In homogenous language communities, it is not your awareness about the genes of your neighbour that makes you think of him as belonging to ‘your group’ – it’s simply the custom that labels any community of people speaking the same language as an ‘ethnic group’; actually they for a ‘language group’. The word ‘ethnic’ is superimposed. The problem with this unfortunate customary labeling is that you think of a community of people speaking another language as members of a different biological club of sorts.

by Susantha Hewa

Dr. N.A. de S. Amaratunga’s article titled “Ethnicity and genetics–A non-racial academic response” (The Island of December 11, 2024), which refers to Dr. Geewananda Gunawardena’s article titled “Agnotology and Ethnic Relations” (The Island– December 4, 2024), would surely have made the readers feel optimistic about more friendly relations between different ethnicities in Sri Lanka.

In his article Dr. Amaratunga writes, “Ethnicity is a social heritage and may be based on, not genes, but one or more of the following characteristics; language, religion and geographic location. Different ethnic groups may have very similar genomes. Similarly, there may be genetic differences within the same ethnic group”. This is quite informative and enlightening because it contributes to throw some light on the facts and myths about ‘ethnicity-based estrangement’, a socially constructed ‘reality’, which we have unsuspectingly continued to cultivate in various ways to our own disadvantage.

While not ruling out the possibility of genetic differences between ethnic groups, he questions our jealously guarded notions of ethnic particularity by pointing out that it’s not the genetic differences that pull apart people, but our social, cultural, linguistic and geographical differences, all of which are caught in a vortex of local and global power politics. He says “genetic composition of Israelis and Palestinians are very much similar, dating back to the Stone Age, but today they are arch enemies”.

How ironic and unfortunate! Hence, it is clear that our sense of closeness to or distance from our fellow travellers is hooked on nonbiological and external circumstances, i.e. language, religion, class, caste, geography, culture, education, last but not least, politics, and not on genetic differences. The last Parliamentary Election in Sri Lanka showed us how the so-called ethnic and religious affiliations could be decidedly made irrelevant by economic and political factors. This historic veering of loyalty flies in the face of everything we have been told about the so-called resilience of ethnic attachments.

Hopefully, any empirical evidence emerging to support a link between ethnicity and genetics is unlikely to further worsen our ethnic bias for two reasons. First, because it is so calloused that any scientific evidence simply will have little room for deterioration. Second, science and logic have no firm foothold in our instinctual and communal life unlike notions – be they based on facts, customs, delusions or myths – which get planted in our consciousness from our early years and strengthened over the years through repeated festivals, rituals, ceremonies, state-sponsored programmes, official authorisation (as in documenting of ethnicity in birth certificates), etc.

Unfortunately, cultural labeling has done enough damage to our otherwise humane relations with no support from empirical evidence, science or reason. Vital as they are for meaningful and decent relationships, science and logic don’t come to us with the same ease, grace and frequency that conventions and myths do, where all the formal and informal publicising needed are at their service dressed in ‘culture’. And, science and reason are not good playmates of all those that constantly shape our collective mind. Hence, the tools that can chip away at our ethnic ‘reality’ are the ‘social tools’ some of which have helped carve the fiend of ethnic bias in our minds so as to render it almost impossible to erase it with learning and reason in later years.

Many scholars including linguists, not forgetting politicians – would cherish language diversity for different reasons. However, diversity of language, unlike diversity of music and art, has done little to bring people together across various social, cultural and geographical borders. For example, we can enjoy songs sung in any language. We have no problems enjoying plays and movies where the language spoken may be unintelligible. However, this is not the case in real life when language is used to bridge the ‘information gap’, convey meaning, or simply to make sense.

Language is our most efficient tool of communication and it is that which has made all the difference between animals and the happy us. However, what about ‘languages’? While ‘language’ connects people, ‘languages’, in their multiplicity, have – yes, unintentionally- set them apart feeding into the myth that a different “mother tongue” is manufactured by a different biological factory; we don’t see it as something acquired as a result of being in a specific language environment in our early childhood.

