Challenges
in university education in Sri Lanka
Featured
in The Island
7
By Prof.
Gamini Samaranayake
Chairman,
University Grants Commission
Being
a person born and bred in Anuradhapura and also as one who studied at Central
College of Anuradhapura, it is a great honour and privilege to deliver the 20th
Dr. C.W.W. Kannangara Annual Memorial Lecture. First of all, I wish to express
my gratitude to the present Director General of the National Institute of
Education (NIEU) Dr. Upali Sedera and the organizing committee for their kind
invitation. However, initially it was late Professor Lal Perera who intimated
to me to deliver the prestigious lecture on the occasion of the last memorial
lecture delivered by Professor Carlo Fonseka. I am deeply sorry as Late
Professor Lal Perera is not with us today to witness this memorable event even
in my life.
The
title of my presentation is ‘Problems and Challenges of University Education in
Sri Lanka’. I believe the theme is very relevant and appropriate considering
the present global and national context in relation to university education.
The main focus of my presentation is to examine and analyze problems and
challenges besetting university education in Sri Lanka in the context of the
changing university system at global level. One of the great challenges faced
by many governments is trying to keep their higher education system abreast
with the changes that occur at the global level to avoid being left behind
while protecting their countries from being overwhelmed by demand for progress.
This
presentation shall be divided into five major sections. The first part briefly
examines developments and changes in relation to the university education
taking place at global level. The second part deals with the vision of late
Dr.C.W.W.kannangara regarding university education in the country. The third
part examines the origin and development of university education in the
country. The fourth part deals with problems and challenges of the university
system in Sri Lanka while the fifth or final part draws on the way forward in
the context of Mahinda Chinthana- future vision 2010.
My
field of study is not education or higher education but Political Science. My
knowledge regarding university education is based on my experience as a
university teacher, Head of Department, Vice Chancellor, and Chairman of the
University Grants Commission. It is a pertinent question to raise that the
subject of education confines to methods of teacher training or covering higher
education. A few universities in the country maintained either a Faculty of
Education or a Department of Education. The University of Colombo, Eastern and
Open University have a faculty while the University of Peradeniya and the
University of Jaffna have a Department of Education. Either faculty or
department does not specialize higher education. As a result, there is no
discourse on status or development of higher education in Sri Lanka. Only
available debate is regarding establishing private universities in the country.
Kannangara’s
vision
The
report of the Special Committee on Education chaired by the late Dr. C.W.W.
Kanangara is confined to secondary education and barely touches on university
education. However, the scope of his analysis is so wide that it encompasses
the nexus between education at all levels and citizenship and nationhood. The
lack of specific reference to university education could be attributed to two
factors. The first is that Sri Lanka was a long way away from achieving
universal primary education free of charge on an equitable basis. Second, the
trajectory of university education was already set in motion and the
preliminary steps had been taken to establish a university. Nevertheless, the
late Dr. Kannangara had a farsighted vision of how education in general,
inclusive of university education, would contribute to a local definition of development
in the country. Therefore, I shall focus on some of the salient aspects of his
report that remain valid for all levels of education and national development
in Sri Lanka.
To
him the character of an educational system depends upon the character of the
society for which it is designed. He assumed that the task of the committee was
to recommend an educational system that established and sustained democracy.
Hence, education was the means that supported every child to reach his or her
full potential and equipped them with the life skills to play his or her full
part in nation building, sustaining democracy and national development. For
this end two main broader objectives had to be met. The first was that the
state had to support every individual to achieve the highest degree of
physical, mental and moral development of which he is capable irrespective of
his wealth, or social status. Secondly, individual should be able to use his or
her abilities for the good of the nation. Thus, he aimed at democracy, equity
and equality from the educational system breaking barriers of exclusion and
discrimination stemming from ethnicity, class or caste. His vision was so far
sighted that he envisages a liberal and flexible national education that
provides the space for experimentation, discourse and creativity which we today
interpret as learner centered education. As a result the country’s educational
system had to originate from the ethos of the country and must be a system
designed for the country. In this context he was able to predict the dangers of
a lack of national unity and argued for the translation of the concept of
diversity as strength rather than a divisive factor. He emphasizes the
importance of establishing national unity through education and inculcating
tolerance, nationalism and non racial discrimination through education that was
the means of citizenship building and nation building. It is indeed a very
broad and farsighted vision if understood and interpreted to action.
