Roadmap ProjectHigher Education

Progress and IssuesAstana June 2014

Dr. Mary CanningFormer Lead Education Specialist World BankMember: Higher Education Authority Ireland

Some Statistics: 2014

• Declining Numbers of Institutions: 149 HEIs in 2011 reduced 130 in 2014;

• Estimated total enrolment in higher education is 24.4% of the 18-24 year olds;

• Improvement in drop out rates and a steady increase in the numbers of PhD students enrolled;

• But absolute enrolments are declining…..

Absolute Numbers of Enrolments are declining

Student Numbers, 2009-14

460480500520540560580600620640

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-1013 2013-2014

Stud

ents

('00

0)

Quality• By May 2014, out of a total of 130

institutions, 43% had completed the accreditation process, of which 14% were private institutions;

• However, there remains a reliance on centralized quality control and on compliance rather than a culture of quality assurance and self-evaluation at the institutional level.

Access and Equity

• The policy of reducing the number of HEIs appears to have had a disproportionate impact on oblasts with a greater incidence of poverty.

Enrolment and Oblast Per Capita Income

Tertiary enrolment related to oblast income per head, by oblast, 2012

Almaty cityAstana city

East-KazakhstanNord-Kazakhstan

Pavlodar

South-Kazakhstan

Mangistau

Kyzylorda

Kostanai

Karaganda

Zhambyl

West-Kazakhstan

Atyrau

Almaty oblast

Aktobe

Akmola

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

enrolment as % population 18-24

per c

apita

regi

onal

pro

duct

('00

0 te

nge)

Access and Equity

• There are differences in enrolment levels between rural and urban areas which may be attributed to the difficulties that school leavers in rural areas, especially those from small schools, have in achieving the grades in the Unified National Test required for access to full time higher education.

Changes in Enrolment related to Income

Oblast poverty and percentage change in tertiary enrolment , 2003-4 to 2009-10

Almaty city

Astana city

East-Kazakhstan

Nord-Kazakhstan

Pavlodar

South-Kazakhstan

Mangistau

KyzylordaKostanai Karaganda Zhambyl

West-Kazakhstan

Atyrau

Almaty oblast

Aktobe

Akmola

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

0 5 10 15 20 25percentage classified as poor 2009

%enrol

ment change

Relevance to Labour Market

• The diagnostic Report concluded that there is a national need to :– Increase the absolute numbers of students in higher

education as well as the proportion of graduates in Science and Technology;

– Focus on strong technician-level tertiary education systems at the level of ISCED 5B (Tertiary B);

– Strengthen information about career opportunities and the labour market;

– Provide defined pathways through the education system to encourage lifelong learning.

Governance

1. Autonomy/Academic Freedom: Public HEIs are by legislation tied to Central Government and have little control over own budgets;

2. Accountability: little public trust/corruption is a major concern;

3. Major Challenge is to achieve better governance and trust and to attract financing from industry for applied research;

• Regulatory Constraints;• Revision of Law on State Property;• Not for profit issue;• Non fungible budgets based on historical norms and tied to rigid

categories;• Restricted Institutional influence on curriculum content and

academic programme development.

Institutional Accountablity

Priorities:1. New model of Corporate Governance;2. New Model of Institutional Leadership; 3. Culture of Quality Assurance and self-

evaluation needed at institutional level;4. Institutional Capacity Building

Research Funding

• In 2013, Kazakhstan spent 48,968 million tenge (0.16% of GDP) for Research. Of this, 7,874 million tenge ( 16%) was for capital investment;

• 70% of these funds were allocated to Higher Education Institutions; the remaining 30% were allocated to Research Institutions;

The following table shows that this spend is proportionately small when compared with Korea or the USA.

Selected Country Comparators for Research Funding Source: OECD Main Science and Technology Indicators. 2012. Kazakhstan 2013 expenditure

Public Expenditures on R&D (GERD), 2010 as % GDP

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Kazakhstan

Mexico

Russian Federation

United States

Korea

Research & InnovationProgress to Date

• Capacity is being built for research and innovation in HEIs, through the planned establishment of one/ or two research and ten innovation universities and through developing a system for training qualified staff.

• Increase in post-graduate enrolments: in 2009, there were 666 Ph.D. students enrolled in Kazakh universities; by 2013 that number had risen to 1533.

Research& Innovation

Issues• Further measures are needed to:

– Improve coordination among the government agencies responsible for funding research and innovation and integrate the activities of the Research Agencies and HEIs;

– Reform allocation mechanisms to improve efficiency;– Encourage more basic research; – Create a commercialization infrastructure for

researchers (institutions, training innovation managers);

– Adjust the balance of postgraduate enrollments to include more agricultural science and veterinary medicine students.

