The EER is a fixed item on the agenda of the Faculty Joint Assembly spring meeting. During the meeting in June 2026, the new regulations for the 2026-2027 academic year will be discussed. The OC has the right of consent: proposed changes may only be implemented with the explicit approval of the OC. Because there are currently around 20 study programmes within our faculty, this is a task that all members of the OC are involved in.
The FSS board involves the OC in the process of revising the EER at an early stage. The OC received the general sections in February, with a request to provide input on the main points. The members of the OC critically reviewed the proposed changes and were given the opportunity by the board to formulate questions.
Issues surrounding the EER
This time around, the OC noticed that the EER makes no reference to the use of AI systems, such as ChatGPT, by students. We wondered whether this might be desirable, either in the EER or in the fraud regulations. Another question we asked in this regard is to what extent the rule “In the study programme, students are required to write a final thesis as an individual proof of competence” is still appropriate now that, with the advent of AI, programmes are increasingly shifting towards alternative, non-written forms of assessment.
Would it not be desirable to include a reference in the EER to the use of AI systems by students?
We furthermore noted that the current “Cluster Inspection” pilot may deviate from the right of inspection and explanation, which states that an inspection must take place under the supervision of an examiner or a person with substantive knowledge of a course. The OC will receive answers from the board to these and other questions in March. These answers will provide input for discussion on this topic during the FJA.
Meet Matthijs, OC member with a lot of EER experience
In addition to the OC, other stakeholders also play an important role in the creation of the new EER, such as the programme committees, policy officers and education coordinators. OC member Matthijs Brussen works as a policy officer for Pedagogical and Educational Sciences (PWO) within the faculty. He has been involved in preparing the EER for the PWO programmes (two Bachelor’s and three Master’s programmes) for several years.
“Until this year, my own efforts were mainly focused on working with those involved in the study programmes to identify the changes that needed to be made for each programme. These proposals are then submitted to the programme committee (OLC), which provides an advice. These recommendations carry a lot of weight, but ultimately it is up to the Faculty Joint Assembly (FJAA) to weigh up the advice and approve the EERs. Because I have been involved in the preparations for some time, I know what steps precede the EER and how important the OC is in this process. Now that I have been a member of the OC since September 2025, I can see exactly what work is involved.”
The EER is not inviting enough for everyone to read, even though it can prevent problems that might otherwise cause unnecessary work pressure and/or disappointment.
According to Matthijs, the EER is an important document for students, teachers and other staff involved in education, but it is not always very accessible: “It is not inviting enough for everyone to read the document thoroughly, even though it can prevent problems that might otherwise cause unnecessary work pressure and/or disappointment.”
Now that he is also experiencing the process from the OC’s perspective, Matthijs has noticed how valuable the different perspectives are. “In the OC, you have a lot of interaction with other OC members, the faculty board, and the Faculty Student Council. All these different perspectives have given me a much broader perspective on the EER than I had before. The EER may seem like a static document, but developments (such as the use of AI in theses) show that new challenges are emerging for education and that you have to (continue to) consider carefully to what extent developments are desirable for the study programmes. This means that the EER remains an interesting document!”
Do you have an issue or a suggestion that you would like to discuss with the OC? Feel free to have a chat with Matthijs, or send an email to OC [at] socsci.ru.nl.