The Founding Students

TheFoundingStudents (TFS) is een studentenraadpartij die in 2023 is opgericht vanuit de overtuiging dat de
medezeggenschap binnen de faculteit versterkt moest worden. Dit om de kwaliteit van het onderwijs te
verbeteren. De oprichter zag dat eerdere studentenraadsleden onvoldoende resultaat boekten en dat de stem
van studenten niet altijd werd gehoord.
TFS is opgericht met een duidelijke missie: de focus binnen de faculteit terugbrengen naar waar het écht
om gaat: jouw onderwijs. Wij geloven dat jij als student de regie moet hebben over je eigen leerproces en
dat de kwaliteit van de opleiding altijd voorop moet staan. TFS is dan ook een apolitieke partij. Politieke
discussies kunnen gevoerd worden op centraal niveau, niet op facultair niveau.
Wij staan voor een toegankelijke, zichtbare en actieve studentenraad. Alleen zo komt medezeggenschap tot
zijn recht. Onze leden zijn niet alleen actief binnen de raad, elk lid heeft zich al eerder op een manier
ingezet voor de belangen van UvA studenten. Denk hierbij aan het bestuur van studieverenigingen, een
eerder lidmaatschap bij een medezeggenschapsorgaan of vrijwilligerswerk. Dit betekent ook dat onze
kandidaten het belang van iedere organisatie op de UvA altijd in het achterhoofd houden tijdens hun werk
voor de raad.
Afgelopen jaar heeft TFS zich opnieuw concreet ingezet voor de belangen van studenten. Zo hebben wij het
vak ALF nauwlettend gemonitord en bijgedragen aan het opnieuw toekennen van studiepunten aan dit vak.
Komend jaar zal het vaardighedenonderwijs ook gemonitord worden door een nieuwe coördinator.
Daarnaast heeft TFS streng toegezien op de naleving van de OER en treden wij actief op bij schendingen
door contact op te nemen met de betreffende vakcoördinatoren. Dit jaar was te merken dat deze
schendingen niet gering zijn. TFS heeft een lijst bijgehouden met alle schendingen waar de raad weet van
heeft, deze is hier te vinden: Naleving OER. Wij moedigen studenten nadrukkelijk aan om dergelijke
situaties bij ons te melden, wij staan altijd aan de kant van de student. Dit jaar zullen wij dit weer doen. Wij
gaan ons inzetten voor de kwaliteit van jouw onderwijs. Wij roepen de universiteit ter verantwoording op
bij het schenden van jouw rechten.

TFS. JIJ STUDEERT. WIJ REGELEN DE REST

Click on any motion below to see the parties explination

The UvA should completely exclude research collaboration and funding from the security and resilience sector.

Neutral

Stance:
This issue has limited relevance at the faculty level and primarily concerns a central policy consideration.

Explanation:
Within the Faculty of Law, research collaborations with the security and resilience sector are rare. The practical relevance of this issue at faculty level is therefore limited.

In addition, excluding such collaborations concerns a broader policy-based and, to some extent, political decision affecting the university as a whole. TFS believes that these considerations should be addressed at the central level, where the Central Student Council (CSR) and the university board can make an integrated assessment. At the faculty level, TFS aims to focus on issues directly related to the quality of education.

Admission to programmes with limited capacity should be based on random lotteries rather than selection procedures.

Neutral

Stance:
Admission to programmes with limited capacity should be based as much as possible on suitability rather than chance.

Explanation:
Selection procedures provide a better understanding of a student’s abilities and motivation. At the same time, such procedures must remain fair, transparent, and accessible in order to safeguard equal opportunities.

Study programs should be audited by an independent board on the diversity of the academic and ideological perspectives in their curriculum.

Neutral

Position:

It is advisable to follow the recommendations of an independent ethics committee, although there are currently no relevant partnerships within the FdR.
Explanation:

An independent ethics committee is an appropriate instrument for assessing partnerships against fundamental standards. Within the FdR, there are currently no partnerships with parties that have been identified as complicit in human rights violations.

The UvA should strongly oppose any government attempt to reduce the number of international students.

Neutral

Stance:
Opposing national policy plans concerning international students is primarily a central matter.

Explanation:
Policy responses to government plans affect the university as a whole and require decision-making at the central level. As a faculty-level representative body, TFS has limited direct influence on such matters.

The executive board of the university should be elected through an open election by the students and worker's body.

Disagree

Stance:
The executive board should be appointed based on expertise and suitability, rather than through open elections.

Explanation:
Assessing governance qualities requires specific knowledge that is not always present among students and staff. Open elections may lead to decisions in which popularity outweighs quality and competence.

The university should significantly expand student services like student advisors and psychologists, even if this requires reducing spending on education and teaching.

Agree

Stance:
Student wellbeing and proper guidance are essential to the quality of education.

Explanation:
TFS believes that student wellbeing and accessible support services, such as study advisers and psychologists, have a direct impact on the quality of education as experienced by students. Students who are properly supported are able to perform better and progress through their studies more effectively.
Although this may involve difficult financial choices, TFS considers investment in student support services to be a legitimate priority. Without adequate support, not only student wellbeing comes under pressure, but also the quality and accessibility of education itself.

The UvA should prioritise offering permanent contracts to Junior Lecturers (D4s), even if this leaves less financial room for senior lecturer salary increases.

Neutral

Stance:
Decision-making regarding contract structures and salary distribution requires specialist expertise and should not be made by the FSR. TFS emphasizes that the quality of lecturers is most important, regardless of whether they are junior or senior staff members.

