In search of FAECTOR's roots, Estimator has sought contact with the founders and early members of the Econometrisch Dispuut. One of them was Mr. De Boer, one of the last students to have completed the ‘quantitative-economic discipline’ before the real study econometrics started at our university. He currently coordinates the Teaching Assistants at the Econometric Institute. He was also a member of one of the first boards of the Econometrisch Dispuut, so he can tell us everything about the first years of our association.
In which board did you have a position and what was your function?
I was part of the third board for one year. The study association was founded in April 1966, but I actually do not know much about this. During this time I was in my candidate phase and the association was actually founded for the ‘doctoral phase’. The board consisted of a treasurer, a secretary and a president. Besides, there was one student assistant, who was also part of the Econometric Institute. He/she was the connection between the students and what happened at the Econometric Institute. The student assistant of the second board asked me if I wanted to become the student assistant in the next board. In January 1969 I became a student assistant and in march 1969 I succeeded Arno Oosterhaven as a connection between the students and the Econometric Institute. In this time there was no structure at all, the association was just an interest group for the econometrics students. Back in those days, the professors had all the power and the (main) goal of the association was to promote the interests of the students. Those were turbulent times.
What is your best memory of this time?
I really enjoyed the plenary sessions, especially when there were big disputes. During this time the question arose: what is an econometrician? (We didn’t have a study econometrics yet.) So during the meetings, it was not clear who could vote, since it was not clear who was a real econometrician. So, some people (who didn’t have anything to do with econometrics) just came to cause trouble. During one of our meetings about ‘what is an econometrician’ we had invited two directors of the institute and we asked them who was a real econometrician? This ended up in a big discussion with the students.
We had to resort to a kind of a boycott
Mr. De Boer
Of everything you have achieved in the board, what are you most proud of?
We have achieved a lot. Among others, we have taken care of more democracy. The powerful people of those times were actually quite afraid of the students. The board of directors of the Econometric Institute accepted many of our propositions. We have negotiated about introducing the compensation regulation, and we thought that it would be really weird if the board accepted it, but they did. However, they did change it after some time. In our time, the law didn’t say anything about those kinds of topics, so we could arrange of lot of things ourselves.
The most important thing we have done was to keep peace, so the study could function well. We were a small, well-organised group. Nowadays this is not as necessary as then, we lived in turbulent times. W.F. Hermans (a Dutch writer) is a good example of the power of a professor during those times. He was a lecturer in Groningen and he was in fight with the university, so he let no student pass the exam. This was, of course, a big problem for the university. As an organisation we tried to avoid those practices. If the staff and the students agreed on some topics, the professors didn’t have that much power anymore.
One year consisted of only 15-20 students
At that time, there were no student evaluations of the instructors. We had to resort to a kind of a boycott. Once there was a lecturer who gave really bad lectures. So we came up with the following strategy: every week only one student went to his lecture and made notes and shared those with everyone. Every other week another student would go to his lecture. In the end the structure of the lectures was changed completely to improve them. We had no real instruments to exert our power, we had to organise playful actions to reach our goals.
What did the association look like in your time?
The group of students was really small, so the econometrics group was quite close and everybody knew each other. In our time (circa 1966), professors came to student drinks as well: this was common practice. One year consisted of only 15-20 students. Then a few years later, the number of students increased.We didn’t have any committees. Until 2001 we were part of EFR. This was on purpose, since if we would be part of the EFR, we would receive a lot more money than if we would be independent.
We didn’t organise real career events. Sometimes we organised some inhouse days, but not that many. Besides, it was not really the goal to get an internship during those days. The main goal was to learn something more about the different companies. Some graduates who were already working at a firm or for the government organised some lectures to explain something about their career and how your life would look like after you are graduated. However, those events didn’t take place on regular times and it was not as structured as it is now.
Besides, excursions were really expensive. The first time I went to a conference in the United States in 1986, I paid 1609 guilders for a retour, which is equivalent to 750 euro, and that was a huge amount of money in that time! I accompanied the students in the study trips to China in 2000 and in 2004 to Brazil. In that time, staff members went on those trips as well. The students got a grant of the Econometric Institute as well. The staff took care of the contacts in the countries we travelled to and some of them were supervisor of an internship assignment. We wanted that the students would behave properly, so that is why the staff members came along. There is actually a funny story about one of those trips. The year before I went to Brazil, the trip was a bit problematic. One of the participating students had brought her boyfriend with her. The problem was that one of the other male students liked her as well and when the staff member returned to Rotterdam before the end of the trip, the boys were in a big fight with each other. In the end, everything turned out fine. After this year, they decided that students couldn’t bring their partner with them anymore.
Nowadays, staff members don’t come along anymore. In theory, I would like it if would still be possible for staff members to come along with students during those trips. However, it’s quite hard for the young staff members to participate in those events these days, since they have to work really hard in the period FAECTOR organises the trips.
In my time we organised some small study trips as well. We went, amongst others, to Leuven, Brussels and Paris. During these trips, professors came along as well. Furthermore we did not organise that many events and we didn’t have any committees. Like I said before, the main goal was to represent the students. However, I did start the organisation of an indoor football tournament. This was a really nice event and almost all the students and staff members participated.
There were no girls, only men
The Erasmus University in 1968 (photo: PublicatieBlogRotterdam)
Are you still involved in FAECTOR?
Well, I still work at the same floor as where the FAECTOR office is located, but I don’t go there anymore. I would like to go to alumni events, but these usually take place during the evening and this doesn’t quite suit many of us. I did go to some old board meetings, but they are all much younger than me.
What do you think of the current structure of FAECTOR? Would you change something?
We lived in turbulent times
I think it’s well organised with all those committees. In my time things were planned quite spontaneously. However, I do find it a pity that the staff members are less involved nowadays. This has also something to do with the number of students. Halfway the nineties, there was a big boom and the number of students accumulated rapidly. Before, the group was quite small and everybody knew each other. Professors and students did mix as well, which is in my opinion a good thing. Mr Wagelmans (the previous director of the Econometric Institute) was for example also really active during the events the associations organised or during the drinks. Besides the relationship between students and professors, the bonds between staff members have also become less tight.
How was the male/female ratio in your time at econometrics?
There were actually no girls, only men. Of course, the number of girls has increased over the years.
Did you do something else besides your study? Were you a member of a student association?
No. I wasn’t part of a student association. In my time there were many excesses during the initiating (Dutch: ‘ontgroening’). I was part of student association for a really short time, but I really hated the initiating so I quitted. I think in my time, only a few econometrics students were part of a student association.
How did people think about econometricians? (Econometrics was still a quite new phenomenon)
The older people didn’t know what econometrics was, but they were interested in it. In the beginning econometricians had proven themselves quite quickly. Some even got a position in the management. However, not many econometricians got a job in business, but started working for the government or for foreign institutes like the IMF.