What is the Main Issue of the Structural Reform at Tallinn University?

Anu Toots, head of the future unit of society and open governance considers the main issue concerning the structural reform to be defining and implementing the term “interdisciplinary”.

The best example of this term is our future institute of social sciences, she said. “We have the biggest number of merging units. We have many research fields and subfields, which need to collaborate smoothly.”

The question of interdisciplinarity has been discussed repeatedly. Three main viewpoints have emerged:

-          Some current institutes, such as the institute of Political Science and Governance, are already interdisciplinary

-          Interdisciplinarity is something we can achieve only after our students have mastered their own disciplines. A fear here is that interdisciplinarity will not let us be here nor there: there is no real grasp of the terminology nor theories, which would hinder our way to international research fields. Perhaps we should be talking about multidisciplinarity, enriching various disciplines?

-          We should have significantly more academic empathy, cooperation between units and research teams. Natural cooperation has the most potential. This would make Tallinn University stronger and unique among Estonian universities.

So how have these ideas progressed? “We have accepted the fact that a new institute will be established,” says Toots. “Then again, when we try to mark our new academic headings, we seem to want to stick to the old ways. Our current actions would just get a new package. There are some exceptions to the rule, though.”

This is a problem that, according to Toots, can be solved vertically: the leaders of the reform should assess the applications, make suggestions and then decide on what to do. Another way would be to put the academic programmes up for a public vote – it stands to reason that those who have hitherto led the units or programmes are more stuck to traditions and preferences than regular employees, who might be more open to changes in their network.

We have more than 60 members of academic staff and seven offers for new academic headings. Every employee could have the chance to prefer two headings, which to participate in and collaborate with. Every heading should have at least ten people supporting it. Ideas with little or no sympathy should be given up.

Interdisciplinarity nor a cooperative culture are things that happen overnight. Pressuring them onto people would not make the situation better, either. Therefore we can maybe in a few years’ time say: yes, these are our new headings. We cannot rule out the possibility of having even more academic headings – social sciences are quite new in Tallinn University. This also adds dynamics: some headings are at the beginning of development, others are still finding their meaning. It is important to give a chance to everyone, otherwise the idea of reforms can be something people will find disappointment in.