The Power of Peace and Unity

US President Barack Obama’s Nov. 10 Speech at the University of Indonesia November 10, 2010

Let me begin with a simple statement: Indonesia is a part of me. I first came to this country when my mother married an Indonesian man named Lolo Soetoro. As a young boy, I was coming to a different world. But the people of Indonesia quickly made me feel at home.
Jakarta looked very different in those days. The city was filled with buildings that were no more than a few stories tall. The Hotel Indonesia was one of the few high-rises, and there was just one brand new shopping center called Sarinah. Becaks outnumbered automobiles in those days, and the highway quickly gave way to unpaved roads and kampungs.
We moved to Menteng Dalam, where we lived in a small house with a mango tree out front. I learned to love Indonesia while flying kites, running along paddy fields, catching dragonflies, and buying satay and bakso from the street vendors. Most of all, I remember the people — the old men and women who welcomed us with smiles, the children who made a foreigner feel like a neighbor, and the teachers who helped me learn about the wider world.
Because Indonesia is made up of thousands of islands, hundreds of languages and people from scores of regions and ethnic groups, my times here helped me appreciate the common humanity of all people. And while my stepfather, like most Indonesians, was raised a Muslim, he firmly believed that all religions were worthy of respect. In this way, he reflected the spirit of religious tolerance that is enshrined in Indonesia’s Constitution, and that remains one of this country’s defining and inspiring characteristics.
I stayed here for four years — a time that helped shape my childhood, a time that saw the birth of my wonderful sister, Maya, and a time that made such an impression on my mother that she kept returning to Indonesia over the next 20 years to live, work and travel — pursuing her passion of promoting opportunity in Indonesia’s villages, particularly for women and girls. For her entire life, my mother held this place and its people close to her heart.
So much has changed in the four decades since I boarded a plane to move back to Hawaii. If you asked me — or any of my schoolmates who knew me back then — I don’t think any of us could have anticipated that I would one day come back to Jakarta as president of the United States. And few could have anticipated the remarkable story of Indonesia over these last four decades.
The Jakarta that I once knew has grown to a teeming city of nearly 10 million, with skyscrapers that dwarf the Hotel Indonesia, and thriving centers of culture and commerce. While my Indonesian friends and I used to run in fields with water buffalo and goats, a new generation of Indonesians is among the most wired in the world — connected through cellphones and social networks. And while Indonesia as a young nation focused inward, a growing Indonesia now plays a key role in the Asia Pacific and the global economy.
This change extends to politics. When my step-father was a boy, he watched his own father and older brother leave home to fight and die in the struggle for Indonesian independence. I’m happy to be here on Heroes Day to honor the memory of so many Indonesians who have sacrificed on behalf of this great country.
When I moved to Jakarta, it was 1967, a time that followed great suffering and conflict in parts of this country. Even though my step-father had served in the Army, the violence and killing during that time of political upheaval was largely unknown to me because it was unspoken by my Indonesian family and friends. In my household, like so many others across Indonesia, it was an invisible presence. Indonesians had their independence, but fear was not far away.
In the years since then, Indonesia has charted its own course through an extraordinary democratic transformation — from the rule of an iron fist to the rule of the people. In recent years, the world has watched with hope and admiration, as Indonesians embraced the peaceful transfer of power and the direct election of leaders. And just as your democracy is symbolized by your elected president and legislature, your democracy is sustained and fortified by its checks and balances: a dynamic civil society, political parties and unions, a vibrant media and engaged citizens who have ensured that in Indonesia there will be no turning back.
But even as this land of my youth has changed in so many ways, those things that I learned to love about Indonesia — that spirit of tolerance that is written into your Constitution, symbolized in your mosques and churches and temples and embodied in your people — still lives on. Bhinneka Tunggal Ika — unity in diversity. This is the foundation of Indonesia’s example to the world, and this is why Indonesia will play such an important role in the 21st century.
So today, I return to Indonesia as a friend, but also as a president who seeks a deep and enduring partnership between our two countries. Because as vast and diverse countries, as neighbors on either side of the Pacific and above all as democracies, the United States and Indonesia are bound together by shared interests and shared values.
Yesterday, President Yudhoyono and I announced a new Comprehensive Partnership between the United States and Indonesia. We are increasing ties between our governments in many different areas, and — just as importantly — we are increasing ties among our people. This is a partnership of equals, grounded in mutual interests and mutual respect.
With the rest of my time today, I’d like to talk about why the story I just told — the story of Indonesia since the days when I lived here — is so important to the United States, and to the world. I will focus on three areas that are closely related, and fundamental to human progress — development, democracy and religion.

Development

First, the friendship between the United States and Indonesia can advance our mutual interest in development.
When I moved to Indonesia, it would have been hard to imagine a future in which the prosperity of families in Chicago and Jakarta would be connected. But our economies are now global, and Indonesians have experienced both the promise and perils of globalization — from the shock of the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s to the millions lifted out of poverty. What that means — and what we learned in the recent economic crisis — is that we have a stake in each other’s success.
America has a stake in an Indonesia that is growing, with prosperity that is broadly shared among the Indonesian people — because a rising middle class here means new markets for our goods, as America is a market for yours. And so we are investing more in Indonesia, our exports have grown by nearly 50 percent, and we are opening doors for Americans and Indonesians to do business with one another.
America has a stake in an Indonesia that plays its rightful role in shaping the global economy. Gone are the days when seven or eight countries could come together to determine the direction of global markets. That is why the G-20 is now the center of international economic cooperation, so that emerging economies like Indonesia have a greater voice and bear greater responsibility. And through its leadership of the G-20’s anticorruption group, Indonesia should lead on the world stage and by example in embracing transparency and accountability.
America has a stake in an Indonesia that pursues sustainable development, because the way we grow will determine the quality of our lives and the health of our planet. That is why we are developing clean energy technologies that can power industry and preserve Indonesia’s precious natural resources — and America welcomes your country’s strong leadership in the global effort to combat climate change.
Above all, America has a stake in the success of the Indonesian people. Underneath the headlines of the day, we must build bridges between our peoples, because our future security and prosperity is shared. That is exactly what we are doing — by increased collaboration among our scientists and researchers, and by working together to foster entrepreneurship. And I am especially pleased that we have committed to double the number of American and Indonesian students studying in our respective countries — we want more Indonesian students in our schools, and more American students to come study in this country, so that we can forge new ties that last well into this young century.
These are the issues that really matter in our daily lives. Development, after all, is not simply about growth rates and numbers on a balance sheet. It’s about whether a child can learn the skills they need to make it in a changing world. It’s about whether a good idea is allowed to grow into a business, and not be suffocated by corruption. It’s about whether those forces that have transformed the Jakarta that I once knew —technology and trade and the flow of people and goods — translate into a better life for human beings, a life marked by dignity and opportunity. This kind of development is inseparable from the role of democracy.

