BuFaK Council

Demand for flexible exam registrations and cancellations

• The BuFaK WiWi calls for flexible handling of exam registrations and cancellations.
• Registration procedures are carried out individually by universities and are merely for logistical purposes. The handling often differs even within a university, so that different Schools apply different registration and cancellation modalities. These deadlines are at odds with flexibility and the ability to study.
• At the University of Jena, for example, it is only possible to register for exams in the first ten weeks of the semester, while written exams can only be cancelled up to four weeks before the start of the three-week examination period.
• Registration for and cancellation of examinations at Goethe University Frankfurt is only possible up to five weeks before the examination date. Withdrawal from the examination is generally excluded[1].
• At Saarland University of Applied Sciences, all students are always and without exception automatically registered for their examinations. In the first two semesters, it is generally not possible to deregister. Students can deregister for examinations in the third and higher semesters without giving reasons by notifying the Examinations Office or the Online Student Service. Deregistration automatically leads to registration for the next possible examination date[2].
• In our view, there is no reason why students should have to withdraw from an examination registration several months before the examination date in some cases. These are blatant restrictions on students' flexibility compared to other universities and make studying unnecessarily difficult.
• As these deadlines are often justified by room planning and organisational problems, we would like to cite positive examples at universities.
• At the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and the Technical University of Dortmund, for example, it is usually possible to register for written examinations up to two weeks before the respective examinations.
• Cancellation of a registered examination at the School of Business and Economics at the Technical University of Dortmund is possible until 11:59 p.m. on the day before the examination without giving reasons. Cancellation takes place online[3}.
• At the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), it is even possible to explicitly withdraw from a written examination without giving a reason by signing in the lecture theatre until immediately before the examination papers are handed out[4].
• Cancellation is even more progressive at the Berlin University of Applied Sciences. Failure to attend an examination at this university does not result in a failed attempt and is considered an automatic cancellation of the examination[5].
• We demand that it must be possible to cancel an examination registration without negative consequences for students, even at short notice before a written examination. Registering for an examination several weeks before it takes place harbours many risks, some of which are unknown. Preparation for an examination can be disrupted for various reasons. In this case, a cancellation of the examination that can no longer be realised is fatal for the student's course of study - especially in the case of limited examination attempts. This system can also cause problems for students if they are forced to enrol for the next possible examination period.
• Only a flexible registration system can do justice to the self-image of a progressive university. The BuFaK WiWi therefore considers it necessary to introduce such flexible registration systems at all universities and to enable students to withdraw from examinations at short notice.
• In particular, compulsory enrolment without the possibility of withdrawal should be rejected in principle.

Sources:

• [1]https://www.wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de/news-pa/einzelansicht/article/letzte-chance-fristende-pruefungsanmeldung-12062020-2359-uhr.html
• [2]https://www.htwsaar.de/studium-und-lehre/im-studium/gesetze-und-studentische-ordnungen/copy_of_AllgemeineStudienundPrfungsordnungASPO.pdf
• [3]https://www.wiwi.tu-dortmund.de/wiwi/de/studium/studiengaenge/wiwi-bachelor-2015/ba-wiwi-2015-po-aenderung-1.pdf
• [4]https://www.wiwi.kit.edu/lehrePruefungen.php#Abmeldung
• [5]https://www.htw-berlin.de/studium/studienorganisation/pruefungen-praktikum/pruefungsverhinderung/

ÄA1

Amendment

   *blatant restrictions on student flexibility compared to other universities and made studying unnecessarily difficult. 

ÄA2

Amendment

AMENDMENT 3

Amendment

ÄA 4

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council): Introduces PosiPa
• Tobi B (Council) asks about the current status of the listed universities
• Trevis (Uni Frankfurt): One source not up to date
• Alexey (Council) KIT still up to date
• Daniel (TU Dortmund) Still current
• Fynn(Council) GO Proposal for adjournment
• No dissenting speech

Continuation of the discussion on 20.11.2022

• ÄA3 is withdrawn
• ÄA4 is presented

• Tobi B (Council): Introduces PosiPa
• Tobi B (Council) asks about the current status of the universities listed
• Trevis (Uni Frankfurt): One source not up to date
• Alexey (Council) KIT still up to date
• Daniel (TU Dortmund) Still current
• Fynn(Council) GO Proposal for adjournment
• No dissenting speech

Continuation of the discussion on 20.11.2022

• ÄA3 is withdrawn
• ÄA4 is presented

• BuFaK Council

Digital teaching as an integral part of university operations

• Against the backdrop of the current pandemic, universities have been faced with the challenge of designing and implementing digital teaching more clearly than ever before. We, the BuFaK WiWi, therefore set out below what we consider to be effective digital teaching and which aspects of it should be continued after the pandemic.
• Digital teaching should by no means be adopted as an overall concept from the times of the pandemic, but rather we should work towards implementing individual aspects so that digital teaching is an addition, but not a complete and equivalent replacement for classroom teaching.

The BuFaK WiWi considers the following to be productive for digital teaching

• • Online courses with the possibility of interaction between students and lecturers
  • The utilisation of digital possibilities, both inside and outside of courses (e.g. survey tools, group work in break-out sessions, use of interactive whiteboards, etc.)
  • Standardisation of the pool of tools that can be used
  • The option of having a camera view of lecturers, especially for recorded slide comments
  • Easy accessibility of lecturers and technical support throughout the semester
  • Barrier-free availability of all materials (e.g. e-books and network drives) from home and throughout the semester (without time limits)
  • Clear communication of an interdisciplinary didactic concept and the requirements of a course at the start of the course. In addition, consideration should be given to students who have never experienced normal face-to-face teaching at the university.
• Uploading videos and referencing materials with clear comments and with the possibility of communication or asking questions during live events, rather than just a simple lecture/recording of slides.

Basic requirements for successful digital teaching

• • Creation of resilient and university-wide infrastructures (online tools, meeting rooms, lecture tools, general technical equipment)
  • Barrier-free access to all tools, licences, workstations and work materials, which are also available to students outside of the course times set by the lecturers
  • Each university should also provide the option of using digital devices (e.g. tablets, laptops, cameras, microphones, etc.) to participate in digital teaching.
  • Adherence to the lecture times communicated in advance. This applies in particular to the punctual provision of lecture-accompanying materials.
  • Comparability of requirements, particularly with regard to workload and examination performance, between digital and non-digital teaching.
  • As the BuFaK WiWi, we advocate the continuation of hybrid teaching to promote globalisation in degree programmes in the future. This includes, in particular, the provision and continuous improvement of technical infrastructures. Accordingly, digital media should also be embedded in everyday university life beyond the lecture programme.
• Digital teaching offers a great opportunity, which is why we call for a continued open-minded approach to new and innovative solutions in the field of digital teaching.

