Looking to the future:
Meeting challenges of higher education
by Prof. Upali Vidanapathirana
The expectations of the millennium development goals (MDG) were to
come into force again in Cape Town, South Africa when heads of
universities met in April to discuss and debate whether the fading link
between higher education and MDG, can be re-established.
Frankly, much of the MDG fanfare in the 1990s is lost by now. In the
developing countries fraught by problems of political turmoil, soaring
energy prices, recession and droughts, MDGs receded to the background.
Sri Lanka, in contrast, has performed laudably in the spheres of
primary education and gender equality while its poverty reduction
records have also shown that it is on the verge of meeting the
timelines. These are positive signs. However, there are a few other
areas where Sri Lanka needs to purposefully engage in raising its
performance. One such area is higher education. This sector demands a
lot more discussion, debating and commitment at all levels.
The MDG decade that elapsed should have made us a little wiser for
the sake of our own survival. The younger generation that is the target
group of higher education is wise and knowledgable. Therefore, those of
us who are responsible for guiding the youth of this country cannot
afford to be complacent about what we do and when we do what we are
supposed to do.
This is because the prosperity or peril of our generation will depend
on our ability to invest purposefully on education improvements of the
generation to come. Currently it is burdened by a myriad of real and
supposed problems that need serious attention. The purpose of this
article therefore is to reflect on the future of the higher education of
this country.
A fundamental assumption of this paper is that the future of this
country depends almost exclusively on investments on human capital. Sri
Lanka like Japan has an abundance of human capital that requires both
enhancement and enrichment. Sri Lankans by nature are hard working.
Given the opportunity they are capable of proving their calibre.
This is shown by all those Sri Lankans who have migrated for
Education, employment or resettlement. Our youth are a lot more
trainable, committed and capable. However, while living in Sri Lanka
most of us are lethargic. The list of these negative attributes of Sri
Lankans living in Sri Lanka is long and endless.
The assumptions
It is in this background that Sri Lankan authorities need to be
astute. Their design and plans need to be futuristic. This is because
a) human factor is our greatest endowment and
b) the future of the world will be driven by knowledge.
In this context there are two other important lessons we can learn.
Those countries that are worse off than us today have done badly in
human capital development. Sub-Saharan Africa speaks volumes in this
regard. Conversely, other countries that are performing better today
have invested more purposefully on human capital developments. East Asia
can be a case in point. Thus our directions should be clear. What is
perhaps unclear may be whether we have the desired sense of direction to
take us to the future?
There are no alternatives with respect to investment on human
capital. The growth of economies in this country will depend very much
on our ability to generate energetic human capital and use them wisely;
this is because today economies are driven by knowledge; by science and
technology; by training and education and by research and dissemination
of research findings for real world applications. However, there is a
vital need to make them relevant to our long-term needs.
There is also a need to generate new knowledge that is relevant to
us. This new knowledge needs to be exploited to generate value to the
economy and hence ready for human consumption. These changes may be
equally or even more important than our investments on roads, bridges
and power stations we build, expecting a brighter tomorrow. It does not
mean that those investments are irrelevant. They can be made really
relevant only if we can create a generation of people who can
productively and purposefully use them to make our future prosperous.
The orthodox interpretations of economics may differ here as they do
not distinguish benefits of investments on human capital holistically.
This may be why social returns on the investments on education are rated
high only in the case of primary and secondary education. Nonetheless,
higher education too generates important value addition because of its
contribution to social equity and social harmony.
In general, engineers, doctors, scientists, technologists,
accountants and economists appear to be more self-serving in their
approach. This idea has emerged because their contribution to national
development is less tangible. Therefore, we should change our matrix
without blaming the object to be measured.
The challenges
First, the current conjecture demands a different tool kit that can
be used to measure the socio-economic environment of Sri lanka
resolutely and evolve strategies that are bold and unconventional. The
war that drained this country both physically and morally is over. The
economic crisis that engulfed the world since last year has shown signs
of turning around. Interestingly, this crisis was useful as it changes
socio-political and the economic order of the world substantially.
For instance, it has expedited the decimation of the uni-polar world
order. There is also a change of ideological trusts. The ultra leftist
as well as ultra-rightist views pertaining to politics also are
undergoing change. These contextual changes have generated a need for
striking a balance by seeking insights from different viewpoints and
root them in our own cultural and social milieu.
Second, higher education has become an extremely competitive
enterprise the world over (this feature is somewhat evident at primary
education levels too). From the supply side, providers of education are
numerous; they include the State sector, private sector, international
providers, and a mixture of others including those who focus on skills
development of different dimensions.
