Bulletin Number Two 1983

University Development in the Commonwealth —Issues and Trends By I.C.M, Maxwell formerly Deputy Director of the Inter-University Council and Secretary of the First and Second Fulton Commissions on The Chinese University of Hong Kong Trends and issues in less developed countries The 1960s was a time when university expansion was the order of the day, when the wind of change was blowing strongly. The birth of your own University was, I believe, part of that widespread movement in the Commonwealth and of a then prevailing search for greater relevance in university education. I hope therefore that it may not be without interest to look at contemporaneous developments elsewhere than in Hong Kong. As I see from your Bulletin that previous recent speakers have concentrated on higher educational issues in Britain and North America, I propose by way of contrast, though not I hope irrelevantly, to focus on trends and issues in the less developed countries of the Commonwealth, though I am conscious that they are very different indeed from Hong Kong in tradition and economic health. Basis of Development: the Asquith Concept By the beginning of the 1960s the programme of university development launched by Britain in Africa and the Caribbean was fifteen years old. It had been devised in the dark days of World War II, as an essential corollary of political advance towards self- government. The Asquith plan, as it was called, laid down five main guidelines for the creation of five new university colleges: (1) they should be of first class standard — quality before quantity was the motto — and a means of guaranteeing international recognition was negotiated with the help of the University of London; (2) they should offer a balanced education, i.e. they should be multifaculty, providing both a liberal education and education for the professions; (3) they should be fully residential —both by necessity and to encourage the spirit of mutual understanding among students of many different backgrounds; (4) they should be autonomous, having freedom to manage their own affairs though placed under obligation to present an account of their stewardship; and (5) they should be centres of research. Similar guidelines were adopted in relation to support for existing institutions being converted into universities e.g. the University of Malaya. The dominance of the Asquith concept as a basis for university development overseas lasted till the end of the 1950s though its influence was much less significant in Southeast Asia than in Africa and the West Indies. By the end of the decade the small group of university colleges following the Asquith guidelines had firmly established themselves internationally; were sending out into public life a steady, if small, flow of graduates; were increasing their range of studies; were conducting extramural activities; and were beginning to transform the research scene. In short, by 1960, when a new status for your three post-secondary colleges was first encouraged by the government of Hong Kong, the university colleges elsewhere in the Commonwealth had reached the stage at which they too could look forward safely from a firm, if somewhat limited, base to the possibility of further development and innovation. The continuing suitability of the Asquith plan as it was being implemented was, however, beginning to be seriously questioned. Change was in the air and it was clear that no single global pattern was adequate for the diversity of needs and conditions — each institution must henceforth develop in its own way. New University Initiatives By this time (1961) certain trends affecting long-range attitudes had begun to work, unevenly but 18 ACADEMIC/CULTURAL EVENTS