ÄA1

Amendment

ÄA2

Amendment

AMENDMENT 3

Amendment

ÄA 4

Amendment

ÄA 5

Amendment

AMENDMENT 6

Amendment

AMENDMENT 7

Amendment

ÄA 8

Amendment

ÄA 9

Amendment

ÄA 10

Amendment

ÄA 13

Amendment

ÄA 14

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Uni Hohenheim) introduces PosiPa
• Christophe (Council) GO proposal for adjournment
• Accepted without dissent

Continuation of the discussion on 20.11.2022

• ÄA4 and 5 are editorial changes
• Christophe (Council) ÄA10 is presented
• Sebastian (Uni Bayreuth) proposes including students
• Christophe (Council) ÄA10 is withdrawn
• Remus (Halle) ÄA2 is presented
• Remus (Halle) ÄA3 is presented
• Leif (Uni Münster) presents ÄA7
• Jan (Uni Halle) presents ÄA 6
• Christophe (Council) presents ÄA8
• Christophe (Council) presents ÄA9
• Thiemo (University of Göttingen) presents ÄA13

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 48 No: 0 Abstention: 4.

BuFaK Council

Rejection of a fixed gender quota in university committees

• The BuFaK WiWi rejects a generally applicable gender quota.
• A prescribed gender quota in university committees only makes sense in justified (exceptional) cases. It must also demonstrably contribute to improving equal opportunities and Gender equality at the university. Motivation and qualifications are decisive factors in the selection of committee members. These characteristics are independent of gender.
• The results of gender quotas should be empirically analysed in a monitoring process and, if necessary, undergo test phases. In particular, the achievement of previously set targets and the additional workload, as well as the impact on newly appointed persons as a result of the quota, should be examined. Such a quota must not discriminate against any gender.
• Furthermore, a gender quota that is too rigid does not necessarily reflect the very different gender distributions within German degree programmes[1]. Depending on the gender distribution in the respective degree programme, one gender may be disadvantaged. The choice of their representatives should be exclusively in the hands of the students and not be affected by an unfounded gender quota.

Sources:

• [1] https://www-genesis.destatis.de/ Table 21311-0012

ÄA 1

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Uni Hohenheim) presents PosiPa
• Maurice (Tu Dresden) formulated very negatively, possibly Barcamp ?
• Anni-Jasmin (Lübeck) GO proposal for adjournment
• Remus (Uni Halle) counter speech, more discussion to give the Barcamp ideas
• Go proposal is withdrawn by Anni-Jasmin (Lübeck)
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) Adapting the wording so that it suits everyone is not the point of a position paper
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) Sees it the same way as the previous speaker. Should not be softened, as it contradicts the main thrust of the position paper.
• Remus (University of Halle) Agrees with Dresden. He thinks the headline is actually good, but he doesn't think the wording has to suit everyone; all FS should be able to identify with it
• Lena (Uni Bayreuth) In the Bay. Higher Education Act lists the cascade model, to what extent would this be an idea that could be adopted? Cascade model is explained
• Evangelos (University of Bielefeld) asks for constructive suggestions for change
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) agrees with the previous speaker. Would find it useful if concrete amendments were formulated:
• Ken (Council) GO proposal to close the list of speakers
• Accepted without opposition
• Anselm (Alumni) Position papers should be clear, but they are only a starting point for later discussion with politicians, so pay attention to diplomatic language
• Tim (Uni Stuttgart): Would like to address the fact that we should all be 100% behind the positions. Disagrees with this position and is of the opinion that the goal is that the majority should be behind it. Sees discrimination in the cascade model, as it is only based on percentages and not on qualifications.
• Leif (University of Münster) content input for the Barcamp
• Maurice (TU Dresden) joins Anselm
• Robert (LMU) Go Proposal for postponement and asks what the need for a vague position is.
• Formal rebuttal
• Vote to postpone position paper A3 Rejection of a fixed gender quota in university committees: The GO proposal was adopted with Yes: 41 No: 15 Abstention: 8

Continuation of discussion 20.11.2022

• Amendments are presented
• Anselm (alumni) a gender quota forces people to assign themselves to one gender
• Timo (HTWK Leipzig) in PosiPa we talk about committees and not degree programmes
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) talk about gender quotas, why then the word proportion of women
• Anne (Alumni) recommends withdrawing Ä1
• Thiemo (Uni Göttingen) GO proposal to end the debate
• accepted without opposition
• Simon (University of Cologne) speaks out against the position paper
• Maurice (TU Dresden) would like to draw up a new PosiPa until LeiFaK and reject it now
• Anne (Alumni) if it is rejected, we would have nothing on the topic until the LeiFak and possibly nothing would happen and we would have lost the position altogether

Vote: The proposal was not adopted with Yes: 32 No: 10 Abstention: 17.

BuFaK Council

Allocation/assignment of module places

• There are many different allocation systems for modules at universities. It is possible that students do not really have a choice, but are allocated modules based on a method chosen by the university. Or the motto "first come, first served" applies. This can cause a variety of problems. It is common for Master's programmes to require CP in a certain subject area. If modules are allocated and not chosen, it is therefore possible that these CPs cannot be collected in the Bachelor's programme.
• As a result, in some cases students who have successfully completed a Bachelor's degree programme cannot start a Master's degree programme in a similar subject at their own university. In addition, an allocation contradicts the principle of professional freedom, as such an allocation can be an obstacle to a later Master's or career choice. For applicants in particular, the allocation procedure is not comprehensible, so that when enrolling, it is assumed that they have a free choice between the modules.
• Allocation systems must be absolutely transparent and comprehensible, even for applicants. The aim of universities must be to provide sufficient capacity in courses in line with students' choices and to simplify the enrolment process as much as possible. This may require increasing staff capacity and adapting types of examination. In particular, if a written exam has been chosen as the type of examination, a capacity limit is often not comprehensible.
• If profiles, specialisations or modules are offered in a degree programme, these should also be available to every student.
• Allocation systems that discriminate against students outside the standard period of study should not be permitted. Students should have the freedom to study what they choose and not what an algorithm assigns them.
• It should also not be permitted that compulsory elective modules are not offered due to insufficient demand and that students who are interested in these modules are thus denied access to them.

ÄA 1

Amendment proposal

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council) introduces PosiPa
• Alexey (Council) presents ÄA1

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 60 No: 0 Abstention: 4.

BuFaK Council

• Anchoring parity in committees in the Higher Education Act
• The basic democratic idea should also be clearly defined and practised in university committees.
• For this reason, we demand student participation in all teaching-related university committees. In view of the political reorientation in many state parliaments, we consider this demand to be necessary.
• It is good academic practice to argue about what is right and sensible. Experience shows, for example, that coercive measures such as compulsory attendance are not necessary in degree programmes that have been planned with the involvement of students from the outset.
• Decisions based purely on majority votes avoid the need to find a consensus or to deal productively with irreconcilable dissent. The BuFaK WiWi is against quarter parity. Quarter parity is not a suitable means of giving student concerns more weight and a greater voice.

