Connect with us

Features

Is defunding tertiary education really the need of the hour?

Published

on

A file picture of university teachers engaged in a protest march, demanding, among other things, that 6% of GDP be allocated for education

by Farzana Haniffa

The National Education Policy Framework, (NEPF) the latest in a series of misdirected government interventions to reform education, has by now been roundly critiqued and hopefully no longer relevant. (For a critique of NEPF in this column see Ramya Kumar’s Kuppi of March 19 2024). The Parliament’s Sectoral Oversight Committee on Education (SOCE) has made useful observations on the language with which the policy is framed and expressed a lack of agreement on many of its recommendations.

The SOCE has asked that the NEPF include four guiding principles on which reforms are to be formulated: that free education as a principle will not be compromised, that education be recognized as a fundamental right, that equity and social justice be the overarching norm and standard that will govern the NEPF and all reforms, and, especially important today, the principle that education will only be effective when students have their basic needs fulfilled. These framing ideas reflect some of the values long informing education reform in the country that arguably the NEPF has paid only the most perfunctory attention. The SOCE interventions also recognizes that the country is facing its most socially debilitating economic crisis to date. It has deferred decisions on certain contested elements of the recommendations, including on restructuring higher education (HE) funding and doing away with the University Grants Commission (UGC). Overall, the select committee process seems to have enabled some rare thoughtful input to policymaking from Parliament.

While we can heave a sigh of relief that the NEPF will have to be reformulated, it is perhaps worth looking at some of the ideas that informed the NEPF process and draft. Dr. Sujata Gamage, one of the main public advocates of the NEPF, and a member of the drafting committee, has been pushing two connected ideas regarding education funding for several years now. Dr. Gamage’s writings and public appearances have put forward a critique of how we spend our education allocation in the country. Her principle claim is that our spending on HE relative to primary and secondary education, is too high. Dr. Gamage argues that we should therefore realign our education budget to reflect a greater emphasis on primary and secondary education that serves a larger segment of the population and has a greater ‘return on investment’(ROI). Dr. Gamage also claims that our spending on HE only yields individual ROI and does not yield an adequate social ROI, defined by her as the amount of tax that a person benefitting from HE pays back to the government. Given these two issues, Dr. Gamage advocates that the state should no longer increase its investment in HE and instead encourage private investment. Dr. Gamage also states that government support continues to be provided for HE only because self-interested public university students and teachers, together with other trade unions, engage in vilifying private investment in HE. These ideas are scattered throughout the NEPF as part of its framing language. (My characterization of Dr. Gamage’s position is drawn from her submission to the select committee in Parliament on expanding higher education opportunities, her conversation with Sonali Wanigabaduge on the News First TV programme The People’s Platform, and her columns in The Financial Times in 2021.)

I would like to propose a critique of Dr. Gamage’s position while asking the following questions. Given that education spending in Sri Lanka is abysmally low across all sectors, why are we not calling for an increase in education spending in general? Why are we calling for more spending for school education while cutting HE funding? Does the current research on ROI and global policy on education really support such a position? And a question for another column, why is a critique of private investment in for-profit higher education not included in this discussion?

The discussion on ROI emerges from the theorization of education as the amassing of ‘Human Capital.’ Starting in the 1960s, economists Shultz, Becker and Minzer understood education spending as an investment, correlating years in education with improved earning capacity. The term Human Capital coined by economists initially referred solely to the monetary benefit brought both to the individual and society through education. ROI in education emerges from this discussion on human capital where a calculation is made with regards to the cost of education, and in the case of further education, the loss of earnings during the time of education compared with the earnings increase after completing one’s education. ROIs are discussed in terms of individual and social returns (SROI) and they are calculated differently. The Human Capital approach is fully integrated into the education policy discussion and has become the only way in which education is spoken about by powerful actors in the education sector. The World Bank has invested heavily, globally in the discussion. See https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital. As Niyanthini Kadirgamar has discussed recently, there are many critiques of the claims of the Human Capital model and its continued use has required the addition of several qualifications.

