BBC Sinhala, 22/06/2012
ලබන මස පැවැත්වීමට නියමිත වැඩ වර්ජනය බිය ගැන්වීම් මගින් කඩා කප්පල් කිරීමට උත්සාහ දරන බවට විශ්ව විද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනය ප්රකශ කරයි.
අද මාධ්ය හමුවක් අමතමින් ඒ පිළිබඳව තොරතුරු හෙළිකළ සම්මේනලයේ, විශ්ව විද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනයතමන්ට පෞද්ගලිකවම තර්ජනයක් ඇති බව කියා සිටියේය.
ආරක්ෂක අමාත්යංශයේ යැයි හදුන්වා ගත් පුද්ගලයන් කිහිපදෙනකු අසල්වැසියන්ගෙන් තම දියණිය පාසල් යන එන වේලාවල් සහ ඇය අධ්යාපනය ලබන පාසල පිළිබඳව විමසා ඇති බව පැවසූ ඔහු පිට රට යාම සඳහා සූදානමක් ඇති නිසා ඒ ගැන කරුණු සොයන බව පවසා ඇති සඳහන් කළේය.
දෙවැනි අවස්ථාවේදී, ආරක්ෂක අමාත්යාංශයේ රැකියාවක් සඳහා ඇය අයදුම්පත්රයක් යොමු කොට ඇති නිසා ඒ ගැන කරුණු සොයා බලන බව කියා ඇති බවත් ආචාර්ය දේවසිරි ප්රකාශ කළේය.
උසස් පෙළ අධ්යාපනය ලබන තම දියණියට එබඳු කිසිදු අවශ්යතාවක් නොමැති බව පවසන ඔහු මහරගම පොලීසියට පැමිණිලි කළ බවද සඳහන් කළේය.
ජීවිතවලට එල්ලවන තර්ජන කොතැනක, කුමන වේලාවකදී, සිදුවේද යන භියකින් ජනතාව පසුවන බව මාධ්ය හමුවට එක්ව සිටි පූජ්ය ආචාර්ය දඹර අමිල හිමියෝ පැවසූහ.
හැම ක්ෂේත්රයකටම මේ තර්ජනය එල්ලවෙමින් තිබෙන්නේයැයි ද කියා සිටි උන්වහන්සේ තවදුරටත් සමාජයක් හැටියට බලා සිටිය නොහැකි යැයි ප්රකාශ කළහ.
ප්රජාතන්ත්රවාදය යන සංකල්පය ඇත්තක් බවට පත් කර ගත යුතුව ඇතැයි කියා සිටි පූජ්ය දඹර අමිල හිමියෝ ඒ සඳහා පුරවැසියන් හැටියට එක්ව කටයුතු කිරීමේ අවශ්යතාව අවධාරණය කළහ.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
FUTA Media Briefing 22/06/2012 - Videos
23/06/2012,
FUTA held a media conference to brief the media on the threats received by FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Dewasiri, the outcomes of the recently held meeting with the MoHE, and the upcoming FUTA continuous strike on the 4th of July 2012.
The following are three clips recorded at this briefing.
FUTA held a media conference to brief the media on the threats received by FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Dewasiri, the outcomes of the recently held meeting with the MoHE, and the upcoming FUTA continuous strike on the 4th of July 2012.
The following are three clips recorded at this briefing.
SRI LANKA: Government rejects the Universality of Human Rights
Asian Human Rights Commission, 22/06/2012
Speaking at the 20th session of the Human Rights Council, under the agenda item clustered ID with the Special Rapporteur on Health and the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Sri Lanka attacked the United Nations' role in developing international norms and standards relating to human rights. Speaking on the issue of education, the government noted in an official stat"We would however caution on attaching excessive focus and arbitrary conditionalities on developing norms and standards related to quality education, as many developing countries are as yet grappling with the provision of basic education to their populations. Setting goals which require enormous finances which developing countries are often unable to meet, and placing the onus of responsibility solely on the state will not practically advance the quality of education. Instead, it is suggested that realistic goals be set, which are developed taking in to consideration the particular needs of countries and their respective domestic situations, if we are to successfully improve the quality of education worldwide.
Given that in Sri Lanka, the government has been working to downgrade the school and university education systems; this announcement does not come as a surprise. The implication of this statement is that Sri Lankans are not entitled to the highest standards of education, as the citizens of other countries are. Under the pretext of economic difficulties, the Sri Lankan government wants a different set of educational standards for poorer countries. By this, they mean that the poor deserve a poor quality of education.
The setting of international norms and standards for the protection of human rights is the most important function of the United Nations' human rights agencies. Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, this has been the United Nations' human rights agencies most significant project. The covenants and conventions have been developed to ensure a similar entitlement of rights for people in all countries, so that basic rights can be enjoyed by every person.
As such, to attack the making of international norms and standards is to strike at the very heart of the United Nations' human rights project. Sri Lanka's present government has been consistently engaged in this attack since its formation.
In relation to the resolution passed by the United Nations' human rights council on the issue of accountability and reconciliation in Sri Lanka, the thrust of the attack by the Sri Lankan government relates to civil and political rights. The Sri Lankan government is vigorously pursuing a project in which international humanitarian and human rights legal codes will be reformed so as to allow serious violations, thus denying the universality of human rights..
During the mid-twentieth century, Sri Lanka was one of the countries which was heralded as a model for other developing nations in light of its progress in establishing quality infrastructure, such as education. There was good reason to hold Sri Lanka in such high esteem at this time. Indeed, from the early 20th century when Sri Lanka was under colonial rule to the early part of the independence period, achieving a higher quality of life for the people of Sri Lanka was one of the government's central goals.
Today, this pursuit of a higher quality of life is suffering due to the incredible level of neglect. Indeed, Sri Lanka has been reduced to a lawless place. The accusation of lawlessness comes from the highest levels of society. Cynical remarks are frequently made regarding the fact that Sri Lanka has a parliament, but does not have parliamentary democracy, that Sri Lanka has courts but lacks an independent judiciary to preside over these courts, and that Sri Lanka has a rule of law system but is nonetheless becoming a lawless nation.
It is quite clear that this deplorable state of affairs has not come about by accident, but is the product of design; the statement made by the Sri Lankan government at the United Nations is testament to this ideological position. These government officials believe that it is acceptable to deny the basic standards of life to the people of Sri Lanka, in terms of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights. Moreover, they believe that such a viewpoint is justified on the basis of the idea that people in poorer countries cannot have a high standard of life that others in wealthier countries are able to enjoy.
Sri Lanka is a member of the United Nations. When the Sri Lankan government challenges the efforts of UN human rights bodies and officials to define international norms and monitor the upholding of these standards, it is attacking the core of the United Nations' project on human rights. As such, what justification can Sri Lanka make to remain within this assembly of nations which is primarily devoted to defining universal standards and monitoring their progress?
The universality of human rights is at the heart of the basic philosophy of human rights. In attacking the notion of the universality of human rights, Sri Lanka is attacking the fundamental tenets upon which human rights norms stand. The statement made by the Sri Lankan government at the 20th session is clear evidence of the new direction that the Sri Lankan government is taking to renegade from the enterprise that the world became engaged in when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was enshrined as a basic, global agreement.
Speaking at the 20th session of the Human Rights Council, under the agenda item clustered ID with the Special Rapporteur on Health and the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Sri Lanka attacked the United Nations' role in developing international norms and standards relating to human rights. Speaking on the issue of education, the government noted in an official stat"We would however caution on attaching excessive focus and arbitrary conditionalities on developing norms and standards related to quality education, as many developing countries are as yet grappling with the provision of basic education to their populations. Setting goals which require enormous finances which developing countries are often unable to meet, and placing the onus of responsibility solely on the state will not practically advance the quality of education. Instead, it is suggested that realistic goals be set, which are developed taking in to consideration the particular needs of countries and their respective domestic situations, if we are to successfully improve the quality of education worldwide.
Given that in Sri Lanka, the government has been working to downgrade the school and university education systems; this announcement does not come as a surprise. The implication of this statement is that Sri Lankans are not entitled to the highest standards of education, as the citizens of other countries are. Under the pretext of economic difficulties, the Sri Lankan government wants a different set of educational standards for poorer countries. By this, they mean that the poor deserve a poor quality of education.
The setting of international norms and standards for the protection of human rights is the most important function of the United Nations' human rights agencies. Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, this has been the United Nations' human rights agencies most significant project. The covenants and conventions have been developed to ensure a similar entitlement of rights for people in all countries, so that basic rights can be enjoyed by every person.
As such, to attack the making of international norms and standards is to strike at the very heart of the United Nations' human rights project. Sri Lanka's present government has been consistently engaged in this attack since its formation.
