The Perils Of Privatising Higher Education
Dr. Harini Amarasuriya
The current government’s budget as well as statements by several Ministers, including the Minister for Higher Education and Highways, has made it clear that it intends to continue with the previous regime’s policy on education, especially with regard to higher education. The most worrying of proposed initiatives, is that of allowing the establishment of private campuses.
One of the problematic aspects of policy debates in Sri Lanka is the tendency to simply take opposing stands on issues and hurl insults at each other. There is no critical analysis or engagement with issues: instead, debates are split simplistically along ‘for’ and ‘against’ positions. The danger of this tendency is that arguments are simplified and critical decisions are made based on political expediency or even more alarmingly power alliances: so which side has access to the powers that be, will often determine the course of policy in Sri Lanka. The debates on education too have become reduced simply to ‘for’ and ‘against’ privatisation – with very minimal, serious, analysis of the consequences of such policies. This is especially true of the ‘anti-privatisation’ camp – who are usually painted as wild eyed, left-wing idealists who have no grasp of ‘reality’. Their mode of protests – which are usually confined to street demonstrations – have sometimes resulted in their views being dismissed as irrelevant. The pro-privatisation camp on the other hand has mainly relied on a few arguments which they repeat over and over again. It is said that a lie often told becomes the truth, and unfortunately, the arguments of the pro-privatisation camp have been mainstreamed far too easily. Their main arguments can be summarised as follows:
- Thousands of students who are eligible for university are denied these opportunities since the current state universities cannot absorb them.
- State universities are unable to produce graduates who are employable.
- Large amounts of money flowing out of the country to pay for education abroad can be saved if private universities can be established locally.
Each of these arguments ignores certain basic factors. Yes, state universities are unable to absorb all those who qualify. But firstly, this assumes that the A/Ls is simply a qualification for university entrance (which it is not) and secondly that all those who are eligible to enter university and fail to do so, will be able to afford private universities. Thirdly, it ignores the fact that there are many departments in the state university system which are not functioning at full capacity. Apart from popular programmes such as medicine, engineering, management, law etc (which are viewed as professional courses leading directly to some kind of employment), there are many departments in the state universities who are not running to full capacity.