Several public universities in Bangladesh recently announced their withdrawal from the unified cluster admission system, much to the concern of aspirant students and their guardians. The announcement came at a time when admission seekers were at the final stage of their preparation to compete for a place in a higher educational institution. It raised questions about the impact of the withdrawal on students, and educational equity. The universities mentioned that they are leaving the cluster system to preserve institutional autonomy and address logistical challenges. In making the withdrawal decision, they have taken only the benefit of abandoning the system into consideration, and totally ignored its disadvantages.
The government has, however, stepped in and asked the university authorities to continue with the cluster system for admission in their institutes. The ministry of education issued a directive to vice-chancellors of the public universities on December 23 to ensure that their respective universities remain as part of the cluster admission system. The directive has brought some relief to the admission seekers, but has not completely dispelled the concern among them as they fear some universities might remain off the cluster system, showing excuses, despite the directive.
The cluster system was introduced in 2020 across general, science and technology, agricultural, engineering and technology universities for an effective development and management of higher education. Its primary goal was to reduce the financial and mental burden on students, save time during the admission process, and ensure a merit-based, transparent, and coordinated system for selecting students. Under the system, students could apply to multiple universities through a single examination, reducing the financial and logistical burden of appearing for multiple entrance tests.
The cluster system ended the chaotic admission process, freeing students from the ordeal of preparing for and travelling to places for multiple admission tests. Students from rural or economically disadvantaged backgrounds benefit the most from this system. It allowed them to save on travel costs, accommodation expenses, application fees, and minimise the psychological stress associated with preparing for multiple exams.
The government has rightly interfered in the matter. Now it should ensure that universities which were once in the cluster system remain in it. Someone might argue that the government's intervention will undermine the autonomy of public universities. Ground situation suggests the autonomy the universities enjoy is often compromised to serve vested interests of different sections; it is hardly utilised for the greater good.
The government should also ensure that the row over the cluster system does not delay the admission process this year. The students who are going to appear in the university admission test this year as first-timers already went through many uncertainties since the beginning of their HSC course. They got less than two years for completion of the course unlike other batches, many of them sat for the exam amid torrential rain and floods, and all of them faced several deferment of final exams due to the Anti-Quota Student Movement before the exams of some subjects were cancelled amid demand by a section of students.
The authorities should bring remaining universities under the cluster admission system in the future as it represents a step towards a more meritocratic approach to university admissions. By standardising the evaluation process across multiple institutions, the system reduces the influence of subjective biases and inconsistencies in individual universities' admission criteria. We are sure the benefits of the cluster system will outweigh the perceived disadvantages.
[email protected]
