GMOA warns govt. against appointing Carlo to head SLMC

December 4, 2011, 9:54 pm , The Island.

By Don Asoka Wijewardena

Government Medical Officers Association (GMOA) General Secretary Dr.Chandika Epitakaduwa yesterday warned the government not to appoint Prof. Carlo Fonseka as the President of the Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC) as he was regarded to be the most controversial character by the medical profession.

He was also a politically affiliated person who had criticized the SLMC on several occasions. Several medical institutions would hand over a letter to President Mahinda Rajapaksa to appoint another professionally qualified medical person to fill the vacancy created by the impending departure of Pro. Lalitha Mendis, the GMOA General Secretary said.

He told "The Island" that the

Government Medical Officers Association (GMOA), College of Surgeon, the Sri Lanka Medical Association (SLMA), the Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC), the Government Dental Surgeon Association (GDSA), Sri Lanka Dental Association (SLDA), Independent Medical Practitioners Association (IMPA), Deans of All Faculties of Medicine, Medical Faculty Teachers Unions and all GMOA Branch Unions had decided to arrive at a final conclusion today at a special meeting to be held at SLMA.

Dr. Epitakaduwa said that the GMOA knew from a reliable source that Prof. Carlo Fonseka would be appointed as the President of the SLMC. Although in terms of qualifications Pro. Fonseka had all the credentials, the problem was he was considered rather controversial figure. Many medical organizations had discussed with the GMOA on this issue and were under the impression that his appointment as the President of the SLMC would do more harm than good.

In accordance with the Sri Lanka Medical Ordinance, the SLMC should remain as an independent organization. The President of the SLMC should have immaculate character, genuine interest to serve the medical profession, an independent person without conflict of interest, medically qualified person, a flexible person able to act on the spur of the moment, free from politics and ability to resolve divergent issues of the medical profession, he said.

Dr. Epitakaduwa added that the GMOA had requested the government to retain the services of SLMC current President Pro.Lalitha Mendis. She had been able to maintain the activities of the SLMC to a high standard. But in case a person with different attitudes, divergent views and unorthodox opinions was appointed, the SLMC would have to face severe repercussions in the future.

When contacted SLMC President Prof. Lalitha Mendis said that her successor should have the ability to take decisions independently irrespective of cast, creed and religion. The main objectives of the organization were regulating the medical profession. It was involved in regulating code of conduct of doctors and medical education.

She added that apart from academic qualifications, the person who would be appointed SLMC President should be a trusted person in the medical profession. He or she should also have presence of mind to take impartial decisions at all times. A politically affiliated person was not suitable to hold such a post because if that sort of person was appointed he or she would take decisions for the interest of politicians.

Skill based education for economic development

December 4, 2011, 7:59 pm ,  The Island.


Welcome

Welcome to the sixty sixth edition of this regular column. Here, we discuss a wide range of topics around Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), many aspects of Business, SME Development, Agriculture, Education, Entrepreneurship, Creativity, Innovation and the Society at large.

A Skill Based Education System

I heard on the news last week that Minister Bandula Gunawardena had said that during C.W.W. Kannangara’s time, our school system had a lot of practical aspects such as carpentry, pottery (clay craft), home science and many others. In fact schools had special rooms for these subjects. Today, it may be that those class rooms are still there, but the interest for these subjects are extremely low.

What we have is a highly exam oriented system. In fact what we need is a talent based, skill based education.

The late CWW Kannangara, Father of Free Education, introduced a national system of education with emphasis on vocational training. Every school then had a work shop for learning trades. But, with the passage of time that aspect was ignored and we have moved towards passing exams by memorising. Today, that is the system that decides who climbs up in the higher education system. Sounds problematic? Yes it does.

Only a very few can find their way through three key exams (i.e: Year 5 scholarships, OLs and ALs) well and achieve university entrance. The fact remains that no matter how hard students try, there are only about 20,000 seats. But what happens to the rest, the vast majority who won’t get there?

