Thursday, 26th June 2008
Students to get exam results
'Directive suspended, not withdrawn'
The strike banning the publication of university and Junior College exam results was suspended yesterday, so students should expect results to be released shortly.
The directive was suspended by the Malta Union of Teachers and the University of Malta Academic Staff Association (Umasa) following an appeal by the government after promising a counter proposal for a new remuneration package if the unions suspended the directive in full.
The unions had partially lifted the directive for all final-year undergraduate students as a sign of goodwill before a conciliatory meeting held on Monday.
Umasa spokesman Charles Sammut told the Times the University had presented part of their counter proposal but he stressed that the directive has been temporarily suspended and "not withdrawn".
The government revealed yesterday that, last December, as a gesture of goodwill, it reached an interim agreement through which the academic staff were granted a wage increase which amounted to 13.5 per cent of the salary of lecturers.
Prof. Sammut, however, called the statement "misleading" and "underhand" saying the rise referred to was a one-time adjustment issued after the salaries had fallen behind during the five years since the collective agreement expired in 2003.
Labour Party education spokesman Carmelo Abela said the government has been procrastinating for five years and appealed for an immediate solution in the interest of quality education.
The Times reported yesterday that students were preparing a protest despite not having the consent of the University Students' Council, KSU.
Students had shown their disapproval of the strike from day one as many feared losing employment and academic opportunities as a result of the late publication of results.
A Facebook group which had reached over 1,400 members was set up to urge the unions to "stop this nonsense" but many still sympathised with the lecturers' cause.
The KSU yesterday applauded the goodwill shown by Umasa and the MUT in lifting the directive.
The KSU said in a statement that it had reacted and monitored this issue from the very start, keeping close contact with all the parties concerned.
The strike began on June 6, which was the deadline set by the unions for the University to renew the collective agreement.
RSS
Comments
I'd like to point out that my comment was NOT directed to the quality or efficiency of the University's operations, however...
Agreed, but then again the profit motive is sometimes much more compelling than the social one!
And when I said "remove stipends with elimination criteria" I meant just that: that less financially able students would still be given a chance.
The problem here lies that a LOT of students go to university simply because they can have a piece of paper which shows they have graduated and get paid for it!! Stipends truly distort the 'market system' of the university. I'd suggest an IQ test as part of the entry requirements; or are we afraid that 16-year old drop-outs might increase?
I appreciate your textbook description of the 'Resource Allocation' problem. I'm sure you also understand that, when demand exceeds supply there will be a shortage. Now take the University case: Government is supplying at a non-zero price, or rather, at a negative price given stipends+smart cards. Demand is overflowing.
The result? A shortage which reflects itself in inefficiency and perhaps quality. One possible solution? Less stipends, more wages.
In Malta there already exist private universities, or rather branches of foreign private universities, such as the London School of Economics. So those who want to have a private university degree in Malta can already have it.
Privitisation doesn't mean a better quality. It would mean that those students who have the money would pursue with their studies, while others who would have more potential would stay out. Quality/efficiency depends on a) the amount of resources available and b) the way in which those resources are used. A privatised UoM would most likely be run like any other business. The investors would, naturally, be after profits rather than giving our Country a better education system.
I see your point, but with regards to "quality" I would be more concerned with the quality of the inputs in the tertiary learning process.
Below-par entry requirements, a secondary school mentality, blatant spoon-feeding and a horrific level of written and spoken English are producing brain-dead students rather than fresh thinking graduates. Add to this a stipend and all hell breaks loose.
YES, I do receive a stipend (minimum pls note), but I also recognise that it distorts all the statistics that are university related. Take that (the stipend) off, and numbers attending would fall drastically. Privatise the whole thing (or let other universities set up shop) and quality would increase dramtically, as universities compete for the best students offering better conditions, even at a fee. How come have all the most well-known and revered academics and recognized professionals studied at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford or Bocconi?
I fully agree that conditions for lecturers should be re-negotiated, albeit NOT at the expense of us students. How about removing stipends (with certain criteria...) for an "immediate solution in the interest of quality education?"