•

Financing Higher EducationMobilisation of Resources

• In 2013, Kazakhstan spent 0.44% of GDP on higher education. Total expenditure for all levels of higher education was 174,183 million tenge. Of this 36, 697 million tenge (21%) was available for capital investment;

• This spend is relatively little as measured either as a percentage of GDP or on the basis of expenditures per student as set out in the following two comparative tables.

Annual expenditure per student by educational institutions for all services, relative to GDP per capita (2010)

Kazakhstan

Mexico

Russian Federation

Korea

EU21 average

OECD average

United States

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Countries are in descending order of GDP per capita (on PPP basis)

Source: OECD: Education at a Glance 2013, Table B1.4

Public Expenditure per StudentMobilisation of Resources

Comparative public expenditure per tertiary student , 2009, by per capita income, selected countries

KAZ Chile KoreaLatviaSlovakia

USAUK Aus

Israel

Thai

SloveniaCzech

Italy

BulgariaEstonia

BrazilHungary

Spain

PortugalNZ

BelgiumIrelandFinlandFrance

AustriaNetherlands

Mexico

Switzerland

Sweden

Malta

Norway

Denmark

Malaysia

R2 = 0.8469

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

GDP per capita 2009 ($'000)

publ

ic ex

pend

iture

per

terti

ary

stud

ent,

2009

($'0

00)

Private Contributions Mobilisation of Resources

• Kazakhstan relies heavily on private sources of funding to support its higher education institutions: in 2013, 73% of students used their own or family resources to pay tuition fees;

• The next table shows that, internationally, this low State contribution places Kazakhstan considerably behind the EU Average, the OECD Average and even the US average but close to South Korea.

• Countries are in descending order of GDP per capita (on PPP basis)

• Source: OECD: Education at a Glance 2013, Table B2.3

Mexico

Russian Federation

Korea

EU21 average

OECD average

United States

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Public expenditure as % total tertiary expenditure, 2010

Resource Mobilisation:Summary

• The Roadmap Project Diagnostic Report concluded that Kazakhstan does not have enough graduates and is not producing enough research to meet either social or economic needs;

• There is little evidence of philanthropic donations to HEIs.

• Indicators such as salary levels for faculty that are so low as to invite corruption and consistent feedback from employers that students are coming out of college ill-prepared for the world of work suggest that the level of funding is insufficient to meet Government goals for the sector;

• Coupled to low Salaries there are very limited resources to improve teaching and learning, to develop staff, to improve infrastructure, to undertake basic research;

• Kazakhstan needs to increase the level of investment in higher education.

Financing Higher EducationAllocation of Resources

• State Grants: merit based, voucher-like;• Recipients: 27% in receipt of grants in

2013; small proportion allocated to some disadvantaged groups such as orphans, the disabled and students from rural areas.

Financing Higher Education Allocation of Resources

• Affordability: Kazakhstan has taken modest steps to address the affordability of higher education for the majority of students who do not receive state grants.– (i) the National Education Storage System (NESS). – (ii) a student loan programme.

• However, although these programmes help families pay for higher education, they do nothing to reduce the overall cost of attendance and do not materially improve affordability.

Financing Higher Education Allocation of Resources

• The allocation of State Grants discriminates against students from rural areas and lower income students;

• The large majority of students (73%) must use their own resources to pay for higher education, making the issue of college affordability a major policy consideration for the country;

• University Fees may not be less than the State Grant: If the grant is raised, fees will also be raised and thus, perversely, poorer students will be excluded just at the time when the country needs to expand its system;

• The amount of the grant is currently relatively low, (approximately 600,000-700 000 tenge per student in public HEIs;) and the number of grants is relatively small compared to the number of graduates needed by the economy.

Policy ChallengesWith scarce public resources devoted to higher education,

priorities are to:• Rationalise the existing provision of higher education in

Kazakhstan;• Develop New Governance Arrangements;• Reorganise existing regressive education financing

allocation mechanisms;• Increase the numbers of graduates from all geographic

locations;• Increase the proportion of graduate in Science and

Technology;• Support the development of a globally competitive

research base in HEIs.

Current Reform Initiatives (1) • Number of institutions is being systematically reduced to

improve quality and efficiency and ensure diversity; • As a means of quality assurance, in future, public

funding will be tied to accreditation. • Public Funding will be tied to those HEIs that receive

accreditation. ( currently 43% of HEIs are accredited);• Legal Reform to improve autonomy and develop

corporate management system in HEIs. – Piloting New Governing Boards;– Training HEI management teams;– Development of system wide management data base.

Current Reform Initiatives (2)

• Improving access and admission systems;• Review of current grant allocation

mechanism to improve the funding system and ensure the effective functioning of universities. (Pedagogical Universities require special treatment to ensure their sustainability);

Current Reform Initiatives (3)

• Diversification of Funding at HEI level: Encourage development of multi-channel financing of HEIs through new financial management systems including the development of endowment funds;

• Desired National Outcome: create an awareness among policy makers of the need for a greater share of public expenditure on Higher Education in Kazakhstan.