A thousand graduates : conflict in university development in Papua New Guinea, 1961-1976

Abstract

THE history of university development in Papua New Guinea is one of conflict between government and the university institutions, and between and within the institutions themselves. The conflict arose as government, university institutions, and various groups and individuals within the institutions sought to control the course of development. The country’s education system took many years to reach maturity, and thus the stage where conflict over the universities became a significant issue. Though the first missionaries established primary schools in the late nineteenth century, the large-scale development of secondary and tertiary education did not occur for another sixty to seventy years. The poor development of the lower levels of the education system meant that the foundation of university institutions was delayed until the mid-1960s. The late inception of university education brought much criticism upon the Australian government, which came under increasing pressure at home and abroad to implement a scheme for university education in preparation for eventual independence. In the end, when it became convinced that the time for university development was opportune, the Australian government engaged a commission of inquiry - the Currie Commission - to investigate the question. The Currie Report of 1964 was the first milestone in the development of Papua New Guinea’s university system. It recommended the establishment of an autonomous university whereas most people expected simply a university college of an Australian university. Such a proposal in that day and age was so radical government procrastinated for a year before taking action on the Report. Under pressure of continual criticism it finally gave way in 1965 and announced it would set up an autonomous university and an associated technological institute. Councils for the two new institutions were set up in late 1965 and began work immediately to plan the introduction of university teaching. They experienced many difficulties in becoming operational. Life for the first students and teachers was therefore hard, but despite this they made an immediate impact on Papua New Guinean society. It was obvious that the university institutions would become major agents for social change. In their early years the university institutions faced many problems. One of the earliest and most difficult arose over relations between the two institutions, the University and the technological institute, over control of the campus they shared. This was a source of such major disagreement that eventually the Institute moved to Lae. A further area of difficulty was relations between the institutions and the government. Government, which was funding the institutions, believed it should have a controlling voice in the way they developed; but the institutions, being autonomous, resisted government control and regarded attempts to guide them as unwarranted interference. Two issues in particular revealed the tension between the parties - budgeting and the control of medical education. The controversies which arose over such questions enabled government and institutions to establish a modus vivendi with each other, though the potential for further conflict was always there. The University and technological institute were only two of the tertiary training institutions established in the 1960s. Many other institutions had been set up, and consequently there were problems of co-ordination to achieve the most rational and economic use of resources. Government endeavours to produce better co-ordination led to problems with the university institutions, who interpreted government action as an attempt to undermine their academic autonomy. Government, however, was determined to effect a more economic use of resources and subsequently engaged another committee of inquiry, the Brown Committee, to examine the question, in 1971. This led to a proposed scheme which promised to co-ordinate all tertiary training institutions in a national organization. The scheme, however, was never implemented because in the meantime the transfer of political power between colonial and national governments had taken place, and the national government decided the scheme was unsuitable. Although the Brown Committee proposals foundered, something of a national university system had nevertheless emerged from the uncoordinated mass of tertiary colleges. The medical college joined the University as its medical faculty, and the government’s secondary teachers' college later united with the University as well. In addition the technological institute achieved separate university status. To co-ordinate all this university effort a government agency, the Office of Higher Education, came into being. Together these institutions comprised a national university system, the formation of which revealed numerous tensions between the institutions and government, and between and within the institutions. The main problem within the institutions was conflicting views as to how they should operate and be developed. Between institutions the problem was one of competition, since they were essentially rivals for the same resources - status, government funds, students, new courses. The problem with government was its interest in getting best value for its investment, and where it tried to do this by restraining institutional ambition conflict inevitably arose. The tensions which became apparent through these various conflicts did much to shape the system which emerged. The high cost of the university institutions made national government acutely aware of the role of the universities in Papua New Guinea. With the sanction of its nationalist, self-reliant, egalitarian ideology, it demanded that the universities be ’responsive’ to its policy to justify the expenditure devoted to them. Government clearly wished to have more effective control of the universities to ensure a good return on the investment being made in them. This concern in 1973-74 led to a third major committee of inquiry, the Gris Committee, to examine university development. The Gris Report recommended a radical restructuring of the universities and their courses within a framework of a single national university. These proposals were unwelcome to many with vested interests in the university system, and as a result of the conflict which consequently arose the major proposals were scuttled. The period leading up to independence was one of uncertainty for national and expatriate populations alike. The uncertainty of the times seemed to be reflected in the universities, which appeared to become ever more conflict-ridden as independence approached. There was staff militancy over conditions of service, student dissent over questions of national policy, action by university women for more equitable treatment, demands for the reform of academic government, strident calls for localization of the key decision-making positions within the universities, and a questioning of the role of the universities leaders. But throughout the prevailing uncertainty the government seemed to become more sure of how it wanted the universities to develop. It clearly wanted greater control over their affairs, chiefly to guarantee the return on its investment, but also perhaps to curb their tendency towards privilege and an embarrassing independence. The government mood threatened many of the values they held dear, in particular their academic autonomy and their role as the conscience of the nation. Yet because government held the purse strings, and seemed more inclined to draw these tightly around the universities, it seemed likely that government will would eventually prevail. Show more