Repeated violations concerning questions about student influence and quality surveys. The Student’s Union of Humanities and Theology (HTS) has had enough of Center for Middle Eastern Studies’ (CMES) behaviour and has now chosen to report them to the Swedish Higher Education Authority (UKÄ).
At the start of this current semester the Center for Middle Eastern Studies announced that Sweden’s first course about the Islamic State was to take place later this autumn. The University sent out a press release regarding the course and the news was picked up in national media.
The course was a trump card for CMES. But now the founding of the course has laid the groundwork for a report to the Swedish Higher Education Authority.
The course was presented just two months before it was supposed to take place – something that is out of the ordinary. Dan-Erik Andersson, responsible for the course, said at the time that the decision was made after long deliberations and that the current debate required a course about the operations of the Islamic State.
Several rules violated
But behind the announcement something seems to have gone awry – and badly.
According to the rules and provisions at the University, the syllabuses are to be reviewed, set and approved by the Faculty Boards a month before the final day of application. This means that the final day for presenting a course that will take place during the autumn term is the 15th of March. The course Islamiska staten och Mellanösterns framtid was however presented on the 1st of September – almost half a year too late, and even then the syllabus was not finalised.
And it is not just there that CMES’s actions miss the mark in their work on this course. In the production of the syllabus the student union are to be a part of the review and evaluation process. But the Student’s Union of Humanities and Theology, HTS, were notified that the course were to take place when the University published its press release.
“It feels very strange. We as a student union should have insight and a possibility to voice our opinions regarding the decisions made at the faculties, and therefore it is really strange that we did not have that opportunity. Somewhere something seems to have gone awry – where I don’t know right now”, said HTS’s Chairwoman Ronja Lindgren at the time.
HTS reports to UKÄ
But HTS now knows where. About a week ago they chose to report the Center for Middle Eastern Studies to the Swedish Higher Education Authority, UKÄ. The work with the course about IS was the last straw, HTS’s vice-chairman Oskar Johansson points out.
“The cooperation with the Center for Middle Eastern Studies has not functioned properly, and therefore we choose to report them. The report has a heavy symbolic value – if UKÄ says it is supposed to be a certain way it will mean a lot”, he says.
But a report to UKÄ is not the first step when problems arise at the University. It is not recommended nor is it a part of standard procedure – but neither is HTS’s relation to CMES, Oskar Johansson points out.
“There have been numerous problems with quality reviews and legal rights at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies. Since we started with proper supervision of education with a student council in 2013, we have noticed that students have not been included in the decision-making process”, says Oskar Johansson and add:
“We have to put our foot down now and fix this”.
Prior examples of earlier problems
This is not the first time there are problems at CMES. During the spring term of 2014, Lundagard wrote an article about several students feeling ignored by a teacher at CMES.
Even HTS’s vice-chairman Oskar Johansson mentions another instance when problems have occurred. There were large personnel changes at CMES, which created a lot of rumours and many students did not feel safe in their study situation. HTS then worked with CME to have a solution consisting of giving information and having meetings with the students – measures which then never were carried out.
Now Oskar Johansson hopes to have a healthier relationship with CMES.
“I hope above else that they are to start abiding more clearly to the legal framework regarding quality reviewing interventions – like how to produce a syllabus. It is mainly about how to work with students so that they are included in the preparatory and deciding process”, he says and adds:
“We at HTS together with CMES will find solutions and then have the best education in regard to quality and legal right as possible”.
HTS have themselves not contacted CMES about the report, but only notified the Dean and the Head of Departments of the faculties of Humanities and Theology.
CMES positive about the course
Leif Stenberg is the managing director at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and the one responsible for the course Islamiska staten och Mellanösterns framtid. But when Lundagard contacts him, he has not taken part of the report and therefore does not want to comment the case.
But Leif Stenberg views, despite the charge, the newly established course in a positive light.
“It is a relevant and important course. It has given Lund University national goodwill and the knowledge we can minister is integral and is certainly in demand”, he says.
He also points out that it is good if the University can be flexible with the process of developing a new course.
“My job is to develop a course which is topical – the course’s lecturer holds a high quality, includes up-to-date and rigorously chosen texts and more than 150 students has applied. For me, what is important is that we have the chance to do this. We want the students to have the best education”, he says.
CMES stands behind their actions
But it did not come without a cost. According to HTS, they ignore student influence and the process violated several rules about student rights.
[Leif Stenberg, managing director for the Center for Middle Eastern Studies. Photo LU/Kennet Ruona]
“I understand if the students feel that bureaucracy is important, but I mean that in this case the good outweighs the bad. Sometimes I think it is important to do this”, he says and stresses that the course depends on its topicality.
“What if Lund University’s scientists solve the mystery of diabetes, but cannot teach about until a year later due to the University’s guidelines”, Leif Stenberg exemplifies.
But Leif Stenberg also adds that the fact that they circumvented the students’ influence in this process is not a good thing, but at the same time he points out that the University’s system should be adapted for a faster procedure.
“The University should find ways to approach questions of social relevance that have immediate interest where scientists can present their up-to-date research to the students. The two lectures we had recently had more than 300 participants. I think there is a problem with the process if you have to plan a course so far in advance”, he says and continues:
“The curriculum that has been approved is really good. I understand that there would have been problems if it didn’t have a high quality. It is because of this I am also critical towards the process and think that there should be preparations made for these kinds of problems. I think that the University should be on their toes and show themselves flexible, and when something is done well which benefits the students it should be given support”, says Leif Stenberg.
HTS is confident about the outcome
Oskar Johansson at HTS points out that the current system does indeed allow the University to offer relevant courses.
“The current systems are not a hinder to be up-to-date and quick. The course could have been created this fall and been given in spring. It is important to offer education that is relevant, but the University’s system is not an obstacle for this. It is on the other hand a guarantee of the education – and that is more important than being fast”, he says.
The matter is now in UKÄ’s hands and will be investigated during the winter and spring. The case worker for the charge is Ann-Kristin Vesterlund, lawyer at UKÄ. She says to Lundagard that HTS should be counting on that it will take at least four months to review the charge.
However when the investigation is done, UKÄ cannot take any forceful actions, only give recommendations to the centre of learning. But that is usually enough.
“We can only administer criticism. We usually urge the seat of learning to take action and then brief us on the matter. But the centres of learning usually listen to us”, says Ann-Kristin Versterlund.
Oskar Johansson is confident about the outcome:
“We are confident about what we believe: they have done wrong and our actions are correct. We wouldn’t have sent this charge if CMES hadn’t acted wrong numerous times and we need these steps to repair it”, he says.
The course Islamiska staten och Mellanösterns framtid will be held during the fall and starts on the 2nd of November.
Translation: Viktor Jönsson