The conversation in Sri Lanka on SROIs in education emerges from policy positions adopted by the World Bank based on the writings of George Psacharapoulos. Kaushalya Perera has traced the World Bank’s engagement with the concept of ROI in education to two review publications, one by Psacharapoulos (1985) and another by Psacharapoulos and Patrinos (2018). (See https://simplifyresearch.wordpress.com/2023/04/30/rois-in-education-what-are-they/). Psacharapoulos’ 1985 paper that used data from 61 countries concludes “Primary education is the most profitable educational investment opportunity, followed by secondary education.” On this basis Psacharapoulos recommends that states reduce subsidies on public HE and revert the funds to primary education. (He qualifies his 1985 claim by problematically stating that university is generally attended by those who can afford to pay). In the 2018 review including 169 countries, the recommendations are somewhat different as the data now show that while SROI on primary education is still the highest, SROI on tertiary education is significantly higher than SROI on secondary education.

In the aftermath of the pandemic there is a significant emphasis globally on investing in education to ensure equity and social justice as well as to enable people to face the uncertainty of technological change and climate related crises. There is a mainstream recognition, reflected even in the NEPF that learned skills may soon be irrelevant and that individuals should be equipped to ‘reskill’ when necessary and to be engaged in ‘lifelong learning.’ Such a facility can only be cultivated at the tertiary level. For our purposes, what is said in a recent World Bank blog post by Patrinos (co-author of the 2018 report cited above) is revealing. First, it states that the SROI in human capital compared to that of investment in physical infrastructure, is much higher in ‘less developed countries’, and that rate of return-based decision-making benefits low-income, rural and female students in particular. Taking cases of Finland (1970s) and Poland (2000s) as examples, the post suggests that massive and persistent spending on education leads to significant increases in innovation while making growth more inclusive.

The blog claims, crucially that ROI is greatest for tertiary education/HE even in low-income countries. Patrinos also argues that educated youth can make better choices about their future as well as the future of their societies, pointing to evidence of a correlation between education and pro-climate behavior and policy preferences. (https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/education/50-years-after-landmark-study-returns-education-remain-strong#:~:text=But%20education%20is%20more%20than,10%25%20increase%20in%20earnings%20annually.) It is noteworthy that the NEPF’s identification of the problems facing the education sector does not include that of consistent underfunding.

Even within the limited human capital frame, current writing on ROI in education, does not seem to support a position that favours cutting public tertiary/HE spending. Indeed, more recent research highlights the necessity of greater spending on HE. Therefore, any calls for cutting HE spending (as the NEPF does) alongside references to university students as “entitled” can only reflect prevailing ideological positions about our universities as underserving of public support.

Lanka is a country with one of the lowest figures for public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP, as various interlocuters, including Dr. Gamage, note. The entire education sector is severely underfunded, and schools and universities are scrambling to survive. We are therefore in need of urgent and substantial reform and support. Given however, that our free education system has long served as a necessary conduit for social mobility for our population, we should be extremely suspicious of any attempt to “restructure” it. We should be especially suspicious when the proposed policy changes barely acknowledge underfunding as foundational to the problems in our education system, and claim cutting funding further as being for the greater good. At a time when equity and social justice are being prioritized even by the World Bank, it behooves us to try and preserve the positives features of our existing system before proposing drastic changes.

(Farzana Haniffa is professor in the Department of Sociology, University of Colombo)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Rethinking post-disaster urban planning: Lessons from Peradeniya

Published

on

University of Peradeniya

A recent discussion by former Environment Minister, Eng. Patali Champika Ranawaka on the Derana 360 programme has reignited an important national conversation on how Sri Lanka plans, builds and rebuilds in the face of recurring disasters.

His observations, delivered with characteristic clarity and logic, went beyond the immediate causes of recent calamities and focused sharply on long-term solutions—particularly the urgent need for smarter land use and vertical housing development.

Ranawaka’s proposal to introduce multistoried housing schemes in the Gannoruwa area, as a way of reducing pressure on environmentally sensitive and disaster-prone zones, resonated strongly with urban planners and environmentalists alike.

It also echoed ideas that have been quietly discussed within academic and conservation circles for years but rarely translated into policy.

One such voice is that of Professor Siril Wijesundara, Research Professor at the National Institute of Fundamental Studies (NIFS) and former Director General of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya, who believes that disasters are often “less acts of nature and more outcomes of poor planning.”

Professor Siril Wijesundara

“What we repeatedly see in Sri Lanka is not merely natural disasters, but planning failures,” Professor Wijesundara told The Island.

