Beyond policy silos towards a unified

qualification framework for Sri Lanka

The HND accountancy drama a few days back is a manifestation indeed of

education policy making at its silo worst

- Pic by Shehan Gunasekara-Wednesday, 4 November

2015The Higher National Diploma or HND in Accountancy
problem is a storm in a teacup made into a national drama by
incompetency all around. Protesting HND students had their
usual free education slogans, but all they wanted was a
reinstating of Public Administration Ministry Circular 46/1990
which considered HNDs as equivalent to a B.Com. degree for

recruitment and promotion purposes in the public sector.

The previous Government tried to bring the HND qualifications offered by
the Sri Lanka Institute for Advanced Technical Education (SLIATE) within its
mandated mission. SLIATE was created in 1995 to foster advanced technical
education through the awarding of diplomas and higher diplomas. For some
reason, historical perhaps, SLIATE drags on its HND programs for three to
four years of fulltime study when the international practice is the awarding
of an HND after two years.
Rolling back the HND is no longer politically viable. If the future is in an
inflation of qualifications, we might as well do it properly. In that regard, it is
well and good that the Government is looking at a national qualification
framework as the basis. The present Sri Lanka Qualifications Framework
(SLQF) is a misnomer. It is a qualification framework created by academics
for academics. It is not even a good Higher Education Qualification
Framework (HEQF) as I elaborate later.
Sri Lanka is education silo capital
Sri Lanka has a uniquely rigid and compartmentalised policymaking
structure in comparisons to its Commonwealth or other neighbours. We
have separate ministries for school education, university education and
vocational education and training, with little communication among the
three. In effect, a silo structure that prevents coherent and effective policy
making is in place here.
In contrast, the education sectors in other countries in the commonwealth,
such as Australia, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and UK,
are led by a single ministry for education and supported by departments,
authorities or commissions dedicated to different sectors and/or different
functions.
This structural difference is manifested in the gap between promise of freeof-charge education and its delivery in the education sector in Sri Lanka.
The HND accountancy drama a few days back is a manifestation indeed of
education policy making at its silo worst.
Higher education silo
The z-score admission system has created a watertight system that rigidly
controls admission from out of the silo to in. But, leakages from in-to-out
are becoming apparent. In Humanities and Social Science faculties, young
men have voted with their feet. The result is a student body made up of
85% of more women. Monks make up a highly visible part of the fraction of
males in those faculties. No shows are becoming common in science
faculties, and, even after registering, lectures are not taken seriously. Since
higher education is a free of charge, whatever the quality, there will always
be takers.
The silo problem is the reason for lack of success in higher education
reforms, I believe. Large amounts of money have been spent on within-silo

reforms when the need is for winds of change from outside. Quality
assurance processes where weak evaluated weak and the development of a
qualification framework which does not sync with international norms or
local development are cases in point.
Worse still, this higher education silo affects matters outside. For example,
academics from the university lead institutes of education and chair
important curricular committees etc. in school education, propagating
insularity and mediocrity from top to bottom in the education sector in Sri
Lanka. It is a pity that Government continues to look to mouldy higher
education silos for resources without looking outside, locally, or even
internationally from among qualified expatriates.
Alternative higher education silo
All HND programs offered by the Government are under the purview of
SLIATE which is identified as the agency responsible for the alternative
higher education sector. In a rush to create alternate opportunities for those
who cannot be accommodated within the limited capacity of universities,
policymakers have inadvertently created a sub class of students within
higher education. The fact that our universities are rigidly structured with
no room for lateral entry or exit makes the alternative education sector a
silo that traps students and the apparently authentic higher education silo
a silo that excludes.
To add injury to insult, the HND accountancy curriculum at ATIs, for
example, requires 128+ credit hours of work spanning over four years when
a management degree with accounting specialisation can be completed at
a public university with 128 credit hours and the same duration.
Technical and vocational silo
A third silo, in regard to transferability across public sector institutions
includes technical and vocational training institutes under the purview of
Tertiary and vocational Education Commission (TVEC). Although the sector
has achieved much in regard upward mobility and lateral transfers within
the sector thanks to a National Vocational Qualification framework in force
since 2002, there is not much interaction between the TVET sector and the
other two sectors. In fact the so-called SLQF published by the UGC is not
sync with the more established NVQ framework and its numbering system.
The real world
Meanwhile, a private sector led by chartered professional institutes and
private universities is offering flexibility and transferability which
characterises a truly free education. Take the case of accounting education.
According to a LIRNEasia survey, enrolments in the three major accounting
bodies Institute of Chartered Accountant of Sri Lanka (ICASL), Chartered
Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) and Association of Accounting
Technicians of Sri Lanka (AATSL) totalled more than 100,000 students in
2011. AATSL is a particularly noteworthy organisation dedicated to

