115. From polarisation to participation

We find ourselves at a time when political tensions, misinformation, and social divides increasingly spill onto university campuses across Europe and beyond. Higher education institutions are trying to respond to growing polarisation and a need to strengthen democratic culture. But how can the foundations for constructive dialogue be secured on our campuses? What’s involved in equipping future citizens with the skills to engage constructively? And how do institutions remain resilient in a rapidly shifting world?

In this EAIE podcast episode, host Laura Rumbley speaks with Tatiana Zimenkova, Vice President for Internationalisation and Diversity at the Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences (Germany), and Arend Hardorff, member of the Executive Board of The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS; the Netherlands). They discuss the real-world challenges facing higher education institutions eager to foster space for respectful, reasoned conversations on campus amid global conflicts, rising populism, and questions about academic freedom, as well as the responsibility HEIs feel to create safe, inclusive spaces for dialogue. Be sure to tune in to hear about the good practices implemented at these two institutions, how to engage ‘the silent middle' and what these speakers recommend to others eager to address, and ideally reduce, polarisation on campus. 

About Tatiana Zimenkova
Professor Dr habil. Tatiana Zimenkova is Vice President for Internationalisation and Diversity at the Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences (Germany), where she is a professor of sociology. She received her doctorate and habilitation in sociology at Bielefeld University. Her goals include further strengthening and developing HSRW’s international character and strategy, as well as increasing visibility and awareness of diversity-related issues. She envisions an inclusive university where each person is empowered and able to achieve their goals. At the same time, her aim is also to enable all members of the university to participate in decision-making processes and the campus community. 

About Arend Hardorff
Arend Hardorff joined the Executive Board at The Hague University of Applied Sciences (the Netherlands) on 1 September 2022. Arend studied Leisure and Tourism Studies at the University of Tilburg. After his studies, he worked as a lecturer and programme manager, and from 2012 to 2018 as Director of the Academy for Leisure at Breda University of Applied Sciences. From August 2018 until August 2022, he was a member of the Executive Board and Dean of Hotelschool The Hague, responsible for Education and Research. 

Additional resources
For further insights into the topics touched on in this episode, the following resources may be of interest:
→ The Hague Network
→ Dangerous questions: Why not keep quiet?
→ Living our EAIE values in times of conflict

Transcript

SPEAKER_03 0:04

From Amsterdam to the world, here comes another episode of the EAIE podcast. Thank you for joining us. I'm Laura Rumbly, Director for Knowledge Development and Research at the EAIE, and you're tuning in here to episode number 115 in our series. We're hearing so, so much these days about the profound disagreements that divide us within our societies, between nations, across great swaths of the planet, from the so-called global south to the global north. Polarization is a term on many lips in these challenging times, and the realities of deep difference are as apparent in the halls of academia and on higher education campuses as they are anywhere today. This presents some significant challenges to higher education institutions. How should they respond to polarization on campus? What does the work of managing politically sensitive partnerships involve? In what ways should institutions be thinking about and engaging the often sizable silent middle consisting of students and staff who don't outwardly register opinions about the polarizing issues of the day? And what does it mean for higher education institutions to serve as guardians of democracy, which is a very lofty aspiration, to say the least? To tackle some of these important questions, we're joined by two individuals who began a conversation on many of these same points in a spotlight session offered by the EAIE's Thematic Committee on Leadership Strategy and Policy back in September 2025 at the EAIE Annual Conference in Gothenburg. Tatiana Zemenkova is Vice President for Internationalization and Diversity at the Reinwald University of Applied Sciences in Germany. And Arend Hardorf is a member of the Executive Board at the Hague University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands. As you'll hear in the conversation just ahead, there are many possibilities for ratcheting down polarization and ratcheting up participation in meaningful campus conversations and activities that can help us navigate turbulent times, now and into the future. Thanks so much for listening in. Tatiana Arendt, welcome to the EIE podcast, and thanks for being with us. We are having a conversation today about some really interesting issues of campus dynamics. And at the EAIE's annual conference in September of last year in Gothenburg, our Thematic Committee on Leadership Strategy and Policy hosted a spotlight session focusing specifically on how higher education institutions should respond to this matter of campus depolarization, politically sensitive partnerships, and the rising pressure to act as guardians of democracy, a rather provocative term. Could one of you tell us a little bit about what that conversation last year was like and some of the main takeaways that you walked away with?