“Floods, landslides and environmental degradation are intensified because we continue to build horizontally, encroaching on wetlands, forest margins and river reservations, instead of thinking vertically and strategically.”

The former Director General notes that the University of Peradeniya itself offers a compelling case study of both the problem and the solution. The main campus, already densely built and ecologically sensitive, continues to absorb new faculties, hostels and administrative buildings, placing immense pressure on green spaces and drainage systems.

“The Peradeniya campus was designed with landscape harmony in mind,” he said. “But over time, ad-hoc construction has compromised that vision. If development continues in the same manner, the campus will lose not only its aesthetic value but also its ecological resilience.”

Professor Wijesundara supports the idea of reorganising the Rajawatte area—located away from the congested core of the university—as a future development zone. Rather than expanding inward and fragmenting remaining open spaces, he argues that Rajawatte can be planned as a well-designed extension, integrating academic, residential and service infrastructure in a controlled manner.

Crucially, he stresses that such reorganisation must go hand in hand with social responsibility, particularly towards minor staff currently living in the Rajawatte area.

“These workers are the backbone of the university. Any development plan must ensure their dignity and wellbeing,” he said. “Providing them with modern, safe and affordable multistoried housing—especially near the railway line close to the old USO premises—would be both humane and practical.”

According to Professor Wijesundara, housing complexes built near existing transport corridors would reduce daily commuting stress, minimise traffic within the campus, and free up valuable land for planned academic use.

More importantly, vertical housing would significantly reduce the university’s physical footprint.

Drawing parallels with Ranawaka’s Gannoruwa proposal, he emphasised that vertical development is no longer optional for Sri Lanka.

“We are a small island with a growing population and shrinking safe land,” he warned.

“If we continue to spread out instead of building up, disasters will become more frequent and more deadly. Vertical housing, when done properly, is environmentally sound, economically efficient and socially just.”

Peradeniya University flooded

The veteran botanist also highlighted the often-ignored link between disaster vulnerability and the destruction of green buffers.

“Every time we clear a lowland, a wetland or a forest patch for construction, we remove nature’s shock absorbers,” he said.

“The Royal Botanic Gardens has survived floods for over a century precisely because surrounding landscapes once absorbed excess water. Urban planning must learn from such ecological wisdom.”

Professor Wijesundara believes that universities, as centres of knowledge, should lead by example.

“If an institution like Peradeniya cannot demonstrate sustainable planning, how can we expect cities to do so?” he asked. “This is an opportunity to show that development and conservation are not enemies, but partners.”

As climate-induced disasters intensify across the country, voices like his—and proposals such as those articulated by Patali Champika Ranawaka—underscore a simple but urgent truth: Sri Lanka’s future safety depends not only on disaster response, but on how and where we build today.

The challenge now lies with policymakers and planners to move beyond television studio discussions and academic warnings, and translate these ideas into concrete, people-centred action.

By Ifham Nizam ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Superstition – Major barrier to learning and social advancement

Published

on

At the initial stage of my six-year involvement in uplifting society through skill-based initiatives, particularly by promoting handicraft work and teaching students to think creatively and independently, my efforts were partially jeopardized by deep-rooted superstition and resistance to rational learning.

Superstitions exerted a deeply adverse impact by encouraging unquestioned belief, fear, and blind conformity instead of reasoning and evidence-based understanding. In society, superstition often sustains harmful practices, social discrimination, exploitation by self-styled godmen, and resistance to scientific or social reforms, thereby weakening rational decision-making and slowing progress. When such beliefs penetrate the educational environment, students gradually lose the habit of asking “why” and “how,” accepting explanations based on fate, omens, or divine intervention rather than observation and logic.

Initially, learners became hesitant to challenge me despite my wrong interpretation of any law, less capable of evaluating information critically, and more vulnerable to misinformation and pseudoscience. As a result, genuine efforts towards social upliftment were obstructed, and the transformative power of education, which could empower individuals economically and intellectually, was weakened by fear-driven beliefs that stood in direct opposition to progress and rational thought. In many communities, illnesses are still attributed to evil spirits or curses rather than treated as medical conditions. I have witnessed educated people postponing important decisions, marriages, journeys, even hospital admissions, because an astrologer predicted an “inauspicious” time, showing how fear governs rational minds.