Ethnicity is a concept which is kept alive in ways somewhat similar to the ways in which religion is kept glowing. There can be many biological differences between people whether they belong to the same ‘ethnicity’ or not. As we grow up, we learn many things which we were ignorant of as children. Today we are told that there are different blood groups and a person’s blood type is determined by a pair of genes, one from each parent (experts will set the record straight), but we have no communities labeled under different blood groups because we haven’t constructed a connection between language and blood type unlike the connection we have formed between language and ‘ethnicity’.

It is the language that is spoken by a community of people which enables us to label them with a so-called ‘ethnicity’, which is the same label given to the relevant language. So, we label those who speak Sinhala as Sinhalese, who speak English as English, who speak Tamil as Tamil and so on and thus have constructed unreal communities which draws from the myth that they are biologically distinct communities.

You don’t need to know whether they are genetically similar or different to classify them as similar or different in terms of stock; it is the language that does it with the help of custom, unwittingly. So usually, the members of a family, because they happen to speak the parents’ language, become the smallest unit of a so-called ‘ethnic community’, which is actually a ‘language community’ with any number of biological differences, which should undermine the link between ethnicity and genetics.

In homogenous language communities, it is not your awareness about the genes of your neighbour that makes you think of him as belonging to ‘your group’ – it’s simply the custom that labels any community of people speaking the same language as an ‘ethnic group’; actually they for a ‘language group’. The word ‘ethnic’ is superimposed. The problem with this unfortunate customary labeling is that you think of a community of people speaking another language as members of a different biological club of sorts.

Increased knowledge of science doesn’t make us bigoted. It is cultural conditioning which does the insidious job. Perhaps, that may be why we haven’t still started forming groups according to our blood types.

BY RANDIMA ATTYGALLE

‘The primary task of a society is to find a real teacher – one who performs his duty with perfection and dedication and is a perfect moral teacher for the society’– Rabindranath Tagore

The Faculty of Education at the University of Colombo which is the pioneering Faculty of Education in Sri Lanka marks 50 years on January 1, 2025.
In an interview with the Sunday Island, Emeritus Professor Marie Perera, one-time Dean of the Faculty of Education and the former Director, National Education Research and Evaluation Centre (NEREC),

elucidates on its evolution and contribution to the teaching landscape of the country.

Following are the excerpts:

Q: In what sense does the Faculty of Education at the University of Colombo mark a milestone in the state university setting of Sri Lanka?

A: When the Faculty was established in 1975, it was the only Faculty of Education in the university system in Sri Lanka. In 2003, the Open University of Sri Lanka (OUSL), established its Faculty of Education. However, aligned with the mission of the OUSL, it was to conduct courses in the Distance Mode. University of Peradeniya and University of Jaffna recommenced their Departments of Education in 1978 and 1990. They remain as departments of education in their respective faculties of Arts. Therefore, the Faculty of Education at University of Colombo marks a milestone in the state university setting when it celebrates 50 years of service as the only Faculty of Education in the ‘conventional university system’ in Sri Lanka.

Q: Who are the stalwarts behind the journey of its evolution?

A: Many of our pioneer educators paved the way for the Faculty of Education to be the center of excellence that it is today. Sadly, many of them are no more with us. However, I am very happy to remember Dr. Elsie Kotelawala who was the pioneering Head of the then Department of Education. With only five permanent staff members to assist her, the feat she achieved was exceptional. Dr. Kotelawala is still a source of inspiration and a ‘living library’ to us.

Former Head of the Department, Prof. C. Kariyawasam who was the longest serving Head of the Department of Humanities Education, former Deans and professors Dr. Raja Gunewardena and Dr. W.G. Kularatne in the Faculty are still resources to us. I acknowledge the services of the founder Dean of the Faculty, the late Emeritus Professor Ranjith Ruberu and all the past Deans, all the academics and non-academics of the Faculty during the last 50 years. I must acknowledge with gratitude the contribution of the late Emeritus Professor Swarna Wijethunga who was the founder Director of NEREC and was also a former Dean. If not for her untiring efforts, we would not be able to boast of a National Education Research Center in the Faculty today.

Q: What are the study programs the Faculty offers today?

A: Among the two main programs is the Four-Year Bachelor of Education Honours Degree for undergraduates. This is a combined Arts/Education Degree. From the academic year 23/24, the Faculty is offering an innovative B.Ed. in Primary Education to a direct intake of undergraduates selected by the UGC based on the A/L cut off marks. This program was initiated at the request of the Ministry of Education.

