Next meeting for heads of subjects will be a bit different. The main topic on the meeting this Tuesday March 5th is about how to develop our faculty organisation. More exactly the following two questions are on the agenda:

• How can the meetings for heads of subjects and the cooperation between heads of subjects in general be developed to meet all our needs better? How can they better facilitate leadership and communication while also reflectively contributing to a discussion about academic quality?
• Is there a need for a small managerial team in the faculty, for developing the strategic academic leadership together with the dean and for the faculty board? Should it consist of a head of subject from all areas, or of a representative group from the faculty board? Which role and authority could it have?

This discussion is a follow up from last fall when we inquired the possibility to re-organize the faculty. After a long and thorough process, we concluded that changing the organisational structure would require too much and would not necessarily pay off. Nonetheless, through the process we had seen that there were things we could and needed to work with. In general, there was an emphasis on some core values:

• Democracy in the management of the faculty, specifically in the form of transparency and active dialogue together with cooperation and seeking synergies.
• Integrity that secures the unique needs of subjects and programs within the faculty but also the position of the faculty in relation to its larger context.
• Leadership that develops on all levels towards responsibility and competence, and is engaging and communicative.
• Efficiency focused on teaching and research, anchored in a flat structure, and well-defined responsibility, relations, and processes.

The meeting this upcoming Tuesday can of course also bring up other issues of relevance, and will hopefully do so, but the two questions above are essential to the role of heads of subjects.

It does not end here. This is one step forward. We will over the spring term come back to the core question of how to develop our faculty organisation. There is a need for separate dialogues with university lecturers, doctoral students, administrative personnel, and students. Our take on democracy, integrity, leadership, and efficiency depends on what our roles and experiences are in the faculty.

We have currently a lot going on, especially when we consider the upcoming need to balance our budget. Nonetheless, I look forward to these discussions. They constitute an essential piece in the larger puzzle. We have already started to look into ways to enhance wellbeing of students and staff, develop our doctoral education, and to become a more sustainable faculty. These different conversations are all entangled.

(continues in English below)

Det är onekligen en hel del på gång vid ÅA, på både konkret och övergripande nivå.

Rektor Mikael Lindfelt sände nyss ut ett brev till hela personalen med frågan hur vi skapar de bästa verksamhetsförutsättningarna för vårt Åbo Akademi? Parallellt har prorektor Reko Leino arbetat intensivt med frågan om forskarutbildningens framtid, dels i ljuset av de 1000 3-åriga doktorandbefattningar som finansierades nationellt, dels i ljuset av våra egna interna behov att se över utbildningens och doktorandprogrammens roll. Prof. Ronald Österbacka från Forskningsstrategiska rådet där prorektor Leino är ordförande besöker fakultetens egen workshop om forskarutbildningen den 6 mars.

Prorektor för undervisning Gunilla Widén fattade nyss ett beslut som också pekar mot större förändringsprocesser. Inom fakulteterna skall vi göra “översiktsplaner i Excel över undervisningen som ges vid utbildningsprogrammen under det kommande läsåret”. Vidare skall antalet valbara kurser och självstudiekurser som erbjuds läsåret 2024-2025 minskas. Slutligen kommer minimiantalet deltagare för en kurs vid Åbo Akademi att vara 5-6: obligatoriska kurs som inte når detta måste ges på alternativt sätt. Beslutet i sin helhet hittas på ÅA:s publiceringsplattform bland förvaltningsbeslut för prorektor Widén.

Vad gör vi med det här beslutet vid fakulteten?

Excellistor över kurserna kommer att göras centralt så att ämnesansvarigas och lärares roll minimeras till att fylla i när och hur kurser ges, samt vilken timbelastning det här innebär för inblandade lärare. Det här är ett steg mot större transparens vad gäller arbetsplanering vid ÅA och hur vi arbetar med kurser. Listorna fylls i parallellt som man arbetar med årsplaneringen för undervisning 2024–2025 i Peppi. Årsplaneringen ska vara klar den 15.3, men listorna kommer att kunna uppdateras efteråt. Excellistorna för det här distribueras per 26.2.

Minskningen av valbara kurser och självstudiekurser som erbjuds läsåret 2024-2025 tog vi redan tag i inom fakulteten, och prorektors beslut understryker mest vikten av det här. En del program minskade redan antalet kurser medan andra behöver göra det nu som en del av den pågående årsplaneringen. Vad gäller den andra biten, dvs. hur vi hanterar viktiga kurser som inte har tillräckligt med deltagare så måste den frågan diskuteras på fakultetsdagen den 9 april då huvudtemat kommer att vara god praxis inom undervisningen.

The big picture?

Rector’s recent letter to staff (14.02.2024) clearly ties in with ongoing changes and ambitions to reduce the number of courses, and to think reflectively about our use of resources, as indicated by vice-rector Widén’s decision, while all the time trying to secure possibilities for student progress on all levels, and to maintain quality in research and teaching.

The situation is complex and challenging. On the one hand, we have to pinpoint all this and more in the current renewal of ÅAU’s strategy. On the other, we need to deal with the fact that ÅAU’s finances are strained and we cannot continue along the current road. Dealing with one of these aspects would be more than enough, and they are hard to combine since they easily conflict with each other.

Yet, the ÅAU Board realizes that they still need to go hand in hand. Rector has consequently initiated this process and we will now need to find new models for our work and how we think of it. Whether or not we succeed is yet to be seen, but one given prerequisite is that we take part in the process, that we take it seriously, and that we engage in the dialogue. Unless we try to make this also our process, the outcome cannot even come close to what we value.

What can we provide in terms of education and research for the future?

Given the current situation and the limits we face, we will have to rethink and redefine, we will have to negotiate with ourselves and with others, and we will need to compromise. Considering all this, I am confident that it was a good decision to refrain from an organizational change in the faculty. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that the current situation requires us to go ahead with finding ways to strengthen leadership, democracy, integrity, and efficiency in our faculty, building blocks that we need in the coming processes.