In relation to the resolution passed by the United Nations' human rights council on the issue of accountability and reconciliation in Sri Lanka, the thrust of the attack by the Sri Lankan government relates to civil and political rights. The Sri Lankan government is vigorously pursuing a project in which international humanitarian and human rights legal codes will be reformed so as to allow serious violations, thus denying the universality of human rights..
During the mid-twentieth century, Sri Lanka was one of the countries which was heralded as a model for other developing nations in light of its progress in establishing quality infrastructure, such as education. There was good reason to hold Sri Lanka in such high esteem at this time. Indeed, from the early 20th century when Sri Lanka was under colonial rule to the early part of the independence period, achieving a higher quality of life for the people of Sri Lanka was one of the government's central goals.
Today, this pursuit of a higher quality of life is suffering due to the incredible level of neglect. Indeed, Sri Lanka has been reduced to a lawless place. The accusation of lawlessness comes from the highest levels of society. Cynical remarks are frequently made regarding the fact that Sri Lanka has a parliament, but does not have parliamentary democracy, that Sri Lanka has courts but lacks an independent judiciary to preside over these courts, and that Sri Lanka has a rule of law system but is nonetheless becoming a lawless nation.
It is quite clear that this deplorable state of affairs has not come about by accident, but is the product of design; the statement made by the Sri Lankan government at the United Nations is testament to this ideological position. These government officials believe that it is acceptable to deny the basic standards of life to the people of Sri Lanka, in terms of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights. Moreover, they believe that such a viewpoint is justified on the basis of the idea that people in poorer countries cannot have a high standard of life that others in wealthier countries are able to enjoy.
Sri Lanka is a member of the United Nations. When the Sri Lankan government challenges the efforts of UN human rights bodies and officials to define international norms and monitor the upholding of these standards, it is attacking the core of the United Nations' project on human rights. As such, what justification can Sri Lanka make to remain within this assembly of nations which is primarily devoted to defining universal standards and monitoring their progress?
The universality of human rights is at the heart of the basic philosophy of human rights. In attacking the notion of the universality of human rights, Sri Lanka is attacking the fundamental tenets upon which human rights norms stand. The statement made by the Sri Lankan government at the 20th session is clear evidence of the new direction that the Sri Lankan government is taking to renegade from the enterprise that the world became engaged in when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was enshrined as a basic, global agreement.
Friday, June 22, 2012
FUTA Media Briefing 22/06/2012
22/06/2012,
FUTA held a press meeting today at 10:00AM to brief the media about the recent threats to FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Dewasiri, the outcomes of the recently held meeting with the MoHE, and the upcoming trade union action on July 4th.
Lankatruth.com, 2012 ජූනි 22 වෙනි සිකුරාදා, 14:
විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනයේ (FUTA) සභාපති ආචාර්ය නිර්මාල් රංජිත් දේවසිරි මහතාට මීට පැය කිහිපයකට පෙරද නිර්නාමික දුරකථන ඇමතුමකින් යම් තර්ජනයක් සිදුවී ඇතැයි වාර්තාවේ.
මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් අප කළ විමසීමකදී ඒ මහතා පැවසූවේ "අපි අද මාධ්ය සාකච්ඡාවක් පැවැත්වූවා. එය අවසන් වී සුළු මොහොතකින් මට 0119977025 දුරකථන අංකයෙන් ඇමතුමක් ආවා. මගේ දියණිය සහ බිරිඳ ගැන සියලු තොරතුරු හොයාගෙන ඇති බවත්, දරුවා පාසල් යන එන වේලාවන් පවා දන්නා බවත් පැවසූවා. මම කරණ වැඩවලින් විශ්වවිද්යාල සිසුන්ට පාඩුවෙන බවත් වහාම මගේ ක්රියාකාරකම් නවත්වන ලෙසත් ඉතාම තර්ජනාත්මකව පැවසූවා. පසුගිය දිනවල මාගේ නිවස අවට සැරි සැරුවේ ඔවුන් බවත් මට පැවසූවා" යනුවෙන් පැවසීය.
නිර්මාල් මහතාගේ බිරිඳගේ නමටද නිර්ණාමික ලිපියක් ලැබී ඇති බවත් තම ස්වාමියාගේ FUTA හි කටයුතු වහාම නතරකරවන ලෙසටත් එහි සඳහන්ව තිබී ඇති බවටත් වාර්තා වේ.
හිට්ලර්ලාටත් වඩා ඉහළින් වත්මන් හිට්ලර්ලා කටයුතු කරනවා - දඹර අමිල හිමි
එදා සිටි හිට්ලර්ලාටත් වඩා ඉහළින් මෙම වත්මන් හිට්ලර්ලා කටයුතු කරමින් සිටින බවත් වත්මන් ආණ්ඩුව යන ඒකාධිපති ගමන්මග සම්බන්ධයෙන් ඕනාවටත් වඩා උදාහරණ හැටහුටාමාරක් ඇති බවත් විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිත් සම්මේලනයේ උප සභාපති පූජ්ය දඹර අමිල හිමියන් අද (22) කොළඹ ජාතික පුස්තකාලයේ පැවති මාධ්ය හමුවකට එක්වෙමින් සඳහන් කර සිටියහ.
විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සභාපති, ආචාර්ය නිර්මාල් රංජිත් දේවසිරි මහතාට එල්ල වී ඇති තර්ජන පිළිබඳව මාධ්ය දැනුවත් කිරීම සඳහා මෙම මාධ්ය හමුව කැඳවා තිබූ අතර එහිදී අදහස් දැක්වූ පූජ්ය දඹර අමිල හිමියන් මෙසේ සඳහන් කර සිටියහ.
මෙම සිදුවීම හුදෙක් විශ්ව විද්යාලයීය ආචාර්යවරයෙකුට හෝ පුද්ගලිකව කිසියම් කෙනෙකුට හෝ කළ බියවැද්දීමක් ලෙස නොව සමාජයක් ලෙස අප මුහුණ දී තිබෙන ප්රජාතන්ත්රවාදී නිදහස පිළිබඳ ගැටලුවක් බව ද තවදුරටත් මිනීවලට කරගසාගෙන යාමට හෝ සුදු කොඩි දමන්නට පමණක් මග බලා නොසිට මෙම ක්රියාදාමය නැවැත්වීම සඳහා කටයුතු කළ යුතු බව ද එම හිමියෝ පෙන්වා දුන්හ.
විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන් විසින් ආරම්භ කිරීමට නියමිත අඛණ්ඩ වෘත්තීය සමිති ක්රියාමාර්ගය කඩාකප්පල් කිරීමට හා එහි ක්රියාකාරීකයින් බියවැද්දීමට බලධාරීන් ක්රියා කරමින් සිටින බවද සිය වෘත්තීය සමිති ක්රියා මාර්ගය හුදු වැටුප් වැඩි කිරීම සඳහා ගෙනයන ක්රියාමාර්ගයක් නොව අධ්යාපන නිදහස හා රටේ ප්රජාතන්ත්රවාදය දිනවීම සඳහා වූ දැවැන්ත අරගලයක කොටසක් පමණක් බවත් එම හිමියන් අවධාරණය කර සිටියේය. එබැවින් සුදු වෑන් රථ එවීමෙන් හෝ චරිත ඝාතනය කිරීමෙන් හෝ බියවැද්දීම් තුළින් රටේ ජාතික අවශ්යතාවය වෙනුවෙන් ගෙනයන අරගලය කිසිසේත්ම නැවැත්විය නොහැකි බව පැවසූ උන්වහන්සේ වැඩිදුරටත් පවසා සිටියේ නවකවද සිදුවීම් වැනි කාරනා සම්බන්ධයෙන් ප්රවෘත්ති මවමින්, විශ්වවිද්යාලය අපකීර්තිමත් ආයතන බව හුවා දැක්වීමටත් ඒ හරහා අධ්යාපණ පෞද්ගලීකරණ ක්රියාවලිය තීව්ර කිරීමටත් බවය. ඊට එරෙහිව තමන් වහන්සේ ඇතුළු විශවවිද්යල ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනය විසින් අඛණ්ඩව අරගල කරනබවත් පැවසූහ.
මෙහිදී විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනය සභාපති නිර්මාල් රංජිත් දේවසිරි සමහතාද මාධ්ය හමුව ඇමතූ අතර එම සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සාමාජිකයින් 15 දෙනෙකු පමණ එයට සහභාගීවී සිටිහය.