SPEAKER_02 3:12

Yeah. I could start. Thank you very much for having us here, actually, and for having us uh during the conference, because it was very, very important not just to talk to each other about this, but also to see what the public um has to report. I believe it's one of the important takeaways, is not just us speaking to each other and reflecting on what pressures do we have in in Europe at the moment, uh and the questions of democracy and political polarization on campus, but also how we how we all similar into it. I believe it's one of the most takeaways for me was that we sitting there in a podium, but also the public reported the same things, had to deal with the same challenges, and and and having this feeling where together into it is, I believe, one of the most surprising, but also important things for me. And well, as the title already says, we've been speaking about what kind of political activities are there, how our students, our staff dealing with some political issues, definitely the situation in Gaza and Israel was one of the central points, but some others also come up. What we deal with in Germany at the moment is definitely question of populist parties rising up and how their activities also are visible on campus, how they're visible in what students feel, what international students feel, and how we can how we can support them. And I believe one of the most challenging questions we have is how to ensure participation and democracy and balances with governance. So on the one side, at least in Germany, we have a legal task as universities to educate people in democracy and to secure democracy and to secure our constitution. Um, at the same time, yeah, for freedom of speech and so on, and then you have very polarizing ideas and people having a feeling that they're being censored or some other topics might be censored. The other feeling people have the feeling that if some topics are discussed and they are excluded and they don't, they cannot uh report what they feel. And I believe the balance of enabling participation, enabling free speech, enabling free discussions, and governing this is one something you really have on on the level of high school, high school governance. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 5:42

I I agree, uh Tatiana. I think it was a um very interesting session we had, like you said, also with the people in the room sharing their experiences. Um at the end, we we are leading, co-leading uh universities, and we stand for academic freedom. And that academic freedom is being challenged by what happens around us in society, but also how we are approached as a university, both by our students, but also by other stakeholders, by politics, etc. And I think what is a common for most of us is that we try to see let's first go to our own values, also as a guideline how to react or to respond to the changing environment. In the case of The Hague University, that is the, as we call it, the four C's: curious, connected, caring, and committed. Um, but of course it doesn't say everything. Um, it says something, but doesn't say everything. And how it plays out in practice is different, I think, for all the universities, also because you're part of different national and political contexts, and that's something that we explored during uh the conversation, where um you also get an insight in what are the considerations of other people who are in similar positions being board members of universities. So it's not only the the conversation was how do we respond as universities to this development, but also as leaders of a university. And I think that made it really interesting.

SPEAKER_03 7:09

Aaron Ross Powell Sounds like it really was a very fascinating conversation um touching on these larger issues of principles and values and concept, contexts, and challenges, but then also the practicalities of how do you do the work of responding, you know, in this in these particular uh moments. To that point of concrete responses. And I think one of the exciting things about the EAE is the way that we hopefully to some degree successfully bring peers together to learn from one another and share experiences. Um, can we talk a little bit about the experiences that you've been having at your own institutions? Some particular approaches or tools that have worked particularly well that you might recommend to colleagues at other institutions that are really trying to address this issue of depolarization uh of campus conversations and environments.

SPEAKER_00 8:00

Yeah, I can go first now. Now um I I would like to um uh support what Tatiana said um earlier. Um it's I think the the the we're convict as as a as a university we're convinced, but also I personally that as a university we are uh um a space for learning. And um it is I really truly see it as our role also to educate our students not only for their future jobs, but also um for the future citizenship, global citizenship. And that's also in in our strategy that we say within our programs, whatever you study, being becoming an educator, IT specialist, a nurse, um, we want to educate global citizens, people that can respond to the world around them, but also can take ownership and responsibility. So that should be part of the program. But we also see, especially when it becomes more tense, and you gave the example of Gaza and Israel, um, we also see, and not only see, but also hear the little bit the insecurity of our own educational professionals to do that properly because it is so sensitive. So, what we did as a university, the YK University, is that we said on top of what we expect and try to support in the classrooms, in the curricula, is that we organize uh university-wide dialogue sessions on topics where we don't avoid what's difficult but try to address it, but in a safe environment. A safe environment means we are all equal. We're not there as a board to present or to host, but we take part in a conversation and listen more than that we speak. But we also had it independently moderated by a very experienced journalist who creates a safe space and actively explores the different perspectives uh on a certain topic, and that can be um difficult at times. But at the end, uh we heard that people really appreciated it, um, even the ones who didn't participate in those dialogues, but heard that we uh we organized the dialogue. So the fact that we provide a platform and we don't close our eyes for certain discussions that might be difficult was highly appreciated, and we also decided to continue them.

