Libor Žídek: May the faculty have motivated students

The faculty celebrated 30 years of its establishment. It has been part of your professional and, in a way of your personal life for about the same time. When and how did it all begin?

I passed the school-leaving exam in 1990. After secondary school, I chose civil engineering, but left after one year of study. Students at the fac find it hard to cope with either maths or technical drawing. The latter was my problem, too, so I decided to study English at the language school for a year. English was clearly the language to learn; I had only studied German and Russian at grammar school.

Then I filed an application to the Faculty of Economics and Administration, which was in the second year of its existence. The faculty was located in Zelný trh, the building was rather small and the conditions were improvised. On the other hand, it had a touch of uniqueness.

What made you apply to such a young faculty?
The economic transformation that was underway seemed interesting. I found the developments exciting and moreover, it was a matter of competition to apply to the faculty. I am sure there are more reliable sources of information, but I think there were seven applicants per vacancy at that time.

Besides, this was the only possibility to study economics in Brno. Although it was also taught at the agricultural uni, there you studied deep tillage and other agri-related issues on top.

Do you remember your first day at the faculty?
Unfortunately not, I do not remember the first day at all. But I won’t forget the day when I went to look at the entrance exam results. I met a friend there, who had always said he was going to the economics fac, whereas I said I applied. That was the difference between us.

We met at the notice boards with printed results and searched whether our names were above the line. They were. Both of us got in. Although under normal conditions I don’t drink much, we went to celebrate to the legendary Sputnik bar.

What specialization did you study at the newly opened faculty?
The first three years were general studies. After that I briefly tried another field of study and then pursued economic policy for my Master’s degree.

When you look back to the 1990s, the period of restart, how did you perceive it as a student?
It was exciting, no other word comes to mind. This is the most apt description.

At what turning point did you decide to stay at the faculty as an academic?
In the fifth year, I spent the autumn semester in England; after I returned, I was offered an opportunity to lead a few seminars. In the summer, I was invited to teach economic history. This was the course I studied in Leicester and I enjoyed the theme. At the same time, I started Ph.D. studies.

Which milestones in the faculty’s history would you emphasize?
I personally would not do this. Of course, certain landmarks are worth mentioning, such as moving the faculty to Kounicova Street or opening the new building. On the other hand, I perceive the remarkable continuous development as more important than those moments. The immense journey that the faculty has travelled in those thirty years is quite unbelievable.

You can provide a two-way perspective. How much have students changed over the years?
There were 150 students in my year and 100 in the year before. It was an elite faculty, which among others was manifested by the students striving for excellent results; few of them would accept a “C”. I got three “Bs” for the entire period of study. We showed great interest and overall enthusiasm prevailed everywhere. For instance, students with an MSc. (Ing. in Czech) degree started to study in the first year because they needed or wanted to graduate from an economics faculty. In some seminars, I was taught by second-year students, who were excellent. Those colleagues of mine really made their way in the world and a lot of my fellow students had a brilliant career. The truth is that possibilities were enormous. Where older generation did not manage to adapt, my generation, who were willing to learn and knew the languages, came into play.

The turning point occurred even before I started to teach. At the moment you had 500 students in one year, it was clear the enthusiasm and the students’ interest were waning.
I think that it was a hard change for many of my colleagues. I myself dived into the teaching with zeal and determination to capture everyone's attention and interest. After a time, I had to face reality: it was not possible to captivate everyone.

You sometimes hear that the quality of students is gradually decreasing. Judging by what I see in my courses, I do not share this view. Maybe I am a little naive.

Who do you like to remember as the most important figure in your student days?
Michael Hobbs, who taught us micro- and macro-economics as the main courses, was a very important figure. He and several students even founded a brokerage company ATLANTIK finanční trhy, which was closely connected with the faculty. A lot of my fellow students started their careers at that company.

The whole educational system has gone through a difficult period in the past two years. Classes moved online and to a certain degree have persisted in that form. Do you think the situation will help the faculty move forward?
We have learnt a few things. Now we know that many issues can be dealt with in Teams et cetera. I personally missed in-person teaching a lot. I love it and it is important for me. It is definitely an enjoyable process and I hope the students agree.

The use of Kahoot in teaching was beneficial in my view. I have recorded my lectures and so I could give a big quiz instead of one of them. Ideally, the students looked into the subject beforehand. Then we could talk more and the lesson was interactive. It is interesting that in the autumn semester, the students turned down this form of teaching because they missed normal, in-person classes. Anyway, I think that Kahoot or a similar tool is a good way to improve education.