ÄA 1

Amendment

AMENDMENT 2

Amendment

AMENDMENT 3

Amendment

AMENDMENT 4

Amendment

ÄA 5

Amendment

ÄA 6

Amendment

ÄA 7

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council) introduces PosiPa
• Dennis (FH Bielefeld) explains the difference between gender parity and parity
• Julius (Alumni) says that the creation of the PosiPa was really about parity
• Chiara (Uni Münster) notes that parity is strongly linked to gender parity
• Frank (Uni Kassel) wants to point out that there are approaches in the Hessian Higher Education Act to code the electoral lists. Such specifications are not possible without violating laws.
• Tobi (Council) clarifies that it is about equal representation of students on the committees
• Robert (University of Cottbus) Clarify quarter parity so that it is clear that it is really not a gender quota 2
• Jonas (Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences) If we reject quarter parity, what do we want?
• Ken (Council) notes that we could not agree on a suitable parity at the time
• Gerrit (Münster) asks again what we want, because we don't want quarter parity, third/half is not legally possible
• Simon (University of Cologne) sees this as difficult to implement for all committees, does not understand lines 4&5
• Tobi B. (Council) assumes that this refers to the entry of new parties into the state parliaments
• Thiemo (University of Göttingen): just because we don't achieve it, we can still set the demand as high as possible in our PosiPa
• Tobi L (Uni Hohenheim) presents ÄA2
• Anni-Jasmin (Uni Lübeck) presents ÄA3
• Marisa (Uni Göttingen) is still in the process of submitting a far-reaching amendment and asks whether this should be voted on first
• Marisa (Uni Göttingen) presents ÄA4
• Tobi Lutz (University of Hohenheim) would like a more meaningful formulation
• Maris (University of Göttingen) agrees, suggests leaving the first sentence as it is to make it more meaningful
• Anni-Jasmin (University of Lübeck) is of the opinion that the amendment is not wrong, but the sentence that is to be deleted should remain.
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) Leave sentence in, so reject ÄA, but then accept the second sentence with amendment
• Marisa (University of Göttingen) withdraws ÄA4 and submits a new ÄA
• Marisa (University of Göttingen) presents ÄA5
• Dominik (TU Berlin) will something else be done about quarter parity?
• Fynn (Council) points out that this PosiPa no longer meets our standards. PosiPas can be postponed, revised or rejected.
• Jonas (Rhein-Wahlen) Is too vague for him to confirm it
• Marisa(Uni Göttingen) proposes to postpone instead of presenting her ÄA presentation
• Marisa (Uni Göttingen) GO proposal for postponement
• No counter-speech
• Discussion will be continued on 20 November
• Marisa (Uni Göttingen) GO.proposal for adjournment

   *Accepted without objection 

• Marisa (Uni Göttingen) presents ÄA
• Jonas (HS Rhein Waal): Are we calling for an amendment to the Basic Law with this?
• Stefan(Uni Göttingen) Yes, you've got it wrong.
• Marisa (University of Göttingen) It is still possible, there are already universities with quarter parity
• Frank (Uni Kassel) Judgement is from the 70s
• Jonas (Rhine-Waal) also agrees with this in principle

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 46 No: 1 Abstention: 6.

BuFaK Council

Sustainable development at German universities

• Due to the rapid change in earth systems caused by climate change, threatening biodiversity loss, soil degradation and desertification, water shortages and pollution as well as the current worldwide shortage of resources and global food insecurity, the Federal Conference of Economic Sciences would like to advocate a transformation towards sustainability (see WBGU 2011).
• We call for the strategic and operational implementation of sustainability at universities.
• The term sustainability is understood to mean "[...] development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[1] Governance, operational implementation and sustainable teaching and research are seen as sub-topics to be considered in the higher education process.

Governance

• All universities represented in the Federal Conference of Student and Faculty Representatives are calling for the establishment of sustainable development in federal and state policy. This should be operationally implemented and structurally anchored in the form of sustainability and, in particular, climate protection strategies. In this way, universities are taking on a pioneering role in social transformation processes and fulfilling their obligation under Article 20a of the German Constitution to position themselves in favour of the well-being of people and the protection of natural resources. We want to think and act responsibly in line with the National Action Plan on Education for Sustainable Development, which was initiated by UNESCO in 2015.

Measures:

• In the long term, we aim to achieve climate neutrality in university operations, including through energy efficiency.
• We, as BuFaK WiWi, call for the promotion of discussion forums on the topic of sustainability at universities.
• The BuFaK WiWi is in favour of the nationwide preparation of sustainability reports at universities.

University operations

• In addition, university operations should introduce an environmental management system, expand their sustainable procurement system, advocate a sustainable mobility concept and actively promote health. In this respect, a sustainable food offer and a green campus design, such as a campus garden, which serves as the basis for student health and recreation, are also desirable.

Measures:

• The BuFaK WiWi is in favour of the long-term introduction of a sustainability and environmental management system at all German universities (ISO 14001 or EMAS). This measure serves, among other things, to increase process efficiency and the general conservation of resources.
• Furthermore, as part of a sustainable mobility concept, the use of public transport or the provision of campus bicycles should be favoured.
• Innovative food rescue concepts, such as food saving, should be implemented to avoid food waste.
• At the same time, the greatest possible divestment of fixed assets from existing, unethical facilities is desirable[2].

Teaching

• Didactically, students should be able to acquire more expertise instead of just specialised knowledge by promoting critical thinking, theoretical and methodological diversity as well as design and action skills for solving future, challenging and complex problems in university teaching. We therefore call for the introduction of education for sustainable development into university teaching. Incentives for high-quality teaching must be provided.

Measures:

• In the interests of sustainable teaching, we, the BuFaK WiWi, are calling for examination formats that test more applied knowledge and the ability to reflect rather than simply reproducing knowledge.
• In addition, an appropriately high level of interdisciplinarity is a desirable component of the curriculum.
• Furthermore, creative activities for the realisation of the diversity of theories and methods, such as online platforms for the collection of lecture concepts, summer schools or project workshops, should be supported.

Source:

• [1] Iglesias, E. et al. 1987: Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, p.4
• [2] https://gofossilfree.org/de/was-ist-divestment/

AMENDMENT 1

Amendment

AMENDMENT 2

Amendment

ÄA 3

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council) presents PosiPa
• Patrick (LMU Munich) presents ÄA2
• Julia (Uni Duisburg) is against a cancellation as this reporting system is very important to track and ensure sustainable work
• Ken (Council) agrees with Julia. Reports create transparency and do not promote green-washing
• Laura (University of Hohenheim) agrees with the previous speakers
• Lisa (LMU Munich) we should get on with it, sustainability reports are currently being written
• Tobi L. (University of Hohenheim) is of the opinion that it is not up to us how quickly or to what extent universities implement the requirements.
• Robert (LMU Munich) presents ÄA1
• Robert(Cottbus Senftenberg) presents ÄA3
• Anni Jasmin (Lübeck) agrees that there are 2 different aspects of sustainability, suggests deleting one aspect and resubmitting it in the long term
• Fynn (Council) The term sustainability encompasses more than ecological sustainability. That is why the position paper should remain as it is.
• Anni-Jasmin (Uni Lübeck) would like to correct herself and agrees with Fynn.
• Patrik (Council) Go proposal to determine the student bodies present

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 57 No: 2 Abstention: 6.