Democracy

Today we sometimes hear that democracy stands in the way of economic progress. This is not a new argument. Particularly in times of change and economic uncertainty, some will say that it is easier to take a shortcut to development by trading away the rights of human beings for the power of the state. But that is not what I saw on my trip to India, and that is not what I see in Indonesia. Your achievements demonstrate that democracy and development reinforce one another.
Like any democracy, you have known setbacks along the way. America is no different. Our own constitution spoke of the effort to forge a “more perfect union,” and that is a journey we have traveled ever since, enduring civil war and struggles to extend rights to all our citizens. But it is precisely this effort that has allowed us to become stronger and more prosperous, while also becoming a more just and free society.
Like other countries that emerged from colonial rule in the last century, Indonesia struggled and sacrificed for the right to determine your destiny. That is what Heroes Day is all about — an Indonesia that belongs to Indonesians. But you also ultimately decided that freedom cannot mean replacing the strong hand of a colonizer with a strongman of your own.
Of course, democracy is messy. Not everyone likes the results of every election. You go through ups and downs. But the journey is worthwhile, and it goes beyond casting a ballot. It takes strong institutions to check the concentration of power. It takes open markets that allow individuals to thrive. It takes a free press and an independent justice system to root out abuse and excess, and to insist upon accountability. It takes open society and active citizens to reject inequality and injustice.
These are the forces that will propel Indonesia forward. And it will require a refusal to tolerate the corruption that stands in the way of opportunity, a commitment to transparency that gives every Indonesian a stake in their government, and a belief that the freedom that Indonesians have fought for is what holds this great nation together.
That is the message of the Indonesians who have advanced this democratic story — from those who fought in the Battle of Surabaya 55 years ago today to the students who marched peacefully for democracy in the 1990s, to leaders who have embraced the peaceful transition of power in this young century. Because ultimately, it will be the rights of citizens that will stitch together this remarkable nusantara that stretches from Sabang to Merauke — an insistence that every child born in this country should be treated equally, whether they come from Java or Aceh, Bali or Papua.
That effort extends to the example that Indonesia sets abroad. Indonesia took the initiative to establish the Bali Democracy Forum, an open forum for countries to share their experiences and best practices in fostering democracy. Indonesia has also been at the forefront of pushing for more attention to human rights within Asean The nations of Southeast Asia must have the right to determine their own destiny, and the United States will strongly support that right. But the people of Southeast Asia must have the right to determine their own destiny as well. That is why we condemned elections in Burma that were neither free nor fair. That is why we are supporting your vibrant civil society in working with counterparts across this region. Because there is no reason why respect for human rights should stop at the border of any country.
Hand in hand, that is what development and democracy are about — the notion that certain values are universal. Prosperity without freedom is just another form of poverty. Because there are aspirations that human beings share — the liberty of knowing that your leader is accountable to you, and that you won’t be locked up for disagreeing with them; the opportunity to get an education and to work with dignity; the freedom to practice your faith without fear or restriction.

Religion

Religion is the final topic I want to address today, and — like democracy and development — it is fundamental to the Indonesian story. Like the other Asian nations I am visiting on this trip, Indonesia is steeped in spirituality, a place where people worship God in many different ways. Along with this rich diversity, it is also home to the world’s largest Muslim population, a truth that I came to know as a boy when I heard the call to prayer across Jakarta.
Just as individuals are not defined solely by their faith, Indonesia is defined by more than its Muslim population. But we also know that relations between the United States and Muslim communities have frayed over many years. As president, I have made it a priority to begin to repair these relations. As a part of that effort, I went to Cairo last June, and called for a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one that creates a path for us to move beyond our differences.
I said then, and I will repeat now, that no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust. But I believed then, and I believe today, that we do have a choice. We can choose to be defined by our differences, and give in to a future of suspicion and mistrust. Or we can choose to do the hard work of forging common ground, and commit ourselves to the steady pursuit of progress. And I can promise you: No matter what setbacks may come, the United States is committed to human progress. That is who we are. That is what we have done. That is what we will do.
We know well the issues that have caused tensions for many years, issues that I addressed in Cairo. In the 17 months that have passed we have made some progress, but much more work remains to be done.
Innocent civilians in America, Indonesia and across the world are still targeted by violent extremists. I have made it clear that America is not, and never will be, at war with Islam. Instead, all of us must defeat Al Qaeda and its affiliates, who have no claim to be leaders of any religion — certainly not a great, world religion like Islam. But those who want to build must not cede ground to terrorists who seek to destroy. This is not a task for America alone. Indeed, here in Indonesia, you have made progress in rooting out terrorists and combating violent extremism.
In Afghanistan, we continue to work with a coalition of nations to build the capacity of the Afghan government to secure its future. Our shared interest is in building peace in a war-torn land — a peace that provides no safe-haven for violent extremists, and that provides hope for the Afghan people. Meanwhile, we have made progress on one of our core commitments, our effort to end the war in Iraq. One hundred thousand American troops have left Iraq. Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their security. And we will continue to support Iraq as it forms an inclusive government and we bring all of our troops home.
In the Middle East, we have faced false starts and setbacks, but we have been persistent in our pursuit of peace. Israelis and Palestinians restarted direct talks, but enormous obstacles remain. There should be no illusions that peace and security will come easy. But let there be no doubt. We will spare no effort in working for the outcome that is just, and that is in the interest of all the parties involved: two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
The stakes are high in resolving these issues, and the others I have spoken about today. For our world has grown smaller and while those forces that connect us have unleashed opportunity, they also empower those who seek to derail progress. One bomb in a marketplace can obliterate the bustle of daily commerce. One whispered rumor can obscure the truth, and set off violence between communities that once lived in peace. In an age of rapid change and colliding cultures, what we share as human beings can be lost.
But I believe that the history of both America and Indonesia gives us hope. It’s a story written into our national mottos. E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one. Bhinneka Tunggal Ika — unity in diversity. We are two nations, which have travelled different paths. Yet our nations show that hundreds of millions who hold different beliefs can be united in freedom under one flag. And we are now building on that shared humanity — through the young people who will study in each other’s schools, through the entrepreneurs forging ties that can lead to prosperity, and through our embrace of fundamental democratic values and human aspirations.
Earlier today, I visited the Istiqlal mosque — a place of worship that was still under construction when I lived in Jakarta. I admired its soaring minaret, imposing dome and welcoming space. But its name and history also speak to what makes Indonesia great. Istiqlal means independence, and its construction was in part a testament to the nation’s struggle for freedom. Moreover, this house of worship for many thousands of Muslims was designed by a Christian architect.
Such is Indonesia’s spirit. Such is the message of Indonesia’s inclusive philosophy, Pancasila. Across an archipelago that contains some of God’s most beautiful creations, islands rising above an ocean named for peace, people choose to worship God as they please. Islam flourishes, but so do other faiths. Development is strengthened by an emerging democracy. Ancient traditions endure even as a rising power is on the move.
That is not to say that Indonesia is without imperfections. No country is. But here can be found the ability to bridge divides of race and region and religion — that ability to see yourself in all individuals. As a child of a different race coming from a distant country, I found this spirit in the greeting that I received upon moving here: Selamat Datang. As a Christian visiting a mosque on this visit, I found it in the words of a leader who was asked about my visit and said, “Muslims are also allowed in churches. We are all God’s followers.”
That spark of the divine lies within each of us. We cannot give in to doubt or cynicism or despair. The stories of Indonesia and America tell us that history is on the side of human progress, that unity is more powerful than division, and that the people of this world can live together in peace. May our two nations work together, with faith and determination, to share these truths with all mankind.

