-
FUTA President discusses need for more funding for universities
Prof. Shyama Banneheka[/caption]
Can universities accommodate the additional intake of students that the UGC has agreed to following the issue with the Z-score?
We fully agree with more students being admitted to universities as we are always for increasing opportunities in free education in principle. But this time, we were asked to accept a large number of extra students without being provided any of the necessary resources. We understand that the students who have faced this Z-score issue should be given a solution. So, despite all the issues, many faculties have agreed to this intake. We prefer if the state sector can accommodate all the higher education needs of this country.
In the Faculty of Dental Sciences, University of Peradeniya, where I teach, for example, the intake has increased by 50% this time. The Engineering faculty in the University of Ruhuna is taking in more than 250 students additionally. We asked authorities for more resources and we hope that we will get those resources to ensure that the students who enter receive a good education. We have also requested for buildings to be rented out as immediate solutions. Lecturers have had to repeat lectures for smaller groups of the same batch due to the lack of space with social distancing. We are not asking for allowances in the event of an additional intake but for standards to be maintained for students with the necessary facilities. The society has a responsibility to tell political authorities that the quality of the degree programmes of these students should be ensured when there is an increase in the intake.
Would this increased intake be continued?
The UGC has written to universities that these increased intakes would not be reduced next year no matter what. This is not practical and therefore not acceptable. We would like to go for a gradual increase instead. The last time this happened in 2011, though we increased the intake for the batch in question, we went back to the old intake with the aim of gradually increasing the intake for the subsequent batches. So, we asked the UGC to revisit what they said and they expressed their agreement to revisit it and to renegotiate the decision with Vice-Chancellors. The UGC brings in decisions taken in some other political body and they get them approved by the Vice-Chancellors. Decisions taken to increase the intakes should be based on assessments of what the country needs as merely increasing numbers will not help the country. The intake should also be backed by a rational decision, it should not be a political decision. Under the Universities Act, Deans of Faculties have the powers to decide the intake. But what happens now is that the UGC says that they cannot deal with Deans and Heads and claims to work with the Vice-Chancellors instead.
The FUTA campaigned for a 6% of GDP allocation for education. Does FUTA still represent these demands?
During the 2012/2013 FUTA struggle, one of our main slogans was ‘6% GDP for education’. We knew that it was not a demand that could be met at once. So what we asked was for a gradual increase and if they began it at that time, by now, something significant would have been achieved. If there was a plan to gradually increase this allocation, by now state education would have progressed a lot more with an increased capacity and would not be facing the challenges we are facing now. FUTA said that all those years ago with this vision. The last budget only allocated 0.6% of GDP for higher education out of the 1.9% allocated for the total education budget. FUTA has not dropped the 6% campaign and we think that the demand is still valid. The slogan is still in the society as we see placards with this demand being carried by other education struggles. If the need arises, we are ready to come back to the streets with the struggle for 6%.
Was the campaign dropped after University Teachers’ salary demands were met?
No. We continued the campaign even after this. The only thing was that most of the active members of FUTA who were there in the time of the 2012/2013 struggle are no longer active. This is something that happens to any organisation. They have allowed the next generation to step in. Maybe they have not strongly felt the need for the campaign yet. This new generation joined as lecturers after the things that FUTA was able to achieve for the profession. We need to bring this discussion back and we think that this is a good time for that. We are in the process of preparing a programme for the same. Another issue was that the 6% campaign was made a political slogan. Certain political parties hijacked it. Some of the FUTA members withdrew from the campaign because they did not want to be labelled as supporters of those parties. FUTA members can have their political affiliations but the FUTA is not a political organisation.
UGC chairperson Prof. Sampath Amaratunge said that non-state higher education institutions are to be regulated to assure quality but that they would not intervene in the financial aspects. Shouldn’t the financial aspects be regulated as well?
We are of the position that private higher education should be regulated and that it should be done through the UGC or another acceptable body. Regulation should come from all aspects. Institutions should not be allowed to exploit students. We were always of the stance that education should not be a commodity. Fees should not be determined with the aim of raising profits. The recruitment of students and the basic qualifications required should also be regulated. There is no point in a partial control.
Are state universities up to standards with regards to quality assurance?
There is a quality assurance process implemented by the UGC right now. But we are not too happy with the present system. It is limited to paperwork. The quality of state universities should be assured and the way to fix the current issues in the system should be the result of a longer discussion. This program has two parts. Programme review is where the academic programmes are evaluated and institutional review evaluates the functioning of the institution. They cover the academic staff and the academic programmes but the quality of a university is based on more factors such as the administration. There are delays in the administration processes when it comes to things like promotions and leaves being approved, for example. The administration should also be reviewed to assure quality.
Unemployment of Arts graduates was raised as an issue in the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA). The UGC is planning to introduce an IT diploma for all Arts undergraduates. Do you think this will solve the problem of unemployment?
When we talk about university education, it is often raised that historically, universities are not places that prepare people for work. They are places that educate. The education leading to employment is a different matter. But in the current context, what is looked for is the employability of a graduate and it has become a need. If there are programmes being introduced to produce a quality graduate without overburdening them, that is a good thing and we see that it is a timely need. There is a proposal to give an IT diploma for Arts graduates from the University of Colombo, School of Computing (UCSC). This is not a bad thing as the USCS would provide a quality diploma. We cannot say if these programmes will solve the issue of unemployability of Arts graduates but it will certainly be a good push as it would give students more confidence. But if employability is paid more attention than the degree programmes, then that too is a problem. There is no point developing soft skills alone if the State Universities are getting ready to admit additional students due to a problem that arose with regards to a problem with the Z-score cutoff marks difference in the old syllabus and the new syllabus whilst attempting to go back to the pre-pandemic way of doing things.
What are the challenges faced by the University community in returning to the previous system after online learning?
What we did was emergency remote teaching and not online teaching. These curriculas were not prepared for that delivery mode. Certain degree programmes could not continue this way because the learning had a practical component. We need to go back to where we were and have requested that the staff and students be vaccinated. It is one of the only solutions we have. We did not push our request too much because we thought the World Health Organisation endorsed priority group order would be followed. But we saw later that that was not the case. Certain faculties have of course received the vaccine because they are connected to the health sector. But we need the vaccine for everyone to resume activities as usual. We can’t keep universities shut like this. Universities make a big contribution to the development of a country.