Solution to Education Crisis Lies in Encouraging Democratic Discourse, Dialoguing with FUTA and Realigning the Budget to Reflect Constituent Values

30 September 2012, 10:46 am, http://dbsjeyaraj.com

By M.A.Sumanthiran M.P.

Teachers and students across the island have succeeded in securing space in national discourse for Sri Lanka’s degenerate education system. They have raised fundamental concerns about the quality of education being provided and the quality of student being produced.

pic courtesy of: VikalpaSL

For three months, nearly 5,000 university professors have been on strike forgoing their own pay, and all State universities in the country have been closed indefinitely.

In this context, much of the discussion has come to centre on the demands of the Federation of University Teachers Association (FUTA), specifically the demand for the education budget to be increased from 1.9 % to 6 % of Sri Lanka’s GDP.

FUTA’s critics claim 6% is an arbitrary figure. They demand a detailed plan regarding what the additional funds will be used for, and how they will solve the problems plaguing Sri Lanka’s education system. In the critic’s view, answers to these questions are a prerequisite to action.

Consideration of the critic’s demand reveals an irony. Even as the demand for 6% circulates and gains grassroots support, Sri Lanka lives in the current reality of an education allotment of 1.9% of the GDP. The primary question, then, is not ‘why should we have 6%?’ instead, the primary question is ‘why do we have 1.9%’? The fact that the 1.9% was imposed without a detailed plan as to how it would solve the emerging education crisis, reveals the irony. The critic’s inquiry is thoughtful and legitimate, it is an echo of FUTA’s own exasperation, and it is best directed towards the government.

FUTA has stated the 6% figure is symbolic; it is a representation of the seriousness of their concerns and what they surmise are proportionately severe demands. FUTA’s stated intention has been to start a discussion and to frame that discussion in a consequential light. The grip education has on national discourse, can serve as some vindication of their method. The figure symbolizes a re-prioritization of education. While the figure itself serves as a wedge into discourse, the message the people have come to rally behind, is uncompromising and clear, the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) cannot marginalize education anymore.

The government’s position was recently defended in a forum discussion by Professor Rajiva Wijesinha. The professor argued a low education budget was actually a counter to ‘Statism’ and served as a de-evolution of the State ‘monopoly of supply’ on education. According to the professor, by decreasing the education budget the government is disentangling itself from the market. Furthermore, the professor argued education must be addressed in isolation, and the topic must not become politicized by other issues.

This position is problematic. Because the debate has been usefully framed in the context of ‘Per cent GDP’, it is clear that, budgeting a 1.9% of the GDP towards Education is not indicative of de-evolution; instead, it indicates de-prioritization. Per cent budget is zero-sum; an increase in one, necessitates a decrease in another, and vice versa. It is not hard to discover which sectors are being fortified to the detriment of others.

For example, the government has been steadily increasing the defence budget. In 2011, the defence budget rose by over 6%, and in 2012, it rose by 7%. While the government claims these increases were necessary to pay off old war debts, it is estimated nearly half of the defence budget is spent maintaining 200,000 military deployments. Keeping 16 out of 19 army divisions in the North and East is costly and education is paying for it.

The characterization of ‘monopoly of supply’ is also problematic. The professor assumes if this supply is broken up, it will be met by the private sector. He points to the success of private universities like Harvard and Princeton in the USA, to illustrate his point. But in determining what steps Sri Lanka is to take in developing an education policy, it becomes important to consider how and why those institutions were started.

‘Save State Education’, Protest march Moratuwa to Colombo, 2012 September 28, Organized by FUTA-pic: VikalpaSL

Harvard and Princeton were started as seminaries to train Christian clergy. They were conceived to address a gap in the American market, for which there was significant demand. Clearly, that gap and demand cannot be transplanted, but, perhaps, Sri Lanka has its own gap. In fact, technical and vocational schools are in increasing demand, but interestingly the private market has failed to meet it. The question then is, why has the private sector failed in this regard, and what confidence does that instill, upon which we ought to entrust a larger share of education? The solution to Sri Lanka’s education crisis is not necessarily in the private sector. And the private sector cannot be used as a safety net for government refusal to address inherited responsibilities.

