Preserving heritage of a sound education system and ending present multiple crises

August 31, 2012, 7:14 pm . The Island

"After the Roman Army took Syracuse

a soldier, in the midst of the looting and raping,

stopped when he saw a Greek bent over

figures inscribed on the sand. Gaping,

the Roman watched his strange absorption

in that magic of lines and circles. He,

(not looking up at the soldier said, "Move!

With your shadow there it is hard to see!’

The soldier hit him on the head, and so

Archimedes died."

- Regi Siriwardena

NOTEBOOK OF A NOBODY

by Shanie

Archimedes was one of the greatest mathematicians of all time. He was a native of Syracuse and when the Roman Army overran Syracuse, the Roman General gave orders that Archimedes, because of his fame, should not be harmed. But, yet, a Roman soldier killed him. The circumstances of his death are not known but Regi Siriwardena’s creative enactment of the killing perhaps effectively captures the mindset of a conquering army. An arrogant soldier, unable to comprehend the genius of Archimedes, takes it upon himself to kill the respected scientist, He perhaps thought that this old Syracusean had no right to be talking to a conquering soldier in that manner, without the deference the petty man thought he deserved. It is the same arrogant mindset that seems to grip many of those in power in our country. But we will come to that later.

Our country has had a proud educational tradition since ancient times. Both in the Buddhist and Hindu cultures, scholarship and the guru-sishya tradition flourished. In modern times, the colonial rulers introduced a system of school education. It was during British rule, however, that sound secular education was encouraged, with primary and secondary schools, imparting education both in English and in the vernacular, being established throughout the country. In 1921, the University College, affiliated to the University of London was established and transformed 21 years later, as the fully fledged University of Ceylon. About this time, the State Council, on the initiative of the Kannangara Committee, introduced far-reaching educational reforms. The twin pillars of these reforms were the provision of free education for all, from primary to tertiary levels and the establishment of high quality central schools in all the districts pf the country. Even though the legislation for compulsory education for 5 to 14 year olds did not come immediately, school enrolment was high. That is why at the time we gained independence, our country had a near 100% literacy rate, among the highest in the world. The Kannangara reforms had made possible education available and affordable to all, thus enshrining one of the cardinal principles of a democracy – the right to education.

Decline in Quality

During the first couple of decades after independence, we carried on with the momentum built with the Kannangara reforms. Thereafter there were ups and downs, depending on the Minister of Education. but over the last few years, there has been a rapid decline in the standards and quality of the institutions and bodies associated with education. It will not be fair to place the whole blame on bungling politicians. The sycophantic bureaucrats who have found a niche in our educational system have to share the blame. They have failed to take a firm stand on ensuring that our educational institutions enjoy academic freedom and maintain acceptable academic standards. There are two apex bodies – the National Education Commission reviewing on an ongoing basis the education system in the country and advising on overall educational policy that needs to be formulated; and the University Grants Commission concerned about coordinating the University system, regulating the broad administration of Universities and ensuring that they maintain academic standards. Unfortunately, both Commissions do not function as they should. The NEC has virtually been sidelined and policy decisions are made by politicians and the bureaucrats in the Ministry without any consultation with the NEC. The UGC which maintained its independence until a few years ago, now merely carries out the directives of politicians, even when they are in total violation of the Universities Act.

z-scores and University Admissions

Take the case of University admissions. We have two Ministers responsible for this. The Examinations department under the Minister of Education has to release the results of the GCE (AL) results. Based on those results, a system has been in place to choose those eligible for admission. Raw scores are converted to z-scores based on a system worked out by competent academics. The Minister of Higher Education becomes responsible for the admission of students to Universities.

A new syllabus was introduced for some of the subjects at the 2011 AL examinations: Thus some students sat under the old syllabus and some the new. But the Examinations Department erred in having the z-scores calculated without treating the two sets of candidates as different, and released the z-scores. The Minister refused to listen to the protests and ultimately the Supreme Court had to rule that the calculation of the z-scores by combining the raw marks of two different ‘populations’ was wrong. This has now been rectified. But it has taken the UGC an enormously long time to finalise the university admissions. It will be unfair to penalize the students who qualified for admission under the old (and wrong) system of z-scores but do not qualify under the corrected system. This column suggested some months ago that all those who qualified under both systems of z-scores should be admitted to universities. This is also the opinion of several academics including Professor Arjuna Aluvihare, former Vice-Chancellor and former Chairman of the UGC. It entails taking in an additional batch of students but the UGC in typical bureaucratic fashion seems yet to make up its mind. They seem so used to following political directives that they are unable to take a decision on an issue that is within their mandate. In the meantime, the students are left in total suspense. The z-score issue is not one that should have ended up in a fiasco calling for Supreme Court intervention. But our Ministers and their bureaucrats are not used to admitting mistakes or taking responsibility for mistakes. It is always a case of blaming it on conspiracies!

