Prologue

The coronavirus pandemic proved once again that universities are vibrant, resilient institutions with a strong capacity for adaptation. In just a few days, almost all our courses shifted to remote online teaching, and we were able to continue with much of our research by changing parts of the method or structure, rescheduling tasks, creating flexible lab working hours, and so forth. In addition, the pandemic also, yet again vividly illustrated how vital fundamental-, and particularly also applied research is for society, especially when the research is conducted in an international context. New vaccines, medications and treatment methods were developed and tested at an awe-inspiring pace. Interdisciplinary research took off, as the biochemical, biomedical, and social sciences, and humanities, as well as public administration and economics, all joined together to investigate the complex issues that arise in a global pandemic. Transdisciplinary research, in which knowledge institutions collaborate with not-for-profit institutions and private companies, also played an important role.

At the same time, we also see that in parts of society there is extreme scepticism about the results of scientific research, especially when based on those results citizens’ rights and freedoms are being limited. This applies to the government’s many measures to combat the pandemic, but also to measures concerning climate change. On social media, alternative truths quickly sprout, reducing scientific knowledge to ‘just an opinion’.

Over the past few years, universities have been facing other challenges as well. Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are under threat in many places, even in countries where they had once seemed unassailable, like the United States. Political parties increasingly express demands that universities, in their education and research, adhere to political and ideological opinions. At the same time, there is also pressure from societal parties to terminate certain collaborations because of ethical and ideological views. University staff are met with the stain of heavy workloads and pressure to perform, in combination with serious competition for funding because of inadequate financing. Particularly the pressure to perform has raised fundamental questions: which results are worth the effort? And for whom do we aim to produce those results? In essence, questions about the legitimacy of the university.

These issues, in turn, raise the question of how the university will develop in the future. To us, an even more interesting question is: how do we aspire that the university will develop in the future? This brings up the highly critical question: what is the ideal university? This could easily lead to futuristic daydreaming, which would only bring fleeting enjoyment. Instead, we’ve challenged ourselves to come up with a beckoning perspective that is firmly rooted in reality, and the developments we observe around us every day.

Of course, there is constant thinking about how the university is developing. This has resulted in some interesting publications over the past few years, like the one in the Netherlands by former UU Rector Magnificus Bert van der Zwaan, titled Higher Education in 2040. A Global Approach,^[1] in which he discusses the higher education system in European and international contexts. There is also the publication by Floris Cohen, with the enticing title: ‘De ideale universiteit’ (The Ideal University), in which he largely draws on a number of fundamental principles to design a new university, which in part surprisingly resembles the university as we knew it in the (distant) past.^[2] These and many other publications in the Netherlands and abroad have inspired thoughts, and led us to the conclusion that it might be worthwhile to brainstorm about the future of the university based on developments in its core tasks: education, research, and societal impact. Those core tasks are developing within the context of the most important change in the contemporary academic culture: the trend towards Open Science. In essence, this change is about the university’s desire to further embed itself in society by increasing to address major social challenges at local, regional, and global levels in its education and research, but also by giving back more to society.^[3] Particularly in this context, how are education and research currently developing?

First and foremost, the university is shaped by its people. As such, it is therefore important for us to consider how the university community is developing today, and how it could ideally develop in the future. Evidently, this means that we should look at how the university is organised. The following considerations give rise to the main themes of this book: education, research, society, community, and organisation. We will complete the whole with a brief historical sketch and an epilogue that synthesizes the main conclusions and beckoning perspectives.

Our modest ambition extends beyond merely describing what we believe to observe: we further aim to describe which future developments we expect and consider desirable. In some cases, we also describe the steps needed to realise certain ideals. And of course, these steps also serve to spark discussion.

Many people are of importance when it comes to determining the future of the university. The first are the members of the university community itself: its students and staff. Then, of course, there are also politicians, policy makers and opinion leaders. Beyond that, there are many other stakeholders in society who are, to say the least, interested in the functioning of the university and can exert influence at decisive moments, such as during elections. These include public institutions, but also the business community, both of whom are extremely relevant in the Netherlands and abroad.

With this broad audience in mind, we have tried to write a book that is as accessible as possible, with plenty of room for explanation and examples. As all three of us are affiliated with Utrecht University, and we have drawn extensively on our own experiences, it will come as no surprise that quite a few examples are drawn from how we do things in Utrecht. This, however, does not make it an ‘Utrecht vision’, nor do we want to set Utrecht University as an example. On the contrary, we believe that the topics we deal with are relevant to all Dutch universities, to at least some extent. High-quality research is, by definition, international, and as such the university world is also by definition an international one. It is a world where the European Union has become increasingly important over the past years, both in terms of policy and for research and education funding. This book will therefore deal with the international, and in particular European-, context in some detail.