The professor’s defence of the government position on education did touch on an important point. ‘Statism’ is a problem, but it is not limited to education. The Counter to ‘Statism’ is not for the government to withdraw from providing Education. Instead, the solution lies in combating Centralism by encouraging democratic discourse, dialoguing with FUTA and realigning the budget to reflect constituent values. The democratizing process will bolster both private sector confidence and public sector efficiency.

Plans underway to boost education system: SB

DailyMirror

Higher Education Minister S.B Dissanayake said today that the government was prepared to make amendments to the Universities Act of 1978 to expand and develop local universities to be on par with other internationally recognised institutes.

Minister Dissanayake said despite negative reports about local universities and the government’s role in education reforms amidst the ongoing university strike, the government had a clear vision to further develop the education system and that plans were already underway. (Olindhi Jayasundere)

A Review of Quotas in University Admissions

A Review of Quotas in University Admissions

Ground Views, 4 Oct, 2012 Devanesan Nesiah Colombo, Education, Politics and Governance, Youth

Photo courtesy Vikalpa

My good friend Somapala Gunadheera has made some thoughtful observations (The Island, 10 Sept 2012) on the problems of University admissions, and noted that in my “ Tamil Language Rights in Sri Lanka”( CPA, April 2012) I had not suggested ways and means of solving them. My analysis and suggestions were expressed in some publications way back in the 90s, and that is why I chose not to repeat them. But since my friend has raised the question, I will( belatedly) retrace some of what I had written then, supplemented with an outline of the historical back ground.

Jaffna youth have traditionally depended on education for employment since other avenues have been lacking in comparison with other districts. Since Sinhala Only in 1956, Tamil speakers have had even more problems than previously in finding employment. They have responded with even greater focus on education and on acquiring superior academic and professional qualifications, especially in fields such as Medicine and Engineering in which such qualifications virtually guarantee employment. Thus the proportions of Tamil youth entering the Medical and Engineering university faculties progressively increased, posing political problems for the Government. In particular the intake from Jaffna, which has long had a disproportionate number of very good secondary schools was very high. The political problem came to a head in 1970 -71, in the first year of the newly elected Srimavo Bandaranaike administration.

A hasty (and shortsighted and irrational) decision was taken by the Cabinet of Ministers to fix different pass marks to students of different ethnic groups so as to achieve an acceptable ethnic mix in University admissions in 1971. This was blatantly racist.  Predictably, the impact on Sri Lankan Tamils was traumatic, and a small section of Tamil youth took to armed rebellion. This “solution” was also widely critisised by educationists at home and abroad. Modifications were therefore introduced in subsequent years, for intakes in those years, but those schemes were also defective and, in any case, the damage done could not be undone. It was first sought to give a veneer of pseudo respectability by introducing what was called “linguistic standardization” which was again ethnic discrimination but in disguise. No educational or egalitarian or affirmative action / reverse discrimination principle was served. What it did serve was to instigate a serious of anti-Tamil pogroms culminating in a very bloody civil war which, with interruption, extended to 24 years (1985-2009), with a death toll of many tens of thousands, mostly of non-combatants.

Under “linguistic standardization”, Sinhalese ( Sinhala medium) students of all socio economic classes and in all schools gained privileged admissions to Medical, Engineering and some other faculties at the expense of Tamil and Muslim (Tamil medium) students of all socio economic classes and in all schools. This scheme was just as racist as the  1971 scheme. It would be an obscene travesty to describe as affirmative action / reverse discrimination a scheme that gives a step up to the child of senior Sinhalese professionals in the Sinhalese stream at Royal or Visakha or Trinity over a Tamil or Muslim child of estate laborers or slum dwellers purely on the basis of language medium.  Whereas under affirmative action / reverse discrimination the under privileged would get a step up over the privileged, under linguistic standardization, as in the  above example the reverse may take place.

