Myths and realities about education

We reproduce excerpts of the Lalith Athulathmudali Memorial Lecture on 'Myths and Realities about Education in Sri Lanka' delivered by the Minister of Public Administration and Home Affairs Dr. Sarath Amunugama, held at the BMICH on November 23.

SPEECH: I am greatly honoured by the invitation extended to me to deliver the Lalith Athulathmudali memorial lecture this year. It is not only an honour but an emotional moment for me because Lalith was my friend, colleague and later leader of a party-the DUNF, which we founded together in the face of repression and a one-man show in Sri Lankan politics.

I recall that it was in late 1961 that I first met Lalith. He had just been elected President of the Oxford Union. He was brought along to Peradeniya by his Oxford friend Alex Gunasekara to join a party hosted by Professor Laksiri Jayasuriya for his students in the Department of Sociology, which included me.

After he came back to Sri Lanka to practise Law and engage in politics we met often first as Minister and Civil Servant and later as political friend and colleague.

His sense of commitment to bettering the life of Sri Lankan people and his indefatigable attempts to achieve such goals remains constant in our memory though he was brutally cut down in the prime of his life.

I always felt that Lalith's deep attachment to Sri Lankan people, especially her educated youth, grew out of the circumstances by which his education at Oxford was supported by the people's representatives in Parliament.

He was the first, and perhaps only, Sri Lankan student who had money voted by name out of the public exchequer for his education. That grand gesture led to a deep seated sense of debt, a personal obligation, that he actually rendered to the full, by paying with his life.

Of Lalith's multi-faceted interests in serving the people of Sri Lanka perhaps his greatest hope lay in promoting quality education as means of providing equality of opportunity.

While democracy may recognize that people are differently endowed, one's commitment to a democratic as against a totalitarian philosophy requires the providing of equality of opportunity as the sine qua non of the modern social contract.

It was this belief that made him start the 'Mahapola' scheme which endows deserving university students with sufficient funds to go through their undergraduate studies without financial worries.

Those of us who walked behind Lalith's bier to Kanatte on that sad day in 1993 through both tears and tear gas, will well remember the thousands of young men who joined us to pay homage to a man who had the humanity, intelligence and empathy to understand their plight.

A few days ago my friend and colleague MDD Peiris in a newspaper article made a summary of Lalith Athulathmudali's contribution during the short period in which he was Minister of Education.

He wrote "In Education too, Mr. Athulathmudali concentrated on the fundamental issues of strengthening and upgrading teacher training; curricular reform; text book production; particular emphasis on the teaching of science; Mathematics and Languages with emphasis on the mother tongue and English; giving pupils the wide options in the choice of papers at examinations; improving remedial teaching; supporting the creation of wider opportunities in higher education, through affiliated university colleges; tackling the question of a perceived inferiority of technical education in relation to University and academic education by working towards instituting the bachelor of Technology Degree and constructing a ladder leading to it".

Therefore when the organisers of this lecture asked me to name a subject, I thought it would be appropriate to choose an area which was not close to his heart but would also honour a man who to my, and succeeding, generations symbolised the best of good education. Hence the title of today's lecture; "The Myths and Realities about Education in Sri Lanka.

Analysts of Education Policy and Practice in Sri Lanka (Eric J De Silva, Harsha Athurupane, Saman Kelegama, Castro and Devarajan) have remarked that much of Education Policy here has been fashioned after consultation with stake holders, political debates and a transparent process culminating in the enactment of appropriate Legislation. For instance the special committee on Education of which CWW Kannangara was Chairman took three years to submit its recommendations.

These recommendations went before the Executive Committee on Education which in turn placed it, with modifications, before the Board of Ministers in 1944. It was only in July 1945 that a resolution was passed by the State Council.

However, following the Youth Insurrection of 1971 far reaching changes were introduced without adequate consultation. As the Chief Architect of these reforms Dr. Premadasa Udagama himself has stated "These reforms were too quick. We could have better prepared parents for changes."