The end of the public university in England

October 26, 2010 by globalhighered

Editor’s note: the entry below was kindly provided to us by James Vernon, a professor of history at the University of California, Berkeley. His entry is posted here on the same day a BBC news story suggested that teaching grants “for degree courses in arts, humanities and social sciences at England’s universities are likely to be phased out under government plans.” Our thanks to James Vernon for these informed reflections regarding an historical transition unfolding in England; one with significant implications for those in the UK, Europe, as well many other parts of the world. Kris Olds

I graduated from the University of Manchester in 1987 with no debt. I paid no fees and received a maintenance grant to earn a degree in Politics and Modern History. If my seventeen year old son were to follow in my footsteps he would graduate with debts of at least £50,000 and were he to study in London that could rise to £90,000. In the space of a generation we have witnessed the destruction of the public university.
The Browne Report released on 12 October, and effectively rubber stamped in the savage public sector cuts announced yesterday, was simply the final nail in the coffin. Under the beguiling but misleading title Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education it effectively announced that university degrees are no longer considered a public good but a private investment. Accordingly, it is the individual student, not the public, who will pay its cost. Tuition fees will rise from £3,225 to a minimum of £6,000 rising to a potential ceiling of £12,000. State funding will fall from £3.5bn to just £700m – a total of 80% but a 100% cut in areas like the arts, humanities and social sciences that apparently have no public utility.
The cost of a university education may be charged to the individual student but they will be forced to pay for it through the sort of debt-financing that governments across the world now consider so inappropriate for themselves. The scale of national debt is so ruinous we are told it requires emergency austerity measures (like all state intervention these days couched in the inevitable military metaphor of Osborne’s ‘war of welfare and waste’). Students, meanwhile, will be encouraged to take on loans based upon an imagined future income. They will effectively gamble that the loan will eventually pay-off by enhancing their future job prospects and earning power. It will be a hedge against their future security. What are effectively sub-prime loans are guaranteed by the state. Higher education is now modeled on the types of financial speculation that has helped get us in to this mess.
It is thankfully still just about inconceivable that primary and secondary education could be treated in this way - indeed, Osborne claimed he would be investing more in these areas. There at least it seems education remains something that serves a public and social function. Clearly something magical occurs when one turns eighteen and your education becomes a matter of personal not public gain.
When education becomes a private investment not a public good the principle of universal provision necessarily falls by the way. It used to be a central pillar of the British higher education system that all institutions offered a similar range of degrees at the same price (if not with the same prestige). A degree in biochemistry at Cambridge cost the same as one in cultural studies at Liverpool John Moores. In making students customers of educational services Browne opens up the English and Welsh university sector (Scotland has it own more sanely run system) to the vagaries of student demand. Different universities will compete with each other charging variable rates for different degrees depending on the quality of their service and the branding of their product. Everyone recognizes that Departments and programs be cut, many will be reduced to teaching factories where the link between teaching and research is severed, and some campuses will close altogether or be sold off in pieces.
As so often in Britain when business is the model we are told this is how things are done in America. Indeed, it is. Last week the State University of New York cut its programs in Classics, French, Italian, Russian and Theater. In the last two years the University of California has raised its tuition by 32%, introduced furloughs for its workers that represented an effective 8% pay cut and are now seeking to restructure the pension packages of its employees.
There are however real differences between the American system and the model being developed in Britain. The now ailing public universities in America existed in a diverse sector with privates (ranging from the small liberal arts colleges to the Ivy League campuses with their enormous endowments), community colleges and the rapidly expanding for-profits like the online degree factory the University of Phoenix. Private endowments and federal programs like the Pell grant scheme enable both public and private universities to at least be seen to maintain ‘access’ to a diverse student body. Yet even they seem unable to prevent the fortification of privilege amongst those social and ethnic groups most able to take the loans to gamble on their futures. The rest are likely to be driven in increasing numbers to for-profits who offer a faster, cheaper, denigrated, on-line education.
The lessons to be learnt from the American experience are that fees will continue to rise, unequal access between rich and poor will become structural to the system, and the for-profit sector will grow. Buckingham University, once the only for-profit private in the entire UK, may well become the model. In July, the Minister responsible for higher education, David Willetts, made BPP (now owned by the Apollo Group the parent company of the University of Phoenix, the largest online for-profit in the US) the second for-profit capable of granting degrees in the UK. With Obama’s administration accusing Apollo and co of using public funds and federally guaranteed student loans to leverage more private debt from students the for-profits are turning their attentions to the UK. Encouraged by David Willetts the for-profit sector awaits in the wings hungry to buy up or ‘rescue’ the publics that will surely fail in the years ahead.
Many politicians and university administrators present the Browne report as a reasonable response to the expansion of student numbers at a time of austerity and shrinking public budgets. Quite apart from the falsity of the choice between rising student fees or reduced numbers of students it is an argument that belies the length, depth and scale of the present crisis.
Firstly, it is not unique to England. Across Europe and the Americas students and their teachers have been protesting against the same processes: the public disinvestment of higher education, rising fees and levels of student debt, the expansion of management and administrative systems for measuring efficiency or ‘excellence’ of services, the quest for new fee-paying consumers online or overseas, the casualization of academic labor, the restructuring of pensions. Yet, the destruction of the public university in England is widely seen as a test-case where these processes are unraveling faster and further than anywhere else.
Secondly, the storm has been brewing for decades. There should be no wistful nostalgia for a once pure public university. In the nineteenth century the great ‘redbrick’ provincial universities were founded on the alliance between industry and ivy. In the post-war period a good deal of academic research served a decolonizing state uneasily placed in the cold war arms race as the student protests of the late 1960s recognized. It was hardly news then when in 1970 Edward Thompson railed against the erosion of intellectual life and academic governance by the captains of local industry that ran Warwick University, Ltd. And, of course, despite the faux radicalism of the new universities that enabled the system to expand after the Robbins Report of 1963, universities remained the preserve of a privileged elite charged with running the welfare state with just 457,000 students in 1971 – 14% of the age group.
