Enfermedad espiritual del orgullo

For most universities, and certainly those that enjoy a reasonable degree of autonomy, their governing board or council is the highest decision-making body. In an earlier era, when universities existed in their own collegially governed world, the university council was comprised entirely of senior members of the academic community. Only occasionally was a government representative from the ministry of education included in council membership, mainly for purposes of liaison and coordination. As the twin trends of greater accountability for university relevance (discussed in Chapter 6) and democratization fueled a significant rethinking of the role and organization of public agencies at the end of the 20th century, universities gave up their isolation under pressure from new demands for accountability and societal representation. As a result, a wide range of university governance is practiced in the world today. It stretches from the traditional collegial model to the cutting edge of what might be called “accountable corporativism”—a mix of broad stakeholder representation in university decision making with corporativist management practices.

University governance in South Asia possesses intrinsic features and occasionally unique vocabulary (Table 12). In Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan, the highest authoritative body is called the Senate. But unlike the academic senates of many western universities, this body is more akin to the university assemblies found in Latin America. It is generally a rather large body. For example, the University of Dhaka senate has 104 members. The senate’s primary functions are to approve university statutes, ratify budgets, and, in some cases, select candidates to become head of the university. It meets once or twice a year to perform these limited functions.

In addition to their senates, universities in Bangladesh and Pakistan contain a combined governance and executive body called a syndicate, composed of 12 to 25 members, which operates under the purview of the senate and is therefore only roughly analogous to a governing board. However, the syndicate performs many of the functions normally allocated to a governing board, such as managing university assets, developing the institutional budget, and making staff appointments. In both countries, the head of state appoints some or all of the syndicate’s members—even those from the academic community. Sri Lanka inserts notable external representation into university governing boards, but the external appointments are made by the University Grants Commission. Notably, most South Asian countries explicitly reserve some board seats for women representatives.

Levels of university autonomy and accountability vary considerably in South Asia (Table 13). Autonomy is high in Afghanistan and Nepal because their universities are self-governed by the academic community. Substantial and varied external representation contributes to increased accountability among the university governing boards of India and Sri Lanka. However, the high accountability of boards in Pakistan and Sri Lanka is of the negative sort, reflecting close government control of the member appointment process.35 _{In Sri Lanka, the University}

Grants Commission appoints all of the external board members, sets staff recruitment and appointment procedures, approves staff appointments, selects candidates for chief officer for approval by the head of state,

35 _{In Pakistan, the head of state directly names all board members and the government controls numerous other aspects of university administration.}

61

Steering Higher Education Systems and Institutions: Go

ver

Table 12 University Governing Boards in South Asia

Country No. of Members Composition How Appointed

External Accountability

Degree of Autonomy

Afghanistan 12 all internal By academic position

held, or as the elected representative of designated group

low High

Bangladesh

(syndicate) 12–17 majority internal;2 educationalists named

by head of state; 2 government appointees; 1 citizen selected by academic council

4 by government; the rest are elected by designated groups

moderate moderate

Bhutan 22 University officials,

Cabinet officials, private sector and one student representative

appointed by authorities moderate moderate

india 12–25

(10–12 in indian Institutes of technology)

great variation appointed by authorities;

elected by constituencies High moderate

nepala _{52 8 government;} 31 internal; 8 external; 4 teachers unions 8 appointed by government; 21 by position held; 23 appointed by vice- chancellor moderate High

pakistan 25–30 100% appointed by the

chancellor (head of state)

all by high political authorities (head of state or governors)

High low

sri lanka 23 11 internal;

12 external internal members are designated by office

held; external members are proposed by the university and selected by the university grants commission and ministry

High low

a _{Tribhuvan University, which enrolled 90% of all university students in 2009.}

Sources: University laws and acts; and W. Saint. 2009 a. Guiding Universities: Governance and Management Arrangements around the Globe. Human Development Network. Washington, DC: World Bank. p. 21.

Table 13 South Asia University Governance Classified by Levels of Accountability and Autonomy

Autonomy

Accountability Low Moderate High

low Afghanistan

moderate Bangladesh nepal

High _{sri lanka}pakistan india

Source: Author’s assessment.

62

Inno

vative Strategies in Higher Education for Accelerated Human Resource De

controls student admissions, and even approves overseas travel by academic staff (World Bank 2009,58–59). In addition, administrative staff postings are managed directly by the government, and general public service and treasury regulations for government also apply to the universities. In contrast, the majority of board members in Bangladesh and Nepal represent internal constituencies (officers, teachers, and students), with government nominees or officials accounting for roughly 20%–25% of total board membership.