Nikola Edelsztejn | Universities have turned into course centers
Universities should set much higher standards for students, argues Nikola Edelsztejn. “The task of the university is to create good academics, but in the current system universities have become more like course centers, where most students after their first year are still just as unskilled as they were at the start of their studies.”
In most bachelor’s programs, a secondary school diploma, an HBO propaedeutic certificate, or a colloquium doctum is sufficient for admission. Bachelor’s programs are open to almost everyone, but dropout rates are correspondingly high. I am firmly convinced that the current system is detrimental both to students and to universities, and in recent times I have given much thought to changes that could have a positive effect on the academic system.
I am not a supporter of the Central Final Examination (CE). First of all, because secondary schools can individually determine the content and level of difficulty of their school-based assessments (PTAs), and the level can vary considerably from one school to another. As a result, the CE at the end of secondary education can be either a great blessing or a dreadful curse.
Abolish the Central Examinations
Schools are free to design their PTAs in detail, as long as the content aligns with that of the Central Final Examination. To prevent the government from having to design the school-based exams itself – so that every school would administer exactly the same material and preparation for the final exam would be completely uniform – we could instead solve the problem from the other side: by abolishing the CE.
If the Central Final Examination were abolished, responsibility would lie with the universities themselves, which would then have to think carefully about their admission requirements. An entrance examination might sufficiently replace the weighting of the CE, but in practice one encounters the same problems: a prospective student focuses on a specific program and studies hard in advance for the entrance exam. This would not reduce the number of early dropouts, and the pressure on students would remain undiminished.
The Argentine Model
I find the model of the Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) far more interesting. At the UBA, all students must complete the Ciclo Básico Común (CBC), which replaced entrance examinations in 1985. All new students are required to participate. The program consists of two broad cognitive development courses, two broad courses tailored to the faculty in which one has enrolled, and two courses related to the specific field of study chosen. The CBC must be fully completed before students may proceed to their final degree program.
I believe the CBC could serve as a solid framework for an improved variant, divided into two separate cycles (and offered free of charge). In the first cycle (semester I), prospective students would be taught broad academic skills and further develop their cognitive abilities. In the second cycle, students would choose a specific faculty to which they wish to apply and follow courses related to that faculty. The focus would primarily be on introductory subjects, with a strong emphasis on both content and methodology, so that prospective students gain a clear understanding of the bachelor’s program they ultimately intend to pursue. Once these cycles have been completed and all courses have been passed, students may enroll and would, naturally, be admitted.
Higher standards
It is positive that we currently offer many prospective students the opportunity to pursue higher education, and we should certainly continue to do so. But standards must simply be raised. We are currently facing very high first-year dropout rates, and these could be prevented by giving students more time to immerse themselves in university life and to acquire the necessary academic skills.
The task of the university is to create good academics, but in the current system universities have become course centers, where most students after their first year are still just as unskilled as they were at the beginning of their studies. Prior knowledge is too limited, and faculty boards know that standards must be lowered because the differences in level between students are fundamentally too large.
It is true that a stricter (and in this case, longer) admissions system could result in more students being left out, which may seem to increase inequality. However, an important qualification must be made: slightly more than 40 percent of students already drop out in their first year.
These are thousands of students who unnecessarily pay tuition fees, accumulate student debt, experience stress, and ultimately have to start the entire process again in the hope that they will then find a field of study that suits them. If we want to avoid facing large numbers of students each year who have wasted a year of their lives on a program that does not fit them, we must tackle the problem at its source: the admissions system is too lenient. With a Dutch variant of the Argentine ciclo básico común, we could make significant progress.
Nikola Edelsztejn is in his first year of the BA in Italian Studies at the UvA.
