Internationalization bill: Forced layoffs, no mandatory subject of Dutch, and other details
Foreign-speaking staff may have to be fired if education switches back to Dutch, according to the new bill on internationalization. Also interesting: It will not be “compulsory” for foreign students to learn Dutch.
It is a comprehensive bill that has already been much discussed: Internationalization in Balance. Outgoing minister Robbert Dijkgraaf took his time, while various parties in the House of Representatives urged him to hurry.
The broad outlines were already known, but the bill has many interesting details. For example, there will be no effort to require foreign students to learn Dutch. And yes, the language policy of universities and colleges may lead to forced layoffs. Here are some of the items.
Language
It is a much-discussed topic: the language of education. The bill should ensure a stronger position of Dutch in higher education. Even foreign students in foreign-language programs should learn some Dutch, giving them a better chance of staying here.
Currently, educational institutions have a duty of care to promote their students’ “ability to express themselves” in Dutch, but foreign students are not covered by that duty. In any case, language education is not going well enough. In practice, little attention is paid to it, writes Dijkgraaf.
That has to change. The minister wants to make “administrative agreements” with clear starting points and measurable results. The phrase “expression skills” has been replaced by “language skills.” And foreign students have to be included.
Or do they? The bill does not include an “obligation of effort” for students. That was considered, reports Dijkgraaf. “In that case, an institution could only award a diploma after determining that the student has fulfilled their obligation of effort.”
The bill does not specify a required level for language proficiency, nor will there be a legally required number of credits for the subject of Dutch. Dijkgraaf prefers to leave it up to the institutions. His example: Law students may need different competencies than chemical engineering students.
He does issue a warning, however. Universities and colleges of higher education must demonstrate that they can handle this freedom, or stricter rules will follow.
Staff laid off
Some programs will become Dutch-speaking again or will be given a Dutch-language track. To this end, universities and colleges of higher education have announced their intentions, but the minister (or his successor) might go even further in the future. There will be a one-time test for existing English-language courses to determine whether teaching in a language other than Dutch is effective.
This could have consequences for staff. “This might mean that foreign-language staff leave or have to be fired because they are unable to teach in Dutch,” the minister acknowledges. “Another option is for these staff to be required to learn Dutch.”
The universities estimate that it would take about five years to teach instructors enough Dutch. The minister (or his successor) will take that into account when determining a “reasonable time frame” by which English-language programs must become Dutch-language again - if that is decided.
Freedom for educational institutions
Why is politics interfering? Universities and colleges are autonomous, aren’t they? Dijkgraaf dismisses that argument. If they want to be autonomous so badly, they should try harder. “The government notes that the autonomous choices of individual institution boards have not been sufficient to solve emerging social bottlenecks related to international student mobility.”
Now he is forcing them to consult each other or come up with “self-governing plans.” These include agreements on student housing, the administrative language within institutions, and the Dutch language skills of foreign teachers. On top of that come “administrative agreements” with the ministry.
If things do go wrong in this system, the minister can intervene. For example, he can refuse to grant permission to start a foreign-language program (this also goes through the CDHO), he can limit the number of students and in extreme cases, even withdraw permission for such programs.
Emergency cap
Universities and colleges of higher education will have the option of an “emergency cap.” They may still set a maximum number of first-year students in the event of unexpectedly high interest in their program. They may decide to do so until March 1st. Such an emergency cap is “exceptional and very radical,” writes the minister, because the conditions change during enrollment.
The March 1st date was chosen so that Dutch and EEA students still hear about it in time and are not caught off guard. Of course, an emergency situation could also arise after March 1st, but Dijkgraaf thinks that this will not happen so soon. In practice, it only concerns students from outside Europe. In connection with their visas, those students must express their interest in time.
Pathways
Introducing a Dutch-speaking and non-Dutch-speaking track within the same program sounds simpler than it is. The various systems cannot handle that easily. Studielink, where students register, estimates that the adjustments would take about four years.
So for now, programs may not distinguish between Dutch and non-Dutch-speaking students in their numerus fixus. An amendment by the VVD passed by the House of Representatives a few months ago that anticipated this does not save time.
The previous law
A bill had previously been passed with roughly the same goal: the Language and Accessibility Act (WTT). The House of Representatives agreed at the end of 2019 and only the Senate still had to debate it. Upon taking office, Dijkgraaf shelved it, but why?
The old bill stated that foreign-language education had to have “added value” for students. That was vague, and Dijkgraaf amended it. His bill is all about effectiveness. He changed it from added value for the student to “added value for society.”
That has an interesting corollary. In the old law, quality inspector NVAO judged the choice of language of instruction, saying that the language should contribute to the quality of education. In the new law, that task falls to the Higher Education Effectiveness Commission. It gives advice but the minister ultimately makes the decision.
The language of education is thus made more political, or as Dijkgraaf describes it, the minister is given “follow-through power” as an “ultimate solution.” If institutions do not handle the situation properly or if the CDHO is not strict enough, the minister can intervene.
Another striking difference: The WTT made the numerus fixus on foreign-language pathways possible only for bachelor’s programs and two-year associate degrees. Dijkgraaf includes master’s programs as well.
