UvA Kieswijzer

The University must prioritise active diversity policies, including decolonization

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

For the Activist Party, decolonization is one of the priorities. As a society we need to reckon with our colonial past, and the university is one of the most important places to do so. Especially so in the UvA, where at least one of our buildings (Bushuis) has been massively involved in colonialism.

INTER

Fully agree

INTER considers that it is one of the main responsibilities of the UvA to acknowledge their colonial history and make an active effort to do better. Given our existing focus on international students, we highly support the initiatives for a more diverse student and staff composition.

UvASociaal

Fully agree

UvAsociaal believes it to be very important that every student feels at home at the University of Amsterdam, irrespective of race, sexual orientation, gender, culture or disabilities. We are satisfied with the report of the Diversity commission because of the emphasis they put on intersectionality. Intersectionality in policy forming at the UvA implies that in thinking about diversity at the university we need to consider intersecting social identities that relate to their own system of oppression, domination or discriminations. We believe that focusing on only one marginalised group is not enough, we have to consider all students and their place at the university. We stand for an inclusive and diverse university, not only in people but also in knowledge.

LIEF

Fully agree

UvA FNWI is one of the least diverse beta faculties in the Netherlands. This is not acceptable and must improve according to LIEF. Decolonisation is part of the solution. So should be catered to people who need extra resources or people who do not fit the ‘Western’ stereotypes according to the number one on our list, Michelle Magiera, because UvA is a fairly international university, it is important that students have a decolonised view of the world and their information. Furthermore, LIEF wants to emphasise underlying prejudice, also called racism and discrimination, at the university, especially in job interviews and social life on campus. There is a reason there are so few female professors at Science Park. That should be solved with the diversity policy!

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS advocates for a diverse university with equal opportunities for everyone. There are various ways to pursue diversity. Part of active diversity policies includes diversity quotas, where a certain percentage of employees are targeted. This results in individuals being selected not based on merit, but on gender or ethnicity. Instead of quotas, universities should strive for equal opportunities for all, regardless of background, by offering outreach programs, mentoring, and education. This can help improve access to education for underrepresented groups without the need for rigid quotas. Ultimately, this will lead to a truly diverse and inclusive university community where all students can thrive based on their merits and talents.

Fuck This Party

Fully agree

HUMANS

Agree

Sefa Student Party

Agree

The UvA should offer free menstrual products at each campus

Fuck This Party

Fully agree

LIEF

Fully agree

LIEF thinks this is a simple and inexpensive way to make students feel more comfortable on and around campus. We also want to make it available in gender-neutral/disabled toilets. LIEF and other FSR members have given away menstrual products in the past (and now in orgaised activities or when asked), but this should be more accessible to everyone! Furthermore, we wonder: why are things like toilet paper and soap free, but menstrual products (which are just as necessary) are not?

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

It is important that students, regardless of gender, have their basic needs met in college. Although strides have been made in the provision of menstrual products over the past year by placing dispensers on several campuses, the Activist Party believes it is important that menstrual products be easily accessible: that is, in the restrooms themselves, not just at one point per campus.

UvASociaal

Fully agree

UvASociaal believes offering free menstrual products on campus is important for student well-being and removing barriers to education. Students should not have to worry about having access to necessary menstrual products while on campus.

INTER

Fully agree

Menstruation products are a biological necessity, and should be widely accessible to all those who menstruate. INTER fully supports this initiative, and believes it helps greatly to support students on campus.

Sefa Student Party

Fully agree

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

DVS believes that everyone should have access to menstrual products. People do not choose to menstruate, and when someone is financially disadvantaged, they should not be without the necessary menstrual products. Providing menstrual products should be primarily a government responsibility, according to DVS. However, this is not the reality, and therefore the UvA should facilitate this. Additionally, the costs for the UvA to facilitate this are relatively low.