Yet another conspiracy!

The latest scandal to hit the Ministry of Education is the leaking of the Grade 5 scholarship examination papers. Instead of investigating it, admitting any mistakes made and putting things right, the Minister of Education talks of ‘conspiracies’. To what ridiculous a length can the Minister go. Does he think the public will keep swallowing his conspiracy bogeys. If blundering Ministers cannot take responsibility for mistakes and put things right, they should gracefully give way.

Also, on the subject of schools, it is reported that the Police have installed complaint boxes in several schools (presumably it will cover all schools) with a request that students place any complaints, etc in the boxes. The key to the box is held by the Police and the Principal has no access to its contents. Has the Minister initiated this or is it a Ministry of Defence brainwave? Either way, it will undermine school discipline when the Principal has no control over any student complaints. There are acceptable ways of dealing with student abuse, student complaints (even against the Principal), etc. without undermining student discipline in schools and without the intrusion of the Police or the Ministry of Defence in school affairs.

From Jaffna, comes the report of the senior girls in a leading school having protested against the conduct of an education official whose office is sited within the school premises. Apparently, following the protest, the Sri Lanka Army officials have taken some of the Prefects of the school to the local Army camp, given the girls a dressing down, got them to apologise and obtained a pledge from them that they would not allow such an incident to happen again. Again, at what price is school discipline and the authority of the Principal and the staff of the school.

Indeed this growing intrusion of the security establishment in schools is a worrying development. There have been reports that some school Principals are to be given military rank and that A/L students are to be given training in military camps. Indeed, apparently the students at the Mahinda Rajapaksa Vidyalaya in Homagama have reportedly already had this "training". The University community is already in upheaval about the growing militarization in the campuses. The plan seems to be to extend militarization to schools as well.

Trade Union Action by FUTA

The University teachers’ strike is now nearing two months. Their demands were eminently reasonable but it has taken the Minister of Higher Education, after weeks of denial, to come round to doing something. The reports of this week’s cabinet meeting suggest a Cabinet Paper was presented jointly by Basil Rajapakse and S B Dissanayake on the FUTA demands. The cabinet seems to have approved the proposals. Why did it have to await Basil Rajapaksa’s intervention for this to happen. Of course, the Minister of Higher Education, like his colleague in the other education sector, is unlikely to admit that he was wrong in not having listened and acted on the FUTA demands. We will probably be treated to another conspiracy theory and how he successfully broke the conspiracy.

Reports indicate that in terms of the cabinet paper, University teachers are to be treated as a special category of public servants, as they were some years ago when they were treated on a par with Central Bank officers. But there is no commitment on their salary demands. The FUA demand was also for an acceptance of the UNESCO recommendation that public spending on education should be 6% of GDP. At present, Sri Lanka is at the ridiculously low rate of 1.9%, the lowest in our region. Of course, it may not be possible to change this overnight but there must be a commitment that we would work towards achieving that UNESCO goal on an incremental basis within a defined time frame. In the meantime, adequate resources should be provided to the Universities to function effectively as institutions of excellence in higher education. The cabinet also seems to have accepted that the Universities should enjoy autonomy and independence. This should have been the goal of the UGC which the UGC shamelessly surrendered.

The cabinet has also decided to appoint a committee of some sort. At the time of writing this column, the exact function of this committee is not known. It is hoped that it is not a means to put off meeting the FUTA demands and for implementation of the cabinet proposals. For far too long, the Ministry of Higher Education has been playing games with FUTA with promises made but not implemented. The present cabinet proposals have come about due to the intervention of Minister Basil Rajapakse. He should assure FUTA of the immediate implementation of those demands that can be met now and a definite time frame for others. It does not appear that the academics have much confidence in the Minister of Higher Education delivering on anything.