BuFaK Council

Social responsibility in research at German universities

• The BuFaK WiWi calls on the state governments of all Federal States to leave the civil clause (or "peace clause") in the respective state higher education law or to include it accordingly.
• The civil clause is a voluntary commitment by academic institutions such as universities to conduct research exclusively for civilian purposes. The civil clause is currently enshrined in the higher education laws and state higher education laws of many Federal States. 1] The aim is to increase this number and extend it to the whole of Germany in the long term. The current reason for the preparation of this position paper is the cancellation of the civil clause by the NRW state government in the corresponding Higher Education Act.
• The BuFaK WiWi calls on the state governments to provide universities with the necessary framework conditions to make a contribution to a just, sustainable, peaceful and democratic world and to be able to fulfil their special responsibility for sustainable development both internally and externally. These framework conditions include a legal anchoring of the social responsibility of universities within the framework of the introduction or retention of the civil clause in the state university laws.
• Universities must adopt a position that contributes to the clarification of the causes and profiteers of war as well as misrepresentations. To this end, universities should conduct research into civilian options for conflict resolution. The importance of this can be seen, for example, in the fact that RWTH Aachen University recently cancelled a third-party funded project involving a feasibility study for a factory to produce military vehicles in Turkey[2], explicitly emphasising that it was encouraged in this decision by the peace clause in the NRW Higher Education Act. The deletion of this clause increases the pressure on universities to also work on inhumane projects. In our view, the aim of granting universities more freedom is clearly missed by the deletion of the civil clause.

Sources:

• [1] www.zivilklausel.de/index.php/bestehende-zivilklauseln
• [2] www.rwth-aachen.de/cms/root/Die-RWTH/Aktuell/Pressemitteilungen/
• September-2017/~oktv/Statement-der-RWTH-Aachen-zur-Machbarkei/

AMENDMENT 1

Amendment

ÄA 2

Amendment

ÄA 3

Amendment

AMENDMENT 4

Amendment

ÄA 5

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council) introduces PosiPa
• Tobi B(Council) takes over ÄA1
• Maria (Ansbach) source link not correct
• Jonas (HS Rhein Waal) also delete "recently" in line 22
• Chiara (TU Münster) many Federal States, but only 2 examples, contradicts itself a bit
• Tobi L. (Uni Hohenheim) Topic is solved in the next amendment.
• Anni-Yasmin (Uni Lübeck) suggests: "anchored in the following Federal States" (delete line and among others)
• Alexey (Council ) asks to create another amendment from this
• Alexey (Council) takes over ÄA 3
• Alexey(Rat) ÄA4 is presented
• Alexey (Council) ÄA4 is adopted
• Tobi L. (Uni Hohenheim) only editorial comment
• Patrick (LMU Munich) Opposes the position paper as it would restrict research in various areas

Vote: The proposal was not adopted with Yes: 21 No: 14 Abstention: 25.

BuFaK Council

Ensure long-term financing of student and student services organisations by the federal and state governments

• The BuFaK WiWi calls on the federal and state governments to contribute more to the financing of student services organisations in order to ensure their sufficient funding and existence in the long term.
• Since 1992, state subsidies for the ongoing operation of student services organisations in Germany have fallen steadily (see Figure 1). In 2019, the share of state subsidies, with a total volume of around €159.7 million, amounted to an average of only 8.7% of the total turnover of the student services organisations.[1] This contrasts with the share of funding from student body contributions, which averaged 19.2% in the winter semester 2019/20, which corresponds to a contribution of €74.50 per student.[2] This average student body contribution increased by 2.3% (€1.73) in the winter semester 2018/19 compared to the previous year.[3]
• The BuFaK WiWi is extremely critical of these developments: on the one hand, the absolute amount and the relative increase in the student body contribution is leading to an ever-increasing financial burden for students and, on the other hand, the contribution is becoming increasingly important as a source of funding for student and student services organisations, as public funding is increasingly being cut or not adjusted to price increases.[4] The BuFaK WiWi therefore calls for greater financial participation by the federal or state governments in the financing of student services organisations and at the same time advocates that the financing share of student services organisations should consist of a maximum of 10% of the student body contribution.
• Furthermore, the BuFaK WiWi demands recurring one-off payments from the federal or state governments in order to eliminate the accumulated backlog of renovation work in the housing sector over the past decades. The refurbishment costs must not be passed on to all students through an increase in the student body contribution or through a rent increase on the residents of the halls of residence. Recurring one-off payments can prevent structural losses in the student and student services organisations.
• In 2019, there were only 195,308 dormitory places for a total of 2,897,300 students, which corresponds to a dormitory rate of 6.7%[5] This dormitory rate has even fallen from 7.7% in 2016 to 6.7% in 2019. The BuFaK WiWi is therefore calling for support for the construction of new accommodation in the amount of €40,000 per place from the federal government or the federal states, as already established in Bavaria in the amount of €32,000[6] and affordable, affordable accommodation for students, as well as a limit on monthly rents for student and student services organisations.

Sources:

• Figure 1 (Source: German Studentenwerk (2020): Studentenwerke im Zahlenspiegel 2019/20, Deutsches Studentenwerk, Berlin, p. 27)
• [1] Cf. German Student Services Organisation (2017), p. 2
• [2] Cf. ibid. p. 2
• [3] Cf. ibid.
• [4] Cf. ibid. p. 26.
• [5] Cf. German Student Services Organisation (2017), p. 47 f.
• [6] https://www.freistaat.bayern/dokumente/leistung/024320213283

ÄA1

Amendment proposal

ÄA2

Amendment

ÄA3

Amendment

ÄA 4

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B introduces the PosiPa
• Alexey (Council) presents ÄA3
• Remus (Uni Halle) presents ÄA 2
• Domenika (Uni Wuppertal) does not understand why labour should go there, finds existence more appropriate
• Remus (Uni Halle) points out that it is about the existence and work of the student unions
• Marcel (Uni Trier) are the values/information still up to date or has this deteriorated in recent years
• Nicole (HS Rhein-Waal) has found more up-to-date figures
• Ken (Council) GO proposal for adjournment
• No dissenting speech

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 50 No: 1 Abstention: 3.

BuFaK Council

Importance of the quality reports of system-accredited universities

Background

• Both the ESG and the MRVO stipulate that accreditation reports, including accreditation decisions, must be published. This also explicitly refers to the internal procedures of system-accredited higher education institutions, which must not fall behind programme accreditation in this point of transparency. In its resolution of 17 September 2019, the Accreditation Council developed and made available further information on how system-accredited higher education institutions must publish their so-called quality reports and defines requirements for these quality reports. According to this resolution, from 30 September 2020 at the latest, it will only be possible to enter one's own degree programme in the accreditation database in conjunction with a quality report. The BuFaK WiWi is in favour of these quality reports now being required from system-accredited universities and welcomes the decision of the Accreditation Council of 17 September 2019. As there is a desire on the part of individual universities to change the requirements for quality reports and the added value of these reports in terms of content has been strongly questioned, this paper is intended to represent the student position.

