 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 11 - 17 May 2000 Issue No. 481 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 11 - 17 May 2000 Issue No. 481
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Books Features Interview Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters A university storm
By Shaden Shehab
One cannot read a newspaper or a magazine or watch television these days without coming across the raging debate over the draft of a new universities law. The Supreme Universities Council (SUC) disclosed the contents of the draft at the end of last month and, since then, they became the talk of the town, especially in educational circles.
The only point of consensus appears to be that it is high time for a new university law because the legislation currently in force, passed in 1972, reflects a society that no longer exists. Officials have modified it more than once, turning it into a patchwork that lacks consistency.
An article in the draft law that has caused a major uproar deals with the teaching staff. As in the provisions of the current law, the teaching staff are classified as ameleen (active) if they have not yet reached the retirement age of 60. Once they reach 60, they are classified as mutafarregheen (full-timers), but they cannot occupy leading administrative positions. Financially, they are paid pensions as well as bonuses to make up for the difference between the pension and their previous salaries. These provisions are valid for life.
The new draft law, however, slammed restrictions. At the age of 64, the draft law stipulates, the status of being a full-timer is subject to renewal by the university council every two years until the staffer reaches the age of 70. If not renewed or upon reaching the age of 70, the full-timer is designated a part-timer, with his duties confined to conducting scientific research and supervising MA and PhD theses.
At a meeting between Higher Education Minister Moufid Shehab and chairmen of the teaching staff's social clubs on 30 April, complaints were aired that retired professors would be humiliated, being placed at the mercy of university councils in order to be allowed to serve as full-timers until the age of 70. Similar complaints were voiced through the press and media. Shehab responded by amending the article so that professors would automatically serve as full-timers until the age of 70.
But adding salt to the wound, the SUC decided on 20 April that priority to teach undergraduates should be given to professors under the age of 60, with full-timers teaching post-graduates, unless their services with the undergraduates are needed. This system is to be implemented in the next academic year.
The total number of universities' teaching staff is 48,000, including 2,000 between the ages of 60 and 70 and 800 above 70.
The article in the draft law dealing with the age classification and the decisions taken by the council have triggered an outcry in educational circles. Some were so confused they thought the council's decisions were part of the new draft law.
"The draft law is so unfair and complicates matters for no logical reason," No'man Goma'a, an over-60 professor at Cairo University's Faculty of Law and deputy chairman of the liberal Wafd Party, told Al-Ahram Weekly. "Getting rid of professors at the age of 70 is brutal. Not only that, but paying them pensions only is like condemning them to humiliation and need," he complained.
Goma'a said that "depriving full-timers of teaching undergraduates is like telling them 'you are of no good use anymore.'" He wondered whether "experience is a bad thing these days. What is happening is definitely not to the students' benefit." Goma'a added that the decisions taken by the SUC contradict the 1972 law that equates professors under 60 with ones above that age.
Helmi Nammar, a full-time professor at Cairo University's Faculty of Commerce and a member of the SUC, told the Weekly, "It is awkward to criticise the draft law and the decisions made by the SUC while being a council member, but there are things that have to be discussed and amended for the sake of all." He argued that the SUC's making decisions on the teaching staff before the law is passed is unacceptable." Nammar said that it is the business of university councils, and not the Supreme Council, to define professors' specialties. He added that "depriving professors above 60 from teaching undergraduates will empty universities of distinguished, efficient professors." Furthermore, Nammar said that "after the age of 70, a pension alone will not provide a decent life to a person who gave his life to the university. And confining professors above 70 to supervising and conducting research is to reduce them to mere decorations."
In response, Minister Shehab told the Weekly that there was no intention to get rid of professors of any age because "they are invaluable." He explained that the goal is to give professors below 60 the opportunity to gain experience and become involved in university life. "People like Taha Hussein, Ahmed Lotfi El-Sayed and Mustafa Musharaffa made way for the next generation when they reached 60, but their contribution to the university did not stop," he said.
As a result of overstaffing, Shehab said, "there are some who have reached the age of 54 and have not had the opportunity to teach students or publish a book. The law is an attempt to realise justice for the teaching staff."
Moreover, Shehab wondered why the law's more than 30 other articles, dealing with ways to upgrade education, are being ignored. "At any rate, this is only a preliminary draft of the law and we are open to suggestions from all," he said.
Galal Abdel-Hamid, secretary-general of the SUC, was surprised by the outcry. "What is all this uproar about?" he asked. "It is a sure fact that people over 70 are physically less capable than when they were younger. Let us give the new generations a chance to excel."
Abdel-Hamid said that the "crux of the matter is that professors over 60 are furious because if they are not allowed to teach undergraduates, this means they will be unable to sell students the books they have authored on the subjects they teach and, thus, will lose thousands of pounds in income."
Concerning the reliance on pensions after the age of 70, he explained that the draft suggests the establishment of a pension fund to make up for the decline in income. "No one wants professors to become financially needy at this age, although most have other financial sources," Abdel-Hamid said.
Another point of contention is that the draft stipulates the establishment of the post of chair. To be eligible for this post, a candidate must have been a professor for at least five years, must have obtained a PhD at least 15 years prior to his candidacy, must have conducted distinguished research and studies and must have a clean record.
Goma'a believes this provision will create "unnecessary competition and jealousies between professors, making them similar to students sitting for an examination to prove their scope of knowledge."
Shehab responded that the aim of the provision "is to provide an incentive for scientific research, because when teachers are promoted to the post of professor, they usually stop conducting research."
Another controversial point in the draft is that the post of faculty dean will be filled by appointment, not election. The dean will be appointed by the president of the university for a three-year term, renewable only once. The university president is appointed by presidential decree.
Hassan Ghallab, president of Ain-Shams University and a member of the committee that prepared the draft law, told the Weekly why he thinks this provision is advantageous. "This will prevent the division of the faculty into camps favouring one person or the other and will remove unnecessary sensitivities between professors because there will be no competition for the post of dean," he said.
However, Farouk Ismail, former president of Cairo University, said that "although we call for greater democracy, this step is being taken in the opposite direction. It is not to the benefit of universities."
The draft law was prepared by a 15-member committee of educationists that began work in 1998. It will be discussed by Shehab with the SUC, the People's Assembly, the Shura Council and student unions. A final draft is expected to reach the cabinet by the end of October, to be forwarded later to the People's Assembly for endorsement.
