The UGC and the Universities Today

May 21, 2011, 3:36 pm


By Savitri Goonesekere

The academic communities were present in large numbers at the recent funeral of the late Professor B. A. Abeywickreme, Emeritus Professor in the faculty of Science, University of Colombo, and former Vice Chancellor of the university. As I entered the cemetery, an employee of the University of Colombo who recognized me rushed up and offered me an academic gown to wear, like the other ‘dons’ who were present. I thanked him and politely declined the gown. I am one of those old fashioned academics who believe that academic robes should be worn at ceremonial academic events. As I followed the funeral procession, I reflected that the Vice Chancellor, Staff and others dressed in their academic robes of office were perhaps participating in a final ritual that would see the demise of values on academic freedom and university autonomy that an older generation believed were the essence of respected seats of higher learning. I was a member of the UGC and a university academic and administrator, when these values, handed down to us by our predecessors, still seemed important. And yet today, Vice Chancellors, academics and university trade unions are passively watching while core principles of university autonomy in the present Universities Act 1978 are being violated by the University Grants Commission and the Ministry of Higher Education.

The Universities Act has clearly indicated that university academics are not government servants regulated by the State Establishments Code, and norms that apply to the public service of the country. The University Grants Commission is not a government department placed under the Minister and the Secretary to the Ministry of Higher Education. The powers of the Minister in relation to universities are defined by the Act. The Commission is authorized to function as an independent regulatory authority within the framework of the Act, which incorporates the concept of university autonomy, and the recognizes the distinct powers and responsibilities of University governing bodies (Councils) and University Senates responsible for all academic matters. These principles and the structure were recognized by the Supreme Court as a dimension of the concept of academic autonomy in universities enshrined in the Universities Act and international standards, in the celebrated case of Udagama and Others v Minister of Higher Education. Certain changes to the Universities Act including amendments to the provisions in the Act regulating the appointments of heads of departments of study were rejected by the Supreme Court as a violation of this important concept. The case must be familiar to the legal officer at the UGC, law teachers in the university system, Unions and university administrators. Extracts are published in the University of Colombo calendar of 2000. The UGC under the Chairmanship of the late Professor S. Tillekeratna, engaged in a consultative exercise to propose reforms to the Universities Act that would give more academic autonomy to universities, restricting the UGC to a standard setting and funding authority like in many other countries of the Commonwealth. This was considered essential to enable universities to become competitive institutions that could also generate and use their own funds for research and development. A new Universities Act drafted to reflect these perspectives was submitted by the National Education Commission to the government in 2005. Some academics like the current Vice Chancellor of the University of Ruhuna were involved in these consultations, and the preparation of the Act.

And yet, recent events indicate that University academics are permitting the UGC to regularly take decisions in violation of the Act. For example:

(1) S. 73 of the Act provides for retirement of teachers, indicating that a university teacher confirmed in the post continues in office until he/she reaches the age of 65, or if this event occurs in the course of the academic year, at the end of the year. Since this is a statutory provision, the UGC or the Minister have no power to change this except by an amendment to the Act. Yet a cabinet decision, communicated by the UGC to a University Council has been implemented, in violation of the Act, enabling a person who has retired to continue as a Dean of a Faculty. S 33 and 49 of the Act clarifies that the Dean is a fulltime officer of the University elected from among the Heads of Departments, who must also be permanent (tenured) members of staff. A professor who has retired may be employed again on contract but not as a permanent member of staff. The Dean receives certain payments and the Vice Chancellor as Chief Accounting officer and the UGC will have to explain to Parliament and Auditors at some time, how these payments are being made, and an appointment held on a Cabinet decision that violates the law.

(2) Powers of the UGC are specified by S 15 of the Universities Act which authorizes the Commission to determine in consultation with the Councils and Senates, the courses to be provided by Universities. We are told that the Ministry has now decided that all first year students shall follow a course in a military camp or facility. How did the UGC allow the Minister to make this decision? Was this discussed by the UGC with the Senates and Councils of Universities, as required by the Act? To permit the UGC or Ministry to determine the content of courses without discussion with university Senates violates the provisions of the Act on the universities powers regarding teaching programmes.