This international context obliges us to define what we mean by a ‘university’: the institutions that are often referred to internationally as ‘research universities’. These are not, as is generally thought, universities that give priority to research. They are higher education institutions that conduct research as the basis for their activities, and where research therefore also forms the basis of education, contrary to higher education institutions, where this is not primarily the case. In an international context, these institutions are often referred to as ‘universities of applied sciences’. Dutch Higher Professional Education (HBO) fits into the latter category. In practice, the distinction between these two types of institution is not so black-and-white; universities of applied sciences also pay increasing attention to (applied) research. As such, it is understandable that the two types of institutions are increasingly considered to be equal, certainly within the EU. However, there also remains a valuable and defensible difference between institutions that focus on educating people who can generate new, high-quality knowledge, and those that focus on training people who can apply such high-quality knowledge (and also conduct further research into these applications).^[4] This book is mainly about what happens at the first type of institution. That being said, much of what we write will also be relevant to HBO institutions, especially in the field of education. But modesty also befits us here, for we are not intimately familiar with universities of applied sciences.

Many people have inspired us in this project, amongst whom numerous national and international authors. Equally valuable to us, however, were the insights that close colleagues and students were willing to share. When we started working on the topic, we held three meetings with students and colleagues of whom we were sure they had affinity with, knowledge of and experience in the three main topics we wanted to discuss: education, public engagement, and the university community. Our invitation to participate in what we called ‘expert meetings’ received an enthusiastic response. We were highly motivated by the participants’ input, as well as their engagement. Afterwards, we were told it was a pity that there had not been room for more people to attend, and that the opportunities to meet were limited. There is really no better way to discover that a subject you’re working on is so relevant to so many people. We wish to thank all the participants in these ‘expert meetings’, as well as those who could not attend but provided us with written input. Their names can be found in an appendix.

Entirely in line with the Open Science philosophy, we made the first version of this work publicly available in a digital pre-print version in July 2023, on an open platform provided by the Publishers of Trial and Error. This brought us numerous responses, suggestions, and examples. Discussion sessions with colleagues and students about (parts of) the book further enriched our thoughts. In this revised version, we have made corrections and, to some extent, responded to questions and suggestions in reaction to the previous version. We’ve noticed that the book has sparked a wide range of discussions and perspectives. We welcome this, because our intention was precisely to spark and fuel dialogue. In our opinion, these discussions cannot - and need not - be included in the book in their entirety. The Center of Trial and Error’s website provides an open platform for further discussions, and we welcome both critical and empowering feedback and look forward to the evolution of thinking in this area.

As authors, we divided the work among ourselves. Manon Kluijtmans took on the primary responsibility for the chapters on education and community. Frank Miedema had primary responsibility for the chapters on the transition to Open Science and those on interaction with society. Henk Kummeling set up the other sections. The final product, however, is the result of an in-depth collaboration, for which we claim joint responsibility. In this context, we would also especially like to thank Maarten Post, who fulfilled the role of critical co-reader. He paid particular attention to the accessibility of the texts, and he made sure that the chapters are somewhat streamlined linguistically, while allowing the signature of each particular author to remain visible. The chapters are obviously related, but we also wanted to ensure that they are each individually easy to read and understand.

One person who certainly deserves our special thanks is Claire Stalenhoef, who was a UU student in the Legal Research Master’s programme when the first version was written. She helped collect and compile research material, and also coordinated the expert meetings. Claire provided valuable substantive feedback, and also ensured that we kept the student perspective in mind as well. The same goes for Manar el Amrani, who took over her responsibilities halfway through the project. Claire and Manar ‘orchestrated’ the author team, which was certainly a challenge given the writers’ distinct schedules. With seemingly inexhaustible enthusiasm and attention to detail, they definitely got their jobs done.

We would also like to thank Eva ten Hoor, who supported the writing team in the revision from pre-print to final version. Our thanks also go out to Robert Smith and Hanneke Olivier who arranged for the eagerly awaited English translation. And, of course, the entire team at the Centre of Trial and Error who made it possible to publish this book on an open platform. Both the Dutch and English versions are available on their website.

Henk Kummeling, Manon Kluijtmans, Frank Miedema

September 2024

1. Van der Zwaan, B. (2017). Higher Education in 2040: A Global Approach. Amsterdam University Press. ↑

2. Cohen, H. F. (2020). De Ideale Universiteit: Ontwerp van een Uitvoerbaar Alternatief. Prometheus. ↑

3. Chapter 2 deals with the development of Open Science in more detail. ↑

4. See also: Vereniging van Samenwerkende Nederlandse Universiteiten – Vereniging Hogescholen (VSNU-VH). (2019). Position Paper VSNU-VH doorontwikkeling binair stelsel. Retrieved from: vereniginghogescholen.nl↑