The product mix on offer is also broad and varied; it includes
academic courses as well as different types of professional and skills
development programs. All these products and their providers take
business promotion drives seriously; some of them may be more covert
while others are even overt. A cursory look at Sunday newspaper
advertisements gives the idea that millions are spent on colourful
advertisements to promote institutions, individuals and courses. It
shows that the higher education market is not only competitive, but also
lucrative.
From the demand side, the buyers are selective; an element of choice
that was not present a few decades ago has crept into domain of higher
eduction as well. This is a drastic change that has engulfed all sectors
and communities. People today have become more mindful of educational
providers, teaching faculty, content, costs, relevance, quality, media
and learning ambience. These were propositions that were unthinkable two
decades ago. These two opposing forces have made higher education an
extremely competitives enterprise. This situation is not peculiar to Sri
Lanka. It is a worldwide trend and our neighbours such as India,
Bangladesh and Nepal are not spared by these changes.
Another related area is the numbers game in terms of the number of
people who seek opportunities and the number of seats that ate available
for them. This is a stark reality in the higher eduction sector in
particular. For instance, the number who sat for GCE (A/L) examinations
stood at 201,686 in 2006 and the number selected to the university
system of the country was a meagre 17,248. In 2009 this number increased
to 225,000 whereas the number of places in the university system too has
numerically increased to 21,000. However, the number of students
entering universities as a ratio of those who sit for the Advanced Level
examinations remain abysmally low; it is strikingly low for the age
cohort comparing poorly with the rates for those neighbouring countries
including Bangladesh.
There are many other issues that may be relevant. But they make the
paper long and the arguments woolly. Suffice to state that the current
demand and supply conditions pertaining to higher education in
particular have created a massive void. It is this void that has
attracted other providers who are genuinely capable of providing such
services as well as those who want to derive quick financial benefits.
Here again the weekend newspapers provide ample proof of the
complicated nature of the higher education ‘market’ in Sri Lanka. A word
of caution regarding the use of the word ‘market’ is warranted here. It
is used consciously because of the existence of the forces of demand for
and the supply of higher education opportunities in the country.
However, it does not necessarily mean that the arguments supports
‘unfettered marketism as proposed by some writers.
As in many other countries in South Asia, Sri Lanka too registers
some resistance to private investments in the sphere of higher
education. This resistance is partly attributed to what we believed to
be ‘real’ reasons and other reasons that are ‘imaginary. Let us look at
the real reason first.
Two important real reasons are a) quality assurance and b) social
equity considerations. Both considerations are unquestionably valid. In
a country where there is no regulatory mechanism to guide private
investment on higher education, there is a real danger that diplomas and
degrees can easily be generated for a price. Such a scenario can be
extremely counter-productive in relation to the first assumption that
‘knowledge’ is the key driver of development.
However, the sorted knowledge imparted can hinder the very
development process that it tries to inspire. The second aspect of
social equity too can be equally valid as high-priced qualifications
necessarily lead to widening the divide. This is primarily because only
the rich can afford to buy such qualifications which trigger further
accumulation.
The ‘imaginary’ reasons are mostly based on ideological
considerations, attributions and assumptions. For example, higher
education as a public good must be exclusively in the hands of the
State. The expression that privertisation of education is inherently bad
has become questionable in a situation where even primary education in
Sri Lanka has a high element of private involvement and investments. A
case in point is the private tuition that is quite pervasive at all
levels of education.
According to the Consumer Finances and Socioeconomic Survey of the
Central Bank, private investments that go into education have increased
substantially both in rural and urban areas during the past few decades.
These are voluntary investments or expenditure. There is growing private
‘health’ sector in the country patronised by both the rich and the poor.
Yet, there are seemingly valid apprehensions pertaining to the goals
and ownership of private providers of higher education. Firstly, if
there primary goal is ‘profitability’ it goes against the models
operating in many other countries where the so-called private providers
are identified as not-for-profit organisations. Secondly, with respect
to ownership too, if investments are exclusive private funds it may be
inconsistent with those models based on State/private endowment funds
that contribute substantially to meet the expenses of private
universities.
Thirdly, there can be questions regarding the quality of the faculty
staff employed by those institutions. Eventually, there can be a
likelihood of questionable institutions providing questionable
qualifications. These are genuine anxieties that arise in the absence of
regulatory mechanisms to guide private investments of credible sources
and options in the country.
The public sector providers too are not totally free from criticism.
Two important criticisms are worth mentioning here. The first question
deals with the relevance of the qualifications provided by the public
universities. This is a contentious issue. On the one hand, an
evaluation regarding the attributes that make a qualification relevant
or vice versa is not forthcoming.
