Why encourage mediocrity?

The decision of the minister of higher education and scientific research to raise the Tawjihi grades for admission to state universities from 65 to 70 and to private universities from 60 to 65 caused a stir among some members of Parliament who circulated a memo calling for the decision to be delayed until a committee tasked with preparing a new higher education strategy completes its mission.

While the ostensible claims are that “the new unified admission criteria may contradict the committee’s outcomes” and that the decision would not give private universities time to prepare for the outcome of the new admission criterion, the underlying reason is that many refuse to lose some privileges even if that means graduates who may not be up to par.

Some deputies even threatened a no-confidence motion against the minister.

No sensible discussion, not a worry about the crop of young people graduating from universities because they could, not because they deserved, and no stopping to consider whether all is well with our education system — which is not.

Some even called for the resignation of the minister.

It is difficult to understand the MPs’ outrage when all the minister wants is to upgrade the level of education at Jordanian universities by demanding higher academic achievements for students admitted to universities.

What is wrong with such a policy at a time when the level of university graduates in the country has dropped considerably?

What is wrong with wanting to curb mediocrity? With wanting to have graduates who deserve the degree they obtained, who are knowledgeable and who can immediately find work because they are true specialists in their fields?

What distinguishes a university — aside for the quality of professors absolutely necessary to ensure quality graduates, the equipment and research work, mostly absent in Jordanian universities — is the quality of students it bestows its degrees on.

What good is a diploma when its bearer cannot spell? Or manage a simple task? Or does not know how to address a potential employer or write a CV?

The minister’s decision is judicious. Where it is not sensible is in still allowing exceptions, which only perpetuate a wrong.

Why extend so many exceptions and lower the admission standards depending on the region a student come from?

If certain areas of the country are underprivileged and certain individuals are needy, and therefore under-represented in universities, the remedy lies in improving the quality of education and the standard of living of the affected regions, not in lowering admission standards.

Compromising on education should be a red line, for the result is a poorer country at every level.