structured degree program, unfortunately this does not apply to many other large segments of Austria's student population: “Working students, parents, and other students with caregiving responsibilities, as well as individuals with mental health issues, will in the future have to fear that if they make too little progress, they will not be allowed to study their degree program for the next 10 years,” says Desmond Grossmann. Additionally, the proposal represents a restriction of academic freedom and a loss of flexibility in one's studies. The FLÖ also fears that the introduction of a minimum study performance requirement will impose a backdoor restriction on multiple degree programs, since the 24 ECTS must be completed per degree program – which quickly becomes impossible with several programs and poses a threat to inter- and transdisciplinarity in the tertiary education sector.

Additional harshness arises from the fact that negative grades and late-corrected exams do not count toward study activity. The end of the semester can thus quickly become a torment when the transcript does not arrive on time and the sword of Damocles of exmatriculation hangs overhead. The fact that, beyond quality and structure, even the mere possibility of sufficient study progress varies greatly between individual degree programs is shown by the special evaluation of studyability in the 2019 Student Social Survey. At least the amendment contains an approach here to better standardize the workload per ECTS credit. The consequence Exclusion from studies serves solely to clean up statistics and takes no account of the real-life circumstances of those affected.

In summary, many of the planned changes cast a poor light on the intentions of the turquoise-green government coalition. In the coming weeks, the Independent Student Lists Austria (FLÖ) will continue to report on various aspects of the amendment on their social media channels. FLÖ will advocate for improvements in study law at all levels.

FLÖ leaves ÖH coalition because party politics must not take precedence over the interests of students

As Independent Student Representative Lists of Austria (FLÖ), we have continuously advocated for students in the executive of the Federal Representation of the Austrian Students“ Union (BV, ÖH) since 2011. As a party-independent faction, our most important concern is to place the interests of students at the center. The destructive factional infighting of recent months has enormously impaired work in the interest of students. The lack of willingness to engage in dialogue following the events at the last meeting of the ÖH Federal Representation led to an intolerable paralysis of the executive. Ultimately, it was no longer possible to criticize the government. ”When one is no longer allowed to point out grievances and the failures of the turquoise-green government, we, as FLÖ, can no longer be part of this executive," states Desmond Grossmann, until now ÖH Chair, clearly.

It pains us to have to end the coalition. However, under the given circumstances, we see this as the only way to continue working constructively for students at the federal level. As an opposition faction, together with the university representations, we will continue to fight to ensure that the interests of students are not buried under the rubble of party politics.

Over the past 9 years, we have advocated in the Executive for strong and student-friendly higher education legislation. Constructive cooperation with the Federal Ministry and other stakeholders was a major concern for us; nevertheless, we have always openly criticized their poor decisions and highlighted the grievances and their consequences in statements, press releases, and discussions. What was and remains especially important to us is the best possible representation of students at the local level. That is why we have organized countless training sessions for student representatives from all higher education sectors across Austria and continue to support them with advice and practical assistance beyond these events.

A big thank you goes to all volunteer staff members of our FLÖ family, who in recent years have represented the interests of all students to the best of their ability and will continue to act in the interest of students. We would also like to express our gratitude to the employees of the BV, who have supported us in our work and who represent the continuous cornerstone of the ÖH.

As Independent Student Representative Lists of Austria (FLÖ), we look forward to Austria's new government coalition, though we do criticize several points in the government program.

Experience from recent years shows that while universities have seen increased funding, student numbers have declined due to demographic change and a greater choice of alternative pathways. We demand that universities not be disadvantaged as a result and that improved conditions be allowed to bear fruit. At universities of applied sciences, we welcome the increase in funding rates and study places in the interest of fully financed institutions of higher education.

Conversely, the program also reveals tendencies to further restrict access to higher education and to reduce the proven study rights framework. We see the danger that the number of students will continue to decline while more problematic cases arise, given that strong study rights at all higher education institutions lay the foundation for legal certainty and provide protection against arbitrariness. It must be the declared goal that people find the educational and training path that is right for them and can then complete it without unnecessary obstacles.

We are pleased that the new government acknowledges the everyday lives of students in several respects, for example in creating part-time study options, expanding financial aid, and recognizing knowledge acquired elsewhere. It would only be consistent to take this further and completely abolish enrollment fees and tuition fees as socially selective instruments.

We view with particular concern possible shifts in decision-making without consideration of students. It is striking that, on the one hand, the rectorate is given directive competence in study plans, whose approval has so far been solely the responsibility of the senate (with student voting rights!), and on the other hand, in the formulation “rethinking the relationship between the University Council, Rectorate, and Senate in decision-making structures.” Past legislative amendments often paint a less than positive picture; in particular, in appointments, the student voice has not always been provided for in recent years. As the largest group at Austrian higher education institutions, students are entitled to a say on equal footing. Even in the relatively new system of Teacher Education New (PBN), decisions must not be made over their heads.

What the science sector unfortunately lacks is a perspective for all non-STEM fields. The government must also consider basic research and applied research in other areas, including in particular interdisciplinary studies. We also reject aligning research purely with the short-term needs of the economy, as this would completely disregard many fields of study.