On the other hand, just like higher education, vocational skills are important for the country. However, to create an interest in vocational education after school, they should have been educated in a skill-based school system. So that is the problem at the moment.

The Problem

Everyone’s geared towards exams, everyone’s geared towards higher education, and we know for a fact that we can’t accommodate all of them and we know for a fact that we don’t need that much higher educated (academic studies) people anyway and we know for a fact that we need vocational skills for our country. And then the obvious solution is to start producing them!

Well, one can argue that you can start converting them into vocational skills after school. But in reality it is not effective, because people haven’t built tact or an interest for that type of work during their school period.

So, the school period is the best time to instil those features, skills and interests. It’s not an alien concept, it has been there in our schools as was noted at the start. Even some of the facilities might be there. It’s more about re-starting it. But I don’t think it is enough to just say we have to do it, but we have to have a plan to get there. Especially you have to tackle the real problem to fix a resultant issue.

What should we do?

The key thing is to take measures slowly to take out the exam oriented nature in the education system. Parallel to that, there needs to be a process that introduces and implements skill-based education. A part of it could be looking at the delivery modes. At the moment, it’s very little practical work but more writing, as students are expected to memorise notes. Nevertheless can we make it more of a practical environment where the students actually learn? There is a difference between learning vs teaching. What we do is mostly teaching, of course it is important in certain areas, but it has to be mixed with learning. That is getting the student to do things practically; research, read, observe, experiment and learn. They are the traits we need to develop in a student to have a generation that is more innovative, takes initiative and adds value to the country using their talent.

Also it is important to do a mindset change in the people. One reason that the education has become so competitive is that there is a misconception that higher education is the best thing and everyone needs to pass exams. Vocational areas are extremely important for the country as we need people to do certain things. They are important, so they have to be valued. As long as we perceive that only a few professions as good, then people won’t create an interest in others.

Vocational education has diversified over the 20th century and now exists in industries such as retail, tourism, information technology, funeral services and cosmetics, as well as in the traditional crafts and cottage industries. Some other areas are carpentry, masonry, electrical work, pre-school teaching, beauty culture, performing arts, electrical sewing, motor mechanics, plumbing, welding, tailoring, computer applications and IT, handloom, embroidery, sewing, chefs/cookery and hospitality. When you read through that list, it is clear how critical they are for the economy of a country. Basically, you can’t run a country without these skills.

So, it is great to see the Education Minister himself coming forward and admitting the problem. I hope we see some improvements on this identified problem pretty soon.

There is already a vocational training sector in Sri Lanka for people who have left school. However, the point here is to have a holistic view on things and see how we mould kids during school and then release them for more advanced vocational training after school.

In September, there was a news item about an initiative to set up a school for prisoners. The school would be located in the Watareka area in Homagama. The prison school is expected to provide non-formal education opportunities to the prisoners. Carpentry, masonry, motor mechanics are among the eight fields that will be offered to the prisoners. I hope these initiatives will come into reality sooner rather than later.

All of that would help us to improve the skills of our people, helping us to uplift the country to the next level.

Inaugural Reconciliation Conference

Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRSS) is a Sri Lankan research institute (or ‘think tank’) in the area of international affairs. The Kadirgamar Institute is organising Sri Lanka’s first national conference on Reconciliation and it is to be held on the 24th of November. The key note address will be made by Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, Secretary of Defence. The Kadirgamar Institute functions under the Ministry of External Affairs.

For a country that has come out of a civil war, reconciliation is extremely important. Whether we like it or not, there is a bit of a broken link between the Tamils and Sinhalese, and between North and South. Many events have happened in the past that have caused many people to suffer, to be unhappy and go through utmost pain. But then again, are we to just be in pain and stay separated forever? Or are we to look on the bright side, and move on to a better future? The latter is the right thing to do by the human kind. And reconciliation is for that. Therefore this conference will discuss these aspects in a serious manner.

