Educational reforms Sri Lanka demands today for a brighter tomorrow

As a Sri Lankan who benefitted from free education, I feel honoured and privileged to deliver this Dr. C.W.W. Kannangara Memorial Oration, the 32nd in the lecture series inaugurated in 1988 on the twentieth anniversary of his demise.

I am well aware of the gravity of this task, particularly when considering the impressive stature of previous orators, often beneficiaries of free education themselves. The current economic, political and social crisis adds a further layer of complexity to the context in which this oration is delivered today. Within that backdrop, and with a keen awareness of the responsibility placed on my shoulders, I shall humbly endeavour to do justice to this task.

I am a medical practitioner by profession; however, I have spent most of my life sharing knowledge with friends, colleagues and students, as a teacher. This student-teacher reincarnation has been the focus and foundation of my entire life. Taking on the task of teaching arithmetic to my elder sister at the age of fifteen was my first venture into teaching. While waiting for entrance to the Medical Faculty, during the five years of university and well after that, I spent a considerable proportion of my time as a teacher. I had supported a number of students to pass their examinations for free, and as word spread of my skill in getting students through examinations, so many requests came in that I ended up establishing and running a private education institute named ‘Vidya Nadi’. This was more because I could not avoid the responsibility than for economic reasons. Most of those students are very prominent members of society today. The life lessons I obtained from being a teacher were significant and serve me to this day. Since then, I spent most of my life teaching and carrying out research in local and foreign universities, so much so that I would like to note that I have spent more time as a teacher and a researcher than as a doctor.

Within the same time frame, as a socially sensitive and politically informed person, as well as a medical student, I was also an activist who fought to defend free education, which gave me a different perspective on education. The complex and challenging context of today forces me to revisit this past and to re-examine the path we took in our younger days.

Against this complex background, my approach to this lecture today is based on two contrasting viewpoints Sri Lankan society holds on free education and the Kannangara legacy. Professor Narada Warnasuriya, who is a dear and well-respected teacher to me, during his Kannangara Memorial Lecture delivered in 2008, explained these two viewpoints as follows:

One group sees the Kannangara legacy in a single dimension, as a valuable basis for further expanding access to education, which also helps preserve fairness and social justice. They see it as a keystone of a just and conflict-free sustainable society.

The second group acknowledges that the Kannangara reforms had a major impact on bringing about a positive societal, and social transformation, but considers such changes irrelevant in the present context of a globalized free market economy. Professor Warnasuriya states that this group sees the Kannangara reforms as ‘a sacred cow, an archaic barrier to development, which stands in the way of building a successful knowledge-based economy’.

As an individual examining the status of education with an analytical mind, I do not wish to align myself with either of these groups exclusively, and decided to deliver this lecture from a neutral position, considering the positive and negative aspects of both viewpoints. This oration is therefore entitled Educational reforms Sri Lanka demands today for a brighter tomorrow and I plan to expand the discussion on Kannangara Legacy

I should also like to clarify that I prefer to refer to this as ‘our lecture’ rather than ‘my lecture’, because this lecture necessarily contains the views of a large group of like-minded people who work together with me as a team, on educational reforms.

Most of the facts forming the basis of this lecture are extracted from the recently published thirty-ninth (one-hundred page) special issue of the trilingual journal ‘Gaveshana’, entitled: ‘Educational reforms the country demands to create a productive citizen adaptable to the modern world’. This edition of Gaveshana is particularly significant in that it was published in the form of a research publication based on original data, and secondly, since a cross-section of educationists and officials from the Education sector who are directly involved with Sri Lankan educational reforms contributed to this publication, as did external experts who brought in a broader, societal viewpoint.

As someone who strongly believes that ‘a person alone cannot win a battle against the deep seas’, I would like to note that we are in an era in which not one but thousands of Dr. C.W.W. Kannanagaras are needed. Furthermore, it is important to note that educational reforms should not take a top-down approach but aim to incorporate the requirements and viewpoints of the beneficiaries of such reforms as honoured stakeholders: the knowledgeable student community, teachers and the general public. Such reforms should be informed by a regular feed-back loop, follow-up and grass-roots research. Educational reforms must be a dynamic process, not a static one, and follow-up research should be used to change not only the direction, but also the content of the reforms, if and when necessary.

