* Education sector trade union in Sri Lanka gathers over 100,000 signatures demanding resignations of two ministers
Sat, Aug 4, 2012, 08:01 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.
Aug 04, Colombo: An education sector trade union in Sri Lanka has gathered over 100,000 signatures demanding the resignations of Education Minister Bandula Gunawardena and Higher Education Minister S.B. Dissanayake.
General Secretary of the Ceylon Teacher Services Union (CTSU), Mahinda Jayasinghe said the petition demanding the resignations of the two ministers has been signed by people in several districts.
He said the petition has so far been signed by people from Colombo, Gampaha, Ratnapura and Kurunegala districts and it would be taken to the Kegalle, Kandy and Embilipitiya districts next week.
According to Jayasinghe, there has been a good response for the petition since people were disgruntled with the failure of these two ministers to address the issues in the education sector, especially the controversy surrounding the Z-scores of last year's GCE Advanced Level examination.
He charged that the Z-score issue has now pushed the people to the limit of their patience due to the impact it has had on thousands of students.

In defence of university autonomy and academic freedom

August 2, 2012, 7:38 pm , the island

By Prof. Wiswa Warnapala

Continued from yesterday

In the last three or four decades, there was a considerable expansion in the intake which, of course, was stimulated by a great demand for higher education. The rapid increase in the number of students, which had taken place in the sixties, was not simultaneously accompanied by a concentrated attention on quality. It was in the last decade that a major effort has been invested in this direction, and the very process of transformation was accelerated in the last few years. It was the exhortation of this policy which called upon the universities to devote their energies to improving the quality of education offered to the students. This had to be done notwithstanding the increasing pressure for the expansion of the intake. The compelling reason was that the country demanded a greater measure of social and educational equality which partly, was one of the aspirations of the post-colonial state. This had a direct impact on the expansion of the universities, and it became lop-sided because the inevitable expansion was on arts and humanities. As was inevitable, the expansion created numerous problems. A numerical expansion was planned to be carried out within a period through a network of provincial universities; the objective of this policy was to make special innovations with regard to their curriculum and new specializations to be given priority. What was vital in each of them was the introduction of new disciplines; it was constantly mentioned that the quality of the University graduate must not be sacrificed to quantity. Character, temperament and wider qualities of mind are, of course, as important as intellectual attainments.

The maintenance of academic standards depended on two important factors, the quality of the undergraduate material reaching the universities from the schools and the quality of training provided by the universities themselves. The two factors are closely related. Well-educated teachers are required to train the school population and to avoid the schools from sending ill-educated entrants to the universities. The main question was the capacity of the schools to produce such freshmen of quality. In this connection, it needs to be recommended that more than ninety percent of the undergraduates are recipients of the Mahapola grants. There is no question that the universities attract suitably qualified university students, who do not need cosmetic ventures such as leadership training programs in army camps, the authors of which, perhaps, never understood the mission of a University. The existing school network is certain to increase the supply of potential undergraduates and the future increase, though not predicted with accuracy, will be substantial, and this indicates the magnitude of the investment needed for higher education. Given the number of universities, investments on an unprecedented scale will be needed, and to decide how this is to be achieved is the responsibility of the government.

Expanded access led to reduction in quality

It has been realised that the elimination of all obstacles to an expanded access led to the reduction in quality. There is no doubt that the average quality has substantially suffered. Apart from the quality of the undergraduate, the maintenance of university standards depends, to a large extent, on the quality of the life and the education which the universities are expected to provide. Most complications of the system are tied to this basic proposition. The rapid increase of student numbers, resulting from a policy to expand access, has, naturally imposed severe strains on the system, contributing to the deterioration in the standards of university education in the country. In Sri Lanka, standards depend on a number of factors-quality of the academic staff, bilingualism and monolingualism of the academic staff, the ratio of staff to students, the buildings and their adequacy to the present requirements, library facilities, residential facilities, extra-curricular facilities and canteen facilities. The sudden expansion of numbers has exceeded the levels of accommodation. In the meantime, the student body, politicized or not, began to make new demands on the universities. In this environment of shortage and inadequacies, the leisured university life with adequate opportunities for regular contact between the staff and the student became impossible, which clearly affected the intellectual life of the university.

The doubling of the numbers of the students in the last four decades could be justified on the ground that it raised the proportion of the population which has had the advantage of university education. The output of graduates from all faculties has had a major impact on the social and economic potential of the country. Advantages of university education for social and economic progress of a given society have been widely recognized. The creation of useful knowledge, as anticipated, has had a direct link with the creation of employment opportunities for the output of graduates in Sri Lanka. The perception of the public is that the University education is a means of training for a particular career. As an inevitable consequence, the failure to provide employment has created a sense of frustration and disillusionment among the unemployed graduates. One way out is to establish an active post-graduate intellectual culture, and the many forms of specialized study could be better left to the post-graduate students. The absence of such a post- graduate intellectual culture is a major deficiency in the present system, which, partially, has been rectified with outside assistance. Sri Lanka does not have benefactors who can dole out money for research. Further, the notion of research has been given a different value. Unfortunately, for many policy makers, university is essentially a place for impartation of knowledge than a place for the creation of knowledge. Therefore, the teaching, at the expense of research, has gained importance.

Principle of public welfare

To conclude, the relationship between the state and the universities, by implication, is a difficult one, as the current debate of the question illustrates. The hard task is to devise appropriate means of reconciling the planning and control of the universities with the maintenance of academic freedom. The need for some kind of central planning of university education through direct government intervention, as the system remains wholly state- funded, has been widely recognised. Universities, in the execution of their policies, needs to be based on the principle of public welfare. However, central control and planning, even through the UGC, cannot involve the curtailment of academic freedom. It needs to be reminded to those who intend in invoking Macarthian techniques of witch- hunting and interference, that such forms of interference would definitely lead to intellectual retardation. As Eric Ashby notes, "the price of autonomy is to abjure power". There are examples of arbitrary political interference in the affairs of the universities in the Commonwealth, but they rarely became issues of political contention, because most governments have shown themselves scrupulously careful to avoid even the appearance of interference with academic freedom. The relationship between the state and the universities, which evolved and conceived as a form of partnership, should not be disturbed and all conflicts between the two parties, each of which showing their own power at the expense of the other, need to be avoided in the interest of the development of the universities. The main responsibility for this kind of arrangement rests with the UGC as the accepted intermediary between the state and the universities, and the accomplishment of this important task depends on the goodwill and understanding between the university community and the UGC. The developing climate of distrust between the State and the universities is certainly not in the interest of higher education in Sri Lanka. The simple truth is that universities need to be given better resources as higher education is an investment in human capital.

Concluded

Dons demand more

August 2, 2012, 7:49 pm , the island

It was heartening to read the news item in the front page of The Island of July 31 of the position taken by  President Rajapakse on the above. He quite rightly has said that there is no way their demand for more and more pay hikes could be met as that would prompt other professionals to follow suit. The dons should understand that there should be some parity in the salary scales of similar professions, as was the case a few decades ago, if not the entire administrative structure can collapse. The country has become almost ungovernable now because of the successive Governments’ failure to stand firm when unreasonable demands were made for pay hikes by powerful trade unions over the years.

