NCU News
Campus life
Horizontal cooperation and groundwork
Horizontal cooperation should be our goal. We are a university with a wide spectrum of disciplines, with the largest number of evaluated disciplines in Poland - and this is a resource we should use,' says the Vice-Rector for Science, dr habil. Adam Kola, NCU Prof.
Żaneta Kopczyńska: The common perception of Polish science is not the best. Is it right or is it just plain complaining?
Dr habil. Adam Kola, NCU Prof. and Vice-Rector for Science: – The answer is neither easy nor clear-cut. Indeed, for years we have been saying that Polish science is in decline, that its condition is bad. However, as a born optimist, I can see the positives - in the perspective of recent years, the change for the better is visible, for example in the level of international engagement, applications for European projects, publications in prestigious journals and our position in the world rankings. So, looking at the indicators, I would not be so critical in my assessment.
What is worrying, on the other hand, is the issue of spending on the science and higher education sector in Poland, which barely exceeds 1 per cent of GDP. This is significantly less than even 3-4 years ago, and even then, we already complained that the funding of Polish science was too low. We are a country with one of the lowest levels of science funding in Europe, among countries that are leaders in development, we perform very poorly. Financially, there would be a noticeable change if we reached a rate of 3 percent of GDP.
I wish we all would start to think of science not as an expense in Poland, but as a means of development, as an investment, both in the short and long term.
To notice the change for the better in recent years, one has to be inside this world. Daily media coverage tends to be dominated by a narrative which presents a darker picture of Polish science. This affects the way we think both about the level of Polish science and about researchers themselves.
- The media often focus on crises, difficult situations, emergency situations. We remember that when the Covid-19 pandemic broke out, the position of science rose and the social impact assessment of researchers became positive, scientists became authorities almost overnight - we were all waiting for vaccines, for help in the dramatic fight for people's lives and health. When this finally happened, conditions changed - anti-vaccine and conspiracy narratives began to dominate, which falsified the image of science. The work of researchers from all over the world who joined forces to fight the coronavirus was depreciated - these negative narratives were allowed to prevail, without any reflection on their social, medical or political implications.
At the moment paper mills, i.e., large-scale, publicly funded productions of articles are the dominant theme in the Polish science sector. This is clearly an unacceptable situation and should be condemned, which the academic community is actually doing now. The media are quick to pick up on such reprehensible practices, which are not necessarily only the result of individual decisions by those publishing, but also show the pathologies of the system. The effect of this is far-reaching - by focusing on pathologies, we cease to see the bigger picture of positive changes, development and everyday educational and research work in Poland.
Talking to researchers, I have heard more than once that they would just like to work in peace, that they do not need revolutions, big changes, adapting to the ideas of successive ministers, but they need stability.
- The level of uncertainty in which Polish researchers operate is definitely another matter of concern. Governments and coalition parties, ministers change, and with them - the concepts of functioning of the science and higher education sector, that translate into more and more new regulations. There is no institutional, long-term continuity to ensure stability for scientists and steady growth and development for the state. Countries that have exempted the science and higher education sector from casual political turmoil and gamesmanship, and have placed their bets on modern higher education and innovative research and development, treating it as an investment that is certain to pay off - have ensured their long-term development.
The next Excellence Initiative – Research University (IDUB) programme call may provide us with additional funds - the application is being prepared. Six years after the NCU was awarded the status of a research university, it is probably safe to summarise what has been successful and what needs to be improved, and to indicate what we will focus on in our efforts to obtain the 'new' IDUB programme.
- Several important things have been achieved. We have definitely internationalised research, and we have also improved the publication situation in the best journals and publishers in the world. The development of some research groups within the University is also evident - whether within the Centres of Excellence or emerging research fields and teams. The student and doctoral student support sections have also gone well, although the development of young science remains an area that still lies ahead of us.
There are also a few areas where there is still room for improvement. What has failed above all is horizontal cooperation - within our university between different disciplines.
Perhaps this is a result of the changes resulting from Jarosław Gowin's reform, which introduced a very strict disciplinary division, affecting the organisation of universities and, for example, academic promotions. As a result, at the NCU, for example, disciplines are strictly assigned to faculties, which in many cases complicates matters. Today we can already see how important internal horizontal cooperation is for our University. We are a university with the widest range of evaluated disciplines, and this is our resource that we should use. In preparing the new Excellence Initiative – Research University proposal, I would like to strongly strengthen this aspect.
