Submitted by Udari Abeyasinghe, Farzana Haniffa, Ahilan Kadirgamar, Anushka Kahandagama, Ramya Kumar, Shamala Kumar, Hasini Lecamwasam, Kaushalya Perera, Aruni Samarakoon, Sivamohan Sumathy, Mahendran Thiruvarangan

Decades of underfunding have left our education system, overall, fractured and in urgent need of rebuilding. The virtual lack of public early childhood education, the years of neglected vocational training, and the scale of problems facing general education (widespread staff shortages, stark disparities in resources, among other things) mean that these subsectors demand immediate attention. Therefore, despite the opaqueness of the consultative process and questions we have about the content of the reforms, the ongoing action on reforming general education and vocational education by the Ministry of Education is a welcome move. No part of the system operates in isolation, however. Even if reforms focus on early, general, or vocational education, higher education must remain part of the conversation. Democratising higher education and making it accessible to a larger number of people will strengthen the entire education system. Such reforms have to be undertaken together with other actions through a consultative process. Waiting until other sectors are ‘in better shape’ will only deepen existing fragmentation.

What is needed is a comprehensive plan that serves all sectors of education and builds a more integrated system capable of addressing each subsector’s specific needs. Only then can we create an education system equipped to meet the challenges ahead. We are concerned that recent higher education reforms in Sri Lanka are emulating the market-based model that has failed elsewhere. One of the basic principles of our higher education system has been free education supported by the state, but of late this principle has been given to serious erosion. Successive governments have defunded our state university system–a lower-cost and more equitable model of tertiary education–while supporting the expansion of private higher education. Universities are compelled to function as businesses, generating their own funds. Inequalities in access are widening with university admissions increasingly favouring the privileged.

In an effort to contribute to the conversation on education taking place currently, we outline issues of concern and actions the government could take to strengthen the state university system.

*  Funding state universities

Public spending on education (as a % of GDP) in Sri Lanka is among the lowest in the world. It is being increasingly replaced by project-based funds from external organisations, particularly the World Bank, compelling reforms modeled on market-friendly designs. Our universities must now generate funds, primarily through fees from postgraduate courses and international student enrollment. Students and their families are increasingly expected to spend on their undergraduate education, eroding the Free Education policy.

*  Increase the budget allocation for state universities; halt the push toward self-generated funds.

*  Halt the introduction of fee-levying undergraduate courses (e.g., School of Open Learning, University of Peradeniya; plans to enrol fee-levying medical students at University of Vavuniya).

*  Curtail initiatives that subsidise private and foreign degrees. The rapid expansion of private and foreign degrees, often supported by state subsidies, including student loans, results in the extraction of resources from public education to support private interests.

*  Critically examine and reduce reliance on project-based funding. The World Bank in particular uses funding initiatives to institute their agendas into our systems of education. Decades of such interventions have substantially transformed higher education.

*  Democratising university administrations

University administration has become increasingly hierarchical, with authority filtering from the University Grants Commission (UGC) to Vice Chancellors and Deans. While administrative mandates insist on student friendly pedagogy that foster critical thinking, actual practices take away authority from the lower ranks of the academic community, importantly, the teacher. Power is increasingly vested in Vice Chancellors, Councils and the UGC, which does little to advance the cause of education, or the wellbeing of students and staff.

*  A participatory and dialogue based governance model should be promoted by strengthening the authority of participatory bodies like Faculty Boards, Senates and Statutory Committees. Administrative bodies should be concerned largely with procedure and feasibility.

*  Concerns regarding curriculum and curriculum revision need to be led by departments and faculties, and a greater degree of independence granted to the academic community in administrative matters.

*  Improving fairness and transparency in appointments and recruitment

The recent decision to bring an end to political appointments in the non-academic staff cadre is welcome. However, the current system of making appointments to UGC committees, University Councils and other university/faculty level committees by government officials lacks transparency and is subject to manipulation. Committed academics and others who want to advance knowledge and have involvement in specific areas of interest may not make it to the relevant decision making forums. The schemes of recruitment of academic staff are outdated and often impede the recruitment of well-qualified candidates. There have been numerous reports highlighting the increasing politicisation of academic recruitment processes.

*  Create transparent processes regarding higher level appointments to commissions and councils.

*  Update the schemes of recruitment to reflect present-day realities of inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary training in order to recruit suitably qualified candidates.

*  Ensure recruitment processes are made transparent by university administrations.

*  Change bond regulations to be more just, in order to retain better qualified academics.

*  Strengthening existing degree programmes

Out-migration of academics has created a dire shortage of university teachers. Degree programmes offered by peripheral universities have a dearth of staff. STEM programmes at state universities are well-supported as they are presumed to produce students with ‘marketable skills’ for the industry, while the social sciences and humanities (SSH) are given less priority despite their having the highest student intakes and serving the most underprivileged sections of society. Lecturers who work after hours and on weekends teaching in fee-levying courses are poorly compensated in certain disciplines.

*  Remove the freeze on hires so that academic and other staff vacancies can be filled; increase academic cadre positions, especially in peripheral universities.

*  Recruit adequate academic staff for ongoing programmes and implement minimum staff requirements to commence new programmes.

*  Halt the trend of employing contracted workers, which leads to a work climate where there is no buildup of capacities and less commitment to scholarship, teaching and the institution.