If I remember right when I joined the Engineering Service in 1970, my salary was Rs. 650 a month, salary of a new recruit to the Medical Service was Rs 680 and the salary of an arts graduate joining the Administrative Service was Rs.620. All were on the same salary scale with an annual increment of Rs 30. The engineering graduates were given one increment more than the Arts graduates as the engineering degree course duration is one year more than the arts degree course and the Medical Doctors were given one increment more than the Engineers as the medical degree course is one year more than the engineering degree course. The Graduates joining the semi government services such as Corporations, Boards, Institutes etc.were paid generally 33. 3 percent more than their counterparts in Govt. service, mainly to compensate for the pension rights and job security to a certain extent. No wonder the services functioned smoothly then!

Talking about Dons in lighter vein, I am reminded of an encounter we had, in mid nineteen sixties at the Colombo Campus with our physics lecturer Professor Mylvaganam, a brilliant product of Oxford University and a superb lecturer,  who was extremely  strict especially to us male students!  Those days we had to get our "record books" signed by the lecturers in charge of the subjects in order to sit the exams, for some reason or other,  about twelve of us in the batch couldn’t get this done on time and we had to approach Professor Mylvaganam. We were standing just out side his majestic office which had swing doors and he could see our feet from underneath and when he roared " come in " , I almost got shoved in and my "friends" bolted! I quite respectfully handed over my " record book " and requested his signature timidly. He took it and without glancing at it even, threw it, through the open windows of his office on to the lawn outside and said

"COME IN MY FREE TIME AND I HAVE NO FREE TIME"!!!      

  R.Arambewela

  Colombo     

‘Dont let Privatization of Education Destroy the Free Education System’

1 August 2012, 11:27 pm, http://dbsjeyaraj.com

Vivimarie VanderPoorten

by Roel Raymond

Vivimarie VanderPoorten is an award winning Sri Lankan poet. Her first book Nothing Prepares You won the Gratiaen Prize for the best piece of English literary work in Sri Lanka, in 2007.

In 2009 she was recipient of a higher honour; the SAARC Poetry Award, which was followed by the publication of her second book Stitch Your Eyelids Shut, in 2010.

Vivimarie is also a senior lecturer in English language, literature and linguistics at the Open University of Sri Lanka, which puts her firmly at the fore of the on-going strike by academics, spearheaded by the Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA). Ceylon Today spoke with Vivimarie to understand her reasons for supporting the strike, factors that led to trade union action by the academics and the nature of their demands.

Q:How is it that you are involved in this massive, on-going strike by academics?

A: I am currently the Assistant Secretary of OUTA – that is, the Open University Teachers’ Association. OUTA is a part of the Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA), hence my support and involvement.

Q: What demands are your collective unions making?

A: Our unions are faced with a number of unaddressed issues. However, for the sake of convenience, they can be broken down into two major demands. We ask that the government 1) Enhance recruitment and retention of the highest qualified academics and that it 2) Safeguards and uplifts the State education sector.

Q: What does FUTA mean by ‘Enhance recruitment and retention of the highest qualified academics’?

A: Basically, to make sure the Sri Lankan university system ‘gets the best’. That is, to ensure we recruit those graduates that top the batch; the ones that obtain First Class and Second Uppers, as probationary lecturers (the first rung on the academic ladder). At the moment the university system is unable to attract these graduates as lecturers because the salaries on offer are abysmally low. Even if universities do manage to recruit these top students to their teaching staff, they are unable to retain them as many leave the island to study for their Masters or Ph.Ds and opt to stay abroad, preferring to take up better paying teaching appointments there. This is the ‘brain-drain’ we speak of; our country is being drained of the best of its brains because it has not yet been able to create a university system that will use and look after its best.

Q: You are currently a senior lecturer at the Open University of Sri Lanka, were you ever offered a post abroad?

A: Yes, I was, after obtaining my Ph.D at the University of Ulster in Northern Ireland I was asked if I would be interested in teaching on the Masters programme.

Q: You obviously chose not to. What would you have been paid if you had?

A: I would have been paid about 45,000 GBP per annum as a starting fee.

Q: Why choose the Open University instead?

A: There were, obviously, many reasons for choosing to do so. I had always wanted to teach – I knew that. I had also worked briefly – as a new graduate in English and Economics – for the Social Scientists Association in Sri Lanka. It was there that I began to be socially and politically aware, and form opinions for myself. By the time I had completed my Ph.D, I knew I wanted to give back to the State education system from which so many had benefited, myself included.

Q: How long have you been at the Open University?

A: 15 years now, at the Department of Language Studies.

Q: The second demand the unions are making is to ‘safeguards and uplift the State education sector’ – what does this entail?

A: We have made a number of detailed request to this end, key among them are a call for 1) six per cent of the GDP to be allocated to Education, 2) that politicization within universities is ended and 3) the university community be involved in all higher education reforms.

Q: Six per cent of the GDP is a serious commitment. Do you feel that request is justifiable?

A: Totally. The current budgetary allocation towards education is a meagre 1.9% of the GDP. This is one of the lowest in the world – countries like Kenya (7.1%), Bangladesh (2.1%), India (3.7%), Nepal (3.4%) and Namibia (7.2%) allocate more than that towards education! The budgetary allocation towards education has decreased since this government came into power in 2005; back then 2.5% of the GDP was the commitment towards education, now it is 1.9%.

Q: What do your unions mean when it asks for ‘de-politicization’ of the university system?

A: It means that all government meddling with the administration of universities must come to a complete end. The Minister of Higher Education currently meddles with even the micro-management of the universities and this cannot be continued. We are governed by the University Grants Commission (UGC) – a body that at one time was staffed with impartial academics that recognized their role in safeguarding the interests of the entire university system – teachers, students all. The UGC is now more interested in agreeing to act as a mouthpiece on behalf of the government rather than university representatives.

Q: You say the minister meddles in even the micro-management of universities; can you give me an example of one such incident?

A: Yes, the University of the Visual and Performing Arts that is situated near the NelumPokuna insists that qualifying students sit an aptitude test before being allowed to enter their programme. Recently, some students with ‘connections’ that had not passed the test had complained to the Minister who in turn called the Vice Chancellor at the University and asked that the aptitude test be removed; which he did.

Q: Vice Chancellors; what exactly is their function and are they not independent?

A: Vice Chancellors are the Administrative Heads of universities – like the ‘Principal’ in a school; he or she has the highest authority. A Vice Chancellor is expected to be independent and run the universities autonomously but that no longer happens as all Vice Chancellors are appointed by the President and hence, chosen more for their political affiliations than impartial authority.

Q: The question of privatizing universities has been subject to much debate – what is your unions’ stance on this?

A: We are not against privatization – by all means do set up private universities in this country, but don’t do it at the expense of the State education system – in other words, don’t kill the free education system to embrace the private one. Instead, simultaneously develop both systems – that way both the affluent student and the one that is not have access to education.

