The definitive decisions concerning the TU/e programs with an intake limit will depend largely on what King Willem-Alexander announces today during the Speech from the Throne. That is the reservation issued by dean Frank Baaijens right at the start of yesterday afternoon’s meeting when he announced that the board is seriously considering cancelling the intake limit for three programs as of next academic year.

The four technical universities will likely receive more funding as a result of the Van Rijn Commission’s recommendations. These extra financial means are meant to alleviate the pressure caused by the substantial inflow of students at these universities during the last few years. In early July, umbrella organization VSNU (Association of Universities in the Netherlands) calculated that TU/e could expect 13.4 million euros of additional recourses. The ministry of education, incidentally, denied this.

An intake restriction will remain in force at Computer Science & Engineering, Architecture, Building and Planning, and Industrial Design next year as well. Baaijens says that the possibility of raising the intake limit for these programs is currently being discussed. But that, too, heavily depends on what TU/e will receive in potential additional resources this afternoon, Baaijens says. He also says that the additional funding for technology and hard sciences, as part of the so-called sector plans, that TU/e will receive may increase the possibility of raising the intake limit.

Risky

Baaijens says that as far as Computer Science & Engineering is concerned, the board considered cancelling the intake limit too risky since graduates from this study are in high demand on the job market. This decision was taken in light of the high number of advance registrations – over seven hundred – for this program at the start of this year.

The university council faction ‘Groep-één: Eindhovense Studentenraad’ wanted to know how the board expects to deal with the potentially strong student inflow for one or more of the three programs should an intake restriction no longer apply. Baaijens said that he had much faith in the study-choice check. “This instrument needs to offer us and the students an insight into whether someone is actually right for the program of his or her choice or not. If we believe, based on the results of the study-choice check, that someone shouldn’t study here, we really need to convince that person to look for a program somewhere else.”