HUMANS

Fully agree

The UvA should invest in more accessibility for students with functional limitations as well as sensitivity towards these students

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

It is important that there is room for every student at the UvA, including students with functional limitations. This can be done both by easing processes in education and by investing in the accessibility of buildings.

INTER

Fully agree

There is an urgent need to improve the accessibility of this university, and the way it treats students with special needs. One of the main goals of INTER is to help make this a reality through our own advocacy and our council member initiatives.

HUMANS

Fully agree

Fuck This Party

Fully agree

UvASociaal

Fully agree

UvAsociaal places a high value on accessibility, encompassing various aspects such as physical accommodations to facilitate mobility, providing assistive technologies for academic support, and offering personalized support. Additionally, promoting understanding and empathy among faculty, staff, and students is essential to create an inclusive environment where all individuals feel respected and supported in their academic journey.

LIEF

Fully agree

Science Park is poorly accessible in LIEF's opinion. LIEF members are already working to improve this by advocating: getting blind infrastructure (e. g. walkways) at Science Park, getting text-to-speech available through UvA for students who need it, making building entrances accessible to people with wheelchairs or crutches and removing the unsympathetic article A-6.5.4 from OER-A (TER-A in english), as it is “not so LIEF”.

Sefa Student Party

Fully agree

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

For students with physical disabilities, more investment should certainly be made to ensure they have equal access to the UvA as other students. For students with mental disabilities, the UvA provides many resources (such as courses, extra time, and accommodations during exams, etc.). DVS is pleased to note that the UvA is already working to improve the opportunities for this group of students. Furthermore, DVS prefers to focus on the potential of students with disabilities. We find the term "sensitive" inappropriate here, as we do not want to give this group of students the impression that they are disadvantaged.

All board members of study associations should receive equal financial support from the University

UvASociaal

Disagree

UvASociaal believes providing all board members of study associations with equal financial support may not always be fair due to various factors such as roles within the association and differing levels of time commitment.

Sefa Student Party

Disagree

The financial support board members receive should depend on their contribution and impact of their actions to the university.

Activist Party UvA

Disagree

The Activist Party believes that governing a study association should be accessible to everyone, including students with less income. At the same time, we see that different study associations have different demands in time commitment, so it does not make sense for all directors to receive the same scholarship. However, we do think that there should be invested more in the financial support for these boards.

HUMANS

Agree

LIEF

Disagree

LIEF thinks the board scholarship for student associations should be based on the workload for board members. Currently, this is done with a formula that takes the quantity of members into account. We think this system can be improved because some study associations cannot receive all their board grants themselves due to UvA regulations (max. 24 months of grant per person). This is a disproportionate arrangement that should be improved.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS believes that the grants for board members of study associations should correspond to the amount of time each individual board member puts into their work. If the workload of each board member is equal, then the grant for it can also be equal. When there is a concrete difference in workload/pressure between different board positions, the grants do not have to be equal.

Fuck This Party

No opinion

INTER

Disagree

INTER believes that all study associations deserve compensation for their efforts. However, equal funding would disregard differences in reach, scale of initiatives and size of varying study associations. If some study associations have a larger following and organise events on a larger scale than others, it makes more sense to suggest that they receive more funding in order to make these efforts a reality.

All lectures should be available online for everyone

Fuck This Party

Fully agree

INTER

Agree

Lectures should be made available online to accommodate students with multiple commitments outside of university and also in support of those with special needs and circumstances. Additionally, making lectures available as recordings rather than live streams would ensure that lecture attendance remains high, but those who need an online format are still accommodated for. Moreover, online lectures allow students a greater degree of flexibility when it comes to note-taking, allowing them to pause the lecture, simmer the information, and reflect in their notes.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Fully agree

DVS believes it is important to promote students' freedom and ensure free access to education. By making all lectures available online, students have more opportunity and freedom to determine when and where they study. This can be especially useful for students with jobs and other obligations. Moreover, online access to lectures can increase access to education for students who are geographically limited, for example, due to distance or mobility issues. This contributes to a more inclusive learning environment and gives students more flexibility. Offering classes online can also be a solution for students who cannot find accommodation in or around Amsterdam.

