Let me repeat my argument.

If the government can spend enough money to produce graduates, obviously the country does not need, it has all the reasons in the world to spend money producing technicians the country need.

Yes, private technical collages are always welcome (some do exist even now) but so are private universities. I am sure we need more private universities at this point than private technical colleges.

There is no point maintaining the government monopoly on the university education and ask private sector to provide technical education.

The issue is a public monopoly that does not work and a population that refuses to accept the reality. A population that believes in thinking up ways to spend non existent public funds to create absolute social equity when they let inequalities exist within their own spheres of influence. How many of us have maids whose children do not have the same access to quality education that our own children have? Does that stop us from using old-boy old-girl connections to get our children into popular public schools? Why not share poor quality with all until at least the people in one’s sphere of influence have equal access to education? Finding somebody who believes and practices equality in education would be like kisa Gotami getting her handful of Aba (mustard).

Only way out is to build up enough private sector providers that can compete with government institutions. If the government technical colleges are not delivering students should be able to choose an alternate college, private or public, and the government subsidy should follow the student not institutions or tenured staff.

Right now the private sector (in nursing, catering, tailoring etc.)is developing in spite of government and the poor are paying taxes through every packet of milk and cylinder of gas and also paying out of pocket for private opportunities.

Why not have more technical education centres for these o/L dropouts?

If the govt spends Rs. 500,000 or above to produce a graduate in Buddhist Civilisation or Archeology the country does not need, I think it is very fair it spends much less amount to produce an electrician, technician, mechanics or carpenters the country do need.

Not that I say we do not have such education institutions today, but the supply is very low when you consider the demand.

I find this system is good because;
(a) then nobody will have high expectations that they cannot fulfill
(b) any country needs mechanics, carpenters, plumbers and electricians.
(c) they do not have to waste time looking for white collar jobs

True, everyone like a white collar job. But not everyone can get it. Directing everyone towards white collar jobs in not a viable solution, specially for a developing country.

It is much better to introduce standards to blue collar jobs and give some status to the technical people rather than looking down upon blue collar jobs.

[The data are for those sitting the A/L in 2000/2001; original source is regaining Sri Lanka document, p.11. The precentages could not changed significantly since then]

Yes, Ranil was the only politician to recognize the reality and he pushed as hard as he can during his brief time as PM.

Why are we hung up on graduates then?

The reasons are emotional, I think. University entrance is a big deal. From what I have seen, students who gain entry to university carry the hopes and dreams of not only their families but of those of the larger community that they come from. Their failure is a downer for all, I think.

We should stop the expansion of public universities but put more money per student. But the biggest push should be to get 90% or more of our students pass the GCE (O/L). They can do it, if there is enough help.
[www.educationforum.lk/2005/09/beyond-literacy-a-wish-list-for-sri-lanka/]

The number of graduates coming out of universities to the job market per year is in the range of 10,000.

On the other hand, the number of A/L dropouts is in the range of 100,000s. The number of O/L dropouts might be much more than that. (Sorry, I do not have the correct figures.)

The question is why we worry about that 10,000 while there are so many hundreds of thousands of youth out there looking for a job? (Many of them might have got enough marks to enter the universities, but the doors were closed to them in the name of standardisation. Lot many people out of that 10,000 would have scored LESS than them.)

Why both the government and the society at large never bothers about the unemployment problem among A/L and O/L dropouts? Why nobody bothers about the “higer education” of the A/L and O/L dropouts?

Why this 10,000 so important? Why only focus on this tine fraction of the population?

If I remember correctly Ranil Wickremesinghe was the only politician ever spoke about the A/L and O/L dropouts. He said in 1999, if UNP comes to power they plan to issue “vouchers” to everyone who completes A/Ls. Those vouchers could be used to gain admission to a higher education institute of one’s choice. However, the successive UNP govt. never implemented this plan.

If given a choice, I will always take the side of the A/L and O/L dropouts, rather than that of local graduates for two good reasons.

(a) A/L and O/L dropouts are much higher in number

(b) In case of graduates, the government has already invested public money more than Rs. 500,000 plus for their university education. Compared to that the investment govt. has done for A/L and O/L dropouts is very little. So it is very fair to focus on those who have got less.