Added value of quality reports

• It is a fundamental issue of transparency and comparability between different universities that system-accredited universities also publish their accreditation reports and decisions in a comprehensible, comprehensive and accessible form. The current situation in which individual system-accredited universities completely withhold their accreditation reports from the public is non-transparent and unacceptable. Currently, accreditation reports of programme-accredited degree programmes are made publicly accessible; these reports deal transparently with deficiencies, potential for improvement and measures. This gives individual system-accredited universities a supposed advantage because they do not publish their own potential for improving degree programmes. However, we believe that prospective students, students, employers and the public have a right to expect that system-accredited universities also fulfil their publication obligations. Minimum criteria for quality reports are crucial to ensure that they are comparable and that there is comparability between internally accredited and programme-accredited degree programmes. In our opinion, this also includes naming the experts in the quality report, making the final accreditation result available for inspection and disclosing any special votes. This does not contradict the heterogeneity of our higher education landscape, but leads to clear, fair and equal rules for all universities. Degrees of freedom within the quality reports can be used as an opportunity to present the degree programme's own measures and follow-ups and thus underline the importance of its own quality development. Quality reports can thus serve as an instrument for making one's own efforts to improve quality visible and show prospective students that there is a process of continuous further development of the degree programme in addition to glossy advertising materials and shows opportunities to get involved themselves. In particular, students who have already gained study experience, for example by having already obtained a Bachelor's degree at another university, are looking for specific information. The quality reports can be used as a basis for various purposes and various addressees. They want to be able to read for themselves how, for example, the studyability, management of studies or compatibility with family responsibilities in a degree programme has been reviewed and evaluated by independent experts. In addition, the quality reports can provide an overview of good practices within the various system-accredited higher education institutions and the diversity of quality assurance systems and can serve as a basis for a systematic analysis of developments in internal procedures (see (ESG 3.4 Thematic analysis Standard: Agencies should regularly publish reports that describe and analyse the general findings of their external quality assurance activities)). Against this background, we expect system-accredited higher education institutions to have more self-confidence in their own processes and a transparent approach to their own potential for improvement and corresponding measures. In our view, it is an opportunity for a positive external image if system-accredited universities publish corresponding quality reports.

Conclusion

• Accreditation decisions must already be documented in a meaningful way within all systems. The documentation contributes to continuous quality assurance and further development. The reports must be published in accordance with the resolution of the Accreditation Council of 17 September 2019, accessible to all stakeholders.
• In summary, the obligation to publish quality reports and the consistent implementation of the minimum criteria already adopted is essential,
  • because quality reports are an indispensable part of legitimising the accreditation decision
  • because transparency is the basis of any good and functioning QM system,
  • because it enables comparability between higher education institutions, degree programmes and QM systems,
  • because there is already a binding legal basis for documentation"

ÄA 1

Amendment

ÄA 2

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Tobi B (Council) introduces PosiPa
• Tobi Lutz(Uni Hohenheim) ÄA1 is probably editorial

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 54 No: 0 Abstention: 3.

BuFaK Council

Effectively promote student mobility

• The BuFaK WiWi is in favour of actively and effectively promoting the mobility of all students. This includes, above all, student-friendly semester public transport passes based on the solidarity model as well as a bicycle-friendly infrastructure and international mobility. Mobility is an important part of the process of learning and experiencing studying as a stage of life and should be made possible for all students in the mobility of their choice. The Federal Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, together with the transport associations, should ensure that this mobility is accessible to students.
• Currently, for example, there are state-wide semester public transport passes in 12 of the Federal States. In ballots on the extension of semester public transport passes, there is always clear approval from students. Schleswig-Holstein, Baden-Württemberg, Saxony-Anhalt and Bavaria are still fighting to introduce one. At some university locations, 95% of students voted in favour of retaining the semester public transport pass last year despite a 30% price increase. This clearly shows how important mobility and the resulting freedom of location is for young adults. It also lowers the inhibition threshold to focus entirely on the subjects on offer when choosing a place to study and to neglect the costs of travelling home.
• Students should see many parts of the country in order to further their cultural and geographical education. In order to make this possible for all students, regardless of the financial means available to them, a nationwide semester public transport pass is essential.
• Furthermore, a semester public transport pass would steer students from travelling by car and plane to travelling by train. This not only benefits the environment, but also creates better capacity utilisation and thus enables a closer network density. The earlier society starts travelling by train, the more likely it is that the benefits will last a lifetime. As a consequence, this means that the long-term effect on the environment and society is incredibly high if this relieves the congestion on the national roads in the long term. The savings and the economic benefit can thus be used directly to support and subsidise the ticket by the federal government and invested sensibly here.
• The prices of regional tickets must be drastically reduced as a result, and German Rail must support the regions according to the region. The prices must be in line with the users of a Bahncard 100, as the frequency of use deviates significantly downwards. The offer of the solidarity ticket must be available nationwide for all student bodies, but each student body must and can decide for or against using it in its entirety. The solidarity contribution is suspended during the stay abroad, as it cannot be guaranteed that it can be financed in the interests of the students and there is no longer any possibility of using the ticket.
• The BuFaK WiWi therefore calls on those responsible to start negotiations on a nationwide semester public transport pass and for the other federal conferences and comparable associations with student interests to endorse this paper.

ÄA 1

Amendment

ÄA 2

Amendment

Regular confirmation

• Moritz (Council) GO Proposal for adjournment
• Moritz (Council) presents global change
• Fynn (Uni Leipzig) why do we stay at 49 euros
• Moritz (Uni Darmstadt) for lack of alternatives
• Tobi L. (Hohenheim) speaks out against 29 as this would more or less invalidate the position paper as a whole
• Leif (Münster) would like to delete the paragraph on shower facilities
• Maria (Ansbach) it is, among other things, about the certification that goes with it and leads to funding

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 47 No: 3 Abstention: 3.

FS WiSo University of Hohenheim

The broadcasting licence fee in its 2013 form is intended to guarantee the financing of public broadcasters. More than 8.4 billion euros (2021) will be collected regardless of the usage behaviour of all citizens who live in their own home [1]. In addition, businesses contribute to the total contribution revenue depending on their size. This right to appropriate financing has been clearly clarified under constitutional law at the latest since the judgement of the Federal Constitutional Court in 2021 [2]. However, the criticism of the amount of funds used by public broadcasters and the way they are passed on to all citizens remains. In the view of the BuFaK Wiwi, independent and critical journalism is essential for a healthy democracy. In particular, public service broadcasting can promote independent political opinion-forming and discourse on current political and social issues. In the view of the BuFaK Wiwi, the task of public service broadcasting therefore lies exclusively in the areas of culture, general news, political education and reporting on regional issues. In the view of the BuFaK Wiwi, the financing of pure entertainment programmes is therefore not the task of public service broadcasting. Only then is a solidarity model into which all citizens pay justified. In addition, the BuFaK Wiwi rejects a standardised contribution for all citizens. For students in particular, the current practice represents a high monthly burden that is not appropriate for the services offered, especially for young people. The BuFaK Wiwi therefore calls for a general waiver of the contribution for all enrolled students and, in addition, an income-based licence fee for all employed persons. This practice is in line with the exemption from contributions for other financially disadvantaged groups such as Bafög recipients or Hartz-4 beneficiaries. Exempting all students would reduce the basic financial burden on this important social group and eliminate existing injustices, such as the exemption of shared flats in which at least one person is entitled to BAFöG benefits. Source: [1]: Annual Report 2021 (rundfunkbeitrag.de) [2]: Federal Constitutional Court - Press - Successful constitutional complaints regarding the First Interstate Media Amendment Treaty

