|
|
|
| Sunday, 31 July 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Privatisation of education by Prof. Ranjith Ruberu, Emeritus Professor of Education, University of Colombo These days much public opinion is expressed on the privatisation of education in Sri Lanka. To the less informed public this gives the impression that privatisation of national education has come to stay in the country.
Besides schools many other educational establishments collectively form the private educational system that functions side by side with the State system. It is the State system of national education developed from the time of the colonial government that forms the Sri Lanka educational system and this national education system that provides for the educational needs of the country. Although government educational establishments dominate the system, privately managed establishments that receive government aid are also found widely. This position has rendered the educational system in Sri Lanka a dual system of government and non-government establishments functioning in accordance with government policy on national education. Traditionally in Sri Lanka, national education was considered to be the responsibility of the government and national schools and other educational establishments provided education to all and sundry. Having a system of free education the annual cost on national education exceeded eight percent of the national budget, much above what is evident in other developing countries in the region. National education was regarded a social service the government was obliged to provide to the people. The state schools that constitute the bulk of schools in the school system, cater to the needs of the majority of people and will remain a dominant partner in the educational system. With all the limitations, the State schools perform a task in a way not second to what the privately managed schools perform at no cost to parents. The State schools are the most popular in the country as is evident in the annual rush for admission at the commencement of the school year in January. Establishments The government schools that constituted the bulk of the school system performed a major portion of this task free of charge and at no cost to parents. The fee levying private schools which were in a small number supplemented the government effort. Since late, the cry for privatisation of education has become evident as a result of the high demand for education associated with the rapid increase in population. It is also mentioned that the government schools sometimes appear to be less efficient as well as less provided with facilities in comparison to privately managed schools. These private schools cater to the more affluent section of society and many of them levy school fees sometimes at high rates that render them exclusive establishments. Yet these private schools serve a valuable service for the promotion of education in the country. When the Hon. Dr. C. W. W. Kannangara, the first minister of education introduced The Free Education Bill to the then State Council he proposed a National System of Education owned to be managed by the Ministry of Education. This state system of education conceived by the Minister of Education in 1945 gained stability in the following years with a significant increase in the number of government schools. By 1960, a unified national system of education was achieved by the enforcement of the Assisted Schools and Training Colleges (Special Provisions) Act of 1960 and the appointment of the Director of Education of the time as the manager of the 2700 Assisted Schools leaving only 50 schools to be managed as unaided schools receiving no financial assistance from the government. The Assisted Schools and Training Colleges (Supplementary Provisions) Act of 1961 vested in the government also the properties of the Assisted Schools without compensation. This Act of 1961 provides for the Director of Education to take possession of the properties vested in the government and also to regulate the establishment of new schools thereafter. Only the Minister of Education was empowered to establish new schools and the State system of education thereby consolidated. The following three decades after 1961 witnessed many changes in the policy of State ownership of schools due chiefly to many factors beyond the control of the government, and the current situation prevents the free establishment of schools and other educational institutions. The opposition to privatisation of education comes from the fear that private management could result in discriminatory activities and partisan procedures unacceptable to the people. A valid criticism appears to be that well-to-do parents stand a better chance for admitting their children to any privately managed school with no hindrance whatsoever, as long as they are able to pay the required fees. This is a privilege the wealthy enjoy acceptable to any democratic society. Every parent would wish to give the best education to their children and the privately managed schools cater to this need. The disparities evident in any privately managed school system are unavoidable unless stringent measures are adopted by the government to curtail the shortcomings that become evident. Some of the privately managed schools are alleged to provide only the minimum of facilities required by government recognition in contrast to the State schools where better facilities are always available. The appointment of teachers to private schools can be subjected to irregularities. The selection of less qualified and inexperienced teachers for low wages is a frequent complaint against private schools. Inadequate Some privately managed schools have inadequate physical facilities by way of classrooms, laboratories, libraries and recreational facilities etc., which the State schools very often possess. Privately managed schools are generally accused of enrolling large numbers of children not taking into account the facilities available. This results in over crowded classes the management of which the class teacher finds difficult. Any privatisation of the country's schools demand vigilant supervision by the national education authority, the Ministry of Education to minimise the shortcomings liable to occur in any private school system. These schools being permitted to charge school fees could result in the exploitation of parents by unscrupulous management. In the absence of strict regulations on the fees charged as well as the money that come in as donations from parents the need is there for careful scrutiny, lest misappropriation of funds become possible. It is the parents who are affected by such drawbacks and make privatization of schools unwarranted in a national system of education. It appears that there is some opposition to the existence of privately managed schools in the national school system. Such opposition comes from those who suggest only State owned systems of schools, as seen in countries having dictatorial governments where State control is considered the most appropriate. Nevertheless for a democratic country like Sri Lanka, State monopoly in the provision of education is not acceptable. The sharing of such responsibility by the State with other organisations is recognised as the most suitable arrangement. State schools and non-government schools working together for the benefit of the country is considered the most appropriate. The private schools have an important role in the development and the progress of national education in Sri Lanka. The private schools if they perform their legitimate obligations
satisfactorily, there is no reason to discourage their existence and
activities. It is the role the private schools play that is important. |
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
Although privately managed educational establishments are becoming
popular and privately managed schools and other educational institutions are
found widely, the provision of the primary, secondary and tertiary education
continue to be a responsibility of the State.