FUTA head complains to police
The Island, June 21, 2012, 10:22 pm
President of Federation of University Teachers Associations (FUTA) Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri yesterday lodged a complaint with the Maharagama police that he was under threat.
Dr. Devasiri told the police that two unidentified persons had visited his house in Pannipitiya on Wednesday while he and other family members were away and inquired from a neighbour about him and his daughter’s daily routine.
The FUTA chief said that on being asked why they were making such inquiries, the strangers had told the neighbour that his (Dr. Devasiri’s) daughter had applied for a job in the Defence Ministry.(DE)
A remedy worse than the malady
The Island, Editorial June 21, 2012, 8:02 pm
Galle District UPFA MP Nishantha Muthuhettigama, who underwent psychiatric tests in compliance with a court order a few years ago, suggested that sanity tests be conducted on all politicians. The government should have taken his suggestion seriously and contracted a psychiatrist to examine at least its ministers and assess whether they are sane enough to carry out their duties and responsibilities. Its failure to do so has made people risk their sanity!
National universities are in an unholy mess. Non-academics have been on a strike for nearly three weeks. Dons are likely to follow suit unless the government meets their demands without further delay. The Higher Education Ministry carries on regardless. It is conducting leadership training programmes for prospective university entrants and reality shows for undergraduates while universities remain crippled.
Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake has unveiled a grandiose plan to build our universities to the level of their prestigious counterparts in the developed world. The government wants to turn Sri Lanka into the knowledge hub of Asia. Surprisingly, they want to attain these lofty goals without making a serious effort to solve the problems of university teachers, non-academics and undergrads so as to ensure the smooth functioning of universities.
It is ironical that Minister Dissanayake, who took upon himself the task of crushing a politically motivated student movement blamed for disrupting universities, has failed to be different. Meddlesome and aggressive, he stands accused of undue interference and arbitrary action that has provoked academics and students alike. His latest battle is with the University of the Visual and Performing Arts (UVPA).
Minister Dissanayake has drawn heavy flak for his decision to scrap the UVPA aptitude test to sift prospective entrants. A well-known senior don, Prof. Sarath Chandrajeewa, in his article on this page today presents an eloquent argument for retaining that test.
One of the demands that the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) has put forth is that teachers be consulted when vital decisions on universities are taken. It is natural that the UVPA teachers have taken umbrage over Minister Dissanayake's decision to abolish the aptitude test arbitrarily on the grounds that there has been a spate of complaints of malpractices.
One cannot but agree with the academics that they, as stakeholders, should have a right to be consulted on such a crucial matter. The minister should have had the alleged irregularities probed and action taken against the culprits without scrapping the aptitude test, as Prof. Chandrajeewa rightly argues.
University dons are far from perfect. Some of them are even corrupt and abuse their privileged positions just like politicians. There are allegations of examination malpractices and favourites of some lecturers being given higher grades than the deserving. So, Minister Dissanayake may have received complaints from students about malpractices in the aptitude test as he claims. But, the abolition of the test is not the answer.
Prof. Chandrajeewa says Dean of the Creative Art Faculty of the Wollongong University, Australia, who was appointed to look into issues related to the aptitude test following its suspension way back in 1998, assessed it as essential for strengthening and developing art education and making it more productive. This being the expert opinion, the minister should have desisted from abolishing the test.
We are at one with Minister Dissanayake on the need to rid universities of inhuman ragging and disruptive elements, but he must stop meddling in matters that are best left to university teachers and playing politics with higher education. The abolition of the UVPA aptitude test has all the trappings of an ill-conceived political decision that needs to be reversed. His remedy is far worse than the malady!
Scrapping aptitude test: A wrong decision University of the Visual and Performing Arts
The Island, June 21, 2012, 7:51 pm
By Prof. Sarath Chandrajeewa|
Faculty of Visual Arts
University of the Visual and Performing Arts
Faculty of Visual Arts
University of the Visual and Performing Arts
A few weeks back, the Minister for Higher Education made a public declaration regarding the Aptitude Test, which is held to select students for the University of the Visual and Performing Arts. He said that the above practical examination would not be held hereafter, and that the criteria for entrance would be three passes including an A, for an aesthetic subject at the GCE Advanced Level Examination.
An Aptitude Test is an internationally accepted criterion used in selecting students for universities offering distinct courses like Painting, Sculpture, Music, Dance, Drama, Theatrical Arts and Architecture etc; to evaluate the creative capacity of the applicant. This methodology has been a regular feature for a long time in our university as well as our earlier institutes. The history of higher education pertaining to Visual Arts in this country goes back to 1893. The Drawing and Painting Course which was held at the Maradana Technical College progressively developed into the Faculty of Visual Arts at the contemporary University of Visual and Performing Arts. In 1952, J.D.A. Perera, the eminent painter, who was also the principal of the Government College of Arts, became a pioneer by introducing Performing Arts, Dance and Music to the existing subjects of painting, sculpture and craft to tertiary level education in this country. The Faculties of Dance and Music at our present university is the result of the development of these two subjects. Accordingly, the history of visual arts in tertiary level education in this country spans for 119 years while performing arts spans for 60 years. Throughout this long history, students for these subject streams have been selected through the means of Aptitude Tests. 21st century international universities conducting visual and performing art courses have developed their level of education by advancing these aptitude tests to a higher standard.
The University of the Visual and Performing Arts is the only university in Sri Lanka to offer courses in visual and performing arts. It is wrong to compare it to other universities.
There are similarly unique universities differentiated according to their subject streams. Among such universities, the University of Moratuwa has a special identity. Our university produces artists and artisans. So, the authority to select the most suitable students according to these disciplines should be held by the particular university. Gaining an A Pass for an aesthetic subject at the Advanced Level examination alone is not sufficient for this purpose. Particulars of the subject matter that are not taken into consideration at the GCE Advanced Level should be looked into at this stage. As an example, an applicant’s capacity for creativity, his skill in using visual space for his 2D creations and his cultural specialty can be read by his drawings and painting compositions. In music, the applicant’s sensitivity to singing and the playing of an instrument, high and low pitches as well as personality when performing are important to us. Likewise, the distinguished body formation in dance, rhythmic peaks in movements, and again the personality in performing should be observed by the university in direct contact with the applicant. These details are not taken into account at the Advanced Level examination. On the other hand, marks at the Advanced Level examination is given on the basis of 50% for the practical paper and 50% for the art history paper. In this regard, a student with a low skill in practical knowledge could also get an ‘A Pass’ by writing a good theory paper.
There are approximately 5,000 applicants, qualified in their GCE Advanced Level, waiting to gain admission to the University of the Visual and Performing Arts every year. However, taking into consideration the available facilities and space at the university as well as the job market, only a little more than 500 can be accommodated. Because of this reason, it is imperative to select a skilled, practical group with a higher capacity for creativity. More than 100,000 students per year pass their GCE Advanced Levels in this country. From this amount, fewer than 25,000 students are selected for universities. What we do is to select the most suitable student. Regrettably, based on petitions we have been informed by a circular to stop these aptitude tests without having any academic discussion or a proper investigation.
Practice elsewhere
In similar universities in other countries designated for Visual and Performing Arts, an applicant must prove his sensitivity and creativity towards the chosen subjects in the field of Architecture as well. A mere ‘A pass’ at university entrance examinations is not considered a qualification in those universities. The competition is at the admission/aptitude test or at the interview. The aptitude test, personal portfolio or a performance in front of an examination board to judge their capabilities is mandatory in this regard. The Delhi College of Art in India, LaSalle College of Art in Singapore, Tokyo University of Fine Arts & Music in Japan, Central Academy of Fine Arts-Beijing-China, Silpakon University-Bangkok-Thailand, University of Wollongong-Creative Arts-Australia, The University of Arts-London, Academy of Arts University-San Francisco, California, Surikov-Moscow serve as examples.
Removing us from this system is a wrong decision. Subsequently, our universities in the future will produce artistes who can only speak about art but without practical ability. International universities imparting visual and performing art education, pay much attention to these guidelines to maintain the standards of these practical oriented degrees and to uphold their reputations as renowned universities. To list two brief examples, the Royal College of Art in London, accepts only four students per year worldwide for their course in Bronze casting at the Faculty of Fine arts. Likewise, at the State Academy of Art Institute in Moscow, the intake is only nine students per year worldwide. These limitations are based on many factors.
The present Minister of Higher Education S. B. Dissanayake, held a one-day seminar at the BMICH under the theme ‘Beyond the Horizon’ soon after he took up his appointment. At this seminar it was stressed that the standard of Sri Lankan universities should be on par with international universities. However, through the autocratic decision that has been taken regarding our university, the standard of recognition for our disciplines has been lowered. These decisions are not compatible with the 21st century vision of Visual and Performing Arts education.