The second main program is the Post Graduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) to provide professional development for untrained graduate teachers in the system. In addition to the general PGDE there are specialization courses such as PGDE /TESL (Teaching English as a Second Language) Post Graduate Diploma in Drama and Theater and a Post Graduate Diploma in Counseling.

In addition, to encourage teachers to Education Research, there are Master of Education, Master of Philosophy and PhD programs. A Master of Education course is also offered to those learning Chinese.

Research Symposium 2024 of the Faculty of Education

Q: How has the Faculty of Education justified its vision of being a ‘center of excellence in scholarship, teaching and research in education, committed to serve humanity’ in its journey todate?

A: Currently there are 419 students following the B.Ed. program. In addition, 1,200 students are following the M.Ed. program and 74 MPhil/ PhD programs. There is a great demand for both Postgraduate Diploma as well as Master’s Programs offered by the Faculty and candidates for these courses are chosen through a selection test. Hence, the demand exceeds the available places. The courses offered by the Faculty, secured an A-Grade at the Institutional Review, conducted in June-July 2023 by the Quality Assurance Council of the University Grants Commission of Sri Lanka.

The only Education Research Center in Sri Lanka which is The National Education Research and Evaluation Centre (NEREC,) is also in the Faculty of Education. NEREC had been selected since its inception, to conduct research pertaining to students’ learning outcomes which are funded by the World Bank. Faculty staff and students are involved in conducting these studies.

Q: To what extent has the Faculty bench marked itself with global trends in education so far and what are the areas where it still needs to improve to meet current global trends?

A: Faculty of Education was a part of a project – Contessa, led by the University of Graz, Austria, aimed to further the development of teaching skills in carefully selected partnerships with institutions of higher education. It was held from November 2018 -2022. This was an Erasmus+ project funded by the European Commission.

In 2012, the Faculty of Education won a Quality Innovation Grant funded by the World Bank to improve doctoral studies. Seven students were selected and all of them completed innovation research and presented the findings overseas and also published papers in peer reviewed journals.

For five years, from 2011, there was staff and student exchange programs with Umea University in Sweden.

At the Annual International Research symposium, many foreign scholars present their papers. In terms of cross-disciplinary studies and research as well as international collaborations, the Faculty still needs to do a lot of work to leverage itself with global trends in education.

Q: Although the Department of Education is responsible for producing teachers with credentials, we do not see a significant collaboration between the department and schools. What measures do you propose to give this relationship more muscle?

A: In many of the universities in developed countries, university teachers are given a period of time to teach in schools to strike a balance between theory and practice which may help to enhance quality and professionalism. However, the experience of the Sri Lankan faculties and departments of education is different. The interaction between universities and schools is increasingly becoming minimal. The main reason for this lack of collaboration is, while the universities fall under the purview of the Ministry of Higher Education, the schools come under the Ministry of Education.

Even though teachers are sent by the Ministry of Education on full-time study leave to complete their Postgraduate Diploma in Education, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find placements in schools for their compulsory teaching practicum. This was not the situation in the past. This could be because there are other teacher training institutes such as National Colleges of Education and the Teacher Training Colleges which come under the direct purview of the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Education has to priorities these institutes when providing placements for practicum.

In the past, there were practicing schools linked to teacher training institutes. For example, the practicing school for the Teachers’ College Maharagama was the present Maharagama Central College. In some countries, there is a pre-assigned school attached to the faculty or school of education in a university. For example, Vorarlberg University of Education, Austria has a school within the university premises. The school and the university work in collaboration and share their resources; the classrooms are used as lecture rooms in the afternoon and the lecturers and teacher trainees walk in and out of the school for teaching and research purposes. It is worthwhile to explore the possibility of re implementing the practicing school concept.

Q: What are your thoughts about graduates being directly placed in schools for teaching with no prior training?

A: I would answer that question with a cliché, ‘to teach John Latin, you need to know Latin as well as John,’ and I would add how to teach John Latin. When graduates are directly placed in schools without prior training they may know ‘Latin’ which is the subject knowledge, but they will not be able to understand the students nor how to teach them. This is the reason that in developed countries, without a ‘license’ to teach, – which is the professional training, no teacher is allowed to teach in a school.

