|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 28 September 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Of a 'moribund university system' Mortician ready to work on corpse by Tara de Mel Today there appears to be a crisis in the entire education sector. Schools and universities are equally affected. And this is not just confined to the quality of education imparted to the students or its delivery mechanisms.
The universities are important primarily because this is where the fertile minds of nearly 60,000 20 year olds, ferment. When this highly impressionable and vulnerable group leave the universities, they expect to get jobs. Good jobs. But what percentage will achieve this goal ? In addition, the percentage of employable undergraduates is dwindling day by day. What is their fate and the fate of the rest ? The rest comprise the schoolleavers who do not get into university - ie: those who have qualified for university entry but cannot enter due to the paucity of places (about 85,000) and those that do not qualify for university (about 100,000). But given this grim situation Sri Lanka sits pretty even today, amongst its South Asian neighbours. This is when we compare our social indicators. We can boast not only of our high literacy (specially female literacy) and life expectancy but also of our impressive ranking in the Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI, (computed using the GDP growth rate, literacy and life expectancy) is the most significant measure of the quality of life enjoyed by the people of that country. In the HDI, we rank 89, only second to the Maldives 84, amongst all South Asian countries. (India-124, Pakistan-138, Bangladesh-145, Nepal-142, Bhutan-140). Despite these indisputable facts, we must also admit to possess some statistics which put us to shame, and put us far behind even "middle level developed countries" in the world. This is so in the case of higher education. Sri Lanka is the only country in South Asia, and also perhaps the only country in South East and West Asia, with the lowest proportion of enrolments in the university sector. (ie about 2% of that specific age cohort). Countries like India have a participation rate of over 8%, Thailand 15% and South Korea has an extraordinary rate of 68% of young people enroled in Higher Education. Australia, a country with our identical population has nearly 700,000 students enlisted in Universities. Even Bangladesh (2.6%) and Nepal have better statistics than we have. The 13 Universities in Sri Lanka continue to absorb just a handful of students each year out of nearly 100,000 students who become eligible for university admission by their A'level results. The expenditure we set aside for education and higher education has declined over the years. Today, the expenditure on Education, is a mere 2.8% GDP growth and a mere 6.7% of the national budget. The per capita funding for university students, which peaked at Rs. 74,327 in 2001 is now Rs. 52,558. Sri Lanka spends only about 0.35% of GDP on Higher Education while countries like India spend nearly 2.4% of GDP. This has hampered the provision of even the most basic resources needed for delivering an education with quality. To add to the misery, The universities are now faced with shortages of qualified academic staff. In most universities staff recruitments have been frozen, barring a few, in selected faculties. Indeed, these are the ingredients that contribute towards making the university system a keg of gun powder that only needs one match to explode. At a recent meeting with the President and the Treasury, the Vice Chancellors bemoaned the pits to which our University system had fallen. They griped about the lack of resources (financial and other). They lamented the brain drain of academic staff, who naturally sought greener pastures overseas when they did not have the academic satisfaction of engaging in research due to lack of funds. They complained about the breakdown in law and order. They demanded answers for the increasing incidence of violence on campus and urged that political interference doesn't take place. They in fact said they would soon have to close the universities if things don't improve fast. I was reminded of what someone recently wrote of a 'moribund university system'. It's worse. The VCs warning was that the mortician has actually donned his gloves and is set to work on the corpse. The Vice Chancellors were in turn chided by the Treasury for producing unemployable graduates. But which came first, the chicken or the egg ? The Universities produce unemployable graduates because the revision of the structure and content of the courses, and the development of curricula have not kept pace with the current trends and the competitive demands of the present day employment market. The inadequate emphasis on Science and Technology based disciplines. The lack of proficiency in English and Information and Communication Technology (two skills that are in high demand by the private sector) added to this. Attitudinal problems of the present day undergraduate is also a point of concern for the potential employer. For all these changes to take place effectively, the primary requirement is money. And of course the political will and commitment to the subject of Education with the highest possible state patronage. All countries that emerged from an "underdeveloped" status and became "developed", had placed education and health, at the high point in their National Development Agenda, with systematically increased funding by the state. The remedy for the ailing university system is not to cut off its supply of oxygen (i.e. to freeze funds and restrict staff recruitments) and when the system is at deaths door, to step in and brazenly set about privatization. The 13 universities of this country should receive optimum funding and as much resources and autonomy as possible. Needless to say, they need to be equipped with the best possible teaching staff. Intellectuals and able researchers should be motivated and incentivised to stay on campus and not go away. We should in fact be thankful that there are some excellent minds still with us, despite the paltry salaries the state pays them. On a sound financial footing, equipped with the required staff, and with true devolution of power, the ability to expand the student placements and to modernize the university system so that they produce employable graduates, cannot be too difficult. My mind goes back to the 1997-2000, era when all the Vice Chancellors of the time, with the NEC and UGC sat for many months to prepare plans to reform the university sector. Those were exciting times. The ambitions were huge. Many teams of academics assembled to carry out these tasks and regular meetings were held with the President to review progress. Some of the key recommendations of the Presidential Tasks Force on University Education were: 1. Increase the annual intake of students and to increase the number of Universities, in accordance with the increase in population over time. 2. Increase state expenditure on higher education. 