OPINION: “It Hurts to See My University Prioritise in a Way That Makes Me Actively Explore the Possibility of Transferring to the University of Copenhagen”
In smaller language programmes, you wouldn’t know that AU has had a large financial surplus over the past three years, writes Leah Buchwald, who studies Japanese Studies at the Faculty of Arts. According to her, the reality is fewer teaching hours, fewer permanent teachers, and ultimately lower academic quality. When discussing financial responsibility and the university of the future, we should also consider what knowledge we are willing to lose, she points out.
This is an opinion piece, the views expressed in the column are the writer’s own.
In Omnibus on December 17th, you could read the article Aarhus University expects large profits for the third year in a row. On paper, it's a success story. But as a language student at Arts, the reality feels very different.
Aarhus University Expects Large Surplus for the Third Year in a Row
I’m well aware that AU's overall finances are not the same as the finances of the individual faculty. Arts is under pressure from, among other things, fewer admissions, declining student FTE funding, etc., and I understand that reality. Yet it's hard not to be surprised when the university talks about surplus and strategic investments, while my degree programme feels more and more cramped year by year: fewer teaching hours, fewer permanent teachers and fewer resources for what is at the core of a language subject – continuous, qualified teaching with progression, feedback and presence.
Language subjects are treated as an appendix
At the same time, I experience a strong focus on IT, AI and economics. Technological skills are important, but AI cannot stand alone. AI is valuable precisely because people with linguistic, cultural and analytical skills develop, critique and shape the technology, and because it must be used in a world that demands an understanding of language, context and culture. Therefore, it hurts when language subjects are increasingly treated as an appendix instead of as a worthy part of the university's core mission.
This can also be seen in the specific priorities in the language area. Studies focusing on non-European languages and cultures have been significantly weakened: Indian and South Asian Studies, as well as Brazilian Studies, are closed for future admissions. In my own department, Japanese Studies, we are feeling the consequences in teaching. Previous classes had guest lecturers who could supplement Japanese teaching, but they have now been abolished. Instead, a system has been introduced where an older student acts as an instructor and teaches two or three different years at the same time in the same room. Despite the instructor's passion and drive, this doesn't work well because we are at very different points in language acquisition. When teaching is brought together in one room, in practice, it ends up being too little and academically incompatible teaching for everyone.
On the way to phasing out
I’m also aware that from a political perspective, a temporary million-dollar boost is on the way for language subjects, and that’s positive. But for us at the smaller programmes, it doesn't create much security when we simultaneously see ourselves moving towards phasing out and a new unified line under "Global Area Studies", where it’s unclear what will happen to the languages. We don't feel the effect yet, but the feeling of erosion is already present. When resources are removed first, and improvements may only come later, it’s the current students who pay the price: in the form of fewer teaching hours, less academic support and ultimately fewer qualifications than both previous and future classes.
Investigating opportunities at the University of Copenhagen
It affects both motivation and the sense of belonging. It hurts to see my university prioritise in a way that makes me actively explore the possibility of transferring to the University of Copenhagen (UCPH). It’s not about a notion that UCPH is free from the same structural challenges that characterise the entire sector. However, Asian Studies (Japanese Studies) at UCPH is still offered as a comprehensive degree programme with a Master's degree that provides the opportunity to maintain and further develop one's language skills to a greater extent than the current joint Master's degree under Global Area Studies at AU. Which is an academic continuity that I increasingly miss at AU.
When talking about financial responsibility and the university of the future, we should also talk about what knowledge we’re willing to lose. Language, cultural understanding and critical humanistic knowledge don’t disappear from society's needs just because they don’t fit into a spreadsheet.
To me, AU's surplus doesn’t feel like a surplus, but more like a deficit in prioritising and caring for the Arts and humanities.
This text is machine translated and post-edited by Lisa Enevoldsen.