Maravi

(NYASATIMES) Developmental meaning of ‘quota system’ in policy and practice

Developmental meaning of ‘quota system’ in policy and practice
By Nyasa Times
Published: October 27, 2009

You have already started boiling with anger even before you have read the rest. Cool down. Be slow to anger, quick to forgive and forget. If anything, you and I are just contributors of ideas (both sensible and nonsensical) on this forum, hoping some policy maker reads and picks up what is useful.

In my last piece, you attacked my lack of statistics which I did not feel necessary to present because this forum is for informal discussion and not for academic rigor. But in case you don’t know, empirical evidence (eg. NSO IHS2, 2005) shows that over 50.2 percent of Malawians are poor and 22.3 are ultra poor, most (over 50 percent) of whom are in rural areas.

About 65 percent of rural southern region is poor, about 55 percent of rural northern region and about 45 percent of rural central region. Less than 30 percent of urban population is poor. About 40 percent of the richest 20 percent have secondary or higher education compared to only 5 percent of the poorest 20 percent. The poorest have annual per capita incomes/expenditures of less than MK8000 compared to over MK50, 000 among the richest 20 percent, such that the former can not afford decent private education compared to the latter.

Most people arguing on this forum, like myself, are closer to the richest 20 percent of the population than to the poorest 20 percent category. You live in urban areas and send your children to private schools where teachers can even borrow MK20, 000 from your ward. If your child is not selected into mainstream unima or Mzuni, you have options of parallel programmes, alternative universities and college (e.g ABC, Catholic, Adventist, and Livingstonia, Share World, MCA) or even western universities. This is regardless of your regions or tribes.

In essence, your arguments against the quota system appear to be for ‘vested interests’ and not ‘voice for the voiceless’. By the way, hoe you realize that this forum (by internet based in urban settings) is for the rich. It is on this basis that I strongly argue for a quota system that benefits the poor (and these are mostly found in rural schools, public schools) regardless of region or tribe. Yet most of you did not see or chose not to see that line of argument!! It was the silly examples I often use loosely that attracted your attention and not the core issue under discussion which I highlighted at the begging- from where (backgrounds) most unima students come today compared to twenty years ago. That you did not challenge because the facts are there- access UNIMA and SDNP databases to analyse figures on MSCE performance by school and unima selection. Or you can conduct study of current unima students.

And by the way, I hope you know that by staff members’ children can now enter unima at lower cut off point and at no cost (fees). But no staff member is against such self-interest quota system. Although I am positioned to benefit from such privileges, I personally still argue for quota system that benefits the poor students in difficult circumstances such as community, public school in rural areas. I feel I am capable like most of you to secure alternative and even better education for our children. This is why in this piece, I endeavour to explain the developmental meaning of quota system. But instead of explaining the developmental meaning of quota system, I want to raise questions hoping you will choose to find genuine answers.

Do you know why lecturers at College of Medicine receive a higher salary compared to their counterparts at same grade in the other colleges? Do you know why female students enter unima at lower cut off point than male students? Do you know why through Gable all female students did not have to pay secondary school fees while even poor males paid? Do you know how and why the initial Kamuzu Academy selected its students? Do your know why CRECOM activities concentrated in some districts and not others?

Or do you know why fertilizer coupons are being used instead of universal subsidies that prevailed in the 1970s? Do you know why ACP countries can export sugar to EU countries where the sugar is not even needed? Do you know why donors are concerned with Africa and not other parts of the developing world? Do you know why within Africa, southern Africa is of more concern than West and North Africa? Or do you know why UN agencies give preference given to under-represented countries when recruiting international staff? Examples are many but the underlying principle is the same – quota system (positive discrimination, affirmative action) to reverse actual or potential developmental imbalances.

Most of you argue for ‘merit’ without explaining what ‘merit’ is. From development perspective, ‘merit’ can be both ‘made’ and ‘given’ just like the principle of ‘comparative advantage’. You can make yourself a ‘merit material’ by working hard in your studies but you are constrained by the ‘given’ teaching and learning environment in which you are. Put loosely, a poor, ugly girl can not compete favourably with a rich, beautiful girl in a fashion show. For the latter, merit is both ‘given’ (naturally beautiful, which the ugly girl can not be) and ‘made’ (by being rich, which the poor girl can also be). I know you will capitalise on this silly illustration.

In my years as a teacher, I have seen students who joined unima with a higher merit (less than 15 points) being weeded or graduating with bare passes while those who entered with lower merit (closer to 30 points) excelling with credits and distinctions. It shows that if confronted with same environment, students considered to be non-intelligent (and hence the target for quota) can perform wonders while those considered to be non-dull (and hence fight aggressively against quota system) can be a disaster. In other words, to me, a student who has studies and scores 25 points at community school in Nchenachena in Rumphi or Chapananga in Chikwawa or Kabudula in Lilongwe has more merit than a student who studies and gets 15 points at a poshy private school in the cities (you know the private schools you send your children to and that dominate unima selection). That’s why Bilira MCDE was respected in those days (sending some students to unima against the odd, poor kholoboyi learning environment).

Why northerners take the quota system issue personally I don’t know? You can check where Chanco staff and students who are aggressively against the proposed quota system come from. Yet at other forums, they argue for a quota and not merit- eg, they want more northerners in cabinet and in powerful ministries. People don’t know that ‘merit’ in politics has nothing to do with education but allegiance. Or they argue for a ‘quota’ Chitipa road against a ‘merit’ Thyolo road serves a more economic powerhouse than Misuku coffee.

You attacked my illustrative quota formula that it did not add up and make sense because it added up to 2.6. What wrong there? It means for every 2.6 students unima selects, one should be from community school and 0.1 from private school. Or for every 100 selected, 38 should be from community, 29 from day school, 19 from boarding, 10 from FBO and 4 from private school!!!!

On a lighter note: From the many charged comments to my last piece, I liked the one who even called himself ‘Tetelite Munthali’. Judging from his comments, I think I taught him at unima. But I can’t remember whether he was called Quota Munthali or System Munthali or Quota System Munthali or System Quota Munthali!! Never mind! Like most commentators here I taught in those days, Quota Munthali

Labels: EDUCATION, ELIMINATION EXAMS

posted by MrK @ 9:00 AM