(3) The University Grants Commission (not the Chairman) issues circulars within the scope of provisions of the Act. Any changes in provisions to the Act can only be made by Parliament (through amendments) to the Act. This has been respected by all earlier governments. Yet on 3 May 2011 the UGC Chairman has issued a circular, apparently in his individual capacity, purporting to change the provisions in S.51 of the Act, which deals with the terms of appointment of a head of department of study. Following usual practice, there is no reference to the meeting of the Commission that adopted this circular. The circular strangely refers to S.51 (3) and ignores its content, thus constituting an administrative decision in violation of the Act.

The Universities of Sri Lanka like respectable academic institutions all over the world have systems of governance regulated by laws. There was a time in the not so distant past when Chairmen of UGC, Vice Chancellors and senior administrators, Councils and Senates understood that they had responsibilities to ensure transparent accountable governance in these institutions according to powers given to Councils and Senates by the Act. Members of these bodies now seem to have become active or passive parties to undermining the very fabric of universities as academic institutions of the nation. Some Vice Chancellors as Chief executives seem to pursue their personal agendas and political affiliations, with no questions asked by the university bodies like Faculty Boards, Senates and Councils. The concept of "following orders" seems to have replaced the concept of academic voice and participation in decision making on matters that concern universities.

When the last salary revision took place decades ago, the academic community, consisting of University Trade Unions, the UGC and Vice Chancellors were in close contact, working together in negotiating with the government to advocate for a just and fair salary structure. I recall how Prof. Arjuna Aluvihare, Chairman UGC at the time, Professor Dayantha Wijesekere, VC of the Open University and senior Professors who were union leaders were actively engaged together in negotiating with government to adopt a new salary structure. Today we witness the unsavoury spectacle of the Chairman UGC and some Vice Chancellors on a collision course with University Unions as witnessed in the UGC Circular of 3 May 2011. Academics refer to the unprecedented manner in which one Vice Chancellor addressed a union before a key decision was made on the proposed industrial action, reportedly even demanding that staff should not go on strike. Recent contributions by academics in the press indicate how academics are abused or treated as conspirators against the government when they seek to exercise the trade union rights that they have legitimately exercised for decades. In the past, Vice Chancellors dialogued with union leaders and tried to negotiate a settlement and prevent a strike. They did not use their official status to interfere with a union’s right to freedom of association and industrial action.

Should Vice Chancellors, Senates and Councils unquestioningly accept these violations of the Act and the erosion of their powers, and follow what are in effect "orders" that violate the law under which universities have been established? Three Universities have either a Faculty or Departments of Law. Why are these teachers so silent when these violations are taking place? Some travel overseas, write and present erudite papers on human rights. But do they discuss these issues of rights and governance with students or raise them in appropriate fora such as Faculty and Senate meetings?

The current trade union action for salary increases is based on a long standing need to rectify anomalies, in a context where other public institutions like the Central Bank and the judiciary have witnessed salary reviews. The newly appointed UGC has two members who were respected Vice Chancellors and administrators in the university system. Hopefully they will give new leadership and understanding on the role and responsibility of the UGC under the Universities Act, and help to resolve the current salaries dispute.

However academics too will gain more public support for their cause if they fulfill their responsibilities and act collectively to safeguard the core values on which our academic institutions have been built over many decades of higher education in this country. Vice Chancellors, Deans, Chairmen of UGCs and University Faculties and Senates, with the full gamut of professors and academic staff must give the leadership that these institutions desperately need to sustain transparent accountable and democratic governance in universities. Caliban, writing of the "Disease of Sycophancy" in the Island of 27 April 2011, refers to the "putrid example" of servility in the University community. Symptomatic of this sycophancy, as he describes it, is "holding on to positions that are not their rightful due, stooging the benefactors, acquiescing and covering up their misdeeds or inadequacies, and basically betraying the sanctity of the office they hold." When the Sri Lankan University system crumbles beyond repair, like many other public institutions in this country, the public will come to realize that, as Martin Luther King once said, this was not just because of a few sycophants, "but the appalling silence of the majority."

S. B. and universities

October 10, 2014, 12:00 pm

One wonders whether Minister S. B. Disanayake is fit to hold that exalted position. The recent incidents at the Sabaragamuwa University and his reaction prove that he lacks the maturity, forbearance and sober contemplation, which are hallmarks of such a responsible position.

No one would deny that the universities of the country have become hotbeds of intolerance, frustration and dissension. These developments are the cumulative result of the radicalization of youth over the years. The general neglect of university education by successive governments which have not provided sufficient funds to meet the needs of the universities such as reasonable remuneration for the academic and non-academic staff and outdated courses of study have also contributed to this situation.