SPEAKER_03 10:08

This is a brilliant example, very, very practical um and with clear outcomes for your your community. Tatiana, are there some examples that you might share with us?

SPEAKER_02 10:17

Thank you very much, yes. Um First of all, we we realize at certain point that we we do have different representations and we have a lot of systems of support, but still for some people it is difficult to report what uh what they're going through. And uh there might be some some conflict situation or escalating situations where people just um never speak about this. So we established an anonymous system of reporting of this kind of accidents, incidents, where people uh can just say what they've been going through. And uh basically it was intensively used by by students, uh, for example, Jewish students experiencing um some exclusions in campus during these um campaigns. And um and I so there are there are group of people where we'd say, okay, uh they they don't really they are a bit of afraid uh to to speak up, and I do understand it's so good. So uh so we had still a chance to communicate and to see what is going on and to to find responses to that. Um we offered some de-escalation seminars for our staff members, um, and we just okay, we just opened them up and they were completely booked half an hour after we opened them. So we're like, okay, so people have a feeling they need some skills to de-escalate situations. So people from staff teaching staff who definitely not only teaching in like uh programs on political education or um uh international relations, so people in some very, very different uh subject areas uh having a feeling I need some further education on a topic, how do I deal with uh difficult topics in my classroom? And um, it was very interesting for us to see that that people really um really wanted that. We also opened up some dialogues, um, talking to students, and it was a lot of one-to-one work. So a lot of work to re-establish trust relationships, because we had definitely some issues with some student representations who had the feelings that the university board would take up some political position, which is not the case. We are we are not actually taking political positions in that sense. Definitely we have our values we stick to. But um there was a lot of a long process of dialogues, of one-to-one talks, of uh moderated talks to re-establish trust that uh the student unions who are very autonomous in Germany and they are very important cooperation and communication partners of us as university board, that we could re-establish this trust, that we could again talk to each other. And uh it took as many months to get there, but now we are there. And um we had a very intensive time of student uh student body re-elections, which showed us that our work really brought some fruits because uh we we used to have some um democracy dropouts, let's say, yeah, so people not not really interested in all these processes, um very low participation and democratic processes, and all of a sudden, uh the end of the last year, so December and January of this year, they had election, re-election, they had like a boost of participation and intensive um election processes, and in the first round, nobody was elected, so they really kind of it I could not imagine this kind of things happening, and now they found a new student body leader. And this is something which took a lot of effort also from our side, but uh now I have a good feeling about this that, and definitely they are critical, and they're not all we're a critical friend, they are critical communication partner, they don't have to be our friend. We just want uh to see student representation to be there, to be strong, and also to tell us as a university board it's not what we want, yeah, and to tell us we want something else, change or so, but for that they need strong representation. And now we have it, and we are very, very, very much looking forward to this cooperation, however critical it might become.

SPEAKER_03 14:36

Really extremely interesting, and I'm very taken by those elements of strong communication and strong engagement, really opening the doors on a sharing of perspectives, which must must be very enriching. Um, I'm struck in our conversation by the notion that depolarization implies the existence of polls, of far distances between opinions. Um, and we know that often we hear from those that hold the strongest opinions. They are the ones who are protesting and speaking up, but there can be quite a substantive or sizable, silent middle, we might say. How do we engage those individuals who aren't on the front lines of the debates, you know, no matter which side they're on? Could you talk a little bit about how you all think about and work with this notion of a maj of a middle majority that we we may want to hear more from or attend to in some way?

