A UniversityThere has been a lot of controversy about private education in Sri Lanka, especially on university level. The government universities exclusively educate recipients of full-tuition state university grants. Those are selected based on the Z-score gained in the GCE A level examination. The selection has other proportion-wise subselection criteria included, but the total number of students in all 14 or so state universities in Sri Lanka do not exceed 20,000. The exact intake every year counts around 15000 maximum, leaving a large percentage of students qualified for university entrance stranded. Even in the existing university system, the level of research and graduate schools are not at all adequate and there's virtually no PhD level teaching.
But the brains, subject-wise, are good. The brightest students in the country gain entrance into engineering and medical schools every year, and most of the top and specialist students go overseas to graduate schools and then employment. Still the medical profession has a kind of prestigious feeling in the country and nowadays most students, who miss university here, go abroad to countries like Russia or India for instance, and then practice here as doctors after taking a medical council test. There's controversy and shouting here and there from time to time, but things are generally settled now.
There's constant pressure against active government sponsorship to open private universities in Sri Lanka, mainly from the leftist-based student unions in state universities. This is not understandable at all. Today it is well possible to gain a degree in subjects like IT and computer engineering from private sector, and the degrees have very high demand and reputation among employers in SL. In the above subjects, there's a very healthy competition between state and private university graduates, and state university graduates are indeed under constant pressure to come out more and more polished in workable skills, not just out-dated book knowledge. Currently quality graduates, with well-marketable skills, are produced only by medical, law and engineering schools of the state universities. Most students prefer to keep away from arts faculties. More and more students prefer not to go to physical science faculties as well. Perhaps cause it's kinda hard to find something to do with some real science involved if you come with a three year degree in physics and chemistry, but there are other concerns about currency and quality of what you get at school. The alternative is to go into some private school for a professional qualification. By now the graduates seem intelligent enough not to go on protests asking government to conjure up bigwig jobs just because they've come out of a state university.
Another thing is, state universities has to 'grow up'. They should stop from being entirely dependent on government, and start being more liberal in enrollment. Ok now don't start shouting. The government should keep the [meager amount of ] state university grants given each year constant. Perhaps this way they'd be able to increase the number of full-tuition grants in a greater rate even. When the universities are earning up something they can link up more with the industry and entities like the world bank [scary, eh?], and would be able to collect up more cash to offer a more modern and more real-word courses to students. Right now the state of the state universities is mostly 'sorry'. This might be the only way to revive them, else they can stay stuck in the rut of a few people opposing reforms. I don't know how long things can go on like this in a fast-paced world out there.
I come from a private university. I know friends from government universities and even have worked with them. One thing a majority of state university graduates have here is wrong attitude. I have seen them fail to apply a more analytical and-broad minded view to life problems. Most seem to be locked with ideas like "World Bank is evil!", "education reforms (of any kind) are evil!", "Tamils are united against Sinhalese!" and "Scandinavians are evil!". Perhaps this is the work of a few leftist people in there, but it has spread kinda evenly among the system. Perhaps it doesn't work very well on people from educated and urban backgrounds, but people who work hard and get in from rural areas with little exposure get spoiled in a bad way.
None of these are among private university students. The one I am from has around 4000+ students, and we only have one students' union, the default one the university has, and people hardly are aware of it. Most people work to help pay for their education. Others work hard to gain a scholarship and maintain it. There's absolutely zero political activity and 'ragging', and rules are rules: if you kick a youngster's butt you get in police and chucked outta school [once I heard from a state undergrad that police can't intervene in internal affairs of their uni!]. The difference is that people are paying for what they get and they know the worth of it. That's a very important thing. If, instead of completely free university, the government only paid part of it and got students into student loans or industrial placements or something to get them pay even a modest amount of their fee, they would know the worth of it. It'd help the universities to give them a better education in turn, help them behave more responsibly, have a broader perspective and as a result be more employable upon graduation. They would be able to serve the country better. What retards Sri Lanka mostly from development is the less-than perfect attitude of the citizens, whatever is being said and done. If the government could stop being selfish for power and do this one reform in education here, it would help more than any other step taken in order to shape the future of our country as a developed one.