The Kadirgamar Institute as a think tank can lead the research and development of ideas in key areas such as this. Their website is at http://www.kadirgamarinstitute.lk/ and will also be launched on 24th November at the historic first national conference on Reconciliation.

The Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies, (LKIIRSS) was inaugurated in 2006. The institute was the brain child of the late Foreign Minister, Lakshman Kadirgamar, who saw the long felt need for a strategic studies institute in Sri Lanka and worked towards establishing one with dedication.

The ground work for establishing a strategic studies institute was completed during his time, but he was not able to witness it actually being set up. After his assassination, President Mahinda Rajapaksa, (then Prime Minister), proposed to the Cabinet that the new Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies be named after Minister Kadirgamar as a tribute. The proposal was approved, thus paving the way for the LKIIRSS to be established. Recently Asanga Abeyagoonasekera was appointed as the Executive Director of the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute. Asanga was once the youngest Chairman in the government sector.

Get in Touch

If you have an event or a group that you would like me to talk to, I can see if I can make some time for such activities. I am happy to speak to groups about the ICT/BPO sector, youth leadership, business, careers, communication skills, soft skills and entrepreneurship. I always take pleasure from such activities.

If you have any feedback, please drop a note to yva@lankabpoacademy.lk

See you next week!





The Columnist

Yasas Vishuddhi Abeywickrama is a professional with significant experiences. In 2011 he was recognised as one of the Ten Outstanding Young Persons (TOYP) in Sri Lanka. Yasas has a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science from University of Colombo and a Masters degree in Entrepreneurship & Innovation from Swinburne University in Australia. He has worked in the USA, UK, Sri Lanka & Australia and being trained in the USA & Malaysia. He is currently involved in the training organisation, Lanka BPO Academy (www.lankabpoacademy.lk). Apart from this column, he is a regular resource person for ‘Ape Gama’ program of FM Derana (Sunday 3-5pm). Yasas is happy to answer your relevant questions – email him at yva@lankabpoacademy.lk .

Academic Freedom and Quality of Education: Looking for a scapegoat

December 4, 2011, 12:00 pm , The Island.


After listening to an interesting, controversial and thought provoking presentation by Prof. Desmond Mallikarachchi at the International Philosophy Day Seminar organised by the Department of Philosophy, University of Peradeniya, I have decided to take up once again the issue previously raised by Dr Jayantha Dhanapala in his open letter and Comrade Carlo Fonseka’s response to it in The Island a couple of days ago although Prof Mallikarachchi’s presentation is not directly related to the issue discussed by two learned persons. The question Prof Mallikarachchi posed was: Is Mahavamsa a Meta-Narrative, i. e. a comprehensive and all-encompassing story? I must record in passing that the way in which the University of Peradeniya has treated Prof Mallikarachchi, an eminent scholar, after his retirement, is disgraceful.

Is there a correlation between the quality of university education and the autonomy of the university system? Or more specifically has the quality of education in the university system declined because of the interference of the government? Dr Dhanapala’s open letter gives an affirmative answer to both these questions. The implication that followed from his argument is that if the universities are made autonomous, the quality of university education and its products will improve. Of course, the quality of university education and its products depends on multiple factors and mono-causal explanations may not hold water. So not giving room to misunderstanding let me state that Dr Dhanapala has not given the impression that university autonomy or lack of it is the sole or the principal cause of the poor quality of education. However, as Prof Carlo Fonseka said that Dr Dhanapala’s "judgment implies that the reason why our university teachers do not teach, do not search for new knowledge and do not serve the public as well as they should and would is that they don’t have the intellectual freedom required to do so." Furthermore, he added: "Speaking from my own personal university experience of some forty-five years as a student and teacher, I have to report that the only threat to my freedom of speech and freedom from fear came from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and not from our university or political authorities". Hence, Prof Fonseka is "unable to agree with JD that what is most needed in our universities right now is intellectual freedom". He has placed more emphasis on economic need of the academics as a reason for the decline of the quality of university education. So he opines: "I dare to think that a little more money will have a greater beneficial effect on academics than more intellectual freedom. Apart from freedom from want, freedom from the menace of the JVP and LTTE influence is a more relevant need for our university system."