Disregard for procedures
Decisions on examination methods, cut off marks, preparing guidelines etc. are taken by the University Senate based on the recommendations of the Faculty Board. These recommendations are arrived at after several academic discussions, debates and in-depth study of facts. This responsibility is carried out in keeping with the University Act. The decision to do away with the aptitude test has been taken without any such discussions with the Faculty Board of the University. The methodology of legalising these foolhardy decisions is also dangerous. Lecturers are highly frustrated over this decision. An incident that happened during the last year can be cited here as an example.
A circular dated 2011.08.25 and No. UGC/AD/1 was sent to us from the University Grants Commission, under the heading "University Admissions Academic Year 2010-2011 (Extra Intake). It reads:
"This refers to the discussion your university had with the Minister of the Higher Education regarding petitions forwarded by the students in connection with the practical test which was held by your university.
As agreed during those discussions, it has been decided to bring down the pass mark of the practical test to 40% from 50% .... According to this an additional 183 students have been successful in gaining admission to courses being held at your university for the academic year 2010/2011…."
By bringing down the pass mark from 50% to 40%, it can be decided whether we are going beyond the horizon or being limited to this island. What actually happened was that the Vice Chancellor, the three Deans of the Faculties and only the Heads of Departments of the Faculty of Visual Arts were summoned urgently for a discussion with the Minister. The Minister came into the meeting saying, "We have to bring down the pass mark for the practical examination. There were petitions from students against this examination. This has to be stopped." This meeting was neither open for discussion, nor was the minister patient enough to listen to those present. The whole meeting lasted for about 15 minutes. The Heads of the Department were against lowering the pass mark and also against terminating the practical test. Nevertheless last year, lowering the pass mark to 40% was legalised by a circular and accordingly, the extra number of students gained admission to the university. Because of this additional intake we now face many difficulties regarding infrastructural facilities.
Again, from this year the methodology of selecting students from an aptitude test has been terminated without any academic discussion. So much for transparency and academic freedom! It is rumoured that the government has taken this decision as some of the applicants who failed at this aptitude test have political connections and therefore a decision has been taken to lower the marks and terminate the aptitude test.
Insulting lecturers
According to the Minister of Higher Education, the Aptitude Test is tainted with corruption. Lecturers admit students who are on good terms with them, according to him. The Ministry claims to have received many petitions on such alleged malpractices.
This is an insult to the lecturers of our University. If the minister’s claims are true then they should be investigated and punitive action taken against the culprits after an impartial inquiry. It is a common practice in our country for applicants to write petitions when they fail a test. Even in 1998, this aptitude test was suspended by the University Grants Commission. Following objections by the lecturers, the Dean of the Creative Art Faculty of the Wollongong University, Australia, Prof. Sharon Bell was appointed to look into this matter as a one-member committee. Her recommendation at that time was also that the aptitude test was essential to strengthen and develop art education and to make it more productive. I wish to gratefully mention Professor Carlo Fonseka, who supported this decision in his capacity as a member of the University Grants Commission at that time. Accordingly, the test was restored. There are ways and means of conducting this examination free from malpractices. We have experience and the methodology to do so. Even now, the examination boards for these aptitude tests comprise, apart from the permanent lecturers of the faculties of Visual Art, Dance and Music, one visiting expert on the subject, a member of the University Grants Commission, Heads of department and Deans of Faculties. It is illegal for lecturers who are conducting private classes to serve on examination boards. A written declaration is also obtained to this effect from these lecturers. The proper procedure is to find methods to conduct the examinations with complete transparency. Scrapping the aptitude test is not the answer.
The writer is a renowned sculptor. He is former Director of the Institute of Aesthetic Studies. He was involved in a campaign which led to the restoration of the aptitude test after its earlier suspension.
(2001 – 2002)
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
FUTA President Intimidated and Threatened
20/06/2012, uteachers.sl,
We have learnt from the FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri that a group of people identifying themselves to be attached to the Ministry of Defense have inquired about Dr. Dewasiri and his family from his neighbors.
The FUTA is taking necessary legal action to ensure Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri and his family's safety.
Updated 6:00PM..
Dr. Nirmal Dewasiri has lodged a complaint with this regard at the Maharagama police and the FUTA has written to the Ministry of Defense and the IGP requesting that immediate steps be take to ensure his and his family's safety. Further to this the AFTU-CU has also requested the above authorities to ensure their safety.
We have learnt from the FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri that a group of people identifying themselves to be attached to the Ministry of Defense have inquired about Dr. Dewasiri and his family from his neighbors.
The FUTA is taking necessary legal action to ensure Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Dewasiri and his family's safety.
Updated 6:00PM..
Dr. Nirmal Dewasiri has lodged a complaint with this regard at the Maharagama police and the FUTA has written to the Ministry of Defense and the IGP requesting that immediate steps be take to ensure his and his family's safety. Further to this the AFTU-CU has also requested the above authorities to ensure their safety.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Autonomy of Sri Lankan Universities and forthcoming Trade Union Action - What is our Role?
A talk by, Dr. Deepika Udagama, 21st Thursday 2012 at 10:30AM at the Open University.
Download the googledoc notice.
Download the googledoc notice.
ලංකාවේ සරසවි අර්බුධයට පිළියම් එතෙර විද්වතුන් කියති
Gossip9.com, 19/06/2012
වර්තමානයේ ශ්රී ලංකාවේ විශ්ව විද්යාල වල පැන නැගී ඇති අර්බුදකාරී තත්වය අඩු කර ගැනීම සඳහා ගතයුතු පිළියම් ගැන ඇමරිකාවේ ෆ්ලොරිඩා විශ්ව විද්යාලයේ ශ්රී ලංකික සම්භවයක් ඇති ආචාර්යවරියක් විසින් අදහස් දක්වා තිබේ.
මෙම යෝජනා ආචාර්යවරිය විසින් උසස් අධ්යාපන ඇමැතිවරයාටද යොමු කොට තිබේ.
එම යෝජනාවලිය පහතින් බලන්න
1) ශ්රී ලංකාවේ සරසවි වලට බඳවාගන්නා සිසුන් සංඛ්යාව අඩු කොට සංඛ්යාත්මක අගයට වඩා ගුණාත්මකභාවයට මුල් තැනක් දීම
2) දැනට රැකියා අවස්ථා අඩු සහ එලදායිතාව අඩු ශාස්ත්ර පීඨ වලට ගන්නා සිසුන් 60 % දක්වා අඩු කිරීම
3) රැකියා අවස්ථා අඩු සහ ගුණාත්මකභාවයෙන් හීන උපාධි පාඨමාලා අවලංගු කිරීම
4) යල් පැනගිය සිද්ධාන්ත සහ විෂයමාලා අඩංගු උපාධි පාඨමාලා නවීකරණය
5) න්යායාත්මක දැනුම සමග ප්රායෝගික දැනුම සිසුන්ට ලබාදීමට පියවර ගැනීම
6) ශ්රී ලංකික විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ගුණාත්මකභාවය ආකල්පමය වර්ධනය සඳහා සංවර්ධිත විශ්ව විද්යාලවල සේවය කොට ඇති අත්දැකීම් සහිත ආචාර්යවරුන් සහ පරිපාලකයන් බඳවා ගැනීම
7) ශ්රී ලංකික විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ඉගෙනුම ලබන සිසු සිසුවියන්ට අන්තර්ජාතිකව පිළිගත් විශ්ව විද්යාලවල ස්වභාව පිළිබඳව පරිචයක් ලබා දීම සඳහා කෙටි කාලින සිසු හුවමාරු වැඩසටහන් පැවැත්වීම
8) නවක වදය තුරන් කිරීම සඳහා දැඩි පියවර ගැනීම සහ නවක වදය කෙරෙහි Zero Tolerance ප්රතිපතියක් අනුගමනය කිරීම
9) නවක වදය නැවැත්වීමට අසමත්වන විශ්ව විද්යාල පරිපාලකයන් ඉවත් කොට නිපුණ පරිපාලකයන් පත් කිරීම
10) උපාධිය අවසන් කිරීමෙන් පසු ආණ්ඩුවෙන් රැකියාවක් දෙනතුරු බලාගෙන සිටීම වැනි පසුගාමී ආකල්ප වලින් සරසවි සිසුවා මුදවා රාජ්ය මෙන්ම පුද්ගලික අංශයේ රැකියා සඳහා තරඟකාරීත්වයක් ඇති කොට රැකියාවන් සඳහා නිසි පුහුණුව ආකල්පමය දියුණුව ඇති කිරීම
11) තරඟකාරීත්වය මගින් රාජ්ය විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ගුණාත්මකභාවය ඉහල නැග්වීම සඳහා නිසි ප්රමිතියකින් යුතුව පුද්ගලික විශ්ව විද්යාල ඇති කිරීම
12) දේශීය විශ්ව විද්යාලවල විනය හා සංස්කෘතිය ඉහල මට්ටමකට ගෙන ඒම සහ ඉන් පසු විදේශීය සිසුන් මුදල් අයකරගැනීමේ පදනම් මත බඳවාගැනීම. එමගින් විශ්ව විද්යාල වලට අදායම් ඇතිකරගැනීම
- දර්ශිනි විමලසුරිය
වර්තමානයේ ශ්රී ලංකාවේ විශ්ව විද්යාල වල පැන නැගී ඇති අර්බුදකාරී තත්වය අඩු කර ගැනීම සඳහා ගතයුතු පිළියම් ගැන ඇමරිකාවේ ෆ්ලොරිඩා විශ්ව විද්යාලයේ ශ්රී ලංකික සම්භවයක් ඇති ආචාර්යවරියක් විසින් අදහස් දක්වා තිබේ.