We intend to identify four key areas of research excellence. This has been a subject of consultation with the NCU community, we already have the first proposals, ideas for solutions, and we are listening to voices about what we should develop. We want to identify such areas that will be open to researchers and research groups within the priority areas. The idea is that the new IDUB should be open to new areas and research topics, and not operate according to a rigid assignment of specific people at the admission to a centre of excellence, as has been the case so far. It is those who are researching, developing and want to develop further who are to be profited. We want the areas to be selected thematically rather than disciplinarily. This means that people from very different disciplines will be able to apply to the same area.
The evaluation of the current IDUB structure by foreign experts clearly indicated that - on the one hand - we would need to embed our IDUB more firmly into the structure of the University, and on the other hand, make it more inclusive, open to university staff. We don't want a system of isolated, closed silos - the new areas are meant to cut across the University, making internal collaboration stronger and, hopefully, more effective. This was also a conclusion directly pointed out by the experts in the external evaluation. In doing so, it is important to develop interdisciplinary research at the NCU. This does not exclude what has already been successful: international cooperation (and we are adding national cooperation as an important component), international publications and mobility.
In the new Excellence Initiative – Research University programme, do you also intend to place a bet on the young?
- Yes indeed, a strong component is to be the scientific development of students, doctoral students and young employees - this is the second pillar of our new research university.
We can see that we are an attractive university that is able to attract staff from outside - from other national centres, but also from abroad. Thanks to the IDUB, we are collaborating and employing researchers from all over the world: both from the United States, Western Europe and Asia. We have a better and more modern infrastructure and tradition of research, strong researchers and know-how. This applies to all disciplines and research areas involved in the IDUB. You can see noticeable benefits from the IDUB in the humanities and social sciences - we have strong cognitive science, psychology, archaeology going into the natural sciences, linguists in language evolution and economists in new technologies. These are teams in the humanities and social sciences that have opened themselves up to experimental, multidisciplinary research, set up labs, have been working in teams. What we will need to develop is a kind of balance on the side of traditional humanities research (including the individual, publishing monographs as the main mode of scholarly communication) and the basic, theoretical sciences. We must not lose what makes us a wide-format university.
We want to develop all these areas further, and of course we can see all sorts of barriers, such as financial issues or working styles, but in principle - young people want to develop their scientific careers with us, and we are trying to make it easier for them.
As far as students and their development is concerned, this is also important from the point of view of faculty accreditation by the Polish Accreditation Committee. We run majors with a general academic profile, for which the inclusion and involvement of students in scientific research is mandatory. We are therefore keen to ensure that students have the opportunity to be part of research groups led by our scientists, and that this is attractive, interesting, developmental and provides employment prospects for young people also outside the academic world.
Speaking of young people, how do you assess the activities of our doctoral schools? Does such a division and the principles by which they operate work well?
- We are watching them very closely, and together with the doctoral community we are trying to solve the problems that are reported to us. These are not problems that affect the level of research conducted by doctoral students, but their elimination will certainly improve the functioning of our doctoral schools.
The first test is ahead of us - Academia Scientiarum Thoruniensis (Doctoral School of Exact and Natural Sciences - ed.) will be the first to be evaluated this year. It is among the first group of doctoral schools in Poland to be included in the evaluation process.
With such a wide-ranging university, we have five good doctoral schools - I think the number is optimal. There are universities that have chosen the model of multi-field and multi-disciplinary doctoral schools, which at the NCU would be cumbersome to implement. After all, schools of exact sciences work differently, and schools of the humanities work differently - of course the framework and regulations are the same, but the method of implementation differs, being tailored to the fields and the specifics of the research method.
A larger discussion about doctoral schools and the direction they should take is yet to come. It will be derived from the first evaluation, from which we will try to draw as many conclusions as possible.
Not only the Academia Scientiarum Thoruniensis. We are soon facing an evaluation of disciplines, against which there seems to be quite a lot of criticism and even calls not only to change the rules of evaluation, but even to abandon the process. Is the NCU ready for it?
- This is a very big challenge, probably even bigger than the Excellence Initiative – Research University programme. Indeed, there are voices from the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities (CRUP) and the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools (CRASP) and the universities themselves to hold off on the planned evaluation. The argument is, for example, that the list of scoring journals and their scoring itself is changing during the period under evaluation. It is proposed to accept the evaluations from the previous evaluation, and these are quite satisfactory for the NCU. The decision will be made by the Ministry. Today, the proposal to suspend the evaluation (very costly and time-consuming on a national scale) seems the most rational. The time and money spent on it would be better spent on a very good preparation for the next evaluation; it is important that its rules be known before the period to be evaluated and that they do not change with changing ministers. This would reduce the level of uncertainty in the environment and allow rational planning of the academic career and development strategy of the university.