The cabinet seems to have approved the right to autonomy of the Universities. We trust this means that political interference will end. Professor Arjuna Aluvihare in a recent newspaper interview has said that political interference in universities was all pervasive. This must end. The UGC must re-discover their role as guardians of University autonomy. The Senates and the Councils must be allowed to function and make decisions in terms of the Universities Act. Political directives cannot do away with aptitude tests in aesthetic studies, interfere in the selection of the most suitable security agency for each University, in the authorization of any training (leadership, military or otherwise) for new entrants, in providing for English or IT skills for new entrants, etc. Nor should indirect pressure be brought on making appointments to senior positions, appointments including those of Vice chancellors. The UGC should re-discover its role as a guardian of university autonomy and the rightful functions of the Senate both in letter and in spirit. Universities can meet the needs of the world around them only if their administration, teaching and research are independent of political authority and economic power.

Now is the time to halt the slide in our education systems, both in higher education and at school level. The multiple crises in education offer an opportunity to reverse this trend. We need to revitalise this sector for the public good. We need to preserve our heritage of a sound education system that produced men and women who took their place in society and made a valuable contribution to nation-building.

SB, Basil in Joint Cabinet Memorandum for Post Graduate University

Presidential Commission for recommendations on Higher Education sector

August 31, 2012, 10:00 pm 

By Ravi Ladduwahetty, The Island

Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake and Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa have presented a joint memorandum to the Cabinet seeking the establishment of a special Presidential Commission for the higher education sector which will recommend reforms needed for the sector.

The proposed Commission will comprise top rung academics of the Ministry of Higher Education, University Grants Commission and the university academic community.

One of the key recommendations for the sector is the establishment of a post graduate University within the next four years.

The proposal for the post graduate university was among a host of proposals aimed at propping up the higher education sector, which is currently going through a massive crisis with universities closed following a strike by dons

The two Ministers have also said that the aim of these reforms will also be to recruit the highest calibre of teachers at all levels of education - be it primary, secondary or tertiary and provide them with attractive emoluments which will also motivate Sri Lanka born academic staff who are serving in the universities of foreign countries as well to return. The two Ministers have said, it would help the country to reach the hyped status of ‘Asia’s knowledge hub’.

have also said that it was the aim of the government to allocate sufficient funds to the education sector as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product which is in accordance with the other developed countries.

The government has recognized the need for a total revamp of the higher education sector and one of the aims of the State is to have a university system which will encompass all districts of Sri Lanka, the memorandum said.

Editorial 

Water cannon & flames of unrest

August 30, 2012, 7:10 pm , The Island

The JVP has a peculiar attitude towards higher education. When universities are open, it wants them closed and when they are closed, it wants them reopened!

In the late 1980s, during its second uprising, the JVP coined a catchy slogan, 'Motherland first, Degree second––palamuwa maubima, devanuwa upadiya––to justify its efforts to disrupt universities and involve undergrads in protests against the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord and terrorist activities. Dissent was violently suppressed and undergrads, teachers and others who put up resistance were gunned down. Its slogan for schoolchildren was 'Motherland First, Education Second'––palamuwa maubima, devanuwa pasala.

But, today, the same political forces are braving water cannon and tear gas to have universities re-opened. What a volte-face!

On Wednesday, a large number of undergraduates led by JVP dissidents turned Colombo into a mini-battle field by trying to march to Temple Trees. They were demanding that universities be re-opened and university teachers' grievances redressed immediately. The riot police liberally used teargas and water cannon to disperse the protesters. The government had better brace itself for more such protests as ideology-driven student groups are sure to regroup and try to make a comeback.

One may not endorse the modus operandi of protesting undergrads who hurled projectiles at the police. However, one cannot but agree with them, in spite of their political motives, that the time has come for the government to swallow its pride and resolve the dons' strike through negotiations so that universities could be reopened without further delay. The Cabinet is said to have worked out a formula to solve the problem, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

The government cannot resolve the university crisis by closing universities, and water cannon cannot douse the flames of political unrest spilling over onto the streets. Earlier, Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake boasted that only a section of university teachers had gone on strike and the strikers were reporting back for work in response to a government appeal to that effect. But, no sooner had he made that claim than he had to close the universities!

The government is apparently trying to turn public opinion against the striking lecturers by keeping universities closed indefinitely and blaming it on the strikers; its propagandists have already embarked on a campaign to vilify the office bearers of the Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA). It is hoped that university dons will not play into their hands by boycotting the GCE (A/L) examination answer script evaluation due to commence shortly. Such action may serve the purpose of disruptive political elements riding the FUTA piggyback, unable to gain political mileage otherwise, but will certainly anger hundreds of thousands of children, their parents and well-wishers.