While teaching students science and mathematics, I have clearly observed how superstition acts as a hidden barrier to learning, critical thinking, and intellectual confidence. Many students come to the classroom already conditioned to believe that success or failure depends on luck, planetary positions, or divine favour rather than effort, practice, and understanding, which directly contradicts the scientific spirit. I have seen students hesitate to perform experiments or solve numerical problems on certain “inauspicious” days.

In mathematics, some students label themselves as “weak by birth”, which creates fear and anxiety even before attempting a problem, turning a subject of logic into a source of emotional stress. In science classes, explanations based on natural laws sometimes clash with supernatural beliefs, and students struggle to accept evidence because it challenges what they were taught at home or in society. This conflict confuses young minds and prevents them from fully trusting experimentation, data, and proof.

Worse still, superstition nurtures dependency; students wait for miracles instead of practising problem-solving, revision, and conceptual clarity. Over time, this mindset damages curiosity, reduces confidence, and limits innovation, making science and mathematics appear difficult, frightening, or irrelevant. Many science teachers themselves do not sufficiently emphasise the need to question or ignore such irrational beliefs and often remain limited to textbook facts and exam-oriented learning, leaving little space to challenge superstition directly. When teachers avoid discussing superstition, they unintentionally reinforce the idea that scientific reasoning and superstitious beliefs can coexist.

To overcome superstition and effectively impose critical thinking among students, I have inculcated the process to create a classroom culture where questioning was encouraged and fear of being “wrong” was removed. Students were taught how to think, not what to think, by consistently using the scientific method—observation, hypothesis, experimentation, evidence, and conclusion—in both science and mathematics lessons. I have deliberately challenged superstitious beliefs through simple demonstrations and hands-on experiments that allow students to see cause-and-effect relationships for themselves, helping them replace belief with proof.

Many so-called “tantrik shows” that appear supernatural can be clearly explained and exposed through basic scientific principles, making them powerful tools to fight superstition among students. For example, acts where a tantrik places a hand or tongue briefly in fire without injury rely on short contact time, moisture on the skin, or low heat transfer from alcohol-based flames rather than divine power.

“Miracles” like ash or oil repeatedly appearing from hands or idols involve concealment or simple physical and chemical tricks. When these tricks are demonstrated openly in classrooms or science programmes and followed by clear scientific explanations, students quickly realise how easily perception can be deceived and why evidence, experimentation, and critical questioning are far more reliable than blind belief.

Linking concepts to daily life, such as explaining probability to counter ideas of luck, or biology to explain illness instead of supernatural causes, makes rational explanations relatable and convincing.

Another unique example that I faced in my life is presented here. About 10 years ago, when I entered my new house but did not organise traditional rituals that many consider essential for peace and prosperity as my relatives believed that without them prosperity would be blocked.  Later on, I could not utilise the entire space of my newly purchased house for earning money, largely because I chose not to perform certain rituals.

While this decision may have limited my financial gains to some extent, I do not consider it a failure in the true sense. I feel deeply satisfied that my son and daughter have received proper education and are now well settled in their employment, which, to me, is a far greater achievement than any ritual-driven expectation of wealth. My belief has always been that a house should not merely be a source of income or superstition-bound anxiety, but a space with social purpose.

Instead of rituals, I strongly feel that the unused portion of my house should be devoted to running tutorials for poor and underprivileged students, where knowledge, critical thinking, and self-reliance can be nurtured. This conviction gives me inner peace and reinforces my faith that education and service to society are more meaningful measures of success than material profit alone.

Though I have succeeded to some extent, this success has not been complete due to the persistent influence of superstition.

by Dr Debapriya Mukherjee
Former Senior Scientist
Central Pollution Control Board, India ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Race hate and the need to re-visit the ‘Clash of Civilizations’

Published

on

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: ‘No to race hate’

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has done very well to speak-up against and outlaw race hate in the immediate aftermath of the recent cold-blooded gunning down of several civilians on Australia’s Bondi Beach. The perpetrators of the violence are believed to be ardent practitioners of religious and race hate and it is commendable that the Australian authorities have lost no time in clearly and unambiguously stating their opposition to the dastardly crimes in question.

The Australian Prime Minister is on record as stating in this connection: ‘ New laws will target those who spread hate, division and radicalization. The Home Affairs Minister will also be given new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate and a new taskforce will be set up to ensure the education system prevents, tackles and properly responds to antisemitism.’