The
aims of education were divided as general and particular aims. The general aims
of education is the preparation for life in its material and spiritual aspects
which are defined as life skills in the Education for All Goals which we are
striving to meet by 2015. The particular aims are: 1. Mental development or
mental discipline, 2, Culture and character and efficiency. Mental development
means the increase of intellectual power, while culture means a kind of
intellectual polish. Efficiency means ability to work well and may be measured
by one’s ability to render social service as a citizen or by one’s success at a
career.
Kannangara’s
education outcomes therefore are very much linked to the concepts of higher
education that we are grappling with, such as the promotion of lifelong
learning, training for professionalism and a learner centered education. For
him the character of the university is unitary and residential and the
university is autonomous and has the liberty of academic freedom. The report
realized that the establishment of the University of Ceylon would not in itself
effect a complete break with the domination of London degrees. The Executive
Committee had decided to permit the continuance of London examinations until
the University of Ceylon was in a position to provide adequate facilities for
all students capable of benefiting from university education. Thus, his vision
of university education was based on the British model of the university but
adapted to the local context and the building of nationhood and national development.
Changes
of university education
The
origin of the university in the Western sense goes back to the medieval Europe
with the establishment of Oxford, and Cambridge. However, the university in
modern sense started in the latter part of 19th century. Initially Latin and
later German dominated scholarship and science now English is the global
academic language.
Higher
education is not an isolated phenomenon subject to vagaries of external and
internal pressure. However, there is a strong belief that universities and
cemeteries are not willing to change or move but both have to change due to
internal and external forces. Let us take the external pressure. They are due
to globalization and internationalization of university education. Globalization
comprise broad economic, political and other trends and it also involves
Information Technology (IT) the use of English, the rise of the private sector,
the marketization of higher education and related aspects that are more or less
inevitable results of the rapidly diversifying and changing global environment.
Internationalization means a package of policies that government or education
institutions develop to cope with the global environment such as providing
academic programmes in foreign languages and sponsoring students to continue
their studies abroad. In the case of internal pressure we note that enormous
pressure being exerted towards our universities by the student union controlled
by the radical political parties. They opposed any form of changes identified
to be introduced in university education.
There
have been significant effects of globalization and internationalization. Of
them, access, quality and equity are noteworthy. Access to higher education has
been rising rapidly all over the world. In the late 1960s there was no country
in Western Europe where the Gross Enrolment Ratio was higher than 8 per cent.
Currently the GER is more than. As a result, the model of higher education has
changed from elite to mass. For example, enrolment at the university of Delhi
is 309,000, while Anatolia University in Turkey has over one million. The
second significance impact has been the quality of higher education. Quality of
higher education is normally measured on the basis of the following criteria: modernize
class rooms, libraries, laboratories, study halls, syllabi, and methods of
teaching and evaluation. The significant impact is to improve equity.
The
origins and development
As
you all aware, the origin of university education in Sri Lanka goes back to the
latter part of British rule. The establishment of the University College in
1921, as an institution that prepared candidates to sit for the external degree
of the University of London, marked the beginning of university education in
our country. The University of Ceylon, established in 1942 under the provision
of Act No. 20, was the first native university with power to offer degrees. The
guiding principles at that time were that a university should be unitary,
residential and autonomous. Consequently, the first university was established
in Colombo and subsequently moved to Peradeniya in 1952 after much debate
regarding the most appropriate sites for a university. The University of Ceylon
followed the model of Oxford and Cambridge popularly known as the ox-bridge
model. It was a fully planned residential university with English as the medium
of instruction until 1959. The majority of students were drawn from the urban
middle class families and elite status was granted to those who passed out of
the university. The number of students who entered was about 900 at the
beginning but increased to about 3500 by 1951. The University of Ceylon was the
one and only university that existed at that time with campuses in Colombo and
Peradeniya, until 1959.
