Thank you for meeting us today, Mathieu! The UCM Community is interested foremost in who you are. Could you tell us about yourself: where are you from and what is your academic background?
I am from the Netherlands, originally from Maastricht, born and raised here. I left the city when I was 18 years old to study Political Science, so I am a political scientist by training. Then I worked a couple of years as a civil servant/diplomat at the Dutch ministries of social affairs and finance, where I did a lot of preparation for European negotiations like Ecofin (Economic and Financial Affairs Council). Advising the minister was a very dynamic life, so I never expected to return to Academia, but then the professor who supervised my Master’s Thesis offered me a PhD position. And then I considered that this may be the last chance to do a PhD, so I accepted and did my PhD on History of European Integration, more precisely on the position of the West German government on the Rome treaty negotiations in the mid 50’s.
I did a lot of archival research in Germany, France, in Florence in the European archives, and the U.S. It was a classical diplomatic history kind of work, and after that I became an assistant professor of International Relations first in Nijmegen, where I did my PhD, and later on in Utrecht, where I worked for 8 years and for the last two years I was associate professor there. I focused on European Integration but mainly International Relations, more from a historical perspective. I have been visiting fellow at the Center for European Studies at Harvard University and at the department for Politics and IR in Oxford. Last five years I did both for a couple of months, in Harvard almost a year. So I extended my international network in Academia in the last ten years after my PhD, and now became professor here so I am looking forward to be part of Academic life. It will be a challenge but I think I am prepared; I look forward to new challenges in teaching, research and administration, all three of them.
What was the motivation behind following this academic path, starting with how you decided to pursue your PhD instead of continuing your career in the public sector?
What I find very important from a personal perspective is independence, and also making analysis from an independent position. For instance, when you work for the government and are a diplomat you work a lot, but an aspect I find crucial for colleague academics in my field, especially those working in current affairs such as European Integration, is that you make an effort to connect your research to topical issues, public debate and societal questions. That is something that I was always interested in and that still drives me a bit to The Hague and Brussels, to the ‘real’ stuff. But I love Academia because you have there a position of independence when it comes to content and analysis, and that is something that I really cherish and find very important.
Moving from your experience and career to the present: why UCM? What was the motivation behind being a part of this community and obviously applying for becoming our Dean?
When I heard of the position here I gave it some thought and then I concluded that it was a good moment for me to be open for a job change like this. On the one hand because I was on a level of research and teaching where I wanted to make the next step in my Academic career, but more importantly, I have always been very multidisciplinary in my research, but I always worked in very disciplinary settings with political scientists and historians. Often these disciplinary boundaries were very oppressing for my own research and ideas, and also my teaching. In the end I always ended up not working together with the people in my department but people in other departments and faculties. In my last three years in Utrecht most of my energy was invested in interdisciplinary cooperation between the political scientists, the people from International European Law, philosophy, and myself coming from history. In traditional Academia in Netherlands and Europe, and maybe in the U.S. that always is an uphill battle because institutions are built around disciplinary lines, and it always arises suspicion if you are exploring a world beyond their boundaries.
UCM is one of the best practices when it comes to an interdisciplinary approach, and mainly in teaching of course. When you look at the developments, for instance in the Netherlands in the last five years, you see this liberal arts and science model winning ground significantly. That’s not only because it appeals to the imagination of future and regular students, but also because it is an answer to a demand in society and among young people to approach things from scratch on, from an interdisciplinary perspective where possible. I think it is great; one of the great things of this time. I really felt that that was a great opportunity to become part of this movement in the academic world, and I decided that I should do that!
Though you’ve talked about that previously, what do you think is the role of interdisciplinary approaches in contemporary higher education, and maybe more specifically in UCM?
In a way, interdisciplinary approach in academic research and teaching in academic life, are two things at the same time: it is very traditional on the one hand, this is the academic ideal that you are not restricted by discipline, but that you are driven by questions, and that you are looking for original approaches. Boundaries are a hindrance in that, also disciplinary boundaries, but that is very traditional and classic. A classical approach is always universal in ambition. But on the other hand it is very trendy, because in the past decades in Western Academia we had these specializations and sub-divisions of sub-divisions of disciplines, niche research becoming very strong in all kinds of fields. This is a counter-trend, in a way. It is very popular because the niche and sub-divisions are driven too far, I think, and people who are not part of a certain niche can even understand what they are doing, even if you are an academic of the same discipline.
