Madagascar - A decade of reform and innovation in higher education : institutional capacity-building in a developmental perspective

54805 No. 159 May 2000 Madagascar: A Decade of Reform and Innovation in Higher Education Institutional Capacity-Building in a Developmental Perspective Higher education in Madagascar was in crisis in the early 1990s. Campuses were taken over by squatters and vandals. Little if any teaching was taking place because senior members of universities could not enter buildings. The quality of education was extremely low, with little or no research conducted, the staff demoralized, and the students alienated. Enrollment rose above 44,000 due to "eternal students" who were paid a grant for as long as they stayed in university. Students repeated course years as many as five times. The internal efficiency of institutions was approximately 30 percent, and external efficiency was less than 10 percent in many faculties and departments. Curricula and teaching methods were outdated and there was no system for evaluating of the institutions' performance. A large portion of the public financing was being wasted. Yet higher education was recognized by the government and the World Bank as being indispensable for generating the human resources needed for economic development and poverty alleviation. This article traces the development of a strategic partnership in higher education between the Government of Madagascar, the World Bank and other donors over a period of almost ten years. To understand the processes undertaken to address this crisis, it is necessary to give a brief historical overview of the four phases of cooperation between the Bank and the Government of Madagascar. Phase One: The Process of Assainissement, Review and Planning. With Bank support, the government took a series of courageous policy decisions to reform higher education. The aims were to improve quality and relevance, to diversify and modernize provision and to network with other institutions abroad. Through a series of bold, yet politically sensitive decisions, campuses were cleared with minimal coercion. The number of students was reduced -- from about 44,000 in 1992 to 18,000 in 1998 -- through a selective admission process, and repetition with scholarship was limited to two years. Gradually, facilities were repaired, services streamlined and improved, and conditions for teaching and learning restored. Staff were encouraged to begin evaluating their own institutions and the services offered. They were requested to identify strengths and weaknesses, and to make the system more attuned to the country's developmental needs. Under an IDA-financed project (CRESED I), self-evaluations began with programs and departments, proceeding to faculty and finally the institution. Institutional reviews were then collected and appraised by the Ministry of Higher Education, which began work on a costed national plan. Concurrently, and with donor assistance, measures were taken to improve institutional management, financial housekeeping, and collection of individual student profiles. In the central ministry, basic statistics such as student pathways and financial data (e.g. unit costs and funding of supplementary lectures) were collected, and a financial model constructed. Major policy decisions were taken to advance diversification, modernization and quality improvement through greater academic autonomy. To advance diversification, two Higher Institutes of Science and Technology (ISTs) were created, offering short training cycles focused on the needs of industry and its involvement in the government of the institutions. Curricula were developed jointly, and delivered through cooperative programs. Additionally, private sector involvement was encouraged and supported by the government. To facilitate modernization, steps were taken to introduce innovations. Institutions were encouraged to reallocate, within their existing budget, funding to student support and services. Discussion on the allocation of finance to departments on the basis of differentiated and weighted unit costs was introduced. The possible privatization of some services was also debated. In quality improvement, progress was extremely slow. With donor assistance, the first short cycle courses were developed. Discussions were initiated about evaluation and accreditation of courses. As teaching groups became smaller, interaction between students and teachers increased. Phase Two: Detailed Preparation for Reform and Investment in Higher Education. With a Japanese Policy and Human Resource Development (PHRD) Grant, the second phase began. A governing body for grant utilization was established, independent of the Ministry of Higher Education and representative of all sectors of higher education. Inter-institutional working parties were set up to consider major issues. These included: funding private higher education; modernization of curricula and increasing relevance to developmental needs; staff development policies; modernization of teaching methods; human resource management at all levels and in all kinds of institutions; and the establishment of quality assurance and program accreditation systems. A draft "Master Plan" was thus produced. Phase Three: The Preparation of a Follow-up Project. The third stage was inaugurated with the design of a proposed second project