For whichever political coalition that would represent the citizens of Malaysia as a legitimate government, I wish to recommend that a serious reform of the public universities be made in order to do one simple thing; returning the honorable status of knowledge discovery and dissemination back to the people of this country.
What does that mean literally? That the universities shall no longer kow-tow to the whimsical wishes of chancellors, vice-chancellors, the education minister and the rule of weak and irresponsible deans of faculties.
The public universities’ primary role is to ensure that Malaysia’s society grows as they grows and all the research and writing should aim directly at social development first and foremost of our people and then to the region of Asia and finally that of the world. It should be firstly nation-class, then region class and only then world-class.
For me, there is very little difference between being ‘world-class’ and nation-class because I believe fervently that the world will come to a good natural order when we have done our own housekeeping well and then teach others to do as such.
What is the present scenario that has caused such a great dismay, especially on my part, that has me losing almost total faith in the meaning of academia in the public universities of Malaysia?
There is no honour any more. Just numbers and rankings and labels and the perpetual race of vice-chancellors outdoing one another to please the political ‘masters’ for their own selfish greed. In turn, the deans and deputy VC would also try their level best to outdo one another to please the VC.
Such petty rivalry was never something that I wanted to sign for in becoming an academic. To me, being an academic was bringing betterment to society and the environment so that it would benefit the many and not just the academic few.
Yes, I, too, wanted promotion, accolades and all things seemingly pleasant that go with being in academia, but I wanted to do it in a meaningful way; that would create a better world for my children and other people’s children, too.
But what do I see after 26 years at a public university? The chase for grants, papers and currying favours with political or official ‘bigwigs’ in order to be an associate professor and then a full professor.
I see indifference or apathy or political fear in creating research that would have a ‘high impact’ on social and environmental conditions in this country. High impact is simply defined as a journal’s publication based on some ‘mat salleh’s’ view of what is important. Do we not ourselves know what is important? As a PhD holder, as a professor, should we not know what is high impact in social or environmental development?
I have been in many committees that vet research, publications and promotions and I would just say that nothing thus far would leave me in confidence that we as a nation are actually going somewhere.
Going round and round to nowhere
My take is, we are going round and round to... nowhere significant. Why? The university leadership does not seem to know what their true roles are in regard to social development and knowledge generation. The leadership of public universities is there only for their own selfish sakes of self-promotion and nothing more. Do I have evidence of this strong statement? Yes! Tonnes!
The silence of our academia is simply deafening! The silence from the universities on so many issues that are plaguing our country, whether it is social, economic or environmental is simply too much for me to take any more. What voice there are from academia such as the so-called ‘council of professors’ is simply a weak echo of the opinions of those that walked the corridors of power. There is no integrity left in the academia in our country.
To me the key element is the powerful vice-chancellor. I wish to clip their wings once and for all.
First of all, empowerment of the university should be returned back to the academicians via the faculties. We should totally eliminate the roles and positions of the deputy vice-chancellors (DVCs) for development, research and Academic affairs. And also, we should kick out the DVC for student affairs too. The student affairs administration seeks only to condition students to bend to specific political wills of ignorant leaders.
Development of the fields of academic and infrastructure should be the purview of the faculties and the deans of each faculties The deans in turn must be in unison of thought with a selected board of advisers from the social, political, academic and professional background. Eight advisers, two each would be a nice figure.
These people would talk about what the country need in their own speciallised area and present these needs in a debate with the academics who would provide their own ideas and opinions on the direction of research writing and other activities. The opinions of the academics, the board and others concerned would trickle down to the student assignments and post-graduate thesis questions.
If a lecturer needs to be sent for PhD or fellowship study, the faculty decides, not the VC or the DVC of development or the DVC of academic affairs. Promotion criteria would be decided by the deans and the board but also in discussion with similar deans of faculties in other universities. Promotion criteria should not be standardised from a single template determined by the VC and his or her gang of DVC.
The last time I checked, the offices of the VC or the DVC have produced no undergraduate or post-graduate student. Only the faculties are empowered to do that, not the offices of those ‘other’ people. But nowadays, the VCs and DVCs strut around like they own the university when they are actually the least important element in a university.
Who are the important elements in a university? The academics, the students and the faculty. In that order. Where is the VC? Or the DVC? Nowhere.
Of course a university is made up of a conglomeration of several faculties in order to share certain facilities for the sake of efficiency. There is a role for the vice-chancellor in this respect as well as in the most important one of all.
