Urgently resolve education crisis; Mahanayakes

The most venerable Mahanayakes of the Malwaththe and Asgiriya chapters in a statement to the Ministry of higher education today said that the government has to take urgent measures to solve the impending deadlock between the Ministry of Higher education and University lecturers.

“We are aggrieved at the current predicament faced by the students of this country who are the torchbearers of the country’s future. It is indeed very disheartening to note that despite the passage of over three months to the crisis the education ministry has failed to address this issue and put forward a sustainable solution” the statement said. ( J.A.L. Jayasinghe), Dailymirror

Mass support for free education

People turned out in their thousands today to support the Federation of University Teachers Associations (FUTA) rally at Hyde Park. Here political leaders and the public listen to one of the many speeches made at the meeting. Pix by Samantha Perera, Dailymirror

FUTA is highly politicized — Ekanayake

Says engaging in TU action to fight for 6% GDP, not  a TU’s function By Aisha Nazim, Ceylon Today Higher Education Deputy Minister, Nandamithra Ekanayake, charged the FUTA of being highly politicized and having personal political agendas. He also alleged that engaging in trade union action to fight for 6% GDP was  not a trade union’s function, as trade unions are meant to fight for their rights and issues. “There are enough politicians in Parliament that can speak up and fight for  6%. It does not concern the FUTA,” he said. He said it was not FUTA’s concern, because it was not an issue concerning trade unions. Furthermore, though 6% has not been allocated from the GDP specifically for education, a large amount of funds are already being channelled into  the education sector, he said. The infrastructure of universities is being developed,  and most of the funds allocated to universities are returned to the government  as sometimes, not all are used. With regard to the funds allocated to the Defence sector being increased even  three years post-war, Minister Ekanayake said that the people’s security is extremely important, regardless of if the country is in a war situation or not. “Large amounts of funds are reserved for the public’s security in all countries,  including India and America. India also has poverty, and yet a large sum of  their funds is allocated to security. If the people are not safe, education, health,  and everything else would automatically collapse,” he said.

Mahanayakes offer to mediate

September 28, 2012, 12:00 pm

By Cyril Wimalasurendre, The Island

KANDY– The Mahanayake Theras of Malwatte and Asgiriya Chapters yesterday offered to mediate between the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations and the government to bring about a settlement to the on-going strike by FUTA.

Most Venerable Tibbatuwawe Sri Siddharatha Sumangala Mahanayaka Thera of Malwatte and Most Venerable Udugama Sri Buddharakitha Mahanayaka Thera of Asgiriya, in a joint statement issued Yesterday (28), observed that the strike launched by the university teachers had lasted for over three months without a solution.

They urged the Higher Education Minister and the FUTA to take necessary steps to resolve the issue through a dialogue without further delay.

The denial of education to the students would lead the youth, an invaluable asset of the country, to destructive paths owing to their frustration, the statement added.

The Manahayaka Theras stated that they had observed such trade union action in other sectors and they had resolved their issues through negotiations but it was sad to note that the problem with the university teachers remained without a solution for such a long time.

SB claims many lecturers want to return to work

September 28, 2012, 11:14 pm , The Island

By Norman Phalihawadena

Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayaka yesterday claimed that many university lecturers, who were participating in the FUTA strike, had informed him that they would like to resume duties.

Even the lecturers in the Jaffna University had informed him of their desire to give up the strike and work.

"They have realized that it is a meaningless strike. I have already received many letters from the university lecturers, who have now rejected the strike. Eleven Jaffna lectures haves sent letters to me, expressing their wish to disengage themselves from the strike," Minister Dissanayaka stressed.

He pointed out that the JVP-backed trade unions were behind the strike.

Let’s not allow the Pearl of Great Price to be destroyed

NOTEBOOK OF A NOBODY

September 28, 2012, 12:00 pm , The Island


by Shanie

"There was once a beautiful apple tree,

who refused to shelter even the tiniest bee.

It was a vain and selfish tree,

It would say,"No one is mightier than me!"