On the other hand, the public university system has not made a
genuine attempt to examine the extent of relevance of their
qualifications and to rectify lapses if any. The second question deals
with the expansion of the external degree programmes in the country
which is argued to have become ‘degree mills’. The numbers involved in
the external degree sector exceeds 300,000 learners following the
so-called “easy-to-complete” combinations of subject disciplines to get
degree certificates. This has become a negative externality as such
qualifications trigger protest movements of unemployed graduates.
Challenges ahead
It is evident that the problem at hand is not simple. Higher
education in Sri Lanka is plagued by a complicated mix of problems and
issues that need carefully designed, but speedy and effective solutions,
for instance, it is worth debating whether there is a space for striking
a balance between private and public funds to augment opportunities for
education.
In economics, education falls into the category of public goods where
the State has to accept a major responsibility. However, the usefulness
of private investments cannot be totally overlooked on account of the
following six reasons:
1. Even today parents spend private funds for public education at all
levels despite the fact that public education is supposed to be ‘free’.
2. Billions of valuable foreign exchange is drained by seeking
education abroad. It is estimated that about 8,000 to 10,000 youth
annually leave Sri Lanka for countries including Bangladesh, Nepal and
Pakistan at the low end and to Australia and America at the high end and
leads to a high outflow of foreign exchange. The drain of foreign
exchange in this manner is estimated to be in the range of US $ 4.5 to 8
billion annually.
3. If at least only part of this amount can be utilized to augment
the capacities in our current higher education system, many of these
students could be absorbed into the system at a relatively lower cost.
4. Further Sri Lanka can be made one of the centres of excellence in
education in this region and thereby attract foreign students from South
Asia and the rest of the Third World.
5. Many countries including India, China and Vietnam have moved away
from totally public higher education institutions to fee levying
institutions with sufficient safeguards to protect both ‘merit’ and
‘needy’ cohorts of the youth. Vietnam too has established private
universities providing higher educational opportunities.
6. In any case Sri Lanka needs graduates capable of fulfilling its
developmental demands. The current “output” of graduates which is about
three percent of the population is perhaps the lowest in South Asia.
7. The budgetary imperatives of the country do not allow Sri Lanka to
start many more public sector universities. Even if started, the
rigidities in recruitment and compensation will not make the university
system sustainable.
It is therefore necessary that a mechanism is evolved to garner
private investments to develop a system of non-state university
institution in the country. In addition there is the need to initiate a
regulatory mechanism to assure the quality of programs offered and also
to ensure that a quota of deserving students are provided with free or
subsidised tuition.
Further, the university system should be made sufficiently flexible
in terms of curricula changes to suit the demands of the country.
These imperatives have contributed to a situation which has demanded
us to revisit the educational policy with respect to the establishment
of a properly accredited system of non-State actors in higher education.
There is of course a danger of misreading such an effort partly due to
political expediency and partly on account of genuine fears of national
interest.
These fears can be allayed only by creating space for debate and
discussion regarding the issue at hand more fervently.
It is in this context that Sri Lanka should explore other avenues to
solve its problems in higher education. In a country where 130,000 GCE
A/L candidates acquire the minimum qualifications to enter the
university system, only 20,000 students are admitted to the 14
conventional universities.
The media, political parties, and the civil society are fascinated by
these limited numbers that are admitted. A simple content analysis of
media reports and Parliament debates will show that the entire country
has forgotten the destiny of the remaining 110,000 students who acquire
the minimum qualifications or the others who are dropped out completely
off the system owing to their inability to secure minimum marks.
Distance education
One might wonder as to why there is no mention about distance
education in this article thus far. As far as the writer is concerned,
it is the best policy option. It is best not because of one’s vested
interest, but solely because it has been tried and teste both in the
developing and developed world. For instance, the British Open
University among the first 10 universities in the UK in terms of
contribution to teaching, research and scholarship.
The Indira Gandhi Open University in India offers high quality study
programs to cater to the needs of more than 1.8 million students
scattered around different parts of the country and it too ranks very
high in the overall academic ratings.
Likewise, there are many distance open universities in Germany,
Israel etc that offer high quality educational programs to cater to both
national and market needs of those countries.
The current information and communication technological revolution
has opened many vistas to users of online resources and free services to
acquire and enhance skills.
The Open University of Sri Lanka has ventured into teaching Natural
Sciences Engineering Technology, IT, Law, Management and Social
Sciences, Education and Nursing Education in Sri Lanka, many of which
were inconceivable with the distance mode a few decades ago.
It is in this context that the education policy of this country needs
to make an authentic and radical shift to exploit the true potentials of
distance education to meet the challenges discussed above.
The writer is Vice Chancellor of the Open University of Sri Lanka.
|