Anyone who holds the higher education portfolio should study these problems, consult the parties involved, cultivate mutual understanding and take steps to broaden the resource base. For this approach to bear fruit, the person, who venture into this chaotic maelstrom should possess, far seeing sagacity, immense patience, tolerance and most of all, he or she should possess winning ways to instill respect, and acceptance in the minds of the parties concerned.

These are the very qualities S. B. sadly lacks. He has been tilting at windmills.

Here I must hasten to add that I do not condone at all the vise-like grip the JVP-controlled Student Unions and their break away fraction have on the universities.

The minister should realize that there are other stakeholders in the system, whose confidence he should win. He also should realise that there are vexed problems which he should solve because these are exploited by the student unions. But, instead of finding solutions, he turns abusive at the drop of a hat and calls his critics names.

Sometime back when S. B. was the National organiser of the UNP he advocated a ‘little bit of authoritarianism’ in any field to achieve success. Is S. B. doling out his own medicine in the restricted space of his ‘little empire’?

Ariyawansa Ranaweera

SB’s puppets wreak havoc on Colombo campus – dons

*Teachers refrain from work in protest,

*Minister’s office denies allegation

October 8, 2014, 9:59 pm 

by Dasun Edirisinghe

Lecturers of the Colombo University Arts Faculty will refrain from teaching from today in protest against the unruly behaviour of a section of undergraduates and Faculty Students Union.

University sources said that the Faculty Board including all department heads would meet today to discuss their conditions to resume work.

Dean of the Colombo Arts Faculty, Prof. Athula Ranasinghe said that the teachers had decided to put an end to the unruly behaviour of students, who had no respect for the academic staff.

"We will discuss with students today after the meeting and will resume teaching if they agree to abide by the university rules and regulations," he said.

A senior lecturer of the Arts Faculty told The Island, on condition of anonymity, that a section of students affiliated to the SLFP had plunged the faculty into chaos by misbehaving and subjecting first year students to cruelty in the name of ragging.

In a recent incident two female students had been assaulted for associating with first year students disregarding warnings issued by the so-called student leaders, he said.

The senior academic said that a section of the students’ union wanted to prevent senior students from moving with first years and they wanted to propagate only their political ideology.

Those unruly students had a callous disregard for university regulations and no respect for lecturers because Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake rose in their defence when action was taken against them, the senior don said, adding that the minister had used those unruly elements to neutralise the JVP at the university. He called the troublemakers SB’s puppets.

President of the Arts Faculty Students Union, Wasantha Gunasundara denied any links to a political party. "The university administration is levelling baseless allegations against us and currently new entrants are on vacation. There was an incident where two seniors came to blows and the administration is trying to make it out to be the result of ragging."

Minister S. B. Dissanayake’s Media Secretary, Gayan Peris said that the ministry did not sponsor any student union contrary to claims by teachers to that effect.

SB wins the day; university closed

Sabaragamuwa Mayhem:

October 5, 2014, 10:24 pm




By Chaminda Silva and N.H. Piyasena,
Balangoda corr

Sabaragamuwa University was shut down until further notice yesterday when pandemonium reigned with students staging an aggressive protest against a visit by Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake and his deputy Nandimithra Ekanayake to the varsity.

Police fired tear gas and used water cannon to disperse the protesting students who had hurriedly put up barricades on the road near the Pambahina Junction to block the ministerial motorcade.

The two ministers managed to visit the university and lay a foundation stone for a new hostel and to declare open the newly constructed Walawe Hostel for female undergraduates.

The protest held up traffic along the Badulla-Colombo main road.

Police said that they had been compelled to use water cannon to disperse the protesting students and no one had been injured. The police denied the accusation by undergraduates that they had used tear gas.

Convener of the Sabaragamuwa University Undergraduates’ Collective, Rasindu Jayasinghe said around Rs. 400 million had been spent on the newly constructed hostel, but it had not been built properly.

It posed a danger to students. And there was a plan to lay a foundation stone for a hostel for male students next to an army camp. he added, alleging that the whole project smacked of a sinister plan.

Addressing the opening ceremony, Minister Dissanayake said there were a handful of students who staged protests. The new building had been built by engineers who had passed out of Sri Lankan universities and they knew what they were doing. "I hear that some politically motivated students claim that part of Rs 400 million allocated for this building has been siphoned off. Then they accused us of not fixing roof gutters. We did not permit fixing roof gutters to avoid the breeding of dengue mosquitoes. There is a group of organised students who sent others to roads with tills to collect money. They do not let students speak English because they do not want the youth to come up in life so that they could prey on them. These troublemakers are thriving on youth unrest and there is no other way they could survive in mainstream politics. We won’t give in to them. They can protest and block roads but we will not stop developing the university system and improving the students’ lot."

