& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Can the actions of one be the yardstick to judge many?

xadim Jahangir
Last year, 466,000 students passed the HSC and equivalent exams. A meager 17,250 seats were available at the public universities. The private universities were projected to absorb 18,730 graduates.
THE private university system has had its share of problems. And public universities have had more than their fare share of problems. If there was a mudslinging contest between public and private universities about their shortcomings, public universities would win hands down.
The praise heaped on public institutions is generous to say the least. Perhaps that is because they have produced talented graduates who have gone on to accomplish great things through hard work and perseverance.
Though lesser in number, private university graduates are doing the same. If public universities are judged by their successes rather than their failures, why can the same not be true for private universities?
The public universities are ahead in the game because of two reasons. They have, roughly, a fifty-year head start and they have the luxury of relying on the taxpayer. The first advantage gives them a proven track record to fall back on whenever the success of their graduates is scrutinised, the latter leads them to ignore the economics of financial viability.
It is pertinent to repeat a much dis-
cussed and familiar contention made by proponents of private universities. The traditional definition of a university as a seat of higher learning offering degrees in subjects ranging from extinct languages to particle physics has evolved in line with economic realities. An impoverished nation needs graduates to land jobs that pay rather than ponder the finer points of idiomatic expressions in ancient Latin.
If we readily consume genetically modified food as opposed to organic due to economic realities, why then can we not accept that a business degree is far more marketable than a degree in zoology?
The proof of the pudding lies in the eating. At the moment, demand for business degrees far exceeds supply. So the answer to why private universities concentrate on offering degrees in business is simple -- economics.
The unfortunate events of last week brought to light the charging of a "campus development fee." Talk show pundits and talking heads proceeded to portray this as a common practice at all private institutions. The naysayers either do not know or have conveniently ignored the fact that this fee is not a standard one.
At present, there are several private
universities in the country which have already moved to their own campuses and have far more equitable fee structures that have never included such fees. There are still others who are constructing their campuses without charging such fees.
In principle, however. If one were to make a case for contributing towards developing a campus, it would still hold water. Students have argued that paying for a campus which they themselves will not, in all likelihood, be able to use has no justification.
This age old argument has been used since time immemorial to question why one should pay taxes when the most basic of public services are not provided by the government. Students at private universities who refuse to pay for the development of the very institution which gives them knowledge and recognition should, as a matter of principal, also refuse to pay taxes.
Taxes go toward subsidising education at public universities and since the private university students do not benefit from this directly, they should not pay any taxes either.
In Europe and America, the alumni routinely donate millions for the development of universities they attended. The time for such spontaneous generosity has not yet come for private universities. This kind of philanthropy is possible when the universities uphold their image as not-for-profit organisations where all accumulated wealth goes toward the development of the institution.
Admittedly, some have slowed down
considerably in progressing toward this goal and instead have had to address allegations of misappropriation and wastage of funds. It has done a great disservice to the cause of private sector education. However, countless dedicated and talented individuals are working tirelessly to further the reach of private universities.
When the questionable decisions of a few are compared against the sustained efforts of many, there is no contest. The majority have made a difference. Last year, 466,000 students passed the HSC and equivalent exams. A meager 17,250 seats were available at the public universities. The private universities were projected to absorb 18,730 graduates.
The absence of private universities would have taken these graduates down one of two paths. One would have been to go abroad, and the other, into the national university system. While plugging the brain drain has had limited success, the rigour and content of the curriculum in private universities has given the graduates a far better chance of securing gainful employment than the national university system in its current format ever will. It is difficult, nowadays, to come across a service sector industry in the country which does not employ private university graduates. In the past decade, many have steadily climbed the slippery corporate ladder and now constitute the upper tier of mid-level management in local and multi-national organisations.
Perhaps if the regulators played a more consistent role, much of the criticism surrounding private universities
today could have been avoided. It is their duty to root out the bad apples. Unfortunately, the arbitrariness of the monitoring methods and regulations this body creates and promulgates makes its own role tenuous at best. If it takes the regulator five years to publish a report on the adherence of private universities to existing laws, the concept of continuous monitoring exists only in theory. Bringing such uncertainty into the scenario heavily discourages initiatives from those who have a genuine interest in furthering tertiary education in Bangladesh.
These institutions are destined to outlast their administrators who the students feel so hard done by. That day may not be too far when the alumni look
upon their alma mater and feel morally compelled to give back. Private universities have weathered a lot of criticism --some of it deserved, most of it perhaps not.
The good work of many in the past fifteen years has resulted in students and guardians putting their trust and faith in the private university system. The events of the past week have drawn vocal and silent condemnation from guardians, students, teachers, and administrators. What transpired does not represent the majority of any of them. The actions of a few cannot overshadow the good deeds of so many.
Dr Nadim Jahangir Is Associate Professor, Independent University, Bangladesh (IUB).