Every good idea has a limited shelf life. “Free” education as C W W Kannangara conceived it in the early 1940s is one such idea. It is true that the Kannangara policy has brought enormous benefits to the country. The adult literacy rate of over 90% in the country is one such benefit. The “free” system has also established some degree of equity in access to education at all levels. But the 1940s “free” education that Kannangara created no longer exists. What does exist is a set of myths that prevents meaningful reform of the system.

Myth 1: Sri Lanka has “free” education. Students who attend state schools, universities and other state tertiary facilities do not pay tuition fees. School children get their textbooks free of charge. A relatively small number of fifth standard scholars and Mahapola undergraduates get a subsistence grant. But this is not the sum total of education. Private tuition is a multi billion rupee industry. “International” schools account for a small but not inconsequential percentage of children attending school. Private fee-levying university programs are growing. Some branches of professional education such as accountancy and information technology are largely available only on a fee-paying basis.

Myth 2: Free education protects equity and helps the poor. At best this is a half truth. Consider the facts. After two generations of “free” education about 5% of adult males and 10% of adult females remain illiterate. In other words some of the poorest in our society do not get even a primary education. Only 11% of the age cohort that can be in tertiary education gets that privilege. In fact only a mere 3% of that age cohort gets a university education. While some children from poor families get into this privileged 11% it is likely that the majority are from the relatively well off middle class and not from the poor segment of our population.

Myth 3: The present education system meets the 21st century needs of the nation and should be protected. The evidence suggests the opposite. Consider the following. In 2005 the government recruited, largely for political reasons, 46,000 graduates to an already over-staffed and underpaid bureaucracy. The very same graduates are rejected by the private sector in preference to young men and women with A-levels from the so called “good” schools. The US equivalent would be IBM or Microsoft Corporation rejecting graduates from Harvard, Yale, or Maryland University in preference to kids from high schools, a situation that cannot ever be contemplated in a country that has a decent university education system.

Myth 4: The JVP-dominated student unions and some trade unions such as the GMOA are protectors of the rights of the poor and the under-privileged in education. This is a patently false claim. They do protect the privileges of the lucky minority, some rich, some poor and mostly middle class who are lucky enough to get into the system. But they have become a major impediment to the development of Sri Lanka's education system, especially tertiary education. Here are two examples. They oppose private medical education. If private education is allowed in almost all other branches of education why not in medical education? They also oppose any form of fee levying in state universities. About two years ago a fee levying program of training that the Galle Medical School wanted to conduct was opposed. This is ridiculous. If there are qualified applicants who cannot afford the fees, grants can be given. But in a resource-starved education system those who can afford to pay must be asked to pay. That is real equity. Students Unions and the likes of the Government Medical Officers Association (GMOA) are posing off as progressives in education when in reality they represent the most pernicious form of reaction.

In our view free education from grade 01 to grade 12 must be protected and guaranteed to every child. The present system that allows private schools from grade 01 to grade 12 also makes good economic sense because on a self-selecting basis some of those who can afford to pay choose private schools. The government must address two basic issues to enhance equity. First, the failure of the primary system to reach and retain the poorest 5% to 10% of the community must be rectified. Second, the massive inequities that exist in the state school system Royal College verses Wanathamulla Vidyalaya syndrome must be reduced.

In post-secondary and tertiary education the present tuition-free state system should be replaced with a comprehensive system of mean-tested grants, scholarships and loans. The basic principles are simple. Enhance to the maximum access to tertiary education for everybody irrespective of the capacity to pay. But do not give “free” higher education out of a misplaced and misconceived sense of equity. There is absolutely no reason for graduates such as doctors who get into the highest earning bracket in the labour force not to pay back some of the expenses that the state has incurred for their education.

Finally, in the past fifty years the almost exclusive focus in education has been on equity. While further enhancing equity we must shift our focus to quality.