Saturday, 9 November 2013 07:01
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
SOMETIMES the numbers do say it all. The university cut-off marks for the 2012/2013 academic year show only 22,943 students gaining entrance out of the 55,241 students who applied for university entrance, according to the University Grants Commission. It also mentioned 229,737 students sat the GCE A/L Examination last year.
These numbers sum up the main problem of Sri Lanka’s higher education system. Even with stringent standards in place that aim to fail rather than pass students, over 55,000 of them scrambled across the line, but mainly due to a space issue less than half that number will gain access to public universities.
This is indeed the unfair plight of what is arguably the best and brightest crop of students from this academic year. Should they be denied a higher education simply because the public university system is too underfunded to accommodate them? The answer is a resounding no. Yet, as always, the issue is more complex.
Private universities have long been a thorn of contention between the Government and student unions, which has resulted in allegations of repressive actions by the former. After much back and forth, the Government has, largely under the table, allowed private universities to enter Sri Lanka. In this complex web of educational opportunity versus shadowy procedures, the battle rages on an ethical platform.
The project to establish a branch campus of the University of Central Lancashire (UCLAN) in the Mirigama Export Processing Zone received Parliament approval earlier this month without attracting much criticism from the Opposition. The UCLAN branch campus, which is identified as a Strategic Development Project, will be the first-of-its-kind foreign university to be established in Sri Lanka and adds US$ 125 million to Government coffers.
Providing higher education is big business and investors stand to make tens of millions. However, what is disturbing is that while the Government is enthusiastic about accepting FDI from foreign universities, they are paying scant attention to regulating these same institutions and making sure that they maintain international standards. There is also little attention to making these new universities inclusive so that it does not become a situation where poor children are relegated to badly-funded public universities while richer kids end up at private institutions purely because their parents have more money.
A few years ago the Higher Education Minister rolled out an ambitious plan to upgrade local universities and assist them to specialise in one field, thereby being able to climb international rankings and attract foreign students. Yet this ideal is yet to get off the ground in any meaningful sense, putting the vision of universal higher education at risk. How much opportunity does this current step by the Government give to talented children from poor backgrounds? Conversely how does it ensure that parents’ hard-earned money is not frittered away on inflated degree prices?
The transparency of this investment needs to be questioned as much as Packer’s infamous casino venture, but few are questioning why it was kept under wraps for so long. Without an independent regulatory system and transparent investment mechanism, higher education in Sri Lanka will be sold to the highest bidder. Parents, fatigued by political wrangling and non-existent policies, will be happy to purchase their children the chance of a better life.
But development comes to societies that provide equal opportunities. Private universities should be allowed, but in a space that allocates a level playing field for their public counterparts as well. Around the world there are examples of development based on such a system. Sadly, the Government seems to have no interest in leading this change as the latest Appropriation Bill has proved. It details less funding when the marginal increases are balanced off by inflation, leading one to believe the numbers will continue to disappoint in the battle for universal higher education.
