Our universities: Testimony of an insider

Our universities: Testimony of an insider Mahmudul H Sumon Resuming teaching after my doctoral degree, I soon found myself in a new situation. One of the formidable aspects of this newness was, of course, the big class sizes I was having to deal with. In the academic department where I have worked in the past many years, I have usually taught a class size of around 25-40 students. When I first began teaching in 2001-2, only a few old departments would tackle large class sizes above 50 or 60 students. However, around 2010-11, I often found myself in classes of fifty-plus students. Apart from the more practical question of how am I going to reach out to this large number of students with the limited time and resources allotted, there were also some broader policy and pedagogical questions in mind: How is a decision reached on the number of students to be admitted at the university? Is there any change in demand for the subject I teach at the university? If not, then why was the intake number increased? How does it benefit the students or the discipline? It was a time when a discussion was going around about change in all tiers of our education system. Despite this, popular opinion on education and its “quality” was not very favorable in Bangladesh. I also spotted the need for certain kinds of guidance amongst the students in ways not previously required. In this backdrop, I conducted a study amongst students that employed qualitative and quantitative methods to address some of the key research questions. Amongst the small group of 152 students participating in the survey, male students were slightly in the majority, 52.98%, compared to 47.02% female counterparts. At the time of the study, the percentage of student's regular social media and internet use was limited. Data on the use of social media showed Facebook to top the list with 31% of students using the app, followed by others such as WhatsApp 11.60%, Viber 9.40%, Messenger 21.00%, and Others 3.70%. Data also showed a relatively low percentage point for email users, around 23 % at the time of the study, something that drastically changed since the COVID-19 year as a lot of teaching activities moved online and the university was forced to provide a dedicated email ID to students. The survey revealed that the university's central library was not necessarily a popular go-to place for students. Space constraints have been commonly reported as the cause for this. The library's reading rooms have been reported to be frequently occupied by the Bangladesh Civil Service examinees (who were, of course, university students)—only 25.10% of students reported to have used the university's central library for academic purposes. The rest of course used their dormitory rooms for study purposes.  Our data on parental education revealed some gendered inequalities. Data on male parent education showed around 20% had a Master's degree, around 15% had an Honors degree, 20% had a Higher Secondary Education, and around 15% attained a primary education. Data on female parent education showed secondary education topping the list with 28.20%. Only around 7% of female parents studied up to the Master's level, while its counterpart Male percentage point was around 20%. Data showed that more female parents attained secondary level education (28.20%) followed by primary level (23.90%), indicating an apparent inequality with their male counterparts. In other words, for many female parents, education stopped at the secondary level. Regarding incoming students' school background, most male students came from the village (47.10%) and sub-district (28.60%) levels, while only 5.70% got admitted from the capital city. However, the data also showed that for the HSC level, around 65.70% of students have opted for education at the town/ divisional level. A high percentage of 85% of students studied in educational institutions at the SSC level with no national position. Curiously, a very high percentage of recruited students came from both the merit and waiting lists, 32.50% and 21.20%, respectively. The tall waiting list column begs questions about the university's admission strategy. The survey confirmed the relatively high percentage of students entering the university from villages and peri-urban areas. In the FGDs, a view emerged of the students' situation and experiences in the university: A perception existed amongst the students that specific programs at the university were biased towards "elite students" from the upper middle to rich backgrounds. Some departments' preference for subject-based exams for admission tests was also seen to be biased towards students coming from urban English-medium backgrounds. In the words of one participant, framing questions in English, and often very difficult ones at that, proves to be difficult for students coming from village backgrounds. The student participants called some disciplines/ institutes (names withdrawn) "VIP departments." (The perception was that only the wealthy and elite students studied there; "the number of waiting cars is proof of that," said one participant.) However, these programs were in heavy demand by all students.  