|
Alexander Blagoev
Globalisation and higher education issues in our country
Prof. Alexander Blagoev, Dr. of Physics, was born in Sofia in 1943 and graduated the Faculty of Physics of Sofia University in 1968. Then he lectured at the Optics and Spectroscopy department at the Faculty of Physics of Sofia University, where he has been a full time professor since 2001 and Head of Department since 2003. In 1998 he defended his dissertation thesis and became Doctor of Physics, specializing in Plasma Physics. He has dozens of significant and acknowledged publications in that area.
Globalisation has emerged as a world phenomenon because the core capitalist countries have entered into a new stage of their development. This stage has been given various names: information society or post-industrial society, global society, knowledge society, turbo-capitalism, etc., all of them focusing on different aspects of its nature. What matters here is that over the last 10-15 years these core countries, using their summary superiority in the field of science and mainly in the new technologies, their financial capacity and the significant development of global communications, have drastically increased their labour productivity and organised mass production of goods with very high consumer value. In addition, they have taken control over the financial flows of the world, over the leading media and, last but not least, have created high-tech military forces, which they use to provide solutions to their political or economic problems by either direct intervention or threats in the political poker game. All that takes place in very short periods of time and over the entire globe. This transformation into a global, post-industrial society is expected to end by the middle of the century. The eventual goal of this policy, called globalism, aims to completely subordinate the rest of the world to these core countries so that they can exploit the world resources without having to wage great wars. After the collapse of the socialist system and its replacement by numerous new states with democratic forms of rule but with no single political will, at present there is no real force capable of opposing globalism.
Several articles have appeared in the socialist media emphasising that the ideal of the left forces should be the social version of globalisation, whereby sustainable development would be achieved through knowledge-based economy in the interest of a much wider circle of people, belonging to the so called "golden billion"; to protect the environment and to create a noosphere (knowledge- and reason-based society). As a theoretical postulate this sounds very tempting, but is such a version of globalisation viable at present? According to Benjamen Varon, the forces capable of globally rejecting capitalist civilisation have already been marked, but how much impact do they have, how well are they united and organised, what resources do they have, in order to expect a turn in the near future?
There are a number of other aspects of globalism, but our purpose here is not to study this phenomenon, but to see what are some of its consequences for our country and what we can do with our limited capacity.
Let us go back to where we started. One of the assumptions of globalism is scientific and technological superiority. Science, in its essence, is international. For example, talented children are born in India and in Argentina. Moreover, in these two countries some of them can also acquire excellent education and generate a good idea. The question, however, is where that idea can be transformed into a new market product. For instance, photoelectrets were discovered by Georgi Nadjakov, but the copying machine, which is based on that discovery, was invented in the USA.
It is well known that inventions appear where large teams of well-trained and motivated people are engaged and equipped with adequate funding. This is a key postulate and every one of the outlined aspects matters.
I. The Human Factor
Generally, it is possible for an invention to occur accidentally, but today no one relies on laymen. The time of great inventions made by self-educated genius laymen is long past. Let's say you are head of a team - you can only organise an efficient team if you can select from a wide range of professionals with adequate university or vocational degrees. Let us look now at who can select, and how, their staff for faculty and research teams, and above all for the technical institutes: the following are percentages of the population holding a higher education (HE) degree given by country: Israel - over 35%, Japan - 30%, USA - 26%, the Nordic countries - 12.5%, average for EU - 10.2%, Bulgaria - 8.5% (compared with Turkey - 3%). These figures are from the early 1990s, there may be some changes, but because of the emigration, regardless of the increased number of university students, I do not expect a rise of this indicator value for our country.
The policy of globalism is most markedly pursued by the USA, where 500 of the major trans-national companies are based. Why then, the United States, producing relatively so many people with higher education degrees, 'import' so many graduates - young as well as mature researchers and faculty! - while having a perfect system to produce their own professionals? The answer to this question is self-evident: by amassing human intellect and providing excellent work conditions American universities and research laboratories work consistently in the fore front of science. It is most frequently there that new scientific facts emerge, which gives birth to new ideas and preconditions the creation of new technologies. Provided with a generous financial support, both private and provided by the state, new technologies turn quickly into new market products. Here I must note that the USA does not shirk from having a 4.5% budget deficit, in spite of the fact that they are the largest debtor in the world.
After the changes in 1989, our country took its place among the countries supplying USA with fresh brain. Similar, though lesser, braindrain flows to the other developed capitalist core countries. EU integration processes, however, will increase this flow. Europe has been suffering that kind of pressure by the US for half a century. But for the developed European countries this migration of young scientists is not so dangerous - almost every medium-sized European city has a university of long tradition, which makes, along with the significant public support it commands, its well-developed educational system very vital. Furthermore, United Europe:
1. Undertakes measures to reintegrate its scientists by providing additional incentives for the scientists who have worked in the US but decided to come back.
2. There is a number of serious European programmes aiming to turn the EU into a scientific and technological leader.
3. West European countries partially solve their problem of insufficient specialists at the expense of Eastern Europe countries, among which is Bulgaria.