vocational training but committed to ensuring multiple pathways of

progression, academic or professional progression, for their trainees
through MOUs signed with a multitude of organisations.
A national qualification framework is a mechanism for connecting
segregated systems of qualifications, but, Sri Lanka is yet to develop a truly
national qualification frameworks. The National Vocational Qualifications
(NVQ) framework which was introduced by TVEC in 2002 follows the
Australian and New Zealand frameworks closely. The NVQ reserves level 1-6
for certificates, diplomas and higher diplomas, and Levels 7-10 for degrees
and above.
The qualification framework developed by the Ministry of Higher Education
in 2010 with World Bank assistance in contrast is more concerned with
distinctions between a general degree and an honours degree or an MA and
an MPhil and other university specific concerns. It sets aside levels 5-10 for
degree qualifications and above and limits the range for vocational
qualifications to Level 1-4!
The six levels from Levels 5-10 which deal with the progression from degree
to post-graduate qualification is relevant to less than 10% of a cohort of
about 340,000 or more youth who join the ranks of 19-24 year age group
every year. It is unfortunate that Sri Lanka does not have a national
qualification framework that prioritise the other 90% whose progression
from NVQ levels 1-6 and beyond is critical for human resource development
in the country.
The education market or the job market has no regard for self-imposed silos
found in the public sector. A survey of jobs advertised in the newspapers
carried out by LIRNEasia in 2012 revealed job openings in 40+ sectors from
Accountancy, Architecture, and Aviation to Logistics, to Teaching and
Tourism. Whenever degree level qualifications are sought, equivalent nondegree qualifications too are specified. In some sectors, professional
qualifications with or without experience is preferred over degrees. A
parallel survey of educational opportunities advertised by private sector in
2012 revealed the existence of 600+ education and training programs
offered by 200+ plus institutions.
Unfortunately, our from viewing tertiary education sector from the vantage
point of employers or 340,000 youth who join the demographic group of 1924 year olds every year.
One qualifications authority
Even though our education sector is split across four ministries or more, it is
still possible to establish one single qualifications authority to develop and
enforce standards for qualifications from GEC (O/L) to diplomas, higher
diplomas or professional charters or academic PHDs, within a truly national
qualifications framework. Such a qualifications authority would be
responsible for informing and educating students at all levels about the full
range of educational opportunities public/private,

technical/vocational/professional or academic and facilitating smooth

articulation and transfer from one qualification to another.
The Office for Qualifications in UK is an excellent example. Sharing of
results of graduate tracer studies too could be made mandatory for all
qualification awarding bodies providing market signals to both the awarding
bodies and prospective enrolees.
Many providers
If a strong policy framework is made available through one policymaking
body served by multiple regulatory bodies and one qualifications authority,
provision of education can be taken up by any number of provider
institutions, including private universities and colleges, chartered institutes,
local authorities, provincial authorities, religious bodies and others to
increase opportunities for all concerned. A centralised financial support
system would be an essential component that ensures equity in access to
economically disadvantaged students.
And a BTech solution
A single examination, the GCE (A/L), decides whether one earns a
Bachelors degree free of charge or earns a diploma or a higher diploma
only, and jumps through hoops later to top-up the diploma to a degree. In a
class/caste conscious society, forcing young people into these situations is
a recipe for disaster. We need avenues for progression for the 320,000 or so
youth in each age cohort who are discriminated into a sub class of citizens
in this manner.
Therefore, it is better that all HNDs should be standardised to international
norm of completion within two years, but bring in laws to allow SLIATE to
gradually convert the currently 3.5 to four years-long education programs
to Bachelor of Technology programs. HND students should have the option
of exiting with an HND or continuing on to a BTech. University of Vocational
Technology which is within the Technical and Vocational silo already offers a
BTech, but, the combined time for a HND with Btech to up 6.5 to seven
years!
If HND students want to launch a well-reasoned campaign for a BTech
option after a two-year HND, and they do that without the invisible hand of
the Peratugami Party behind them, God speed, I would say. Financing for
the Bachelor of Technology programs is another topic which we will have to
postpone for later.
Posted by Thavam