In 1970, the Nobel Laureate, George Akerlof brought the argument of ‘The Market for Lemons’ showing how, in markets where sellers know more than buyers, trade can dry up.
His example was not fruit, but second hand cars — a ‘lemon’ is one with hidden defects. Buyers want reliable wheels, or ‘peaches’. Not knowing which they are buying, they shave their offers. That puts off peach-sellers, some of whom exit the market, raising the chance of buyers getting a lemon, pushing prices down still further.
It becomes impossible to sell a peach for what it should be worth. Such ‘adverse selection’ can be found in markets from insurance to education. In this write up, I am trying my best to convince academia how this information asymmetry makes an imbalance in education when taken as a market. One such ‘niche’ is lateral entry, unless we handle it with care and caution.
Though lateral entry has been an accepted principle in countries where liberal policies have been embraced, it is academicians’ responsibility to ensure it does not pave the way for ‘lemons’ that otherwise discriminates others, at least passively.
Instead of having a transparent and competitive entry criterion, entertaining mere lists of students prepared by a group of individuals or viva voce the panel composition of which is by board paper approval would definitely create this rift against the noble truth of ‘educational equity’.
According to Akerlof, the seller has more information that distorts negotiating and creates failure in the market efficiency as “bad cars drive out the good because they sell at the same price as good cars”. I think academicians having no malicious intent have enough brains to understand this simple logic.
One of the key objectives of the Sri Lankan Qualification Framework is to facilitate lateral and vertical mobility, and progression within higher education and career pathways. A handful of universities entertain lateral entries with utmost care and caution.
Here are two examples - Applications are invited from medical sector technicians who are in-service and working under the Ministry of Health/Provincial Ministry of Health for lateral entry to Bachelor of Science degree courses. The duration is three years and the selected candidates are enrolled into the second academic year. As these are four-year degree courses the selected candidates will have to spend three years in the University and exempted only from the first year of study.
Some Faculties of Agriculture call for applications from Diploma Holders in Agriculture to enroll five people to follow the BSc. (Agriculture) Degree programs. They should be permanent employees in the agriculture and plantation sectors of government organisations subject to fulfillment of basic requirements. Recommendations in this respect included promoting a scheme for lateral entry to universities (National Education Commission 2009: 13 - 47).
The Sri Lankan Qualifications Framework (SLQF) recognises the volume of learning of students and identifies the learning outcomes that are to be achieved by the qualification holders. Hence, it is imperative to understand the fact that lateral entry should not be a matter of negotiation any more. When bypassing the traditional route, care must be taken to not adulterate the educational values such as transparency, competitiveness and equity.
Of what we can decipher from the present situation is not necessarily one that we admire. The idea of lateral entry in itself looks decent enough but there are few obvious things to be cautious of. The sole motive of the private sector is to earn profits which defeats the very purpose of the government to uplift the socio-economic status of all people in the country.
Hence, a couple of questions. Whether your partner is a private entity or not, at the outset? Where is this KYC form (Know Your Customer)? Whether decision takers have a conflict of interest (as some ‘negotiators’ may be external faculty members too).
Unlike in the private sector, decision making in the case of government services should come with a collective responsibility or should it not? Whether the panels to talk about reciprocity reflect a fair cross section of the stakeholders? Are there any external representatives? Is this open for all, i.e. a flood gate? Why should a lateral entry be open for anyone without any age limit?
It is all about policy as to admission, eligibility, choice of discipline, number of seats, change of branch, attendance, completion of program, reservations, results and power to relax. We can easily derive a benchmark only after a detailed scrutiny of the lateral entry schemes.
Generally, lateral entry into programs is only for Bachelor programs and these students should be admitted in the third semester of the program and should complete the program into which they are admitted, in three years.
Only those candidates who have obtained a three-year diploma relevant to the program, with minimum aggregate of 60% marks in a single sitting in the qualifying examination for a diploma course, from a recognised State Board of Technical Education and Training.
The admission to any program should be governed by the principle of compatibility, viz. a mapping, so that the knowledge gained by the candidate during his Diploma is relevant to the program in which the admission is being sought.