ÄA 1

Amendment

ÄA 2

Amendment

ÄA 3

Amendment

  From line 20 to 21: 

ÄA 4

Amendment

ÄA 5

Amendment

AMENDMENT 6

Amendment

Verbal

• Tobi L(Uni Hohenheim) presents the position paper
• Leif (Uni Münster) asks why the ÖRR should not finance entertainment programmes?
• Tobi L (Uni Hohenheim) Core task of broadcasting is journalism and not entertainment
• Leif (University of Münster) does not agree that entertainment programmes should be excluded. The programme needs to be revised
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) Series can be produced by private institutions and do not have to be paid for with public funds
• Tobi B. (Council) This really means pure entertainment and not a mixed programme of entertainment and information
• (University of Bremen): Agrees with Tobi. Under certain circumstances, the amount of funding for entertainment programmes could also be adjusted.
• Anni Jasmin (Lübeck) notes that the main issue is which parts of the ÖRR's remit are actually carried out.
• Tobi L. (University of Hohenheim) especially about radio on Youtube is entertaining information, we mean series like Traumschiff and co.
• Jonas (HS Rhein Waal) Broadcasting is not just for our age group. For older people, for example, the Traumschiff counts as culture
• Robert (LMU) Why is it necessary for us to discuss the content of the ÖRR, it is beyond our competence and our task
• Maurice (Tu Dresden) It is short-sighted to advocate the removal of certain programmes from the schedule. We should concentrate on the demand for a reduced contribution for students
• Partik (Council) Calls for cancellation because it is about general politics/opinion and therefore not our beer
• Nils (Bremen) differentiates between forms of entertainment
• (LMU) Culture is not our core topic, but certain entertainment formats should not be financed via the contribution
• UZK: Agrees with the proposal to delete the second paragraph.
• Patrik (Council) submits a proposal to adjourn the meeting
• Jules (Uni Dresden) dissenting as the wording is not decisive on this point
• Ken (Council): Supports Julius' counterspeech.
• Patrik (Council) GO proposal withdrawn
• Ken (Council): Makes a GO proposal to close the list of speakers.
• Anni-Yasmin (Uni Lübeck) asks for discussion of content produced with public funds
• Tobi L. (Uni Hohenheim) Emphasises once again that the core of the position paper is not the entertainment topic, but the contribution and its compilation.
• Timm (University of Stuttgart) points out once again that it is not about the explicit entertainment content, but about entertainment as a component of the ÖRR
• Domenik (TU Berlin) criticises the last paragraph, which deals with the exemption of BaföG recipients. If people live at home and receive BAföG, is the whole family exempt?
• Domenic (Paderborn) It's about exempting students and some programmes are less/not relevant for them. That is why the point should remain in the position paper.
• James (Dresden): Suggests splitting the position paper in two.
• Remus (University of Halle) disagrees with Julius that the wording in the section is not irrelevant.
• Dominik (LMU Munich) responds to his speech
• Ken (Council) GO Proposal for adjournment
• (Bielefeld) Counter-speech asks for an opinion poll
• GO proposal accepted
• Timm (Stuttgart) presents ÄA 4
• Tobi L.(Uni Hohenheim) In the Barcamp, the focus was more on financing
• Robert (LMU Munich) Culture was probably deleted
• Tobi L.(Hohenheim) No
• Rudi (Bielefeld) presents ÄA1
• Tobi L. (Hohenheim) notes that exactly what was deliberately cancelled shortly before would be included
• (LMU) presents ÄA3 has spoken to the Studierendenwerk, hence this ÄA
• Tobi (University of Hohenheim) We threw out the sentence with our ÄA because it raised too many questions. Would ÄA3 possibly like to be withdrawn so that the sentence remains out?
• Leif (Münster) Why did unemployment benefit become Hartz 4?
• Sebastion (Bayreuth) asks for a more detailed presentation of the amendment
• (LMU) withdraws ÄA 3
• Daniel TU Dortmund presents ÄA2
• Tobi L. (Hohenheim) Reasons are missing, as the sentence is no longer in the position paper
• Daniel TU Dortmund withdraws ÄA2
• Leif(Münster): Introduces ÄA5
• Thiemo (University of Göttingen) proposes to treat ÄAe as if there are no far-reaching ones
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) which person does it refer to
• Tim (Uni Stuttgart) in shared flats where only one person receives BAföG, the whole flat should be exempt
• Maurice (Dresden) wrong
• Sebastian (Bayreut) it is not permitted for an entire flat to be exempt if only one resident receives BAföG
• Jacob (University of Göttingen): A flat that is separated by a door pays a contribution
• Toni (Halle)In partnerships this is possible
• Marisa Uni Göttingen GO proposal for postponement
• Tobi L. (Hohenheim) Discussion does not relate to the core of the item, therefore postponement does not make sense
• GO proposal is withdrawn
• Domenic (TU Berlin): presents ÄA6
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) What injustice is involved?
• Tobi L (Hohenheim) Injustice refers to the WG situation
• Patrick (Council) GO proposal to close the list of speakers
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) It is about financial relief and a quickly realisable solution for students. This should be taken into account when voting. We are getting bogged down in trivialities
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) nevertheless, it is about the entire text

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 45 No: 2 Abstention: 5.

FS WiSo University of Hohenheim

The consequences of the corona pandemic and the Russian war of aggression on Ukraine and the resulting energy crisis with sharply rising prices are placing an increasing financial burden on all citizens. The current developments are placing an enormous financial burden on students in particular, who are usually in a weaker financial position than other social groups anyway. To relieve the burden on students, the federal government passed the heating cost subsidy I (relief package I) in June 2022 in the amount of a one-off lump sum of €230. All BAföG-funded students who no longer live in their parents' home are eligible for this, as are people who receive BAföG or housing benefit. The payment for this was made in September 2022. Another relief measure from which students benefit in part is the energy allowance paid out in September 2022. All students in employment received a one-off flat-rate energy allowance of €300. The German government will continue to support students with further relief measures in the future. The second heating cost subsidy (Relief Package III) amounting to a one-off lump sum of €345 was approved in October 2022. Those who have already fallen under the conditions of the first heating cost subsidy are once again eligible. The federal government had planned to pay out the subsidy this year. According to media reports, payment can be expected in January 2023 or February 2023 at the earliest. In the third relief package, all students will also be treated equally for the first time and are to receive a one-off payment of €200. According to the federal government, this payment will be made quickly and unbureaucratically. However, it is still unclear when and how this lump sum will be paid out. A quick payout should therefore be viewed critically. The measures finalised so far only support people who receive BAFöG or similar benefits from the federal government. In the view of the BuFaK Wiwi, however, supporting this small group of students compared to the student body as a whole is not sufficient to prevent precarious financial situations among students and the resulting drop-outs. On the one hand, only around 11% of students in Germany receive BAFöG benefits, but this does not mean that students who do not receive BAFöG are not in need. On the other hand, parents who have not yet fallen below the BAFöG income threshold are affected by rising inflation and, in the long term, by short-time working, redundancies and other consequences of the emerging economic crisis. This will inevitably lead to parents' financial support coming under pressure. Furthermore, it is to be feared that the increase in energy and commodity prices could lead to an increase in rents, especially in student residences that were previously inexpensive, as well as cafeteria meals and semester fees in general. As around 80% of students visit their student union's canteen at least three times a week, cost increases in these areas can quickly lead to considerable additional financial burdens [1]. According to the Secretary General of the DSW, Matthias Anbuhl, cafeteria prices have already been increased by 10-20% at many locations [2]. In order to prevent further price increases, the resulting risk of financially induced drop-outs and the development of further psycho-social problems among students, the federal government must urgently take effective measures that apply to all students. The BuFaK WiWi therefore demands: Gender equality in financial relief for all financially weaker groups. The immediate structural reform of the BAFöG in accordance with the 3-pillar model proposed by the BuFaK WiWi in order to grant significantly more students sustainable access to financial support from the federal government - The federal government's involvement in the financing of student and student services organisations, e.g. through subsidies for canteen meals, facilitating the purchase of building plots, the new construction and energy-efficient renovation of student residences in order to keep the prices of and contributions to student and student services organisations constant. A federal funding programme for all universities to compensate for the additional energy costs incurred by universities in order to prevent an increase in semester fees. The prompt establishment of a nationwide register of all students in order to be able to easily process direct payments and the payment of the agreed €200 for all students in 2022. The payment of heating cost allowances 1 and 2 for all students who do not live in their parents' home. Sources: [1] Canteen & Co.