There is another way tackling this issue ; the government could invest more in the existing universities – enlarge them, bring them up to international standards and then charge a fee to students that didn’t qualify for free entrance and education. Further still, if the government invested more in the existing universities they could actually increase local intake – ending the cut-throat competition to get into local universities because there are only limited spots open.

Q: Tell me more about the strike action launched by the university trade unions..

A: As of the 4 July 2012 all teaching activities have been stopped and all examinations have been stopped. In addition to not reporting to work we are also conducting a very organized campaign – a one million signature campaign that is going very well. Academics took to the streets and handed out leaflets explain the reasons for our strike action – just imagine that, Professors standing out at street corners explaining to the average man that his actions are aimed at saving free education for our children, for the future. We have currently close to 100,000 signatures and this number is growing by the hour! In addition to that we run an active online campaign on blogs and Facebook – membership currently at 10,000+ and we use that tool to network and raise awareness on the reasons for our collective strike action, and what our demands are in all three languages.

Q: Doesn’t this trade union action affect university teachers themselves?

A: Yes, it does. This trade union action affects our teaching, it affects our day to day lives, it affects our pay; but we mean to continue to the dogged end. It is important to note that we don’t enjoy what we are doing. As academics we are used to looking at things critically, consider all aspects, all sides, looking for the shades of grey and not just the polarized hues of black and white, and yet, with this trade union action we are being forced to look at things in terms of black and white and take a stand accordingly. This doesn’t make us very comfortable, and yet we must, because we have been pushed to do so. It is heartening that many of our students are supporting us and with us because they know this is a struggle for long term benefits and for the common good, not just for lecturers to get a salary hike.

Q: And for how long will your unions’ be on strike?

A: For as long as it takes. We will continue this trade union action until the government gives in to our demands, or at the very least until a compromise, FUTA and its affiliated trade unions can be happy with, is reached. There must be serious and genuine commitment from the government for us to move forward. courtesy: Ceylon Today

University teachers for excellence in education

August 2, 2012, 7:36 pm, the island

By Dileni Gunewardena

There is trouble in the universities and trouble in the schools. While frustrated students and academics have taken to the streets, there has been much posturing among those responsible for the state of education and higher education in this country. This article attempts to counter prevalent misconceptions about the nature, motivation and demands of the Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA) and the academics they represent.

FUTA comprises over 40 member unions of university teachers of the Universities of Colombo, Peradeniya, Moratuwa, Kelaniya, Sri Jayawardenapura, Ruhuna, Jaffna, Visual and Performing Arts, as well as of Wayamba, Rajarata, Eastern, South Eastern, and Open Universities with a total strength of approximately four thousand members. FUTA has been in existence since 1983. Among its current opponents are former leaders of FUTA. However, I believe that there is a significant difference between the current FUTA leadership and its forebears that explains why the current TU action has garnered widespread support among academics, students, intellectuals and leading lights in the country, as well as the general public.

Clever, young and committed

The most striking feature of today's university trade union leadership is that it comprises academics with outstanding scholarly credentials. A search in scholarly research databases for their names reveals them to be authors of international repute, award-winners for Ph.D. and postdoctoral research, with impeccable track records of international research publications. They represent the best in Sri Lanka's University system today. Among the few I know (of) are an internationally published historian, a distinguished young evolutionary biologist, an outstanding macroeconomist with a Ph.D. from East Asia's best university, a brilliant mechanical engineer, Sri Lanka's first Ph.D. in counseling psychology, and two award-wining authors and poets, all of them trained in some of the best universities and post-doctoral research labs in the world. In fact, in terms of research and publications, these scholar-trade unionists have better academic credentials than several present-day Vice-Chancellors.

Many in the FUTA leadership and others who give dynamism to the movement are in their late thirties or early forties. They are recent Ph.D.'s, having completed their doctorates in the last five to ten years. Most of them funded their own postgraduate studies through teaching assistantships and research fellowships, because state-funded scholarships for postgraduate studies have simply not been available to university academics, at least in the last twenty five years. These academics were brilliant enough to obtain admission and funding on their own merit to some of the best universities in the world, and often turned down good job opportunities in developed countries to return to Sri Lanka, to the ill-paid positions in the universities that nurtured them.

These leaders have a vision for university education in this country, precisely because of the excellent overseas training they themselves received. Dynamic teachers and solid researchers, they have in the past few years, engaged in curriculum revision exercises, brought in external funding to their universities to improve teaching, learning and research infrastructure through competitive research and development grants, disseminated knowledge through workshops and seminars, launched new undergraduate and postgraduate degree programmes and inspired recent cohorts of students to pursue academic careers and obtain training in good universities abroad. A critical mass of such academics is what helps universities to thrive and become engines of change and promote Sri Lanka as a knowledge hub.

But these same academics have watched with regret as their colleagues have left the universities for academic positions in universities abroad. They know that if this trend continues-as it will, if salaries are not raised and the present political interference and micro-management of universities continues-the universities that they serve with dedication and commitment will no longer be spaces for intellectual growth and independent thinking.

FUTA demands

FUTA's current demands fall into two categories: (A) outstanding salary-related demands and (B) demands relating to the state education. The first set of demands relates to the remuneration scheme required to retain and recruit highly qualified academics. Principally, FUTA demands the complete implementation of the Prof. M.T.M. Jiffry and Prof. Malik Ranasinghe proposals made in 2008 in consultation with the University Grants Commission (UGC), Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE), and FUTA. The second set of demands specifically asks that the Government (1) delineates a course of action to increase government spending on education that will reach 6% of GDP within the next 2 years, (2) clearly states government policy on state funded education, (3)suspends all existing higher education reform processes until a proper consultative process involving all stakeholders and the public takes place, (4) agrees to refrain from the politicization and?micromanagement of the Universities so that these institutions can thrive as autonomous institutions that would act as catalysts in the development of Sri Lanka. [A detailed summary of FUTA demands can be found at http://futa-sl.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/FUTA_Demands_Comprehensive_19_06_2012.pdf ]

What motivates this set of demands? University academics realize that they do not work in a vacuum. They are constantly accused of producing "unemployable" graduates. However, they can only do their best with the raw material -students-they are given. Recent analyses of education standards conducted by government entities themselves have shown that there are many quality issues in both primary and secondary education in Sri Lanka (World Bank, Treasures of the Education System in Sri Lanka, 2005, Transforming School Education in Sri Lanka: from Cut Stones to Polished Jewels, 2011). To be able to achieve the kind of transformation required in both school and university education, quality inputs-training, learning and teaching infrastructure, research facilities and better remuneration-will be needed. The type of inputs and facilities required for education and higher education are spelt out in the Mahinda Chinthana Vision 2010 document. In recognition that the measures that need to be taken to ensure quality education for all (EFA) involve substantial budgetary allocations to education, ministers and high level government officials of eight South Asian countries including Sri Lanka, at the second ministerial meeting of the South Asia EFA Forum in Dhaka, Bangladesh, in December 2009, committed to a public expenditure allocation for education that is equivalent to 6% of the country's GDP (UNESCO, Reaching the Unreached in Education in Asia-Pacific to meet the EFA goals by 2015: A Commitment to Action, 2010, p.6). While none of these countries had spent anywhere close to this target in 2010, data from Sri Lanka's Central Bank report and World Development Indicators of the World Bank show that Sri Lanka lags far below her SAARC neighbours, as the graph taken from World Bank (2011, p.30) shows. FUTA's demand is simply that the government takes steps to meet its own commitment.

