UWI shortcomings reflect badly

On Tuesday, students staged a noisy protest outside campus principal Bhoendradatt Tewarie’s office. They were objecting to increased fees which, apparently, had been dropped on them without warning. The new fees have reportedly been instituted because of a $35 million debt incurred by the faculty. After a two-hour meeting with Dr Tewarie, the students were told that the new fees would not apply to Trinidad and Tobago students.

It seems, then, that this incident could have been avoided if the students had been told well in advance that their fees were to be increased. By springing the announcement on them, UWI’s administration sparked off the typical response among Trinbagonians of any class — to take up placards and chant. But citizens respond this way because our culture is one where the powers-that-be often have no respect for genuine dialogue; and the UWI administrators certainly invited this action on themselves through what was either incompetence or sheer discourtesy.

Then, by the very next day, the matter became even more convoluted when Tertiary Education Minister Mustapha Abdul-Hamid revealed that UWI had previously agreed not to increase students’ fees. Mr Abdul-Hamid referred to correspondence between his Ministry and Dr Tewarie’s office, sent on June 29, in which the Medical Faculty’s financial problems were discussed and the Government made it clear that it did not support an increase in fees. The Government, according to the Tertiary Education Minister, was also willing to take up the financial slack, once UWI submitted a proposal. Yet the first proposal submitted from the country’s highest academic institution failed to include specifics about how the increased funding would be utilised. By the time a second proposal was submitted, it was already September. And then, two weeks later, the new fees had been introduced.

Even if this confusion was the result of miscommunication, it still reflects a great degree of inefficiency on the part of UWI’s administration. If it is not that, then someone is playing games for some unknown purpose. But such inefficiency in other areas has been highlighted in recent weeks by UWI students as they prepared to return to campus. There have been complaints of late timetables, inadequate classroom space, lack of communication between departments, and a mix-up in hall accommodations for students from the other Caribbean islands. Students have also remarked on the dismissive and discourteous attitude of the administrative staff.

Much of these problems are the result of an increased student intake, made essentially for the purpose of increasing the percentage of university graduates in the society. Since the core goal is political rather than social, this intake has happened without adequate preparation. But this does not excuse UWI’s leadership for allowing the situation to develop. The present shortcomings reflect badly on an institution which, as a centre of higher learning, is expected to also adhere to higher standards of bureaucratic competence and behaviour. The university cannot simply be a reflection of the wider society. It has to lead the country to a better future, and it has to do so by setting a better example in the present.