[2] Winter semester starts - canteen food more expensive at many universities (rnd.de)

ÄA 1

Amendment

ÄA 2

Amendment

AMENDMENT 3

Amendment

ÄA 4

Amendment

Verbally

• Tobi Burg presents the position paper
• Rudi (Bielefeld) presents the ÄA1
• Tobi L (University of Hohenheim) thinks ÄA1 is good. In the Barcamp, however, it turned out that "war on European soil" is really critical
• Jonas (Rhein Waal) last sentence should also be revised grammatically
• ÄA1 will be withdrawn and resubmitted
• Ruffi (Bielefeld) presents ÄA2
• Tobi L (Uni Hohenheim) line 40 wording is too soft instead of "could" rather "this"
• Amendment ÄA2 is accepted by the proposer
• Amendment ÄA3 is accepted by the proposer
• Amendment ÄA4 is accepted by the proposer

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 59 No: 1 Abstention: 1.

Lena Härtl, Sebastian Schröter, Hannes Koch (student body RW - Uni Bayreuth)

• Currently, there is hardly any pseudonymisation of exams at German universities and colleges.

pseudonymisation of written exams takes place.

• We consider a general pseudonymisation (for the legal definition see: § 3

Paragraph 6a BSDG old version[1]; Art. 4 No. 5 GDPR[2]) is necessary and realisable. In our view, complete anonymisation is not necessary, nor is it possible or legal. In our view, pseudonymisation is therefore in favour:

• Protection of examinees' personal data

The University of Bayreuth, for example, is a small, informal campus and students and student representatives within our School engage in lively personal dialogue between teachers and students. Many other small universities in Germany are similar. Especially in smaller degree programmes, it can often be the case that students and lecturers know each other personally by name. Even in large degree programmes, this is not impossible, for example when members of the mid-level faculty and students in higher semesters know each other privately (or through work as a student assistant at a chair). We know that today's fellow students are tomorrow's proofreaders. This can be a pressure situation for students. For example, if the examination is corrected by a known person with potentially high (or even low) expectations.

• Protection against conscious or unconscious discrimination

A person's name could allow supposed conclusions to be drawn about their origin, gender identity, social status or even age. Studies suggest that, among other things, people with a history of immigration or women are given lower marks in examinations.[3] Ultimately, pseudonymisation has advantages for both students and lecturers. Chairs would not be exposed to accusations of individual discrimination and students could be sure that their assessment is independent of social and personal prejudices.

• Avoidance of disputes under examination law

The accusation of bias in examination appeals can generally be ruled out by pseudonymisation. This also protects chairs and correctors from alleged favouritism or discrimination against students, as the identity of the examinee is unknown. For example, it is not only standard practice to pseudonymise the examination papers for the first state examination in law, but an examination is considered failed if a candidate makes comments that allow conclusions to be drawn about their person (Annex 1 No. 3 First State Examination in Law - Notes on the Examination Procedure). Pseudonymisation is already common practice at other universities (e.g. Passau and Bonn). In our view, it is sufficient if students only have to state their student ID number and degree programme for written exams. If you want to avoid system errors in individual cases (transposed numbers etc. pp.), a combination of student ID number and seat number can secure this. Sources: [1]Pseudonymisation is the replacement of the name and other identification features with an identifier for the purpose of excluding or significantly complicating the identification of the person concerned. [2]"Pseudonymisation" means the processing of personal data in such a manner that the personal data can no longer be attributed to a specific data subject without the use of additional information, provided that such additional information is kept separately and is subject to technical and organisational measures to ensure that the personal data are not attributed to an identified or identifiable natural person. [3]Towfig, Emanuel V. / Traxler, Christian / Glöckner, Andreas, Geschlechts- und Herkunftseffekte bei der Benotung juristischer Staatsprüfungen, ZDRW 2018, 115 ff.; Towfig, Emanuel V. / Traxler, Christian / Glöckner, Andreas, Zur Benotung in der Examensvorbereitung und im ersten Examen, ZDRW 2014, 8 ff.

ÄA 1

Amendment proposal

AMENDMENT 2

Amendment

ÄA3

Amendment

see text of motion

• Lena (Uni Bayreuth) presents position paper
• Efin (Bielefeld) Information on student ID number, number of semesters, number of attempts critical due to data protection
• Sebastian (Freiwald) irrelevant in terms of data protection law
• Thiemo (Göttingen) Addition of examples, e.g. from Göttingen
• Jonas (Rhein Waal) A similar sentence is already included. You could add other universities at this point to shorten the whole thing.
• Tobi L.(University of Hohenheim) introduces ÄA1
• Sebastian (Freiwald) asks for a more explicit explanation of the ÄA
• Tobi L. (Uni Hohenheim) delete two sentences, therefore not editorial. and we consider the wording to be very critical
• (Münster) Doesn't want this out of there as it still comes up in practice
• Timo (RTWH Leipzig) agrees with the ÄA, we impute this to the professors
• Domenic (LMU Munich) is in favour of the source
• Thiemo (University of Göttingen) presents ÄA3
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) applicant takes over ÄA3
• Julia (Duisburg) presents ÄA2
• Sebastian (Bayreuth) Applicant takes over ÄA2

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 44 No: 0 Abstention: 5.

BuFaK Council

The Federal Conference of Student and Faculty Representatives dissolves the Networking Working Group.

In accordance with our university charters under paragraph 8, sections 4 & 5, we are discussing the dissolution of the Networking Working Group. This seems to have been inactive for a longer period of time and the task of long-term networking can be guaranteed by a supporting membership in the BuFaK WiWi Förderverein.