What is affirmative action / reverse discrimination? Its objective is to give a step up to the under privileged and /or  the victims of discrimination with a view to compensate for the deprivation and/or discrimination. In India quota reservations are constitutionally prescribed for Untouchables/ Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. For lack of space I will not spell out here the relevant sections of the Indian Constitution. In the USA preferences are mandated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which, however, does not expressly prescribe quotas nor identify the beneficiaries. In a land mark ruling the then Indian Chief Justice A. N. Ray affirmed that “Equality of opportunity for unequals can only mean aggravation of inequality. Equality of opportunity admits discrimination with reason” (State of Kerala v N.M.Thomas, 1976). In the USA, in a landmark judgment, Supreme Court Justice Harry A.Blackmun claimed that “ … in order to treat some person equally we must treat them differently”(Bakke v Regents of California, 1978). These quotations, approvingly cited in my book “Discrimination with Reason? The Policy of Reservations in the United States, India and Malaysia”, Oxford University Press, 1997, set out the essence of affirmative action / reverse discrimination.

What Sri Lanka now has is District Quotas, also unsatisfactory in that it has no rational basis and is divisive on several counts, but an improvement on “linguistics standardization” in that it is not overtly racist. What has not been tried out is any solution based on affirmative action/ reverse discrimination. Those of Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Classes and Schedule Tribes in India , and Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans and few other categories  in the USA have claims to affirmative action /reverse discrimination to compensate for current discrimination as well as the cumulative impact of centuries of past discrimination. In Sri Lanka the major ethnic categories, with the possible exception of “Plantation Tamils”, cannot claim such benefits. Numerically smaller categories such as Veddahs,Rodiyas and a few “Untouchable” castes among Tamils may claim such benefits but these claims are not as compelling as those in India. There could be a case for reserving small numbers of places in Sri Lankan Universities for children of such categories.  But in any case being located in “backward areas” cannot generate such claims unless such privileges are tied to agreements to return to those areas after graduation to teach in under privileged schools with the view to progressively erasing such backwardness. In effect, since there are privileged schools in every district and the elite of those districts send their children to those or other privileged schools elsewhere, it is they who benefit from quotas outside Colombo and Jaffna rather than the most backward in those districts. Thus District Quotas help the rural elite at the expense of the urban underclass. Moreover, the markup for some Districts is  so high that within each class in the Universities the disparity between students is unduly large.

In India and the USA, a disproportionate share of affirmative action/ reverse discrimination benefits are appropriated by the elite of the disadvantaged communities. In fact those countries have attempted to exclude benefits from such elite by prescribing socio economic cut off criteria, but this proved to be cumbersome and unworkable. In India since the caste system continues to operate even among those converted to Christianity, they too enjoy quota benefits. But among Tribals, since converts to Christianity gain privileged access to good Christian schools, Christian Tribals were appropriating a disproportionate share of the Tribal quota benefits. For this and other reasons the Indian Supreme Court has ruled that the Tribals who convert to Christianity cease to be eligible for quota benefits.

Under the currently prevailing district quotas scheme, the under privileged everywhere in Sri Lanka suffer multiple  disadvantages of socio economics backwardness, poor schooling as well as the bulk of the district quotas being appropriated by the privileged of those districts. Their situation is made worse by the fact that the children of the underclass to which they belong are virtually excluded from admission to “good schools” to which children of privileged classes find easy access.

It is not possible to compensate for all handicaps. Moreover, most handicaps are difficult to define in terms of objective criteria. For example, if the parents are illiterate or if the situation at home is not conducive to children advancing in their studies, those handicaps are real but not easily quantifiable in terms of objective criteria and are therefore difficult to compensate for. But one handicap that is both real and definable in objective terms is the quality of schooling. Perhaps quotas can be justified if they are based on objective criteria related to a measure of the quality of schooling. It is also conceivable to use socio-economic criteria, but these would be highly subjective, especially in countries like Sri Lanka where most people are in the unorganized sector in which even the rich escape paying income tax. Our scheme may need to depend solely on an objective grading of schools.