3. Diversify university courses and revise curricula focusing on current employment patterns and the needs of the private sector. 4. Revise the Universities Act of 1978 to meet the current trends in higher education and to give more autonomy to the universities and the Vice Chancellors. 5. Encourage universities to generate income and resources, in partnership with the private and NGO sectors. I remember how the discussions for obtaining funding for implementation of these recommendations began with the World Bank officials, at the Aid Group meeting in Paris in 1998. Thereafter much preparations were made at workshops, seminars and many such sessions with relevant academics and officials. These eventually led to the Government of Sri Lanka agreement with the World Bank which has now provided US$ 40.3 million for "improving the quality and relevance of tertiary education", Extensive preparations have been made for receiving this loan since 2001. But it is still not clear as to how this money will be spent. But sadly, although much could have been achieved without this money, this did not happen. Many of the Reforms proposed by the Presidential Task Force (eg., - amending the Universities Act of 1978) did not need money for implementation. The Act prepared in 1999 - 2000, although not a perfect piece of work, attempted to give the necessary autonomy to the VCs to run the universities. Although this Act was discussed at Cabinet, presentation to Parliament met with resistance. Those were times of serious political uncertainties (mid-late 2001) and these superseded the critical changes proposed for Education. Then in 2002, a further revision to this Act had been proposed but not implemented. A similar fate befell the Education Ordinance of 1939. Two years ago the amendments proposed to register and monitor standards of the private and International Schools, to introduce Quality Assurance into the school system and to develop a more liberal medium of instruction policy, did not see the light of day. Establishing a Quality Assurance Council and an Accreditation system for Universities also needed no funding. But today, three years down the road we are still to see it happen. Such examples are numerous. Today we see countries, less endowed than us, surging forward with progressive policies in education. Take Cuba for example, which enjoys a literacy of 96.7% a primary school enrolment 100%, and a student teacher ratio of 20:1 in the primary classes. In Sri Lanka, the actual ratio is somewhere near 45:1 (although we document spurious figures for a variety of reasons), except in very small rural schools. Regulations are set by the Ministry to curtail the classroom size to 40 (although the most educationally sound number would be 20-25). But it is the same Ministry that violates these regulations. Today, the majority of leading national schools in the big cities have classrooms packed with 45-55 children. Child-centered learning as recommended through the Education Reforms Programme, is not even remotely possible in such an environment. The Ministry continues to interfere with school admissions and teacher transfers, reducing the status of the principal (the leader and manager of the school) to that of an orderly merely carrying out instructions that are far from sound, educationally. A country like Cuba spends 11.5% of the GDP on education while Sri Lanka spends 2.8% of the GDP. Even the average expenditure on education for Asian countries is 3.5% of GDP. Each primary classroom in Cuba is equipped with a TV, VCR and a computer. Every student is compelled to be literate in information/computer technology when he/she leaves school and every high school student is assured of a place in the university. Cuba, with a population of 11 million has 11 Universities, where as we have only 13 universities for a population of 19.2M. Not only have we pruned funding for education, but we have also ensured that our universities function in the most restrictive manner, subject to stringent financial control. The lack of decentralization, diversity, academic freedom and systems of shared governance, have seriously compromised the growth and quality of higher education. Not only should the state expand, strengthen and increase its patronage on the education sector, moves must be made simultaneously to build partnerships and to invite recognized universities from other countries to set up campuses in selected disciplines in Sri Lanka. This should go hand in hand with an independent Accreditation and Quality Assurance System, which will ensure that only the best will be selected and allowed to operate. Such moves will not only allow a diversity of academic expertise to enter our system, but it will also enrich our own capacity in research and development. This would also prevent, student seeking their destinies in higher education overseas paying enormous fees, for a sometimes sub-optimal quality of education. While we continue to close our opportunities and restrict expenditure, many countries less developed than us, are steadily increasing them. While their mission is to increase enrolments in higher education and to become centres of excellence in education in their region, we seem to want to remain where we are or to take a step back every year. While we continue to play politics with our education system many batches of students have missed many opportunities they will never get again. Meanwhile bright and talented students will continue to leave school, frustrated and angry with a system which deprived them of a University education they so richly deserved. It is such young people that get easily enticed by and recruited into movements (political and other), directing and guiding them in pathways that lead to destruction and decay. For too long we have been kicking the subject or education, like a political foot ball, from one goal to another, depending on the whim and fancy of those at the helm of power. The time is ripe for a visionary leader to take the bold and imaginative steps required to lead this country's education system towards its rightful place. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
The problems have eroded into the administrative structure, leading to
closure of schools, open warfare between principals, the staff and
students; picketing and walk-outs, and violence in general. Breakdown in
discipline and order at the highest levels has allowed the rule of the mob
to enter and establish itself within the school structure.
