Differentiation and Articulation in Tertiary Education Systems: A

198 Pages·2008·0.59 MB·English

W O R L D B A N K W O R K I N G P A P E R N O . 1 4 5
Differentiation and Articulation
in Tertiary Education Systems
A Study of Twelve African Countries
Njuguna Ng’ethe
George Subotzky
George Afeti
ASSOCIATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF EDUCATION IN AFRICA
Working Group on Higher Education
and the
Association ofAfrican Universities
In partnership with
Africa Region Human Development Department
THE WORLD BANK
Washington, D.C.
Copyright © 2008
The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank
1818 H Street,N.W.
Washington,D.C.20433,U.S.A.
All rights reserved
Manufactured in the United States ofAmerica
First Printing:April 2008
printed on recycled paper
1 2 3 4 5 11 10 09 08
World Bank Working Papers are published to communicate the results ofthe Bank’s work to
the development community with the least possible delay.The manuscript ofthis paper there-
fore has not been prepared in accordance with the procedures appropriate to formally-edited
texts.Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily avail-
able.
The findings,interpretations,and conclusions expressed herein are those ofthe author(s)
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development/The World Bank and its affiliated organizations,or those ofthe Executive Direc-
tors ofThe World Bank or the governments they represent.
The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work.The
boundaries,colors,denominations,and other information shown on any map in this work do
not imply any judgment on the part ofThe World Bank ofthe legal status ofany territory or
the endorsement or acceptance ofsuch boundaries.
The material in this publication is copyrighted.Copying and/or transmitting portions or all
ofthis work without permission may be a violation ofapplicable law.The International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination ofits work
and will normally grant permission promptly to reproduce portions ofthe work.
For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work,please send a request with
complete information to the Copyright Clearance Center,Inc.,222 Rosewood Drive,Danvers,
MA 01923,USA,Tel:[phone],Fax:[phone],www.copyright.com.
All other queries on rights and licenses,including subsidiary rights,should be addressed to
the Office ofthe Publisher,The World Bank,1818 H Street NW,Washington,DC 20433,USA,
Fax:[phone],email:[email protected].
ISBN-13: 978-0-8213-7546-4
eISBN: 978-0-8213-7547-1
ISSN: 1726-5878 DOI: 10.1596/978-0-8213-7546-4
Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data has been requested.
Contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
About the Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Acronyms and Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
Part I: Comparative Analysis and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. Higher Education Differentiation and Articulation in Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Objectives ofthe Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
How the Study was Conducted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The Ideas and Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Framework ofAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2. Differentiation and Articulation in Sub-Saharan Africa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Observations from the Literature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Nature ofDifferentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3. Drivers and Inhibitors ofDifferentiation and Articulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Drivers ofDifferentiation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Inhibitors ofDifferentiation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Drivers and Inhibitors ofArticulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4. Differentiation and Articulation:Policies and Practices from
Other Regions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Historical Reference Points:United Kingdom and France. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Korea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Singapore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
The Bologna Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5. Towards Policy Options for Improved Tertiary Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Perspectives and Interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Points for Policy Consideration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Topics for Future Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
iii
iv Contents
Part II: Country Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6. Cameroon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
The Higher Education Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
7. Ghana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
The Higher Education Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Relationship between Universities and Polytechnics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8. Kenya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Differentiation between Universities and National Polytechnics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Articulation between/among Universities and National Polytechnics. . . . . . . . . . . 76
Conclusions and Challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
9. Malawi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Systemic Characteristics:Governance,Regulation,and Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Articulation and Interface between Universities and Polytechnics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Conclusions and Main Challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
10. Mozambique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Systemic Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Articulation and Interface between the University and
Polytechnic Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Conclusion:Principal Challenges and Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
11. Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
The Higher Education Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Relationship between Universities and Polytechnics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
12. Rwanda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Contents v
Differentiation and Articulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Main Challenges and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
13. Senegal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
The Higher Education Sector. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Articulation and Mobility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
14. South Africa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
The Higher Education System in South Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
On-going Debates around Differentiation and Articulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Conclusion:Key Challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
15. Tanzania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
Differentiation between Universities and Polytechnic-type
Institutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Articulation between Similar/Different Types ofInstitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Main Challenges and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
16. Uganda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Differentiation between Universities and the Polytechnic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
Articulation among Similar/Different Types ofInstitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Conclusions and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
17. Zambia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
The Higher Education System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Articulation and Interface between the University and
Polytechnic Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Appendixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
A. Research Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
B. Selected Annotated Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
vi Contents
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
LISTOFTABLES
1. Dimensions ofDifferentiation among Types ofHigher Education Institutions . . . . 17
2. Dimensions ofArticulation among Types ofHigher Education Institutions . . . . . . . 18
3. Differentiation Profiles for Selected African Tertiary Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4. Classification ofTertiary Education Systems in Selected Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5. Structure ofTertiary Degrees Awarded in Anglophone and Francophone
Tertiary Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6. Summary ofArticulation Indicators for Selected Tertiary Education Systems . . . . . . 36
LISTOFFIGURES
1.1 Distribution ofStudent Population by Type ofInstitution
(1996,Headcount). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
LISTOFBOXES
1. Tertiary System Differentiation in Cameroon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2. Weak Articulation in Ghana’s Tertiary Education System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3. Horizontal Differentiation in Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4. Explicit Differentiation Policy in Mozambique. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5. The Higher Institutes for Technology Studies in Tunisia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6. System Articulation in Senegal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Foreword
Partnership has become a watchword for the global higher education community in the
21st century.The pace ofevents,the rapidity ofchange and the explosion accessibil-
ity to information have made it virtually impossible for any single tertiary institution,gov-
ernmental education agency,or development assistance organization to stay on top of
even the few topics that are strategically relevant to its mission.In this area,a division of
labor among similarly inclined partners sharing common interests is proving to be an
effective mechanism for maintaining ‘manageability’and institutional efficiency in our
increasingly complex and dynamic world.
One such partnership that has endured,evolved and quietly proved productive over
the better part ofthe past two decades involves the Association ofAfrican Universities,the
Working Group on Higher Education of the Association for the Development of Educa-
tion in Africa (ADEA),and the World Bank.Formed in 1989,the Working Group was ini-
tially housed in and led by the World Bank,and the Association of African Universities
carried out its first major piece of commissioned research on African higher education.
Since then,these three organizations have regularly contributed information and resources
in pursuit ofcommon goals.Frequent interaction and occasional concrete collaborations
have nourished a rapid expansion ofavailable bibliography on the topic ofAfrican higher
education,helped to spark the introduction and diffusion of strategic planning within
African tertiary institutions,produced two regional conferences on higher education devel-
opment in 1995 and 2003,and assisted the emergence ofa broad and informed consensus
among universities,governments and development partners concerning institutional and
policy priorities for African higher education.
The study presented here is but one example of this effective partnership.It brings
together the credibility and access of the Association ofAfrican Universities,the imple-
mentation capacity ofthe ADEA Working Group on Higher Education,and the extensive
dissemination network ofthe World Bank to provide you with a pioneering policy analy-
sis that surely would have been diminished in the absence ofany one ofthese partners.
Jee-Peng Tan Alice Sena Lamptey Akilagpa Sawyerr
Education Advisor Coordinator Secretary General
Africa Region Working Group on Association of
The World Bank Higher Education African Universities
ADEA
vii

