TREY gave a statement about Tampere University’s facilities Action Plan on the 3rd of December. The Student Union got a request to give our opinion about the Action Plan among other interest groups. TREY’s statement has been approved in the meeting of the Executive Board on the 2nd of December.
In our statement we brought up things that are important to students, in four different matters. These matters weresStudy and teaching facilities, independent studies and quiet work, computer rooms and association rooms. Among these matters, in the statement we also gave our opinion on the four different choices of action regarding the facility reductions.
- Requirements on study and teaching spaces are going to change because of progression. The campuses need to answer to these requirements in the future.
- Independent and diverse studying requires different kinds of facilities and students need quiet spaces to study.
- The amount of computer rooms are going to be reduced so it is important that the university offers spaces where students can use the required equipment and programmes to advance their studies.
- The role that association rooms have in the student community is remarkable. We see that student associations and the facilities that their work requires play a huge role to help students attach to the community and studies.
In the statement we gave our opinion about the four choices of the Action Plan. We saw weaknesses in every choice. The unevenness of the space reductions between campuses, the abandonment of the existing buildings that have association rooms, and the impossibility of assessing long-term impacts are the reasons why we can’t say which choice is the best. We considered the option presented by the board to be the least bad, but its future effects are difficult to predict with the given information.
In general, we find it challenging to predict what kind of an impact these decisions have on the next face. We wish that the decision-making of the next face is dealt with on its own next spring and current decisions don’t block or set too restrictive a direction for the second face.
“We the students at TREY hope that the preparation of the next phase will take better account of the involvement of the university community and give it the time it needs to process. The current tight timetable and low involvement will only lead to unnecessary confrontation instead of us working together as a community”, says Lassi Halminen, TREY’s board member responsible for the sector of campus development.
Picture: Jonne Renvall, Tampere University