4. Europe does not suffer from the lack of finances which is the main reason for the emigration of young Bulgarians.
The situation in our country is quite different - it is precisely over the last 50 years that the 'critical mass' - allowing quality research by significant number of specialties - has been achieved. It is concentrated in the central higher education schools (HES) and in the institutes of the Bulgarian Academy of Science. The breached reproduction, due to the accelerated emigration of young scientists and capable students, will affect seriously the quality of education and will cause the closure of entire divisions.
The system of higher education has to produce high level professionals, valuable scientific product, while self-reproducing and developing successfully. These three functions are interrelated and mutually substantiated. If in one department, faculty or entire higher school one of these functions fails, that unit will inevitably stagnate, decline and finally die out in time. But because of the significant inertness of deterioration processes and the slowness of administrative changes that unit will produce low quality students for quite a long time. The most important factor for the successful implementation of the three functions in any HES is the availability of a strongly motivated and highly qualified faculty team. However, factors like good facilities, a good library, international contacts and mostly traditions should not to be underestimated.
Currently the average age of habilitated researchers, especially professors, is rather high - an average of 63. Still worse, the average age of assistant professors in the technical specialties and natural sciences is also too high. The major goals of education are well-known: a) good mass education, b) passing the genetic code of society to the next generation through education, and c) training the elite, i.e. those who, in some time, will be making strategic decisions.
Skipping the first two items, the question is: what will happen if there is no one to whom to transfer the accumulated experience? Because it is the most capable, the most active and the most strong-willed that emigrate! Then the potential accumulated over decades of effort will disperse. Thus, education will deteriorate and hence the quality of labour force will decline too. And this means a lot of negative consequences for the country. In this case, even if we become a EU member, we will remain for a long time within the tourism - services - agriculture triangle. From the semi-periphery of the industrial world we will be stuck for long in its periphery. By the way, this is where we are being driven by all our external 'benefactors'.
It must be clearly understood that human intelligence is a major resource and for it a war is being waged. This war is one of the characteristic features of globalisation. It is curious, for instance, why the Soros Foundation does not fund natural and technical science projects in Bulgaria.
II. Motivation
In our activities we are driven by numerous and various stimuli. A young person, however, cannot be expected to struggle on a miserable salary only for the love of science and teaching. Secondly - to a young professional it is very important to be able from the beginning to have personal fulfilment. And what could be better than getting that fulfilment in one's own fatherland? I have seen students crowding around famous scientists and lecturers. Therefore, we must support at all cost the work of these promising and viable units.
III. Funding
This is and has always been a very difficult problem. The difference from the past is that now the question is about survival. And if there is not enough money, what little money there is it has to go where the effect will be visible and guaranteed. For lack of space I am not going to list here the multitude of potentially successful tasks on which we are working here.
About EU integration. The process of establishing a single EU education space is irreversible. I am afraid, however, that soon it will be a one way street. There is an EU policy to restrain the draining of brain by supporting research locally, in the new member countries, but for various reasons this policy is not very popular and in most cases it cannot have critical importance. A radical change can only take place if the state addresses the problems of higher education and science.
To recap, in the conditions of lasting financial stagnation, we should strive to reduce this gigantic brain drain in order to maintain and develop the potential of the higher schools and research organisations so that they may accomplish their main tasks as factors of economic growth. In doing so our super task is to maintain the quality of education, as well as its accessibility for the prevalent number of impoverished Bulgarian families.
In the conditions of impoverishment, the steps for counteraction have to be prioritised according to time and then to scale:
Proposals:
1. Immediate significant increase of young specialists' and assistant professors' initial salaries. Analogically so doctoral fellowships, but while strictly controlled. Such reduction of the margin between full professors' and young staff salaries in higher education and research will not be welcomed by most members of academic circles but it must be done urgently. It must be accompanied by an increase of the benefits for a scientific degree (the state contributions). This is the only way to stimulate young people to go for HES employment and not take other parallel jobs!
2. Lifesaving financing of research in the vital and most promising units.
3. Changes in the legal basis: Higher Education Act, Scientific Degrees and Titles Act, as well as other laws and by-laws regulating the normal functioning of HES (HAC, NEC) and facilitating private funding, etc.
4. Increase the salaries of faculty and research staff with relevant ranging according to titles and degrees.
5. Annual increase by 0.2% of the GDP allotted for Higher Education until it reaches the level of 1.2%.
In conclusion I will quote the American economist Lindon La Rouche (George M. Rainov's book 'Economy and Morality'): 'The real economy of a modern country depends on the degree of development of three components of the so called hard infrastructure - energy, railway transport and access to clean water, as well as on three components of the so called soft infrastructure: housing, healthcare and education'.
With a well functioning infrastructure of this kind the economy can resume working at a high rate.
It is the responsibility of the Left to maintain what has been accomplished and continue modernising the country. It will not be easy at all. To illustrate my last words, here is 'State Gazette' - Issue 18/1.03.2004, p. 55-56. What kind of society of knowledge will we find ourselves in if ministry employees get professor salaries, while the average salaries of ordinary education staff, from school teachers to university professors, are the lowest of those in all institutions?
|
|