If the public university had always been a faustian bargain with industry and the state the rules of the game certainly began to change decisively during the 1980s when I was a student. First came the effective freeze on hiring following the Howe budget cuts of 1981. In 1993 when I was appointed to teach at the Department that had taught me it was the first permanent appointment in over a decade. Next came the stripping of the student maintenance grants I had marched unsuccessfully to protect in the mid-1980s. And then there were the infamous administrative systems for auditing the efficient use of public funds at universities by measuring the productivity of academic labor: research outputs by the Research Assessment Exercise from 1989, teaching by the Quality Assurance Agency in 1993 renamed the Teaching Quality Assessment in 1997. One consequence of this, consistent with the merging of the former polytechnic sector in 1992, was the growing incentives on a frequently dwindling and increasingly casualized labor force to admit more students and teach ever larger classes. Inevitably these auditing systems not only greatly increased the amount of time academics spent talking or writing about the research or teaching they would do if they only had the time to do it. It also catalyzed the staggering growth of management personnel.
New Labour only made things worse. Faced with the systematic under-funding of the universities, the expansion of student numbers (funding per student fell 40% from the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s), and the decline in real terms of academic salaries, they answered the call of the last official review of the funding of higher education handed from one government to the other – the Dearing Report. If Dearing enabled the introduction of a £1,000 for tuition (and the final abolition of the maintenance grant in 1999), by 2006 it had increased to a variable rate up to £3,000. The final indignity came with the shift from the RAE measurement of academic’s research productivity – which, in the name of generating ‘output’ had arguably produced a great deal of increasingly specialized and unexciting publications – to a concern with its utility or ‘impact’ under the absurdly named Research Excellence Framework from 2008. Unsurprisingly, as universities now answered to the Department of Business, Skills and Innovation, impact was measured in increasingly narrow and economistic terms.
Before rushing to join the denunciations of our short-sighted and philistine politicians we have to accept that no-one within the English university sector emerges from this process with much dignity. Administrators have grown fat, plumping up their personnel, enlarging their office and buildings, as well as inflating their salaries. Most damagingly they meekly accepted the economistic logics that drove the auditing of productivity and were naive enough to believe that the introduction of fees would supplement, not replace, state funding. They have turned away from the public they are supposed to serve in the quest for new ‘markets’: professional schools, overseas students, and creation of empires with institutions that franchise their degrees.
The Last Professors of the public university have hardly fared better. They have been only too content to learn and internalize the new rules of the game in the name of self-advancement. I was one of the new breed of entrepreneurial academics who had only ever worked in this system. I quickly learnt that research grants came to those who spoke whatever language the research councils were speaking in, that one had to recruit postgraduates to generate income, that quantity not quality of publications was the measure of scholarly productivity. Those who went on research leave or won big grants for research projects were happy to hire replacements and assistants on short-term contracts. At the opposite end others seemed content to become stars, to play musical chairs as institutions competed for prestige through big names with long CVs of publications, and to see their professorial salaries climb into the stratosphere in the name of their new market value.
The past twelve months has seen many wake up from this bad dream. As respected individuals, programs and Departments – all festooned in the baubles of research excellence and prestige indicators – have been cut students and their teachers have mobilized. There have been marches, protests, online petitions, teach-ins and occupations. These struggles have been very local – at Sussex, Middlesex, King’s College, etc – but those involved were in conversation with or at least virtually connected to protests elsewhere in Berlin, Berkeley and Buenos Aires. It has been on these front-lines that the defense of the public university has begun to be articulated. And it has been the targeting of the arts and humanities in the cuts that has made it possible.
The humanities, along with the arts and even the interpretive social sciences, have become the true test of the public value of higher education. As the recession grips market models of utility and efficiency have surely been exposed as a dangerous fallacy so this is a good moment to re-articulate the purpose and role of humanities and social sciences in ways that justify renewed public investment in them. We could have expected more from those like the British Academy or Arts and Humanities Research Board that institutionally represent the humanities in the UK. Instead, they have effectively caught themselves in arguments about economic impact and the capacity to aid national economic recovery that they are doomed to lose (see the Arts and Humanities Research Council’s Leading the World and the British Academy’s The Public Value of the Humanities). We should not be surprised then that the Browne Report recommends the complete withdrawal of public funding for the teaching of the arts, humanities and social sciences in contrast to the STEM subjects that will continue to be supported.
The defense of public universities is intricately tied to arguments that can establish the public value of the humanities. We need to get beyond the hand-wringing of those who believe only philistines require the humanities to be justified just as much as the meek reproduction of the government’s own vocabularies of impact and value. We can and should remind the world that it is our classes that students want to take. Despite a decade of the rhetorical marginalization of our disciplines in the UK as not relevant there are more studying in the arts, humanities and social sciences (1,073,465 in 2008/9) than in the STEM subjects (829,115) and they are growing at a faster rate (a 28% increase since 2001/2 as opposed to 20% increase for STEM). Indeed, in all likelihood, the arts, humanities and socials sciences are cross-subsidizing the more expensive STEM fields that teach fewer students in more resource heavy infrastructures and laboratories.
Why then do we face increased demand from students for the arts, humanities and social sciences? There is no one reason why students take these classes and we do not need a one-size fits all justification of their public value. There are for sure those that rightly view these subject areas as helping them prepare for the world of work without necessarily providing a clear career trajectory in the social field or the knowledge and culture industries. Students recognize that even vocational training can not ensure life-long careers any longer. Instead they require a set of skills – of critical thought and analysis, of reading and digesting materials quickly, of making presentations and convincing arguments across a range of media – that equip them for a flexible labor market in which they may work across multiple sectors.
We need, however, not stop at these instrumental ends. We should be gratified to recognize that students are no less concerned with becoming citizens of the world. They realize that the humanities provide them with not just an education in the issues and problems that face our global society but the forms of analysis that allow us to connect our particular local experiences to sometimes global processes. They also provide the language training necessary for us to understand the perspectives of other cultures. No less importantly, given the democratic deficit and seemingly growing disenchantment with our political system, the humanities teach our students the critical skills they require to become active and valued citizens of our democratic life. Often they teach them that it is possible to think of themselves in new ways, to discover a new identity and to forge around it a politics they share with others that challenges and enriches our democracy.
Finally, the humanities, like the arts and social sciences, offer us the opportunity to think otherwise. In an age in which the financialization of everyday life appears to demand an economic value is attached to everything we need to be reminded that this was not always the case. The humanities speak to different systems of value, different orders of pleasure and enjoyment, that we can all enjoy – of imagination, beauty, laughter and wonder. It is these qualities afterall that make us fully human, that enable us to appreciate what is unique about our own culture as well as what it is we hold in common with the rest of humanity.
A good deal is at stake. We must defend the vision of a publicly funded university able to support classes in subjects that do not generate economic benefits. Economic utility is not the measure of who we are or who we want to become.
James Vernon