LIEF

Fully agree

LIEF believes that all lectures should be available online, but current legislation unfortunately does not think so (privacy-related legislation). Until this law possibly changes, we are of the opinion that all students who cannot physically attend lectures due to force majeure, should be able to attend the lectures online. This is currently not always possible, which needs to be changed!

UvASociaal

Fully agree

Accessibility is one of our four main values at UvASociaal. Providing online access to lectures is beneficial for all students, including those with disabilities and busy schedules.

HUMANS

Fully agree

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

Unfortunately, in today's capitalist system, it is not possible for all students to study without a job, so lecture attendance is not always possible. In addition, there is also a large group of students for whom it is not always possible to attend lectures due to physical limitations, mental health or other issues. In order to make lectures and education more accessible, lectures should be recorded and available to all students without questions.

Sefa Student Party

Fully agree

Students wishing to take honours courses should be able to do so based on their motivation, regardless of their grades

Fuck This Party

Neutral

INTER

Disagree

The Dutch grading system is not without its own critiques. Nevertheless, grades do showcase the extent to which a student is able to handle their university workload. If one's grades are low, this might be indicative that an additional honours course would not be suitable. That being said, one's motivation should definitely still account for a large portion of the admissions process and be taken seriously.

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

Motivated students who want to take a subject should be encouraged in this: not stopped purely on the basis of their grades.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

Grades are an objective measure of these performances and provide a reliable indication of someone's ability to handle complex academic tasks. DVS believes that the honors program should not only be a reward for motivation but also a recognition of academic achievements. If the honors program is solely based on motivation, this could compromise its academic integrity and diminish its value. Furthermore, ignoring grades may pose the risk of admitting students who may not possess the necessary academic skills to successfully complete the program

UvASociaal

Neutral

LIEF

Fully agree

LIEF's biggest stance over the years has been interdisciplinarity. We stand for the opportunity for every student to take interdisciplinary subjects, such as honours courses and tracks. We also appreciate the internationally recognised academic value of an honours degree. Therefore, we believe that any student, regardless of grades, should be able to take these courses. If the capacity of a course is exceeded, we want to see if there are other solutions before those with a 7.0 average or higher are given priority. This is because LIEF sees this as a last resort.

HUMANS

Neutral

Sefa Student Party

Agree

More investment is needed in interdisciplinary education (providing students with more than just one perspective on a particular subject, such as is done in honours, PPLE or IIS programs)

UvASociaal

Agree

Activist Party UvA

Agree

Gaining multiple perspectives is something the Activist Party likes to see, and students should have more opportunities to pursue this in university. At the same time, this should be accessible to all students, which is not the case with programs like PPLE where students have to pay higher tuition than for other programs.

HUMANS

Agree

LIEF

Fully agree

This is THE position from which LIEF was born and which remains with it every year. LIEF believes that every student should have the opportunity within their curriculum to take interdisciplinary subjects. We also want courses at Science Park to be flexible with students taking courses at another faculty.

Fuck This Party

Neutral

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

DVS aims to advocate for more investment in interdisciplinary education. In the current job market, the ability to think across disciplines and collaborate with people from diverse backgrounds and expertise has become increasingly important. DVS emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary education in promoting innovation and creativity, and believes that more resources could be allocated to programs such as honors, PPLE, or IIS. However, this should not come at the expense of investments in traditional studies.

Sefa Student Party

Neutral

INTER

Agree

Interdisciplinary is a valuable asset in today's increasingly complex world. More interdisciplinary education, therefore, would generally serve to benefit the UvA student body. That being said, there remains a need for specialised education within certain fields. This should not be overlooked, and deserves its fair share of investment.

As a way to curb the growth of the university, Dutch language courses should be a mandatory part of all programs

HUMANS

Fully disagree

INTER

Disagree

INTER agrees with more accessible and free Dutch courses. However, we strongly disagree with making them mandatory. We also take issue with the way this statement is formulated, and believe that the responsibility for curbing university growth should be placed on the institution itself and the Dutch government, rather than serve as a burden for students.