The university administration later announced that the university had been closed indefinitely.

Rajani and the Tamil National Struggle

September 18, 2014, 7:30 pm 

Dr Rajani Thiranagama

By Rajan Hoole

Dr. Rajani Thiranagama was killed 25 years ago on 21st September 1989

Every death, as Rajani said, is a monumental tragedy that needs to be accounted for and the moment we lose that human empathy and become apathetic or indifferent, we are, as a people, doomed. While death and loss was not confined to one community, we Tamils believed in the liberation struggle, lost a great deal, sheltered behind apathy while many of our best were killed as traitors and children of the vulnerable sections dragooned off to fight a doomed war. We are now the living dead, corrupt and subservient, unable to run the institutions we have for the public good, appeasing the new order by pretending that the liberation struggle was something we had no part in, and those who died for it as completely alien to us. With her keen understanding of society and the dangerous shallowness of narrow elite nationalism, Rajani foresaw this betrayal as her writings in the Broken Palmyrah show. She saw it was the poor and downtrodden who were at the receiving end. Her ears and heart were open to all; she pleaded that to avert our common dismal fate, our politics should become more open, and we should reach out to the wider world as a people deserving sympathy.

While being an internationalist from her university days, Rajani joined the LTTE as a reaction to the hypocrisy of Tamil nationalist politics, upon seeing, first as a doctor, the sacrificial earnestness of some LTTE cadres. She left in disgust upon being exposed to the trauma of young persons, whose sacrifice was being cynically betrayed. As with Tamil nationalist parliamentary politics, she saw that the LTTE was a prisoner of its rhetoric of Tamil valour and its heroic destiny and could only impose greater sacrifices on an unwilling people and severe repression against those who questioned it, while being drawn into new and malign forms of dependence. Nationalism when admired for its military feats has been a source of dangerous delusions.

The stunning victory of the Japanese against the Russian Navy, then a major European Imperial Power, in the Tsushima Strait in 1905, charged up nationalist movements from China and Vietnam to India, Turkey and the Islamic world with fresh fervour for throwing off European Imperial dominance and asseting national independence. But they lost sight of the fact that Nationalism was already an outmoded and gangrenous sore. Japan’s was not an agenda for the liberation of Asia, agenda for posession, particularly Manchuria and Korea. Its victory was not made in Japan but in current imperial rivalies, and the Japanese Navy was armed largely by Britain. Japan’s hubris eventually led to the tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

We failed to appreciate that nationalism was ultimately predatory in character. Once the beast of nationalism is awakened, its depredations as we have seen may be more insidious and incurable when exercised by groups within the whimsical boundaries of modern states. The predatory spirit of nationalism inspired by Japan’s victory, marred the independence of nations from colonial rule. Take education.

After 65 years of independence, why do we still hold degrees and doctorates from western nations in high regard and treat ours with increasing skepticism? Did we not have the potential for our universities to equal Oxford and Cambridge? The failure has much to do with our partisanship and violence that are an aspect of nationalism, which made impunity tolerable when the victim was not in our group. For us, the disenfranchisement of Plantation Labour of recent Indian origin in 1948 using tenuous arguments founded on Legal Positivism, then the vogue in English Law, brought us to Sinhalese majoritarianism and frequently, total eclipse of the rule of law. In India it begun with the trauma of Partition that owed to the refusal of Hindu Nationalists to treat the Muslims as equals. In both instances the predatory aspect of nationalism stunted us and our institutions. As an internationalist and a keen participant in solidarity movements across national boundaries, and an early supporter of the African National Congress, Rajani understood this and in the development of her thinking distinguished between narrow nationalism and the kind of nationalism dictated by the defence of a community and struggled to maintain that distinction against the noxious rhetorical legacy of a bankrupt parliamentary nationalism, which had legitimised the murder of so-called traitors. Some left militant groups too tried and failed.

