Sri Lanka’s higher education system struggles to meet growing demand due to inherent flaws. Free education, initially envisioned as promoting equity, has become a misnomer. This article series identifies two key roadblocks to growth in Sri Lanka’s Higher Education (SLHE): incapacity and lack of quality. While other problems exist, these three are primary and require immediate reform.
Incapacity of SLHE
Sri Lanka boasts of a free higher education system, a legacy many nations envy. However, beneath the surface lurks a crisis. The current system, despite its noble goals, struggles to keep pace with the growing demand for higher education. The result? A valuable resource—an educated youth—is left untapped. This incapacity manifests in several ways.
Inadequate university seats, outdated curricula, and limited resources constrain the system’s ability to accommodate qualified applicants. The mismatch between supply and demand has led to intense competition, with many students unable to secure a spot in their preferred fields. This situation not only frustrates aspiring scholars but also deprives the nation of their potential contributions. Addressing the incapacity of the SLHE system is crucial to unlocking the country’s intellectual capital and driving sustainable development.
The problem lies not just in limited capacity, but also in unequal access. While a fortunate few secure coveted spots in universities, the vast majority are left behind. This creates a crucial bottleneck, hindering Sri Lanka’s potential for development.
It is necessary to explore the need for a comprehensive overhaul of the higher education sector. This could involve a bold step: opening the doors to private investment. Sceptics might raise concerns. But consider the potential benefits. Increased investment could translate into more universities and expanded access to higher education for all Sri Lankans. This wouldn’t just empower individuals; it would fuel the nation’s engine of progress.
A revamped system could address the secondary issues that plague universities today. Ragging, a harmful initiation practice, and disruptions due to union actions are byproducts of a strained system. Addressing the root cause – limited access and outdated structures – could lead to a more positive and productive university system.
Quality education
Sri Lanka’s current approach to higher education, with a rigid divide between state-funded and private institutions, is failing to deliver on its promise of equity. This two-tiered system creates a false hierarchy, branding state universities as “elite” while marginalising the vast majority of private institutions.
The true focus, if we aim to create lasting solutions for the majority excluded from higher education, should be on unifying all Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) under one comprehensive framework. It necessitates a rigorous evaluation and accreditation system that ensures all institutions, regardless of funding source, meet the same high standards.
This is why these matters. The current system discourages students from attending private institutions, even if they offer excellent programs. Unification removes this artificial barrier, allowing students to choose the best fit for their needs and goals.
Private institutions bring diversity and innovation to the educational landscape. By integrating them into the national framework, Sri Lanka can leverage this potential to expand access and offer a wider range of specialised programs. A unified system fosters collaboration and knowledge sharing between institutions. This can lead to improved curriculum development, faculty training, and ultimately, a more robust and competitive higher education sector for Sri Lanka. This approach requires a shift in perspective. Instead of focusing on funding sources, we should put the quality of education and student outcomes at the forefront. By creating a unified system with clear standards and accreditation processes, Sri Lanka can achieve its social goal of educational equity and empower a much larger segment of the population to contribute to the nation’s development.
The Quality Assurance and Accreditation Bill was an attempt in 2019 by the then Government to bring all HEIs under one umbrella. However, the Bill faced significant opposition and was ultimately not implemented. Overcoming these challenges and successfully integrating private institutions into a unified system will require a comprehensive approach. This should involve stakeholder engagement, clear regulatory frameworks, and incentives to encourage collaboration. By adopting a flexible and inclusive model, Sri Lanka can harness the strengths of both public and private higher education providers. This unified system would enhance access, quality, and innovation – key drivers for the country’s continued social and economic progress.
High-quality education
To ensure quality across the board, Sri Lanka should establish an independent Quality Assurance and Accreditation Authority (QAAA). This independent body would be responsible for developing a new national framework for assessing and ranking all Higher Education Institutions, regardless of funding source. This framework would replace the current system that differentiates between State and non-State institutions. Eliminating this categorisation is crucial – a high-quality education should be the benchmark, not the source of funding. The QAAA would then use this framework to evaluate and rank HEIs, ensuring students have access to clear and reliable information.