Hanya 34 peratus pensyarah PhD di IPTA

Hanya 34 peratus pensyarah PhD di IPTA
Okt 30, 10 5:21pm

Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi (KPT) menyasarkan 75 peratus pensyarah yang berkelulusan doktor falsafah (PhD) mengajar di di setiap 20 Institusi Pengajian Tinggi Awam (IPTA).Timbalan Menterinya, Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah berkata sasaran itu meliputi kepakaran dalam semua bidang pengajian di IPTA.
"Kita harap dengan memiliki ramai pensyarah berkelulusan PhD ia dapat melahirkan lebih ramai pelajar berkeupayaan dalam bidang penyelidikan dan pembangunan (R&D) negara," katanya kepada pemberita selepas merasmikan Majlis Penyampaian Sijil dan Anugerah Bahagian Pendidikan Masyarakat Kemas Parlimen Temerloh di Kampung Pangsenam dekat Temerloh, hari ini.

Beliau berkata setakat ini, pihaknya difahamkan hanya 34 peratus pensyarah di IPTA mempunyai kelulusan berkenaan dan ia masih tidak mencukupi bagi menghasilkan mahasiswa yang baik dan kompetitif."Kita mahu pensyarah yang lebih pandai daripada pelajar dan mempunyai personaliti yang baik bagi menghasilkan IPTA bertaraf dunia," katanya.

Dalam perkembangan berkaitan, beliau berkata pensyarah kanan kini boleh terus dinaikkan pangkat ke jawatan "Turus" tanpa perlu memegang jawatan di bahagian pengurusan.Katanya, sebelum ini mereka (pensyarah kanan) perlu memegang jawatan Naib Canselor terlebih dahulu sebelum dilantik ke jawatan Turus.
Beliau juga berberharap pihak pengurusan universiti kelak menggunakan Bajet 2011 sebaik-baiknya bagi meningkatkan lagi kualiti pengurusan dan melahirkan mahasiswa yang kreatif dan kritis.
"Pada pembentangan Bajet 2011, KPT telah menerima penambahan peruntukan sebanyak 14.5 peratus iaitu sebanyak RM10.2 bilion berbanding RM8.9 bilion bajet tahun 2010."Penambahan bajet itu menunjukkan kerajaan peka terhadap keperluan universiti bagi melahirkan modal insan yang berkualiti dan mampu memenuhi keperluan tenaga kerja mahir dan profesional," kata Saifuddin.--Bernama

Sajak-sajak era dulu

TEBING BARAT – WEST BANK

Dari tebing dikau merintih
lagu sedih bangsa terserpih
itulah daerah merah
darah mengalir di pasir
pejuang di bumi pesisir
menatap pada potret bung yasser
perdamaian israel dan mesir

Itulah riwayat dari pusara
kubur-kubur tidak bertanda
sepanjang sempadan dan tanah usang
di jordan israel syria dan lubnan
tanah gaza haifa ramalah serta jerusalem
palestin itu di mana?

Bangsa yang utuh
ugama yang kukuh
disiksa dari tahun ke tahun
pada tembakan M16
terjaga anak dalam buaian
tangisan malam tidak berbintang
terpahatlah semangat waja
perjuangan turun temurun
kemerdekaan kau kejar mesti
palestin wajib dibebaskan
dari belenggu zionisme

Manan Wan
Julai 1982



MAHASISWA HARI INI

Mahasiswa hari ini
Angkatan yang pudar
Disudukan dan disuapkan
agar mulut mu tidak bersuara
agar ilmu mu teratur rapi
bakal menjadi pak turut sejati

Mahasiswa hari ini
Masa depan yang cerah
Penelaahan sekadar lulus cuma
tapi kau sedar
semangat mu
kewibawaan mu
keislaman mu
nasionalisma mu
lihatlah mendung di langit
bumi pasti kan basah
pengangguran pasti bertambah
tujuh puluh juta dalam pembiakan
tandingan mu merebut sarapan

Mahasiswa hari ini
garis-garis penukar zaman
perindustrian dan perbandaran
itulah kampus mu
mencari nafkah di bumi nyata

Manan Wan
17 Ogos 1984

The Development Set

Excuse me, friends, I must catch my jet
I'm off to join the Development Set;
My bags are packed, and I've had all my shots
I have traveller's checks and pills for the trots!

The Development Set is bright and noble
Our thoughts are deep and our vision global;
Although we move with the better classes
Our thoughts are always with the masses.

In Sheraton Hotels in scattered nations
We damn multi-national corporations;
injustice seems easy to protest
In such seething hotbeds of social rest.

We discuss malnutrition over steaks
And plan hunger talks during coffee breaks.
Whether Asian floods or African drought,
We face each issue with open mouth.

We bring in consultants whose circumlocution
Raises difficulties for every solution --
Thus guaranteeing continued good eating
By showing the need for another meeting.

The language of the Development Set
Stretches the English alphabet;
We use swell words like "epigenetic"
"Micro", "macro" and "logarithmetic"

It pleasures us to be esoteric --
It's so intellectually atmospheric!
And although establishments may be unmoved,
Our vocabularies are much improved.

When the talk gets deep and you're feeling numb,
You can keep your shame to a minimum:
To show that you too are intelligent
Smugly ask, "Is it really development?"

Or say, "That's fine in practice, but don't you see:
It doesn't work out in theory!"
A few may find this incomprehensible,
But most will admire you as deep and sensible.

Development set homes are extremely chic,
Full of carvings, curios, and draped with batik.
-level photographs subtly assure
That your host is at home with the great and the poor.

Enough of these verses - on with the mission!
Our task is as broad as the human condition!
Just pray god the biblical promise is true:
The poor ye shall always have with you.