In Sri Lanka, every government that comes to power, especially before an election gives teaching appointments to unemployed graduates without a systematic professional development program. According to the School census 2023, as many as 37.32% of graduate teachers in government schools are untrained. However, as large number of graduates were recruited to the teaching cadre just prior to the Presidential Election, this number will be more by the next school census. This is a grave situation that needs urgent attention.

Q: In the good old days, there were fully-fledged teachers who were above their subject expertise- equipped with communication skills, social skills etc. which is sadly eroding today. What is the responsibility of relevant state agencies such as universities, training colleges etc. to fill this vacuum and empower teachers who could be good counselors, administrators etc.

A: Education has been the medium through which the noblest ideas of mankind have been transmitted through civilizations. Aristotle has put this succinctly when he remarked that human excellence was his aim in all his efforts in education. Erosion of values is a worldwide phenomenon and the academia in Sri Lanka too is affected by it.

In the Faculty, in all its curricular platforms, development of soft skills is embedded and students are evaluated during teaching practicum by two internal examiners. However, how much of these skills have been internalized can be seen only when they go back to the workplace. Their behaviour in the work place will be influenced by their commitment and love for humanity and the role models available in that sub-culture.

Q: A national policy for education still remains an unrealized dream for Sri Lanka. What are your thoughts?

A: The absence of a strong, consistent and clear-cut national policy on education which is consistently implemented irrespective of the change of political regimes, has been a critical issue that needs careful attention. Since the 1940s, there had been policy proposals but they have never become a long-term national policy. The absence of such a national regulatory framework has caused serious repercussions. Whenever a new government comes in to power, ongoing education reforms are abandoned without a critical review if they are not in line with the new government’s political manifesto. This results in a waste of resources as well.

Q: The skills-based formative years of learning is virtually non-existent in our setting. As an educator what are your thoughts on this matter?

A: We need to change the exam-oriented teaching and make students producers of knowledge rather than consumers of knowledge. Education and learning systems are at a critical juncture. The climate crisis, the pervasive rise of Artificial Intelligence, growing inequality and societal divisions compel us to rethink the role of education in shaping shared futures.

We face an existential choice between continuing an unsustainable path or radically changing course. There is an urgency to shape alternatives and re-imagine possible futures. Education is crucial to this change of course. It has great potential to help shape more just, inclusive and sustainable futures by re-balancing our relationships with each other, the living planet and technology. Yet, to do so, education itself must be transformed.

Q: What are the most urgent reforms you would like to lobby to address Sri Lanka’s outmoded education system, especially in terms of producing future-ready professionals who can meet the current job demands?

A: Teaching methodologies must be radically changed for the newly emerging times of flux as most education systems now in existence were established for other times and purposes with the ‘one size fit for all’ model intended to produce learners who store inert knowledge in a passive manner.

It is also important to produce globally competent, professional socialized teachers in an interdependent globalized world. Professional socialization is the process of learning the values, attitudes, skills and knowledge that are part of a profession. In this context, the present need is for teachers who will be knowledge-producers rather than mere knowledge-consumers.

Teachers must be equipped with the minimum competencies such as the 7Cs of Conceptualization, Communication, Commitment, Collaboration, Compassion, Critical thinking, and Creativity as well as digital dexterity.

According to the great guru Rabindranath Tagore, “the primary task of a society is to find a real teacher – one who performs his duty with perfection and dedication and is a perfect moral teacher for the society.” This is rather a tall order but the Faculty of Education has to strive towards this goal.

Q: Finally, as the Faculty Education marks its 50 years, what are its future plans to take it to the next level and become a stronger hub of academic excellence?

A: Throughout the history of the Faculty, the greatest challenge had been the inadequate physical and human resources. The problem of space was alleviated to a certain extent when the Faculty was granted a four-storied multi-functional building in 2011.

However, the challenge of human resources still continues with 53 approved cadre out of which 23 are vacant. The collaboration between the Ministry of Education and the Faculty is also a major challenge. Laboratories are where new knowledge is created in science and technology fields. Similarly, classrooms are the laboratories for education faculties.