මෙම යෝජනා ආචාර්යවරිය විසින් උසස් අධ්යාපන ඇමැතිවරයාටද යොමු කොට තිබේ.
එම යෝජනාවලිය පහතින් බලන්න
1) ශ්රී ලංකාවේ සරසවි වලට බඳවාගන්නා සිසුන් සංඛ්යාව අඩු කොට සංඛ්යාත්මක අගයට වඩා ගුණාත්මකභාවයට මුල් තැනක් දීම
2) දැනට රැකියා අවස්ථා අඩු සහ එලදායිතාව අඩු ශාස්ත්ර පීඨ වලට ගන්නා සිසුන් 60 % දක්වා අඩු කිරීම
3) රැකියා අවස්ථා අඩු සහ ගුණාත්මකභාවයෙන් හීන උපාධි පාඨමාලා අවලංගු කිරීම
4) යල් පැනගිය සිද්ධාන්ත සහ විෂයමාලා අඩංගු උපාධි පාඨමාලා නවීකරණය
5) න්යායාත්මක දැනුම සමග ප්රායෝගික දැනුම සිසුන්ට ලබාදීමට පියවර ගැනීම
6) ශ්රී ලංකික විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ගුණාත්මකභාවය ආකල්පමය වර්ධනය සඳහා සංවර්ධිත විශ්ව විද්යාලවල සේවය කොට ඇති අත්දැකීම් සහිත ආචාර්යවරුන් සහ පරිපාලකයන් බඳවා ගැනීම
7) ශ්රී ලංකික විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ඉගෙනුම ලබන සිසු සිසුවියන්ට අන්තර්ජාතිකව පිළිගත් විශ්ව විද්යාලවල ස්වභාව පිළිබඳව පරිචයක් ලබා දීම සඳහා කෙටි කාලින සිසු හුවමාරු වැඩසටහන් පැවැත්වීම
8) නවක වදය තුරන් කිරීම සඳහා දැඩි පියවර ගැනීම සහ නවක වදය කෙරෙහි Zero Tolerance ප්රතිපතියක් අනුගමනය කිරීම
9) නවක වදය නැවැත්වීමට අසමත්වන විශ්ව විද්යාල පරිපාලකයන් ඉවත් කොට නිපුණ පරිපාලකයන් පත් කිරීම
10) උපාධිය අවසන් කිරීමෙන් පසු ආණ්ඩුවෙන් රැකියාවක් දෙනතුරු බලාගෙන සිටීම වැනි පසුගාමී ආකල්ප වලින් සරසවි සිසුවා මුදවා රාජ්ය මෙන්ම පුද්ගලික අංශයේ රැකියා සඳහා තරඟකාරීත්වයක් ඇති කොට රැකියාවන් සඳහා නිසි පුහුණුව ආකල්පමය දියුණුව ඇති කිරීම
11) තරඟකාරීත්වය මගින් රාජ්ය විශ්ව විද්යාල වල ගුණාත්මකභාවය ඉහල නැග්වීම සඳහා නිසි ප්රමිතියකින් යුතුව පුද්ගලික විශ්ව විද්යාල ඇති කිරීම
12) දේශීය විශ්ව විද්යාලවල විනය හා සංස්කෘතිය ඉහල මට්ටමකට ගෙන ඒම සහ ඉන් පසු විදේශීය සිසුන් මුදල් අයකරගැනීමේ පදනම් මත බඳවාගැනීම. එමගින් විශ්ව විද්යාල වලට අදායම් ඇතිකරගැනීම
- දර්ශිනි විමලසුරිය
Monday, June 18, 2012
The Academic Spring continues!
The Island, June 17, 2012, 7:51 pm
-.jpg)
By Camena Guneratne and Harini Amarasuriya
Open University of Sri Lanka
Open University of Sri Lanka
Almost one year ago, we wrote an article suggesting that there were signals from the academic community that it was waking up from a long slumber. We wrote about the fact that the Federation of University Teachers Association (FUTA) was moving away from, primarily a battle for salaries, to addressing a range of issues affecting not just higher education, but education in general.
We felt inspired to write another piece after participating in the FUTA march and rally that marked the academics’ token strike on the 26th of April, 2012. After almost one year, FUTA called upon academics from all the national universities to come together for a protest march starting from the University of Colombo to the Public Library where several speakers addressed the gathering. The proceedings were chaired by Prof. H Sriyananda, a much respected, former FUTA President. What was significant about this rally was that of the many demands put forward by FUTA, explaining the reasons for the strike, the primary focus was not on salaries but on other pressing issues faced by state universities and the national education system. The slogan for the day was, ‘Let’s Protect State Universities’ and one of the main demands was for the government to allocate 6% of the GDP for education. Other demands included a more consultative and transparent policy making process and halting the politicization and micro-management of universities by the Higher Education Minister in violation of the Universities Act. Academics also registered their protests against the suppression of student activism and the instigation of intra-student violence through the Ministry’s open support of certain student factions.
The letter sent by the General Secretary of FUTA to President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Minister of Higher Education
S. B. Dissanayake giving notification of the token strike was in a sense historic in that perhaps for the first time in the history of FUTA’s trade union struggles, it sent a strong message to the government, that the academic community is no longer confining itself to the issue of university teachers’ salaries and other benefits, but is now taking on the many issues and challenges faced by the higher education sector and that it is holding the government to account on these matters.
S. B. Dissanayake giving notification of the token strike was in a sense historic in that perhaps for the first time in the history of FUTA’s trade union struggles, it sent a strong message to the government, that the academic community is no longer confining itself to the issue of university teachers’ salaries and other benefits, but is now taking on the many issues and challenges faced by the higher education sector and that it is holding the government to account on these matters.
Given that salary issues were not the main focus of the march and the rally (and also considering the inclement weather at the time), the turnout was particularly impressive. Almost 800 academics from all parts of the country converged on Colombo that day. Their enthusiasm and energy were palpable and the concerns of academics were eloquently expressed by the stream of speakers at the meeting.
Success
Part of the reason for the success of the token strike on that day could be attributed to the slow and incremental steps FUTA has been taking over the past several months with regard to keeping its membership awake. When the trade union action was called off last year, there was a feeling of shock and even betrayal. Many within the academic community were not ready to call the strike off and were unhappy at the decision. But it is clear that the mobilisation of academics that took place during last years’ trade union action has not diminished and has now been channelled into wider national issues.
The activism of the academic community gained a renewed impetus as a result of the government’s attempt to pass an ill conceived law relating ostensibly to the establishment of non state universities. This Bill was earlier titled the Qualification Framework, Quality Assurance and Accreditation of Higher Educational Institutions Act, and then, in a later version, re-named the Higher Education (Non-State) Act. Notwithstanding its name it is not limited to establishing a (very questionable) legal framework for setting up non-state universities. While the current Universities Act clearly excludes any political interference in the functioning of universities and limits the role of the Minister in their academic and administrative affairs, the proposed law reverses this position. Under the guise of ensuring quality control of universities, it gives the Minister total control over all academic matters in state universities to the extent of permitting him/her to terminate or suspend academic programmes.