One day, as it woke up from its slumber,

It was surprised to see a strange climber.

It saw an army of termites, all ready for a fight.

The tree trembled with fear,

and asked them the reason why they were there.

"You do not shelter the birds’ nests,

you sway in the wind and make them fall instead.

You are a selfish creature and as good as dead", said they.

The tree now fearfully called the birds,

"Help me, I apologise,

I promise I shall shelter you and do my best,

But please save me from these horrible pests."

The birds came, one and all,

for they could not ignore the plea of the tree forlorn,

From that day onwards it would to every passerby call,

for it had learnt a valuable lesson

That pride goes before a fall!"

- Poornima Kamath

For centuries, Sri Lanka has placed great value on education. Buddhist Pirivena educators, theosophists, Hindu reformers, Christian missionaries and Muslim modernists have over the years helped to build institutions of great learning. Compulsory education was introduced in 1911 but it became effective only after the wide education reforms in the mid 1940s. The state provided free education from primary to tertiary levels and also established quality secondary schools in all the districts of the country – from Tellijawela in the south to Nelliady in the north, from Ibbagamuwa in the west to Vantharamoolai in the east, and in Nugawela and Welimada in the hill country. These schools had some of the best teachers in the country. By 1950, there were fifty such schools. There was consequently a quantum leap in the country’s literacy rate from 58% in 1946 to 92% fifty years later. In 1990, over 95% of children of primary school age were enrolled in a school. In 1942, we had just one full-fledged national university. Today, we have universities in almost all districts plus an Open University that has study centres spread throughout the country. University enrolment increased from 2500 in 1950 to over 50000 about fifty years later. The Kannangara reforms provided equitable access to quality education up to the University level. It was the Pearl of Great Price.

It is this Pearl that all right thinking people need to safeguard from unthinking and arrogant politicians and their sycophantic bureaucrats. Access to free education from the kindergarten to the university must be available to all. That is not all. It must be access to quality education. Quality education can only be provided by top quality teachers at all levels. Such quality teachers need to be retained and that would be possible only by the state providing adequate resources for it. The trade union action by the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations is all about providing such resources to the Universities, safeguarding equitable access to education and maintaining the University traditions of autonomy and academic freedom.

The need for a revision in pay

The trade union action began with the academics requesting a pay rise in keeping with their academic and professional qualifications and positions. When this demand was made last year, the government accepted this as reasonable and promised to deliver. But like many a promise made to others and broken, the promise of a pay rise was contemptuously ignored. But the academics would not take this lying down and continued their agitation. They still had not launched on strike action. The government’s response was typical. There was a volley of abuse hurled at the FUTA and its leadership. Perhaps, it would not be fair to say that the government as a whole was responsible. There were many within the government and indeed within the cabinet who were embarrassed by the shameless breaking of a solemn promise. Even among the academics, there are many who have politically supported the President and UPFA who were angry that the government had let them down.

There were Ministers who were willing to negotiate with the academics for a reasonable resolution to the pay rise demand. They did talk to FUTA and agreed to convey this reasonable demand to the government. But it appears that their efforts were scuttled by the Ministers in charge of education who perhaps found, in their arrogance, that their pride had been hurt. There were also the political sycophants in the UGC and even among the academic community who supported the Minister. These were the self-styled patriotic university teachers. Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel and recent history has shown us that playing the patriotic card is resorted to by those bereft of ideas and a belief in justice. To this was added another well known gimmick – the conspiracy theory. It is laughable to even think that there can be a conspiracy to overthrow the government by university teachers.

The conspiracy theory was effectively demolished by Professor Jayadeva Uyangoda in a recent article in The Island. He stated: "(The FUTA trade union action merely) seeks policy changes with regard to education. It challenges the government’s positions on education, allocation of public expenditure, and, the role of the state in social issues. It critiques the government’s policy priorities. It actually argues for policy reforms on education, particularly in higher education." He went on to add: "It appears that the government has two parallel tracks to deal with the FUTA strike. One stresses a hardline approach with no concessions to, or compromise with, the striking academics. The conspiracy story seems to emanate from the faction which advances this hardline track. The other is for a negotiated settlement though compromise. When the negotiation track has begun to show some positive directions, the other line seems to be determined to undermine the possibilities of a compromise. That is why they appear to be trying to re-define the FUTA action as a national security issue."

