Quality? Another time!

One of the first measures taken by the new leadership of the Ministry of Education and research was that of suspending a program aiming to introduce some quality evaluation criteria in the high education. Another important target was to reduce the number of non-gratuitous places in the state universities. President Iliescu himself attacked, during the latest conference of the university directors, this type of offer, bringing into discussion moral and constitutional reasons.
Why that hurry, as for these two problems that, at first approach, shouldn’t be one of PDSR’s priorities at the beginning of the mandate.
In the case of the fee places in the high education system, the real explanation is as prosaic as possible: having introduced these places massively attacked the interests of the private educational institutions, which now use the government changes.
But why was this the first measure to take? Why suspend a program that only aims to promote the quality of high education? It could be a surprise only for those who don’t know the Romanian university medium from inside. It is marked with inertia, personal fiefs; it is confronted now with a renewal crisis, both biologically and conceptually. The value inversions, not rare at all, together with the miserable wages, drive away the big majority of the bright graduated that should ensure the pedagogical and scientific continuity. The heaps of universities emerged out of all kind of local interests and vanities in the most unexpected places in the country lead to derisory the statute itself of the university teacher. It makes possible that famous middling individuals become over night university professors, deans or directors.
How could it be possible, that revolt do not appear within such a system, when people tried to introduce some objective evaluation criteria, that settle things in a framework based on value? The effects are potentially bothering for many people. For instance, on eof the consequences could be a differentiated allocation of the resources.
As this kind of unpleasant situations are to be avoided, the ministry’s decision is understandable. It indicates, after all, the difficulty to apply a deep reform in the Romanian education system. Few people truly realize how grave the crisis of the Romanian university system is. A crisis that has not the privilege to be in everybody’s attention, as the water alimentation, for instance. As Spiru Haret said, in education the effects can be seen only after several generations.
The state politics hasn’t placed for the last 11 years the education among the priorities. It can be seen at the level of numbers too, given that at the level of the public budget expenses for education, not even 4% was the registered here, comparing to 7.3%, for instance, in Estonia and 5.8% in Slovenia. Moreover, the high education medium itself didn’t manage to coagulate a favorable trend for a fund discussion as far as the necessary type of education for Romania would be, remaining the prisoner of admiration in front of the professional successes of some tops that are not necessarily relevant, if we consider the general perspective.
The destiny of education in Romania is infinitely more important for the country’s destiny than the fate of Sidex, TEPRO, IMGB or all the coal mines together; of these two categories of problems, the latter can easily find a place in the public agenda. But it is not clear whether, beyond the obtuseness or the lack of vision at the level of the different rules – accuses most probably true – the university and pre-university media themselves will be able to surpass the incapacity of renewal they have showed until now.
(Alexandru LAZESCU)