It is often very difficult to guess what is going on in these sub-disciplines of a certain field. Seen from that counter perspective it is a very fresh and new movement in the academic world. That is inspirational to me because the traditional approach is very dear to my heart, to have an open and universal starting point, approaching from problem from the perspective of ideas not bounded to certain disciplinary dogmas. I find that key for every academic. But it is very traditional and it was kind of pushed into the background in the past decades, and it is now coming back with a vengeance because, in a way, the bearers of this new trend are young people. And they are breaking open the academic world, for instance via these university colleges in the Netherlands. So that is something inspirational to me and I think it is important to give that a strong support. I am against building rigid churches in the academic world with their own dogmas, and not open to questioning their own assumptions and axioms. That is the key point here. If you are a disciplinary academic but open to discussion with other disciplines then I think you are in the right place here, in my view. The most beautiful thing is if we can facilitate conversation on an academic level between all kinds of students.
Up to this day UCM is one of the most, if not the most widely recognized university college in the Netherlands, perhaps even in continental Europe. Do you think that UCM should be a leader in European education with this interdisciplinary approach and view of education? If so, then how can UCM lead?
UCM is doing fine in the rankings; that is one thing and that says something. But it is only part of reality, of course. The most important part of reality is here in the classrooms, in rooms of academic scholars working on their research. The most important thing to me is that we cherish the academic ideal of fusing research and education, so that we have really active, high-level, excellent scholars, and we have them in staff here who are still very active in their own fields, and at the same time teaching high-level courses from an interdisciplinary perspective where possible. That is an ideal, and an ideal is never reality. So you have to work for that every day, and it is hard work too. I think if we can keep that agenda as the priority here at UCM we will do fine, whatever the rankings will say. And probably we will keep scoring high grades in any ranking because it all starts in the academic world, especially in the mid to long-term with content-driven activities.
I am still a bit impressed by the community and the strength of the organization. And that is not something very normal in academic life. There is a lot of lack of confidence and that is not the problem here. People are confident and there is a reason for that: the organization is well organized; it has the priorities set in a very convincing way, content-driven and interdisciplinary, and that is something to keep as it is in my view. The first task is to keep things running as they have been.
Student participation has become a hot topic lately in UCM. We have had this group come about called ‘UCM Students for Democratic Participation’, who aim at reforming the structures of student participation and foster a more critical and political culture. What do you think is the role of student participation and how can we create an atmosphere that fosters critical discussion and debate about UCM?
I think student participation is key to any academic organization, and I am very open for original or well thought out ideas. Aspects of the organization, content of courses, career perspectives, connection between bachelor and masters, for instance, are all kinds of things that I think are important. I have always worked very closely with my students, especially on the things concerning content because I think that input is always very valuable. Democracy, the other issue, is of course also an essential element of an organization. But that may be something for the students to decide how important they think it is and how pure they want democracy to function because democracy is only a term, you have several ways of organizing democracy. Democracy is also not an end in itself, you also need some institutions to safeguard the minorities and to protect minority views, for instance. It is a good idea to scrutinize the procedures so as to find the most optimal system for this moment. But as far as I am concerned I am open to input. And if these are challenging ideas we will discuss them and I will invite the students to explain what they think should change and why, so that should be clear. My feeling is that the whole staff is very open; there is not really a classical hierarchy. I come from a traditional history department which is very top-down. It is great to hear that there is constructive dialogue between students and teachers, as well as staff members as a whole. There are always thing that can be optimized, so if there are certain things that are not working at the moment, you as students but also we should look at the together and openly discuss what can be done.
Other social and political movements, not only in Maastricht and the Netherlands but worldwide, for instance the New University movement, have begun questioning the current conceptions of education and its role in our society. To you what is the role of higher education in society and how does UCM fit into this picture?