Sefa Student Party

Disagree

Dutch courses should be encouraged and become more accessible to students instead of using it as a tool to prevent international students joining in.

UvASociaal

Disagree

Activist Party UvA

Disagree

Although the Activist Party is for accessible Dutch language education, the ability to learn a language should not affect the final grade of study if it has nothing to do with language.

Fuck This Party

Neutral

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS applauds the provision of free Dutch language courses to all international students interested in them. DVS encourages international students to learn Dutch as it will enhance their interaction with fellow citizens and significantly increase their chances of finding employment in the Netherlands. However, DVS stands for an inclusive university. Mandating the completion of a Dutch language course as part of every program may lead to the exclusion of non-Dutch-speaking students. Therefore, DVS believes that the choice to take language courses should be left up to the students.

LIEF

Disagree

At Science Park, it is expected for all Bachelors that you can speak and read Dutch and English well. For Masters, this is not the case because the disciplines at Science Park expect research in English. We approve of this. Furthermore, LIEF sees no capacity problems with Masters at Science Park. Thus, this arrangement is useless.

It is the government’s responsibility to provide mental health support for students. Therefore, the university should not spend extra resources on this

Fuck This Party

Fully disagree

INTER

Fully disagree

While we agree that mental health support should be on the government’s agenda, it absolutely does not absolve the university of responsibility for their students and their well-being. Students spend the majority of their time at the university or with university-connected activities, many live here purely for their studies. The university should not only care for their students well-being, but is in our eyes directly responsible for providing support to any student who needs it and should therefore allocate resources to providing students in need with mental health support.

UvASociaal

Fully disagree

While we do believe that it is the government's responsibility to provide mental health support for everyone, universities must also prioritize the mental well-being of its students and provide adequate resources.

Sefa Student Party

Fully disagree

The university knows way better about their students and the studies their students are doing, so the university can guide through their students better than the government.

HUMANS

Disagree

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS believes that universities can support students more effectively and efficiently than the government. The national government is at a greater distance from the student than the university. Although the government is responsible for the well-being of students in many respects and should also allocate resources for mental health, the university can allocate these resources more targetedly.

Activist Party UvA

Fully disagree

It is important for the university to be a safe place for students, and in our capitalist society many students struggle with mental problems: stress, study pressure, fear of the future. The university should invest on student welfare so that students can feel safe and at home here.

LIEF

Disagree

‘Both the government and university have a role to play in this. It can be communicated more clearly with the UvA that the waiting lists of specialised help are too long and that the UvA should then be able to accommodate students as well. Student deans and psychologists should offer a listening ear and support to students. This can vary between just listening, helping with a referral, extra exam facilities, and/or help with the profiling fund. So before a student can get specialised help, interim help must be available. Student psychologists are often not specialised in complex (mental) health issues and should therefore rather support and help students to find appropriate help instead of referring them to their GP. I would say here that we disagree and the university should provide more support.’ -Fay Further, if you are a student suffering from mental complaints, and UvA's psychologists are taking too long for an appointment, check out UvA students' initiative All Ears.

The Binding Study Advice (BSA) should be abolished

Fuck This Party

Fully agree

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS believes that the BSA (Binding Study Advice) threshold may be lowered or that certain personal circumstances warranting leniency (resulting in a student not meeting the BSA requirements) could be handled more compassionately. The BSA serves as one of the few objective measures to assess student performance. Therefore, it is not advisable to completely abolish the BSA.

INTER

Disagree

At INTER we think that the current BSA is too high and that the regulations surrounding it are too inflexible to allow students freedom in their study and personal development. We believe the BSA needs to be lowered and the regulations deciding about exemptions and providing support need to become more flexible and personalisable. However, completely abolishing the BSA is not the answer as it would either further drive UvA’s growth into unsustainable heights or necessitate stricter admission criteria, which would defeat the UvA’s value of giving students fair chances.

