As an interested follower of developments in higher education, I take exception to the public statement carried by one of the newspapers on Friday May 27, about the proposed amendments to the Higher Education Act.
The statement was released by the Vice Chancellors’ Committee, presumably by the Chairman of the Committee, President of Divine Word University, Reverend Jan Czuba. Father Jan is member of Commission for Higher Education, representing the higher education sector including universities.
The advertisement carried information about alleged jostling of the processes and procedures adopted in giving and receiving information in connection with the review of the Act. Dr William Tagis, the Director General of the Office of Higher Education, was the focus of the Vice Chancellors Committee’s criticisms.
However, the public ought to know that Director General of OHE is simply implementing Government Directives, following from the recent progress made in national development agenda like the PNG Vision 2050 and the PNG DSP 2030 and the MTDP 2015. Subsidiary laws, conventions and higher education plans have mandatory duties to align to the higher national and patriotic callings. Following the launch of PNG’s strategic plans, the Commission for Higher Education, in partnership with the OHE and heads of institutions of higher education, including universities, have met severally in order to chart new directions for this sector. Many confident professionals in the sector are working smartly in varied programs of universities corporate system to address government’s plans and objectives. Unfortunately, the Vice Chancellors are sadly operating on their own orbits, in narrow windows.
The committee that claims to represent the universities’ top hierarchy has become old-fashioned and recalcitrant because theirs have always been mischievous and calculating in their responses to government directives and at various times interventions to bring about national institutional reforms and good governance to bear on the universities policies and practices, they have resisted copiously, including taking injunctions against State ministers.
Some university heads have not been opened and transparent in their administration and finances, nor have they allowed freedom of speech, including staff unions to have a voice in managing resources, including improved terms and conditions. Yet, the same club members have seen fit to openly criticize government officials who are working to modernize and manage the sector.
It has been established that members of the Vice Chancellors Committee, led by the Chairman of the Committee, did have an audience with the Commission for Higher Education at an ordinary session of the Commission early this year.
There was a dialogue, the first in the series to talk about the proposed review of the Higher Education Act. Incidentally, the Committee of Vice Chancellors does not necessarily represent the entire sector of the institutions of higher education.
Educator and Mentor, NCD
source: Post Courier – More light on Act review