Post
independence Sri Lanka was a society and an economy in transition seeking and
forging a common identity and vision. The foresighted policies of offering
education for all and the unleashing of latent social forces created a demand
for the expansion of university education particularly in the Social Sciences
and Humanities. However, due to the limitation of English as the medium of
instruction these demands were not met. The then Vice Chancellor Sir Ivor
Jennings was astute enough to moot the idea of establishing a second university
in Colombo. He was a member of the committee though he did not place his
signature on the report.
The
year 1956 marked a turning point in the expansion of access to university
education in Sri Lanka. After the election victory of the Mahajana Ekksath
Peramuna (People’s United Front) and the formation of the coalition government
headed by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike in 1956, the underlying aspirations of a hitherto
un-represented social force came to the fore. The pressures of increasing the
number of students to the Arts and Social Sciences with the medium of
instruction in Sinhala and Tamil languages came to be forcefully articulated.
It was not only a social pressure but also a political pressure by upgrading
two leading Buddhist Pirivenas, Vudyodaya and Vidyalankaraya, to the status of
universities. The two newly upgraded universities too were made to follow the
prevailing Ox-bridge model. Simultaneously, Sinhala and Tamil were introduced
as the languages of instruction in university education along with English as a
medium of instruction. These changes had a far reaching impact on the
development of university education in the country.
In
the meantime, the government intervened to regulate and coordinate university
education through the Higher Education Act No 20 of 1966. This act created the
National Council of Higher Education (NCHE). The Vice Chancellor became an
appointee of the Minister of Higher Education. The allocation of funds and
control of expenditure, selection of students and members of governing bodies
were appointed by the minister.
The
next stage of expansion in university education took place after the election
victory of the United Front (UF) coalition headed by Sirimavo Bandaranaike in
May 1970. The U.F government also introduced a new University Act in 1972
merging all universities under one umbrella and named those outside its purview
as campuses. The Act of 1972 was similar to the Act of 1966 by the fact that it
reduced the autonomous character of universities and changed every aspect of
university administration. Universities Act No 1 of 1972 consolidated
government control over universities. The two Acts were a complete departure
from the University Act No 20 of 1942. Later during the same regime, the
University of Ceylon was named the University of Peradeniya, while the Colombo
campus of the University of Ceylon was declared an independent university,
named the University of Colombo. During the same period, the technical college
of Katubadda was up-graded as a university, which specialized in engineering
and the Jaffna University was established in 1975. The former was renamed the
University of Moratuwa after 1978.
The
next phase of expansion in university education took place after the election
victory of the United National Party (UNP) under the leadership of J.R.
Jayewardene, the first Executive President of Sri Lanka. The establishment of
the Ministry of Higher Education in March 1978 was the major step taken by the
government. Another major change was the introduction of the University Act No
16 of 1978. The Act of 1978 reverted to the tradition and practices of
university education before 1966. The important feature in the Act of 1978 is
the assigning of full autonomous status to the then campuses, upgrading them to
university status. The establishment of the University Grants Commission (UGC)
which serves as a buffer between the university and the government was a
significant step in university education in the country. The main functions of
the UGC are planning and coordinating in keeping with national policy,
regulation of administration, maintainance of academic standards, selecting of
students for state universities, and allocating public funds to higher
education institutions and control of expenditure.
The
President is empowered to appoint and remove Vice Chancellors in consultation
with the UGC. Due to the financial support of the staff and accountability to
the public, the universities in Sri Lanka are controlled by the state through
several regulatory agencies and other institutions. They are as follows: the
Ministry of Higher Education, University Grants Commission, University Services
Appeals Board, Auditor General and the Treasury. Due to politicization of
higher education the student and employee unions strongly impinge on the
autonomous and academic freedom of universities.
This
was also an era when it was felt that political and administrative
decentralization was imperative to address the issues of unequal development
and the pressures of issue of university expansion. Therefore, the University
of Ruhuna was established in 1978 and the Eastern University was established in
1980. Eleven Affiliated Universities were established under the provision of
University Act of 1978, after the second insurrection of the Janatha Vimukthi
Peramuna (JVP) from 1987-1989.
It
is evident that the political and economic ideologies of the political parties
that governed the country impacted university education. During the period of
the People’s Alliance (PA) in 1994 there was a demand from the students of the
Affiliated Universities with a backing of the Inter University Students
Federation (IUSF) controlled by the JVP to upgrade such institutions to
university status. Consequently, three new universities were born by merging
eleven affiliated universities. The two first universities to be established,
conforming to such transformation, were the Universities of Rajarata and
Sabaragamuwa in 1996 and University of the South East was established in 1986.
