Sheikh Nahid Neazy

Bangladesh needs an independent higher education commission (HEC) to improve the quality of tertiary education, ensure academic freedom with administrative autonomy, and create an advanced sustainable system that is more responsive to state policy, the national economy, public engagement and the job market.  Such a commission should have been constituted ten years back. Even the interim government led by Professor Dr Muhammad Yunus has failed to form this commission, which will address issues like the need for updated curricula, better faculty development programmes, better faculty recruitment & promotion policy, and effective quality control for both public and private universities.  Ultimately, this move would help align higher education with national development goals and produce graduates who are well-equipped for the job market and future leadership positions across the globe. 

In Bangladesh, university education is primarily viewed through the narrow lens of teaching and research only. The third mission of the universities—service to society—is yet an undernourished and underestimated component of our higher education culture. Both public and private universities could not ensure academic freedom and autonomy. For private universities, which already cater to a significant proportion of enrolment in higher education, a weakness in the institutional framework for supporting, nurturing, monitoring, and rewarding community engagement represents a missed opportunity for the nation.

Universities around the world are known to have three missions: teaching, research, and community service. We know that the first mission is to prepare graduates for careers; the second is meant for the process of knowledge or knowledge generation; and the third—the most neglected one in Bangladesh—takes learning and discovery out of the classroom or laboratory to the community or society at large.

In Bangladesh’s higher education landscape, the third mission, termed “community service”, is an afterthought. While disputes over governance/autonomy, academic freedom and student/teacher politics continue to weaken public universities, private universities remain constrained by a rigid regulatory framework that primarily evaluates them based on adherence to conventional academic standards. They are hardly assessed/measured or incentivised on making a positive impact on community service/well-being, social entrepreneurship, and national development initiatives or enterprises. Even any need-based academic or research collaboration between public and private universities is rarely found. In fact, these universities need to be decolonised first.

The present higher education system in Bangladesh stands at a crossroads. Only four public universities – Dhaka, Jahangirnagar, Chittagong and Rajshahi – are run by the Public University Act, 1973. These universities enjoy autonomy to some extent, though academic freedom is not ensured. Besides, in most cases, the vice-chancellors are recruited on the basis of their political party affiliation or loyalty to the government. On the other hand, private universities have made spectacular strides since the Private University Act, 1992, was passed. Now about 115 private universities have over half of all higher education students enrolled in their roles, positioning them not only as complementary players but also as the pivot of the nation’s intellectual future. The quality of these universities will decide Bangladesh’s capacity to foster knowledge, innovate new technology, increase its economic competitiveness, and nurture the next-generation leaders.

But, unfortunately, the academic environment in public universities is often hampered by bipartisan student politics, violence, and teachers’ blind political affiliation. On the contrary, private universities are still constrained by a governance system that does not help them become real agents of change. They usually face excessive micromanaging at the workplace and get frustrated because of stress and burnout. They do not have any systematic cultivation of academic leadership. Their academic autonomy and abilities are not acknowledged or valued.

Vice-chancellors, pro vice-chancellors, deans, and department chairs are supposed to be chosen based on their qualifications or scholarly track records. But, unfortunately, when they assume office, they are to manage bureaucratic compliance. Rather than focusing on strategic policy, local/global collaborations, or research distinction, they spend hours waiting for UGC approval—whether for curriculum changes/revisions, programme initiations, overseas collaborations, or small research grants.

In Bangladesh, however, in-service training for the academic administrators is non-existent or minimal. Administrative jobs are usually assumed to be based on academic credentials or political loyalty/inclination rather than managerial skills/experience. Once in office, academic leaders are expected to “learn on the job”. Without formal training or any kind of orientation, many of them have to muddle through and make mistakes that cost the institutions or individuals.

Educational leadership requires a distinct set of skills. A vice-chancellor must be able to articulate a strategic vision/plan, manage finances, inspire staff, build partnerships/collaboration, navigate political or social contexts, and deal with changes within a complex academic environment. Deans and chairpersons need to balance the professional interests of the faculty and institutional needs. They must have academic integrity to foster innovation, maintain quality research, and explore community engagement. Of course, these are challenging assignments, and they cannot be acquired by scholarship only. They must have some relevant training and workshops so that they can develop the necessary skills to understand the diverse needs of higher education and adapt to social or cultural changes.
Leadership is the most crucial determinant of whether a university thrives or lags behind. Across the globe, empowered academic leaders with skills and integrity have managed to take the lead in navigating institutional transformation positively. Unless the government of Bangladesh makes substantial reforms in the higher education system, both public and private universities will remain trapped in a vicious cycle of average quality and be intervened in by bureaucratic entanglements, rather than being driven by their academic freedom and autonomy to excel.

Universities must be freed from the UGC’s micromanagement and interference. Accountability must be outcome-based: quality teaching-learning, graduate employability, quality research publications, international collaborations, and community services or engagements. Leaders must be empowered to launch different programmes, fund research, and forge partnerships. They will be held accountable for outcomes. Boards of trustees at private universities must be strategic overseers, not micromanagers.

Private universities in Bangladesh are not failing due to lack of mission, vision, imagination, or talent. They are failing because their academic leaders (VCs, Pro-VCs, Deans and Chairs) are not given the autonomy to lead from the front. The functions of strategy and vision have been outsourced to ceremonial roles, leaving UGC micromanaging forces to direct vice-chancellors, deans, and department heads to focus on seeking approvals rather than making decisions independently and contributing to higher education systematically.
This is the crux of the crisis in Bangladesh’s higher education landscape. Academic leadership has lost relevance. The faculty members are frustrated, students are deprived of a congenial academic environment, and potential partnerships collapse under the bureaucracy of UGC. Instead of supporting positive initiatives and enabling growth, the regulatory model has turned into a straitjacket—blocking innovation, discouraging reforms, hindering autonomy and suffocating good initiatives within the universities.

Great universities are built by great academic leaders, and great leaders need autonomy to lead and set an example. Singapore’s autonomous body, the Higher Education Group (HEG), Malaysia’s Higher Education Leadership Academy (AKEPT), and South Korea’s reforms in higher education all show what is possible when leadership is trained, empowered, and trusted. These nations strengthened the higher education system by giving universities autonomy and ensuring that institutions are both nationally responsive and globally competitive.
Bangladesh needs to establish a National Higher Education Leadership Academy (NHELA) like Malaysia’s AKEPT. This academy will develop vice-chancellors, deans, and chairs systematically with strategic management training, financial leadership, international partnerships, and innovation. International fellowships and mentorship programmes need to be integrated. But most importantly, universities must be allowed to fund and implement such initiatives without facing any micromanagement from UGC.

Bangladesh needs to initiate and strengthen collaborations with the universities of Singapore, Malaysia, and South Korea for educational leadership fellowships and exchange of the faculty. Bangladesh should now decide whether it would proceed following the bureaucratic inertia or introduce a model of growth governance revamping the higher education system. The solution is not to reconstitute UGC under the Ministry of Education but to establish an independent “Higher Education Commission” (HEC) that will help the universities grow with autonomy in imparting quality education, extending need-based research collaborations, exploring innovations, and providing services to the community or society at large.
Without an independent higher education commission, the universities of Bangladesh could be trapped in an eternal cycle of mediocrity due to lack of autonomy, potential academic leadership and good governance. Under this commission led by a panel of bright academic leaders or scholars, these universities would turn out to be the agents of national advancement in terms of graduate employability, innovations, global competitiveness, and intellectual engagement.

________________________________________
The writer is an Associate Professor, Department of English, Stamford University Bangladesh. He could be reached at [email protected].