As one whose perceptions were moulded by state-complicity in communal violence, Rajani accepted the Tamil Nation as forced upon us by events, but whose materialisation was conditional upon the Tamils’ success in nation-building, to include Muslims and Hill-Country Tamils in a concrete, rather than superficial, working relationship with mechanisms to address mutual grievances. It meant building people’s institutions to mitigate harmful dependencies, both locally and internationally. Part of her advocacy was her leading role in forging in Jaffna University, the Staff, Students and Employees Consultative Committee, chaired by the Vice Chancellor, where members talked as equals to resolve problems. It challenged the LTTE’s attempt to control the University, and foundered once Rajani was assassinated.

Rajani’s worst fears of the narrow Tamil nationalism forged by the elite in response to Sinhalese supremacism, found its searing denouement in the bloodied sands of Mattalan and Mullivaykkal in 2009, and the continuing paralysis of Tamil society. What is Rajani’s message to this society today? Maria Remarque, a young German soldier who fought in the ruinous First World War, in his masterpiece ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’, left us a powerful critique of his country’s nationalist excess and the young’s total disillusionment with the older generation and the service of the State they preached: "[they were] convinced that they were acting for the best, in the way that was most comfortable for themselves…[to us] that was the very root of their moral bankruptcy…we saw there was nothing left of their world. Suddenly we found ourselves horribly alone."

We see it today in the intellectual barrenness that characterises her University, and the near absence of discussion and engagement between the academic staff and the students. The generation responsible for this plight hides its bankruptcy by not allowing the young to think. They are being exhorted to more tradition and more religion and are rendering our political future hopeless by dismantling secularism – the only basis for a united Tamil Nation – that even the militant movements paid lip-service to. The Tamils’ internal destructivess, combined with the Sinhalese establishment’s quest for complete victory over truth about the recent war in particular, and history in general, renders the situation more volatile.

Could one pronounce judgment on the character of the recently ended war without a fair estimate of the casualties? Could one make such an estimate after throwing away primary data about the number of civilians in the war zone given by the leading government official in charge of those civilians, and not gainsaid by the LLRC, as simply cooked up? Was shelling civilians on the run all the way from Sampoor to Batticaloa in August 2006, then going back on the promise of allowing civilians to return, and turning over Sampoor to a crony capitalist as a zone for heavy industry, a benign and professional military operation, or primarily an ideological operation?

Particular versions imposed with state-backing leads to anger among the victims silenced by pervasive fear, and is reflected in the fertility of sentiments that gave birth to the LTTE in Tamil politics. The resulting Dialogue of the Deaf augurs ill for a united Lanka.

How do we respond? In writing the Broken Palmyrah in late 1987 and early 1988, the authors had different perspectives. One was the simple belief that the truth is greater than ourselves, and the truth in itself has curative power. Rajani and Sritharan went much further and wanted to make it a people’s narrative through which the people hold their oppressors of every hue to account and seek ways to build their collective strength. The book could not have been what it is without their constant engagement with victims left to their misery in villages and hovels.

Govt. has reduced promised pay hike from 25% to 20% – FUTA

August 1, 2014, 11:14 pm , the island


By Dasun Edirisinghe

Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake says that the government was boasting that the government had increased the salaries of university teachers by 20%, but it was only one of the promises on the basis of which the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) had suspended its 100-day strike in 2012, former FUTA chief and executive committee member Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri said yesterday.

Dr. Dewasiri said that the government had promised a 25% salary increment,but after one-and-a-half years it had granted only 20%.

The increment was granted with effect from last month and the government had reneged on its promise to pay arrears, Dr. Dewasiri said.

The FUTA, he said, wanted the 35% research allowance added to the basic salary and the conditions stipulated to obtain it should be relaxed as all university teachers could not do a research every year as they were too busy with teaching activities or attending to administrative duties, the FUTA executive member said.

Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake said that they would not pay the research allowance to those who would not engage in research activities. "We introduced the research grant to encourage university dons to engage in research as it is a need of the hour to improve our universities," he said.

Jaffna University science teachers complain of foul play in recruitment

UGC Chairperson promises probe

July 31, 2014, 10:03 pm, the island

By Dasun Edirisinghe

The Jaffna University Science Teachers’ Association (JUSTA) yesterday claimed that recruitment procedures in the university were abused through political interference by a member party of the ruling UPFA coalition.

According to a report prepared by the JUSTA’s Subcommittee for Academic Integrity––summary of the report appears on page seven in today’s edition of this newspaper––the political party concerned has been given monopoly over the appointment of external council members though by statute the responsibility lies with the UGC.