Ross Cogins
1976

Thursday, January 1, 2009

LIDAH-Edisi Khas 2008: Perutusan Daripada Presiden

Oleh: Wan Abdul Manan Wan Muda (Presiden PKAPUSM)

Warkah 1:
Assalamualaikum dan salam sejahtera kepada warga USM yang budiman,

Bagi pihak PKAPUSM saya ingin mengucapkan ribuan terima kasih kepada para ahli di atas sokongan yang sdra/i berikan sejak setahun yang lalu. Dan sejak setahun yang lalu juga pelbagai peristiwa telah terjadi yang kadang kala di luar dugaan kita. Namun sebagai golongan terpelajar dan komuniti akademik kita harus berfikir dan bertindak selangkah di hadapan, dan hanya dengan cara itu kita akan menjadi relevan dan menjadi peneraju atau peneroka di bidang pengajaran, pembelajaran, penyelidikan dan juga tindak tanduk harian. Universiti dan para akademik kini menghadapi cabaran yang besar untuk membuktikan bahawa universiti pada hari ini bukan sekadar menara gading yang lesu tetapi sebuah pusat kecemerlangan yang bakal memacu kemajuan dalam semua bidang yang merangkumi sains, teknologi, sosial, politik, budaya dan pembinaan bangsa yang belum selesai.

Sejak tahun lepas sehingga Februari 2008 kita telah mengadakan beberapa perbincangan dan perbincangan di kalangan persatuan-persatuan kakitangan akademik dan juga dengan Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi berkaitan isu autonomi universiti, kebebasan akademik, kecemerlangan akademik, penurunan kuasa kepada IPTA, pindaan AUKU, skim perkhidmatan pensyarah dan guru dalam universiti dan pelbagai lagi isu yng mencakupi hal ehwal universiti dan para warganya.

Salah satu kejayaan yang kita capai pada tahun lepas ialah persetujuan Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi mengiktirafkan Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (GERAK) sebagai badan yang mewakili suara kakitangan akademik IPTA dalam urusan rundingan dengan pihak Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi. Kita juga telah berjaya mewujudkan persefahaman untuk mengadakan mesyuarat berkala tiga penjuru, yang pertama antara wakil persatuan kakitangan akademik dengan semua pendaftar IPTA dan KPT yang dipengerusikan oleh Ketua Pengarah JPT, dan satu lagi antara persatuan kakitangan akademik dengan semua naib canselor IPTA yang dipengerusikan oleh Menteri Pendidikan Tinggi. Kedua bentuk mesyuarat tiga penjuru ini diharapkan dapat menyelesaikan banyak masalah secara rundingan yang juga berasaskan perkongsian bijak di antara ketiga-tiga golongan di atas. Namun begitu ini tidak bermakna pihak persatuan kakitangan akademik telah hilang taringnya sebagai pembela golongan akademik dan pentadbir yang tertindas, sekali-kali tidak. Perjuangan kita untuk kebebasan akademik dan hak akademik diteruskan. Malah menerusi forum-forum sedemikian ada kalanya kita dapat mendepankan pandangan dan pendirian kita dengan lebih berkesan dan mendapat timbalbalik segera.

Ketidakpuasan dan rasa tidak berkuasa (powerlessness) akan sentiasa wujud di kalangan warga kita, dan adalah tanggungjawab kita bersama untuk memastikan tidak wujud salahguna kuasa dan suasana yang tidak adil dalam universiti kita. Kita berjuang di peringkat nasional dan juga di peringkat setempat, apabila ramai dari kalangan kita yang berani bersuara dan berani mendedahkan kezaliman dan salah laku maka semakin banyaklah kes-kes sedemikian diketengahkan dan ditonjolkan di peringkat umum untuk dinilai atau dihukum oleh pandangan umum (public opinion). Salah satu tugas utama golongan intelektual yang disarankan oleh Noam Chomsky ialah ” untuk menyuarakan kebenaran dan mendedahkan pembohongan atau kepalsuan (to speak the truth and expose lies.)”, justeru sebagai golongan intelektual dan ilmuwan kita perlu sentiasa berpegang dan mengamalkan kejujuran intektual dan menyuarakan kebenaran dalam apa bentuk sekalipun mengikut kemampuan dan keberanian kita.

Sewaktu saya menulis nukilan ini kita belum lagi tahu siapa yang bakal menjadi MenteriPengajian Tinggi, sebab jika kita mendapat menteri yang tidak mempunyai ketokohan dan kewibawaan untuk memimpin, maka kita akan berdepan dengan banyak masalah nantinya. Namun begitu, keputusan pilihanraya umum ke 12 baru-baru ini telah memberi petanda bahawa golongan muda dan golongan terpelajar lebih berani membuat pilihan dan memberi isyarat bahawa pimpinan baru perlu lebih telus dan mesra rakyat. Oleh itu isu pindaan AUKU bakal menjadi satu isu penting rasanya pada tahun ini. Gejolak politik negara kelihatan menuju ke arah sistem dwi parti, walaupun ramai rakan akademik yang menjadi penganalisis politik di muka tv kebanyakannya masih belum dapat keluar dari kepompong lama mereka.

Pihak USM sekarang telah memulakan penurunan kuasa kepada PTJ masing-masing untuk mengendalikan beberapa kebijakan yang sebelum ini ditentukan oleh pihak pusat. Diharapkan penurunan kuasa ini akan mempercepatkan jentera pentadbiran dan pengurusan dalam universiti. Namun begitu kita harus sentiasa berwaspada supaya tidak berlaku penyelewengan dan salahurus di peringkat PTJ atau kewujudan ”little Napoleans” yang bermaharajalela. Pada masa yang sama pihak Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi telah menurunkan kuasa juga kepada pihak universiti untuk membuat keputusan sendiri dalam beberapa hal yang sebelum ini diputuskan di peringkat KPT. Keadaan yang wujud ini juga adalah sebahagian daripada kejayaan pihak persatuan yang sudah begitu lama memperjuangkan autonomi universiti, walaupun kita belum mencapai autonomi yang diidamkan tapi autonomi yang sedikit ini diharap dapat diperluaskan lagi di masa hadapan.

Warkah 2:

Dalam catatan sebelum ini saya ada menyatakan bahawa kita belum pasti siapa bakal menjadi Menteri Pengajian Tinggi yang baru. Namun, di antara tarikh itu sehingga LIDAH keluaran ini diterbitkan pihak kerajaan telah mengumumkan barisan kabinet baru Malaysia selepas pilihanraya ke 12 baru-baru ini. Menteri Pengajian Tinggi yang baru ialah Dato’ Seri Khaled Nordin, dan pada kesempatan ini pihak PKAPUSM mengucapkan tahniah kepada beliau kerana diberi kepercayaan untuk menerajui sebuah kementerian yang sangat penting ini.