Explanation:
Balancing permanent contracts for junior lecturers against creating financial room for salary increases for senior lecturers is complex and requires in-depth knowledge of personnel policy and financial frameworks. TFS believes that such decisions belong at the central level, where the necessary expertise is available and an integrated assessment can be made. TFS emphasizes that the quality of lecturers is paramount, regardless of whether they are junior or senior staff members. Considerations regarding contracts should primarily be based on quality.

Every bachelor programme should be offered in both Dutch and English.

Disagree

Stance:
The choice of the language of instruction should be left to the programmes themselves; a fully uniform language policy is not desirable.

Explanation:
Nationally oriented fields of law, such as labour law or criminal law, are best suited to Dutch, while internationally oriented disciplines benefit from English. A differentiated approach best reflects both the content and the quality of education.

The university should ensure a larger part of the curriculum (of all study programs) is focused on career preparation, even if this takes away from time spent on academic subjects.

Agree

Position:

Greater emphasis on career preparation enhances the quality and relevance of education.

Explanation:
TFS believes that education should not only provide students with an academic education, but also prepare them for the labour market. A greater focus on career preparation helps students to bridge the gap between theory and practice and improves their prospects after graduation.

Although this may mean that less time is available for purely academic subjects, we consider this shift to be necessary. Education that is better aligned with practice contributes directly to the perceived quality of the programme and to a successful start to students’ careers.

The university lacks sufficient readily accessible gender-neutral toilets and should convert more existing toilets to be gender-neutral.

Neutral

Stance:
TFS does not have sufficient insight into the need for gender-neutral toilets to make a firm judgment. However, TFS is of the opinion that converting existing toilets into gender-neutral facilities would not be problematic.

Explanation:
There is no principled objection to gender-neutral facilities. Everyone should feel welcome at the university. However, assessing whether the current provisions are sufficient requires insight into the actual demand, which TFS currently lacks. TFS does believe that converting existing toilets into gender-neutral facilities would not be problematic.

The university should prioritise expanding study spaces over investing in additional contemplation rooms.

Agree

Position:

Expanding study spaces is a priority, as this directly supports students’ studies.

Explanation:

TFS believes that the university should, first and foremost, invest in facilities that directly support students’ education and academic progress. At present, there is a clear shortage of study spaces, particularly during busy periods.
Although quiet study areas can be valuable, study spaces have a more direct and broader impact on students’ day-to-day lives. Expanding these spaces contributes to better study opportunities and aligns with the university’s core function.

Student & Workers Councils should have the final say in all policy decisions

Neutral

Stance:
Decision-making should take place in consultation with all relevant bodies; however, final authority rests with the executive board.

Explanation:
Student and works councils fulfil an important advisory role, but they are not vested with final decision-making authority. Under the Dutch Higher Education and Research Act (WHW), powers are explicitly distributed among the various bodies. While TFS supports broad participation, it adheres to the legal boundaries set by this framework.

Calling the police is an appropriate response when protests disrupt education or access to services.

Neutral

Stance:
Dealing with student protests is primarily a central matter; when education is disrupted, involving the police may be an appropriate measure.

Explanation:
TFS is an apolitical party focused on the quality of education. When protests genuinely disrupt education, action must be taken to safeguard the continuity of classes. In such cases, the UvA is free to contact the police. The ultimate decision on whether the police will enforce measures lies with the mayor.

The university should actively prioritise diversity targets in hiring, even when this means deviating from purely merit-based selection.

Disagree

Stance:
Selection should primarily be based on quality and suitability.

Explanation:
TFS believes that quality and suitability should always be the leading factors in recruitment and selection procedures. Actively deviating from merit-based selection by prioritizing diversity goals is considered undesirable.

Although diversity within the university is a valuable objective, it should not come at the expense of objective and substantive selection criteria. TFS stands for equal treatment and believes that every candidate should be assessed based on their qualifications and abilities.

The UvA should expand research collaboration and funding partnerships with private sector companies.

Agree

Stance:
Collaborations with the private sector are possible, provided they contribute to the quality of education and are assessed carefully. A good example of this was the now discontinued ALF minor.

Explanation:
Entering into research collaborations and funding partnerships with private parties requires specialist knowledge and a careful balancing of interests.
TFS believes that such collaborations should in principle be possible, as long as they demonstrably contribute to the quality of education and academic independence remains safeguarded. A good example of this was the now discontinued ALF minor. In this minor, students worked on cases provided by both private and public institutions, ranging from law firms and legal aid organizations to the judiciary and the Public Prosecution Service. These real-life cases provided students with valuable practical knowledge and experience.

Students wishing to follow honours programmes should be admitted based on academic performance, not motivation alone.

Agree

Position
TFS believes that grades should continue to play an important role in admission to honours programmes.

Explanation
Grades provide a reliable indication of academic ability. For motivated students who do not have top grades, there are plenty of other extracurricular opportunities available, and they can apply for a hardship clause.

The Binding Study Advice (BSA) should be abolished.

Agree

The BSA is no longer a reliable indicator of whether a student is likely to complete their bachelor’s degree. TFS keeps pace with the latest research. https://esb.nu/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/000-000_deVries_KLAARv2.pdf

The majority of the food options sold on campus should be plant based.

Disagree

Position:

TFS welcomes a plant-based diet. However, students should retain the freedom to make their own dietary choices; standardising options to be plant-based is undesirable.

Explanation:

Dietary choices are personal and may be influenced by health, culture or religion. Promoting plant-based options may be legitimate on sustainability grounds, but not through a mandatory framework that excludes alternatives. TFS does, however, welcome plant-based food.

Occupations should be considered as a legitimate means of protest at the university.

Neutral

Stance:
Peaceful protests are acceptable, as long as they do not disrupt education or the progress of classes.

Explanation:
Peaceful occupations can be a legitimate way of expressing a viewpoint, provided they remain within the boundaries of order and safety. However, protests should never come at the expense of education.