A Deficit of Professors

One of the most frequently discussed issues in connection with our world of higher education is the number of professors. The ratio of our professors to lecturers is still too low, at less than 10 percent.

As stated by Science and Technology director general Ali Ghufron of the Research and Technology and Higher Education Ministry, our professors still number only 5,389. This is much smaller than the number of our lecturers of about 260,000. With 22,000 programs of study throughout Indonesia, there should be at least 22,000 professors, assuming that one program of study has one professor.

We are short of professors. But is it true that the number of professors is an important indicator of an institute of higher learning?

Why so few?

It must be admitted that in terms of mere volume, our professors number far below that of our neighbor, Malaysia, which has about 25,350 professors. When compared to the population, our professor per capita is far below Malaysia’s, even though there has been a significant increase from 4,700 in 2015 to 5,389 in 2017.

The increasingly easy certification procedures yet more stringent requirements have not reduced the rate of increase in the number of professors in the last two years. However, the number remains far from adequate if we use the standard of 10 percent – or one professor per program of study. Why do we have such a minimal number of professors? This is a problem related to other issues in our higher education system, especially finances.

There are at least two important reasons why not many lecturers have doctoral degrees. First, many lecturers feel financially secure and comfortable without a doctorate. Many lecturers with only a master’s are able to live well, and have adequate incomes. Of course, the salary is the main draw, because the combined salaries and allowances for non-doctoral lecturers are not very big compared to other professions.

Side jobs in the form of corporate, state enterprise, or government agency projects provide a source of great income for lecturers. Such incomes can be obtained more easily and faster than, for example, funding for research projects – projects that require a long time to complete and have a complicated system of accountability.

The good relationship between lecturers and the institutions that employ them even makes young lecturers with master degrees reluctant to continue their education to a higher level overseas. They are afraid to lose network connections if they continue their education abroad. Why should they get a doctorate, when they can still teach with full authority and their off-campus work does not require it?

Second, many young lecturers who hold master and doctorate degrees occupy administrative positions. These positions in higher education institutions, even though they may not be the main career paths for academics, have caused many lecturers to become less interested in or to lose focus in attaining a professorship. With an administrative position, they feel they have received adequate rewards on the financial side.

On the other hand, with an administrative position and its inherent responsibilities, many lecturers shift focus: Their academic focus is overtaken by the administrative task of managing heavy campus operational matters. In addition, with an administrative position, they feel that they have become an important figure in the hierarchy of the higher education institution.

In practice, these administrative officials have more power in organizing higher education programs than professors. The issue has also become a preoccupation among lecturers. The reality of institutional hierarchy makes those in these positions feel comfortable in continuing their careers at an administrative level rather than pursuing the functional position of lecturers to achieve the highest career level as professors.

Way out

This occurs nearly in all our higher education institutions. It may even be that administrative positions are the lecturers’ main target rather than a career in academia. Is this good for the development of our higher education?

This is one of our fundamental problems. Many academics prefer to pursue careers as administrative officials rather than academics. This should be reduced gradually or even eliminated. Give administrative positions to professionals in related fields.

If necessary, the position of rector can be held by an outsider who is not an academic, but has adequate competence in the management of higher education institutions. Administrative positions in universities are similar to organizational positions in public companies. Public companies need experts in finances, human resources, information technology, organizational management, and so on, who are recruited from professionals in corresponding fields.

Universities have to take such a step in the future. It is better for lecturers to concentrate on academic affairs and the “Tri Dharma” (the three pillars of higher education comprising education, research and community service).

The Legal State Entity University (PTN BH) is one of the solutions toward that direction. The PTN BH is intended to establish a university with a "private" management style, but its academic quality is beyond that of a state university (PTN). The "private" management style means that the organization is lean, but remains effective. The PTN-plus academic quality means a PTN BH must produce more output in general than a PTN.

With all the advantages of the authorities accorded a PTN BH, it should be possible to achieve the goals above. Even though in practice, this is still taboo because it is not easy to recruit professionals for a career in education if funds are limited.

A PTN BH that has been able to raise funds outside of government assistance should already be recruiting professionals to manage education. A private university in South Korea, Konkuk University, is boldly recruiting young Koreans who have graduated from reputable universities in the US as marketing officers for several regions around the world. This is one of the breakthroughs of how non-lecturers are involved in the management of universities.

Proposals like this will likely be challenged by many parties, because the consequence of this system is that lecturers will return to the laboratories and classrooms. The main tasks of lecturers are researching, teaching, and engaging in community services.

In reality, the administrative officers who are also lecturers spend most of their time thinking about higher education management issues at the university, departmental or divisional levels. It is difficult to expect academic output in the form of publications or other extensive scientific studies if the lecturers occupy administrative positions. Possibly there are some superior lecturers who are able to hold the two positions simultaneously, but generally it is difficult.

Tri Dharma focus

The worry about the lack of professors is in fact synonymous with the concern over the number of scientific studies being produced, because professors are considered the producers of scientific studies and other academic products.

However, is it true that the number of professors constitutes an important indicator for a university? Let\'s look at the limited data for top universities in Indonesia in terms of ranking.

Recently, QS World University Rankings issued its 2017 ranking for Indonesia. Indeed, the Research and Technology and Higher Education Ministry is committed to raising the rank of our state universities in the world arena. The ministry chooses which institution is used in the QS ranking. Other rating agencies include the Jiao Tong (Shanghai) or the Times Higher Education.

The QS standards used to rank universities around the world are followed by the higher education Ministry in order to raise our university rankings. The top three domestic universities that have achieved a good QS rank are the University of Indonesia (UI), the Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), and Gadjah Mada University (UGM).

We can see that the UI, ITB and UGM employ 231, 167, and 321 professors respectively. The UI and ITB, even though they have fewer professors than the UGM, are ranked higher than the latter. In terms of research productivity in the form of publications indexed by Scopus, ITB, with the fewest professors, is the best among the three. The number of professors is no guarantee of a university’s quality.

To this end, the more important thing in raising our university rankings is to increase the overall number of doctoral degree holders. The universities should encourage their lecturers to raise their education level to a doctorate. From this, the quality and quantity of researches or publications will be enhanced, because it is doctoral education that hones research and publishing capabilities. This is more important than questioning the number of professors employed at a university.

It is better that the government provides incentives for lecturers with doctorates to heighten the work of Tri Dharma in teaching, research – including publishing – and community service.

If this can be improved along with improvements in procedures for processing academic titles, professorships are nothing else but a natural consequence. Universities should also set aside a proportion of administrative positions for non-lecturers so that lecturers can concentrate on the Tri Dharma of higher learning.

BUDI SANTOSA

Professor of Industrial Engineering of ITS