For example schools may be graded 1,2,3,4 and 5 on the basis of the average of the last three (or four) years of admissions to university faculties. The total of  the marks scored by a student at the university entrance examinations can be increased by 10,20,30 and 40 respectively for those attending schools graded 2,3,4and 5 respectively. This ranking could vary from faculty to faculty since some schools may be good in Maths science, others in Bio science, etc. The ranking may also change gradually from year to year as schools improve or decline in respect of each discipline. This scheme has several important advantages. The grading is objective, transparent and any student or parent can understand it. It also addresses real disparities (unlike district quotas and linguistic quotas) in a meaningful manner. Further, the step up a child receives is modest so that there is no glaring disparity within each university class as under the current district quotas scheme. Moreover, since the step up is modest the incentive for each school to upgrade itself is not undermined; nor is it likely to provoke a negative backlash of resentment. It is a scheme such as this that can successfully replace the district quotas scheme   that now prevails. But a scheme such as this may not be acceptable to the  elite outside Colombo and Jaffna among whom Ministers and Members of Parliament are well represented and who are well served by the district quotas scheme. Perhaps this is why the District Quotas Scheme continued to prevail despite the protests of the Colombo elite, who also enjoy some political clout, and of the Jaffna elite and the underclass everywhere, who remain powerless.

FUTA and Free Education in Sri Lanka: Question of Social Justice and Democracy in an Oligarchy

FUTA and Free Education in Sri Lanka: Question of Social Justice and Democracy in an Oligarchy

Ground Views, 3 Oct, 2012 Athulasiri Kumara Samarakoon Colombo, Education, Politics and Governance,Youth

Photo courtesy Vikalpa

The results of the so-called ‘mother’s examination’, or the year five scholarship examination of this year, have once again sturdily testified for the importance and significance of preservation and continuation of the free education system of this country. The two students who have achieved the first places hail from two divergently opposing social classes, but the duo being educated in the same, state sponsored, free education system. When the boy student from socially affluent strata, attending a high ranked school scored the highest marks, the girl student attending a low ranked, poorly facilitated rural school could produce the same result under more difficult conditions than the conditions the boy student had to face. Both of them have made their schools proud and won the hearts and mind of the people equally; but if it weren’t for the free education would the underprivileged rural student ever have got that opportunity to be equal among unequal? I have just contemplated on this case at the beginning of this piece, because the narrow attempts at labeling the struggle being launched by Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) as a conspiracy against the government or its Ministers of Education are rightly debunked with this story. Further, the success story of the girl student of Thalathu Oya Kanishta Vidyalaya speaks volumes of why we should protect free education for further assuring and protecting social justice of this country.

Unfortunately, the much clichéd patriotism that this government continues to preach long after the end of war never distinguished the raison d’être behind the system of free, state sponsored education that has historically guided Sri Lankan society, after the independence, towards a more equitable and just society. The pillars of social justice, democracy and equality have remained the immaculate tenets of the philosophy behind a free education system and visionaries like C.W.W.Kannangara could correctly perceive the historical importance of this system in founding a united nation. However, the oligarchic and authoritarian tendencies that the post- war Sri Lanka has begun to experience currently has made the well-wishers of this majoritarian system keep their mouths shut and remain silent, still having some remorse towards a regime which violently defeated the LTTE. Conversely, the most educated strata of this country, the University academics, under FUTA Leadership, have displayed their character and power of knowledge and sent warning signals to the ruling regime that it has to conform to the norms of social juice and democracy by preserving the state education system

Now, three months have passed since the FUTA started a continuous protest campaign demanding, mainly, a 6% allocation of GDP on Education and autonomy of education sector. The progress of the FUTA protest campaign has flourished amazingly during the last couple of months and disproportionate to the response from the government. And today, it seems, the FUTA struggle is reviving an unresponsive opposition and attracting the support of left parties while converting its struggle into a large scale national and social movement of people from various sections of the society, who have realized the value of free education for social justice and democratic governance.

The five day foot-walk that FUTA begun at Galle, beating rough rainy weather conditions, now has culminated in a far stretched chain of people united for one goal, the freedom of education sector from the clutches of neo-liberal reforms that the current education ministers have jointly moved to introduce in the school and the University system. The FUTA has shown that it is determined to save the ill-fated education sector from the mismanagement and bad governance of the politicos and bureaucrats who are advised by a bunch of so-called intellectuals upholding neo-liberal policies. The very calculated process of making free education a marketable commodity, a process that would ultimately deprive this country’s poor people the opportunity to climb the ladder of social status through justifiable means, is now being battled at various fronts by University teachers, students, opposition parties, civil society movements and average masses. The message has reached the government that, despite its huge success at every election largely depending on the accomplishment at the battlefield, its public policy is what mostly hated by the educated sections and the civil society which raise concerns on behalf of the large sections of underprivileged masses of this country.