Public expenditure on education

The FUTA trade union action has had a radical shift from the original pay rise issue to the future of higher education in our country. They have demanded greater allocation of resources towards education. Education now accounts for only 2.5% of government expenditure. The expenditure on defence is 400% more than on education. The government repeatedly assures the people and international community that they have successfully eliminated terrorism and there is peace in the North and East and the rest of the country. The priority then is now to spend more on education, health and social services. Is there not something sinister in defence spending continuing to take precedence over education and welfare services?

Creeping Militarisation

One of the grievances of the university teachers is the creeping militarisation in the universities. Last year, all new entrants were subject to what was euphemistically called leadership training in camps. There was no consultation with any of the university academic bodies and the UGC meekly acceded to political directives. Some kind of training and orientation may be good for new entrants but this and the curriculum for it should be worked out in consultation with the academics. In the end, the curriculum was based on promoting the ideology of the ruling class within the government. What also was the need to have this "leadership training" in army camps and not in the universities.

Another aspect of the militarisation and the loss of academic independence was the UGC directive to the Universities, in clear violation of the Universities Act, to employ a security agency linked to the Ministry of Defence. This came at a huge price too. Earlier, each University called for tenders and evaluating all the bids chose the security agency that was most appropriate. The UGC’s illegal directive meant that the statutory bodies of the Universities did not have the freedom to evaluate the quality of security service nor any choice about the enormous difference in costs for employing the Defence Ministry related security agency, Rakna Lanka. The natural suspicion is that this agency is engaged not only in providing security services but also in spying on activities within the universities.

Political Directives

The quality of our educational services, both higher education as well as the schools, used to be the pride of Asia. We maintained that quality by establishing the healthy tradition of autonomy and academic freedom, and avoiding political interference in university affairs. But over the last couple of years, there has been a marked decline in the quality of our education services. This has been accentuated in recent times. The deterioration of standards is directly attributable to the Minister of Higher Education, the Chairman of the University Grants Commission and some of the Vice Chancellors flouting the traditions of academic autonomy and making political decisions and political appointments to the universities. All of them, in their arrogance and pride, are fond of attributing political motives for FUTA’s trade union action. The Chairman of the UGC, when confronted, denies any politics in his decisions and denies having issued any directives in violation of the Universities Act. The circular directing the Universities to hire Rakna Lanka for security services was one such. More recently, he has reportedly issued another circular that the UGC representatives on the Selection Boards would have a right of veto when selecting persons for academic appointments, etc. The Vice Chancellor of the Colombo University has reportedly, addressing a workshop this week, accused the FUTA leadership of having a political agenda. Academics, she is reported to have stated, must not be involved in politics. She probably does not remember (like politicians who conveniently do not remember after they have committed crimes) that she along with the Chairman of the UGC and some other Vice Chancellors appeared at a Press conference and urged support for a particular political party/candidate at the last election.

Universities should be liberal seats of learning where study, research and teaching, diverse opinions, dissent and legitimate challenges to authority should be encouraged and safeguarded. People with authority in the university system must respect the Universities Act and remember that their primary loyalty is to the university community, teachers, students and non-academic staff, and not to the political establishment. They must have the humility to dialogue with the university community and resolve issues through consultation and negotiation. Arrogance and Pride surely goes before a fall. When that fall comes, all the King’s horses and and all the King’s men will not be able to put them together again.