Nowhere in the list of FUTA demands is there opposition to the private provision of education. Rather, what FUTA requests is a broad-based consultative process on education reform, and clarity regarding the government's commitment to the continued provision of state education.

Who will suffer if FUTA loses?

FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith has stated that if FUTA loses its demands, it will not be FUTA that loses, but the general public of Sri Lanka. It has been very clear that (especially younger, qualified) university academics are waiting on the outcome of these negotiations in order to make career decisions. If FUTA loses, over the next few years, the best and the brightest will leave the universities for jobs abroad or in the private sector of Sri Lanka. After all, university lecturers are not just teachers, they are skilled professionals: engineers, doctors, scientists, lawyers, economists, sociologists, psychologists, linguists, etc. who are not restricted to teaching jobs in universities. Eventually, even those with a commitment to stay will leave-not because of the lack of pecuniary benefits, but because of the absence of other colleagues with whom they have a shared vision. Meanwhile, private universities which are not hamstrung by salary structures and patronage will be able to attract some of these academics. Eventually, the only academics who will be left in the universities are those who have few options elsewhere, who possibly were hired to the universities because of their political affiliations.

With the exodus of high-quality academics from the state university system, there will emerge a dual system of higher education in Sri Lanka, a low-quality state system and a higher quality fee-levying system. Who then will suffer? A depleted and poor quality state higher education system is obviously a poor return to taxpayers. Countries with a strong higher education system also had strong state education systems, which provided the backbone of the higher education system, especially in terms of research. But the greatest losers will be the students of state universities-the sons and daughters of the average Sri Lankan. In the future, such students may continue to enter the university, but will receive a poor quality education, while their counterparts in the private sector will have the benefit of better academic staff and better infrastructure. As the gap between these two sectors widens, the social fabric of the country is likely to be threatened. It is interesting to note that in Sri Lanka's history, the highest state expenditure on education (5.2 % of GDP) was allocated in 1972, one year after the 1971 youth insurrection.

Sri Lanka has been called the land of missed opportunities. If higher education officials are unable to grasp the opportunity in this "academic spring", perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury, himself trained in one of the best economics departments in the world, can. Otherwise, sadly, the "knowledge hub" will remain in the sphere of the rhetoric, and the reality that is the education system in Sri Lanka will continue its sad decline from mediocrity to poverty.

Dileni Gunewardena is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Economics and Statistics of the University of Peradeniya.

FUTA adopts new strategy to secure pay hike

August 2, 2012, 9:52 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando, the island

The Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) yesterday separated its ongoing strike to win a pay hike from the overall push for an agreement with the government on the allocation of 6 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for education.

FUTA Chief Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri asserted that even if an agreement could be reached on salary and related issues, their battle for enhanced allocation for the education sector would continue. The head of the Department of History of the Faculty of the Colombo University reiterated FUTA’s commitment in the wake of the government and the FUTA initiating a fresh dialogue to settle the ongoing strike.

Dr. Devsiri was addressing the media at the National Library Services Board yesterday morning having met presidential secretary Lalith Weeratunga and Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa the previous night. The government kept Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake and University Grants Commission (UGC) Chairman Prof. Gamini Samaranayake out of Wednesday’s meeting.

A large group of trade unions, including the main union affiliated to the JVP, too, joined the media briefing. Addressing the gathering on behalf of the JVP, Mahinda Jayasinghe alleged that the government was trying to further limit its role in the education sector. Comparing the State sector spending for education in the SAARC region, Jayasinghe said that GoSL’s contribution to the vital sector was now negligible. Unfortunately those who had immensely benefited from free education remained silent when the government was destroying everything. Both free education and free health services were on the verge of collapse due to rapid decrease in State support, he said, adding that the parents were finding it difficult to provide education.

The FUTA chief said that deliberations were held at the Economic Affairs Ministry in a cordial atmosphere, though an agreement couldn’t be reached. "We discuss various aspects, though it is too early to speculate on the outcome," he said.

The soft-spoken academician said that both parties felt that an early settlement was necessary. The FUTA asserted that successful conclusion of the ongoing deliberations would entirely depend on a serious intervention on the part of the government. "Next few days will be crucial," Dr. Devasiri said, while stressing on the importance of taking decisive action to settle the crisis.

The FUTA launched a strike on July 4 to win their demands, mainly allocation of 6 per cent of the GDP for education and a pay hike.

Asked by the local BBC correspondent whether the government was serious in the latest initiative or trying to wear out the FUTA, a smiling Dr. Devasiri said that he didn’t like to comment on the government strategy. Expressing confidence that the government wouldn’t adopt such a counterproductive strategy, the FUTA chief warned such a move would invariably fail.

Devasiri pointed out that the direct involvement of Messrs Weeratunga and Basil Rajapaksa meant that the government was keen to settle the crisis. But the possibility of the ultimate failure of the ongoing talks, too, couldn’t be ruled out. He regretted the failure on the part of Minister Dissanayake and Prof. Samaranayake to help resolve the crisis.

When The Island pointed out that Minister Dissanayake had alleged that the FUTA made a series of demands, including government allocation of funds to teach two children of each FUTA member and the association was, too, greedy, Devasiri that Prof. Navaratne Bandara made a suggestion to that effect sometime ago, though the FUTA wasn’t pushing for that particular demand at the moment. Prof. Devasiri revealed that JVP parliamentary group leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake got in touch with him soon after Minister Dissanayake first made the allegation in parliament. Devasiri insisted that Prof. Navaratne’s proposal was not on the agenda, while likening offer of scholarships to the children of FUTA members to various perks and privileges offered to the public sector.

However, Ven. Dambara Amila thero accused Minister Dissanayake of making an attempt to give a different interpretation to what he called scholarship issue. The Ven. thero said that that FUTA made that particular proposal after Minister Dissanayake offered scholarships to foreign students. "We felt our children should be given scholarships first before foreigners were accommodated," the Ven. thero said.

The Island also raised the issue of the government trebling the university intake without having the necessary infrastructure facilities and giving preferential treatment to FUTA and over two dozen of State sector enterprises, whereas the vast majority of government servants and private sector workers were struggling to make ends meet, the FUTA asserted that that wasn’t the forum to discuss such issues.

Asked whether education and health sector trade unions had at least bothered to inquire into complaints that those who shirk their duties do a much better job for a fee, the FUTA said that there were problems, which couldn’t be tackled by them alone.