Acknowledgments
The three regional reports on which this report is based were written by Njuguna
Ng’ethe,Associate Research Professor,Institute for Development Studies,University
ofNairobi,(East Africa),George Afeti,formerly Principal,Ho Polytechnic,Ghana (West
Africa),currently the Secretary-General ofthe Commonwealth Association ofPolytech-
nics in Africa,and George Subotzky,formerly Director,Centre for the Study of Higher
Education,University ofthe Western Cape,South Africa (Southern Africa,and project co-
ordinator).
The international literature review and the annotated bibliography were drafted by
Mark Abrahams,then senior researcher at the Centre for the Study ofHigher Education,
University of the Western Cape.The final versions of these documents were prepared by
George Subotzky.
Prof.Ng’ethe was assisted by Samuel W.Kiiru,Project Assistant in the Institute for
Development Studies,University ofNairobi.
Peer reviewers were Sajitha Bashir,Kristian Thorn,and William Saint.
The authors wish to acknowledge the Association for the Development ofEducation
in Africa (ADEA),specifically the Working Group on Higher Education (WGHE) for com-
missioning and co-ordinating this study.The study also benefited from the comments and
suggestions ofthe Coordinator ofthe WGHE,Alice Lamptey.For the World Bank,William
Saint contributed to data collection,research,and editing.
The views and opinions expressed in this report are,however,those ofthe authors and
not those ofthe WGHE,ADEA,or the World Bank.
July 2007
ix