While the White Paper on Education presented by the J. R. Jayewardene regime in 1981 created much controversy, and even ignited the JVP's violent confrontation with the State, Lalith Athulathmudali as Minister of Education and Higher Education succeeded in 1991 in getting opposition support for his Bill to establish a National Education Commission. Lalith called it "An instrument by which stability could be restored to the system". He appointed the Members of the NEC with the concurrence of the Leader of the Opposition.

It is my contention therefore that we must now begin anew national consultation and debate on the future directions of Education Policy and practice in conformity with new and changed circumstances.

As Eric de Silva so clearly puts it, "The abandonment of Maoist policies by the People's Republic of China and the disintegration of the USSR marked the end of what could be called the 'statist' state.

These changes were followed by a breakdown in the state monopoly in education and a gradual shift towards the market, even in countries that continued to call themselves socialist.

Globalisation and international movements of Labour and skilled personnel, not to speak of capital, became the order of the day. Neither Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao Zedong, nor C.W.W. Kannangara, to whom this country owes a lot, could have foreseen these changes".

A similar need for change is envisioned in the 10 year Development Framework entitled "Mahinda Chintana: Vision for a new Sri Lanka", which describes the over all goals of education for the future as follows; "Under the present plan, Sri Lanka's education system will be transformed into one that will provide the technological skills required for rapid economic growth and national development. Educational content and methods will be designed to promote the development of inquiring and adaptable minds".

It is my hope that today's presentation, even if it is provocative, will stimulate a very necessary public discussion.

Let us begin by looking at the current structure of Education in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lanka public education system comprises the following;

(a) Primary Schooling (Grade 1 to 5) which has approximately 1.8 million students whom almost 50 per cent are female.

(b) Secondary Schooling (Grade 6 to 13) which has approximately 2.3 million students of whom about 50 per cent are female.

(c) Tertiary Education, which covers basically Bachelors level courses of which 42,000 are internal students and 100,000 are external students. 33,000 students follow professional and technical courses.

Of the above mentioned educational system 97 per cent of student enrolment and 98 per cent of schools are in the public sector. 4.1 million school-children are enrolled in 10,000 public schools and 100,000 students are enrolled in about 80 private educational institutions. Both these categories follow the national school curriculum and present themselves for examinations.

In addition there are about 60,000 students enrolled in about 90 International Schools, which offer foreign curricula and those students sit for overseas examinations.

Looking at these statistics we must recognise that overall the Sri Lankan educational system is a remarkable example of social engineering which has drawn the admiration of many policy planners and social philosopher-economists, the pre-eminent of them being Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen.

As Castro and Devarajan remark: "Sri Lanka's education system has been celebrated around the world as one that has achieved universal primary education, and high levels of literacy, at very low per-capita incomes.

Financed and provided almost exclusively by the public sector, the education system has achieved these results with relatively low levels of education spending as a share of GDP (2.9 per cent in 2002), considerably lower than some other countries in South Asia such as India, which have worse education outcomes".

In the paper I have reproduced a Table which indicates education expenditure as a share of national income and government expenditures in Sri Lanka and other selected countries.

According to these figures based on 1999 data Sri Lanka spends 2.7 per cent of it's National Income on Education. Only Bangladesh spends less with 2.2 per cent. Proportionately India spends 3.2 per cent Nepal 3.2 per cent Malaysia 4.9 per cent and Thailand 4.8 per cent. We are below the South Asia average of 3.2 per cent.

The reasons for such a low investment have been recognised as:

(a) High level of Defense expenditure which crowds out other investments

(b) Low teacher salaries and

(c) Small size of the tertiary sector.

Though political critics, particularly of the left, regularly call for increased budgetary allocations for education they do not identify the defects of present allocations which can be clearly seen. The myth of global allocations tends to hide a necessary critique of how the present allocations are distributed.

The Overriding characteristic of public investment in education has been the emphasis on quantity at the expense of quality outcomes. While politicians can readily promote and take credit for quantity they are neither equipped nor inclined to monitor the quality of education imparted.