The government's waiting game is not going to work. Minister Dissanayake sought to justify his 'crackdown' on JVP student unions by claiming that universities had to be rid of politically-motivated student outfits and kept open at any cost. His tactics have apparently yielded results to a considerable extent. The JVP is no longer active in some universities and is fast losing its grip on others. But, Minister Dissanayake has done exactly what he once accused the JVP of; he has closed the universities! It is a supreme irony that he is now coming under pressure from JVP student activists to reopen universities! This is an interesting role reversal as it were.

Protracted labour disputes are like old anthills into which venomous snakes creep. Hence the need for the university crisis to be resolved through negotiations urgently! Regrettably, the government's arrogance knows no bounds. It seems to believe that simply because it commands a two-third majority in Parliament and is winning elections with the Opposition in total disarray it could railroad the striking dons into giving up their struggle easily. Its arrogance is likely to be its undoing.

UGC to submit Z-score settlement decision on Sep. 3By Chitra Weerarathne

August 30, 2012, 9:57 pm , The Island

The Supreme Court yesterday advised the University Grants Commission (UGC) to submit on Sept. 3, 2012, settlement in respect of the 2011 GCE A/L Z-Score dispute.

Faiz Mustapha PC, counsel for the UGC, told the Court that several meetings had been held between the members of the UGC, counsel for the petitioner students and the Attorney General. The outcome had been a success.

The petitioner students had recently filed a motion complaining that the authorities had pooled together the re-calculated Z-Scores of the candidates who sat under the examination under the old and the new syllabi. The Court on June 25, 2012, ordered the UGC to re-calculate the Z-Score treating the two syllabi as separate populations.

In the motion, recently filed, the students who sat the examination under the old syllabus have complained that the pooling together of the recalculated Z-Scores of the two populations is unfavourable to the old syllabus candidates. Their chances of university admissions have been impaired, they claim. President’s Counsel Palitha Fernando, the Attorney General appeared for the State.

J. C. Weliamuna and Saliya Pieris appeared for the student petitioners.

The Bench comprised the Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake and Justice K. Sripavan.

FUTA demand for 6 % of GDP for education: Free education not factored in – govt.

August 30, 2012, 9:59 pm , The Island

By Ravi Ladduwahetty

The Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) had not taken the component of free education, in calling upon the government to allocate 6 per cent of the GDP to the education sector, the government charged yesterday.

The FUTA was demanding that the government spend 6 per cent of the GDP on education as in the developed countries in the West, but it had not factored in free education at primary, secondary and tertiary education level, Media Minister and government spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella told the weekly Cabinet news conference at the government Information Department auditorium yesterday.

The Minister said the people who were clamouring for higher fund allocations for the education sector talked only about funds allocated from national budget but they failed to take cognisance of the funds provided by the Finance Commission to Provincial Councils.

Minister Rambukwella said out of 9,700 schools in Sri Lanka only 330 were maintained by the government while the others were run by the Provincial Councils. "How many of them have factored in the quantum of funds allocated for tuition classes and the funds parents pay on behalf of their children for education in private and international schools?" the Minister queried.

Dons snub govt. stick to their main demandsby Dasun Edirisinghe

August 30, 2012, 12:00 pm , The Island

Although the Cabinet of ministers had decided to establish a special category of service for university lecturers and appoint a high-powered committee to monitor the implementation of proposals submitted by the university lecturers, the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) has refused to give up its on-going strike.

FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri told The Island they would not suspend the trade union action until all demands were met, practically.

The Cabinet of ministers on Wednesday night endorsed the views expressed in the joint memorandum, submitted by Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapakse and Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayaka that university teachers should be treated as a special category.

The Cabinet also decided to appoint a high-powered committee to monitor the implementation of the proposals agreed between the university academic staff and the authorities concerned.

It was also agreed that there should be an effective dialogue with the university academics and they acknowledged the need to make university academics active players in the development strategy of the government.

Dr. Devasiri said they would not accept those decisions as the government had forgotten the several other demands submitted by them.

"The cabinet did not talk about our salary hike or allocating 6 per cent of the GDP for education," he said.

The FUTAchief said that those Cabinet decisions were included in the Mahinda Chinthanaya policy document, too, but were yet to be implemented.

Dr. Devasiri said that they would not stop the ongoing strike until all their demands were met.

FUTA’s main demands are the allocation of 6 per cent of the GDP for education, consulting them when decisions are made on the higher education system and a pay hike.

