Over the Fence: A Press Conference with a Difference

by Sumanasiri Liyanage

(March 21, Kandy, Sri Lanka Guardian) Anyone who is familiar with the University of Peradeniya should also be familiar with a motto, ‘more open than usual’. The phrase was taken from the speech made by Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh who accompanied Queen Elizabeth at the opening ceremony of the University of Peradeniya in 1952. He said: "You have remarked Mr. Chancellor, that it is not easy to open a university, because once established it is always open. However, like the shopkeepers of London during the bombing, I can declare this place to be "more open than usual..." Openness is essential in order to gain knowledge that is the eye unto all (‘SarvasvaLocanamSatram). Openness promotes and stimulates creativity. An Afro-American pop singer Mýa once said, "I’m a little bit more open than usual, and I’ve lived a life." We at Peradeniya are happy and proud because our university campus cannot be closed as the university does not have gates or fences, even when the authorities decide to close the university. However, I encounter a totally different experience when I went last Monday to the University of Colombo to participate in the press conference organized by the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA). The press conference was scheduled to be held as usual at the Faculty Club of the University of Colombo. Open and free media is depicted as an essential element of vibrant democracy. As the Vice-Chancellor, University of Colombo gave an order that the media people should not be allowed inside the university premises, FUTA was forced to hold a press briefing in an unconventional and unusual manner. University teachers were standing on one side of the fence while the media people with their pads, pencils and cameras on the other side of the fence. Deliberation took place over and through the fence. Two social groups that value freedom and openness in discourse were separated by an iron fence. The media people met university teachers with hard questions and tough answers in spite of hard iron rods that stand between them. In my opinion, this event signifies the current situation in the country with regard to free exchange of ideas. The unfortunate thing was that Vice –Chancellors who are responsible in keeping the universities ‘more open than usual’ have in the process become the instruments of suppression of freedom.

The criticism against academia by the politicians and their lackeys (no I am not referring to the Vice-Chancellor of Sri Jayawardenepura University) emanates from a gross misconception of university education. It was said that ‘You guys trained them for four years, but you have failed to make them employable’. This argument is incorrect on two grounds. First, a generation of skilled employment depends on multiple factors and the most critical factor is the rate of economic growth. As I have pointed out in my previous notes, Jayasundaraconomics would create an economy based on low wages and superficial growth. To generate demand for skilled engineers, agronomists, and similar categories, the economy should be oriented towards what I call growth augmented economic activities. The programs like divineguma are not a substitute for but would only be a complement to such a well thought out strategy. Secondly, the university education is not to produce ‘commodified hands’. They are centres of knowledge creation and dissemination. Of course, it does not imply the university graduates are not employable. Let me give an example. GodfryGunathilake, a highly praised public servant, studied English, but worked as a secretary, economic planning. I am sure his study of English at the University might not have directly helped his position as planning secretary. But I am sure he would not say that his training in languages at the university level was a waste. Let me give one more example from my own teaching at the university. I offer a course called Special Topics in Political Economy, a kind of heterodox economics. I expected about 15 students would be enrolled this year for this course. However, the number exceeded 50. And some students are from the department of management. At the very beginning, I told them this is not a job-oriented course and studying this course would not help in finding employment. On the contrary, I emphasize that this would teach you how to rebel (like in Egypt) against the establishment including established ideologies. If we are aiming at degrading universities to glorified technical colleges, I should be sacked and my course would be scraped.

No I am not painting a rosy picture. It is true that the quality of the products of our universities, at least in some disciplines, is now substantially lower than it was twenty years ago. This should not be reduced to employability or marketability. My final year students complain that after four years of studying, they do not know how to connect what they have learnt. This is a serious issue in arts and social sciences, but I heard it exists in other disciplines as well though at lesser extent. This may be attributed to multiple factors and I personally believe some of the ‘imported methodologies’ of quality improvements have contributed to this situation. Secondly, the method of recruitment is to be changed and the universities should compete with other sectors to recruit the best people with critical capacities. When a private sector is ready to pay for a such a person Rs 150,000 starting salary, the Rs 25,000 that universities are ready to pay may not be attracting them. Of course I am not arguing for salary equalization. A Professor at MIT or Harvard University may not get a salary and other fringe benefits that the CEO of Citibank receives. But Noam Chomsky may be happier working for a substantially lower salary as he enjoyed the freedom to be critical. Thirdly, we have seen a gradual erosion of university independence in the last 30 years or so. All key positions in the university system are political appointments. Those who are inspired to be the UGC chairman, deputy chairman or Vice-Chancellors should prepare themselves for the job by weakening their spine. In order to hide this weakness, they can be tough on students, academics and media as the recent example at the University of Colombo has demonstrated. Of course, the list of reasons may continue.

I agree with the Minister of Higher Education that radical change is necessary in the sphere of education and higher education. We also need not apolitical but a non-partisan approach and perspective. Branding The FUTA leadership as UNP or JVP will not help. What the Minister should do is to engage in a long discourse with the academia and to take necessary step to salvage the state university system. Let me conclude with what my younger colleague at Jaffna University told me about a week ago. He obtained his Ph D in one of the rare field of science from the University of Cambridge. Instead of seeking a job abroad, he returned back and resumed duties. There are no facilities for him to continue his research and create new knowledge. He cannot use his training in his teaching. Our universities still have people of this calibre. I submit that if the government needs to find an answer to the question why our education system is degenerating, it has to change the question. Why do these academics still stay in the university system the lower salary and poor working condition notwithstanding?

The writer teaches political economy at the University of Peradeniya. He can be reached at: sumane_l@yahoo.com