There are precedents in various countries around the world for forming "search committees" to appoint vice-chancellors in universities. Such search committees play an important role particularly in the appointment of vice-chancellors in both public and private universities in the United States, Japan and other countries.
These search committees often go on to form various subcommittees to oversee the process of appointing a vice-chancellor. Such committees typically include experienced faculty members such as deans, former vice-chancellors, teacher representatives, undergraduate and postgraduate student representatives, as well as members of the university’s alumni association.
This is somewhat similar to the system in our country’s universities governed by the 1973 ordinance, where the Chancellor can select one individual for the post of vice-chancellor from among nominees proposed by Senate members. However, in Bangladesh, these rules largely exist only on paper and are not effectively implemented. For decades, vice-chancellors have been appointed under a bureaucratic framework within the umbrella of the Ministry of Education, following the directives of the Chancellor.
However, the Government of Bangladesh has recently announced the formation of a search committee to select qualified candidates for the appointment of vice-chancellors in the country’s public universities. According to a report published online by Prothom Alo on 1 April, the six-member search committee will be chaired by the Secretary of the Secondary and Higher Education Division.
Other members will include the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Dhaka, the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Rajshahi, a member of the University Grants Commission, and a professor from the Marketing Department of the University of Dhaka. In addition, the Additional Secretary (University) of the Secondary and Higher Education Division will serve as the member-secretary of the committee.
Structurally, the position of vice-chancellor in public universities should rank above that of secretaries. But ironically, the responsibility of appointing vice-chancellors in public universities is now influenced by the bureaucratic administrative system.
On what basis a secretary becomes part of a search committee for appointing a vice-chancellor is unclear; although such a precedent is not found in universities in other countries, it is being allowed in our universities. The country seems to be moving in a strange and paradoxical way. Even from a straightforward perspective, a secretary enters the civil service after completing undergraduate or postgraduate studies and passing the public service commission examination.
In reality, these BCS cadre officials, who remain immersed in routine official and administrative structures, have very limited opportunities and experience in matters related to universities—such as research, evaluation of academic papers, or overseeing the creativity of research. Although they may have control within education-related administrative frameworks, they are often unfamiliar with the research work of university professors or the academic policies of teaching and learning. Yet, when they sit at the top of the process of appointing vice-chancellors, it becomes almost impossible to ensure the selection of qualified leaders for universities in that country.
For a long time, university teachers in this country have had the experience, complaints, of having to go from office to office, appealing to ministry secretaries to secure government funding for research proposals. Even though many faculty members with PhDs and research experience from abroad have expressed dissatisfaction with the funding process in ministries, the government has not been able to bring about any change in this regard. Now, the appointment of vice-chancellors is being added to that same pattern. By drawing universities into a bureaucratic framework, it seems this government is about to drive the final nail in the coffin of higher education, rendering it “spineless.”
Those who have been appointed as vice-chancellors, without going through search committees and without prior experience as vice-chancellors, will now be the ones selecting new vice-chancellors. In any case, in our country, the "political" appointment of vice-chancellors never really stops. By appointing teachers loyal to particular parties as vice-chancellors, governments and political parties have, for decades, effectively strangled universities. When spineless vice-chancellors are in charge, universities are unable to breathe in terms of creative education and research; in such a situation, these search committees are likely to remain confined within a one-party or one-sided ideological framework.
There may be a search committee for appointing vice-chancellors, but before that, the university laws should be amended. The search committee should be free from bureaucratic influence. Faculty members from the university where the vice-chancellor is to be appointed should be included in the committee
We are already witnessing the condition of the country’s primary, secondary, and higher secondary education systems, which are struggling within a bureaucratic structure. Issues surrounding teacher recruitment, posting, and promotion frequently make newspaper headlines. Yet now, by placing the responsibility of appointing university vice-chancellors within that same loop, the government may feel relieved, but the very concept embodied by the word "university" risks evaporating into nothing. If everything is absorbed into a bureaucratic framework, it is worth questioning whether institutions with distinct identities will ultimately become crippled.
The biggest question is whether, before forming this search committee, the universities that nominally enjoy “paper autonomy” have actually amended their own rules for appointing vice-chancellors.
Under the 1973 ordinance governing Bangladesh’s four major universities (Dhaka, Rajshahi, Chittagong, and Jahangirnagar), Clause 11(1) clearly states that the Chancellor shall appoint one vice-chancellor for a four-year term from a panel of three nominees proposed by the Senate, under specified conditions. Has this provision of the university governance ordinance been changed? Similarly, in science and technology universities, where the law provides for the direct appointment of vice-chancellors by the Chancellor instead of through the Senate—if those provisions have not been amended, then under what legal framework are we now forming search committees and planning such appointments?
Yes, it is true that public universities in this country lack the financial capacity to run independently. Even if they develop such capacity, the general population would not be able to bear the cost of higher education in the way it is done in foreign institutions. As a result, so-called “public” universities, funded by the government, operate under its directives. However, if we withdraw from the global concept of a university, then our generation seeking higher education will be deprived of the true essence of university learning.
There may be a search committee for appointing vice-chancellors, but before that, the university laws should be amended. The search committee should be free from bureaucratic influence. Faculty members from the university where the vice-chancellor is to be appointed should be included in the committee, along with representatives from other universities, student representatives, and individuals with prior experience serving as vice-chancellors at that institution. If necessary, expatriate Bangladeshis serving as faculty members at universities abroad could also be included.
The academic appointment system should remain solely in the hands of skilled and experienced academics, kept away from political parties and bureaucratic administrative officials. Unless a precedent is established for appointing vice-chancellors based purely on merit, beyond political considerations and party lines, the decline of higher education cannot be prevented. At the same time, if appointed vice-chancellors cannot overcome partisan bias, universities will fail to foster creativity and openness in education and research.
* Nadim Mahmud is a researcher, University of California. email: nadim.ru@gmail.com
* The views expressed here are the author’s own.