Education and social emancipation:

The need for a broader discussion on the education crisis

September 28, 2012, 8:16 pm , The Island


by Andi Schubert

The trade union action of the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) is now about to enter its fourth month. Prior to and during the strike a number of debates and discussion have raged between supporters, opponents and observers about the issues raised by FUTA viz. education and the crisis facing the education sector in Sri Lanka. In this short article I hope to examine the nature of the debate so far and hope to broaden it by introducing the dimension of social emancipation. This article is the further development of a point I raised during the "Forum with Eran" program organized by Eran Wickramaratne MP on the 26th of September which brought together Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri and Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha MP for a discussion on the education crisis in Sri Lanka.

Current discussions on the FUTA strike

The debate on the FUTA strike has brought to the fore a number of key questions about education, trade unionism, policy development and the future of students in this country. In this section I try to document some of the major debates on these issues as they have appeared in the media since the beginning of the FUTA strike. I must note that the list below is not an exhaustive one but I have tried my best to capture some of the key debates that have taken place so far. In doing this I don’t attempt to take sides but simply hope to document some of the key issues that have been raised in the media.

The discussions on the issue of education include the need for higher allocations for education, the question of whether private expenditure on education should be considered part of the government’s education allocation, the way in which an increased allocation for education should be spent, the financing of higher allocations for education as well as the question of the introduction of the private sector as an education provider (especially at the university level). Another aspect of this debate has been the discussion on the quality of education generally and more specifically on the quality of teaching in the university as well as in schools around the country. Questions have also been raised about the quality of research and knowledge production within academia mainly because of the call by FUTA for better salaries for academics. Most importantly FUTA has succeeded in creating debate as to the purpose of education (specifically tertiary education) in the country and a wide debate has raged on whether the primary aim of education should be for employment or for knowledge or both (and to what degree of each).

In terms of trade unionism the debates in the media have ranged from the legitimacy of FUTA’s trade union action to whether it is within the scope of a trade union action to call for policy change. There have also been a number of articles that either critique or praise the tactics employed by both FUTA and the Government in seeking to resolve the current standoff. Another important aspect of the debate on trade unionism has been the question of voice in a broader social movement for change and questions have been raised about the capacity of FUTA to represent a variety of interest groups as it evolves into a larger social movement calling for serious change in the education sector.

This has also led to serious debates about the process through which policy development takes place in Sri Lanka, and questions have also been raised as to who should be consulted in policy formulation and whether there is a need for wider public consultation in policy development. Furthermore in the light of a number of educational blunders, serious questions have been raised as to who should take responsibility for educational policy though there appears to be very little consensus on this.

Interestingly much of the debate has also focused on the "student" and both FUTA and its detractors have invoked concern about the student in seeking to legitimize a variety of stances. I must note here that "the student" appears to be stuck in a time warp between the present and the future as FUTA’s detractors point to the plight of current students while FUTA has sort to emphasize the need to think about the future student and the capacity of education to support her/his development.

A blind spot in the debate?

Three months into the FUTA strike it would be unlikely that there has been any aspect of the debate on education that has not received much attention. However, there is one significant issue that is yet to receive much attention but which I believe would significantly broaden the terms of the debate on education that has taken place so far.

In an extremely interesting article, a key FUTA member and prominent academic Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda excellently argues that the introduction of free education provided by the welfare state was widely seen as a stepping stone to social emancipation for a class of people in the country that had been severely marginalized and excluded during colonial times by the elite as well as the British. It was hoped that education would open doors to employment in the public sector that had hitherto been limited to the elite who had the capacity to pay for a private education that in turn secured them employment in lucrative and respectable public sector jobs.

However, the welfare state was unable to cope with the surging demand for public sector employment or provide the necessary infrastructure to ensure that all students across the country received the quality of education that would enable them to secure similar employment prospects in the public sector. As a result Uyangoda argues that the State could only provide partial social emancipation in so much as it provided a new generation of youth with the education but it could not secure complete social emancipation for the vast numbers of rural, lower middle-class young men and women. Or as Uyangoda puts it "the system could not help them beyond purchasing one way tickets to higher education."*

Social emancipation in an era of patronage politics

I want to build on Prof. Uyangoda’s insights to argue for the need to re-examine the link between education and social emancipation. In a country that has come to rely more and more on patronage politics, the onus is placed on personal relationships to mediate and facilitate personal interests in order to achieve social emancipation. In this context it is hardly surprising that the Government’s intransience seems to suggest that the existing system is adequate to bring about social emancipation.

