See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331560462

Planning for a differentiated higher education system

Article · March 2019

CITATION READS
1 457

1 author:

Wondwosen Tamrat
St Mary's University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
200 PUBLICATIONS   238 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

private higher education View project

equity View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wondwosen Tamrat on 07 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Planning for a differentiated higher education system
06 March 2019
The Ethiopian higher education sector urgently needs differentiation and a perfect
opportunity has presented itself with the development of the Education Development
Roadmap (2018-30), which recognises the benefits of promoting quality and
competitiveness based on programme offerings, functional focus, institutional status
and student composition, together with the country’s fifth Education Sector
Development Programme or ESDP V (2015/16-2019/20). But strategies are needed as to
how this will be achieved.

In spite of two decades of change and transformation, the higher education model in
Ethiopia still follows similar patterns and trends. There is little distinction among public
universities in their missions, visions, governance structure, student admission policies,
core activities and the disciplinary mix which defines their programme offering. The
similarity further abounds in research engagement and output.

The residential model is still the dominant pattern across the public sector. And in spite
of their differences in resources and capacities, public and private universities are
equally expected to discharge the triad responsibilities of teaching, research and
community services.

The major explanation for this isomorphic trajectory has been the fact that the
expansion of the Ethiopian HE system over the last two decades has not been
accompanied by the features of a differentiated system, despite early calls for such a
system.

Current developments both at national and institutional levels are, however, suggestive
of the sector’s readiness to embark on the new frontier of a more differentiated HE
system. Among the most prominent indications of this readiness are the plans set out in
the country’s fifth ESDP V and the recently developed Education Development
Roadmap.

Time for differentiation

Ethiopia’s new Education Roadmap has recognised the values and need for a
differentiated HE system. In addition to acknowledging the benefits of promoting
institutional quality and competitiveness, the roadmap clearly suggests the need for

1
envisioning various routes of “differentiation” based on programme offerings, functional
focus, institutional status, student composition, etc, without putting restrictions on the
paths to be pursued. This policy can be regarded as an important first step towards
nationwide planning and institutional actions.

However, no clear strategy or mechanism is yet in place to institute such a system. The
new Education Roadmap itself stops short of mentioning what course the differentiation
should take, how and when. Given the need for such a system, the next step should focus
on careful planning by examining both international and local experiences that may
lend useful lessons.

The lessons offered by the globally famous California Master Plan for Higher Education
and other similar models of differentiation in other countries are still relevant. They
include the need for understanding the objectives and context for differentiation,
recognising the variety of implications a differentiated system entails, and the need for
designing such systems in congruence with national needs and aspirations.

Proposed models and alternatives

A variety of practical suggestions have been made since the early 2000s, if not even
earlier, towards the creation of a differentiated system in Ethiopia.

The first formal proposal was made in 2003 by the World Bank. Under what it called “a
pedagogic model” the Bank proposed the development of one national research
university specialising in graduate training (ie Addis Ababa University); several regional
universities offering degree training in development disciplines relevant to the economy
of their particular region; numerous private institutions providing demand-driven
education; a collection of shorter cycle colleges that host applied certificate and diploma
programmes, and various types of print-based and technology-based tertiary distance
education.

With the development of many aspiring institutions, and diploma-offering colleges

relegated outside of higher education, the direct application of this model is no longer
tenable.

Proposals along the lines of developing universities based on geographical advantages

and relative strength was another route suggested. This plan was on the table as far back
as the late 1980s when the Dergue government in its final years planned to develop
Ethiopian HEIs along this line.

Another repeatedly-mentioned route gaining relative traction over the last decade is the

2
move towards the creation of research universities. Adama University and the Addis
Ababa University of Science and Technology have been split from the former public
system since 2014 to become science and technology universities and serve as central
institutions to the national industrial strategy, with a strong focus on applied research
and technology transfer. For the last few years, the two universities have been
experimenting with different mechanisms of running specialised institutions, a process
that could provide useful insights.

Though the concept of a research university in the local context is still not clearly
defined, ESDP V’s aspiration to establish three research universities having 20%
postgraduate students and 50% doctoral staff can be considered as an additional
planning direction.

This is an indication that although it might be difficult to suggest ready-made models of

differentiation, there are strong alternatives that planning along this line cannot easily
disregard. One is the relative experience and strength local institutions have acquired
over the years.

For instance, in terms of research and graduate education, Addis Ababa University still
maintains the lead over other universities, closely followed by Jimma. The new
experiment with Adama and Addis Ababa universities of science and technology as
research universities is another experience from which to draw.

Bahir Dar University and Kotebe Metropolitan University have relative strengths when
it comes to teacher education. Haramaya also used to assume an uncontested priority as
regards agriculture though all these institutions now seem to have diluted their former
specialisations in hot pursuit of becoming comprehensive universities.

Another strong consideration to be made is the geographical location of existing

universities that can provide strategic advantages in terms of introducing a
differentiated system along possible areas of excellence. This plan from the 1970’s is still
logical considering the specific geographical advantages most of the Ethiopian
universities possess.

Way forward

Ethiopia currently aspires to become a middle income country by 2025 and wants to use
higher education as its major tool of poverty reduction and economic development. The
transformation of its agriculture-led economy to an industrial one hinges on the
availability of an educated workforce that can play a critical role in technology transfer
and knowledge creation.

3
 Towards this end, a differentiated HE system should be planned to respond to the
overall national vision of enhancing local development and creating an internationally
competitive labour force that assists in the current move towards the creation of a
knowledge society.

The undifferentiated growth and experiences gained over the last two decades indicate
that aligning Ethiopia’s development strategies with the unabated growth of its higher
education sector calls for a holistic vision and strategy that should guide the future
development of institutions, their systematic deployment and utilisation.

The choice of a comprehensive national subsystem of differentiation should not focus on

a limited number of institutions, but how the whole set of institutions within the system
are classified and deployed to respond to nationally-envisaged goals and to regional and
international positioning.

The scheme asks for closer scrutiny of existing institutions, their relative strengths,
aspirations, institutional cultures, resource and location advantages and the
implications of a differentiated system in terms of infrastructure, budget, student
admission, staff qualification, work load, and other relevant factors. The task requires
not only expert knowledge and long-term vision but also the involvement of as many
pertinent stakeholders as possible.

Whichever way it is done, the success of such a system would be determined by its most
coveted goal, which is the ability to combine efficiently the elements of access and
excellence in a balanced manner.
Link: https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190227045938131

View publication stats