Does marketisation of education bring about a better education system? This was the theme of the latest meeting held by the think-tank group organised by the Centre of Labour Studies at the University of Malta and the Fredrich Ebert Foundation, that is the main sponsor of the centre. To a certain extent, the marketisation of education is already occurring at all levels of the educational system but mostly at the tertiary level. We have become accustomed to experience daily advertising exercises on our local press promoting degrees in various disciplines offered by foreign universities. Such advertisement has even found its way on our roads with flashy billboards on board of trailers pulled by small motor vehicles.

This neo-liberal market system as experimented in the US and the UK might in the future find its way to Malta. The success of such a system stands whether it satisfies the criteria that education is the whole of the individual’s formation and should be equally accessible to all. Along the years this responsibility has been mainly attributed to the state; however a number of sectors among society are increasingly calling for a more decentralised and efficient educational system.

There is no doubt that there is always room to enhance the educational system. For instance, as one participant pointed out, Malta still lacks a specialised curriculum aimed for the inclusion of students. Moreover state-provided education is sometimes coined as inefficient, having a number of unmotivated teachers and students. Free market supporters claim that it is a self-regulatory system that can provide a more incentive-reward system and stimulate competition and motivation.

There could be a risk that by treating education as a mere commodity, it could lead to the increase of an already existent sub-stratum of students who complete their academic years without formal qualifications. An increasing privatised educational system could mainly cater for students that can pay while those who cannot afford are disadvantaged, irrespective of their capability to achieve.

The state can intervene by providing a voucher system so that every parent and student can be free to choose their school and not being confined to the area state school. This in itself may provide a risk that the state will eventually abdicate from its responsibility to provide education and abandon the said sub-strata of students to the mercy of the market forces, where the maxim is that of more with less.

One of the scholars present at the meeting insisted that young children who get detached from their immediate social network would experience a trauma as a result. The voucher system would also create the formation of a “football league table” system among schools and dominated by a usual top five, thus presenting numerous negative implications.

Among the participants of the think-tank group who believe that the value of a school mostly lies on the intake of its students, are some who doubt the reliability of certain institutes represented in Malta that grant access to any student who can pay their hefty prices; “it’s like buying your degree”. They called for an updated regulatory system.

Nevertheless a participant involved in the management of a local institute representing a foreign university in Malta pointed out that European standards are more concerned about the output level of students in completing the degree rather than at course intake level. One must point out that such institutes are in a way providing a wider access to tertiary education for people who for some reason or another were denied from the possibility to attend for locally, also given that the law currently prohibits the set up of a competitor university in Malta.

The above are just some salient points of the interesting debate that took place which surely requires a more in-deep reflection. Thanks to such initiatives the Centre for Labour Studies is promoting an avant-garde and democratic discourse among some of the key persons involved.

[email protected]