UGC sidlined
The draft law sidelines the University Grants Commission, which is currently the apex body overseeing the functioning of State universities, including quality control, and takes away the autonomy of university Faculty Boards and Senates to decide on matters relating to instruction, education, research and examinations in universities. Most amazingly, a ‘secrecy’ clause in the draft law requires all persons involved in the process of quality assurance of universities to sign a declaration of secrecy in respect of any matter which may come to their knowledge in the exercise of their functions. In effect, the law, if enacted would give the Minister the power to terminate university academic programmes without giving any reasons and with no accountability for his/her actions. This Bill was, in fact, drafted in secrecy and to date its origins are unknown. It would probably have been rushed through Parliament if academics had not got wind of it. The swift reaction by FUTA which voiced its strong protests against the Bill has, for the time being, resulted in it being put on hold.
Non-State universities
Academics’ concerns are that the establishment of non-State universities is in effect a strategy of the government to abdicate responsibility for university education in Sri Lanka and transfer this sphere totally to the private sector. The draft law was one such attempt. However, over the years the capacity of universities in this country to function effectively and to provide a quality education to students has been systematically eroded, partly by political interference in university matters, but mainly by the withdrawal of funds for education.
A presentation by Prof. Amal Kumarage of the University of Moratuwa at the public meeting demonstrated very clearly the extent to which successive governments had sidelined education and higher education over a period of time. He quoted a World Bank Report of 2011 titled Transforming School Education in Sri Lanka which states, "Public expenditures on education in Sri Lanka are modest when compared to middle income countries and other comparable nations. Education expenditure as a percentage of GDP is 1.9 percent and as a proportion of the government budget is 7.3 percent. This is the smallest share of public investment in education among a cluster of countries that share common features with Sri Lanka. Public investment in education in Sri Lanka falls below the level of East Asian countries such as South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore; Latin American countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Columbia and Cost Rica; and of the other South Asian nations such as India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal. It is also well below the share of investment for middle income countries as a whole. In fact, advanced middle income countries normally invest about 4.6 percent of national income in education, which is more than double the share of national income devoted to education by Sri Lanka."
UNESCO statistics
According to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics even sub-Saharan Africa spends close to 4.5% on education and it further states that "By far the lowest level of public spending is found in Central Asia and in East Asia and the Pacific – both of which report only 2.8% of GDP." Sri Lanka with an annual expenditure of 1.9% of GDP on education does not even come close to the lowest. Of this amount, the proportion that has been allocated for university education has been steadily decreasing. In 2005, it was 0.50% and this has decreased to a mere 0.27% in 2010. Universities are accused of not being able to cater to the increasing demand for higher education; with such woefully inadequate investment in university education how can we accommodate larger numbers, let alone improve the quality of higher education?
University academics are now campaigning for greater investment in education and the slogan "6% of GDP for education" has become a central theme in discussions. This is not a random figure plucked out of the air; it is a UNESCO recognised benchmark on what a country should invest in education. There is now far more discussion in Sri Lanka regarding this allocation and this is due to academics taking up this issue as a primary concern. Faculty Boards and Senates in universities have also slowly started taking up matters such as these with more energy, making it clear to university administrators that they cannot ride roughshod over established procedures.
Such bodies exist for the purpose of debate and consultation on all matters relating to higher education and there are signs that they are now becoming forums of intense debate on a range of issues. Academics are beginning to assert their rights and obligations to actively participate in the decision making process.
A related matter of concern for academics is the erosion of university autonomy and academic independence in recent years. Academics themselves have contributed to this erosion by remaining ignorant of proper procedures and not only allowing procedures to be bypassed but by actively by passing these themselves. For instance, the University Grants Commission (UGC) remains the central body that is responsible for universities and academics. This is very clear in the Universities Act. Although, this Act gives the Minister of Higher Education a role, it is an extremely limited one and the Minister has no say in academic matters. It is clear that over the years, these boundaries have been seriously violated. The ‘leadership training’ given to university entrants without consultation with universities is a case in point. The recent concessions provided to CIMA to operate within universities is another instance where Senates and Faculty Boards were bypassed when making decisions that have implications for academic programmes of universities. It has now become the practice for some academics to deal directly with the Minister and the Ministry, bypassing the university bodies and also the UGC. Of course, the UGC has not helped by actively ceding its role to the Minister and the Ministry, but academics need to insist that the UGC fulfils its mandate. Issues that should be dealt with at university level by Faculty Boards and Senates, are now being decided upon by the Minister. The gradual erosion of established systems and procedures through ceding too much authority to the political leadership is a serious problem in Sri Lanka. We must recognise our own complicity in this process and be aware of its dangers.
Finally, its actions over the past several months have put FUTA and university academics in the public eye. As many speakers on the 26th of April noted, in a way, this is a historic moment for FUTA and for university academics. It is coming forward as a strong voice not just on behalf of itself but on behalf of the broader public interests. This means that it has raised expectations not just among its own membership but among the public as well. When the last trade union action was called off, the public saw it as an admission of defeat by FUTA.
FUTA has decided to resort to trade union action again in the near future. This time around, the stakes are even higher: there are a few signs that the government may be prepared to give into FUTA demands on salary and other welfare issues of academics. The tone with which the Ministry is dealing with the academic community has also changed. There are no longer attacks on the academic community by the Minister of Higher Education like during the last trade union action. There was no doubt that the crudity of those attacks also helped to mobilise the academic community. What does this then mean at this juncture of the battle? Will FUTA and its membership decide not to persist with the broader agenda if its salary demands are met? If that happens, the academic community’s legitimacy and relevance in the eyes of the wider community will be seriously eroded. During the last year or so, the FUTA leadership and the academic community have worked hard to make themselves relevant after a period of long hibernation. This would be wasted if the current momentum is not sustained. Despite the superficial easing off of the cold war, this government has not in any way shown a serious interest in addressing the broader issues raised by academics regarding the problems in the state university system and education in general. It is important that we remind ourselves that this time around, we are not fighting only for ourselves but for the future of public higher education in Sri Lanka.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
FUTA to take TU action
Ceylon Today, Date:2012-06-14 15:41:00
By Aisha Nazim
University lecturers will launch aggressive trade union action from 4 July, for a number of unresolved issues in the university sector, asserted the Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA).
Addressing a media briefing, FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri said the FUTA has warned the Higher Education Ministry and the University Grants Commission (UGC) that the lecturers would agitate if the demands they put forward to the government are not met.
The academics’ demands were that the Higher Education Ministry should consult the lecturers before making any reforms in the university system, that the academics should receive better salaries and benefits, and for private universities to be abolished. In addition, the FUTA also demanded that at least 6% of the GDP should be allocated for the education sector.
“We withheld trade union action last year based on an agreement with the government, in which President Rajapaksa himself promised to look into our issues. However, it’s nearly one year now, and the agreement has been violated as the government has made no effort to fulfill their promises to us,” said Dr. Devasiri.
The universities are in chaos, with the non-academic community on strike and the students also agitating against the lack of resources and against student suppression, he said, urging the government to seriously consider the appeals of the university community.
By Aisha Nazim
University lecturers will launch aggressive trade union action from 4 July, for a number of unresolved issues in the university sector, asserted the Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA).
Addressing a media briefing, FUTA president Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri said the FUTA has warned the Higher Education Ministry and the University Grants Commission (UGC) that the lecturers would agitate if the demands they put forward to the government are not met.
The academics’ demands were that the Higher Education Ministry should consult the lecturers before making any reforms in the university system, that the academics should receive better salaries and benefits, and for private universities to be abolished. In addition, the FUTA also demanded that at least 6% of the GDP should be allocated for the education sector.
“We withheld trade union action last year based on an agreement with the government, in which President Rajapaksa himself promised to look into our issues. However, it’s nearly one year now, and the agreement has been violated as the government has made no effort to fulfill their promises to us,” said Dr. Devasiri.
The universities are in chaos, with the non-academic community on strike and the students also agitating against the lack of resources and against student suppression, he said, urging the government to seriously consider the appeals of the university community.
Meet demands now or face strike action, says FUTA
Sunday Times, 17/06/2012
Higher Education in crisis
12,000 non academic staff still out on strike
By S. Gunasekara
Academic staff of state universities will join the ongoing strike by non-academic staff from July 4, unless the Government agreed to meet demands put forward by them, Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) President Nirmal Dewasiri has announced.
Addressing a news conference in Colombo on Friday, Dr. Dewasiri said the academics’ strike would be in support of their demand for a 20 per cent pay hike and a government undertaking to safeguard the free-education system.
He charged that the government was reluctant to support education in general and university education in particular. “In 2005 the government’s expenditure on education was 3.4% of the GDP, while in 2012 it had been reduced to a miserable 1.9%. In 2005, the government spent 0.52% of the GDP on the universities. It has declined to 0.27% in 2012,” he said.
FUTA’s Peradeniya University Branch General Secretary Terrance Madhujith warned that if the strike by the academic staff was allowed to continue, not only state universities but education in general too would be affected.