The political party kept a tight control over them by summoning them for pre-council gathering before each monthly council meeting, the report says.

When probationary or assistant lecturers are recruited to all faculties, the interview board drops the qualified persons with highest GPA (Grade Point Average) and other academic qualifications and experience, including post graduate and selected persons with low qualification, but with political backing, the JUSTA says.

According to the report, the March 2009 list of selections for Computer Applications Assistants (CAA) drawn from a mainly Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP) list forwarded through the Ministry of Higher Education was prefaced with the Scheme of Recruitment which claimed candidates were sought by open advertisement.

Ministry of Higher Education sent a list of candidates for the post of labourer and they were told to obtain their qualifications and complete their applications. On 8th July, the Ministry telephoned the University to withdraw 30 names from the list already given and to include 23 names from a fresh list, the report says.

"We recommend that all cases of irregularities that have come to light be reviewed swiftly and highly qualified applicants that were excluded at interviews be called," the subcommittee has said.

The JUSTA also says that independent persons of repute with an appreciation of university values should be appointed to the Council as external members, and student representatives and academic staff should be allowed to review their qualifications. Internal members should be advised to resign their positions and seek a fresh mandate from their constituencies in the Faculties.

Chairperson of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Prof. Kshanika Hirimburegama, contacted for comment, said that the UGC was not aware of such a report.

She said that some time back the UGC had investigated the appointment of Jaffna University Vice Chancellor following a complaint that it had been made under political influence, but it had been proved that the appointment was not politically motivated.

The JUSTA should have submitted the report to the UGC first as it was the management authority of university academics, Prof. Hirimburegama said.

"If it is submitted to the UGC, I’ll definitely have a very impartial inquiry into their charges," she said.

Secretary to the Ministry of Higher Education Dr. Sunil Jayantha Navaratne said the scheme of recruitment of non-academic staff, whereby the lists were vetted by the area Minister had been in practice even before Minister S.B. Dissanayake took over the Higher Education portfolio.

Lanka hosts regional meeting on recognition of qualifications in higher education

July 31, 2014, 9:26 pm,the island


by Dasun Edirisinghe

The 13th Session of the Regional Committee on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific in conjunction with the Regional Workshop on Quality Assurance in Higher Education will be held in Sri Lanka for the first time on August 04 and 05, the Higher Education Minister says.

Addressing a media conference at UGC auditorium, Minister S.B. Dissanayake said yesterday that 35 countries would participate in the workshop which would cost Rs. 8 million.

"We are happy to host the workshop as it will enable us to exchange our students and teachers with global universities, while getting recognition for local qualifications and quality assurance," Minister Dissanayake said, adding that it would help Sri Lankan universities with securing higher global rankings.

Secretary of the Higher Education Ministry Dr. Sunil Jayantha Nawaratne said that at present 4,000 foreign students from West Asia, China, Japan, India and the Maldives were studying in the state and private universities here.

Dr. Nawaratne said that when Minister Dissanayake took office there had been only 300 foreign students in Sri Lanka.

UGC Chairperson Prof. Kshanika Hirimburegama and Additional Secretary of the Ministry Piyasena Ranepura also attended the media conference.

Govt. hikes dons’ pay by 20%, refuses to add research grant to salary

July 31, 2014, 9:56 pm ,the island

by Dasun Edirisinghe

Research allowance for university teachers would not be added to the basic salary as the allowance had been introduced to encourage university dons to engage in research, Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake said yesterday.

Addressing a media conference at the University Grants Commission auditorium, the minister said that few university lecturers wanted the 35% research grant added to the salary without doing any research.

"A majority of lecturers are engaged in research as they receive the allowance after producing their research or project," Dissanayake said, adding that they could not develop Sri Lankan universities without research.

The minister said that the government had increased the salaries of university teachers by 20% from last month without any publicity, but some lecturers were still asking for pay hikes.

Dissanayake said that now the basic salary of probationary lecturer was Rs. 67,000.

Discriminating against excellence:
Abuses in recruitment practices at the University of Jaffna

 

July 31, 2014, 8:52 pm


Summary of a report prepared by the Subcommittee for Academic Integrity, Jaffna University Science Teachers’ Association

Introduction

The Subcommittee for Academic Integrity found blatant, endemic abuse across several university departments and units in the selection of academic and non-academic staff. The root of this abuse is both political and personal patronage which operates at all levels of the system, and an unwillingness of senior professors and administration to challenge it.

