| If
You Want Quality, You Must Be Ready To Pay More
Former vice-chancellor of Tribhuvan University
and renowned social worker TROILOKYA NATH UPRAITY has
had a long experience in the promotion of education
quality. Upraity spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on the problems
and prospects of higher education in Nepal. Excerpts:
Is it possible to have quality
education at low cost?
In plain terms, it is not possible, because education
has become a consumer item. Like all other things, if
you want quality, you must be ready to pay more. This
is true with education almost all over the world. When
I visited socialist states like the former Soviet Union
and China, which stressed free education for all the
people, I saw institutions of different levels. Some
offering high-quality education cost more. We live in
a democratic and consumer society where quality education
does not come cheap. TU is providing low-cost education
for a large number of students. At the same time, it
provides quality education in engineering, medicine,
agriculture and forestry. The cost of technical education
is high. TU offers low-cost education in social sciences
and the humanities. In such faculties, teachers don't
have to teach full time. There are no provisions for
strict attendance.
When you were vice-chancellor
at TU, higher education was subsidized. Was it of better
quality?
It has never been made clear whether TU is a state
university or a private university. One of the problems
of TU is the tussle between what we call the concepts
of private and state universities. When I was vice-chancellor,
TU was smaller and we got good support from the government.
We could manage things rather well. At that time, the
objective was to groom TU as a teaching and residential
university. But as you went along, things drifted gradually
to the wrong side. TU is more interested in the affiliating
part and the teaching-learning process is neglected.
The government is providing huge sums in assistance,
but TU is unable to define its role in the context of
national development. Donor countries have given some
money, but they were not properly utilized.
Were there any flaws during the
formation of TU?
Well, that is where, I think, we slipped. After the
political change of 1950, the governments of Nepal and
United States ran a joint education project. I was working
as a co-director on behalf of the Nepalese government.
We had taken up the issue of developing a new university
in the kingdom. We wanted to develop the university
in a way that would have avoided the mistakes made by
universities in India. India has had a long history
of developing universities after 1835. Freedom fighters
like Mahatma Gandhi sought to get rid of colonial-era
education. They believed those university gave the wrong
kind of education. Since our university is based on
the concept of Patna University, we wanted to have a
new framework of a Land Grant University of the United
States and were working on this project. Suddenly, there
was an announcement from the Royal Palace on establishing
the university in the name of late King Tribhuvan. Because
of various reasons, the task of developing the university
taken by the Indian Aid Mission. They came forward to
provide assistance to the Tribhuvan University Development
Commission.
Why did the authorities accept
Patna University as the model?
They took a very easy approach, because colleges were
affiliated to Patna University at the time. Tri-Chandra
College was affiliated to Patna University and the commission
decided to copy Patna University's regulations and framework.
At that time, Patna University did both teaching and
affiliating. That was where we made the first mistake.
King Mahendra, as chancellor of the university, held
consultations with foreign scholars. They advised the
king that the university in Nepal should not go for
both teaching and affiliating at the same time. It should
be developed as a teaching and residential university.
The decision to copy the concept of Patna University
was the basic mistake. All our difficulties today have
grown as the result of that decision.
What can we do to improve the
status of higher education?
Much water has flown under the Bagmati Bridge. There
are so many new universities like Kathmandu, Pokhara
and Purbanchal Universities. We have seen that if the
right kind of leadership comes forward, they can create
a better institution like Kathmandu University. As far
as TU is concerned, it is the first university in learning.
In technical fields like engineering and medicine, TU
is offering high-quality education. In order to improve
the quality of education, we should amend the TU Act
to allow the university to develop as a place of excellence
for teaching in technical field as well as humanities
and social science. The affiliating part should be left
to the open university.
How can the new TU vice-chancellor
change things?
Bringing in a new person alone is not going to change
the university, because the vice-chancellor is not really
running TU. You may call it a bad word, but TU is under
a mafia-style grip of students and people working in
different departments. In some cases, even the professors
are responsible, as they don't teach full time. They
take the university salary as special privilege and
are committed to institutions outside the university
to earn more. The students do not pay minimum fees as
they control the admission, examinations and other day-to-day
activities. Interestingly, many students who spend money
on private tuition oppose moves to increase fees to
raise quality.
Is quality education a distant
prospect, then?
While talking about TU, I am reminded of one incident.
In early days, when a group of people visited India,
we had the opportunity to meet Indian Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru. In his usual way, Nehru asked what
Nepal was doing in education. Our colleagues spoke of
building new blocks and infrastructure. Pandit Nehru
said a good university needed good teachers and a good
environment for teaching, not just bricks and mortar.
What Nehru said is still true. People here have to realize
that building big structures alone will not improve
the quality of education.
TROILOKYA NATH UPRAITY [Spotlight]
|