UvASociaal

Agree

The current BSA places a lot of unnecessary pressure on students, negatively impacting their mental health and study progress. Some students may fail to meet the BSA due to reasons that are beyond their control. We believe students should receive more personalized non-binding study advice, catered to their specific situation.

Activist Party UvA

Fully agree

Currently, the BSA adds a lot of unnecessary pressure on the student's already stressful life. There are many legitimate reasons for failing the BSA: without other problems, starting at university, a new environment, can already be a stressful time. In addition, it also encourages exactly long study, while it is intended to combat precisely this: students often seek a similar study at the same university after failing the BSA, or exactly the same study at another university. Abolishing the BSA would eliminate many problems.

Sefa Student Party

Disagree

HUMANS

Agree

LIEF

Neutral

LIEF is not happy with the current form of BSA, but thinks the BSA should be allowed to stay. We are in favour of establishing clear expectations for first-year students. What we are not in favour of is that students deregister before 1 February to try the same study again the next year. For those students, extra support should be provided earlier. Oftentimes, these students are also liable for BSA remission due to force majeure. This should be improved. This is also the only thing that can be improved without changing the law.

There should be mandatory attendance for tutorials

HUMANS

Disagree

Sefa Student Party

Neutral

Mandatory attendance for certain courses and tutorials which strictly requires students' presence is understandable, but not all courses should be mandatory.

Fuck This Party

Fully disagree

INTER

Neutral

We do think it is important for students to attend tutorials and engage in discussions with each other about the subjects they are studying. However, similarly as with the BSA, current exemption regulations for the attendance are too inflexible and inconsiderate of students’ physical and mental health, as well as their financial means as many need to work or travel far. We advocate for a more flexible, student-focused attendance policy that is adapted to students’ needs.

LIEF

Disagree

LIEF thinks that first-year work seminars should be compulsory, where not attending twice means that you are not allowed to take a resit of that course. We also think that only seminars should be compulsory that add value. Seminars where you can only ask questions to the TA should not be compulsory. This also applies to programming assignments.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Disagree

DVS disagrees with this statement. To promote participation and attendance in tutorials, a lecturer should incorporate more participation assignments in the form of debates/interactive activities in the tutorials. Attending a tutorial should be motivated by the intrinsic motivation of interactive learning experiences, not by obligation. A student should be free to choose whether to attend tutorials and is responsible for attending all assessment moments.

UvASociaal

Fully disagree

Non-mandatory tutorial attendance creates greater flexibility in learning, allowing students to manage their responsibilities autonomously. We believe the university should focus more on ensuring the tutorials are meaningful and engaging so more students attend voluntarily.

Activist Party UvA

Fully disagree

For the same reason that students may be absent from a lecture, students may also be absent from a work group. The Activist Party does not believe that a student should not be allowed to pass a course purely because they have been absent from a tutorial.

The university should be allowed to limit the number of international students

LIEF

Fully disagree

According to our interpretation of the law, this is... not according to the law. Furthermore, LIEF has no problems with international students on the English-language masters taught at Science Park. These Masters are currently not too full and provide more diversity at Science Park.

Fuck This Party

No opinion

Activist Party UvA

Fully disagree

A hard limit on international students only goes along with the nationalist discourse against all things international and does not solve the actual problems we face as a university.

UvASociaal

Disagree

Restricting the number of international students goes against the development of a global learning environment that benefits from diverse perspectives and experiences. The university should instead implement policies that help international students integrate better with the dutch students, promoting academic and cultural success for both.

Sefa Student Party

Disagree

INTER

Disagree

We understand that there have been tensions among international and Dutch students, and growing resentment on both sides. However, INTER does not believe that the amount of international students is the issue, but rather the disconnect and division among the student body. Instead of curbing the amount of international students, measures of integration, like accessible dutch classes, would be more fruitful.