Guardian of the society’s expectations
The main role of the VC, to me, is to be the guardian of the society’s expectations. He or she must ensure that all the university programmes are for the good of the people and of mankind. Not for the good of him or herself selfishly nor for the good of some political entity.
The VC is NOT supposed to be the star of the university. The academics and the faculties are the stars, not the VC or the DVC. The VC should make certain that the deans have appointed the right individuals to be the board of advisers and also monitor the programmes that would benefit the country and its people. He or she must ensure that the university is in constant engagement with the public on all issues that would be meaningful to common development.
Political figures from all parties must be allowed to share their views about the country with the students and the academics so that the academics can formulate and reformulate their short-term and long-term objectives. The VC should not close down or set up centres without first checking with the deans of faculties and the board of advisers.
The VC is just the caretaker and not the star attraction. A student goes to such and such a university because of the faculty or the academicians, not because so and so is the VC. The VC, in order to be effective, must be invisible.
What nonsense is this that a VC would terminate the contract of a popular and important academic such as Aziz Bari? What nonsense is this that VCs can cancel a serious seminar that invites a balance of viewpoints just to please the powers that be? What nonsense is this that a VC can allow the screening of a controversial movie known for it’s racist slant just to curry favour with their so called ‘political masters’?
What nonsense is this that VCs and DVCs have interfered with student elections to ensure one party fares better than the others again to curry favour with the top country’s leadership?
No more. In my reformed universities, the VC shall not have that much power. Peaceful meetings and seminars with a balance of viewpoints must never be cancelled. The university is supposed to be the place for the clash of ideas and thoughts in a peaceful manner. Voices can be raised occasionally but not weapons or threats of bodily harm. The academic ‘adab’ or good manners must rule in discussion, debates and opinion wars.
Thus by empowering the deans with the decisions in academia, we would have eliminated layers of bureaucracy and give a strong identity of the dean and the faculty in leadership. The dean is as powerful as the VC in determining academic intake, promotion and transfer. The dean must govern with the people as represented by the board of advisers who represent the country.
The dean must ensure that there is constant public-academic engagement or else he or she would be unfit to wear the title of ‘dean’. The VC should not interfere with the affairs of the faculties but perform mediating roles as a ‘secretariat’ rather than the all-powerful role now as a superstar and a dictator. End the feudalistic hold of the VC and return the power and meaning of academia back to the academicians and the people.
What does that mean literally? That the universities shall no longer kow-tow to the whimsical wishes of chancellors, vice-chancellors, the education minister and the rule of weak and irresponsible deans of faculties.
The public universities’ primary role is to ensure that Malaysia’s society grows as they grows and all the research and writing should aim directly at social development first and foremost of our people and then to the region of Asia and finally that of the world. It should be firstly nation-class, then region class and only then world-class.
For me, there is very little difference between being ‘world-class’ and nation-class because I believe fervently that the world will come to a good natural order when we have done our own housekeeping well and then teach others to do as such.
What is the present scenario that has caused such a great dismay, especially on my part, that has me losing almost total faith in the meaning of academia in the public universities of Malaysia?
There is no honour any more. Just numbers and rankings and labels and the perpetual race of vice-chancellors outdoing one another to please the political ‘masters’ for their own selfish greed. In turn, the deans and deputy VC would also try their level best to outdo one another to please the VC.
Such petty rivalry was never something that I wanted to sign for in becoming an academic. To me, being an academic was bringing betterment to society and the environment so that it would benefit the many and not just the academic few.
Yes, I, too, wanted promotion, accolades and all things seemingly pleasant that go with being in academia, but I wanted to do it in a meaningful way; that would create a better world for my children and other people’s children, too.
But what do I see after 26 years at a public university? The chase for grants, papers and currying favours with political or official ‘bigwigs’ in order to be an associate professor and then a full professor.
I see indifference or apathy or political fear in creating research that would have a ‘high impact’ on social and environmental conditions in this country. High impact is simply defined as a journal’s publication based on some ‘mat salleh’s’ view of what is important. Do we not ourselves know what is important? As a PhD holder, as a professor, should we not know what is high impact in social or environmental development?
I have been in many committees that vet research, publications and promotions and I would just say that nothing thus far would leave me in confidence that we as a nation are actually going somewhere.
Going round and round to nowhere
My take is, we are going round and round to... nowhere significant. Why? The university leadership does not seem to know what their true roles are in regard to social development and knowledge generation. The leadership of public universities is there only for their own selfish sakes of self-promotion and nothing more. Do I have evidence of this strong statement? Yes! Tonnes!