My view is much closer to the views of Prof. Fonseka, who apparently argues that Dr. Dhanapala’s thesis gives prominence to external factors, economic hardships or the JVP/LTTE interventions. My submission is that the resultant quality reduction is basically internally driven. It is difficult for me to believe that ‘a little more money’ would help in persuading university teachers to teach, to search for new knowledge and to serve the public as well as they should unless money is linked to performance. We have witnessed during the last trade union action of the university teachers led by FUTA that some of the teachers resisted such performance-based grants. As in other sectorsn in this overarching consumerist culture, it is not need but greed that governs university teachers’ behaviour and attitudes. Speaking from my own personal experience of some forty-five years as a university student and teacher, I can see a drastic decline in the quality of teaching in our universities. Let me qualify by saying that my observations are applicable and may be valid only to the teaching of social science and humanities. One may argue justifiably that the universities would develop as better centres of learning and creation and dissemination of knowledge if those institutions are given more autonomy, academic freedom and better salaries for university dons. Moreover, more facilities for students would enhance the interests of the students. However, just reiterating this general and rather abstract truth will not be adequate for overcoming the flaws and weaknesses of the Sri Lankan university system. In my opinion, many of these flaws are internally generated; outside interference might have contributed to making them more pronounced. Let me list some of the factors that led to quality degeneration.

First, many faculties in the Sri Lankan university system restructured their programmes from the term-based systems to semester-based systems. In accordance with the new system, in addition to end of the semester examination based evaluation a continuous evaluation was introduced. Although it was said that system worked well in the US and many other countries, I would submit that it has become a total failure in Sri Lanka. In social science and humanities, this system fails to give a comprehensive and critical view on the subject to students. The tutorial system that was a key feature of the previous system was replaced by assignments. Hence the interaction between teachers and students and classroom discussion was abolished. Although teachers claim that the new system increases their work load, they have found ways and means of reducing their working hours significantly. Let me give an example. In the last five years or so I asked economics graduates who passed out with first or second class upper division to give in two sentences the essence of the theories of J M Keynes. Only one out of ten were able to give a satisfactory answer. I asked the same question from my final year students at the beginning of this academic year, none was able to give an answer.

How do we explain this? This relates to my second reason. Instead of addressing issues in creative and innovative manner, we tend to seek formalist answers. When we witnessed the deterioration of quality, we create new section called quality control and comes up with formalist formula completely neglecting the fact that the teaching has suffered primarily because teachers do not read books and they do not try acquire new knowledge.The VCs, the Deans and Heads of Departments were burdened with paper work. When I was a student, the then Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Prof H A De S Gunasekera was also Head of the Department of Economics. While performing the both functions, he took more than ten lectures and tutorial classes a week. And he was an excellent teacher equipped with knowledge of the latest development in the subject. The excessive formalism has given rise to excessive bureaucratic structures in the universities.

Thirdly, substantial a number of university teachers are prone to a disease that led them to consider teaching as ‘work’. When I joined the teaching staff as an assistant lecturer in the early 1970s, I used to teach more than twenty hours a week for five different courses. In recent years, at the faculty and department meetings what I witnessed was that if a lecturer is given a ‘work’ load of nine hours week, they began to complain. In addition, some lecturers, small in number, do not conduct lectures at all and ask junior or temporary lecturers to do the lecture on behalf of them. Hence the hierarchy is misused to exploit juniors. Some, once again small in number, are present in the university only two days a week. And some dons tend to manipulate leave system (real and hypothetical vacation etc) in the university system to avoid teaching during the semester. None of the formalist formulae work to transform this tragic situation.

All these are internally generated factors. However, we, university teachers, need scapegoats. In the current situation it is the lack of academic freedom.

The writer teaches political economy at the University of Peradeniya.

E-mail: sumane_l@yahoo.com