HUMANS

Fully disagree

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

DVS is proud of the University of Amsterdam's position on the international academic stage, partly thanks to all the international students studying at our institution. DVS believes that although it is currently not necessary to restrict, the university should retain the ability to regulate the number of international students in response to increasing pressure on facilities and housing.

Calling the police is an appropriate response by the university to deal with student protests and demonstrations

INTER

Disagree

Student protests are an important tool for students to express their discontent with important political issues. If students peacefully exercise their democratic rights to freedom of assembly and expression, the police should not be called on them. Especially in light of past protests in which police has engaged in disproportionate violence, calling the police should not be the first line of action. Of course, if a situation escalates, calling the police might be the last resort.

Activist Party UvA

Fully disagree

Absolutely not. The university should protect its students, and bringing violence to campus by involving the police in demonstrations is going way too far.

UvASociaal

Fully disagree

The university needs to respect its students' rights to freedom of expression and peaceful demonstrations. Involving the police has shown to exacerbate tensions and leads to further unrest and conflict. We believe students should feel safe and heard at their university.

HUMANS

Disagree

Sefa Student Party

Fully disagree

University should be a safe place to its every student, not a place where violence happens which threatens student's safety.

LIEF

Neutral

LIEF believes that police can only be used to control protests and demonstrations if a clear line is crossed during these protests. What this line is is complicated for LIEF to determine, and should actually be looked at on a situation-by-situation basis. Generally, for LIEF, this line is violence, intimidation or vandalism. Only then are we in favour of police involvement at protests and demonstrations. Furthermore, the dean/CvB should take into account the rich history of disproportionate violence used by police against (UvA's) students.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

The right to protest is of utmost importance to us. However, sometimes this may conflict with the academic obligations and the open academic debate of fellow students who are not participating in the protest. Protests should not obstruct access to education, and (fire) safety must be ensured for all students present. The UvA should operate with clear protocols to de-escalate such disproportionate protests. If demonstrators do not cooperate, the university should have the ability to involve the authorities.

Fuck This Party

Fully disagree

The university should stop the prioritisation of students from outside the EU in regard to the university provided student housing

UvASociaal

Disagree

Activist Party UvA

Disagree

For students from outside the EU, finding housing can be more difficult, and it is more essential to find housing for their visa. At the same time, international students from within the EU also often find it difficult to find housing here without contacts: so this group should not be entirely excluded.

De Vrije Student (DVS)

Agree

DVS believes that the UvA should reduce the priority given to non-EU students. This creates unequal treatment among students. The housing shortage in Amsterdam is a growing problem, and prioritising non-EU students exacerbates this shortage. It is important for the university to adopt a fair and balanced policy when allocating student housing.

Fuck This Party

No opinion

HUMANS

Agree

INTER

Fully disagree

While we understand why such prioritization may feel discriminatory to Dutch and EU students, we cannot ignore the fact that the university admits students who then travel around the world for UvA education while the housing market in Amsterdam is even more difficult for them to access, with a housing shortage combined with the fact that many landlords demand in-person meetings and Dutch or at least EU passports. We support the UvA in informing international students more about these issues to prevent them from facing housing problems after their student housing ends. Additionally, the UvA should analyze its role in combating the housing shortage for all students and actively contribute to this effort.

LIEF

Neutral

This is currently not an issue at Science Park. Furthermore, LIEF believes that UvA should give priority to students who need it due to travel time, regardless of whether this is inside or outside EU or even the Netherlands. LIEF would prefer that for Dutch students, who cannot reasonably study in Amsterdam due to travel time, be given equal priority as the inside and outside EU students.

Sefa Student Party

Neutral

As far as we concern, the prioritisation of Non-EEA students for housing has already been cancelled.

The Numerus Fixus should be used to stopthe growth of the university

"Numerus Fixus" is a maximum on the number of students that each year can enroll into a specific degree program. Students are enrolled on the basis of selection or (possibly weighted) random draw.