Tertiary education based on specialised institutes must replace faltering university system in Sri Lanka

August 29, 2012, 6:51 pm, The Island 

In many countries – notably in the Soviet Union – specialised academic Institutes take on the task of training future specialists in key areas of learning. Suppose a school-leaver or a person with a first degree wishes to be a specialist physicist or obtain a diploma of specialization in this field. As things are in this country, he (or she) must enroll in one of the nondescript physics departments in our impoverished universities - which may, with justice, be described as mere teaching stations for undergraduates. The few competent physicists we have in this country are ‘loners’ in scattered places that serve as centres of undergraduate instruction. There is little professionalism in such places and it is a flight of extraordinary optimism to hope that such places will thrive as as centres of research and innovation. Suppose the scarce resources – human as well as the necessary peripherals – are concentrated in one place – a specialised institute – is it not clear that there will be a vast improvement in the quality of teaching and research in physics? Such institutes will offer courses for school-teachers, technicians and interested members of the public while taking over from the traditional universities the burden of instructing those reading for honours degrees in the subject. Research and teaching is best done when there is a critical mass of specialists working in an institute dedicated to the advancement of science. The low standard of research in our country is due to a ‘guru-sishya’ mentality in our places of learning.- the system where the is a ’know-all’ that passes his precious wisdom to his ‘disciples’. In scientific research, the young are often the great innovators and their teachers must stand aside when the need arises. This collegial spirit flourishes best when camaraderie is established between equals – a situation that is rarely seen in traditional places of learning but that which is vital for research in science. Hence the need for independent institutes of learning and research that foster this new spirit.

What has been said for the discipline of physics has a very general applicability. Thus Institutes foe Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, Geology and the Earth Sciences, Mathematics etc can be established by combining resources and by affiliation with universities already established. The education of specialists – be they the elite or humdrum ordinary folk – will pass on to specialist Institutes dedicated to the single-minded advancement of teaching and research in a chosen field. The disciplines outside science – for example, history, languages and religious studies – can be ‘institutionalized’ along similar lines and a new sense of dedication instilled into the study of subjects widely regarded as staid and unglamorous. Suppose we succeed in this revolutionary approach to Tertiary Education – does it mean that existing universities will decline to the contemptible level of a post-secondary certification centres? They need not if the first-degree courses are revamped to be a powerful basis for launching into careers that are wide open to the persevering and the ambitious. The first degree must not be a specialization – thus ‘Arts’ students must follow a course in science while science students must learn some history and philosophy. Both groups must strengthen their grasp of English by taking special courses in this vital subject. If these innovations are adopted, the first degree can be a true preparation for challenging work in in Post-Graduate Institutes, Administrative Service, Teaching etc.

Let us conclude by speaking briefly about financial outlays – a very contentious issue among academics these days. The Institutes must seek funds from the philanthropic public, industry and from students with the capacity to pay for the instruction received. They must have the power to deal directly with sponsors and supporters of the work they are engaged in and to tailor their programmes to meet current demands in commerce and industry. This must surely be a welcome relief for those who are appalled to see universities being directed by trade-unions and ill-disciplined bands of students. The ethos of disinterested learning and service to humanity must be placed foremost in the work of the proposed Institutes. This means that scholars – not politicians - will the principal architects. The goodwill and dynamism of politicians must be co-opted to secure the ends that serve all.

R. Chandrasoma

Riot police descend on undergrads

August 29, 2012, 10:16 pm 

by Dasun Edirisinghe, The Island

 The police anti-riot squad yesterday fired tear gas and used water cannon to disperse a protest march by undergraduates. Five police personnel were injured when some of the protesters pelted stones.

Thousands of undergraduates gathered opposite the Fort Railway Station and commenced their protest march demanding that all universities be re-opened, problems faced by the university teachers and non-academic staff be solved, education privatization plans and the Malabe Private Medical College be abolished and that all students affected by the Z–score mess-up be admitted to universities.

 The march organized by the Inter University Students’ Federation (IUSF) led by JVP dissidents brought traffic to a standstill. It was proceeding towards Temple Trees when the riot police descended on the protesters dispersing them near the Telecom Junction.

Police spokesman SSP Ajith Rohana said that the police had been compelled to use tear gas and water cannon to disperse the protest as undergraduates had turned unruly and started pelting stones.

Five police constables had been injured in the attack, SSP Rohana said.