What did you bring to your teaching career from your student years?
I was influenced by the studies of economic history in Leicester. The course was taught by Professor Galassi from Italy. Unlike others who tended to look down on us as “Eastern Europeans”, he was very friendly and supportive.

An attitude similar to the above mentioned Michael Hobbs. It was obvious he wanted to teach us something and exerted great efforts to succeed.

I always try to be friendly to my students. We are on first-name terms. I believe otherwise there would be an unnecessary barrier between us. Some of my colleagues think that addressing students by their first names would be a sign of disrespect. I see it the other way round; I greatly respect my students and I wish we were partners.

I also try to make the students form their own opinion. I provide them with facts; it is up to them to think. Of course, I give an answer when someone asks me what I think about this or that, but I really try not to force my view on them. The students must think critically about what I tell them. I believe that friendly atmosphere will help to achieve this.

I wish the faculty generated personalities and I think that the university should teach the students not to be afraid to speak their minds. They should feel free to say the opposite of what I think. At the same time, I teach them to have their opinions well-grounded, for the world is complicated. You cannot just say: “I think this or that,” without having arguments.

Has a student become your colleague?
(laughter) They certainly have. In fact, it applies to half of the department. I have been here really long, so most colleagues are younger than me.

How do your former students remember you? Have you ever discussed it?
No, we have not. It sometimes follows from the conversation that I did or said something a long time ago. However, I do not remember discussing anything substantial. I try to do my best and I hope it is beneficial and reasonable.

Half of the department consists of your former students. Are you proud of yourself to have played a part in shaping such personalities?
They are good in their own right; my contribution is negligible. They are all very competent people and strong personalities.

Are you in touch with other graduates who do not teach here?
Yes, I am. This year, I have launched a course that I was discouraged from due to difficult organization. The course consists of lectures given by graduates from the Department of Economics. I do believe that the students will benefit from meeting successful practitioners who studied at the faculty and can share their experience. The lecturers will contribute with their views of issues and communicate expectations of potential employers to the future graduates.

What direction will, or should, the faculty take in the future?
We have not discussed “science”, which exists parallel to the teaching and which also has significantly moved forward. The scientific, or research part of our work is currently given high importance. It is quite difficult to pursue together with the teaching and I hope this trend will not be to the detriment of the pedagogic component of our work in the future.

What do you think of the position of the faculty in the competition with Czech and international institutions? How are we doing?
We have made huge progress. As for the comparison, it is difficult to answer. I actually do not know how to measure the quality, for the conditions differ; an objective criterion is hard to find.

Let me return to the progress. I must honestly say that my original education is incomparable to that we offer nowadays. Today, we are a modern, Western-style faculty, and the quality of education the FEA offers is really high.

Do you think fields of study are going to change in the future? Should they merge and thus provide a more comprehensive perspective, or should they further specialize?
What I will say is not exactly popular. My education, I mean in the 1990s, consisted of common courses shared by all students up to the third year. In this way, the students could make sure what they really wanted and they chose and pursued this specialization in the Master’s studies. It was not bad at all, and I think this form of study could be applied even nowadays. I am not sure about the support for this view, but it makes sense to me.

For example, I find it feasible that a maximum number of students is set for Master’s degree programmes and applicants are chosen according to the results in their Bachelor’s studies. It could also motivate the students.

The past year marked the 30th anniversary of the faculty. How did you celebrate?
First of all, I again realized what tremendous progress the faculty had made. The long-term evolutionary change in teaching and research is clearly visible. I do believe we shall continue in this ongoing progress. This development is associated with the growth of the whole country that has come into bloom during the 30 years; I am very lucky to have been born right here, to live in this period and to be able to follow the transformation.

It is my sincere wish for the faculty to continue to be a place where enthusiastic people come together. I wish we had a lot of motivated students, because there are many teachers who genuinely strive to pass on the knowledge.

If you could go back 30 years, would you apply to this faculty again? Would you follow the path of a teacher?
Yes, I would. I enjoy the work. I hope that it is obvious from what I said. At the same time, I hope I am useful to the faculty and students. Sometimes I say to myself I could have finished the civil engineering and design bridges. Thus I would leave something material behind. Or it occurs to me I could have preferred more demanding studies to the job here. Then I realize teaching would be incompatible with such work and it is the teaching that really fulfils me.