He added there would be no “new intake to the universities in October and there would be no undertaking of any school matters such as the setting of papers for the ‘A’ level exams, nor will there be any marking of papers” he warned.
Referring to the ongoing strike of non-academic university staff –numbering 12,000 workers- which commenced at the beginning of the month he said it had critically affected the day-to-day functioning of all sate-run universities. It had also led to the cancellation of daily schedules including weekend classes.
A case in point he said was the abrupt cancellation of weekend classes at the Colombo University without adequate notice being given to students. He added the decision to launch strike action came in the aftermath of failed talks between the Inter University Trade Union Federation and the Secretary to the Ministry of Higher Education Dr. Sunil Jayanthe Navaratne on June 5.
The issue in dispute was the failure of authorities to settle salary anomalies which had existed over the past several years. Dr. Madhujith said facilities such as sanitation, garbage disposal, hostel services were a few of the services provided by the non-academics which had been brought to a standstill following the strike.
As a result large numbers of students staying at university hostels had no alternative but to return to their homes.President of the Inter-University Student Union, Sanjeewa Bandara said if the strike continued it would affect the academic timetable for the year. This action would cause the semester to be extended and delays in holding of exams he added.
Higher Education in crisis
12,000 non academic staff still out on strike
By S. Gunasekara
Academic staff of state universities will join the ongoing strike by non-academic staff from July 4, unless the Government agreed to meet demands put forward by them, Federation of University Teachers’ Association (FUTA) President Nirmal Dewasiri has announced.
Addressing a news conference in Colombo on Friday, Dr. Dewasiri said the academics’ strike would be in support of their demand for a 20 per cent pay hike and a government undertaking to safeguard the free-education system.
He charged that the government was reluctant to support education in general and university education in particular. “In 2005 the government’s expenditure on education was 3.4% of the GDP, while in 2012 it had been reduced to a miserable 1.9%. In 2005, the government spent 0.52% of the GDP on the universities. It has declined to 0.27% in 2012,” he said.
FUTA’s Peradeniya University Branch General Secretary Terrance Madhujith warned that if the strike by the academic staff was allowed to continue, not only state universities but education in general too would be affected.
He added there would be no “new intake to the universities in October and there would be no undertaking of any school matters such as the setting of papers for the ‘A’ level exams, nor will there be any marking of papers” he warned.
Referring to the ongoing strike of non-academic university staff –numbering 12,000 workers- which commenced at the beginning of the month he said it had critically affected the day-to-day functioning of all sate-run universities. It had also led to the cancellation of daily schedules including weekend classes.
A case in point he said was the abrupt cancellation of weekend classes at the Colombo University without adequate notice being given to students. He added the decision to launch strike action came in the aftermath of failed talks between the Inter University Trade Union Federation and the Secretary to the Ministry of Higher Education Dr. Sunil Jayanthe Navaratne on June 5.
The issue in dispute was the failure of authorities to settle salary anomalies which had existed over the past several years. Dr. Madhujith said facilities such as sanitation, garbage disposal, hostel services were a few of the services provided by the non-academics which had been brought to a standstill following the strike.
As a result large numbers of students staying at university hostels had no alternative but to return to their homes.President of the Inter-University Student Union, Sanjeewa Bandara said if the strike continued it would affect the academic timetable for the year. This action would cause the semester to be extended and delays in holding of exams he added.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
FUTA Demands 2012
The summary on the FUTA trade union action initiated on 15th March 2011, its suspension on 21st July 2011, its revival on 26th the April 2012 and the basis for its actions is detailed in the following FUTA document titled ``Federation of University Teachers' Associations’Continuous Strike of 2012 July - Demands''
Download Google Doc document.
Download Google Doc document.
අනධ්යයන වර්ජනය ගැන අද තීරණාත්මක සාකච්ඡාවක්
www.divaina.com, 16/06/2012, නිලන්ත මදුරාවල
වැඩ වර්ජනයේ යෙදී සිටින විශ්වවිද්යාල වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුව සමග මුදල් අමාත්යාංශ හා වැටුප් හා සේවක සංඛ්යා කොමිෂන් සභා නිලධාරීන් අද (16 වැනිදා) තීරණාත්මක සාකච්ඡාවක් පැවැත්වීමට නියමිතය.
වැටුප් විෂමතා ඉවත් කිරීමට අදාළ සියලුම පියවර ගෙන ඇතැයි උසස් අධ්යාපන අමාත්යාංශ ලේකම් ආචාර්ය සුනිල් ජයන්ත නවරත්න මහතා ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවට ඊයේ (15 වැනිදා) දැනුම් දුන්නේය. ඒ පිළිබඳ සාකච්ඡා කිරීම සඳහා පැමිණෙන ලෙසද ලේකම්වරයා කමිටුවෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේය.
ගැටලුව සම්බන්ධයෙන් සාකච්ඡා කිරීම සඳහා මුදල් අමාත්යාංශය සහ වැටුප් හා සේවක සංඛ්යා කොමිෂන් සභාවේ නිලධාරීන් සම්බන්ධ කළ හැකි බව ලේකම්වරයා දන්වා සිටියේ යෑයි වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවේ සම සභාපති ආර්. එච්. චන්ද්රපාල මහතා zදිවයිනZට පැවැසීය. පවතින ගැටලුව විස¹ ගැනීම සඳහා ඕනෑම අවස්ථාවක සාකච්ඡාවට සූදානම් යෑයි ද හෙතෙම කීවේය.
වැඩ වර්ජනයේ යෙදී සිටින විශ්වවිද්යාල වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුව සමග මුදල් අමාත්යාංශ හා වැටුප් හා සේවක සංඛ්යා කොමිෂන් සභා නිලධාරීන් අද (16 වැනිදා) තීරණාත්මක සාකච්ඡාවක් පැවැත්වීමට නියමිතය.
වැටුප් විෂමතා ඉවත් කිරීමට අදාළ සියලුම පියවර ගෙන ඇතැයි උසස් අධ්යාපන අමාත්යාංශ ලේකම් ආචාර්ය සුනිල් ජයන්ත නවරත්න මහතා ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවට ඊයේ (15 වැනිදා) දැනුම් දුන්නේය. ඒ පිළිබඳ සාකච්ඡා කිරීම සඳහා පැමිණෙන ලෙසද ලේකම්වරයා කමිටුවෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේය.
ගැටලුව සම්බන්ධයෙන් සාකච්ඡා කිරීම සඳහා මුදල් අමාත්යාංශය සහ වැටුප් හා සේවක සංඛ්යා කොමිෂන් සභාවේ නිලධාරීන් සම්බන්ධ කළ හැකි බව ලේකම්වරයා දන්වා සිටියේ යෑයි වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවේ සම සභාපති ආර්. එච්. චන්ද්රපාල මහතා zදිවයිනZට පැවැසීය. පවතින ගැටලුව විස¹ ගැනීම සඳහා ඕනෑම අවස්ථාවක සාකච්ඡාවට සූදානම් යෑයි ද හෙතෙම කීවේය.
Friday, June 15, 2012
රාජ්ය විශ්වවිද්යාලවලට ආණ්ඩුවෙන් කුඩම්මාගේ සැලකිලි - සරසවි ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සම්මේලනයේ සභාපති
www.divaina.com, 15/06/2012
නිලන්ත මදුරාවල
ආණ්ඩුව අද රාජ්ය විශ්වවිද්යාල පද්ධතියට දක්වන්නේ කුඩම්මාගේ සැලකිල්ලක් යෑයි විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සභාපති ආචාර්ය නිර්මාල් රංජිත් දේවසිරි මහතා පැවසීය. එලෙස අඩු සැලකිල්ලක් දැක්වීම පිටුපස උපාධි කඩ ආරම්භ කිරීම වැනි වෙනත් න්යාය පත්රයන් තිබිය හැකි යෑයි ද ඒ මහතා සඳහන් කළේය.
සභාපතිවරයා මේ බව ප්රකාශ කළේ ලබන මස 4 වැනිදා සිට ආරම්භ කිරීමට නියමිත අඛණ්ඩ වැඩවර්ජනය සම්බන්ධයෙන් කරුණු දැක්වීම සඳහා කොළඹ ජාතික පුස්තකාල හා ප්රලේඛන සේවා මණ්ඩලයේ ඊයේ (14 වැනිදා) පැවැති මාධ්ය හමුවේදීය.