No discussion.

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: XX No: XX Abstention: 5.

Lisa Weimer (University of Göttingen)

Dear BuFaKis, let me briefly introduce myself: I am currently studying Business Education in Göttingen and am 23 years young. I have been active in the WiWi Gö student body since 2017. I have already gained a lot of experience in the student body and was active in the FSR for 3 years (one year each as deputy spokesperson, spokesperson and networking officer). Most recently, I was able to organise the Summer BuFaK 22 in Göttingen as part of the Head Orga. I have been on the BuFaK Council since the Summer BuFaK in Hohenheim 21. I was a co-opted member for one year and since Göttingen I have been elected to the council as an admin. Through my longer involvement, I was able to familiarise myself with the structures of the Council and gain a good overview of the tasks of the spokesperson. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask:) I would be delighted to receive your votes!

Election as spokesperson

• Lisa introduces herself

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 53 No: 1 Abstention: 1.

Moritz Richter (Darmstadt)

Dear Bufakis, my name is Moritz and I would like to apply for the open admin position in the council. I am 23 years old and am now in my second master's semester studying industrial engineering at TU Darmstadt. I have been active in the student body in Darmstadt since 2018 and have gained a lot of experience during this time. I have been a co-opted member of the council since the beginning of this year. During this time, I have gained a good overview of the tasks and would now like to become even more actively involved in the council's work. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Otherwise, I would be delighted to receive your votes :)

Election as admin in the BuFaK Council

• Moritz introduces himself
• Lisa (Alumni) Do you still have time to programme our app?

Moritz: That's not a thing

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: XX No: XX Abstention: XX (not).

Stina Mitsche (University of Oldenburg)

Hello dear BuFaK-family, my name is Stina, I am 25 years old, I am in the 1st semester of my Master's degree in Economics and Law and have been a co-opted member of the Council for a year. I am mainly involved in the policy team. Our aim is to represent our positions to the outside world and assert our student interests. It is also very important to me that everyone feels comfortable and safe at the conferences, which is why I am very concerned with this topic. The work in the council and the experience you gain through this is a real enrichment for me and therefore I would like to be elected as a member. Ps. I hope you all had a great conference and are at least as devastated as we were. Greetings Stina

Election as an additional member of the BuFaK Council

• Stina introduces herself
• Daniel (TU Dortmund) What is your favourite dinosaur
• Stina: T-Rex

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 53 No: 0 Abstention: 0.

Konstantin Schultewolter

• Good afternoon,
• I was involved in accreditation at the University of Cologne and completed the accreditation seminar. I would therefore like to be delegated to the pool.
• Mfg
• Age:
• 23
• Student body / FSR:
• University of Cologne student body Wiso
• Place of study:
• Cologne

Oral

No questions

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 48 No: 2 Abstention: 1.

Pascal von der Linde

• Hello everyone,
• I am interested in accreditation as my own university is currently in the process of system accreditation. After attending the accreditation workshops at the last BuFaK and completing the training seminar in the summer, I would now like to be elected to the student pool.
• Best regards
• Pascal
• Age:
• 23
• Student body / FSR:
• Student body WiSo
• Place of study:
• University of Cologne

Oral

• Pascal introduces himself

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 50 No: 0 Abstention: 2.

Jendrik Ehlers

• Hi,
• I'm Jendrik and I've been the 1st faculty councillor at the WiSo in Cologne for about a year.
• Since the beginning of my term of office, the current SysAkk of the UoC has been a big topic, so I attended the seminar on programme accreditation in July to gain experience there next year.
• Ultimately, the aim is to support other universities with system accreditation as a student assessor.
• Age:
• 20
• Student body / FSR:
• Student body WiSo University of Cologne
• Study location:
• Cologne

Oral

No questions

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 50 No: 1 Abstention: 2.

Fynn Hug (FSR WiWi Uni Leipzig)

I attended the system accreditation seminar and would like to be sent to the system accreditation pool in order to carry out a system accreditation. I would like to gain more experience so that I can bring this to the BuFaK and competently support students.

Verbally

• Fynn introduces himself

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 51 No: 0 Abstention: 0.

Tobias Jansen (WiSo student body)

Hello dear Bufak Council, I would like to be delegated to the student accreditation pool for the following reason. After taking part in a programme accreditation as a student reviewer in May, I would like to do it again. For scheduling and personal reasons, however, I have not yet been able to take part in an official accreditation seminar, but I plan to do so soon. Best regards Tobias

Oral

• Tobias introduces himself.

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 51 No: 0 Abstention: 2.

Juliane Patry (currently none)

Dear Plenum of the BuFaK Wiwi, my name is Juliane Patry and I would like to ask you to appoint me as a pool-bearing organisation in the student programme and system accreditation pool. I started my studies in Administrative Sciences from 2011-2015 and through my student council work I was also a participant in the Federal Conference of Student and Faculty Representatives (at that time still WiSO) several times. I was also able to participate in the BuFak Council and support many exciting university policy changes. I have already assessed around 15 programme accreditation procedures. When I decided to continue my studies at the IU this year (3 months after the birth of my first son), I contacted the pool to ask whether there was a need and under what conditions I could re-enter the programme. As a result (as agreed), I have now attended a programme accreditation seminar from 28-30.10.2022 as a refresher and last weekend (12-13.11.2022) a system accreditation seminar. For these reasons, I would like to ask the BuFak plenary session in Oldenburg to re-send me to the pool for completeness and proper re-admission. Thank you - if you have any questions, please contact me at my usual contact details. Have a wonderful BuFaK! Best regards, Juliane Patry

Oral

• Fynn introduces Juliane.
• Elisa (Alumni) Juliane has been on the Council for a year, also in the area of accreditation and I can only recommend her.

Vote: The proposal was approved with Yes: 53 No: 0 Abstention: 1.

Susann Nicolai (LAG Hamburg)

Hello dear plenum of the BuFaK Wiwi, my name is Susann Nicolai, I am a student in the 3rd semester of business law at the HFH (Hamburger-Fern-Hochschule). I completed my Bachelor's degree at the University of Wismar. Before I started my studies, I completed an apprenticeship as a social insurance clerk and further education as a specialist in social and health care. I am also a certified trainer. It took a while before I was able to pursue my passion for studying, as I embarked on a traditional academic appointment in public administration before starting my studies. I am still employed by a statutory health insurance company alongside my studies and also work as a research assistant at Saarbrücken University in the field of commercial criminal law. In my previous job as a student assistant, I also had the opportunity to get a taste of university politics and was able to gain some experience. In my private life, I am married, the mother of 2 little girls and also take care of relatives within the family. On the last weekend in October, I attended a great seminar organised by the student accreditation pool for the implementation of programme accreditation and immediately "caught fire" for this topic. I would very much like to get involved in improving study programmes and contribute the experience I have gained so far to accreditation procedures. To this end, I would like to be seconded to the student pool. If you have any questions, please contact me at 01743777909 Best regards, Susann Nicolai

See application text

• Fynn introduces Susanne.

Vote: The proposal was adopted with Yes: 50 No: 0 Abstention: 2.