The number of seats for lateral admission is not fixed and these are being made against the dropouts / seats remaining vacant / students who failed, debarred in the first year of the programs and should not be more than 10% of the approved strength of the program for the batch.
There is no blanket guarantee as such. The students admitted under the lateral program should not be allowed to change the program. The basis of the calculation of the attendance shall be from the date of commencement of the classes prescribed by the University by its academic calendar.
For the first semester/third semester (lateral entry) newly admitted students, the same should be reckoned from the date of his/her registration to the program.
A student admitted to the second year under the lateral entry scheme, needs to complete the program within a maximum five academic years from the date of first registration, failing which he/she should not be allowed to continue study further for his/her Degree. For students admitted to the second year (lateral entry), the result of the program which comprises six semesters, should be declared on the basis of working out the CGPA as being practised at the University. In admission, the number of seats should be notified.
Applications shall be invited by post / email / online mode. Candidates should be called for test-cum-interview session with the weightage as: Written 80%, Personal interview 20%. The selected candidates should be notified through a posting on the website of the university and by mail.
The selected may have to go through a special course – Lateral Entry Program, designed for them to make up for any deficiencies in courses / communication skills, for which a fee may be charged. After selection and fulfillment of the admission formalities, students will be considered on a par with the other regular university students and be treated similarly as in a class award.
Though simplistic in face-value, the above benchmarks can still pose problems if not adopted spiritedly. It is only logical that the situation in the industry reflects what obtains in academia. Basic degree level qualifications that are now sought by prospective employers will be a boon to Sri Lankan students seeking a degree to further their ambitions.
This essentially warrants competence, the basis of which should admittedly be a structured form of education backed by a broad theoretical and scientific know-how. This needs a minimum stay at the university environment too, to boost some important attributes.
However, offering programs at various entities under the label of ‘equivalents’ without any concern over fundamentals specific to techno-based education programs should be a serious concern.
A good library and student resource centre with adequate reading and study material, computer laboratories with up-to-date hardware and software, fully-equipped engineering and science laboratories, classrooms with proper seating, space and basic facilities such as multimedia and internet are considered to be the absolute minimum for any university student. Therefore, common entrance and exit needs are often used as quality proxies which are an integral part of any accreditation scheme.
Accreditation is the certification of competency, authority, or credibility. The standards for accreditation are generally set by a peer review board to ensure that the certification practices are acceptable, typically meaning that they are competent to test and certify third parties, behave ethically and employ suitable quality assurance.
It is a function of professional bodies which should not be ‘assorted’ with lateral entries. In the same vein, it is important to see that any reciprocity proposals entered into with professional entities do not even by mistake impair the efficacy of ‘educational equity’ remembering that reciprocity eventually establishes precedent, as the central form of reasoning for subsequent arrangements.
The next important factor is whether it works in the long run. This is where a sustainable mechanism is carefully drafted with blessings of every member having some kind of stake in education. Accreditation, Membership Award, Lateral Entry must not be contingent upon each other, and instead each component must be addressed on its own merit.
For example, in awarding memberships of those students who successfully complete their degrees, the professional entity must be free enough to apply its own discretion, considering a host of various other factors such as national competency standards and so on.
The context is complex. However making the context more complicated is none other than a terrible wickedness particularly when a huge amount of money is pumped into and circulated within educational institutes on advertisements and promotions.
Publicity by word of mouth by former students, friends and workmates could be an influencing factor in decision making. With the multitude of available options in education, applicants have very limited time to explore the real learnings and comparing the program of study with other universities or colleges. This is true for academics as well.
However, education is not negotiable. In reality, the emanating competition reinforces ‘lemon’ theory that low quality students wipe out good quality students. Hence, it is time an analysis is done to check whether education and information are enough to empower decision makers to make ‘good’ decisions, at the faculty and senate level. In a nutshell, institutionalisation of transparency and competitiveness help avoid back door entry and idiosyncrasies of ‘individual panel members’.