Why some University Teachers are not Participating in the FUTA Strike Action

25 August 2012, 9:25 pm , dbsjeyaraj.com

University Of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka

by Mahendra Gunawardane

Everybody knows by now that the Federation of University Teachers Associations (FUTA) has been leading an all out trade union action of university academics. However, it has not been so widely known that there are some lecturers who refused to join the strike action. Some of them continue to teach their students without interruption and I am one of them.

Many would find it difficult to understand why some of us stay away from the trade union action while many others are engaged in.

The FUTA and its followers may like to know why some lecturers do not follow them. However, unless they ask why, I have no appetite to give them explanations and I certainly refuse to be apologetic. Nevertheless, I am happy to clarify my stance to my students and to the public who pay my salary.

My students already know very well why I refused to participate in the TU action, as I have discussed the matter lengthily with them intermittently during the long hours of lectures I had with them during the past month or so. Hence, the aim of this piece is to justify my action in the eyes of general public. I would like to point out also that even if the TU action is over by the time this is published, the arguments would always be relevant.

Though many lecturers, including even some who are on strike seem to have no clear idea on what FUTA really is asking for, the demands can be roughly put into three categories.

One demand of FUTA is that there must be further salary increases surpassing the unprecedented pay hikes given since mid 2011 until now. FUTA also demands that the government must spend 6% of the GDP on education. The third demand says that the education sector must be left without any political interference and the decision making in the sector must be left to the lecturers.

I had pre-planned to keep the students in the university by informing them well ahead of the FUTA strike action that I will continue to conduct lectures. My students stayed en masse, and to do them justice for hanging about for a single series of lectures, I had to take whole days of lectures with them without restricting ourselves to scheduled one or two hours. To do so, what had I in mind about the FUTA demands?

Salary and allowances:

I and my comrades who refused to join the FUTA action do not suffer from any allergy to money. If there are further pay hikes, it would be good for us as well. However, my conscience does not allow me to stick to such demands so arrogantly at the expense of my students. To me, it is almost like taking them hostages.

Therefore, I do not feel like resorting to strike action demanding further pay hikes. Nevertheless, if a salary increase is given under an agreement between the government and the FUTA or as a humanitarian overture of the government or as a result of the government knuckling under FUTA pressure, I would accept the increment without any shilly-shallying.

I am sure those of my profession who are on strike will be hopping mad by reading this. How would they be able to stomach the idea of people like me reaping the benefits of their struggle while opposing it completely?

I also believe strongly that one has an obligatory social responsibility to join hands in achieving common good. However, here I have to give preference to serving my students instead of joining a TU action that victimizes the students. I am well aware of the fact that a delay in graduation even by a month or two will be enough to delay the progress in the lives of students by years.

As we have been given extraordinary salary increases during the 2011-2012 years, the priority in pay hikes should now be given to employees of other sectors. I reach that decision as a supposedly educated employee who must thus have a holistic view on the country, its economy and the people. That is another reason for me not to join demanding a pay hike for university lecturers at this juncture.

The FUTA asks for allowances to give private-school education for their children and also to keep their children in fee-levying hostels. I have the self-esteem not to be a part of such wicked demands, which would infuriate the general public if they come to know.

The FUTA also asks from the government to take university teaching as a 24hour job and to give allowances accordingly. This is pure insanity, I think.

6% of GDP on education:

The Gross Domestic Product of a country is the total market value of all the products and services produced in the country within a year. The FUTA demands that the government must spend a 6% of the GDP on education.

According to recent statistics, the government income is about 14% of the GDP while the government expenditure amounts up to about 24% of the GDP.

A 6% of GDP is therefore exceeds 40% of the government income. It is also about one fourth of the total expenditure. If one fourth is to be spent on education, only three fourth would be left to spend on all the other things, including health, agriculture, salaries, pensions, etc. and for development activities. The reader will immediately realize the difficulty in allocating a good one fourth of expenditure on education.

I am reluctant to brand the FUTA officials as morons who cannot understand such simple logic. Having said that, I must admit that the FUTA bigwigs have always been trying to duck the question, when pressed to explain how on earth a government can spend that much on education.

The fact of the matter is that this demand for 6% of GDP expenditure is not at all a reasonable demand that has been formulated after careful analysis by FUTA on the Sri Lankan education sector. Instead, it is a demand put forward initially by the JVP as an attempt to instigate student unrest, if possible, for another round. There are reasons to believe that this demand was something forced down the throats of other FUTA officials by those who are linked to the JVP.