The silence of our academia is simply deafening! The silence from the universities on so many issues that are plaguing our country, whether it is social, economic or environmental is simply too much for me to take any more. What voice there are from academia such as the so-called ‘council of professors’ is simply a weak echo of the opinions of those that walked the corridors of power. There is no integrity left in the academia in our country.
To me the key element is the powerful vice-chancellor. I wish to clip their wings once and for all.
First of all, empowerment of the university should be returned back to the academicians via the faculties. We should totally eliminate the roles and positions of the deputy vice-chancellors (DVCs) for development, research and Academic affairs. And also, we should kick out the DVC for student affairs too. The student affairs administration seeks only to condition students to bend to specific political wills of ignorant leaders.
Development of the fields of academic and infrastructure should be the purview of the faculties and the deans of each faculties The deans in turn must be in unison of thought with a selected board of advisers from the social, political, academic and professional background. Eight advisers, two each would be a nice figure.
These people would talk about what the country need in their own speciallised area and present these needs in a debate with the academics who would provide their own ideas and opinions on the direction of research writing and other activities. The opinions of the academics, the board and others concerned would trickle down to the student assignments and post-graduate thesis questions.
If a lecturer needs to be sent for PhD or fellowship study, the faculty decides, not the VC or the DVC of development or the DVC of academic affairs. Promotion criteria would be decided by the deans and the board but also in discussion with similar deans of faculties in other universities. Promotion criteria should not be standardised from a single template determined by the VC and his or her gang of DVC.
The last time I checked, the offices of the VC or the DVC have produced no undergraduate or post-graduate student. Only the faculties are empowered to do that, not the offices of those ‘other’ people. But nowadays, the VCs and DVCs strut around like they own the university when they are actually the least important element in a university.
Who are the important elements in a university? The academics, the students and the faculty. In that order. Where is the VC? Or the DVC? Nowhere.
Of course a university is made up of a conglomeration of several faculties in order to share certain facilities for the sake of efficiency. There is a role for the vice-chancellor in this respect as well as in the most important one of all.
Guardian of the society’s expectations
The main role of the VC, to me, is to be the guardian of the society’s expectations. He or she must ensure that all the university programmes are for the good of the people and of mankind. Not for the good of him or herself selfishly nor for the good of some political entity.
The VC is NOT supposed to be the star of the university. The academics and the faculties are the stars, not the VC or the DVC. The VC should make certain that the deans have appointed the right individuals to be the board of advisers and also monitor the programmes that would benefit the country and its people. He or she must ensure that the university is in constant engagement with the public on all issues that would be meaningful to common development.
Political figures from all parties must be allowed to share their views about the country with the students and the academics so that the academics can formulate and reformulate their short-term and long-term objectives. The VC should not close down or set up centres without first checking with the deans of faculties and the board of advisers.
The VC is just the caretaker and not the star attraction. A student goes to such and such a university because of the faculty or the academicians, not because so and so is the VC. The VC, in order to be effective, must be invisible.
What nonsense is this that a VC would terminate the contract of a popular and important academic such as Aziz Bari? What nonsense is this that VCs can cancel a serious seminar that invites a balance of viewpoints just to please the powers that be? What nonsense is this that a VC can allow the screening of a controversial movie known for it’s racist slant just to curry favour with their so called ‘political masters’? What nonsense is this that VCs and DVCs have interfered with student elections to ensure one party fares better than the others again to curry favour with the top country’s leadership?
No more. In my reformed universities, the VC shall not have that much power. Peaceful meetings and seminars with a balance of viewpoints must never be cancelled. The university is supposed to be the place for the clash of ideas and thoughts in a peaceful manner. Voices can be raised occasionally but not weapons or threats of bodily harm. The academic ‘adab’ or good manners must rule in discussion, debates and opinion wars.
Thus by empowering the deans with the decisions in academia, we would have eliminated layers of bureaucracy and give a strong identity of the dean and the faculty in leadership. The dean is as powerful as the VC in determining academic intake, promotion and transfer. The dean must govern with the people as represented by the board of advisers who represent the country.
The dean must ensure that there is constant public-academic engagement or else he or she would be unfit to wear the title of ‘dean’. The VC should not interfere with the affairs of the faculties but perform mediating roles as a ‘secretariat’ rather than the all-powerful role now as a superstar and a dictator. End the feudalistic hold of the VC and return the power and meaning of academia back to the academicians and the people.
PROF DR MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN MOHAMAD RASDI is a 23-year veteran academic and teaches architecture at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. He specialises in mosque and Islamic architecture particularly that which relates to Malaysia using a hadith-based and socio-cultural approach in order to create the total idea of built environment suited for a whole social structure.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.