This is the responsibility history vests on our shoulders, and in order to do justice to this obligation, I am deeply grateful to the Director General of the National Institute of Education and the staff of its Research and Planning Department for giving me this opportunity.

I was influenced early in life to believe the Stalinist concept of It is not heroes that make history, but history that makes heroes. But today, I am of the firm opinion that there are individuals who make constructive (or destructive) contributions to history. Dr. C.W.W. Kannangara is undoubtedly such a person who has left a lasting and positive contribution a hero that did change history, and it is therefore necessary to study not only the history he bequeathed but the person himself.

Who is Dr C.W.W Kannangara?

Dr. Christopher William Wijekoon Kannangara was born on October 13, 1884, at Randombe village, Ambalangoda. The third child in his family, he lost his mother early in life when his mother died giving birth to a younger brother. His father had five children from his first marriage and four from his second marriage. Although he was well looked after by his stepmother, he had faced the sad fate of losing his mother early in life. His father was a Buddhist, but his mother was a devotee of the Church of England. Christopher William Wijekoon was therefore baptized as a Christian although he formally converted to Buddhism as an adult in 1917. It was, as many of his closest Christian friends said, an act of wisdom and not a political act. Moreover, he learned Sinhala and Pali languages ??as well as Buddhism from his locality and environment.

He was a bright student, initially at Ambalangoda Wesleyan College. At its triennial prize-giving ceremony, he received the attention of accomplished mathematics teacher and the then Headmaster of Richmond College, Galle, Father D.H. Darrell.

Father Darrell had graduated from the Cambridge University, England with a first-class degree in mathematics. It is documented that Father Darrell had said to young Kannangara you will have to bring a heavy cart to take home the prizes you have won’. Father Darrell had then asked the Principal of Wesleyan College to prepare young Kannangara for the open scholarship examination at Richmond College. It is evident that it was this meeting with Father Darrell, the Headmaster of Richmond College at the age of 14 years, that turned out to be the pivotal point of Dr. Kannangara’s life.

Young student Kannangara subsequently won this scholarship, enabling him to attend Richmond College with free tuition, room and board. My belief is that this full scholarship established the foundation for the gift of free education that he later bequeathed to the nation.

He had to face further adversity in his life when his father lost his job and his pension after thirty years of service, leading to significant financial difficulty for his family. I would like to emphasise on, particularly to the young generation of today, the importance of recognising how his life was not cushioned in comfort, but was one of achieving greatness despite hardship and difficulty.

He was a bright student who excelled not only in studies but also in sports. He passed the Cambridge Junior Examination with honours and came first in the country and in the British Empire in Arithmetic. He was the captain of the cricket team, played in the football team and was a member of the debating team. He was also the lead actor in the school’s production of The Merchant of Venice. He was not a ‘bookworm’, but also excelled in extracurricular activities. Sadly, it is necessary to note the significant difference between the life of Dr. Kannangara as a student and the lives of the majority of children today.

At the time, the only option available for studying abroad was a government scholarship. Twelve Richmondites sat this examination, but he was unable to secure a scholarship, thus losing the opportunity to study at a foreign university. He chose instead to study law at the Sri Lanka Law College. Father Darrell, his mentor, however, requested young Kannangara to stay on at the school as the mathematics teacher and senior housemaster of the student hostel. He accepted and fulfilled this responsibility until the untimely death of Father Darrell, after which he moved to Colombo and embarked on his legal education. During this period, he also worked as a part-time teacher at Prince of Wales College, Wesley College and Methodist College.

By 1910, he had qualified as a lawyer and returned to Galle to start his legal career. He focused on civil law, carried on social service activities simultaneously and entered formal politics in 1911, supporting Mr. Ponnambalam Ramanathan. He actively campaigned for Mr. Ramanathan when he successfully contested in the 1917 elections for the Legislative Assembly, and the two ended up establishing a close friendship thereafter. He was an eloquent speaker at the establishment of the Ceylon National Council in 1919, expounding on its objectives to direct the country and the people towards a life of political freedom with equal rights and independence.

The pivotal moment of his political life came about when he was elected to the Legislative Assembly in 1923, representing the Southern Province. He was then elected as the President of the Ceylon National Congress in 1930 and in 1931, he became Sri Lankas first Minister of Education, after being elected to the State Council of Ceylon from the Galle district. He was elected the first chairman of the Executive Committee for Education with an overwhelming majority. He was re-elected to the same position in 1936 and held that position for 16 years.