SPEAKER_00 15:38

Yeah, I can say something about it because you're totally right. And we also notice also with uh with the meetings I just told you about is that uh there are um much more people that we don't reach with those meetings, or at least don't attend them, than the ones that do. Um and even there we were a little bit um how do you say that, um accused, maybe that's too strong, but accused that there is kind of a a right answer or a right middle. So there were also people maybe a little bit uh on on the right or left side who said, yeah, is it really a place where also my perspective is being valued? So it is also being challenged. On one hand, you say there are the strong voices, but there are also strong voices who said, yeah, maybe if you don't fit in that liberal progressive paradigm, are you really so inclusive? Also, for my opinion. So that has also been challenged. The practical thing that we did in reaction to uh at first um Gaza Israel, where you saw that in the Netherlands, but I think also elsewhere. Uh, it was challenged if, as Dutch universities, you should have partnerships with Israeli universities. That the question was raised: who are actually the partnerships, strategic partnerships of the university, not only academic partners, but for example, also work field partners. And at that time it was Israeli universities, but earlier also fossil industry partners, or, for example, companies that are also in arms and weapons. Um that are the type of examples where the question is raised: yeah, what is right? What do you do as a university when it comes to being involved in teaching or funding research, for example? How independent are you? And um what we decided at that point. Now, let me say it differently. At that moment, you're almost challenged, also as a leader of a university, to take a stand, as if you become a judge about what's right or wrong. And of course, we do have our compass, but we also make ourselves vulnerable, also as university leaders, if we take that position. So we take, we took a different route, not to be weak, but because we thought it was a more appropriate response to the more intense debate about uh who do we allow to be the partners or who do we select to be the partners of the Hague University of Applied Sciences. So there was already a very short ethical framework about partnerships, but it was so generic that everything was right, everything was wrong. Um so we decided we should redo that and not have one or two policy advisors and one legal advisor write that, but let's make that into a process. So let's write a little bit more extensive ethical framework about who should be or who do we want as the partners of our university, and engage different groups, also that silent middle, in rewriting that. Also, the students who protested against Israel and pro-Palestine, and ask us to break ties that, by the way, we didn't have with Israeli partnerships. Um, but also in the sort of so we had uh professors, people from participation, both students and staff members, legal advisor, but also the ones with more stronger opinions, and made them part of kind of a reviewing process that led to an ethical framework that again doesn't give an absolute answer to what's right or wrong, but it leaves a little bit more clarity on how you, as a student, but also as a staff member, as a professor, as a lecturer, as a manager, can take responsibility for that ethical uh dilemma. Um, and actually, what we said there is that there are two main axes to be evaluated with whatever partner you uh you you choose. One is what are you actually gonna do? So the actual activity, is it right, is it just in terms of of uh what you do? And the second one is how about the partner itself, the company, the organization. Um and we only work with partners that score a yes on both elements, so both the partner and the activity, and of course, there's then again also a gray area, but at least that's something that you then consciously discuss and are also able to explain. And again, not all everyone will agree, but at least you know that that it was a thorough and ethical consideration before you choose or yes or no to work with a certain partner. But the most important thing is that um by again cre uh uh starting a process of talking about the ethical dilemmas, also made the discussion about it much more nuanced than it appeared to be at first. And I think that's the most valuable outcome of this whole process. And we said, let's um reiterate or re um reiterate every maybe two, two and a half years, or if there's a reason really to do so, because it's not also not static. I think, let's say four or five years ago, in the Netherlands, even pension funds were accused of investing in w arms and weapons, and now we are even encouraged to work um on drones together with companies that can enhance the the military autonomy of Europe. So it can change in just a few years. So I think it already shows that we have to keep on evaluating that and engage our community in doing so.

SPEAKER_03 20:48

I was just gonna say I think that uh widening the participation in that process is a is an interesting component of that, and also very openly acknowledging the nuance and the f the fluidity of these of these kinds of conversations and the world we're living in, for that matter. Thank you so much for that. Tatiana, to you now.