In order to take the Faculty of Education to the next level and make it a stronger hub of excellence, my suggestion is to make it a University of Education. This concept is totally different to the proposal of the previous Government to form a University of Education amalgamating the National Colleges of Education under the Ministry of Education. I am proposing a University of Education in the lines of Vorarlberg University of Education, Austria which will pave way for academic excellence, innovative cross disciplinary research, and contribute to Policy and Practice for the betterment of society.

By Anura Gunasekera

It is more than two weeks since the matter of the Speaker, Asoka Ranwala’s doctorate, or lack of it, was raised in public. If he does have one, it is sufficient time for him to have produced the necessary evidence and laid to rest the ongoing speculation. When my daughter acquired a doctorate from a university in England, she was ceremoniously presented with an ornately inscribed scroll, on thick, parchment paper , along with a foolish hat.

To me, a non-academic, it seemed a paltry outcome for the several years of intense study which preceded the award but that, apparently, is how these systems work. Perhaps Waseda University of Japan, the institution alleged to have conferred the doctoral degree on Ranwala, does not emulate old-fashioned British institutions, but there still needs to be tangible, physical evidence of such an award, with which Ranwala came away from that institution.

Ignore the flippancy of the above paragraphs. The issue of the Speaker’s doctorate is a very serious matter. I understand that Ranwala has been using the prefix, “Dr”, for many years before his investiture as the Speaker of the 10th parliament of Sri Lanka. During the run-up to the recent presidential election, he has been introduced on stage as “Dr Ranwala”. Therefore, he deliberately made the world believe that he was a, “Dr.”

Recently there was some talk of Ranwala’s daughter offering an explanation but that is a ridiculous, unacceptable response. An explanation must come from Ranwala, personally, and not from a member of his family. It is a very simple matter, actually; either he has a doctorate or he has been deceiving the world for many years. In the case of the former he needs to furnish immediate proof to the public and if the latter is the reality, he must apologize for having been a public fraud and withdraw from governance.

To be the Speaker of the Parliament of Sri Lanka, a person must be compliant with the conditions of Articles 89 and 91, of the Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka. Neither of those articles specify that the Speaker should be literate, or that he should even be able to read, write and speak, in any known language. In fact, there are simply no minimum educational qualifications for those aspiring to represent the people of Sri Lanka in parliament, although there are clearly specified minimum educational qualifications for any person who applies for employment within the Parliament premises, even if it be the position of security guard, premises cleaner, or a minor employee, respectfully distributing glasses of water and cups of tea, to thirsty legislators within the chamber of representatives.

Then why is the issue of the Speaker’s qualifications of such importance?

When public figures, especially those occupying vital positions such as the Speaker of the Parliament, make a false claim about their educational qualifications, it undermines public trust in the political system. The NPP-JVP machine captured power in the last general election, largely on the promise of restoring principled governance to a corrupt country. I voted for candidate AKD at the presidential election in the fervent expectation of transparent governance. Thus, every elector who contributed to elevating the NPP to power, has the right to know whether Ranwala actually possesses the educational qualifications he claims, although those have no relevance to his current position in Parliament, or to the effective delivery of his responsibilities.

This matter is important because it highlights broader issues of accountability and transparency within governance. When public officials are permitted to misrepresent themselves, it points to a lack of scrutiny in the vetting of candidates for positions of power and influence. The fact that such claims go unchecked, also calls in to question the mechanism the party has in place, for ensuring ethical standards and honesty among its members.

Therefore, the quick and equitable resolution of this issue is crucial and central to entire ethos of the NPP regime, as the expectations of honourable conduct it has inspired within the public, is greater by an order of magnitude than that which was expected of any previous regime. It is also an issue which has been seized gleefully by an enfeebled Opposition, to discredit the government, and to move public focus away from the investigations into issues of corruption within earlier regimes, represented by many members now in the Opposition. The Ranwala affair is the first litmus test, of the present regime’s publicly declared ethos of doing only what is right. It needs to prove to the expectant polity that it means business, on every front.

