For Release Upon Receipt - February 22, 2010
Cave Hill
The challenges facing our country and campus as we prepare citizens for this long century are many and interlocked.
We have embarked on a project to build a world class university environment at Cave Hill. We have created a network of support: governments, private sector, alumni and international donors. We have signed Memoranda of Understanding with dozens of distinguished universities to enable the exchange of students and professors, and to integrate international best practices into our system. We have globalised Cave Hill in order to ensure its sustainability.
But there are challenges. Some of these are related to rising costs, and others to the stresses and strains of transformation, structural change, growth and expansion. Some of these are short term, others systemic, but we are aware of them and have developed management strategies.
Creating and sustaining a first class university in a developing country is no easy matter. We have had to be at once bold and cautious, courageous and careful. There is little room for error, but risks we must take. Some
We have endemic macro-economic challenges in the funding model for the university. There is a tendency for the unit cost in higher education everywhere to rise at a faster rate than the unit cost in other areas of the economy. Quality university education generally requires a high investment, and if well done reaps returns that are extremely valuable to society. We have an opportunity to engage public policy makers in government and private sector on how best to invest scarce resources in The University to build our social capital for development.
The organizing concept we used in our strategic plan, 2002-2007, was “at least one graduate per household”. This enabled us to focus on expansion of access by all citizens. Access to university education has been the most reliable poverty alleviator in
The growth of students at Cave Hill has been satisfactory, moving from some 3,000 to near 9,000 between the end of the 20th Century to 2010. In a shorter period, the
The growth of Cave Hill’s enrolment has unlocked the full potential of Barbadian citizens, and has unleashed the desire of the youth for education, and mature citizens for professional advancement. It has also lowered the per capita cost of Cave Hill from the highest of the campuses to the lowest. We are now more efficient than ever before in resource use.
But this growth has raised questions about ‘quality’, an academic concept generally misunderstood in popular discussion, but one that requires clarity of comprehension for debate on the future of the university enterprise.
A ‘quality’ university is one that serves the development needs of the community that funds it; that is, its fitness to deliver on the purposes for which it was established. The next step is to drill down and look at the quality of the student intake, its output as graduates, the quality of senior academics, teaching skills and competence, relevance of research, the quality of physical facilities, the modernity of the learning environment, and of course the social provisions made for students to enjoy the learning experiences.
Critically, a campus should have rules, regulations, and institutional systems to measure, audit, report, regulate, and enhance all of these features, and how they interrelate. This is known as the quality assurance system. It is required in order to achieve national and international accreditation, and importantly, programme recognition to assure graduate global mobility.
At Cave Hill we have gone about quality assurance very scientifically, and have received national, regional and international recognition for our success. This does not mean that we do not have ongoing problems, but there are mechanisms for their correction.
All students who enter the Cave Hill Campus are qualified to enter, having met the university’s matriculation requirements as set out centrally by the Senate of the University. Cave Hill has not, and cannot, offend these requirements. A greater cross section of student competencies now enters the campuses, which is normal to all universities that have a non-elitist access policy.
In the early 1970s changes to the university matriculation regulations enabled more students to enter with what is known as “lower level matriculation”, that is students with five or more ‘O’ Levels and later CXCs who enrolled in a “4 year” as opposed to a “3 year” degree. The Faculties of Law and Medicine held strictly to an ‘A’ level requirement. This policy accommodated Cave Hill and later Mona. St. Augustine held more closely to the traditional route because the government built more sixth forms, community colleges, and technical institutes. But a Lower level matriculation student does not necessarily perform less satisfactory than a “full” matriculation student. All students go through a learning experience in order to reach the required standard for graduation.
Teachers more than before are challenged to be more creative and innovative, and Faculties to be development-oriented towards students. A larger number of students are a challenge to teachers, and present an opportunity to test their commitment and skills. But, they should not be condemned nor dismissed. Very proficient students bring blessings as well as challenges of their own.
In addition, there has also been a radical transformation in the age composition of the Cave Hill student population. In the 1980s the average age was about 30; mature students were the norm. They were easier to teach and less challenging. Today near 60% of the students are under 24. The Cave Hill student is now mostly a school leaver. Young students have changed the identity of the campus; they have different attitudes, aptitudes, and are not fairly to be compared with their older predecessors. A few colleagues who taught during the 1980s are challenged to adjust to this explosion of youth on the campus. Not all of us from the old school are equipped to communicate with the burgeoning new cohort. They have special needs. To this end we have now required that all new lecturers must undergo teacher training. Many of these young persons do not have enough experience with independent learning. But they qualify to enter and we are rising to the challenge of developing them.
We have also been tracking the growth and quality of academic staff. We measure these variables, and benchmark them in comparison with the other UWI campuses, and comparable public British and American universities. We also audit the growth of teaching facilities. The new buildings that have sprung up, many financed by the private sector, are a response to this scientific planning process and the need to provide high quality teaching spaces.
The reviewing and auditing of the quality process is undertaken by the Campus Quality Management Team and the University-wide Quality Assurance Unit. Cave Hill is intensely audited for quality, and Faculties have done very well in implementing critical quality recommendations. Recently the campus was audited by the
With respect to the product that is a Cave Hill graduate, what obtains is the normal distribution found in all universities. Generally speaking, about ten percent of them might be classified as “exceptional”, another 20% very good, 40% good, and the remaining 30%, average. What some teachers and employers have experienced is the growth of the ‘average’: 30% of 2000 was not good, but 30% of 8,000 is disturbing.
Employers in
Our students now have first class sports and co-curricula facilities and have done very well, winning national, regional, and international competitions. Student leaders have become the co-creators of the new campus environment.
Cave Hill, like Mona and
Cave Hill is on the threshold of becoming a cutting edge physical and electronic learning environment. It will serve
The funding model will require from time to time some refinement. The introduction of the Student Amenities Fee, for example, was controversial but has empowered students at Cave Hill with an investment in new services and facilities ranging from a world class soccer field to comprehensive health care for all. The private sector has invested heavily in campus modernization, and regional and international donors – IADB, USAID, E.U., CIDA, OAS, CDB, IDRC and many others, have funded research and new programmes We are working with the government in this difficult fiscal time to restructure budgets for operations and capital. It is a creative and responsible dialogue and we congratulate the Prime Minister, government Ministers and officials, for setting the context and laying out the vision for a new approach to resource investment in the university.
Hilary Beckles,
Pro-Vice Chancellor & Principal