* Minister to hold discussions with striking university academics of Sri Lanka
Wed, Aug 1, 2012, 07:37 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Aug 01, Colombo: The union of Sri Lanka's striking academics, Sri Lanka Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA), is to meet Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapaksa today (August 01) to discuss their demands.
The Minister has come forward to discuss with the FUTA to find a solution to the strike by the university teachers that has been continuing for nearly a month.
The FUTA launched a continuous strike on July 04 despite the salary increment granted by the Ministry of Higher Education and academic activities at the country's universities have been paralyzed due to the strike.
Minister of Higher Education S.B. Dissanayake has said that a 72 percent salary increase has already been provided for the University lecturers.
However, according to the FUTA, the strike is based on broader demands to find solutions to other problems of the universities not just the salary increase.
The FUTA demands granting the salary increase promised by the government in 2008, increasing allocations for education up to 6% of GDP, freeing universities from politicization and granting facilities to admit children of the university teachers to the schools.

A silent revolution? ‘Free Education’ and Sri Lankan women

August 1, 2012, 12:00 pm , the island

By Carmen Wickramagamage

It is no exaggeration to say that one of the social groups that has most benefited from the revolutionary education reforms implemented starting 1947 [which most of us know as either Free Education or Kannangara Reforms] is Women. In 1946, when the overall literacy rate for the country was 57.8%, only 43.8% of the female population was literate as opposed to 70.1% of the male population (Panditaratne and Selvanayagam, 1973). By 2001, however, the percentage of literate women had gone up to 90% of the female population in comparison with 93% for the male population. Among Lankan youth between the ages of 15-24, it is even higher at 97% literate females to 99% literate males, according to UNICEF Sri Lanka statistics for the 2005-10 period.

This poses an interesting question: How did the gap between the percentages of literate men and women come to be narrowed so rapidly and significantly during the intervening 60-odd year period? What was the equivalent of the "open sesame" that opened the closed doors of formal school-based education for Lankan women in the post-independence period? The simple answer: "Free Education." While the Kannangara reforms did not introduce "free education" to Ceylon/Sri Lanka, they (i) abolished the earlier two-tiered education system very much pegged to class where fee-levying "English Medium" schools catered to the local elite and a system of "free" Vernacular Schools catered to the masses; (ii) introduced Swabhasha [or First Language] Education into the school system starting 1947, where it was made compulsory for students to be educated in their "mother tongue." It was these two reforms that have enabled Education to function as an instrument of social justice in Sri Lanka, freeing individuals from the debilitating impacts of ascribed social status such as caste, class and gender and instituting a meritocracy of sorts in Sri Lanka, however imperfect it might be, where the deserving individual can move up the social and economic ladder on the basis of merit irrespective of his/her "origins."

The education policy, however, was not alone in elevating women’s life-chances in Sri Lanka. The enlightened policy of "free health," another revolutionary welfare policy measure, went hand in hand with "free education" in bringing about a remarkable improvement in Lankan women’s physical quality of life, as manifested in such indicators as maternal mortality and life-expectancy rates, making Sri Lanka at one time the ‘poster child’ in UN development circles for its counter-intuitive achievements in the Human Development Index despite its classification as a ‘low-income’ nation. As Dileni Gunewardena points out in a newspaper article (Daily News, July 12, 2012) citing a recent study by Seema Jayachandran and Adriana Lleras-Muney, women’s health indicators and women’s educational indicators are linked. As women live longer, parents appear more willing to invest in their education. Equally importantly, as researchers have pointed out, education for women carries other kinds of social dividends, among them, a deceleration in population growth due to shrinking family size. There is one simple reason: staying in school longer delays the age at first marriage and, combined with career requirements and increased receptivity to public service messages, such women have fewer children. Literate/educated women are also a good conduit for public health messages. The significantly lower under-5 child morbidity and mortality rates in the case of Sri Lanka in comparison with the rest of South Asia have been attributed to the higher education rates of women. Educated women are more receptive to information on children’s nutrition, family hygiene, etc. Though we have not sustained and consolidated these gains in the recent past due to many reasons such as the recently concluded Civil War, it is necessary to highlight the sea-change in Lankan women’s lives brought about by these achievements at this critical juncture when cuts in state expenditure on health and education threaten to arrest if not roll back the remarkable achievements that made Sri Lanka the ‘Miracle of Asia’ long before that slogan came to be adopted by the present government.

But how did ‘free education’ benefit women in particular? As long as education was not free, cultural reasons, or gender norms regarding the place of men and women in society, combined with economic reasons, in the case of women, to keep women at home and away from formal, school-based education. Let me explain: as long as education is not free, parents with limited resources must make a choice regarding whom to educate and how much. Considering that in the Sri Lankan context, deep-rooted gender normsassign men the role of ‘bread’ winner and wage-earner, and women the home-based roles of housewife, wife and mother, it would seem logical for parents to expend their limited resources on the education of sons. Therefore, what the state expenditure on universal free education in the mother-tongue did was to take away the economic rationale to parental discrimination with regard to access to education for their sons and daughters.

One could then argue that it was not all Lankan women but women of the socially and culturally marginalised groups who were the real beneficiaries of the Kannangara Reforms; that certain women, who faced a double or triple jeopardy in access to education because gender combined with class, caste and other ‘disabilities’ to keep them out of school, were the ones who truly benefited. But was it only the economic rationale that prohibited women entry within the gateways of educational institutions? What about the cultural rationale that for long years saw "education" as spoiling women for marriage and making them less desirable in the marriage market so that parents with sufficient economic means would prefer to save for a dowry rather than invest in the education of their daughters? Among other reasons that, in the early years of female education in colonial Ceylon, kept even women of the local Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim elite out of formal school-based education were the fear of contamination due to inter-class and inter-caste mixing at school and the fear of conversion at Christian missionary schools. For these same reasons, as Malathi de Alwis has shown in her discussion of the Udduvil Girls’ School in Jaffna, sometimes it was women of the lower castes that first benefited from formal, school-based education while women of the upper-castes and classes were kept away. For women then to access educational opportunities, educated local men had to regard educated wives as an asset and upper-class parents had to see educated daughters as more a means for status-consolidation than a status-loss!

So how did the Reforms of 1945 help? It created the "visibility effect." The inevitable increase in the school-going population of girls with universal free education ‘normalized’ or ‘naturalized’ the notion of the educated woman. The educated woman was no longer an anomaly. No family wanted to be denied its social and cultural dividends all else being equal.

Today, with some variation in gains attributable to ethnic, religious and class differences [the most deprived group being Indian Tamil women of the plantation sector], Lankan women as a whole have used education not only to break free of gender norms but to challenge gender-based stereotypes regarding women’s brain power, most famously articulated in the Sinhala saying, "gaenunge nuwana haendi mitei digai" [=women’s intelligence is only good enough to taste the quality of the curries they cook!]. Thus, according to the World Development Report 2009, the ratio of girls to boys in primary and secondary schools was 102 to 100 in the year 2006. The percentage of girls to boys in senior secondary school enrollment in fact has now come to be skewed in favour of girls. So, while the percentage of girls to boys in Grades 10-11 is 51%, the percentage of girls in Grades 12-13 increases to 58%! The percentage of women to men at the public universities repeats these numbers where female students comprise 58% of the overall intake to public universities according to UGC statistics for the year 2010. And if we were to break this percentage down along subject streams and in terms of the intake to different faculties, an interesting picture emerges that can only be attributed to the socially transformative potential of Free Education:

These numbers foreground the slow but sure feminization of higher education—a feminization that has gone unremarked but is the indubitable result of the silent revolution brought about by the gender-neutral policy of universal and compulsory free education. It is also a reality that should make policy makers and concerned citizens pause: Why are male students turning away from education, particularly higher education? How would certain spheres of study be affected by this feminization, for instance, the study of the social sciences and the humanities or law and medicine?