Amidst the cacophony of the voices that are speaking out on education in Sri Lanka, I believe that at the heart of the issues raised by FUTA and its supporters is the question of the contribution of education to the social emancipation of marginalized youth around the country. What is not articulated however, is the question of as to how increased funding for education will enable this social emancipation.

Therefore, it is necessary to pose a few questions that I believe can broaden the debate on the current education crisis in Sri Lanka. What do marginalized young people expect from education today? What is the link between education in Sri Lanka today and the desire for social emancipation? Does education still only offer partial emancipation? Would the increased allocation of funds for education bring about social emancipation or stymie it by creating expectations that cannot be fulfilled? Is the creation of employable graduates the answer to the demand for social emancipation? This can also broaden the understanding of who is responsible for bringing about social emancipation, and goes beyond the narrow confines of the debate on graduate employability.

By seeking to answer these questions we can broaden the discussion even further into the role that education is expected to play in a developing society. While lauding FUTA for creating and generating debate on the current status of education, I believe it is important that there is also an articulation of the relationship between education and social emancipation. This is because in the final analysis the questions FUTA has so successfully raised are not limited to education alone but impinge on the very meaning of social emancipation and its role in combating oppression.

*I have made a rather clumsy attempt to paraphrase what is a truly insightful and thought provoking article. For the full version of this article see Uyangoda, J. (2003). Social Conflict, Radical Resistance and Projects of State Power in Southern Sri Lanka: The Case of the JVP. In M. Mayer, D. Rajasingham-Senanayake, & Y. Thangarajah (Eds.), Building Local Capacities for Peace: Rethinking Conflict and Development in Sri Lanka (pp. 37-64). New Delhi: Macmillan India.

More students than teachers in FUTA protest - SB

September 28, 2012, 11:05 pm , The Island


by Zacki Jabbar

While the Chief Prelates of the Malwatte and Asgiriya Chapters have offered to mediate in the crisis affecting the education sector, Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake yesterday claimed that there were more students in the protest march organised by the Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) than teachers.

"We counted the number of teachers in the procession and it was around 150," the Minister said, adding that there were a large number of politicians and undergraduates.

The Minister said that the demonstrations could not be considered a success, since there were about 5,000 dons countrywide.

The entire protest was politically motivated, since senior university professors were among the highest paid public servants in the country and drew even more than the Chief Justice, he claimed.

Dissanayake said that the monthly package, including allowances of Grade One Dons, was around Rs.170,000 while an ordinary lecturer drew about Rs.75,000.

Asked if he was not interested in resolving the chaos in the education sector, the Minister replied that talks could commence once the protests ended.

Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella said that FUTA’s demand for the education budget to be increased to six per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was unrealistic.

A figure of more than five percent of GDP was allocated by countries with a low qualitative growth in education, but Sri Lanka was way ahead and did not fall into that category, he said.

The Minister said that due to poverty, malnutrition, illiteracy and unemployment that had afflicted under developed countries in Africa, they were forced to spend more on education.

University teachers' march

September 28, 2012, 7:50 pm , The Island

This march started off from Galle on 24th September, and their modus operendi was to force the Government to give in to their demands.

If the striking dons and teachers think that a march from Galle to Colombo could solve this problem when other avenues failed, they are mistaken. Even as I write this comment, the march is on (Sept. 26).

But what has happened now? The March has been 'devoured' by the U.N.P, J.V.P. and other disgruntled politicians. Persons like Rosie, K D Lalkantha and Ranil himself said that "this should be the first step towards the defeat of the Government or something to that effect.

I blame the university academics for tolerating this nonsense.

RANJITH G. PERERA

Retired University Academic

PANADURA

Who ‘Ruins the chances of reconciliation?’

