Dear readers,

To mark the end of the 25th-anniversary celebrations during the summer semester, the University of Oldenburg received a birthday present that was as significant as it was unexpected: its strong performance in the ranking by the Centre for Higher Education Development (CHE), published by START and STERN for the subjects of Computing Science, mathematics, physics, chemistry and economics. This study is not just one of many that have been entertaining a wide audience for the past ten years and rarely provide any real insight into the quality of higher education institutions. Rather, the CHE’s detailed questionnaire, developed in the mid-1990s by the German Rectors’ Conference (HRK), provides a highly nuanced view of the performance of individual subjects. It comes as no surprise that the USA once again serves as a model in this regard. There, a university’s performance in the rankings has already become a matter of survival. Poor grades mean significantly less funding and far fewer students.

Oldenburg’s results in the CHE ranking are impressive. Not only is the university rated highly by its students (two places in the top group, three in the middle group), but it also performs well in the research category – and very well indeed when compared with other universities in Lower Saxony.

However, it is an exaggeration for a STERN feature on the University of Oldenburg to speak of an “idyllic world in Lower Saxony”. The university does not excel in every area – for example, it would be good if degree programmes were shorter and if, in one or two subjects, contact between lecturers and students was improved.

In fact, there is plenty to do in the face of ever-intensifying competition, in which some university presidents across Lower Saxony have already abandoned their genteel reserve. In Oldenburg, a different approach is being taken to boost the university’s performance. During the summer semester, the University Senate took a groundbreaking decision which will, in future, make the allocation of operational funding to the faculties dependent on their performance. If a department has a large number of graduates and doctoral students, and if it secures a particularly high level of third-party funding and produces a significant number of publications, its share of the university’s budget will also increase.

This was a major step forward in Lower Saxony. Further steps will follow.

Yours,

Gerhard Harms