We have the opportunity to speak about the problems, needs, challenges and opportunities of Polish science, about our experiences, at the European forum. The Nicolaus Copernicus University is a member of the YERUN, the Network of Young European Research Universities. This is also an opportunity to learn from the good practices of other universities.
- This is indeed the case. The YERUN is an alliance of young and, above all, ambitious research universities dedicated to scientific and institutional development. It is not at all easy to get into this group: you have to meet all sorts of criteria, which are sometimes difficult to meet. Belonging to the network offers many opportunities that we, as the NCU, have not exploited so far. We are now starting to take advantage of them. I now have the pleasure of being vice-president of the YERUN board, so I can see at first-hand what the benefits are for the university of being a YERUN affiliated university.
Until now, it has been the case that most European boards have been staffed by old universities with long traditions. YERUN is the first and best platform for the presence of young universities in the European forum. It gives us, as the NCU, increased presence in Europe, representation in Brussels and the opportunity to influence European science policy. We are at a moment of great change in the system of science and higher education across Europe - both in terms of the system (European universities, joint European degrees) and funding for the sector. In January, I attended a meeting at the European Commission with the office of Commissioner Roxana Mînzatu, where we discussed, among other things, the development of higher education, particularly with regard to lifelong education and the principles of the Union of Skills programme. I was the only representative of Central and Eastern Europe there - I emphasise this because I believe that the voice of this part of the Old Continent has not been heard enough so far, and it is important because on many issues it differs somewhat. We have a different perspective and experience, Central European universities have come a different way. The YERUN gives us more noticeable presence in Europe and the opportunity to be heard, which may be further strengthened this half-year by the Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union. There are great challenges ahead. The question remains, are we as universities ready for the changes that are being prepared?
It is also worth recalling that we have been able to create a great platform, Connect by YERUN, which allows researchers from all twenty-plus universities to connect with each other in a simple and friendly way. It enables researchers and teams to be found and, even more importantly, connects them to European grant programmes to which they can apply. There has never been a tool like this before. The fact that it has been implemented on such a large scale is a unique opportunity for us in terms of international development.
When it comes to grants and projects, the NCU reaches out to help our researchers, especially in terms of administration and clearing. Since January, an integrated Department of Research and Projects Support has been established.
- We wanted the Department to bring together the whole sector of research, project management and evaluation - with a clear division between the national and international projects sections. The aim is for us to streamline and increase efficiency in applying for project funding and then in operating and settling projects. Analogous changes are taking place at the Collegium Medicum, where we are tidying up matters related to managing research and supporting scientists. Above all, we have been able to establish a Centre for Clinical Research Support (CCRS), which allows us to manage these particularly important studies, which involve large financial resources but are also risky and require appropriate supervision. The CCRS. allows us to achieve these goals.
The Excellence Initiative – Research University (IDUB) programme also appeared in the structure of the University in this Department for the first time, as part of a larger whole. It is no longer an external unit, but embedded in the structure of the NCU. This was also the requirement of our mid-term evaluation of the Excellence Initiative – Research University (IDUB) programme.
The Department of Research and Projects Support will be a real asset for scientists, as they will receive a profiled service for their ongoing research. We have started this process, further actions are ahead of us - the most important thing is that we handle science in a better and more efficient way and relieve researchers of the burden of project management.
Finally, it is perhaps worth saying a few words about the University's cooperation in the region?
Yes, indeed. During the first few months of our term of office, we were able to establish cooperation with universities and research institutions in the region. Just before the end of 2024, we signed a letter of intent for cooperation between the Nicolaus Copernicus University and Kazimierz Wielki University and the Oncology Centre in Bydgoszcz. This is an important step in the development of personalised medicine, targeted therapies, shortening the path from research to diagnostic and treatment practice. This is what we have been doing for some time within our IDUB ("Excellence Initiative – Research University" programme), and now we are translating it into a broader scale and cooperation in the region. Science today is and must be socially engaged. Alongside education and research, it is the social responsibility of the university - the so-called third mission of the university - that we need to develop.