Since this piece is not an attempt to unequivocally celebrate women’s gains in education but to raise a red flag regarding certain half-concealed dimensions to where women are in education and higher education, let me now engage in a further disaggregation of the available statistics on women in education. Although more women than men are to be found in senior secondary education or A/Ls, the distribution of men and women across subject-streams at AL should give us pause. Of the 58% percent of women in senior secondary education or A/L classes, the majority are offering Arts subjects. Hence, of the number enrolled for A/L Arts subjects, 67% are female [which, in absolute numbers, is 152, 158 female students] while only 43% of the total or 76,339 are male. In contrast, the number of female students as a percentage of the total enrolled for Science subjects is 48% and for Commerce subjects 47%. Now, if we combine these figures with the following facts—that there are not only more jobs for science-qualified students but that these jobs on average carry higher wages [based on research conducted by Swarna Jayaweera and others] and that the female unemployment rate, Age 15 & above, is twice that of men (SL Labour Force Survey, 2009)—we have to worry about where the women are in education. A similar scenario repeats itself at university as Table II shows. University enrollment is most skewed in favour of women in the Arts Faculties at 78-80% of enrollments. Hence, if there is a higher percentage of unemployed or under-employed Arts graduates compared to, say, Commerce or Science graduates [though this claim is open to debate], then it stands to reason that a higher percentage of that number would be female.

The question is why are more women than men gravitating towards Arts subjects at A/Ls? Is it Biology or Socialization or Unequal Access to Senior Secondary Science Education that is determining this choice? In the case of Sri Lanka, a major reason for the higher enrollment of students in the Arts Stream at A/Ls is the relative inequity in the distribution of Type 1AB Schools: that is, schools offering senior secondary science education, which are mostly located in urban and semi-urban areas. Take just two districts: in Colombo, the number of Type 1AB schools is 68 to 83 Type 1 C schools [that is, schools offering AL classes without the Science Stream]; in Kandy, Type 1AB schools are only 50 compared to 175 of Type 1C schools! Combine this fact with the other known fact that more male students enroll for A/L science subjects and we have to ask if gender plays a role in who gains access to Science A/L education. Are parents with limited means more reluctant to enroll their daughters in senior secondary science education because of the higher costs involved or due to the longer distances they may have to travel in order to get to such schools? Today, private tuition is sometimes the only gateway to universities in the science stream with students sometimes attending two classes per subject! Are girls then opting for Arts because of easier access and lower costs?

The inequities in access to education, and I should say access to good-quality education, that I have outlined above makes it clear that despite 60-odd years of ‘free’ universal education, we are yet to arrive at a completely level playing field. However, the solution to these documented inequities does not lie in a withdrawal of the state from investment in education and further privatization of education. There is a very real danger, from the point of view of women, that parents if called upon to bear the cost of their off-spring’s education, may opt to invest more in the education of their sons at the expense of that of their daughters given the endemic son preference and entrenched gender norms of this country. While it is possible that both reduced family size, and the visibility effect that has ‘normalized’ the phenomenon of female education in the intervening years, may offset gender-based discrimination in access to education, we cannot leave it to chance. As Dileni Gunewardena has pointed out (Daily News, June 30, 2011) citing what happened in China where earlier gains in female life-expectancy were reversed when reforms came to be introduced in 1979, we cannot sit on our laurels banking on the goodwill of parents to decide on ‘merit’ rather than gender with regard to whom to educate in cases of limited resources—which is the case for a majority of parents in this country. It is therefore time for those of us, women and men, who take a justifiable pride in the near-miraculous gains in social indicators of well-being in this country to speak up in the face of the obvious withdrawal in commitment on the part of the present government to education as evidenced by the allocation of just 1.8% of the GDP in the 2012 Budget for both general and higher education. Education is a right, not a privilege. Now is the time for us to get together to save it for all citizens of this country! (The writer teaches English at the University of Peradeniya.)

In defence of university autonomy and academic freedom

August 1, 2012, 6:51 pm 

By Prof. Wiswa Warnapala, the island

Continued from yesterday’s Midweek

University is an institution, which cannot discharge its functions and responsibilities without a measure of freedom. In Sri Lanka, as in other developing countries, Universities attract public attention and all governments are concerned with the cost of expansion. The critics, as usual, look for problems in university administration, and the Treasury imposes controls on university expenditure; all these criticisms and controls are viewed as attempts to interfere in the manner they manage their affairs. It was the high cost of university education which calls for the introduction of new patterns of university government, and the UGC was invented to bring about a compromise between control and autonomy. Control, and political interference, to be exact Ministerial control, was avoided by the UGC, which, of course, was the instrument of governmental policy. UGC is the best guarantee against overt attempts by politicians to interfere in the affairs of the Universities. Ideally, as Lord Annan said, "the UGC must be able to absorb all the political pressures and shocks in the form of a buffer." It will be for the UGC to decide which pressures are unreasonable and which ought to be transmitted to the universities.

Hence, the accepted position of the UGC is that of a "buffer" between the government and the universities interpreting each party to the other. According to the British tradition, the UGC is independent of the universities, though most of its members are academics of repute, and it is also, for the most part, independent of the government; it is the accepted source of expert advice on university affairs, including the allocation of resources which the government made available. From the point of view of universities, it is the effective medium for representing their opinions and needs of the Government. Therefore, the creation of the UGC, which has been emulated by all the Commonwealth countries, has been regarded as an "eminently successful example of administrative ingenuity". This function can only be performed by the UGC which enjoys the confidence and respect of both the government and the universities. In the Sri Lankan context, it is not easy to satisfy the two institutions mentioned above. In the United Kingdom, it began in 1919 as a channel of communication between the state and the universities, and the specific function was to interpret to the government of the policies and financial needs of the universities. Later, as in Sri Lanka, it was called upon to plan their development, and it was here that the government adhered to the fundamental principles of academic freedom and autonomy. The Report of the UGC of the United Kingdom (1947) stated that "education and research in the universities of this country are not functions of the State". It further stated that "it was essentially one of a partnership between Universities and State". The general character of this relationship came to be substantially changed during the post-war period in the UK.