There has been a rapid expansion in quantitative terms:

In 1950 there were 3,1888 government schools. By 1960 it had grown to 4,994. By 1971 it was 8,565 and by 1981 numbers had gone up to 9,521 and in 1991 to 9998. In 1950 there were 38,086 teachers. By 1991 it had risen to 1,77,231. Today there are over 200,000.

This investment has led to a dramatic increase in the adult literacy rate. In 1950 it stood at 65 per cent of the population. By 1991 it had risen to 87 per cent. Today Sri Lanka has already attained all the numerical millennium development goals relating to universal primary and secondary school enrolment.

To be sure, this rapid quantitative expansion was due to a parallel demographic spurt which was noticeable from the sixties to the eighties.

The concept of quality education in Central Schools, which was an essential component of the free education scheme, gave way to the easily identifiable expansion and building programme of primary and senior schools which reached into almost every village.

Let me quote Harsha Aturupane on Sri Lanka's astonishing literacy rate which is a significant social variable in our society which has implications for politics and growth strategies in the country.

"Adult literacy rates in the country are well above literacy rates in neighbouring South Asian countries, and close to rates in countries at considerably higher economic levels. For instance, Sri Lanka's overall adult literacy rate, 91 percent, is more than double the literacy rates of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal.

It is close to the rates in countries such as Hong Kong and Singapore, which have per capita incomes of about US $ 25,000 and US $ 33,000 respectively, in contrast to Sri Lanka's per capita income of US $ 1000.

In addition, there is a high level of gender parity in adult literacy. The adult female literacy rate is 88 percent, more than treble the female literacy rates in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and on par with Hong Kong and Singapore.

The female literacy rate as a proportion of the male adult literacy rate, too, is comparable to some of the high performing East and South East Asian countries".

I now come to a basic issue which is significant not only in terms of the future of education policy but also for the nature of millennium development goals which have been promoted very strongly by the United Nations.

While there is no doubt that there has been in numerical terms strong growth in literacy rates, enrolment and educational facilities, the question is whether the quality of education imparted has been functional in terms of both development and humanistic imperatives.

If the quality of education has led to dysfunction - a lack of it between the world of education and the world of work - then social unrest and a drag on growth is likely to be the predictable outcome.

A functional educational system should be our basic goal with the social optimum as a target rather than the present emphasis on numerical or statistical indicators.

What are the realities of educational outcomes today? The ten year development plan under Mahinda Chintana makes a devastating statement: "the quality of education in terms of infrastructure, distribution of teaching resources and the learning-teaching process in the classroom is reflected in the low mastery levels in first langauge and mathematics in primary grades and in a low pass rate at the GCE/Ordinary Level examination in Grade 11.

Both activity based learning and teaching and personality development as well as technical subjects in the grades 10-11 curriculum have received low priority in schools. Science education in grades 12-13 is confined to 6 per cent of schools with these grades and Information Technology is still in the initial stages of development in schools.

The management of the education system - delivery of services, supervision, administration and monitoring - has been reported to be weak at local level underscoring the need for capacity building of educational personnel at all levels and the adoption of effective monitoring mechanisms."

Let us examine these criticisms further. Although schooling was compulsory up to grade 9, net enrolment and survival rates in grades 6-9 were only 81 per cent and 78 per cent respectively. Of children completing grade 4, only 37 per cent had an average mastery of their first language, namely Sinhala or Tamil.

Only 38 per cent had mastery in Mathematics 10 per cent had mastery of English. The pass rate in GCE 'O' level was 27 per cent which meant roughly that two out of three students taking the exam, failed.

Notwithstanding, or rather because of, the undue emphasis on quantitative expansion in education at the expense of quality, the Western Province has broken away from other provinces and is leading other districts in this field in a spectacular fashion.