The University of Wayamba was established in 1999. In the meantime, two new
universities of an innovative type were established as the Uva Wellassa
University and the University of the Visual and Performing Arts in 2006.
Currently,
there have been 14 traditional or conventional universities along with three
campuses, one Open University with 27 study centers, 16 undergraduate and
post-graduate institutes and 8 degree awarding institute under the per view of
the University Grants Commission (UGC). Almost, 80,000 internal students are
studying at our universities. Besides, there are two religious universities
under the Ministry of Higher Education. There is one university under the
Ministry of Defense and one under the Ministry of Vocational Training. Thus,
there are 19 universities and said institutions of higher education operating
under the principle of Free Education introduced by Dr. C.W.W.Kannangara since
1945. Statistics are not available regarding involvement of our students in
universities of foreign countries. According to my estimate, nearly
8,000-10,000 students are going abroad for higher education annually. Besides,
there are about 50,000 students enrolled within 60 to 70 cross border
institutes established with the approval of the Board of Investment (BOI) in
the country. They cater to those who are unable to get admitted to a state
university in the country or afford to finance university education abroad.
Thus, annually 80, 000 students are involving for higher education in different
forms and modes. As a result, the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) of Sri Lanka is
estimated as 21%, the highest in South Asia.
Thus access to university education
in Sri Lanka has been evolving from the inception in 1942, particularly after 1956. Since then, different
governments were compelled to change the system Of university education from elite
to mass to meet the increasing demands in access due to the
expansion of access in primary and
secondary education, the fact that education continues to be the
only means of upward mobility for the
poor and in equalizing gender disparities. However, our policy
imperatives have failed to address the
anomalies that persist in access, equity and quality in higher
education mainly between the older and
established universities and the newly established universities.
This problem was further complicated
by the exacerbation of violence and war that gripped the north and east of Sri
Lanka over last three decades resulting in restricting the number actually registered
with those Universities. This ever widening gap between the demand and supply
in access, equity and quality in higher education continues to generate a
young, educated and disenchanted social force in the country. There is evidence
to demonstrate that there is a strong correlation between youth unemployment
and lack of access to higher education and skill development. The political
manifestations of which is the onset of the youth led social unrest that we experience
both in the south and the north of Sri Lanka. Given this specific history, it
should be emphasized that social unrest over
youth access to higher education and
skill development are critical issues in our country that every
government has to address in depth.
The above phenomena are further complicated and com-pounded by the intervention
of political parties who strategically plan to create disturbance by
introducing
their ideologies amongst the
university students resulting in new forces being created to influence the very
existence of a peaceful environment for academic work for the majority of the
students.
These factors shape and mould the course
of university education and policy and we have to continuously address the
causal factors of these issues realizing such a fluid state that may be
existing due to some of the unforeseen destructive evil forces. Access We now
have fifteen universities,
three campuses and 16 higher educational
institutions under the purview of the University Grants Commission. The number
of students studying in universities increased from 900 in 1942 to 14,000
in 1970 and increased to 60,000 in
2005. However, access to university education continues to be confined to 2percent
of the age cohort that enters primary education. In the year 2005/06 alone only
17,000 students out of the 35,000 applications submitted for the same was
admitted to university education. In a country where the state is the sole provider
of higher education but is unable to invest heavily in expanding higher
education due to a protracted conflict that existed three decades and post-conflict responsibilities the question
arises as to what are the options we pursue through introducing
changes in policy imperatives and
organizational framework. As aptly pointed out by the World Bank in its Report,
the need to provide access
for all in tertiary education has never
been felt more strongly. But in looking for viable solutions to
increasing access while addressing inequalities
in quality the political, social and economic environment
plays a major role. Therefore, several
measures have been taken in order to narrow the gap between the demand and supply. One such experiment has been the system of Open and Distant Learning (ODL)
programmes with the advent of ICT.