Academic freedom misunderstood

Universities have a form of self-government, and it is the concept of academic freedom that has created so much of misunderstanding in Sri Lanka. Academic freedom is an essential element in the conception of a university which surfaced during the middle ages. From the very inception, universities around the world enjoyed the right to manage their affairs and to decide on what to teach. Universities, thus, enjoyed a unique kind of freedom, but it, however, did not mean that they could teach or write anything they liked, for example they could not offend the Church as in the case of Galileo. It did not mean that the governments could not interfere with the universities but there were accepted parameters within which it was done. Academic freedom and university autonomy are, therefore, intertwined principles which recognize the right to teach what and to whom; four kinds of freedom came to be associated with a university. Firstly the selection of students who are fit for higher education, next, the freedom to appoint its academic staff; thirdly to determine the standards of attainment and the nature and content of courses offered, and last, to determine its size and growth. As in teaching, there is similar freedom in research. All these rights and freedoms are qualified as the rights of an individual in the modern state.

The central idea of the university is the pursuit of knowledge. However, a university is not just an institution of higher education, but a center of learning. It requires its teachers to carry out research if the main function of the university is to be realized. In Sri Lanka, the funds for research are limited as there are no organizations to sponsor research, and this, in my view, is a matter which interferes with the quality and quantity of research in the universities. However, the threat to academic freedom emanates from those in power who wish to control thought, and prescribe opinion on matters related to the production of knowledge; secondly, it emanates from those in power who, for different reasons, want to control the other academic roles of academics, and interference in respect of this role comes from inside the University as well as from outside. In my own personal experience, such attempts to restrict academic freedom fell within this category. Therefore, the concept of academic freedom is central to the life of a university. If knowledge is to be refined for the benefit of the society, it is only through an institution that it can be profitably achieved, and the university, therefore, cannot play its central role without freedom and autonomy.

Public discourse on university education

Today, in Sri Lanka, there is a public discourse on certain aspects of university education in the country. The significance of this issue lies not so much in the profundity of the changes which the system produced in the last fifty years but in the convulsions of the current system. The growing public interest in the universities of the country is largely due to the realization that the university system can make a unique contribution to the national development of the country. The conception that the university education is essentially for a small and privileged class is now redundant. The need for social justice for all classes of people had opened the doors of the universities more widely than in the period in which it came into being. The Sri Lankan state has given substantial support to expand access of higher educational opportunities. However, this phase of development is currently entering a period beset with obstacles and difficulties which need immediate attention of the state.

In the last three or four decades, there was a considerable expansion in the intake which, of course, was stimulated by a great demand for higher education. The rapid increase in the number of students, which had taken place in the sixties, was not simultaneously accompanied by a concentrated attention on quality. It was in the last decade that a major effort has been invested in this direction, and the very process of transformation was accelerated in the last few years. It was the exhortation of this policy which called upon the universities to devote their energies to improving the quality of education offered to the students. This had to be done notwithstanding the increasing pressure for the expansion of the intake.

Continued tomorrow

INSIDE STORY: National Education

A Policy and Structural Change in Education for a Better Tomorrow

| by Professor N.T.S. Wijesekera

( July 30, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) This article is a summary of the key points delivered at the public seminar on the theme “National Education Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow”, conducted by the University of Moratuwa Teachers’ Association (UMTA) at S De S Jayasinghe Hall, Dehiwala on 18th July 2012 (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Seminar of the University of 
Moratuwa Teachers Association at Dehiwala

Every ‘Nation’s Dream’ is to achieve the status of a ‘Great Nation’ that can stand on its own. In the quest for a great nation, a sustainable education system is indispensable. It is more so for our nation because we do not possess the commonly known valuable resources of the world except the invaluable human resource with a very high literacy rate. A sustainable education system would pave the way to produce responsible citizens, ensure ample support for the development and hence to build a strong economy. Further, a sustainable education system will positively contribute to make prudent decisions that will ensure the sustainable wellbeing of the global ecosystem at large.

Presently the University Academics are requesting the government to provide a compatible remuneration to attract the best that are moving to the industry, plus a substantial commitment from the government to enhance the status of their working facilities and upgrading the status of the students presently filtered through the primary and secondary education systems. This has been put forth as a request for the promised salary increase and for a commitment to enhance the public expenditure on education to a level of 6% of GDP. In this instance, the GDP is taken as a unit of measurement keeping to international standards. Therefore it is important not to be mistaken as 6% from GDP.

Many can raise a reasonable question as to why the University academics in this country up to now were not concerned about the sustainability of the entire education system of the country. Answer though implicit, leads to the point that at this juncture, the university academics have realised it is high time for the Sri Lankan academia to come forward and start a constructive dialogue about the core issues of the education system and appeal the nation to take a serious note of this major crisis that causes catastrophic consequences for the forthcoming generations.

Role of the University

In order to rationalise a sustainable education system, first of all, it is necessary to identify the role of a university. In the literature, a university is defined as an entity to ensure that every student, no matter the wealth of parents, has a chance to enjoy the ‘Nation's Dream’; educate the leaders in a democratic system; provide advanced learning and knowledge through faculty research and giving students the opportunity to broaden their minds even when learning does not seem immediately relevant to their careers; teach students to interact with people and appreciate the differences and diversity; and help students to find a passion and even a purpose in life. Universities of a great nation produce good workers who would earn foreign exchange with their products and services. They would also produce good graduates and leaders who would directly attract foreign exchange of international markets to provide cutting edge services and products.

Due to these characteristics, Universities in general are considered as the Backbone of a Country. In very simple terms the universities produce citizens who can exercise influence on behalf of Humanity and Civilisation.

It is no secret that for universities to thrive, academics and students who work together to achieve the aforementioned objectives are a clear necessity. Thus, a university should ideally be composed of good academics, good students, good facilities and possess a conducive-environment for education. In the remaining part of the article, aspects of academics and students who shoulder the pillars of a good higher education system are in focus.

Academics

A good university system needs to look after its academics by providing good salaries and a good supportive environment, which includes good infrastructure and good support staff. A survey carried out in July 2012 at University of Moratuwa revealed that at the present salary scales of an academic (academic positions are filled by the cream of a batch of students) who had obtained a PhD degree would get only 31% of what his or her counterpart who opted not to pursue studies, but to join and work in industry. A Senior Professor who is an Icon of Wisdom would get only 27% of what is earned by an industry parallel (Figure 2). This pathetic situation has discouraged the best graduates joining the academia. A reversing of this trend which is to attract the best graduates to join the academia is an absolute necessity. Other than this it is also necessary to incorporate measures to retain the attracted staff for the purpose of ensuring a sustainable university system contributing to the delivery of a Nation's expectations.

Figure 2: University - Industry Salary Comparison Deteriorates with Time and Experience

A comparison of international value of a university academic, from the information of the book "Paying the Professoriate" (Figure 3) indicated that the most opted greener pastures across the oceans provide much greater remuneration packages. The review of this book on the web presents a good salary comparison utilising a common indicator.

Therefore it is important that the university academics are at least given a salary compatible with the local market.

Figure 3: A Recent Book on Salary

University Facilities

When one considers the university facilities, it is evident that the infrastructure status is very poor and rapidly deteriorating. The research support is nonexistent, laboratories lack new equipment, lecture room space is inadequate and student accommodation needs refurbishment. The current financial figures from state universities reveal that per student expenditure is reducing at an alarming rate simply because the state is increasing the student numbers without increasing the commitment for infrastructure (Figure 4).