In mastery of first langauge Western Province scores 57 per cent against the national average of 37 per cent. In Mathematics it scores 52 per cent against an average of 38 per cent. In English, Western Province scores 20 per cent against an average of 10 per cent. Central, Uva and North-Eastern Provinces remain well below national averages.

Significantly, the economically poorer provinces are also the most disadvantaged educationally. The poor quality of educational services for the poor is shown by the refusal of teachers to be deployed into remote areas. Absenteeism in Uva and North-Central Province is close to 20 per cent.

These figures, bad as they are, do not show a true picture of educational problems which are in reality even worse. These aggregates do not show the internal disparities within a province. It is clearly seen that within such provinces facilities are concentrated in the urban and suburban centres leaving out rural areas.

Parents, who are the best judges, struggle to get their children into urban schools. Notwithstanding the MDGs it is the poorest of the poor who have been forced to send their children unwillingly to village schools.

What are the long term implications of populist policies in Education? Has the abandonment of the Central School system and mother tongue plus English langauge teaching formula which were envisaged in the Free Education compact associated with CWW Kannangara, led to a better deal or has it worsened the plight of the poor and the under-privileged?

The education based social mobility which was engendered by the Central School System modelled on public schools was a contributory factor to the social upheaval of 1956. Educated rural youth wanted their share of the national cake. Today the children of that revolution send their children to Royal College or International Schools. Dudley Seers called it the "Royal road to education".

The success of Western Province in the last two decades has been spectacular. Due to the rapid growth of industries and services its share of national GDP has increased from 44 per cent in 1996 to 50 per cent in 2002. This has now grown to 53 per cent. The services sector dominates economic activity in Western Province accounting for 65 per cent provincial GDP and 55 per cent of employment.

Services include Trade, Banking, Transport, Communications, Telecom and Tourism. Unemployment is lowest in this province and main income earnings from the services sector is much higher than in Industry and Agriculture.

This growth trajectory as I have demonstrated earlier is best depicted in the nature of education in its urban centres. It is clear that parents, who are now described in the literature as "education clients", far prefer the facilities and the education patterns available in Western Province.

These schools show a clear dominance of over their counterparts in other provinces in subjects such as Science, Mathematics, Accountancy and English.

The largest number of International Schools and non-government schools are seen here. So are the numbers of schoolchildren attending tuition classes which is essentially an urban phenomenon. There is a very large surplus of trained, well connected teachers as against a shortfall in the deficit districts.

All efforts of successive Ministers of Education have failed to move out this urban surplus into the deficit areas. There is greater access to electricity and to media, particularly the electronic media, in the Western Province.

Most of us in this hall are what we are because of the education we received. We were taught by outstanding teachers who not only brought us up to par in the three 'R s' but were also splendid role models in dedication, commitment and sacrifice. It is no surprise to us that Lalith himself was a teacher.

He taught Law in Tel Aviv, in Singapore and in our own Law College. Even when we went up and down the country for political rallies facing death threats, grenade attacks as at Pannala and assaults by thugs as at Kesbewa, Lalith would in his speeches try to teach, to educate his listeners.

This brings me to the main point of my presentation. It is clear that present educational policies and the administration that has been set up to implement them are grossly inadequate.

A large educational bureaucracy which has a vested interest in the status quo, are not in a fit condition to bring Sri Lankan education speedily into the modern globalised, market driven world. On the other hand outdated notions of socialism and Statism is preventing the expansion of the private sector to the field of education.

Unlike the age old leftist views of State monopolies in education and health, India and China have opened their doors to both foreign and local private investment into these two rapidly growing fields.

While Singapore, India and Malaysia are committing themselves to frontier services like Bio-technology, we are still debating whether a private medical college should be permitted.

It is high time that statist officials are removed from educational decision-making and top flight Professionals and Managers are brought into this important development sector.

So we must speak up. We must give our youth a chance to learn about the technology led modern world. They must profit from global opportunities that are now opening up, particularly in Asia led by India and China.

We owe that to our teachers who made us what we are. And we owe it to Lalith whom we remember with gratitude and affection today.