Malaysian Public Universities - Weak, Bordering On Being Fraudulent

 Malaysian Public Universities – Weak, Bordering On Being Fraudulent

M. Bakri Musa

(Excerpts from my Qur’an, Hadith, and Hikayat will resume next week.)

Three recent events and initiatives are emblematic of the glaring deficiencies in and serious challenges facing Malaysian public universities. Unremedied they would reduce these institutions to be nothing but a massive expensive fraud perpetrated upon the hopeful young.

            First, the forgiving of student loans for those with first class degrees, and whether to extend that privilege to those at private institutions. Second, having Sixth Form classes on university campuses. Third, the orgies of elaborate convocations. 

Consider that less than ten percent of the over 300,000 annual graduates are absorbed in the economy. Shocking! Elsewhere higher education is the driver of economic growth.

Tease that statistics. The bulk of the unemployed, or more accurately unemployable, are those in Malay Studies and Islamic Studies, as well as lacking in English language skills. Meaning, Malays. That should alarm the government. Instead, the bureaucrats and ministers continue bragging of the number of graduates churned out annually. The excuse that those graduates are unemployed because the private sector is dominated by non-Malays is specious if not inflammatory. 

As for forgiving student loans, far more sensible to do so for those accepted for graduate studies at leading universities abroad. That is a more valid indicator of quality. There is minimal value in rewarding those who consider their first-class degree as their peak achievement. It would reflect more on you and your university if you were to be subsequently accepted into an elite institution abroad. You are then not mere jaguh kampung (village champion). A measure of a good university is the percentage of its graduates pursuing further studies.

Students in China do not consider their university tests the challenge. They strive to excel at such foreign examinations as TOEFL (Test for English competency), GRE (Graduate Record Examination), and GMAC (Graduate Management Admission Council) so they would be competitive for elite global institutions. Chinese undergraduates are not satisfied with only local grades.   

The second initiative of having Sixth Form on university campuses is a colossal misuse of scarce expensive resources. More effective and cheaper to expand schools’ Sixth Form. That would also elevate the academic standards with the accompanying improvements in laboratories, libraries, and other facilities as well as the teaching staff. Likewise, get rid of the current university-run matrikulasi and assasi.

Universities should not duplicate efforts that could be done far more cheaply and effectively elsewhere. American universities have outreach programs to increase the number of potential admittees from disadvantaged groups. However, those are done at the schools, not on expensive limited university campuses. 

As for the current orgy of elaborate convocations and the glut of graduates, ponder this. Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), with an annual budget much smaller than that of a California community college, produces thousands of graduates annually, including hundreds of PhDs. Research is expensive and the market for academics is global. Something has to give. Even the most talented academic staff cannot perform miracles on a shoestring budget and inferior facilities.  

The typical convocation on Malaysian campuses is elaborate, with glossy programs and full portraits of top officials printed on satin papers a la Vogue magazine. By contrast, UCLA’s convocation programs use recycled papers with no fancy portraits of anyone.

California has a three-tiered public higher education. First, the two-year community colleges with its 116 independent campuses enrolling over two million students and accepting any high school graduate. They award only Associate Degrees as well as specialized training for the police force or aviation industry. Next, the 23-campus California State University (CSU) System with its 471,000 students. They offer only Baccalaureate and selected Master’s degrees. Then there is the elite ten-campus University of California (UC) System accepting only the top one-eighth of high school graduates for a total enrollment of 300,000. Only UCs can offer doctoral and professional degrees. Most importantly, students could switch between systems as well as campuses. 

This focusing of funds and efforts makes California’s public higher education the envy of the world. Its other salient feature is that despite the size, reach, and budget, there is no Ministry of Higher Education in California. Instead, UC’s headquarters is a nondescript building on the Berkeley campus. This unique independence as well as effective decentralization reduces the central bureaucracy a la Malaysia’s Ministry of Higher Education. 

The quality of a university is determined by their academics on campus, not the bureaucrats at Putrajaya. Free the former; get rid of the latter. 

I predict that the upcoming Blueprint for Higher Education will miss these critical issues, focusing instead on the usual hifalutin ideas and lofty goals that are unachievable. I hope to be proven wrong.