It is this promptness and single-mindedness to defeat race hate and other forms identity-based animosities that are expected of democratic governments in particular world wide. For example, is Sri Lanka’s NPP government willing to follow the Australian example? To put the record straight, no past governments of Sri Lanka initiated concrete measures to stamp out the evil of race hate as well but the present Sri Lankan government which has pledged to end ethnic animosities needs to think and act vastly differently. Democratic and progressive opinion in Sri Lanka is waiting expectantly for the NPP government’ s positive response; ideally based on the Australian precedent to end race hate.

Meanwhile, it is apt to remember that inasmuch as those forces of terrorism that target white communities world wide need to be put down their counterpart forces among extremist whites need to be defeated as well. There could be no double standards on this divisive question of quashing race and religious hate, among democratic governments.

The question is invariably bound up with the matter of expeditiously and swiftly advancing democratic development in divided societies. To the extent to which a body politic is genuinely democratized, to the same degree would identity based animosities be effectively managed and even resolved once and for all. To the extent to which a society is deprived of democratic governance, correctly understood, to the same extent would it experience unmanageable identity-bred violence.

This has been Sri Lanka’s situation and generally it could be stated that it is to the degree to which Sri Lankan citizens are genuinely constitutionally empowered that the issue of race hate in their midst would prove manageable. Accordingly, democratic development is the pressing need.

While the dramatic blood-letting on Bondi Beach ought to have driven home to observers and commentators of world politics that the international community is yet to make any concrete progress in the direction of laying the basis for an end to identity-based extremism, the event should also impress on all concerned quarters that continued failure to address the matters at hand could prove fatal. The fact of the matter is that identity-based extremism is very much alive and well and that it could strike devastatingly at a time and place of its choosing.

It is yet premature for the commentator to agree with US political scientist Samuel P. Huntingdon that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world but events such as the Bondi Beach terror and the continuing abduction of scores of school girls by IS-related outfits, for instance, in Northern Africa are concrete evidence of the continuing pervasive presence of identity-based extremism in the global South.

As a matter of great interest it needs mentioning that the crumbling of the Cold War in the West in the early nineties of the last century and the explosive emergence of identity-based violence world wide around that time essentially impelled Huntingdon to propound the hypothesis that the world was seeing the emergence of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Basically, the latter phrase implied that the Cold War was replaced by a West versus militant religious fundamentalism division or polarity world wide. Instead of the USSR and its satellites, the West, led by the US, had to now do battle with religion and race-based militant extremism, particularly ‘Islamic fundamentalist violence’ .

Things, of course, came to a head in this regard when the 9/11 calamity centred in New York occurred. The event seemed to be startling proof that the world was indeed faced with a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that was not easily resolvable. It was a case of ‘Islamic militant fundamentalism’ facing the great bulwark, so to speak, of ‘ Western Civilization’ epitomized by the US and leaving it almost helpless.

However, it was too early to write off the US’ capability to respond, although it did not do so by the best means. Instead, it replied with military interventions, for example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which moves have only earned for the religious fundamentalists more and more recruits.

Yet, it is too early to speak in terms of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Such a phenomenon could be spoken of if only the entirety of the Islamic world took up arms against the West. Clearly, this is not so because the majority of the adherents of Islam are peaceably inclined and want to coexist harmoniously with the rest of the world.

However, it is not too late for the US to stop religious fundamentalism in its tracks. It, for instance, could implement concrete measures to end the blood-letting in the Middle East. Of the first importance is to end the suffering of the Palestinians by keeping a tight leash on the Israeli Right and by making good its boast of rebuilding the Gaza swiftly.

Besides, the US needs to make it a priority aim to foster democratic development worldwide in collaboration with the rest of the West. Military expenditure and the arms race should be considered of secondary importance and the process of distributing development assistance in the South brought to the forefront of its global development agenda, if there is one.

If the fire-breathing religious demagogue’s influence is to be blunted worldwide, then, it is development, understood to mean equitable growth, that needs to be fostered and consolidated by the democratic world. In other words, the priority ought to be the empowerment of individuals and communities. Nothing short of the latter measures would help in ushering a more peaceful world.

Continue Reading

Trending