“If Rianne Letschert uses words like ‘nationalistic’ that unnecessarily polarises the debate”

“If Rianne Letschert uses words like ‘nationalistic’ that unnecessarily polarises the debate”

Discussion on anglicisation of higher education

31-10-2022 · Background

“Why does this not just say the Dutch word ‘bieb’?” Lotte Jensen, professor of Dutch Literature and Cultural History from Nijmegen, is standing behind the lectern in the auditorium on the Minderbroedersberg and pointing towards the City Centre University Library. It says ‘Library’ in large letters on the window.

For Jensen, in Maastricht for an evening of discussion on the anglicisation of higher education, this is an example of “where it goes wrong” when English becomes the dominant language at a university. “This is far-reaching and has consequences for the identity of the university and the identity of the city. What message are you giving? You could at least just put ‘Universiteitsbibliotheek’ here and possibly – in a smaller font – the English translation underneath. Then foreign students immediately learn two new words: ‘universiteit’ and ‘bibliotheek’.”  

Internationalisation

Jensen is one of two speakers at the evening session organised by Studium Generale within the framework of the seventh ICLHE conference (Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education) half October in Maastricht. The other speaker is Abram de Swaan, emeritus professor of Sociology at the University of Amsterdam.

According to a message on Twitter, Jensen was looking forward to a little debate with UM president Rianne Letschert. The latter recently reacted to a recurring discussion about internationalisation and the accompanying anglicisation, at the beginning of the new academic year, using words such as ‘nationalistic’ and ‘populistic’. Unnecessarily polarising, according to Jensen. “Very disappointing.” And moreover, not true, she says. “I am not against English and I fully support internationalisation,” Jensen emphasises. “Internationalisation is very useful, but does everything have to be in English? I have just been awarded the Erasmus chair at the Université Catholique de Louvain to promote Dutch beyond the borders; that is also internationalisation. The same applies to foreign students who come here to study and learn Dutch.” Letschert was not present to give a reaction.

The fact that universities nevertheless choose to offer study programmes in English (Jensen: “I am in favour of offering those programmes in Dutch too”) is also because of the way in which they are funded, De Swaan remarks. In this way, they attract more (foreign) students and “the universities are paid per student. That is a perverse stimulus. But to be honest, if foreign students are in doubt as to where to study, I also say the Netherlands: good education for a relatively low price – “a good deal” they would say.”

Multilingualism

Jensen and De Swaan agree on most aspects, but not about multilingualism. Where Jensen argues in favour of promoting multiple languages at a university – so not just English and Dutch, but also German, French, Spanish, et cetera - De Swaan thinks that this would create “a mess”. “We have lost the battle against English. But let us hold on to our own language. This also has to do with self-respect, self-esteem. You are making a right fool of yourself when you start calling the Stadsschouwburg, the International Theatre Amsterdam. Stadsschouwburg is a beautiful word.” And to the hilarity of those in the hall he demonstrates how that sounds when a foreign person pronounces it: the ‘stadsskoewburgh’.

Before you switch to English, ask yourself three things, he says: “For what level is it intended, for what discipline and for whom. Fellow scientists from around the world can just speak to each other in English, but if you want to translate science for a wider audience, you should do so in your own language.”

Lost knowledge

By continually preferring English, both speakers agree that something always gets lost in the transfer of knowledge. Jensen: “Vocabulary is less extensive, you can’t make jokes, irony and nuances are lost. Your story becomes less rich.”

“I have written 4 to 5 books and 20 articles in English and still I find my English not up to much,” De Swaan says. “Why not? Because I can’t say ´niet veel soeps´ (not up to much) in English. I didn’t grow up with that language, I didn’t sing the children’s songs.”

When Jensen voices her amazement about the study programme of Psychology be taught in English (“you are talking about people’s state of mind, about their feelings.”), there is an objection from the audience, from Harald Merckelbach in fact, dean of the Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience (where most courses are in English). “Can you name an empiric study in which it is proven that the transfer of knowledge loses quality,” he asks Jensen. Yes, she can, but her answer doesn’t satisfy him: “That is a very bad study.” Jensen mentions a couple of other examples and adds that teaching in English does not always lead to language deficiency, “but it requires a lot of practice to do it properly. And even then, not everybody succeeds.”

New offensive against English-language teaching

Universities in the Netherlands should immediately start teaching in Dutch again, in the view of action group Beter Onderwijs Nederland (BON). The association, that has fought tooth and nail against the anglicisation of higher education for years, has launched a new offensive with nineteen open letters to the minister, administrators and regulators.

According to BON, English-language teaching has many drawbacks, for graduates in the Dutch labour market for example. Moreover, Dutch topics are not addressed adequately in English-language study programmes, “which leads to deterioration of education and to further distancing universities from the rest of society”, a statement reads.

The action group refers to the law, which states that higher education is supposed to foster the Dutch-language ‘communication skills’ of Dutch students. Another article states that teaching and exams – with certain exceptions – must take place in Dutch.

In 2019, the Inspectorate of Education established that study programmes were not always sticking to the law. Not all of them were able to explain why their teaching had to be in English, but no action was taken on that.
“In legal terms, anglicisation of teaching is extremely questionable, not to say unlawful”, says

philosopher Ad Verbrugge, chair of BON. In his view the solution is simple: “We have to comply with the current law. To start with, let’s make sure that every Bachelor’s programme offers at least 60 percent of the subjects in Dutch. It’s ridiculous that everyone now says that the situation has become untenable and that the government should legislate about it. The law is already in place.”

The previous minister, Ingrid van Engelshoven, piloted a bill through the House of Representatives to strengthen the position of the Dutch language and control the influx of foreign students. But that proposal stalled in the Senate after the fall of the last government. Education Minister Robbert Dijkgraaf has since withdrawn it and is working on a proposal of his own. BON feels things are not moving fast enough.

HOP

Author: Cleo Freriks

Photo: Shutterstock

Tags: anglicisation,higher education,Dutch,English,language,minister,Dijkgraaf,BON,instagram

Add Response

Click here for our privacy statement.

Since January 2022, Observant only publishes comments of people whose name is known to the editors.