The extent of the struggles and sacrifices Dr. Kannangara underwent to achieve free education should also be evaluated in the context of the political environment of the time. He entered politics at the time of Sri Lanka achieving universal franchise. The State Council at the time had 46 members and seven ministerial portfolios were available for elected members, one of these was the education portfolio.

Prof Athula Sumathipala delivering the Kannangara memorial lecture

He was conferred an honorary doctorate in law at the first convocation of the University of Ceylon under the auspices of the Vice-Chancellor Sir Ivor Jennings in 1942. It was in 1945 that he managed to finally achieve the passage of parliamentary bill to establish free education in the country. And yet, Dr. Kannangara, who was venerated as the Father of Free Education, was defeated at the first national parliamentary elections held in 1947. It is time to question if this defeat was a personal one or if it was a defeat of the entire Sri Lankan nation. He lost the election to a Mr. Wilmot. A. Perera, who was backed by wealthy individuals in the United National Party and with the support of the socialist camp as well. Even the Communist Party of Sri Lanka worked against Dr. Kannangara’s election campaign.

Time does not permit an in-depth discussion of the factors leading to the election defeat of a person who achieved societal change at such a significant scale, however, I do consider this one of the greatest ironies in Sri Lankan political history.

He was re-elected as a member of parliament in 1952, and was offered the Local Government portfolio. He was however denied the education portfolio, likely due to the influence of powers that be who wished to prevent further educational reforms by Dr. Kannangara. He retired from politics in 1956 when he turned seventy-two, but served as a member of the National Education Commission, indicating his commitment towards the education of the nation, which was beyond politics.

At the time of his entry into politics, Dr. Kannangara was quite prosperous economically, having started his career as a lawyer in 1923. Twenty years of holding a ministerial role, and forty years of public service, which is indeed the basis of politics, had led to a loss of financial stability by the time he retired. He showed by example that politics should not be a money-making mechanism. The Sri Lankan government offered him a one-time stipend of Rs. Ten thousand in 1963, a substantial amount of money at the time. Considering his health needs, he was offered a monthly living allowance of Rs.500/- in 1965, and this was subsequently increased to Rs.1000/- per month.

This great son of Sri Lanka, considered the Father of Free Education, passed away on 29th September 1969 without receiving much attention from the nation.

I think it is important to highlight a factor pointed out by Senior Professor Sujeewa Amarasena when he delivered the 28th Kannangara Memorial Oration. Professor Amarasena is a proponent of the second viewpoint Professor Warnasuriya mentions, i.e., those who acknowledge that the Kannangara reforms had a major impact on bringing about a positive societal, and social transformation, but consider such changes irrelevant in the present context of a globalized free market economy.

Senior Professor Sujeewa Amarasena said, today every political party, every organization connected to education, every trade union in the government or private sector and every individual who has had some education would come forward to protect free education as a social welfare intervention. The entire country and political parties with allied student movements are in a vociferous dialogue always talking about free education without really giving the legend Dr. CWW Kannangara his due place in this dialogue. I have not seen or heard a single University or a student organization in this country commemorating Dr. CWW Kannangara on his birthday though all of them are vociferous fighters to protect free education. Hence today late Dr. CWW Kannangara is a forgotten person as stated by Mr. KHM Sumathipala in his book titled History of Education in Sri Lanka 1796 to 1965. I would like to add to that and say that not only he is a forgotten person today, but even his vision has been misinterpreted, misdirected, distorted and partly destroyed by some people who benefitted from free education.

The irony of history extends further: at a time when school education was unavailable to the entire generation of children in Sri Lanka during the Covid-19 pandemic, many teachers were committed to providing an education to children via distance / online education, as it was the only viable option, albeit flawed in some ways. Some union leaders, in the guise of so-called trade union action, worked to obstruct such teachers from providing online education. Given that all trade union leaders are beneficiaries of free education, it has to be questioned if it is not the worst mockery in the history of free education that teachers rights were considered a priority, over the right of students to obtain an education. This tragedy raises multiple questions: has the expectation that widening access to education would create selfless citizens who think beyond personal gain and fulfil their responsibilities to the nation not been realised? Did the generation who benefited from the Kannangara reforms shirk their responsibilities in the post-Kannangara era? Or is it simply that the agenda for national benefit has been rendered secondary to narrow political gains?