SPEAKER_02 21:07

First of all, I was I was completely uh flashed by the process. So as Arnold told me that's the first time I was really impressed. I immediately circulated it all at our university, and then uh I had a meeting of vice presidents for internationalization of all German universities of applied sciences, and I was hosting it somehow, and then I thought I I I believe I I wrote you that day in the in the morning, like at six o'clock in the morning, I said, Can I use some of your slides? Because I had this idea, I have to show people how it works. And uh I believe everybody was really, really impressed by the process. And by the way, it's how networking works. So a lot of people learned from you because I could learn from you. And uh yes, but uh what about silent middle? Uh, we we had a feeling we have uh huge numbers of international students, and people come from very different um expectations of possibilities of Participation. Yeah, it depends on where you come from, you don't have much experiences of how much power you actually have in a system, or you could have a say and you could be heard. So what we are ended up with at the moment, we appointed, or every faculty have chosen one colleague, one professor for each faculty, who had some teaching load reduction, also to work together on the question how to integrate the aspects of democracy, of the ideas of democratic participation into teaching and the basic teaching of all our faculties. And we have very different disciplines. It's quite easy to integrate it into programs on gender and diversity or early childhood education. I can imagine it's more difficult to integrate it into sustainable agriculture or in technology and bionics. But then we have four people working together on that. And what was really interesting, talking to stakeholders, so companies around our campus who work with us, but who also are waiting for our graduates to start working with them, they said that they believe that this some basic education in and participation and democracy processes, especially in the political climate we have now in Europe, they believe it to be a part of employability. So we actually try to connect the idea of political education and uh employability and put it in our teaching and through all the uh all the teaching programs. I'm not sure how we implement it so far, but we we are going to do it definitely because we believe it to be important and because we believe that this is the way how we can um change this uh situation of polarizations, because people will still have different opinions, people will still have very polarized opinions, and it's it's a good thing to to speak about them in a university context. Where if not here, then well when then else, yeah, where else? But um to enable as many people as possible, as many students, but also staff members as possible to articulate the thoughts and to not only speak but also have an idea as how to change institutions in ways they want them to be changed. It is something people have to be empowered, and uh we we we we start this process now.

SPEAKER_03 24:32

Incredibly important work for the moment, for the individuals that you're working with as students and and as uh academic staff, but also for the larger society that your institutions are serving. Um it's very exciting and important work. Um, Arand, you've spoken already a bit about the notion of partnerships and the challenges that are embedded in that. I don't know if there's anything more you might like to say about the different tensions that institutions are up against, either you or Tatiana, you know, how how we find our way forward with this idea of, on the one hand, wanting to ensure academic freedom, on the other hand, potentially being perceived as as undermining that very academic freedom by some of the choices that we're trying to make in good faith or not. Let's talk a little bit about the partnership struggles that your institutions may be up against. Um, what can we what can you share on that front?

SPEAKER_00 25:26

No what I already said is there's no absolute truth. So uh in every case we have to look at the context. But what's most important for us is that we see not only partnerships, but certainly also partnerships uh as part of a shared responsibility. Um that we don't want to um we don't want to encourage uh a situation where it has been uh delegated upwards. And what I mean with that is that every lecturer who makes a choice to use certain literature or a certain case study or a project with a company for students makes a choice: do I do this with this organization or with another one? Do I do s choose this literature or other literature up to multiple years company-funded research on on, for example, drone technology that can be used to dual use, so also military. So I think everything between is part of kind of an ethical consideration. And um what was very interesting in the conversation we were in in Goteborg, uh, but I also noticed earlier is that if you look at the research universities in the Netherlands, most made a choice already sometimes years earlier uh earlier to establish a committee, an ethical committee. Um and it seems to make sense, but at the end we as a university chose not to because um we want don't want to turn an ethical consideration that every professional, every academic could or should make uh into bureaucracy. Um so when it becomes difficult, you put it on the table of the ethical committee and let them make a choice, um or let them advise the board. And uh we chose not to, and up to now, I think we're let's say one, one and a half years further. Um we didn't regret that yet. Because of the fact that those type of discussions or choices don't end up at our board table, I think, also shows that people feel empowered to make those choices and doesn't mean that they are easy, but at least feel empowered and also supported to make those choices if we help them in the way uh you at least evaluate or discuss this. And I think that's um a choice we made, and was also kind of a contrast with the approach of some some others. And we'll have to see maybe in two years' time we have to conclude that it doesn't work as anymore, and we're screaming to uh establish a committee. But I think in the way we would like to work, especially as an applied university, so connected, so wired on s multiple levels to the society around us, um, yeah, I still stand for this choice.

SPEAKER_03 27:55

Very interesting shared responsibility and multiple level kind of way of approaching that work. Tatiane, anything more you might like to say about that partnerships dynamic?