Even those who knew that it would be futile to launch an all out strike on a policy issue like this had to join hands, not to be seen as less enthusiastic in the struggle and thrown out as a result. The source from where the influence comes alone is a good enough deterrent for people like me to refuse joining the TU action.

Sri Lanka has been known as a country that gives much emphasis on education. It is legendary that the education is totally free here. Free education and free health are main indicators of our success story. These are achievements appreciated in the world and achievements we all can be proud of. It has been recognized all over the world that the standards we maintain in our education system are among the highest.

In the majority of other countries, the parents have to cough up money for their children’s education and the expenditure on education is calculated taking that also into account. This is the reason for some countries to show higher figures of expenditure than us, even though their emphasis on education remains very poor. I am unable to disrupt the education of my students going merely by some theoretical calculations that tend to depend on many variables.

Decision making in the university sector and political interference:

Some people may not know the fact that all the decisions in the university education are taken by nobody else but university academics. The Vice Chancellor who administers the university, the Deans of the Faculties and Heads of the Departments are university lecturers by profession. In a university, there are various decision making bodies of widest possible participation such as curriculum development committees, boards of studies, faculty boards, the senate and the council and they all are composed of nobody else but university lecturers. Above a university there is this governing body called the University Grants Commission. Who are the decision making officials at the UGC? They are university lecturers.

So, it is very wrong to say that there is any influence of decision making, other than that of the university lecturers themselves.

Nevertheless, one should not forget the fact that it is the public who spend billions on university education. What the government does is the management of this expenditure. Those who manage the expenditure have every right to monitor how it is spent at the universities. If there are some irregularities, shortcomings or scope for improvements, it is the duty of the relevant minister to interfere promptly, instead of sitting idle wasting public money. The problem, if any, is the lack of interference.

In the United Kingdom, there is no government interference at all on the university sector and as a result, the universities have to find money by themselves for survival. They had to increase student fees by many folds, an action that caused the recent student riots. There has been abrupt closure of many departments of studies of which the graduates have no value in the job market.

The lecturers there are recruited not on permanent basis but on the basis of three year contracts. Unless you bring in money to the universities by doing research on the request of outside commercial establishments, the contract will not be renewed and you will be thrown out at the end of the third year. Many non academic officials are also taken in on temporary contracts.

The education sector in my country is much more stable than that. The main reason behind this is the colossal expenditure the government spends on education, increasing the amount every year.

As university lecturers who know these facts, I and some of my colleagues have pledged not to stay away from our supposed to be noble duty of teaching.

That said, I have to admit that we too would join any strike action if the government is going to ruin our education system. However, it is clearly evident that it is not what this government is up to. Instead, it has ventured into improving the education sector and to make it capable of even earning foreign exchange. This is the exact meaning of the declared aim of making the island the hub of knowledge in the region.

Knowing all these, I cannot refuse to teach my student and, therefore, together with my likeminded colleagues, I refuse to participate in the current trade union action.

(Mahendra Gunawardane is Head of the Department,Department of Microbiology, University of Kelaniya)

FUTA trade union action – past and present IV

August 28, 2012, 12:00 pm 

By Nalin de Silva

The Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) twenty years ago submitted the demands as they came from the sister unions to the authorities but the strike decision was taken by the latter and conveyed to the respective Vice Chancellors. FUTA was in effect representing the teachers’ associations that came under its umbrella, and neither FUTA nor the sister unions as they are called did not alter the demands in midstream. A compromise was made, if at all, in the final stages of the struggle in order to come to a settlement still winning a substantial salary increase and some other demands. FUTA at that time never approached politicians, political parties, students, student unions nor other trade unions outside the university sector. Nor did FUTA allow others, be they political parties or trade unions, to approach it. Thus, it convinced the authorities concerned that its struggles were not politically motivated.

