Lec. 5. Promoting Ethnic Cohesion: Possible Activities

1. HETC Project University Development Grants (UDGs) Training Program for Proposal Writers Lec. 5. Promoting Ethnic Cohesion: Possible Activities by Professor Laksiri Fernando

2. Background • The main objective of the University Development Grants (UDG), as it is explained in the “Guidelines for Proposal Preparation”, is “to strengthen the economic and social relevance of university programmes.” • There are four proposed activity areas to achieve this objective and • the purpose of the activity for the “promotion of ethnic cohesion among students and staff” is to address the “social relevance of university programmes.”

3. Objectives of the ethnic cohesion activity could be considered mainly three fold: • To maintain and promote ethnic harmony within the university (student & staff) • To produce graduates who would promote and contribute to ethnic harmony in the country • To contribute to ethnic harmony in the country as an academic community in policy terms   Objectives

4. Definition • ‘Ethnic cohesion’ is another name for ethnic harmony in a more positive and a constructive manner. • Ethnic cohesion entails two main components: • visibility of boundaries • level of interaction.

5. Overall Picture

6. Two Kinds • There are two kinds of activity that universities could conduct to promote ethnic cohesion: • intra-university • inter-university. • For universities with multi-ethnic composition, the best would be to concentrate on intra-university activities. • For universities with largely mono-ethnic composition, the best would be to go for inter-university (cross-university) activities to achieve the same objective.

7. Assessing Problems/Issues • The necessary or desirable activities under ethnic cohesion should be worked out by individual universities. • They should first assess the exact problems of ethnic cohesion both within the particular university and in relation to the larger society. • It is advisable to involve both students and staff in this process, however, keeping it in mind not to get distracted by incidental or ephemeral issues.

8. Three Models of Cohesion • There can be three models where ethnic groups exist within a university context. • These can be named as • cohesive • neutral • non-cohesive. • These three can also be understood as cooperative, neutral and non-cooperative.

9. Visibility of boundaries is low in terms of language, dress or practices. • Medium of instruction is the same (English) for all students. • Multi-ethnic class room is the norm. • Teachers are from different ethnicities but not vocal of their identity. • Level of interaction is high in class, outside, in terms of friendships and extracurricular activities. • Students eat together and live together in hostels or boarding places. • Cohesion among staff is reflected in joint research and papers by multi-ethnic groups. Cohesive Model

10. Ethnic boundaries are visible but moderate in terms of language, dress and practices. • Students may be physically separated by the medium of instruction. • Multi-ethnic class is rare unless consciously organized. • Bi-lingual teaching may be available but rare. • Students interact with teachers across ethnic barriers but with effort. • There is no tension. • Different ethnic groups exist side by side. • Staff interacts across boundaries but keep close friendships within respective groups. • Joint research or papers are rare. Neutral Model

11. Ethnic boundaries are clearly visible in respect of language, dress and practices. • Students are formed into clear ethnic groups. • Even if there are common classes, the students immediately separate themselves into their own enclaves. • Non-cohesive situation could exist irrespective of common medium of instruction. • Often there are instigators to exacerbate mistrust and misunderstanding. • The teachers may be helpless or unconcerned. • There can be divisions among the teachers themselves. Non-Cohesive Model

12. Problems • The existence of different configurations of ethnic cohesion (harmony) will be the outcome of several factors. • The country situation at large might be the key factor. • The end of the war in this sense is an opportunity or a golden opportunity to promote ethnic cohesion in a sustainable manner. • But the same factor or the way the war ended might also be an obstacle.

13. Problems • There can be some suspicions about the intensions of the program. • Those may come from the minority community or the majority community. • These may have to be alleviated if the program has to be an unqualified success. • As the Sinhalese are the overwhelming majority in a large number of universities, except in the North and the East, some of the friendship initiatives should come from them towards the other ethnic communities. • This should work the other way round in the North and the East.

14. Necessary Approach • The second requirement is the most ‘scientific’ approach that the program has to adopt. • The activities under ethnic cohesion have to address some key questions obstructing the cohesion. • Peripheral activities to the issue however much they are attractive in academic terms or dear to respective academics might not reap results.

15. Practical Considerations • What activities could you initiate? • Of course it is up to you to decide, given the specific situation, • but the following are some general guidelines on possible activities.

16. Knowledge factor is the most important in ethnic harmony and cooperation. • This means knowledge about different ethnic/religious cultures and languages. • This could be done through • teaching/learning • educational material • seminars and workshops • joint projects/activity. • A best method to bring necessary knowledge to the undergraduates is to introduce a formalized ‘Course Unit in Multiculturalism’ at the first year foundation level in a multi-ethnic classroom setting followed by other activities in succeeding levels and years. Knowledge Factor

17. A Mechanism • A most important need of the project activity would be its sustainability. • A mechanism could be designed and implemented as a sub-project activity to achieve this objective. • For example, the setting up of a Sinhala / Tamil/ Muslim Brotherhood/Sisterhood Cultural Centre could be such a mechanism. • The title is given here in the most flexible manner to select alternative naming. It could simply be “Multicultural Centre” or “Sinhala/Tamil/Muslim Brotherhood” or any other.

18. In implementing the present project and allocation, what I am suggesting is mainly the creation of a Centre and Certification on Multiculturalism. The latter is in addition to a Foundation Course.

19. If any university goes for the Centre, obviously budgeting for Works and Goods may take an immediate priority. • But the allocation for Consultancies and Other Services are also important because it is through these budget lines that the exact multicultural educational programs could be implemented. • These could entail • teaching/learning • production of educational material • seminars and workshops • joint projects/activity.

20. Teaching/Learning Foundation Course Educational Material Multicultural Centre Seminars/Workshops Certification Course Joint Projects/ Activities

21. Conclusion • Ethnic cohesion in the universities and the country is important. I would have preferred a better allocation (more than 5-10 percent) for this activity under UDG given its critical importance.

22. Thank You for Your Attention !