Secara kebetulan pada 18 April 2008 yang lalu, saya, setiausaha PKAPUSM Sdr Ruzita dan Setiausaha Agung GERAK Sdr Abdul Rahman Othman dijemput untuk majlis suaikenal dan dialog dengan Dato’ Seri Khaled Nordin di Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi (KPT), Putrajaya, turut hadir sama adalah wakil persatuan kakitangan akademik IPTA seluruh Malaysia, Timbalan-timbalan Ketua Setiausaha KPT dan pegawai-pegawai Jabatan Pengajian Tinggi (JPT). Saya kira ini adalah permulaan yang baik untuk kita kerana menteri baru ini bersikap agak terbuka dan sedia mendengar pandangan pelbagai pihak serta beliau sendiri menyatakan bahawa beliau sentiasa ingin mendengar pandangan pihak kakitangan dan akan menimbangkannya dengan pandangan naib-naib canselor sebelum sesuatu keputusan dibuat jika ia melibatkan soal kebajikan dan kepentingan kakitangan.Adalah terlalu awal untuk meramal bentuk atau gaya bagaimana tindak tanduk menteri baru ini dalam menangani isu-isu berkaitan pendidikan tinggi negara dan ke arah mana beliau akan menakhodai perjalanan IPTA kita di masa depan? Saya berharap pimpinan baru ini akan lebih berani dan telus untuk melangkah ke depan demi memartabatkan universiti dan keluhuran akademik. Kecemerlangan perlu sentiasa menjadi kayu ukur untuk peningkatan taraf kita sebagai universiti yang dihormati, justeru ia merangkumi pimpinan universiti yang berkaliber, golongan akademik yang menjunjung kejujuran intelektual, menegakkan kebenaran dan mengenepikan penipuan.

Pada sesi dialog dengan menteri itu kami sempat mengadakan beberapa pembentangan, yang paling utama ialah isu skim perkhidmatan pensyarah dan kakitangan lainnya dalam IPTA dan pindaan Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti (AUKU). Sehubungan dengan itu isu pengambilan pensyarah baru yang berkelulusan PhD atau setara kepada gred DS51 bakal diusahakan tidak lama lagi dan menteri telah berjanji tidak akan melengahkan lagi pelaksanaannya. Tetapi sebelum itu golongan yang berada pada gred DS45 dan memiliki PhD juga perlu dinaikkan dahulu ke DS52 secepat mungkin. Isu ini telah diperjuangkan oleh PKAPUSM dan rakan-rakan PKA lain sekian lama, tapi masih belum di implementasikan secara menyeluruh di semua IPTA. Diharapkan hambatan ini akan berakhir dalam masa terdekat.

Edisi Khas LIDAH (Tahun 2008) yang lengkap boleh diperolehi dari pejabat PKAPUSM di Rumah Merah USM.
Posted by Lidah at 5:29 PM
Labels: LIDAH-Edisi Khas 2008


Friday, September 5, 2008

USM as APEX University - PKAPUSM's Reaction
4th September 2008

USM Selected as Apex University – PKAPUSM’s Reaction

The Universiti Sains Malaysia Academic and Administrative Staff Association (PKAPUSM) welcome the move by the Ministry of Higher Education to categorize USM as the Apex University in Malaysia. We congratulate USM and her staff for their continuous effort in proving that they can and will achieve “world-class status” through the Accelerated Program for Excellence (APEX) initiative.

USM is the second oldest university in Malaysia and will commemorate its 4Oth anniversary next year. Having been selected as the Apex University will be a great challenge to USM and it will have to prove its worth and capability to be one of the world’s top universities in the near future. However, without cooperation of all segments of the USM staff and students, it will not be easy for USM to realize its plan of action. Words have to be translated into hard work and academic dynamism.

To be categorized as an Apex University is not like being given a crown, but it is accepting the duty and trust for USM to pursue higher and leading the higher education edge in Malaysia. The people of Malaysia and the world in general will witness what USM is made up of. We are of the opinion that to be a world-class university, the immediate thing to create or achieve is the culture of excellence on campus, it will encompasses the academic culture, research culture and intellectual culture. With respect to creating the culture of excellence which is the prerequisite towards achieving a world-class university, several factors have to be taken seriously.

1. Teaching and Learning – Improvement in the quality of teaching and learning, recruiting more academic staff and expert with the best qualifications. The quality of students also needs to be assessed before admission to the undergraduate and postgraduate programs.

2. Research – Even though the research track record in USM can be proud of, nonetheless, research activities need to be increased and upgraded in all fields with immediate effect. The immediate benefit of research can be presented in the classroom for both postgraduate and undergraduates apart from being disseminated in peer-reviewed journals of discipline concerned or presented in conferences. Research is the engine of economic development, it will contribute expertise, skills, knowledge generation and dissemination. However, the overzealousness for research should not be at the expense of teaching. Ideally, research and teaching should complement each other, and one of the attribute of a world-class university is to be able to strike the right balance between the two.

3. Academic Freedom and University Autonomy – University autonomy normally refers to the independence of universities from the state and all other forces of society, to make decision regarding its internal government, finance, administration, and to establish its policies of education, research, extension work and other related activities. History has shown that those universities which retained their autonomous status have a long tradition of scholarship and at the forefront of research in their own societies.

Autonomy will promote academic freedom and intellectual dynamism that is central to a world-class university. Academic freedom refers to “the freedom of members of the academic community individually or collectively, in the pursuit, development and transmission of knowledge, through research, study, discussion, documentation, production, creation, teaching, lecturing and writing.” Thus, unless academic freedom is given its due place and respect within a university, significant contribution to the quality of the institution as a whole cannot be promoted to an excellent level. In this respect, USM should exercise its university autonomy and academic freedom through greater autonomy and flexibility that was enshrined under the Apex initiative.

4. Academic Leadership – One of the important attribute of a world-class university is self-governance, where internal self-governance by ensuring that the academic community has control over the main academic functions such as admission of students, curriculum, criteria for graduation, selection of new members of the professoriate, and future direction of the institution. A university is neither a government department nor a business agency. A university of excellence will require a democratic leadership to be able to cater to the needs of various disciplines and coordinate them in such a way that the mission of the university will be fulfilled.

Academic leadership is essential to navigate the university to achieve a world-class status. Appointing the right person can lead the institution to the platform of excellence, while promoting the wrong individual can be a journey down the mediocratic path.

PKAPUSM belief that the campus community need to unite their forces to make the Apex initiative a reality. The academic staff will play a major role in realizing the Accelerated Program for Excellence (APEX); however, other groups should not be marginalized. We may need new thinking and new negotiation, particularly in relation to terms of services. Under the Apex scheme the university should be able to attract more academics and researcher with calibre from within and outside Malaysia. However, those people who have given their long service and have been loyal to the university should not be neglected.

A world-class university is not about producing scientists, engineers, doctors and technicians with higher degrees. What we are lacking are thinkers in our universities in particular and our society in general.