Similarly, private higher education institutions affiliated to foreign
universities are already in
operation in the country offering a variety of degree programmes in demanding
field. These institutions referred as cross-border private degree awarding
institutions are
however, registered under the Companies
Act and BOI and operate as commercial organizations
than universities. Therefore,
striking a balance between the free education and market responsive education
has become challenges faced by the higher education system in the country. One
of the pressing challenges facing the universities in Sri Lanka is the need to
introduce reforms to meet the changing needs of the current world scenario. Add
from World Bank Report, the World Bank has provided financial support to
transform the university system to a modernize and market oriented
system. The changes are:
(a) curricula and structural changes
of the degree programmes,
(b) introduction of novel courses
and multi-disciplinary programmes;
(c), extensive use of modern
teaching methodologies particularly Information Technology (IT);
(d), effective staff development
programs,
(e), promoting and strengthening
research activities;
(f), building linkages with centres
of excellence,
(g) performance evaluation of
individual staff, faculties and departments and
(h) Upgrading facilities in
priority disciplines.
However, amongst the fifteen
universities already established in the country, only a few institutions have
the potential ability to introduce newer approaches to learning and teaching.
Some universities are often resistant to change. There are several reasons for
such attitudes. Mainly being the profile
Of the academics and secondly lack
of resources and lastly the deficiency in organized staff development. The Meaning,
Problems and
Challenges
of Higher Education I believe that as
a country we have to continue to explore all options and means of expanding higher
education provided by the
state while addressing the many deficiencies
in quality. Poor quality as defined in its narrowest
sense is poor alignment of course
content to the country’s development goals, lack of availability of qualified
and trained human resources both academic and non-academic in providing quality
higher education and lack of effective and efficient management of resources and
infrastructure facilities. To
address lack of quality in its
narrowest sense we need to diversify our courses and reform curricular,
develop corporate plans with strong
human resource development strategies, increase efficiency and effectiveness
through better management of resources and introduce an element of performance
based funding as well as an
academic and administrative audit. However, the wider definition of quality is
more complex. Quality is seen as an objective to be reached in all processes of
reform in higher education. Modern education, particularly university education
is a process subject to rapid changes
and the initial objectives of university
education particularly in stream of liberal arts were;
(1)the ability of a person to
understand nature and environment, society and self,
(2) the ability to improve and
develop skills such as clarity of expression, of ideas, scientific methods and
understanding of different subjects and the
(3) appreciation of values such as intellectual
honesty, patience and ability to take judicious decisions.
However, in analyzing the objectives
of education for the 21st century the Jacques Dolar, report of
UNESCO titled, Learning: The Treasure Within, published in
1998 defined the main objectives of
education in the
21st century as follows: learning to learn, learning by doing, learning to live
with others and being your-self ”. The commission names these as the four pillars
of education.
The
qualitative analysis of these pillars of education and the implications for
higher education are manifold. Learning to know means an ability of combining a
broad general knowledge with the opportunity to work in depth on a small number
of subjects. It also encompasses the ability to benefit from the opportunities
that education provides throughout life. Learning to do means not only occupational
skills but also the competence to deal with many situations and work in teams.
Further it means involvement of various socials and work experiences and
involves courses, alternating study and work. Learning to live means development
of awareness of other
people and
appreciation of interdependence
entailing respect of the values of pluralism mutual understanding and
peace. Learning to be means to develop ones personality and be able to act with
greater autonomy, judgment and personal responsibility. These I believe are the
pillars of quality in higher education as a long term and wider interpretation.