We would have a generation with attitude. That may be the change Sri Lanka so badly needs.
But the brains, subject-wise, are good. The brightest students in the country gain entrance into engineering and medical schools every year, and most of the top and specialist students go overseas to graduate schools and then employment. Still the medical profession has a kind of prestigious feeling in the country and nowadays most students, who miss university here, go abroad to countries like Russia or India for instance, and then practice here as doctors after taking a medical council test. There's controversy and shouting here and there from time to time, but things are generally settled now.
There's constant pressure against active government sponsorship to open private universities in Sri Lanka, mainly from the leftist-based student unions in state universities. This is not understandable at all. Today it is well possible to gain a degree in subjects like IT and computer engineering from private sector, and the degrees have very high demand and reputation among employers in SL. In the above subjects, there's a very healthy competition between state and private university graduates, and state university graduates are indeed under constant pressure to come out more and more polished in workable skills, not just out-dated book knowledge. Currently quality graduates, with well-marketable skills, are produced only by medical, law and engineering schools of the state universities. Most students prefer to keep away from arts faculties. More and more students prefer not to go to physical science faculties as well. Perhaps cause it's kinda hard to find something to do with some real science involved if you come with a three year degree in physics and chemistry, but there are other concerns about currency and quality of what you get at school. The alternative is to go into some private school for a professional qualification. By now the graduates seem intelligent enough not to go on protests asking government to conjure up bigwig jobs just because they've come out of a state university.
Another thing is, state universities has to 'grow up'. They should stop from being entirely dependent on government, and start being more liberal in enrollment. Ok now don't start shouting. The government should keep the [meager amount of ] state university grants given each year constant. Perhaps this way they'd be able to increase the number of full-tuition grants in a greater rate even. When the universities are earning up something they can link up more with the industry and entities like the world bank [scary, eh?], and would be able to collect up more cash to offer a more modern and more real-word courses to students. Right now the state of the state universities is mostly 'sorry'. This might be the only way to revive them, else they can stay stuck in the rut of a few people opposing reforms. I don't know how long things can go on like this in a fast-paced world out there.
I come from a private university. I know friends from government universities and even have worked with them. One thing a majority of state university graduates have here is wrong attitude. I have seen them fail to apply a more analytical and-broad minded view to life problems. Most seem to be locked with ideas like "World Bank is evil!", "education reforms (of any kind) are evil!", "Tamils are united against Sinhalese!" and "Scandinavians are evil!". Perhaps this is the work of a few leftist people in there, but it has spread kinda evenly among the system. Perhaps it doesn't work very well on people from educated and urban backgrounds, but people who work hard and get in from rural areas with little exposure get spoiled in a bad way.
None of these are among private university students. The one I am from has around 4000+ students, and we only have one students' union, the default one the university has, and people hardly are aware of it. Most people work to help pay for their education. Others work hard to gain a scholarship and maintain it. There's absolutely zero political activity and 'ragging', and rules are rules: if you kick a youngster's butt you get in police and chucked outta school [once I heard from a state undergrad that police can't intervene in internal affairs of their uni!]. The difference is that people are paying for what they get and they know the worth of it. That's a very important thing. If, instead of completely free university, the government only paid part of it and got students into student loans or industrial placements or something to get them pay even a modest amount of their fee, they would know the worth of it. It'd help the universities to give them a better education in turn, help them behave more responsibly, have a broader perspective and as a result be more employable upon graduation. They would be able to serve the country better. What retards Sri Lanka mostly from development is the less-than perfect attitude of the citizens, whatever is being said and done. If the government could stop being selfish for power and do this one reform in education here, it would help more than any other step taken in order to shape the future of our country as a developed one.
We would have a generation with attitude. That may be the change Sri Lanka so badly needs.
5 comments:
The problems with the local university was polticisation, along with the politicisation of the civil service, schools and other institutions in the 1960's.
Graduates from the University of Ceylon were highly regarded the world over upto probably the late 1960's early 1970.
The testament to the calibre of the graduates was the ease with which they were able to take on senior appointments all-over the English speaking world (these included academics and the civil servants who were kicked out)
For example, EFC Ludowyk, Professor of English, just walked straight into a job with a UK university after Singhala only in 1956.
there are innumerable other instances.