However, what has happened over the last one and half years is exactly the opposite. The FUTA took the strike decision and then informed the sister unions. That was not the method that should have been adopted according to the constitution of the Federation. Last year a token strike was held and then the Heads of Department resigned as part of the trade union action initiated by FUTA. There had been discussions earlier and the trade union action was taken without waiting for a discussion that the President had offered. The main demand was the increase of salaries of academics and one of the basic assumptions FUTA used to justify its pay hike demand was that the university academics were a special category and the underlying impression given to the public was that they were the best qualified in the country, if not the crème de la crème of the intelligentsia. It was said that the university academics should have obtained a very good degree at the time of recruitment and that the promotion criteria were very stringent. The government should have conducted a survey to find out how many academics have first class degrees and or Ph. Ds. There are many with second class (upper) degrees not to mention those with second class (lower) degrees. Then there are so many without Ph. Ds and one could easily find out people with better qualifications in other professions. How many of those leading FUTA can claim that they have First or Second (Upper) degrees and Ph. Ds? I do not attach much value to these paper qualifications but I am mentioning them since FUTA is fond of repeating these arguments on stringent criteria for recruitment and promotion. As I have said already none of the teachers have been trained in teaching, though whatever said and done the Sri Lankan universities are teaching institutions. Have the university academics in Sri Lanka adopted any new methods in teaching? As for research, the less said, the better! Research is not confined to universities and one could find many research officers with Ph. D’s in institutes carrying out research in their respective fields. Has any academic come out with a new concept or a theory during the last fifty years?

One could say that it is due to the absence of quality people in the universities that no research of good quality is carried out. This is tallied with the argument on recruitment and retention and if the salaries are increased the universities would be able to recruit talented people. However one could again make a survey to find out how many "better" people joined the universities as senior academics after the substantial salary increase twenty years ago. Matured people join the universities as senior academics for different reasons ranging from a desire to come back to Sri Lanka if they are abroad, and if they are locally employed for the freedom that is enjoyed by university teachers and for the fact that the retirement age in the universities is sixty five. The university academics do not have much work, as I know through experience, and all these talks of the academics working round the clock for twenty four hours are only fairytales. It is wrong to pretend that the university academics are a special category but I am glad that the FUTA under criticism has been compelled to change its stance and say the academics are a special category in the sense that those in various services belong to special categories. There is nothing gained by having university academics categorised as a special service and I would say that in the final analysis it would be counterproductive.

The 6% of the GDP for education was introduced towards the tail end of the trade union action last year, and this year since FUTA could not justify its insistence on the increase of basic salaries they demanded the government step up expenditure on education. FUTA has ignored the increases in allowances granted during the last few years. With the allowances academics are the better paid category in the public sector of course apart from the income generating institutions such as banks. On top of these allowances the university academics are paid a certain percentage of the fee levying courses subject to a ceiling and often the lion’s share is claimed by the teachers. As a result bogus certificate and diploma courses at a level below that of the undergraduate have been introduced and some of these champions of free education could be seen teaching these courses in universities. Neither FUTA nor the so-called Inter University Student Federation has objected in a meaningful way to these courses. In any event, FUTA insists on an increase in the basic salary, which has to be decided by the Salaries and Cadre Commission. It is one thing to make demands and it is quite another to make compromises during the negotiations as no trade union with reasonable leaders would expect to win all what they want. However, FUTA cannot justify its demand for higher basic salaries. It is very clear that insistence on an increase in the basic salary that could not be justified is nothing but an attempt to destabilise the government.

When FUTA realized that they could not proceed with their demand for an increase in the basic salary it changed the tune; it demanded that 6% of the GDP be allocated for education. It was a good tactic by the anti government forces in the FUTA and very soon they were able to obtain the support of the teachers’ union that is mainly responsible for the Z score fiasco asking the UGC to adopt the so called Thattil. This particular trade union attacks the government and the relevant ministers though it is responsible for forcing the UGC to adopt the erroneous Thattil method. FUTA misled the public by claiming that according to a UNESCO report government has to spend 6% of the GDP on education. The relevant section of the UNESCO report is reproduced here. "Education should be given high priority, and not less than 6 percent of a country’s GNP should be devoted to education, as recommended by the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, chaired by Jacques Delors." Nowhere is it said that the government should spend 6% of the GDP on education. In Sri Lanka the total government expenditure is about 25% of the GDP, and it is obvious that this particular demand of FUTA cannot be met. The government has to spend on defence which I consider should get the first priority under present circumstances.

I would not say that the so-called Academic Spring with this 6% issue was introduced by somebody from the NGOs or anti-government lobby but it gave an opportunity for the latter to rally all the anti-government forces from Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thero to Anoma Fonseka against the government. It is not FUTA that organized last week’s rally; it lacks the ability to do so. Those who did so want the Academic Spring converted to another kind of Spring. It is expected that the government will enter into an agreement with FUTA this week, and I understand that the infamous FUTA demand that an allowance be granted to university teachers to educate two of their children in government or private schools will not be met.