Wan Abdul Manan Wan Muda
President
Posted by Lidah at 11:36 PM 0 comments


USM Universiti APEX - Kenyataan PKAPUSM
4 September 2008

USM di pilih Universiti Apex – Pandangan PKAPUSM

Persatuan Kakitangan Akademik dan Pentadbiran Universiti Sains Malaysia (PKAPUSM) menyambut baik pengiktirafan USM sebagai satu-satunya universiti Apex di Malaysia. Kami juga mengucapkan tahniah kepada keluarga USM kerana telah berjaya membuktikan bahawa mereka mempunyai kemampuan untuk melaksanakan Program Pemacuan Untuk Kecemerlangan (APEX).

USM merupakan universiti kedua tertua di Malaysia, dan akan menyambut ulangtahun ke 40 pada tahun hadapan. Namun perlantikan university Apex in merupakan cabaran yang paling besar untuk USM membuktikan keunggulannya sebagai sebuah universiti bertaraf dunia untuk beberapa tahun akan datang. Tanpa gembelengan tenaga semua warga USM, peningkatan ke taraf dunia mungkin tidak semudah yang dirancangkan.

Menerima pengiktirafan Apex bukanlah menerima sebuah mahkota, tetapi merupakan satu kepercayaan dan amanah yang diberikan untuk USM memacukan diri dan pendidikan tinggi di Malaysia ke tahapyang lebih tinggi di mata rakyat dan mata dunia. Untuk mencapai universiti bertaraf dunia kami berpendapat, perkara utama yang perlu diwujudkan ialah budaya kecemerlangan dalam universiti, ia merangkumi budaya akademik, budaya penyelidikan danbudaya intelektual yang lebih terbuka. Dalam hal ini kami ingin menggariskan beberapa ciri yang perlu diberi perhatian serius untuk memacu USM ke persada “world class”.

1. Pengajaran dan pembelajaran - peningkatan dari segi kualiti pengajaran dan pembelajaran dengan meningkatkan tenaga pengajar mahir dan pakar dalam bidang dan berkelulusan terbaik. Kualiti pelajar juga perlu dinilai untuk kemasukan baik diperingkat sarjana muda atau pasca siswazah.

2. Penyelidikan – Walaupun setakat ini bidanag penyelididan di USM bolehlah dibanggakan , tetapi aktiviti penyelidikan perlu ditingkatkan serta merta dalam semua bidang. Penyelidikan berkait rapat dengan pengajian peringkat pasca siswazah dan penambahan bilangan penyelidikan secara langsung akan menambahkan bilangan graduan peringkat sarjana dan kedoktoran serta juga bilangan penerbitan peringkat kebangsaan dan antarabangsa. Namun penumpuan berlebihan terhadap penyelidikan tidak harus membelakangkan tugas pengajaran, secara ideal penyelidikan dan pengajaran saling membantu. Antara sifat yang dimiliki oleh universiti bertaraf dunia ialah kemampuan mereka mencapai keseimbangan antara pengajaran dan penyelidikan.

3. Kebebasan Akademik dan Otonomi Universiti – Otonomi universiti bermaksud kebebasan universiti daripada campurtangan pemerintah atau lain kumpulan dalam negara dalam usaha USM membuat keputusan berkaitan dengan pengurusan dalaman, kewangan, pentadbiran dan menggubalkan dasar pendidikan, penyelidikan, kerja-kerja perkembangan dan aktiviti lain yang berkaitan. Sejarah telah menunjukkan bahawa otonomi universiti merupakan satu ciri utama universiti bertaraf dunia.

Kebebasan akademik menyentuh hak dan tanggungjawab para mahasiswa dan pensyarah dan ia bakal mewarnai pengajaran dan kesarjanaan. Kebebasan akademik merujuk kepada kebebasan ahli komuniti akademik secara individu ataupun kolektif menimba ilmu, mengembangkannya dan menyebarkannya menerusi penyelidikan, pengajian, perbincangan, dokumentasi, pengeluaran, penciptaan, pengajaran, kuliah dan penulisan. Kebebasan akademik adalah prinsip dan panduan kepada golongan akademik dan perlu diperkembangkan serta dipertahankan setiap masa.

Sehingga kebebasan akademik mendapat tempat yang sewajarnya dalam universiti, sumbangan yang bermakns ke arah memacukan mutu institusi secara menyeluruh ke peringkat kecemerlangan tidak mungkin tercapai. Dalam hal ini USM perlu meneguhkan kebebasan akademik dan otonomi universiti menerusi keluwesan yang merupakan ciri-ciri yang dijanjikan kepada universiti Apex.

4. Kepimpinan Akademik – Salah satu ciri utama universiti bertaraf dunia ialah urus tadbir sendiri (self-governance), yang bermaksud komuniti akademik mempunyai kuasa mengawal fungsi akademik yang utama seperti kemasukan pelajar, kurikulum, criteria untuk pengijazahan, pemilihan pensyarah baru atau kakitangan baru, dan hala tuju msa depan universiti. Perlu ditegaskan bahawa universiti bukanlah sebuah jabatan kerajaan, dan juga bukan sebuah agensi perniagaan.Universiti yang cemerlang memerlukan kepimpinan yang demokratik serta mampu memenuhi dan menampung keperluan pelbagai disiplin dengan baik. Kepimpinan akademik memainkan peranan yang sangat penting untuk menentukan sama ada universiti bakal melonjak ke atas atau menerjun ke bawah pada skala penarafan peringkat dunia.

PKAPUSM berpendapat semua golongan dalam kampus perlu menghayati taraf Apex yang ingin dilaksanakan. Golongan akademik merupakan golongan yang utama untuk memastikan sama ada Program Pemacuan Untuk Kecemerlangan ini menjadi realiti. Justeru beberapa perubahan perlu difikirkan, selain dari apa yang di senaraikan di atas, perkara-perkara berkaitan sekim perkhidmatan kakitangan juga perlu dikaji. Di bawah penurunan kuasa atau otonomi universiti, USM seharusnya mampu menarik para akademik dan penyelidik yang berkaliber dari seluruh dunia, suasana keantarabangsaan merupakan salah satu ciri kecemerlangan akademik. Kakitangan yang sedia ada dan telah terbukti khidmat dan jasa mereka kepada USM juga perlu diberi pengiktirafan.

Bila kita berbicara tentang universiti bertaraf dunia ia bukan saja soal menghasil seramai mungkin para saintis, teknologis, jurutera, doktor atau golongan teknokrat, tetapi kita juga perlu melahirkan para pemikir. Universiti kita sangat kekurangan para pemikir, apa tah lagi dalam masyarakat umum.

Wan Abdul Manan Wan Muda
Presiden PKAPUSM
Posted by Lidah at 11:20 PM

Access Malaysia Today at http://mt.m2day.org/

Access Malaysia Today at http://mt.m2day.org/