Hats off for your nice article...
I think stidents from state universtities involve in raggings bacause they have lot of time and
worthless big............ ego,
they bring the same culture to work place and mess up that place also.
no argument about University of Ceylon grads. But the current situation is a far cry. I think the talent may be there but a lot of factors to spoil it up as well. A solution is required for that.
Too much time off sure makes jack a bad boy :-). That's the point of paying even part of the cost. You work, you become responsible, independent and more worthy.
Starlizzard:
I read your post with much interest. As a State University undergraduate who schooled in a private College I am perhaps better able to grasp the intricacies surrounding the State University systems than one outside.
I must admit that you make some valid points with regard to the number of students who qualify for entrance in to a university and the general view of people not exposed to a State University directly.
However, there is much that you have failed to grasp.
The issue at hand is extremely complicated. However I make the same point on my blog that the amount of people with the capacity to pay for their education is virtually negligible when one considers the amount of people who actually do Local A/L's. Other than the Colombo based schools very few students can afford to pay the high cost of education in a private institution as you yourself must be aware.
Secondly you assume that it is possible for universities to liberalize their funding. However it has been noted in coutless other forums as well that such liberalization also brings with it terms and condtions. Thus if funding is to be afforded to only some departments because they are more 'up to date' for example the entire aim of a university becomes redundant. The aim of a university is to firstly provide knowledge and then to make its students "marketable". Some may go so far as to suggest that making the university system jobs based devalues the entire educational process.
Thirdly it is not that the "most marketable" fields are engineering, medicine and law but rather that they are the most lucrative. Thus you make a valuation based on capital. This is exactly why you find it so hard to appreciate the necessity of State Universities and the attitude of their under graduates.
Unlike those with the capacity to pay for their education, undergrads of State Universities in general face a lot of hardship to enter universities. Quite a few of my friends in campus face grave financial difficulties and some even send home part of their maha pola in order to support their family.
For such people who make sacrifices on a daily basis to become "competitive" i think it is expected that they would value free education more than those who can pay for their education.
Furthermore, you note that you find it difficult to work with them. I believe that is an unfair judgement as in any workplace there will be people who are easy to work with while there will be others who have hang ups. This is not necessarily a State Unviersity graduates phenomenon but rather a common one in all offices. In some cases it may be easier to work with a state graduate as they in general have a better grasp of the grassroot level than most private students. Again the point is that the issue is not a rigid black and white.
I am not attempting to make a value judgement of either system but to point out that this issue is more grey than you have grasped. Nor is it to cast apersions on your judgement but rather to make you more aware of the murky waters surrounding this issue. If i appear to be Private university bashing i apologize as that was not my aim.
Regards,
thanks for the comment, NM. I'd like a few clarifications.
Yes I understand it is not possible for most people in this country to pay for a private education. what I said was the country should open more opportunity for it. It would give more opportunity for the student community who fail to gain a place at a govt. uni. of course those colleges would be offering scholarships as well, so the people who score well at university entrance may also have a chance at a better prospect than a govt. uni. why people are opposed to opening up private education opportunities while the govt. can keep up the scholarships already provided? it should be only an addition, not a replacement.
Another is make reforms at state universities to make their facilities better. For this they may make funding a little liberal. If students could be provided student loans, they need not pay anything up front til they get a job and earn above a certain amount. and event then any remaining amount can be waived off after a certain period. this way i think universities also will benefit and students will also feel more responsible about their education.
As the situation in SL, the government should keep up with the full-tuition grants any way, cause it is the only hope for bright students who can't afford to pay for private colleges. But currently I think the govt. is doing it for the sake of giving it away. it should be something more. i sincerely think these bright students should get something better than what currently they get. and not all of the students in universities are in need of a full-tuition grant. generally it is better to think a full-tuition grant should be given only to those who deserve and need it.
And it's not difficult to work with state grads. only they kinda think different, and most are fully OK as people, I guess. the broad picture of state uni people is as a ragging, protesting, fighting and leftist bunch. it's well possible that all are not like it.
Post a Comment