The most prevalent form of abuse documented is in the selection of probationary lecturers (or assistant lecturers), resulting in the most highly qualified candidates such as First Class degree-holders being systematically excluded from consideration or denied positions.

The culpability of the University Grants Commission in making political appointments to the Council and then being unwilling to fulfil its statutory mandate to regulate the administration of universities is very much part of the problem.

The Political Nexus and ‘Pre-council Meetings’

The governing Councils, especially the external members, the majority who are appointed by the UGC (which in practice acts as a rubber stamp for those in political authority) have been disinclined to act on academic principle and in the best interests of the University. The selection of the Vice Chancellor has largely depended on them. In Jaffna a political party which works with the current government, was given a monopoly over the appointment of external council members, although by statute the responsibility is the UGC’s. That party keeps a tight control over them, by summoning them for pre-council meetings before each monthly council meeting. Unfortunately the internal members have gone along without protest and, consequently, few councillors know or care about the rules. A powerful core of internal members is served well by this system and the others take the easy way out by playing along. Academics who fall in line enjoy unchallenged arbitrary power in their own spheres, especially over appointments to the academic staff.

MALFEASANCE IN ACADEMIC RECRUITMENT

Zoology

The 1stClass Honours candidate, who won the Sir Sangarapillai Pararajasingam Award for best performance in Zoology Special with GPA (Grade Point Average) 3.72, was rejected for the post of probationary lecturer in Zoology on 14th October 2013. The schedule given to the selection board unaccountably failed to flag her distinctive Award. The candidate given the appointment was about the weakest of the eleven interviewed, having a 2nd Upper with GPA 3.44. At the interview, the Vice Chancellor had stopped the First Class candidate’s presentation after 2 minutes, but gave the selected candidate wide berth to present herself.

Computer Science

Four candidates with first class were interviewed for probationary lecturer in Computer Science on 8th May 2012, having GPAs as high as 3.80. However, the selection board ruled, "No selection is made since the presentation skill, subject knowledge and overall performance of the candidates are not satisfactory". They did not apply again.

The candidate selected at the subsequent selection on 12th November 2013, where just two were interviewed, had graduated with a 2nd Upper in June 2001 but worked as Assistant Network Manager Grade II in the Computer Unit for nine years, without any marked academic attainment. How fresh first class graduates lacked subject knowledge is one of those unanswered questions. Circumstances make it look as though the selected candidate was smuggled in as Lecturer at the very moment the most eligible young first classes had been shooed off and credible applicants had dried up.

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

An engineer who entered the University of Peradeniya in 1982 and completed his PhD at the University of Moratuwa in 2008 was appointed as Senior Lecturer Grade 1 in 2012 without the mandatory 6 years experience after obtaining the required postgraduate qualification. Another applicant rejected twice for the same position was admitted to the University of Moratuwa in 1981, but completed his engineering studies at University of Madras owing to the 1983 violence, and in 1995 obtained his PhD in Coastal Engineering from Queen’s University, Canada, which is an acclaimed leader in the field. He also had amply fulfilled the required experience after his doctorate and met all requirements for the post. The second time the Selection Board decisively stated that his ‘subject knowledge, teaching skill, research ability and overall performance are not satisfactory’. But this engineer not selected has three refereed publications, while the selected engineer has little to match this.

Sociology

A first class graduate in Sociology from the University of Peradeniya, with a PhD in Anthropology (a related subject) from the Johns Hopkins University in the US (ranked among the top 20 Universities in the world) applied for a position in Sociology at the University of Jaffna. Although he was shortlisted for the interview, the SAR Academic made a note that this candidate could be dropped because the position required a PhD in Sociology, while the applicant’s was in Anthropology. The regulations are clear that anyone with qualifications appropriate to the position in a relevant discipline must be called and the selection board must rule. In fact it is hard to draw a dividing line between Sociology and Anthropology.

English Language Teaching

A First Class candidate from Peradeniya who had served as temporary lecturer in English Literature for 1 ½ years applied for an ELTC post. The interview was fixed a year after he had applied, two months after he left for doctoral studies in the US in August 2011. He was refused an online interview. He applied next time and the interview was fixed for 17th April 2012 while his academic sessions were on and was refused a postponement by a month when his vacation began. Parallel to this (on the same date) interviews were also fixed for Law. Since Category 1 candidates (1st Class or 2nd Upper) turned up for neither, Category 2 (2nd Lower candidates) were summoned for interviews on 15th May. A 2nd Lower was selected for English. But one of the two Category 2 law candidates who turned up for the interview was told that the interview was postponed. The Law interview was held on 24th May and the candidate absent earlier was chosen. By this time the 1st Class candidate in English who was refused a postponement was present in Jaffna as he had already told the University.