රාජ්ය විශ්වවිද්යාල පද්ධතිය මේ වන විට පාලනය කළ නොහැකි මට්ටමකට පත්ව ඇතැයි ද පාලකයන් විශ්වවිද්යාලවල පවතින අර්බුදය ගැන සොයා නොබැලීම ඊට හේතුව යෑයි ද කී දේවසිරි මහතා මෙම තත්ත්වය යටතේ විශ්වවිද්යාල දැඩි අර්බුදයකට ලක්වීම නොවැළැක්විය හැකි යෑයි ද සඳහන් කළේය.
අධ්යාපනය සඳහා දළ ජාතික නිෂ්පාදනයෙන් වැය කරන ප්රමාණය සියයට හය දක්වා වැඩි කිරීම, විශ්වවිද්යාල දේශපාලන බලපෑම්වලින් තොරව තීන්දු ගත හැකි ස්ථාන බවට පත් කිරීම හා මීට සිව් වසරකට පෙර එකඟ වූ වැටුප් වර්ධකයන් ලබාදීම යන ප්රධාන ඉල්ලීම් මුල්කර ගනිමින් වර්ජනය ක්රියාත්මක කරන බව ද, මෙය හුදෙක් වැටුප් පමණක් ඉල්ලා කරන වෘත්තීය ක්රියාමාර්ගයක් නොවන බව ද ඒ මහතා පැවසීය.
ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සාමාජිකයෝ රැසක් මෙම මාධ්ය හමුවට එක්වූහ.
නිලන්ත මදුරාවල
ආණ්ඩුව අද රාජ්ය විශ්වවිද්යාල පද්ධතියට දක්වන්නේ කුඩම්මාගේ සැලකිල්ලක් යෑයි විශ්වවිද්යාල ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සභාපති ආචාර්ය නිර්මාල් රංජිත් දේවසිරි මහතා පැවසීය. එලෙස අඩු සැලකිල්ලක් දැක්වීම පිටුපස උපාධි කඩ ආරම්භ කිරීම වැනි වෙනත් න්යාය පත්රයන් තිබිය හැකි යෑයි ද ඒ මහතා සඳහන් කළේය.
සභාපතිවරයා මේ බව ප්රකාශ කළේ ලබන මස 4 වැනිදා සිට ආරම්භ කිරීමට නියමිත අඛණ්ඩ වැඩවර්ජනය සම්බන්ධයෙන් කරුණු දැක්වීම සඳහා කොළඹ ජාතික පුස්තකාල හා ප්රලේඛන සේවා මණ්ඩලයේ ඊයේ (14 වැනිදා) පැවැති මාධ්ය හමුවේදීය.
රාජ්ය විශ්වවිද්යාල පද්ධතිය මේ වන විට පාලනය කළ නොහැකි මට්ටමකට පත්ව ඇතැයි ද පාලකයන් විශ්වවිද්යාලවල පවතින අර්බුදය ගැන සොයා නොබැලීම ඊට හේතුව යෑයි ද කී දේවසිරි මහතා මෙම තත්ත්වය යටතේ විශ්වවිද්යාල දැඩි අර්බුදයකට ලක්වීම නොවැළැක්විය හැකි යෑයි ද සඳහන් කළේය.
අධ්යාපනය සඳහා දළ ජාතික නිෂ්පාදනයෙන් වැය කරන ප්රමාණය සියයට හය දක්වා වැඩි කිරීම, විශ්වවිද්යාල දේශපාලන බලපෑම්වලින් තොරව තීන්දු ගත හැකි ස්ථාන බවට පත් කිරීම හා මීට සිව් වසරකට පෙර එකඟ වූ වැටුප් වර්ධකයන් ලබාදීම යන ප්රධාන ඉල්ලීම් මුල්කර ගනිමින් වර්ජනය ක්රියාත්මක කරන බව ද, මෙය හුදෙක් වැටුප් පමණක් ඉල්ලා කරන වෘත්තීය ක්රියාමාර්ගයක් නොවන බව ද ඒ මහතා පැවසීය.
ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සමිති සම්මේලනයේ සාමාජිකයෝ රැසක් මෙම මාධ්ය හමුවට එක්වූහ.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
FUTA Declares a continuous strike to be launched on 4th July 2012
Download the the FUTA media statements issued on 14/06/2012 from googledocs:
English Version
Sinhala Version
Tamil Version
Download Google Doc Sinhala Version
Download the Google Doc Tamil Version
අනධ්යයන සේවකයෝ ඒකාබද්ධ වෘත්තීය සටනකට සූදානම්
www.divaina.com, 14/06/2012නිලන්ත මදුරාවල
වැටුප් විෂමතා ඉවත් කිරීම තවදුරටත් ප්රමාද කරන්නේ නම් රාජ්ය සේවාවේ සෙසු වෘත්තීය සමිති සමඟ ඒකාබද්ධ ක්රියාමාර්ග ආරම්භ කිරීමට අන්තර් විශ්වවිද්යාල වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුව තීරණය කර ඇත.
අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල ආරම්භ කර ඇති වැඩ වර්ජනයට රාජ්ය සේවා වෘත්තීය සමිති මහා සම්මේලනය දැනටම සහය පළ කර තිබේ.
සෞඛ්ය, තැපැල්, දුම්රිය, අධ්යාපන, මුද්රණාල, ධීවර, රක්ෂණ හා ටෙලිකොම් යන ක්ෂේත්රයන්හි වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධව පිහිටුවා තිබෙන රාජ්ය සේවා වෘත්තීය සමිති සම්මේලනය ප්රකාශ කරන්නේ අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල වැඩ වර්ජනය සාකච්ඡා මාර්ගයෙන් වහා විසඳිය යුතු බවත් එසේ නොවන්නේ නම් ඒකාබද්ධ වෘත්තීය ක්රියාමාර්ගවලට යොමු වන බවත්ය.
මීට අමතරව විශ්වවිද්යාල අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල ද සිය වර්ජනයට එක්කර ගැනීම සඳහා සාකච්ඡා කරන බව වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවේ සම සභාපති ආර්. එම්. චන්ද්රපාල මහතා "දිවයින" ට ඊයේ (13 වැනිදා) පැවසීය. එමෙන්ම තවත් වෘත්තීය සමිති රැසක් සමග මේ වන විට සාකච්ඡා ආරම්භ කර තිබෙන බවද හෙතෙම සඳහන් කළේය.
කුමන තත්ත්වයන් යටතේ වුවද තවමත් විශ්වවිද්යාලයන්හි ස්වෙච්ඡා සේවාවලින් අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩලය ඉවත් වී නොමැති බව ද චන්ද්රපාල මහතා කීවේය.
වැටුප් විෂමතා ඉවත් කිරීම තවදුරටත් ප්රමාද කරන්නේ නම් රාජ්ය සේවාවේ සෙසු වෘත්තීය සමිති සමඟ ඒකාබද්ධ ක්රියාමාර්ග ආරම්භ කිරීමට අන්තර් විශ්වවිද්යාල වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුව තීරණය කර ඇත.
අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල ආරම්භ කර ඇති වැඩ වර්ජනයට රාජ්ය සේවා වෘත්තීය සමිති මහා සම්මේලනය දැනටම සහය පළ කර තිබේ.
සෞඛ්ය, තැපැල්, දුම්රිය, අධ්යාපන, මුද්රණාල, ධීවර, රක්ෂණ හා ටෙලිකොම් යන ක්ෂේත්රයන්හි වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධව පිහිටුවා තිබෙන රාජ්ය සේවා වෘත්තීය සමිති සම්මේලනය ප්රකාශ කරන්නේ අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල වැඩ වර්ජනය සාකච්ඡා මාර්ගයෙන් වහා විසඳිය යුතු බවත් එසේ නොවන්නේ නම් ඒකාබද්ධ වෘත්තීය ක්රියාමාර්ගවලට යොමු වන බවත්ය.
මීට අමතරව විශ්වවිද්යාල අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩල ද සිය වර්ජනයට එක්කර ගැනීම සඳහා සාකච්ඡා කරන බව වෘත්තීය සමිති ඒකාබද්ධ කමිටුවේ සම සභාපති ආර්. එම්. චන්ද්රපාල මහතා "දිවයින" ට ඊයේ (13 වැනිදා) පැවසීය. එමෙන්ම තවත් වෘත්තීය සමිති රැසක් සමග මේ වන විට සාකච්ඡා ආරම්භ කර තිබෙන බවද හෙතෙම සඳහන් කළේය.
කුමන තත්ත්වයන් යටතේ වුවද තවමත් විශ්වවිද්යාලයන්හි ස්වෙච්ඡා සේවාවලින් අනධ්යයන කාර්ය මණ්ඩලය ඉවත් වී නොමැති බව ද චන්ද්රපාල මහතා කීවේය.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)