SPEAKER_02 28:04

Yes, um, I would say that uh I I see German landscape as changing a lot at the moment. First of all, um all German universities of most of the German universities have something which is called civil clause, which in our um order, we we gave our universities a main document, we kind of start with we do not work uh with we do we just just do things for civilian purposes, so we don't do nothing for military purposes. And I know that not in our university, but in many other federal states, now there are discussions whether one should kind of delete it and uh think of other corporations and our per other purposes of research. So kind of uh this is this no-go for military research seems to change or seems to be at least in a discussion in Germany. For sure, some political parties also try to push it in some federal states, but it's just all of a sudden a discussion. The other thing, which is definitely a discussion, we have um meetings uh of all uh vice presidents for internationalization of all German universities which take part on like a regular basis, and we had one yesterday. And um, and and the way they are the science security issue is being discussed uh in the in the context of scientific cooperations. Um, German Academic Exchange Services established an own um sub-organization, which is called Kiwi, which kind of consults the universities on the question of strategic partnerships with a very, very strong focus on security, embargo, and so on. So, kind of the question of scientific trust and mistrust are accompanying the research in a very intensive way. So I have a feeling that in Germany we have this kind of invitations and discussions for university board members responsible for internationalization and research. Like every second week uh we can speak about how do you cooperate with this country and that country and uh in this in this research area. And um, so it it seems to be something uh which is also a balance of freedom of research. So uh these meetings of university board members, they definitely um discuss, we don't want politics to decide this for us. Yes, we we want uh to decide as universities, but how do we decide? And I see that we uh many universities, including us, uh use a very they have to put a lot of effort in checking the corporations on these issues. Um and uh now we have even some some discussions on students from embargo countries and so on and so on. So so difficult things going on at the moment which would not which would be unthinkable, actually, like five years ago. So as I started uh seven years ago, I started this position. It was quite a different discourse. I believe it's it's very central. Um, at the same time, um, yes, for sure, as a university we make decisions ourselves. So long, I hope it stays like this. And uh, but we had a very interesting, um, a very interesting experience. We had um a group from um a university in Israel, we don't have partnerships with Israel so far, although our student body requested us to cancel them. It was difficult to cancel something you don't have. Um and but yes, they they did not believe us. It was really interesting and uh interesting discussion. But um then we had a visit from um Academic College Tel Aviv, which is an organization which is very much criticized by the Israel government because they educate uh Arabic and Israel students together, so they are kind of even if you're a very critical student in Germany, this is kind of institution you would kind of believe to be good guys. Yeah, they they are they are criticizing the government, they are supporting students in precarious situations, they're uh supporting first academic students from um Arabic families, and they have they have students who have families in Gaza and so on. Um, and still we had very critical discussions with our students' representatives. How does it come that we invite them? And uh I had a feeling that I had a lot of talks uh before they came because I did not want um the students to be made responsible for as if they were officials by Israel government, right? And and and this was something which was very interesting because I thought, hmm, where where do we make our draw the lines, right? Because uh what what kind of ethical things that we as an institution we we reflected a lot before we invited them, and they came and said, it's a miracle that we are invited to Europe at all because we have a feeling that European institutions don't want to talk to any Israel institutions, no matter what we are standing for. And this made made made me thoughtful on on that we need like single-case decisions in many, many cases as well. Yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_00 33:12

Maybe another example that uh also sh shows exactly um you uh uh underline your last remark is that um uh like I said already said something about military, and you you can't cover everything with extensive procedures. Um a little bit more than I think uh seven months ago, we were invited to take part in a pilot that students could become be trained uh become trained as a National Reserve as part of the bachelor curriculum. Meaning that uh if they choose for the minor safety and security, first they have 10 weeks' theoretical classes on safety, security, resilience at the safety and security program management program, uh, bachelor program that we have. The second 10 weeks, we would outsource them to the military base. They would have their basic military training, and at the end, they could say uh stay um um registered as a as a national reserve in the Netherlands, or just uh uh have their 30 credit points of the semester and continue their studies. And um we had just a few days to discuss. And normally we would say, okay, this has to go to an extensive process and ask advice and with a super uh with a participation council. But we said this is really an opportunity, and we are the applied university in the city of peace and justice, The Hague. So we also see it fitting the profile of our institute, so let's go for it. It was almost gut feeling. And we were surprised actually twice. First of all, that he hardly received any criticism or critical questions: why are we doing this or why are we facilitating this as a university, even as part of a bachelor program? And second, the incredible amount of uh attention by young students who wanted to participate in this program from all corners of the university, even outside our university, who wanted to do this semester at our university so they would be able to be trained as a national reserve. So um personally, I was reflecting. Okay, would this have been thinkable only three, four years ago? Now I think everybody would have said no. And um, we were really surprised, and it it it's you know, this this this anecdote I think only shows that um if if you know what you stand for, what's the profile of your institute, if it fits the regional um uh economic profile, but also that you stay true to your values, you should also be able to defend it. Because we were yeah, again, we were surprised by uh how how little criticism we received on it and actually oh only a lot of praise.