The Ministers, bureaucrats and their advisors who have upheld the virtues of righteous management of the education would have never imagined that the FUTA struggle would ever grow into a large social movement filling the vacuum of a responsible opposition in this country. The ideas of social justice and democracy are thoroughly etched in FUTA demands that have transcended the mere bargain for salary increases that not only University teachers but all the other sectors of employment are currently in urgent need in the face of sky rocketing cost of living.

The government which largely amassed the support of masses of rural and semi-urban Sinhala-Buddhist sections has not carefully analyzed the needs and wants of the very people which elected it into power in many times. Free education and free health have been the two major pillars that have historically uplifted the rural masses and poor of this country and paved the way for them to set their foot in a competitive open economic environment. The welfare character of the state showed its declining phase in the post-war era, and it seems that government was misconceived of the importance of further preserving the welfare image and embarked on an illiberal development process that only looked at the requirements of the Multinational Co-operations and wealthy classes. The ground reality of a war torn country was not carefully realized by the government and it suddenly attempted to close down all the access points open for average masses to participate in and benefit from the welfare-oriented state.

Today, FUTA’s long march has forced the government to think of what it has been doing in the name of large scale economic development and infrastructure building, allegedly accruing huge margins of profit for those undertake the contracts of such projects. While the state education and health sectors that historically founded strong pillars of equitable social justice and democratic governance were crumbling the government has tried to cherish the dream of making Sri Lanka the ‘wonder of Asia’. No wonder that this could be a noble dream of visionary thinking, but if it is to be realized while the social identity that Sri Lanka inherited from free education of welfare state is left for destruction, the future that this regime is making will not belong to the ordinary citizen of this country.

The path of neo-liberal development has been proved to be a failure in terms of assuring social justice, and democratic governance for larger masses of many states in the world and, unfortunately, the war ravaged Sri Lanka is mistakenly taking that path with a strong determination of ending the era of welfare state. The FUTA struggle and the ever growing support for it, has suggested that neo-liberal path would only lead this state to a tragedy of social unrest and authoritarianism, once again making the ordinary citizens bear the brunt of waging rebellions in the name of eliminating social inequality with class hatred. If the government correctly reads the message that FUTA is sending it with long marches, and many more to come in future, the future of this country would be safe with democracy and social justice guiding the way forward.

FUTA predicts

Academic year of 2011 batch in 2013

By Aisha Nazim, Ceylon Today

 The  Federation of University Teachers’ Associations ( FUTA) predicted the university academic year for those who sat for A/Ls in 2011 will begin only in June 2013, as cut-off marks, university selections and other formalities have to be settled before admitting the students.

 FUTA Vice President, Venerable Dambara Amila Thera said it would be impossible to admit new undergraduates to universities before June 2013, as cut-off marks have not been released and also older students would have to pass out first.

“It will take more time for the cut- off marks to be processed and the new students to get selected to universities. In addition, we also have to catch up on the lectures that have been missed due to the trade union action of the last few months. The first and second year undergraduates need to be passed up a year, and the final year undergraduates need to be passed out. By the time their exams are concluded, it will definitely be next June at least,”  Amila Thera said at a media briefing.

 He also said, if the lecturers’ issues are resolved satisfactorily, the academics guarantee that they will be able to produce world class professionals, who will bring pride to Sri Lanka.

“Our universities will produce engineers of the highest calibre, who would repair the Norochcholai Power Plant in such a manner that it will not break down every few months, unlike the repairs done by the Chinese,” he claimed.

The FUTA example

October 4, 2012, 6:55 pm , The Island

This is the first time in our history that one of the trade unions went on strike hiding their main objectives behind a national issue.

FUTA is a set of educated people and they are usually innovative. Other trade unions which are famous for strikes – CEB unions, GMOA and other unions in the medical sector should follow this, as usually they openly put out their selfish demands and do not get the support of the masses.

B S Perera