LA LEGÍTIMA DEFENSA

Several respondents expressed their strong disapproval towards the practice of importing certain Western models, a response which sometimes paralleled a direct ‘narrative of attack’ on officials and policymakers. Their reactions were too critical, constituting the opposite side of the argument. Two of the respondents belonged to Group B, representing the parliamentary/ consultative side; in other words, the voice of the public. Hence, it was not entirely surprising for such statements to come from them. The others, from Groups C and D, respectively, voiced serious matters concerning borrowing ideas in HE.

The main strategies used to communicate the narrative of disapproval was by showing how Western models did not improve education in the host country and by accentuating the presence of an ‘inferiority’ towards Western experts and English language.

8.3.1. Borrowed Models Do Not Serve Education in Host Country

P05, who widened the scope of the problem to include the larger Gulf region, disputed the practice, “If you go to Gulf states, if you take Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, all are borrowed experiences. I don’t think they improve education because they don’t exactly serve the country they are in”. Specifically referring to what he described as “arsenal box5_{, like weapons that come in a box”, he clarified, “either they are expired, obsolete}

and they don’t know what’s inside and if they’re not obsolete, they are not opened or they are taken as they are, exactly. These borrowed things even in education this doesn’t serve the education in any country”. He disapproved the practice of borrowing whole models and proposed, “we should not seek things that are easy, that is [sic] borrowed,

even if we increase our publication, even if we do some research in some areas”. Concerning the specific case of CAS, P05 assumed that “the objective may be noble that we want to have a college in every governorate. We identified [a] certain thing … NZ model. We turned teachers’ colleges to Colleges of Applied Sciences (CAS)”, but he contended, “We thought, but this is my opinion, that we were solving the problem, but we create[d] another problem. We have a deficiency in the number of teachers”.

Another respondent, P15, also expressed his disapproval of the way Western methods were implemented in Oman, stating, “In my opinion, importing systems, models and experiences are good for guidance only and not to be applied”. For example, “they brought Basic Education system in Oman and said that the students in a class in the elementary level I think should not exceed 26, and that there should be a flying class6_,

and a system of automatically passing grades … Unfortunately, we haven’t applied but very little. When we wanted to apply the concept of the flying class, we were hit by reality, that classrooms were not enough. With regard to 26 students, teachers and classrooms were not sufficient. We haven’t applied but automatically passing grades and mixing boys and girls.” He ruled that the system was “a disaster. If applied this way, it’s a disaster.” Furthermore, P15 reported how Omani officials wanted to borrow developed Western models to create a breakthrough in education, but he stated, “I believe they are hasty, as this process must be gradual in the development of education. We cannot bring a powerful model while our financial capabilities cannot afford this, neither do our social and societal norms approve of this”.

Remarkably, both P05 and P15 envisioned a future model for Omani HE by exploring the past. “We should design. We should have a model that take us … the history of Oman. What did they do in the past and how do you link to the new education system”, P05 proposed. To him, anything beyond that was “a luxury”. P15 also found a solution in the glory of the past. “When the Sultanate was at the peak of its glory, it did not import scientists or teachers … it had its own style and was able to spread Islam to East Africa and the Indian Subcontinent … they did not need any expertise from abroad”, he contended. Strikingly, these two attitudes are in line with a conclusion made by Ghubash at the end of his extensive research on the Omani Islamic democratic experience. He

6 _{A concept in BE where the students move or ‘fly’ from classroom to another to attend a certain lesson}

writes, “Oman cannot win the future without adopting its own past. To shut the door on the past would be to shut the door on truth itself, on the sources of Oman’s identity, on its civilisation” (2006, p. 203).

All the same, the opinions of the two respondents along with Ghubash’s recommendation do not fall far from an overwhelming Arab Muslim mentality that still extols the old Arab Islamic civilisation, which was once a rival to the Western civilisation.

8.3.2. ‘Inferiority’ Towards Western Experts and the English Language

Another contentious issue that the rest of respondents in this group protested was reliance on Western experts instead of local competencies. Regarding it “a very critical issue”, P08 claimed, “we have another issue, which is hidden. It is not clear that usually we think if you are a local expert, you are not that competent as the international expert though the international expert who comes to your country takes everything from you. This is a very critical issue”. It seems that the main advantage these Western experts have is mostly linked to the English language, which is also another critical issue P08 insisted to highlight. She asserted, “we have to think that producing research in Arabic is not a weak point for the academic staff. It should be considered a strong point because they are producing for their society. You know, the Chinese, the Japanese most of their research is in their language”. Labelling it as “inferiority’, she urged, “So sometimes you know we need to get rid of this inferiority”. In fact, this particular issue has recently been reported by Al'Abri (2016). Investigating the architecture of policymaking in Omani HE, he confirms the dominating status of English in Omani HE policies. For example, he notes that “SQU did not promote some of the academic faculty because their publications were mainly in Arabic. Academics are forced to publish in English to be promoted” (Al'Abri, 2016, p. 193) .

Furthermore, P03 also used a similar approach to express his disapproval in respect to this topic. He claimed, “The problem is that we had Arab experts … because the Arabic language was no longer needed, the English language has been adopted, and the new approach has become Western or European, hence they brought foreign experts”. He further argued, “foreign experts don’t have anything to do with Omani environment. They think they are coming to plant this seed in this country regardless of its

surroundings and this is the problem”. To him, this was all about money. He explained, “go to any of these countries, when they sense that you have money, meaning you don’t have an issue with money, they sell you the highest they have in price, even in arms and cars, in everything … they tell you, we’ve given you the best that we have, but the problem is that their best is not our best and this is something we are suffering from”. Another respondent who also believed this was an issue they were suffering from was P04. He expressed his disapproval using a metaphor to show that foreign experts were just like marketing salesmen, stating “Don’t they come to market cars and tomatoes? It’s the same thing. OK, you have a good project but have you tried to look at the Omani market … the mind of Omani student? We are suffering from these issues”.