The ELT position was advertised again in April 2013 and interviews were held in October 2013. The Peradeniya First Class who applied again from the USA and appealed for an on-line interview was not granted it. The schedule failed to mention the three merit prizes listed in his application. A First Class in English Literature from Jaffna who faced the same interview was rejected, while three Second Class (Upper Division) candidates from her batch were selected.

Financial Management

A First Class candidate from Jaffna University’s 2012 batch with GPA 3.63 who won the Securities and Exchange Commission Gold Medal was rejected and a candidate from the same batch with GPA 3.49 was chosen. The schedule given to the Selection Board did not flag the first candidate’s Gold Medal. Further the selected candidate had her credentials inflated in the schedule to have worked as Temporary Lecturer from Apr. 2012 whereas she was not given the temporary lecturer appointment until May 2013. In addition, the leading candidate who was not selected states in her complaint to the Council that the interview was held with the Chairman of the Selection Board (Vice Chancellor), though absent shortly after the beginning of the interview, had signed the selection document. A fundamental rights appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court by this candidate.

Commerce

In the 19th Feb. 2014 interview the applications of the First Class candidate with GPA 3.63 and others with a BBA degrees were turned down contrary to the rules as Business management is a discipline relevant to Commerce. Three First Class candidates interviewed with GPA 3.55 and above (two from the 2012 batch) were dropped, while among the three selected were a 2nd Class Upper with GPA 3.19 from the 2012 batch and another 2nd Upper who graduated in 2000 and obtained an MA in Planning from Jaffna in 2009.

Sports Science: The Case of

the Preferred Candidate

A candidate with a First Class Master’s in Physical Education from Annamalai University who was attached to the University’s Physical Education Unit and a Second Class Master’s from another Indian University who had been a sports master for 4 years were interviewed for Lecturer in Sports Science on 30th March 2012. No one was selected. But about two weeks later the Vice Chancellor took the unusual step of making the 2nd Class a Temporary Lecturer for one whole year at a time the academic year was about to end.

When the position was advertised next time both candidates applied. The First Class candidate was without prior notice summoned by the SAR for an interview involving a presentation at 12.00 noon while the interviews were in progress. The Second Class candidate was selected. The Vice Chancellor cancelled the appointment after the First Class candidate pointed out the irregularities. These candidates together with others were re-interviewed on 10th October 2013 and were all found unsuitable. How does one explain such volatility of selection boards?

NON-ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS

* The March 2009 list of selections for Computer Applications Assistants (CAA) drawn from a mainly EPDP list forwarded through the Ministry of Higher Education was prefaced with the Scheme of Recruitment which claimed candidates were sought by open advertisement.

* Issue of appointments to selected CAA candidates was deferred in June 2011 though the Council recorded that the procedures were correctly followed. Later this became an indefinite deferral citing a letter from the Secretary of the Ministry of Higher Education. The same drama was repeated in 2012.

* Ministry of Higher Education sent a list of candidates for the post of Labourer and they were told to obtain their qualifications and complete their applications. On 8th July, the Ministry telephoned the University to withdraw 30 names from the list already given and to include 23 names from a fresh list. The schedule for candidates in the new list was prepared in record time and interview was held on 10th July. The following day, the Selection Board interviewed five absentees and acceded to a further request by a candidate to be considered in absentia. The selection was passed the same day (11th) by a Special Meeting of the Council.

Compare this with the treatment of well-qualified applicants from abroad for academic posts whose requests for on-line interview or adjustment of date were never considered.

Recommendations

1. We recommend that all cases of irregularities that have come to light be reviewed swiftly and highly qualified applicants that were excluded at interviews be called. To guard against retaliation, applicants who have filed complaints should have their cases heard by a special review board appointed in consultation with the Unions.

2. Independent persons of repute with an appreciation of university values should be appointed to the Council as external members, and student representatives and academic staff must be allowed to review their qualifications. Internal members should be advised to resign their positions and seek a fresh mandate from their constituencies in the Faculties. This means starting on a fresh slate where the more independent internal members are not inhibited from speaking out; indeed part of their new mandate must be speaking out against cases of abuse or political manipulation.