Public universities, quotas or meritocracy

 

Recently, the Sarawak government proudly announced its intention to practice full meritocracy in its five state-owned universities. Several months ago, its premier announced that all Sarawakians will go to the state-owned universities for free.

These two announcements will undoubtedly make the GPS government extremely popular among its voters come the next state and general elections, of that there is no doubt.

But is the practice of the quota system for university entry something bad? To many Malaysians it is evil incarnate. However, let us not judge hastily.

Let me make two points regarding the quota system in public universities.

Firstly, it was originally introduced for the sake of social engineering.

It was intended to admit students who experienced a challenging upbringing, especially those who come from villages and jungles where even the provision of basic education was an insurmountable challenge.

It was intended to provide an opportunity to families of all races, faiths and cultures to change their life for the better.

It was intended as a noble gesture. However, it was later turned by politicians into a racial weapon – used to win votes, and resulting in the election of poor national leaders who used race and religion for selfish ends.

We can see how UiTM, for instance, has many students who are from the T20 group. That was not supposed to happen, but it did, because it allowed race-based parties to win elections by pandering to populist and identity politics.

I remember reading a book titled “The Policeman” about the life of current Sarawak governor, Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar. In one chapter, he recalls how a teacher went deep into the jungles to recruit disadvantaged students for a special class so that they could later compete justly with more affluent children from the urban areas.

Our own national cartoonist, Lat, shared a similar story about how he passed the Special Malay Class examination.

I, too, have benefitted from the quota system. A Malay boy, I was the son of a police constable who earned less than RM700 a month. My father had served for 30 years and fought the Communist insurgency, leaving my mother suffering from crippling bouts of anxiety and agoraphobia every night, not knowing if her husband would come home.

I am forever grateful for the opportunity which the quota system and the new economic policy gave to me. Sadly, my father did not live long enough to enjoy his son’s success.

These kinds of social engineering devices are necessary if we are to provide the right people with the right jobs. Does Sarawak not have a situation of young adults from the villages and tribes who cannot on their own compete with young adults from the middle and upper middle classes in its society?

I personally do not believe in meritocracy without context. Meritocracy is fine when everyone is on a level playing field.

Secondly, the nature of education is also changing, and studying at universities may no longer involve on-campus learning for three or four years.

The internet has thrown classrooms and schedules out the window. Online free courses, including on YouTube, are now in abundance. Many online universities now offer personal access to education for a fraction of the cost.

What is required is a body of dedicated practitioners and academics to advise which courses are good and which are not so appropriate for a particular job.

Anyway, the world has opened up, and globalisation is making jobs and needs different from what universities presently train their students for. In many ways universities themselves are out of date and their training courses no longer address real-world needs.

I see education and training for livelihood going in many different directions, with the university not necessarily an important pathway.

As an educator, I look at the changing world and not at what makes a good accreditation exercise from the Malaysian Qualifications Agency or the so-called professional bodies.

Knowledge, skills and experience are fundamental to the making of a professional or skilled worker. Then there are the entrepreneurs who require different skill sets.

For me, the university that is filled with academics from a different generation, professionals of a practice long past and researchers looking at popularity rather than significance may not be the best place for aspiring minds and able bodies.

Instead, self-learning via the internet and strategic internships are the new keys to career development. An attitude of inclusiveness and an appreciation of the dignity of all cultures are essential anchors that would open doors that no university can.

I still believe in a strategic quota system based on real needs and context, but not of populism and race discrimination.

I also believe that a university degree is not the only pathway to a successful career in this rapidly changing world.

What it all boils down to is that the government must treat all citizens with dignity, respect and according to their economic context while facilitating a new institution that looks at non-university-based education as the possible builder of the nation’s future. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.