Another point, connected to the other question, is the whole “re-think” movement about New University and stuff like that. To my view, the central element to that movement is the fact that in some parts of Dutch Academia, but also European-wide academia, even maybe transnational, there is a threat in the form of a very strong trend in which the academics themselves lose control over the primary process in education and research. And that is a way in which that I myself feel connected to this movement because I very much share this analysis. This is not a business, it is Academia, an academic organization, and academics should be in charge. Academics should still do academic work in all the fields that are important, research, education, ideally both of them combined. But also the students are an integral part of the core academic community. I feel a partner of the students in this, and I think most of the committed academics around feel partners of the students here. So students and staff are together in this issue, making sure that this primary process of research and education stays central to the activities of the academic organization. And there are parts of university, and UCM is not among them, where things are threatened to be the other way around; where managers take over, output fetishes are made so strong that academic values are watered down and finally cease to exist. That is something that you do not want in an academic organization because that is the end of it. For instance in Amsterdam, there were some trends that I know very close because I know a lot of people who work there, and they were indeed very threatening to the very essence of academic life, and that explains also the seriousness of this uprising and the durability of it. It is very crucial to keep that in mind by every new step that you take in, for instance, making organizations in academia more efficient or effective. That is of course important, but the essence of it lays in education and research. And students and staff here are partners in crime, so to say, against this societal trend.
I see UCM as the best practice in this, especially in the humanities where academic values are seriously under pressure, where a lot of staff is unable to do research anymore because of managerial decisions taken at government or very high central levels within the academic world. For instance, I do not know if you know that, but the Dutch government has its so-called Topsectorenbeleid, through which they appointed nine top sectors for academic research, and it is all in technology, data science, medical science, pharmacy; nothing in Humanities. These are things that immediately will deliver benefits in material sense. So it is: “can you make a new medicine? No? Go away! We do not know what you are doing, your job can be scrapped from the world, we do not need you anymore; but what is your output?” And that is a very strong trend in the Netherlands, but also in Europe and even transnationally. It is putting a lot of pressure on this broader approach that is so vital for every academic community. Include philosophy, for instance, in every step of your studies, whatever you do: medical sciences, political sciences or law, it is important everywhere. The traditional academic values are under pressure of this policy oriented approach towards academia, looking and asking for concrete material output.
Most of us here would agree that UCM is great, but others would point out that it is not perfect. Of course you have not been here very long, but do you have any ideas regarding things that you’d like to see implemented or would like to improve?
To be honest, as I said before, I’m impressed by the organization. And the only thing that I can think of is very general. This is such a strong organization on vital elements of academic life, the best practice at least in the Netherlands, and it can position itself from a perspective of strength, compared to other parts of Academia. And that opens new chances. For instance, if you have your internal organization in order, you can open to the outer world; you do not have to be focused so much only on internal problems because they are maybe relatively small. So I think there is still an opportunity for UCM to become even more attractive, to open up a bit. Not as a goal in itself, but there where there is, or we can expect, new or fresh input and impulses. It would be great to do that. For instance, to search for crossovers, this is just a wild idea, between academia, liberal arts and sciences, and the arts. Maastricht is a very rich city, although it is a provincial city, when it comes to the arts. You have a school for actors, I don’t know if you know it. You have this art academy, you have ballet on a quite high level, and you have an opera, which is leading in the Netherlands. So that would be, in my view, a very interesting crossover to explore.
The last days I was part of this, I don’t know if you heard about it, the Forum on European Culture (cultureforum.eu) in Amsterdam. You have to google it! It was a forum on European culture, an amazing event, in the framework of the Dutch Presidency of the European Union, which is coming to an end now. This forum was the first of its kind, organized in Amsterdam for three days, bringing together leading thinkers but mainly leading artists from all over Europe and the world, re-thinking the idea of Europe, European integration, the future of Europe. And from new perspective, so not from the perspective of the politics, or the politicians or the policymakers, but from a more culturally-oriented and arts-driven perspective. It was very popular, and it was greatly inspiring for somebody like me because that is what we need. It is true for a lot of problems of this time, the refugee crisis, the future of European integration, or the Eurozone, socio-economic inequalities in our societies, becoming more and more pressing. We need fresh ideas, fresh imagination, and new perspectives on all problems. And maybe it is very helpful to open this world of policy-makers up to thinking from the more traditional academic, but also arts, perspectives. That can be hugely stimulating to approach these problems with more originality and maybe there is a bigger chance to solve them, to some extent. So the Forum on European Culture was a great example of this crossover that I am now talking about between the academic world, the policy world, the current problems, and the arts and culture. But that is also something that UCM can become in sometime, where we can bring parties together here, we have the facilities, we have the students and we have a strong staff team. Maybe we could host sometimes things like these.
I think openness is very important, in UCM but also to the outer world, reaching out to society and other players in the academic field. And I think we can do it because we have a strong starting position.
Sergio Calderón-Harker
The Bell 