This situation creates a serious constraint in effective teaching and research delivery by a university academic when attempting to fulfil the expectations of a nation. This leads to displeasure and frustration among the academic community. Even though the salary of an academic reaches the world standards, this issue remains a great factor contributing to an Academic leaving the system. Such departures would certainly jeopardise the sustainability of the system and the dreams of a Nation.

 

 

 

Figure 4: Comparative Statistics Reflecting the Deterioration of Student Facility Availability

University Students

Looking at the situation with respect to the status of students; they are recruited from the list prepared from the results of the GCE Advanced Level examination and the Z-Scores. Only 15-17% of those who sit for the examination get qualified for university education. Many can raise the question, Aren't they the best out of the group?, Aren't they adequate to produce good graduates?

Surveys carried out among the university academics expressing their level of satisfaction on the students presently admitted as university entrants, revealed a major flaw in the attempt to achieve sustainability of the higher education and the education system as a whole. In this survey, several factors from the view point of academic staff were qualitative evaluated. The factors used in the opinion survey were: Willingness to study/learn; Students not exhausted; Conceptually sound (Knowledge of subject basics); Experienced in group work and Honestly indicating the member contributions; Good speaking and writing in university media of instructions; Experienced in using basic office-software; Good in speed reading; Having good social values; Trained in timely submission of outputs; and Having a good vocabulary. The study of a staff member sample of 45 at the University of Moratuwa revealed that while the first factor just exceeded the 50% satisfaction level of the academics, the rest were between 25% and 50%. The speed reading capability (Figure 5) has been at the lowest of expectation level. The same survey carried out with a sample of 75 staff members from the University of Sri Jayawardenapura revealed similar results.

In order to capture how the students felt about themselves nicely fitting the aspirations of the university academics, the same survey was carried out using a sample of 90 students of university of Moratuwa and the results are shown in the Figure 5. The averages of the results provide a good indicator that reflects a compromise between high staff aspirations and student psychology overvaluing the true position. These results indicate that at best the students would be reaching the 50% level of expectations and hence the primary and secondary education systems require a take a look at its roots without further delay.

 

Figure 5: The Status of University Entrants

Primary and Secondary Education

Considering the primary and secondary education system, some issues that reflect badly on the sustainability of a nation and its aspiration to become the ‘Knowledge Hub of Asia’ are; the number of teachers, teacher training, school buildings, school facilities and low staff salaries. In this connection the following factors also have been evidenced, researched and some are published in Journals.

After passing GCE Ordinary Level, typically a student takes a minimum of 4 years to enter the university. This is a time loss at prime age. At the Advanced Level, the way IT and English are taught, examined, and results are delivered to the students, reflect the care and interest taken to familiarise these two subjects. Further, more than 50% of students do not experience the grip of science as they get the knowledge without a practical exposure. In most education and administrative forums, Advanced Level subjects are recommended to be geared towards employment, without even considering the real objectives of primary and secondary education. The present Advanced Level and Ordinary Level Syllabi are attempting to cater to those who fail the examination and not for those who aspire success and further. The chaos of IT education is well reflected in a research which identified that in a survey of schools, the principals say that student computer usage is 20hrs/week while IT instructors of the same school say it is 6-10 hrs/week: Research pertaining to primary and secondary education system has also recognised that unmanageable student numbers in each class, poor management of class rooms and problems with increased subject contents are critical issues. The dependency on tuition, lack of faith in regular school teachers, negative attitudes of the parents and students on school teachers is a serious negative phenomenon that characterises the plight of the present education system. Research also has indicated that there is deterioration of math knowledge in the university entrants and this can be attributed to the reliance on private tuition system. Lack of student centred activities such as project explanations, field work, opportunity for creative work, and team work make a serious impact on the expected potential of a student reaching the university system.

A recent survey of a student's lifetime in the Ordinary Level Classes revealed that 37.5% of time is spent for system survival (such as eating and sleeping) and 55.2% is spent on education, tuition and transport for education. A similar survey indicated that Advanced Level students use 29.3% for system survival while 66.7% of time is spent for studying for examinations and travelling for education.

Only icing, no cake?

The universities are presently adjusting their curricula and coaching classes to address the issues or deficiencies that are arising from the primary and secondary education systems. In addition, the universities are also adding cosmetic programs to satisfy the industry requirement of "A readymade practitioner". However, what is important to note is that the duration of a university's academic program remains unchanged at either 3 or 4 years. Therefore it is inevitable that the University's core curricular needs to be curtailed or by this sandwich effect. Therefore it is obvious that the graduates do not obtain an education they or the country deserve. Figure 6 is an attempt to illustrate these concerns.

Figure 6: Accommodation of Deficiencies is a Threat to Quality

This creates two problems. The straightforward one is that the country does not get the desired outputs because the subject contents tend to reach below par.

The other is that the university academics find the students would require postgraduate education to carry out the kind of research required for world class competition. 

Figure 7: High Disparity between the Outputs

Since the government presently does not support postgraduate education, the most likely result would be the frustration of academic staff which inturn affect the sustenance of Higher Education System. These factors are presently in existence.

There is a huge disparity in the state expenditure for various undergraduate study programmes (Figure 7). This disparity among various programs cannot be noted in developed countries. Therefore it is important to revisit these curricula and facilities and then upgrade them to such levels that would ensure quality outputs that can match the knowledge-hub aspirations. It is good to take a close look at the foundation qualifications of administrators and planners who are yet to understand the present plight of the education system in the country. It may be prudent to provide an improved status to relevant degree programmes hoping that the outputs from such degree programs would provide a better service to the education system in the future.

There is a big problem at hand. As academics, it is time to come forward to speak out in order to save the nation and strengthen the on-going efforts by pointing out the planning and implementation deficiencies. The University academics are undoubtedly the best brains in the country that can provide the leadership to the betterment of the country's education system.

Booster Dose is a Must

The foregoing discussion clearly points to the fact that in order to ensure best academics in the national university system, it is necessary that not only the salaries are comparable but also the entire education system is revitalised.

A look at the historical public expenditure figures on education pertaining to those nearby nations and the nations that have achieved developed status revealed that such countries had gradually increased the public expenditure on education to reach a point 6% of GDP or more (Figure 8).

It is evident that our nation also requires such a system-boost to clear this big hurdle. In most countries public investment appears to decay after a peak, but this is guessed as the stepping in of private sector collaborations once the system is in place. Thus, it is quite clear that we need a booster dose in education expenditure and when the system has reached sustainability, it is possible to fearlessly open the system to private collaborative opportunities.

In conclusion, the academics and the public in general have a noble task to carryout in order to secure a sustainable education system. It is not an easy one. It is necessary to congratulate the wisdom of Sri Lankan academic community for stepping out of traditional trade union framework to provide leadership to a visionary struggle targeting the country to become a better place to live and also to become the ‘Knowledge Hub of Asia’.

Figure 8: Comparison of Input to Education as a Percentage of GDP - The System Booster

Professor Sohan Wijesekera, Senior Professor,at the Department ofDept of Civil Engineering,University of Moratuwa