& 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

Imperative of coexistence: Public and private universities

And that is healthy competition that is good for the country. As I have stated, public and private universities can coexist as a matter of course, as complementary institutions ultimately benefitting the country.

Shahid Alam
COMPARISONS, as the saying goes, are odious. In many cases, they are, but in others they could be helpful in determining yardsticks or in establishing comparative perspectives.
For instance, it would really be a superfluous exercise to compare Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology with Cambridge University and Oxford University in terms of institutions of higher learning. They are all establishments of academic and scholarly excellence, perennially in the top echelon of universities anywhere in die world.
It would perhaps be more instructive to know that the two American institutions are privately run, while the British universities are public bodies with autonomous identities, much like Dhaka University’.
In fact, Dhaka University was modeled after Oxford, although no one in his/her right mind would dare to extend the linkage beyond the ideals behind the establishment of the two institutions. In this case, any attempt at drawing a comparison would truly be odious.
A more general association between the British and Bangladeshi systems of higher education may, however, be made in order to understand a certain mindset regarding higher education in the aver-age citizen of Bangladesh.
Bangladesh, via the interlude of Pakistan, inherited and established the systems and institutions bequeathed by the British Raj, although, in most cases, not with the same degree of efficiency, or probably as a precondition for achieving efficacy, the development of a mindset for the spirit and philosophy underlying them.
Higher education is one of them. For a long time, we stuck faithfully to the inherited tradition of a three-year Bachelor's (Honour's) degree (here I am restricting myself to institutions of higher learning in the Humanities, Sciences, and Social Sciences), which was awarded after successfully passing examinations in a prescribed number of subjects at the end of three years of study. Only recently have public universities like Dhaka University switched over towards an arrangement approximating the American system of higher learning.
Traditions, including some that have outlived their time, generally die hard in Bangladesh, so this country lingered on with the inherited British system long after its modification became due in the context of changing times. This crucial point requires a lengthy discussion that falls outside the purview of this write-up.
Tradition has also played a major role in the reluctance in much of the population to accept another demand of the time -- the necessity of private institutions of higher learning in Bangladesh.
Again, the influence of Great Britain, with its public higher education system (it has only one privately established university, The University of Buckingham. 96% of whose students have expressed satisfaction with its programs!), seems to have contributed to this mindset.
However, having said that, in the United States, every one of its constituent states boasts at least one public university to its name, of which a few are of high caliber, like the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (along with the University of Georgia, the oldest established private university in that country) and the University of Michigan, while the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, Los Angeles, are right up there with the very top private institutions. The point is, the two, public and private, are not mutually exclusive.
They should be complementary, covering for shortcomings in each other, or just creating a synergy through having their individual strengths combined towards benefiting the country's higher education.
I was a student of. and a lecturer in. Dhaka University. 1 was a doctoral student at, and taught in, Boston University, ranked among the top universities in US and the world by all manners of evaluators. It happens to be privately run. Now I teach at a private university in Bangladesh.
From my experiences in teaching, and combining that with my knowledge of the state of education, society and economy in this country, my feeling is that private universities can, and do, contribute to those sectors, often by complementing the contribution made by public universities. None should dispute that contribution. It is enormous, and. in the prevailing social, political and economic situation in the country will remain that way for the foreseeable future.
However, that very same situation also contributes to a substantial chunk of students aspiring for university education being unable to make it to the limited number of seats available in the public universities. But we already know that. Just as we know that the private universities have taken up the slack, and are providing them the opportunity to receive that education. And, they are completing that education without having to go through the hassles of session congestions, overlaps, campus political disturbances, and other such disruptions. g
In fact, these factors figure seriously in § the decisions of a number of bright stu- g dents in specifically selecting private * universities to get their education in. The putative and real benefits to the society and, yes, economy, and, obviously, the graduating students, of an uninterrupted education are by no means negligible, and studies could be carried out for assessing this impact.
At this point, one may expect people to be questioning the quality of education they have been receiving. Well, it is uneven across universities, and even within them -- from department to department. But, that last could be expected in even the very best institutions in the world. And, yes, there are private institutions that might not match up to the standards of the generally recognised better private universities, but that is not surprising either.
. For every one of the top 100 universities in US, there are probably at least 10 that are well below the mark, some not much better than the mediocre institutions in this country. And, it could realistically be expected that, in the hustle and bustle and/or euphoria of establishing universities following the decision of the government then in office to allow free market to operate in the education sector, some sub-standard institutions would crop up. It is conceivable that the market will see to it that they are phased out.
Whatever the future brings in the context of private sector education, it would be churlish to deny that a good number of graduates from private institutions have established themselves in different sectors of this country's society and its economy, having gotten their jobs through open competition, usually also involving graduates of public institutions, or succeeded as entrepreneurs through sheer enterprise and merit.
Obviously, at least some private universities are imparting the kind of education for their students to compete successfully in the tough job market, particularly in the most visible and desired sectors. And that is healthy competition that Is good for the country. As I have stated, public and private universities can coexist as a matter of course, as complementary institutions ultimately benefiting the country.
Shahid Alam is Head of the Media and Communication Department, Independent University