Dear Editor,
Many universities across the world are transforming themselves to accommodate new and fast-changing realities. If not, then the risk is that some universities could become irrelevant and ultimately non-functional. The transition to a modern university has now embraced ideas such as the university being defined as a knowledge community rather than a physical infrastructure; the move from isolated learning places to socially interactive and engaged spaces; the flattening of management structures; and the linkages between the ivory tower and the community it serves. With these in mind, it was refreshing to read about the work of the University of Guyana (UG) Transformation Task Force.
The recommendations of the UG Task Force are now public and while it is understandable these are going to be general in nature, there are reasons to pause since some key specifics are not given adequate attention. These specifics are crucial since there were many previous attempts by UG to climb the ladder beyond the status quo, but for many reasons there were missteps. From 1988-1999 during my time there as a student and member of faculty, there were at least 3 attempts to climb to higher rungs but nothing substantial materialized.
In the current UG Transformation Task Force recommendations, the issues not given adequate attention are as follows: (1) Science and Technology is given primacy over other disciplines (eg, engineering, social sciences) in the cross/multi/trans disciplinary programming suggestion. But the big local and global problems of today are complex and require contributions from all knowledge domains for effective solutions; (2) operational and tactical planning are rightly given focus but there is little about strategic planning structures and processes at all university levels; (3) there seems to be no mention of a sustainable financial model while a lot is said about going to banks and donors for funding; (4) nothing is mentioned about alternative modes of course delivery (eg, blended, experiential, online, etc) to leverage the OLPF (one laptop per family) and other similar national programmes; (5) capital resourcing at UG is probably the most important dimension of the problem but only a few general recommendations are given; (6) nothing is mentioned about the security of buildings and human safety on the campuses, especially Turkeyen in the evenings; (7) a quality assurance unit is proposed but this has the ring of academic policing ‒ universities globally are transitioning to a more collegial arrangement under a Teaching and Learning Centre; (8) there is no mention of an Intellectual Property Office to accelerate the commercialization of innovations and inventions, or an Ethics Office to oversee sensitive human and environmental research; (9) there seems to be no mention of emphasizing linkages and collaborations with local entities, although there is something in there about regional linkages. In the end, UG will better be able to turn the corner if important issues are prioritized for attention in explicit ways.
The UG Transformation Task Force has embarked on a much needed and valuable endeavour.
Yours faithfully,
Shivanand Balram
Former UG Lecturer in Physics
