What's in store for higher education?
Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
Learning Curve: Perspective
New Sunday Times - 16-3-2014
THE TASK AHEAD: The review of the Higher Education Strategic Plan must not only update but also validate new shifts or change in agenda
IN the flurry of activities to review the Higher Education Strategic Plan as it enters the third phase since 2007, the Regent of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, gave a very timely reminder. Although his reminder is focused on the country's sultanate as one of its key institutions, yet his observation can be applied equally to other institutions such as universities and the Education Ministry in general. He is, after all, the pro-chancellor of University of Malaya.
"Programmes should not be ceremonial in nature, organised and attended only by a limited audience. Badly thought-out programmes are superficial in nature. These programmes are not productive and fail to fulfil their philosophy and objectives," he said.
"Such programmes are a waste of resources, energy, time and money as they do not add value and bring no returns."
This is apparent when the "audiences" -- normally students -- are bused in to make up the crowd, with little consideration for the resources, energy, time and money involved. Universities, in particular public ones, often face a dilemma when "requested" to host programmes by various ministries. Yet, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to "badly thought-out programmes" that are "superficial in nature".
A suggestion for a blanket change of the designation of "vice-chancellor" to "president" as the head of higher education institutions seems very "superficial in nature" because these two nomenclatures describe two quite different structures and systems that keep the British and American education systems apart generally.
Americans hired to head British universities are still known as vice-chancellors. Unless entire structures and systems are also overhauled at the same time, mere change in labels is not the right thing to do academically.
Indeed, it can culminate in a series of "badly thought-out programmes" linked to the next phase of the review of the Higher Education Strategic Plan and create a disconnect with the recently launched Education Blueprint (2013-2025). It is worse if the plan has not been subjected to tough and rigorous consultation processes involving the various stakeholders ranging from the public to special interest groups including the larger academic community, professionals and politicians.
As a comparison, the Education Blueprint for basic and secondary education has set a high benchmark in engaging the widest possible participation of stakeholders in the form of town hall meetings and national dialogues in major cities throughout the country, including closed door and focused group discussions apart from memoranda and other forms of input. Ample time was allocated for these to happen in a thoughtful manner, giving credence to the process and its outputs.
Lack of similar levels of engagements will result in a document seen as a disadvantage before proposals are implemented. Questions will undoubtedly be raised as to the different approaches between the Education Blueprint and the Higher Education Strategic Plan, especially when there are aspirational gaps that could undermine the philosophy and aim of the education system as a whole.
In reality, there are bound to be misalignments if there are severe deficits in the consultation processes, bearing in mind that the Higher Education Strategic Plan itself has not undergone such a rigorous transparent process when it was conceptualised and launched in 2007.
The review of the next phase must make up for this lost opportunity, not only to update but also validate the new shifts or change in agenda by engaging various stakeholders including the appropriate subject and content specialists of international repute. This is to ensure that we keep abreast of common international trends while not trapped in the one-size-fits-all mentality.
On the other hand, there are also things that we can learn from the previous experience to eliminate those that do not add value and bring no return so that there is no "waste of resources, energy, time and money" in light of the government carrying out cost-cutting measures across the board.
In short, unless these sensitivities are taken into consideration in the review of Higher Education Strategic Plan to deliver excellence, it will be an uphill task ahead.