The current District Quota System (DQS) stands as a significant barrier to educational equity in Sri Lanka. Introduced with questionable motives and dubious justifications, it has disproportionately disadvantaged talented students, particularly those from underprivileged backgrounds. Imagine a student living near a prestigious school in Colombo yet denied access due to DQS restrictions. This system not only fails to address accessibility, but marginalises deserving students. With a national ranking system for HEIs in place, the DQS becomes obsolete. Universities should adopt a new, merit-based admissions process that prioritises academic achievement and potential over geographic location. Scrapping the DQS is not just necessary, it’s imperative to create a level playing field and unlock the true potential of Sri Lanka’s youth.
A revolutionary new university admissions system is proposed to replace the District Quota System (DQS). This plan relies on a complete overhaul of the higher education landscape. First, an independent body as described above will ensure all universities meet a national standard. Universities will then be ranked based on performance.
Next, a national pool of student vacancies will be created, with each university contributing a portion (non-fee levying student number they can accommodate) based on factors like government funding and private investment. Collaboration is encouraged – universities can share resources like labs and faculty through consortiums. While fully privately funded universities contribute less to the national pool, they may receive temporary waivers for sharing resources with others. This plan aims to create a meritocratic system, ensuring all students have access to quality education regardless of location, and foster a more collaborative higher education sector.
Students will have more control over their future under a proposed university admissions system based entirely on merit and choice. A national merit list will determine who gets into free spots at any university, as long as they meet basic entry requirements. Students can rank their preferences, listing up to three programs and ten universities each. Only the top ten ranked universities will be included initially, but others can join the pool by improving their national ranking through quality assurance evaluations. This system empowers students and creates a competitive environment for universities, ultimately raising educational standards across Sri Lanka.
A difficulty factor (K) could be calculated, and extra marks could be added accordingly to what was earned by a student from a so-called underprivileged districts before the preparation of national merit list for free positions. However, the calculation of the difficulty factor (K) is done by comparing the data available for the past decade for A/L results from a given district for a given stream with those of the Colombo district. This factor K is calculated annually.
Vacancies for free education
In the new system, the University Grants Commission does not determine cut off marks for any given program. Cut off marks for institutions are determined by the number of available vacancies for free education in a HEI and the merit of the students who has selected that HEI as their first choice for a given course.
All those who are not eligible for their first choice of HEI for a given program are considered for their 2nd choice of HEI and so on. Selecting a candidate for a free position in the HEI pool is done only on their merit. If in the pool, only 100 positions are available, top 100 from the merit list of the pooled students will be given opportunity. If a candidate is not successful in securing any of the free positions for his/ her first choice of program, he/ she is given an opportunity to undertake the first choice program as a fee levying student. This process is continued until a free program is found for at least one of the programs applied by the student.
All the analysis results are communicated to the student to take an informed decision and if a given student is not able to secure any free position for any program, they are still allowed to follow a program of their choice as a fee levying student provided that they meet minimum individual requirements of the HEI of their choice. This system could be made even equitable if the Government with the assistance of state and private banks could implement a student loan scheme with concessionary interest rates to all students requesting, higher education. Loans thus obtained should be made payable only when the individual is formally employed.
Therefore, the way forward for Sri Lanka higher education would be to address key policy issues identified above. Firstly, by enacting Quality Assurance and Accreditation Commission Bill of June 2019. Then by repealing the current DQS and implementing a system which is fair for all. It is no doubt that a new education system thus created will be attractive internationally for Sri Lanka to fulfil its aspirations of becoming an international educational hub.
The writer is Dean, Faculty of Technology, Chairman, University Committee on Sustainability, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University