Speaking of the Opposition, the ridiculous, just concluded (or is it?) charade regarding the appointment of individuals to the respective national lists of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and the New Democratic Front ( NDF), illustrates the incompetence, the indecisiveness and the lack of leadership ability of the two party chiefs concerned. It is relevant to remind the reader that these two, Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) and Sajith Premadasa (SP), were highly vocal in the run-up to both the presidential and the general election, about the lack of governance experience within the NPP. It immediately begs the question, if one does not have the necessary control and influence within the party, to decide on a simple but important internal party issue like a nomination, how can one aspire to govern the country? In reality it is not just an internal party issue but one that concerns the entire national polity, as it is entitled, as of civic right, to see that all 225 seats in the legislature are filled.

Moving on to two equally pressing issues, the high price of coconuts and the non-availability of popular varieties of rice, both are embedded in histories which long precede the installation of the present government.

Coconuts have become progressively more expensive because of increasing consumption and declining production. According to the Sri Lanka Export Development Board (EDB), the annual production ranges from 2,800 mn nuts to 3,000 mn, whilst the combined domestic and export processing demand is around 4,000 mn nuts, annually.

The year-to-year variability of production is linked to climate variations, further compounded by a steady increase in coconut based products since 2012 (EDB). Coconut trees have an economically productive life-span and need to be replaced periodically. However, new planting has also declined drastically, with 2.28 million seedlings being issued in 2021, as against 9.73 million in 2012 and 6.81 million in 2013 (EDB). The 2021 crop had been very high (CRI) but the embargo on inorganic fertilizer imposed around that time by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, has resulted in declining yields thereafter.

Wild animal depredation also has had a significant impact, suppressing yields and discouraging new planting, resulting in possible decline of production for the future as well. The industry assessment is that the 2024 production will reflect a 40% decline on the 2023 output. Around 33% of the total production is assigned for value added export products with the balance going in to domestic consumption. Thus, with the off-take by industries remaining constant, the volume available to the domestic sector has declined drastically. The grim reality is that unless the national industry is realigned, with viable, sustainable solutions for current problems, coconut prices will continue to rise periodically, well in to the foreseeable future. Solutions should also be able to strike a sensible balance between animal rights and farmer requirements. Animal rights activism, which takes place largely in affluent zones of residential Colombo- acted out by well-to-do urbanites of the city who have never had to defend a paddy harvest from a hungry elephant- has no relevance to the desperate realities of destroyed crops in Dehiattakandiya, Girandurukotte and Ethiliwewa.

The rice shortage, notwithstanding the obvious causes which have been ignored by successive governments in thrall to wealthy rice millers – again not attributable to the present regime – needs both a short-term and a long-term solution. Importing rice from India, as a knee-jerk response to the hunger of an angry nation, is not a sustainable solution but a one-time fix. It cannot happen again as the same scenario is played out the next year as well. The unalterable reality is that we are a rice eating nation and irrespective of the obstacles, that need must be appeased. “Let them eat cake”, whether Marie Antoinette said it or not, is not acceptable.

This regime has a two-thirds majority in Parliament and is headed by a president with supreme power. Should he, as an immediate solution, decide to take the most drastic steps in order to break the rice-millers’ stranglehold on rice stocks, a famished nation will applaud and the Opposition, if they understand what is good for them politically, will not dare raise a whisper in protest.

There are also the many questions which are being asked, regarding the status of pending investigations related to past corruption in high places. The difficulties in resurrecting dormant criminal investigations are understood; files are mislaid, papers vanish, evidence is lost, witnesses die, disappear or are terrorized in to silence, impartial investigators are neutralized and replaced with compliant stooges, cases by the dozen, against the high and mighty, are dismissed whilst authority is subverted. Previous regimes, especially those with the members of the Mahinda Rajapaksa “famiglia” in the right places, reduced these tactics to an exact science.

President AKD himself, in his speech at the recent Anti-Corruption Day, with brutal clarity, exposed the issues involved with reference to actual cases. In the audience were officials who, during previous regimes, may have been complicit in the very acts described in the previous paragraph. This nation, which catapulted the NPP-JVP to power as a last resort, will appreciate a commentary from the president himself, on all of the above issues. From time to time it needs to be assured that the regime is moving in the right direction, and the best person to put its collective mind at rest is the president himself.