An adventurous spirit cannot be denied him. In the 1980s, Robbert Dijkgraaf alternated two university studies (physics and mathematics) with a painting course at the Gerrit Rietveld Academy. During his academic career he spent a long time in Princeton (United States), wrote columns for NRC Handelsbladhe performed at The world goes on and was editor of The beta canon from de Volkskrant†
In December Dijkgraaf was asked by D66 as Minister of Education, Culture and Science. He had spoken at a party congress, but was not a member. He became that on January 1. Ten days later he was in the Trêves room. On Friday he sent a letter of more than thirty pages to the House of Representatives, in which he gives his vision of the world of higher education and science so familiar to him.
Dijkgraaf (62) is aware that the transition to politics can be risky, but he took the step carefully. “I’ve learned in life that when you’re facing the deep end, you have to jump.” In the coming years he wants to focus on the well-being of the student (financially, mentally and socially) and a better position for the staff (subsistence security, opportunity for research). ‘Peace and space’ are keywords he often uses.
The coalition agreement, which had already been completed when you were approached, refers to a research and science fund of EUR 5 billion for the next ten years. Was that what convinced you to become a minister?
‘Yes, with other investments added, an extra billion euros will be made available annually for higher education this decade. That’s something everyone in science has been asking for for twenty years, including myself. I consider it very special that I can now deal with that, from a completely different perspective, with the world that I care about a lot and that has also given me a lot.’
You left university at a late stage in your career. In your letter you write that many PhD students and postdocs do not continue in academia. So young people. Why don’t they stay?
‘That is immediately my biggest concern: the position of young lecturers and young researchers. The next generation. Thirty or forty years ago, when I started, there were really more options. If you look at the current disproportionate workload, the little time young teachers have to do research, the chance of success in getting a research grant, the temporary contracts that people have to switch between, the whole thing is quite skewed. Today’s experts have all taken a long run. If we don’t get the youth academy in order now, we won’t have a new national team in the future.’
Universities and colleges are autonomous. You are their financier, but not their employer. How will you enforce changes?
‘We are going to make firm agreements about this, to which the financial resources will be linked. Within the four scientific domains (social sciences and humanities, science, technology and medical, red.) all individual sectors can submit plans that I have tested by an independent committee against the preconditions that I set. Besides an eye for talent, cooperation is also such a condition. So that we can operate as one virtual higher education institution in the Netherlands.’
You expect the fourteen public universities to make ‘common clear choices about division of tasks and profiling’. In other words, not everyone has to do everything.
‘Correct. If you work well together, you can also leave things behind. Because you know your neighbor does. I think it is important that as a collective we can measure ourselves against the best universities in the world. Here we have the unique combination of broad accessibility and high quality. There are actually no outliers downwards and I am quite proud of that.’
Nevertheless, the decision of the VU to stop the bachelor’s degree in Dutch caused a lot of indignation.
‘Yes, I understand that, of course that touched the core of the Dutch university. You have to keep a close eye on the smaller disciplines and ensure that the neighbors do offer them. We have to keep a national eye on that we continue to participate in all areas. When I became professor of mathematical physics at the UvA in 1992, we were able to calculate that the number of mathematics students would be zero within a few years. Now we are at a record high with the beta studies. So this also includes cycles. That underlines the importance of a system that lives, breathes and adapts.’
The pressure on the universities is partly due to the still increasing number of foreign students, 80 thousand this academic year out of a total of 340 thousand. Almost a quarter. Isn’t that too many?
‘As a country, we are very internationally connected. That must also be our strength: that our institutions relate to foreign countries and foreign institutions relate to us. International students are part of this and they have also given us a lot. But it does feel a bit like we’re driving a car with just an accelerator pedal and no brake. We need to get a picture of what the right balance is. My own estimate is that we are already fairly close to that optimal point.’
For the time being, you will not proceed with the Language and Accessibility Bill, which is before the Senate and provides a number of instruments for ‘capacity limitation’. But now you say yourself: the brake is missing.
