Are we proud of our universities?

 

American universities have emerged as dominant players in global higher education. Since the second half of the 20th century, the US has been home to the majority of the world’s top universities. When ranked in terms of research output, America reigns supreme.

There are controversies of course, about the global ranking system of universities and its “imperial” structure. I regularly criticise the hegemonic nature of global higher education and its propensity to marginalise research output from the Global South. However, it is a fact that US universities have a high degree of autonomy, both intellectually and financially. They have produced great scholars.

In the absence of financial security, most universities in America have to build long-term relationships with tuition-paying students and donors. Administrators have to devise creative forms of financial sourcing from the public and private sectors. Naturally, in the absence of strong state control which would guarantee funding, US universities have to adapt to changing market conditions and establish a brand in the marketplace. Vigorous competition among universities is constant. The need for consistent sources of financial support is vital.

As a result, US universities keep close tabs on what society needs, market trends and public sentiments about social issues that are trending. Racism, bigotry, political controversies, sexism and corruption in society keep US universities on their toes. They need to stay abreast of developments and adopt and adapt to public and corporate sentiment.

This keen sense of social consciousness filters down to academic curricula, as well as to the teaching and scholarship standards demanded of professors. Instructors prepare their course syllabi meticulously, and most of the time, close attention is paid to their students and assignments. All these activities command administrative integrity and strict adherence to discipline and quality output.

In Malaysia, the situation is the polar opposite. We suffer from indifference and unethical political interference in higher education. Interference in university administration and academic activity is obvious, gauging from the dismal standards of scholarship produced. It is also clear in the standards of PhDs and degree graduates in society. In fact, it is a known fact that fresh graduates find it difficult to secure jobs.

Oxford University

There are exceptions of course. There are a handful of scholars engaged in relevant, cutting-edge research in a few of our universities, mostly in the sciences. But these are a minority compared to the overwhelming majority who are deadwood and seat warmers. And research standards in the social sciences are extremely pathetic.

Worse still, do we hold our higher education institutions in high esteem? Apart from the delusional pride we feel when annual global university rankings are published, are we proud of our professors, their scholarship and the impact of their research on society?

I am very proud of UM’s Adeeba Kamarulzaman who has achieved world recognition lately. Recently appointed as a member of the World Health Organisation (WHO) Science Council, Adeeba has had an illustrious and productive academic career of excellence. However, she is an exception.

Other Malaysians who have reached the pinnacle of world recognition for their scholarship, left Malaysia decades ago. Professor Kalai Mathee, originally of Ipoh, Perak is one such individual. She was inducted into the American Academy of Microbiology in 2020. She is considered a pioneer in the field of molecular biology.

Furthermore, together with her husband, who is also a professor in the US, they have set up the Kalai Mathee-Giri Narasimhan UGS Travel Fellowship. This is for the benefit of doctoral students involved in biomedical and computing research. Malaysians should feel proud of course, but it is not difficult to understand why this amazing scientist and scholar remains abroad.

A backward nation

When the media uncovers such stories of achievement, reports imply a certain "national ownership" of such achievements. Many successful and world-renowned scholars did their early schooling in Malaysia but later chose to develop their academic skills abroad. They are recognised and utilised in their adopted country for their individual and global benefit.

Another example is Professor Afifi al-Akiti, a fellow at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. Malaysians are naturally proud that he is the first Malay to be appointed at Oxford. Born in Kota Baru, the media hailed him as “exemplifying the Malaysian dream”.

The media consistently gushes over successful overseas Malaysians for fulfilling “our” dreams of excellence. In my thinking, we are delusional. We forget that the dreams Kalai and Afifi realised are their own dreams, which we latch onto. They may never forget their Malaysian roots, but by remaining abroad they know they are free to engage in their dream for true scholarship grounded in academic freedom.

Their scholarship is appreciated by their adopted countries. They are not mired by controversies due to a religiously divided society and bigoted and controlling polity. They do not face insidious political interference, characteristic of the country of their birth. In their adopted countries, they are promoted and recognised for the scholars they truly are, not for their political connections, patronage or bribery. They earn an honest salary.

Shouldn’t we start worrying about why there is a pattern of great talent leaving Malaysia? It has been going on for decades. Our academics who are based in the hundreds of universities here should stop wasting time. They should conduct and publish more transparent research on the ethnic and gender composition of the talents we are losing.

Engage in empirical studies on how many Malays, Indians, Chinese and Malaysians of minority ethnicities are actually leaving Malaysia to pursue their scholarship and dreams abroad. How many never return and what are their reasons for staying away? If research had been done in the past, it should be regularly updated and published for public consumption.

If academics are fearful of the obstacles they may face because of what their research would reveal, the more the merrier. If 80 universities work on this project as opposed to two, our leadership will have to take notice and a conversation will have to ensue.

It is probable that such research may reveal bigger cracks in policies such as the NEP. These studies may prompt more questions about the usefulness of agencies such as Jakim and other Islamic bodies which are concerned about academic output on subjects of race and religion. It may expose the mindless constraints put on academic activities and how our scholarship may be inhibited due to unnecessary political interference.

Nevertheless, we have to start somewhere. The latest controversy over UTM’s cancellation of a talk by Ramli Ibrahim reinforces the issue of the absence of academic freedom in Malaysia. It also exposes religious extremism, ignorance, racial supremacy and the politicisation of our education.

Malaysia will become a backward nation in no time if this goes unchecked. We will never achieve what many Americans are so proud of about their own system. Malaysia may never create a “Harvard of the East” or an “Oxford of the North”. 

Instead, the US and Britain will continue to benefit from Malaysians and this is nothing to be proud of. Let us get our priorities in order. - Mkini

---

SHARIFAH MUNIRAH ALATAS is an academician with zero tolerance for corrupt, arrogant and frivolous leadership.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.