September 27, 2012, 7:38 pm , The Island


By Laksiri Fernando

This refers to The Island editorial yesterday (26 September 2012) on basically the same title without the question: Who? It may be in order to caution the FUTA (the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations) of any possible deviation or adventure, given the subtle machinations that the government, and more particularly the Minister in charge are hatching with the hope of crushing the legitimate demands of the academics which are the concerns of the general public at large on education and higher education.

But it is entirely a different thing to blame the FUTA, directly or indirectly, for unduly politicising the issues as the government has been all out to denigrate the academics as political pawns of local and foreign conspiracies from the beginning. The demand to increase public expenditure on education (both school and university) targeting six per cent of the GDP is not a political demand but a social one.

The other main demands, apart from a salary increase, are to stop political interference in universities (i.e. academic freedom and autonomy) and to consult academics on university reforms (i.e. academic responsibilities and participation). It would only be a political lunatic or a schemer who could characterise these demands as political.

Of course there has been on and off political overtones or expressions by individual academics or even by spokesmen of FUTA. Those were inevitable given the intransigence of the government. The dispute started not this year but last year. The history of trade union struggles show, particularly in the public sector, that they are naturally intermingled with political realities and forces. After all, their employer or the adversary is the Government. Those who aspire for pure trade union struggles are pathetic dreamers.

It is entirely correct for the FUTA to take the struggle to the streets and seek broadest possible support from the students, religious and civil society leaders and political parties in the opposition and also in the governing coalition, the UPFA. Even the international support is soon warranted. The issues are too important to leave them to be a mere ‘labour dispute.’ The past of the organizations such as the Inter University Student Union is not very relevant to the present context as far as they have clearly expressed that they abide by the democratic norms.

As the editorial has acknowledged, "Determined to win its demands, the FUTA is all out to crank up pressure on the government and its resilience is to be admired."

This is the third month that the academics are not paid their salaries, a most inhuman measure that is carried out without any appropriate effort to negotiate and amicably resolve the issues at stake. I personally know the intellectual or rather the anti-intellectual calibre of the present Minister being a university teacher during his student days, and he appears to act as if to take revenge from those who have excelled in education and academic pursuits.

There is no need to hide the need for ‘regime change’ in Sri Lanka in connection with the FUTA struggle or outside. While The Island editorial has shied away from the issue or insinuates that talk about regime change can be counterproductive for the FUTA struggle (as sympathetic advice perhaps) the lead story on the same day and many editorials and news reports before confirm that there is no other way for the people of this country rather than changing the regime and changing many regimes (to mean the systems) within the constitutional, policy and institutional framework of the country.

‘Regime change’ in higher education is the central issue at present starting from the Minister down to the Vice Chancellors who are mere political appointees at present. I would request the FUTA to ask for the resignation or the removal of the Minister to begin with. This is not an ‘Arab Spring.’ It is a legitimate demand. He has failed as the Minister and failed terribly in addition to corruption and nepotism. No confidence motion in Parliament is in order.

There are those who have genuinely raised the issue that mere increase of expenditure is not sufficient. Yes. FUTA demands include educational reforms with full academic participation and that is the right thing to do. It also demands a halt to political interference and that is also a regime change to mean the change of systems. At this very moment the academics are marching towards Colombo and they should win their struggle.

If the government is serious about its declared ‘Chinthana’ or ‘Hubs,’ then it should allocate at least 2.5 per cent of the GDP for education in this forthcoming budget. This is the time of budget preparation. The necessary allocations can come by pruning the present exorbitant and unnecessary expenditure on External Affairs and Defence. That kind of gesture with other promises can settle the present dispute so painful for every one and particularly for the students and their parents.

The editorial has raised the ‘scarecrow’ that the government is strong. Yes, the government may be strong but not on this issue. No doubt that a total regime change is a long way ahead through democratic and peaceful means. But FUTA should win. Let me quote finally what the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared in its Preamble.

"Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."

*The writer is former Senior Professor in Political Science and Public Policy, University of Colombo.