“Yes, that means I’m going to ask the institutions to brake. I will also look into whether and which legal instruments are needed to make this sustainable. We need to get into a stable situation. But I want mutual agreements, because there are also regional differences. For example, there are institutions, especially colleges, that are located in areas with a major shortage of technicians on the labor market. I want that macro view here too. If everyone starts to make decisions for themselves, things will grow crooked again.’
The Education Inspectorate wrote earlier this year that institutions feared that foreign students would stay away due to corona, possibly resulting in a ‘decrease in income’. In the coalition agreement this is called ‘a perverse incentive for a higher intake’.
‘Yes, you want institutions to facilitate foreign students for content and quality, not just for financial incentives. But to be honest, I think that there is already a change going on in the institutions as well. I no longer see the active recruiting of five or ten years ago. It is now mainly about honest information, knowing that life is not easy when you come here as a foreign student.’
Not for Dutch students either. Half still live at home.
‘Yeah, that’s just not sustainable. It beeps and creaks in all student cities. We have to stabilize and look closely at that together.’
Universities are also growing apart from international students. They are more attractive to young people with a VWO diploma than HBO. What’s your job there?
‘My portfolio is MBO, HBO and the universities. HBO occupies a key position in this range. Part of my plans is to make HBO more solid. Among other things, by looking at a better transfer from MBO to HBO, also to stimulate practice-oriented research in HBO. I hope that the reintroduction of the basic grant will help with this. HBO also has an important role in retraining and further training. And we’re going to start a pilot with a professional doctorate, the equivalent of a promotion. So young people who obtain a VWO diploma should not hesitate to go to HBO if that suits them. You are highly educated and have an impact on society.’
The amounts in the bill for the basic grant are different than in your original plan. The amount for people living away from home will be 274 euros per month, instead of 255. The supplementary grant will be lower (maximum 401 euros). Why?
‘I have listened to the Chamber. It has been said: you do a lot for the lowest incomes, but the middle incomes also have a lot of financial need. It is difficult for a large group of Dutch people with two or three children to study. The limit to receive a supplementary grant has therefore been widened. (To a parental income of up to 70 thousand euros, red.) It wasn’t my preferred option, but it was a scenario I gave in my original letter.’
Did last weekend’s demonstration change your mind or is it just 1 billion compensation for the ‘bad luck generation’?
‘It stays that way. I speak to many students and am often touched by how honest they are in telling them how bad they are. The financial uncertainties, the aftermath of corona, access to the housing market. I take that really seriously. On the other hand, I also see advantages for the young generation. The labor market is very good, childcare is almost free. And at this point I would also like to point out that with these extra investments in higher education we are making a double move towards students: with the basic grant and with the quality of education. That is future capital that represents a value that pays off later.’
And will the halving of tuition fees continue in the first year?
‘No. In September, yes, but not next year. We’ll see if there’s anything else we can do for specific sectors.’
The trade press writes that due to the automaticity of indexation, tuition fees will increase by more than 200 euros next September. Is that right?
‘That mechanism is clear, but I’m still considering whether we should want it.’
Then you have to solve that within your own budget, because knocking on the door of the Minister of Finance probably has no chance. Even if she is your party colleague Sigrid Kaag.
“I don’t think even knocking will work, because the line at her door is already very long.”
You said last week at Khalid & Sophie that you also graduated with a student loan. How high was it?
‘I don’t remember exactly, but from memory I say 25 thousand guilders (more than 11 thousand euros, red.† After I was promoted, I was able to pay off everything at once with a discount. That was a one-time arrangement and I did. With only a few hundred guilders left in my bank account, I left for America in 1989.’
You recently announced the arrival of a science communication center. In a speech in Leiden, you capitulated politicians and citizens who dispute the facts surrounding corona. Do you see the same happening in the nitrogen discussion?
“Yeah, it’s exactly what it shouldn’t be. It is important that we let the facts speak. But it should not surprise us that there is also a reaction to this. That’s a lesson we’ve learned. We now know: evidence by intimidation, as we call it in mathematics, if someone is learned to shout something very loudly, that no longer works. You have to explain in conversations how you came to something. What are the things that are solid, what are the things that you can still discuss. Because science is not a consensus machine. My point in Leiden was: this does not stop, the message will become even more profound and the experts of the future must be able to discuss safely. I hope such a center can bridge the gap between science and society.’