A recently held perception amongst education stakeholders that male students' class performance at the university was significantly poor compared to their female counterparts was credited to hall-based politics and their concomitant "culture"; male students suffered more than their female counterparts. Students coming from villages and peri-urban areas often needed dormitories and hence were more susceptible to the hall "environment" as they had no other choice. Students' entanglement with politics has been attributed to factors such as securing a room. However, for this, the students pay a heavy price; it was commonly reported that "common students" are often forced into "political" programs (these include periodic events such as processions and many other activities). Students also participate in politics because of the prospect of being rewarded in the day-to-day life of the university and later in life (perks may even include a teaching job, said one participant with a grin). The perception is that if one is involved with "student politics" aligned with the party in power, chances are high that it may pave the way for many newer opportunities. So, for some students, participating in "student politics" aligned with the regime in power is a long-term strategy. The research participants saw a clear link between teacher and student politics at the university and the government's influence on both. Hence, "student politics" was seen as a viable option for securing a career. The participants attributed the student's often indifference to course activity to the presence of inefficient teachers and teaching methods. One study participant reported that he has often been asked by one of his teachers to prepare the presentation slide before the class, an allegation that raises serious moral questions on the part of the teacher and his/her performance and ethical standards.  "Ragging" and "Gonoroom culture" (in the male dormitories), especially in the first years when the students enter the campus, were also seen as impediments to a congenial environment for education and learning. "There is no environment in the dormitories," said one participant. Students are often asked to stay up late at night for no reason. They are asked to mimic this or that and awarded corporeal punishments in the name of learning "manners." It was, of course, not known on whose instruction senior students (often with political party affiliations) felt the duty to teach manners to the students. It is also reported that the culture has become circular in that they are repeated when the first year graduates to the second year and a new first-year batch is in. The study participants claimed that the "ragging" situation is slightly different in the female dormitories (By the time this paper was under review for publication, from personal correspondences [2021-22], I came to know that the "ragging" was being introduced in female dormitories as well and senior apas were often in charge for such misdeeds).  For those heavily invested in student politics, dropping a year was common. They kept themselves busy with political activities and other activities and overstayed their accommodation on campus. Often, these students, through their ties with "bara bhais" (brothers), began to see and meet the political leaders of the country. Although the participants did not mention drugs as a cause for poor performance in class, some students personally conveyed the message that drugs were rampant on campus and could be impediments to the day-to-day activities of the university, including attending classes and other activities such as exams.  It is widely known that student politics on university campuses in Bangladesh relies on the show of muscle power, and mine is no different. Mohsin (2016) pointed out that political parties in Bangladesh use their student wings to advance their political agendas. The author notes that students outside Dhaka are highly vulnerable, as they remain in need of dormitories and thus fall under the "trap of student politics." Student leaders aligned with the party in power in national politics often control (albeit informal) these allocations and thus have the upper hand in seat distribution. The author rightly points out that student politics lacks "student" issues and concerns today. Due to JU's residential character, its "gano room culture" has been a significant talking point for years. Students with no other options but to live in the university dormitories are particularly vulnerable to this situation The critical discussion for the moment is how we can cater to the needs of students who remain vulnerable on campus and may need additional facilities for teaching and learning. What has the university done to address the additional needs of our students who may have disadvantageous school backgrounds and face shambolic living conditions on campus? Should the university consider introducing additional courses so students do not suffer due to their disadvantageous learning and provenance? What classroom practices are required? What governance structure soothes us? Is it business as usual, or shall we consider the abominable hall condition and take action? If the latter is the case, what additional mechanisms need to be implemented to address some of the problems we face today on our university campuses? The immediate past government has been too occupied with the economic model of education, manifested in its efforts at establishing new universities nationwide. New infrastructures has been the order of the day. However, the urgent step is to develop the soft infrastructure needed for better teaching, learning and research. More research on pedagogical practices and evidence-based activism against the menacing "ragging culture" is needed. Piecemeal solutions in rhetoric or reactive administrative orders ("stern action," the rhetoric of "zero tolerance for ragging") did not work in the past. An internal critique of our universities is something we all should aspire at this moment. Author bio: Mahmudul H Sumon is Professor of Anthropology, Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh. The current paper is an abridged version of an essay published in Nrvijnana Patrika Vol 28.