Fifteen years later, we could have the same
conversation, roughly. And yet, the Arts
Faculty is not the University of Peradeniya and arts faculties are not the
university system. There are men and women
of exceptional intellect who are also endowed with exceptional sense of dignity
and honor. They work regardless of
reward and are motivated by the love of scholarship and a strong sense of duty,
and they do so in spite of and not because of the particular policy and
political environment. If the university
system has resisted collapse it is because of them, in the main.
Much
has been written about the trade union action of academics, led by FUTA
(Federation of University Teachers’ Associations). The
Nation has given space to FUTA to express its views. What FUTA would like people not to know has
also been covered, in part (see ‘The Story that FUTA does not tell,’ The Nation, August 5, 2012). A lot more needs to be said. It will be said, rest assured, and what is
said will not need excessive quotation of the excellent undressing that is "Mage Naduwa Iwarai" (My case is over) written by Dr. Sarath Wijesuriya, Senior
Lecturer attached to the Sinhalese Department of University of Colombo.
FUTA wants academics to be placed in a separate
category in the public service. It
demands autonomy and wants to be spared politicization, even as it is
politically compromised and has been sophomoric in refusing to acknowledge the
fact that rampant irresponsibility, sloth and other ills make academics
unworthy of oversight-free control of systems maintained by public funds.
Still, much of its criticisms of education policy
remain valid. The teachers’ association
of Moratuwa University (MUTA)’s ‘Save Education in Sri Lanka’ presentation (of
slides), widely circulated on the internet, clearly shows that something is
radically wrong, even though some comparisons are unfair (they have not
factored ‘out’ the large sums pumped into university research for commercial
and military purposes in many countries).
One doesn’t need FUTA proclamations to understand that education policy
is marked by incoherence and devoid of vision in terms of overall development
policy (which itself can hardly be called visionary given scant attention to
accountability issues and a top-down thrust from thought to implementation that
is patently undemocratic).
The setting up of the Rajarata Medical Faculty is a
case in point, the institution being ‘created’ to tide over problems created by
an error in an A/L Chemistry paper. Academics and doctors have objected to the
controversial Malabe Medical College on grounds of standard and procedural
deficiency (equally applicable to Rajarata on which FUTA is silent), but more
importantly this issue showed up the ad hoc nature of policy planning, the
Medical Council having had to be reconstituted to obtain regulatory approval.
I am sure FUTA understands that allocating 6% of GDP
is a tough task given development priorities, but wastage, mismanagement and
flaws in institutional safeguards against misappropriation in the overall
economy certainly indicates that corrections can enable increase in allocations
for education. MUTA has shown that there
is a drop in the skills of students entering university. This means that education policy needs to be
revised. From A to Z. FUTA has baggage but the Government’s
policy-baggage is much heavier. FUTA
cannot be asked to put its house in order until the Government rights itself. Ad-hoc must give way to comprehensive review
and reformulation as appropriate. Right
now, a marked aversion to institutional reform, especially those mechanisms
that ensure transparency and accountability which alone can be expected to make
for informed and sensible allocation of resources is giving FUTA a moral high
ground which it does not deserve.
In this context it is certainly laudable that a new
Human Resources Policy has been developed.
One hopes the public and relevant experts will be called upon to debate
it before it gets Cabinet approval. All
that is ‘in the pipe-line’ though. As of
now, the Government has failed in education.
It must do its homework and re-face the relevant examinations, not
because of FUTA rants but in spite of them.
[Published in 'The Nation', August 12, 2012]
1 comments:
we learnt sometimes from our teachers, sometimes from the society, from the history that every individual has right to say what ever he/she wants to say.
i believe as a reader i have the right to write something in this 'leave your comment' section and you have given the readers to say what the reader has to say. thinking of the 'right rights' you have the rights to accept them or neglect them or oppose or to support. that is your right.
when we talk about our right of 'rights' i don't understand why we sometimes forget the other word 'responsibilities'. i remember learning this as a vital term not only from the teachers but also from the society. without knowing much about the 'subject' that you discuss here 'the current issue'related to the University teachers here i avoid saying anything also related to any other'organizations in particular'.
all what i express here is my personal view and i try to apply to the whole system in general.
but i think some systems of any societies of this world are not just 'professions' there should not be any clashes or contradictory in what we learn as theories and when we practice those theories of people or society in anywhere we live inside or outside 'work.
'i like to think of human side of human rights or 'humanity' if we like to talk about human rights or our rights related to a particular job category i m just taking an example here' if we are breaking the right to learn, getting the services people need, from a particular group/department can that be considered as a 'right way to ask for things lacking or need'?
what is the 'human side' of asking our rights/things we need/services without breaking the rights to obtain the services of society/people/citizens?
i am thinking
how can a human group fight or talk discuss an issue of a particular human group without harming a 'right' of a another human group. in this very technologized, modernized, full of theories in this and that part of the world,
' have any human group or an individual found any system or a methodologies to address that 'issue'?
if any department of a state say 'organizing a strike or something' lets say that it is there right' then what will happen to the group or the people who generally expect services from that particular department. what will happen if both parties do the same thing against each other. we ask for our right they fight for their rights.
is this what we called 'right to rights' or right to prevent from reporting to work.
i am just sharing my views as a reader and as a citizen that is all.
Post a Comment