SPEAKER_03 35:33

Your examples are really fascinating, and as you say, the timeliness of them, you know, that they're just how how they are what they are because of the moment that we're in at the just now, you know, very interesting shifting grounds, both in terms of domestic politics, but also regionally, globally, geopolitically. So much to unpack and continue talking about. But we're nearly at the end of our time, unfortunately. And before we go, there were there was just one last question I wanted to put to you. If you could recommend one concrete action that institutions could take this year to strengthen democratic culture and reduce polarization, recognizing that there are very different institutional contexts and national contexts, I wonder what your advice might be. Tatiana, could I come to you first on this one?

SPEAKER_02 36:20

Um, oh, it's a big question. Um I would I would say that uh these kind of things do not go without student participation. So I would encourage everybody to to find active groups of students and cooperate together with them and ask them what they would like to happen as an action, uh, whatever it might become. Because uh these are the groups, these are the young people who are going to change the world at some point or live in this world, which is actually very crazy at the moment. So um, so in order to make them make them powerful and knowledgeable, how to deal with all the polarizing which will be going on further, one really has to come to them as a university board and to say, here, you have possibilities, you have means. What would you like to make? And if perhaps like giving them time, the whole week they they can invest into these topics. I'm not sure my I believe my colleagues teaching subjects would say, Are you crazy? Are you nuts? I'm not giving the whole week of my important lectures. But uh, I believe there's something like this, giving them time and uh and and space, but also to showing them how important the topic is that the university board says, do it now and we will support you. Then I would see what happens if one does.

SPEAKER_00 37:47

No, yeah, I I fully uh agree, Tatiana. I think uh in in line with the example I gave earlier, I think um uh look the beast in the eye and discuss it, create a platform to discuss it and don't dive away because it's not going away. We are the educating the leaders of tomorrow. So I think it's also up to us to show how you deal with things that are more difficult, that can be itchy, can even feel unsafe. But of course, it like I said, it comes with a heavy responsibility to create spaces where you create the the facilities to to have such dialogues in a safe way. But uh don't avoid them.

SPEAKER_03 38:25

So I've really enjoyed looking the beast in the eye with both of you. This has been a wonderful conversation. Thank you so much, Tatiana and Arendt, for taking the time to speak with us today.

SPEAKER_02 38:35

Thank you very much for having us. Thank you.

SPEAKER_03 38:38

That was Arendt Hardorf, a member of the Executive Board at the Hague University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands, and Tatjana Zimankova, Vice President for Internationalization and Diversity at the Reinwald University of Applied Sciences in Germany. Together, helping us consider the possibilities of moving our campus conversations from polarization to participation. If you're interested in learning more about this topic, about our guests, or the Hague Network, of which both their institutions are members, we invite you to visit the links we've provided with this episode's session notes. And special thanks to the EAIE Thematic Committee on Leadership Strategy and Policy, who provided special support for this episode. Now, we can't wrap this episode up without a quick shout-out to our listeners who may be doctoral students or candidates, or to their friends or advisors. The deadline to apply for the EAIE's doctoral research grants is right around the corner on 31 March. Only completed applications will be considered. Don't let this chance pass you by to garner valuable support for your research on international education. We are also less than a week away from the early bird deadline to register for the next EAIE Academy training course, which is on mastering international admissions and credential evaluation. Secure your spot in the course before 3 April to save on registration fees, and remember, EAIE members can add this savings on top of their already discounted rate. That's all for this episode. We're so grateful you joined us for a listen. We'll be coming your way again with a new episode in just one month's time. Until then, all good wishes to you from the EAIE.