*  Ensure recruitment data, including student to staff ratios, are accessible for public scrutiny (they were accessible until 2022).

*  Allocate funds to strengthen SSH.

*  Reevaluate the emphasis on English-medium instruction in SSH, and approach the issue with greater sensitivity, keeping in mind the great inequalities any arbitrary decision may create. It is imperative that Sinhala and Tamil medium instruction is supported and well-funded.

*  Strengthen English language instruction, without prioritising English medium education. Transition to English medium should take into consideration the availability of teachers and resources within the universities to help students improve their English language competency.

*  Review payment structures of fee levying courses (graduate and undergraduate) that are run by departments. Remove the limits on compensation amounts for lecturers pressured to work after hours and on weekends.

*  Promoting fairness in university admissions

Students attending university are not always prepared for tertiary education; they are compelled to select their subject stream at the Ordinary Level. There are wide disparities based on districts in admissions to certain courses. Once admitted, students pursuing STEM education do not have opportunities to explore the social sciences and humanities and vice versa.

*  Institute a formal process of collaboration between secondary, tertiary and vocational education to streamline transitions between these types of education.

*  Strengthen the district quota system to ensure equity of access to higher education. Ensure that the system reflects present-day demographic patterns and resource maldistribution.

*  Support the development of pathways for interdisciplinary collaboration in degree programmes.

*  Reviewing the quality assurance framework

Significant resources are channeled towards quality assurance activities. These activities take up much time and effort of academics, but it is unclear whether the quality of academic programmes at universities have improved as a result. Further, quality assurance processes are conducted in a top-down manner, with directives coming from the UGC with little flexibility for faculties and programmes to design their own procedures. The emphasis is on gathering ‘evidence’ with very little critical thinking on how to actually improve degree programmes.

*  Review the quality assurance programme in place today and the extent and nature of its impact on curriculum development

*  Revise it, so that it functions as a guide to a consultative process that supports the development of alternative approaches to quality assurance designed within universities and faculties and not as a restrictive monitoring mechanism.

*  Include mechanisms of downward accountability to make universities answerable to students and local communities.

*  Promoting research and scholarship

Owing to the emphasis on evaluations of research and publications that emphasise quantity, or numerically value quality, the research culture within state universities has changed. Researchers report various bottlenecks in receiving and using research funds, and various malpractices related to citation gaming can also be seen (e.g., badly reviewed journals, publishing in predatory journals, salami publications, etc.).

*  Relax the bureaucracy related to the initiation of relationships with foreign research institutions and universities.

*  Revise the national financial regulations and leave procedures that at present create bottlenecks for research collaborations and participation at international forums for academics.

*  De-emphasise the commercialization of research which has led to a rise in instrumentalist research and the devaluing of social-justice oriented research in all fields, but especially the humanities and social sciences.

*  Shift the emphasis from working towards improving state universities’ standing in global university rankings to promoting rigorous scholarship that is relevant to our setting.

*  Creating open and inclusive universities

Interventions to rid university spaces of violence and harassment usually target the issue of ragging. There is less recognition of other forms of violence and the subculture of the university that breeds violence through its various hierarchies and exclusions. Violence cannot be expunged from the system in the absence of inclusive university spaces that encourage dialogue and discussion on these important issues.

*  Create policies and bylaws that provide a course of action that supports and brings a measure of justice to victims. Strengthen existing grievance mechanisms in ways that ensure independence and protection of complainants and witnesses.

*  Introduce basic codes of conduct across the university system for administrators, supervisors, academics and others.

*  Implement the national language policy at all universities with regards to both teaching and administration and ensure that all communications from university administrations are conveyed in Sinhala, Tamil and English. The state should also ensure instruction in both Tamil and Sinhala of a similar standard and quality are available for students at all state universities.

*  Support universities to explore opportunities to integrate social cohesion, gender sensitivity, and reconciliation through curricula and other forums. Prioritise and provide training opportunities for staff on the above issues. Support the introduction of opportunities for students to engage in political participation and democratic processes.

*  Upholding academic freedom

Teachers and students should have the freedom to teach, study, pursue research without unreasonable interference or restriction. Media policies, job insecurities, policies for financing research and other university activities, usurpation of powers from lower-level authorities and committees by centralized authoritative command are some mechanisms which have had a stifling effect on academic freedom.

*  Create an independent body at the national level that serves to protect academic freedom within universities and investigate attempts to thwart the exercise of academic freedom. This body could be similar to committees addressing violence and harassment complaints and quality concerns.

*  Strengthening student services and promoting wellbeing

The recent increase in the Mahapola Scholarship disbursement is welcome. However, basic student welfare and support services are in a woeful state. Student intakes have increased without parallel investments in student residences and other facilities. Despite the rise in mental health problems among young people, there are no dedicated staff or facilities to support students who require additional support. Student counsellors and other academics need to juggle student welfare- duties with various other commitments.

*  Allocate funds to build student residences across state universities and/or request universities to do so. Residences should include cooking facilities.

*  Introduce policies to address the welfare of women students who are a growing proportion in most faculties, e.g., residential facilities, washrooms, sexual health facilities, etc.

*  Allocate university cadres whose primary role will be in the area of student welfare, including professional counsellors, disability services, ombudspersons.