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.