Credits as a reward for activities beyond studies? Vice-Dean Lízal reflects on his Past term and describes new challenges

RNDr. Pavel Lízal, Ph.D.

He works as a lecturer at the Department of Genetics and Molecular Biology at the Institute of Experimental Biology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, where he is involved in teaching and supervising student work. He is now serving his second term as Vice-Dean for Undergraduate Studies. In addition to his teaching, he has long been active in academic self-governance, having repeatedly served in academic senates and also gained experience as a teaching representative of the institute director.

You’re starting your second term as Vice-Dean for Undergraduate Studies. What does this role involve?

The agenda is quite broad. The main focus is, of course, working with students – especially handling various requests. Most often, these involve granting exceptions to the study and examination regulations or recognizing completed courses.

The role also includes dealing with appeals and making decisions, for example regarding tuition fees. But communication is just as important – both with students and with individual departments.

Each department has a teaching representative, and I’m in regular contact with them. We share information about planned changes, and at the same time I get feedback on what needs to be addressed. We meet within the teaching committee, and I follow up on its suggestions in my further work.

I also coordinate various committees and projects related to teaching, and I communicate with the faculty and university leadership. So it’s a varied agenda, but to a large extent administrative.

What would you like to focus on during your second term?

I’d like to continue with what I started in my previous term. The agenda is so broad that there isn’t much room to take on entirely new things – we mostly respond to changes coming from outside.

In my first term, I introduced new ideas and initiatives. For example, we managed to establish the Dean’s Award for outstanding teachers, which I consider important – we wanted to recognize colleagues at the faculty level, not just at the university level.

Overall, I managed to bring most of my planned initiatives to completion during the first term. Now new challenges will come. My goal is to continue the work we’ve set up and keep up intensive communication with teaching representatives and colleagues in general.

Why do you think intensive communication with departments is so important?

Our departments differ quite a lot. People sometimes say our faculty is like a small university because of how diverse it is. So when I try to find a compromise, departments may have specific needs and want to set things up a bit differently in their programs.

By intensive communication, I mean not only meeting within the teaching committee but also staying in touch with teaching representatives outside of it, whenever they need to address something.

This approach has worked well. It gives me a good overview of where problems are and what needs attention. At the same time, when something works well at one department, it can be shared and applied elsewhere.

Can you think of a specific example of such good practice?

At one department, they introduced credits for study abroad stays or internships. The goal was to prevent situations where students have to extend their studies due to a lack of credits after going abroad.

I think that’s a great example that could work at other departments as well. The shared goal is to keep students in their studies and set conditions so they can progress without unnecessary complications.

Looking back at your first term, what do you consider your biggest achievement?

From the students’ perspective, we introduced a system where they are rewarded with credits for activities beyond their standard coursework.

For example, for the past three years we’ve been co-organizing the November Mendel Days with the Mendel Museum. The program includes lectures by our experts, and students can participate either actively in workshops or passively as attendees.

We try to motivate them to take part because it helps them develop further. They can earn credits for participation, and the feedback has been very positive. I think it works well.

In the future, we’d like to expand this principle to other activities students do for the faculty – for example, outreach events or cooperation with secondary schools. Many students don’t just look for financial rewards; they actually value credits more.

What was the biggest challenge during your previous term?

The first thing that comes to mind is implementing changes resulting from the amendment to the Higher Education Act and updating faculty regulations.

Another major topic was the full transition to the shared university-wide foundation. Under the new rules, students can now only enroll in courses outside their main field of study. It was important to clearly inform both teachers and students.

Another significant experience was setting conditions for admitting Ukrainian students. I’m glad we managed it – there were quite a lot of them at the faculty, and I think it was enriching for both sides.

With regard to the legislative changes, is everything already implemented, or is there still work ahead?

One topic we’re still dealing with is transfers between study programs. Previously, it was only possible to transfer between study plans within the same program, but under the new legislation it should be possible to change programs altogether.

However, our faculty covers very diverse fields – from biology to physics, mathematics, and Earth sciences – and these aren’t always compatible. We didn’t want to prohibit transfers, but we needed to set conditions to prevent rule circumvention and to ensure students don’t harm themselves by transferring.

We dealt with things like differential exams or recognition of admission results. We gained our first experience at the end of the autumn semester, when students could start applying for transfers. It was a kind of “beta phase” where we tested the processes.

We’ll wait for future periods, when interest will likely increase, to see how to refine everything. I think this is mainly an opportunity for students who realize they chose the wrong field. It can help them stay in their studies instead of dropping out.

Before taking on this role, you served as a senator and teaching representative. How do you use that experience now?

Even in my previous term, it helped that I knew the regulations and understood how to prepare them and submit them to the Dean’s Board, which then presents them to the senate. That was definitely a big advantage. At the same time, communicating with senators feels natural to me.

What do you enjoy most about being Vice-Dean?

I enjoy being able to deal with specific student situations while also helping shape rules and regulations that can benefit both students and the faculty.

Of course, I still teach as well – I couldn’t do without that. Compared to the administrative side of the role, teaching is something that keeps things fresh.

What would you like to say to students in closing?

It’s important to address potential problems early. Students can email me, come see me in person by appointment, or contact the study office.

If a situation is addressed early, there are always more ways to handle it and help. And if the problem isn’t directly related to studies but still affects them, there are other contact persons students can turn to.

And of course, I wish all students a great experience studying here and that they take as much as possible from it into their future lives, and remember the faculty and university in a positive way.