The policy implication therefore are long term entailing a more systemic and
stringent enforcement of educational reforms in post-secondary education,
renewal of the principals of curricula development both in secondary and
tertiary education, continuous assessment of teaching and learning approaches,
promotion of interdisciplinary studies, forward- looking strategies for the
recruitment and training of teaching personnel, modernization of teaching
learning processes, expanding the use of Information and Communication
Technology( ICT) in learning., strengthening research capacities of
universities and higher education institutions. The lack of equity is reflected
in the unequal development of Universities in terms of infrastructure and human
resources. As the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Rajarata and the chairman
of the University Grants Commission (UGC) I have personal experience of the
student frustration leading to agitation within newly established universities
and campuses. Students view universities comparatively as they all sit the same
entrance examination. When they see their counterparts served by better
facilities, taught by more experienced and qualified staff and governed more
effectively and efficiently the sense of frustration is profound. In listening
to the complaints or representations made by the student bodies I am reminded of
the status assigned by the students of Peradeniya to those in Kalaniya and Sri
Jayewardenepura during my student’s days in the early 1970s. They were even the
“butt—end” of many jokes. However, these universities are today offering an
equally competitive education and have overcome many of the deficiencies of the
past. Universities and university education in a real sense is an evolutionary
process; however, we cannot ignore the more pressing needs of the newly
established universities. The lack of basic needs such as accommodation,
potable water and sanitation, transport, qualified academic, administrative and
non-academic staff, access to universities. Within the scenario that I have described
the question arises as to what a good university and good university education
means. This has been an issue of much debate especially in the recent past. As
I mentioned-above university is an educational institution where all partners
work collectively and in harmony towards achieving the vision and mission of
higher education. The following characteristics are vital to have a good
university and university education:
1. Academic
and administrative staff should be recruited on the basis of merit.
2. The
performance of teachers and students should be continuously monitored and
evaluated.
3. Teachers
should have opportunity to develop their teaching/learning skills and research
ability.
4. The
learning facilities such as class
room’s libraries and laboratories are well equipped and updated.
5. The
curricula and academic programmers
should be subject to revision.
6. An
efficient university administration should
be in place In the industry of higher education the success of a university is measured by the income it raises.
However, I
tend to agree with Sir Ivor
Jennings, the vice chancellor of
the University of Ceylon, who perceived
the success of a university, ought
rather to be measured by the
use, which it makes of its available resources. The challenges ahead of policy makers of university education are not
in meeting demands of the
quantitative change
of university education but in
managing and focusing on the qualitative
changes of forging systems where men and women with
the right
level of motivation, the relevant competencies and attitudes are bequeathed to society. As a
developing country we have
many miles
to pass and many a problem
to face but we do have
to collectively recognize that expanding the number of universities
and the number of
students does not meet
the development goals of our university
education. It is only by making
the qualitative changes of equipping
our academic and Thursday
28th October, 2010 administrative
staff and students to
meet the four tenets of educations in
the 21st century that we meet
the development goals
of university education of our
country. This means the
development sans moulding
of the potential students from
their primary and secondary schools
themselves and also introducing effective attidunal changes amongst all the stakeholders in higher education. In this
respect what is the way forward? At present We
are going
Through a
transitional state in the Sri Lankan political and socio-economic scenario. A
new government has just assumed duties with newly planned out strategy
identified as Mahinda Chintana- future vision 2010. This strategy has
identified several key
components
tha needs to be addressed in elevating
Sri Lanka a as the wonder of Asia. The main conceptual design is the establishment
of a knowledge economy. They are; 1. Education- promote the creation of new knowledge
related to local needs (research), dissemination of knowledge at all levels using
multiple sources (educate), capacity build in human resources at various
levels(skilled population) and utilization of knowledge in all activities
(application); 2. Innovation-identification of growing stock of global
knowledge and technologies (technology transfer), facilitate innovation by the local
scientist and technologists to solve local problems(technology incubators),
promote the universities and research institutes to address the issues
concerning sus- tainable national development; 3. Information and
Communication
Technologies (ICT) –creation of a dynamic information infrastructure,
facilitation and encouragement of use of ICT in all spheres emphasizing on egovernance,
creating a ICT literate work force and ICT support staff; 4. Economic
structure- facilitates creation of an entrepreneurial culture, establish
supportive economic and institutional regimes to facilitate knowledge creation
and utilization, introduce suitable regulatory and legal framework to ensure
adoption of best practices to sustain a vibrant economy. Accordingly the
Mahinda Chintana- future vision (2010) has recognized under the caption
“University Education for Knowledge” the following key areas related to higher
education sector of the country. It should be emphasized in translating the
identified key areas
into action
leading to sustainable national development practical, effective, realistic, integrated,
time-based, cost-effective and well focused approach should be adopted. This is
only possible by broadly
a) rethinking and
redefining the present boundaries of administration,
b) reviewing
the currently practiced regulatory frameworks that would curtail efficient transactions,
(c) re-orientating
the mind set and attitude of the responsible officials and above all
(d)
recognizing and rewarding the talented human resources and entrusting them with
suitable responsibilities.
