Why our universities will never be the best

Why our universities will never be the best

By Hendra Gunawan

BANDUNG (JP): In May 1998, Asiaweek, a Hong Kong-based news
magazine, announced the best universities in Asia. Unlike last
year, this year's list was split into universities and schools of
science and technology.

Last year, the magazine placed ITB (the Bandung Institute of
Technology) 19th out of 50, much higher than four or five other
Indonesian universities that were also on the list. This year,
after the split, ITB only ranks 14th out of 30.

The best five schools of science and technology, according to
Asiaweek, are Pohang University of Science and Technology (South
Korea), the Indian Institute of Technology at Delhi (India), the
Indian Institute of Technology at Madras (India), Nanyang
Technological University (Singapore), and the Science University
of Tokyo (Japan).

In an improvement on last year, this year's rankings were
based on academic reputation, student selectivity, faculty
resources, research output, financial resources, average annual
teachers' pay, students per teacher, articles in international
journal per teacher, and students per Internet access point. The
best five schools scored 75.73, 65.24, 63.94, 63.54, and 60.82,
while ITB scored 44.75.

The ITB rector and deputy rector for academic affairs said
they were disappointed with the ranking. They questioned the
criteria used by Asiaweek, particularly the use of teachers'
salaries (The Jakarta Post, June 3, 1998). In terms of teachers'
salaries, ITB ranks only 23rd.

Teachers' salaries, however, is not the only category that
caused ITB to fall in the rankings. In terms of financial
resources (which put ITB high last year), ITB ranks as low as
25th. Although it ranks 13th in terms of research output, ITB
sadly scores 0.00 and ranks 23rd in terms of the number of
articles in international journals. What does this tell us?

It tells us clearly that, nationwide, our university teachers'
research capability is questionable. It also tells us that there
is something wrong with the whole academic system and atmosphere.

In the last couple of years, hundreds or perhaps thousands of
research projects were funded by many sources, such as the
National Research Council, the Office of the State Minister of
Research and Technology, the Directorate General of Higher
Education. Billions of rupiah were spent on research projects.

Universities like UI (University of Indonesia), UGM
(University of Gadjah Mada), IPB (Bogor Institute of
Agriculture), and ITB are always leading in obtaining research
funding.

Research was carried out, there is no doubt about it. But
apparently the results were not as expected: they often stopped
as research reports and never got published (or perhaps were
never sent for publication). But why?

There are at least two explanations. First, for most
researchers, research projects have become projects to get extra
money, not to extend the boundaries of our knowledge nor to yield
any sort of breakthrough. Teachers' salaries are low, so they
need this extra income.

It is true that if one writes a paper from one's research
results and publishes it, then one would get points that are
needed for promotion. For instance, if it is published in a local
or national journal, one gets 10 points and if it is published in
an international journal, the result is 15 points.

But since getting a paper published in an international
journal is much more difficult than in a local or national
journal while the points earned are not that different, why worry
about publishing research in an international journal?

Thus you write a research proposal, obtain the funding, do the
research, and write the report. If you need more points for your
promotion, you write a paper out of your research results and
publish it in a local journal. (Usually nobody will question the
content of your paper except perhaps the format or the number of
pages.) You do this once a year, and you will become a professor
one day.

Second, for most teachers, writing a research proposal is time
consuming and doing research is much more demanding. Meanwhile,
facilities and the academic atmosphere are not supportive. So why
worry about doing research at all?

Teachers know that they will not get fired just because they
do not do research. At worst, they will not become professors.
But as far as money is concerned, they can just moonlight and get
extra income (which is sometimes more than the average research
grant).

All this happens because of the bureaucratic nature of the
system, including the recruitment process, promotion system and
salary scales that applies to our university teachers. In
particular, teachers at state universities are civil servants.
Once employed at a state university, they work there for the rest
of their lives or till they retired.

In most cases, new recruits start working at a university as a
junior assistant. To be promoted to a senior assistant, they need
to accumulate 50 points, which can be obtained from teaching,
research and service to the community. The higher one's position,
the more points that have to be earned to be promoted further. A
minimum of two years in any current position is required before
one can be promoted to a higher position.

But the problem is there is no maximum number of years one can
remain in any position. This means that lecturers will not be
fired, even if you do not earn enough points after many years.
Since there is no such threat of dismissal, why worry about, say,
doing research?

With such a uniquely bureaucratic system, how can our
universities compete globally? Unless the system is changed, the
number of research publications in international journals will
hardly increase. And without research published in international
journals, it will be very unlikely if any of our universities
become the best university in Asia, let alone the world.

The writer is a lecturer in the Department of Mathematics at
the Bandung Institute of Technology.