Higher education – to privatise or not?

To say that private participation in higher education in Sri Lanka is a thorny issue would be an understatement. Various doomsday scenarios ranging from a mushrooming of substandard degree-awarding institutes to a dystopia populated by uneducated buffoons have been presented as arguments against privatisation of higher education and, while some of these arguments are not without merit, it must be stressed that, given the depressing numbers relating to the country’s higher education sector, something must be done to salvage it and done fast. Is private participation the answer? Well, that depends on whom you ask.

Only about 17% of students that qualify for university entrance actually gain admission to a state university in Sri Lanka, leaving hundreds of thousands of otherwise intelligent students behind. State universities’ inability to absorb all deserving students has resulted in an inequitable situation where students are forced to either re-sit the Advanced Level examination or seek alternate means of tertiary education, or find employment via some form of vocational training. 

The anti-private education camp does, however, make a valid point in that, given the exorbitantly high fees charged by private degree awarding institutes, an overwhelming majority of students are unable to afford a private tertiary education, resulting in a similarly inequitable situation where a disproportionate  number of deserving students still get left behind.

There is also the rather alarmist argument that privatising education will result in its commodification. Those in favour of private participation such as Prof. Rohan Samarajiva, however, point out that education is, indeed, a commodity, with credentials as its main product, considering its ultimate goal, whether state or private, is to build a competent labour force.

In last year’s Budget, the Government allocated 5.4% of the GDP for education. The real figure, however, is closer to 3% once capital carrying costs are removed from the equation. The question remains, then: given the ever increasing demand for higher education, is public investment going to be enough to sustain it?

Several solutions have been suggested by economists and educationists alike. If setting up private universities is undesirable for whatever reason, one solution that has been proposed is to allow private sector investment in existing and upcoming state universities, with the Government continuing to be the majority stakeholder. Alternately, in the interest of equity, the Government could provide scholarships or low-interest loans to deserving students to study at a private university of their choice.

The absence of a proper regulatory mechanism has also been mentioned. The University Grants Commission (UGC) currently recognises degrees awarded by several privately owned and semi-Government institutes, including the highly-controversial South Asian Institute of Technology and Medicine (SAITM). There are numerous other degree awarding bodies operating in the country that are not recognised by the UGC. The standards maintained at these institutes is questionable, at best. A competent regulatory mechanism brought about the Government could ensure that any private universities established in Sri Lanka meet the high standards already maintained by State universities.

The debate on private participation in higher education is a healthy one that must not be discouraged. The higher education sector is in dire straits, to say the least, and any and all possible solutions must be examined in earnest, with an objective analysis of their pros and cons. That said, however, it is high time the authorities took some bold steps to address the issue, because it’s the country’s future that is at stake.