[Note: This article appears in the November-December issue of The Lamp Magazine]
Recent media
reports indicated that just before the University of Malawi released its
selection list for the 2012/2013 academic year in October, the Malawi Government
had contemplated ending the quota system of selection into public universities.
The reason given was that the quota system was costly. Although the University
of Malawi went ahead to base its selection on the quota system, Malawians were
left wondering and debating the merits and demerits of the quota system. More
importantly, the question on everyone’s mind was why nearly fifty years after
independence, Malawi’s flagship university, the University of Malawi, could
afford space for only 908 students, out of 102,651 students who sat the 2011 school
leaving certificate examination.
In order to
examine whether or not the quota system is too expensive, and what its merits
and demerits might be, we first need to define what we mean by “quota system.”
We need to contextualize the quota system’s historical and political meanings
and implications for Malawi, and draw comparisons and contrasts with higher
education enrollments elsewhere in the world. We will also discuss why the
number of students invited to sit the university entrance examination
misrepresents the true number of Malawians who qualify for tertiary and university
education each year. We will conclude by reflecting on the ill logic of higher
education financing in this country, which is responsible for putting Malawi at
the bottom of global enrollment tables for percentages of youth eligible for tertiary
and university education.
The ethnic origins of quota
In his
remarkable memoir, And the Crocodiles Are
Hungry at Night, Malawi’s celebrated poet, Jack Mapanje, recounts an
episode from his days at Mikuyu Maximum Security Prison, which points to the
origins of the quota system. Mapanje dedicates two chapters to the episode,
chapter 41, titled “Northerners as an Excuse,” and chapter 42, “Chirunga Campus
Riots.” Chapter 41 talks about how Mikuyu prison played host to Malawi’s hotbed
of ethnic sensitivity and antagonism. A new officer-in-charge for the prison, a
Mr Mughogho, brings some changes to the prison. The diet has begun to improve,
and prisoners can now eat sweet potatoes, among other foods. Then a prisoner,
Mbale, escapes, leading to prison conditions being tightened and reversed back
to the harsh, punitive atmosphere.
When some
prisoners begin the ethnic blame game about the northerner who escaped, other
prisoners point to the improved conditions brought by Mughogho, also a
northerner. The discussion continues to the next chapter, where Chancellor
College students have rioted, following the November 1988 publication of the Chirunga Newsletter, a student magazine. An article in the student magazine has
described how the chair of the university council was overheard expressing his
displeasure at “the large proportion of students from the north who enter the
university,” wondering “whether they were admitted on merit or not.” The council
chair goes ahead to suggest that a quota system would be introduced at the
beginning of the 1987 academic year, in September. Students would now be
admitted into the University of Malawi “on the basis of their district and
region of birth.”
In this
particular form of the quota system, the intent is clear. It is aimed at
limiting the number of students from the northern region, who are believed to
be disproportionately more than their counterparts in the central and southern
regions. At the heart of the quota system debate is the incredibly small number
of students who are accorded space in Malawi’s public universities. Malawi
ranks bottom in the university-age cohort of young people who are actually
enrolled in tertiary education, according to the website nationmaster.com.
A 2011
survey of 150 countries places Malawi at number 150, with 0.3 percent of young
Malawians in the 17-22 year age range actually pursuing tertiary education. In
Africa, the highest percentage in 2011 was Libya, ranked 26th in the
world, at 48.8 percent. Malawi’s neighbours did slightly better: Zimbabwe at
3.9 percent, Zambia at 2.5 percent, Tanzania at 0.7 percent, and Mocambique at
0.6 percent.
Curiously
but understandably enough, more heat is created by the debate surrounding the
quota issue than on what solutions to pursue to increase access and allow every
qualified student a place in a public university or tertiary institution. Efforts
by education activists to propose a quota system that uses socio-economic,
gender and class indicators do not amount to much. Emotions rule and debates
are considered on which side of the quota system and the ethnicity divide the
proponent stands.
A “win-win university
quota selection system”, as suggested by education policy analyst and scholar-activist
Limbani Nsapato, would consider merit on the one hand, and socio-economic
factors including gender, disability and poverty, on the other. It would ensure
that qualifying students from rural districts of Malawi and from marginalized
backgrounds would have an equal chance of being accorded a place in Malawi’s
public universities. With the exception of the gender factor, which was taken
into consideration in the 2012 selection into the University of Malawi, the
type of quota system suggested by Nsapato has never been attempted.
Quota as scapegoat
In its
September 8-14, 2012 issue the weekly newspaper Malawi News published on its front page an article titled “How
Quota System Died.” Written by Charles Mpaka, the article quoted an official
memorandum from Finance Minister Dr. Ken Lipenga to President Joyce Banda,
recommending that the quota system be abandoned on the grounds that it was
expensive. A close reading of the article, based on the quoted parts, shows
that rather than abandoning the quota system, the main issue raised in the memo
was reducing government expenditure on public universities.
On October 4th
the University of Malawi released its 2012 selection list, while the newly
instituted Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR),
with Bunda College as its biggest constituent college, released its list three
days later. Contrary to the reported recommendation to drop the quota system as
per the quoted memorandum, the University of Malawi selection list was again
based on a quota system.
The University
of Malawi published on its website a statement that said selection had been “done
using the equitable access system of admitting candidates into public
institutions of higher learning.” The term “equitable access system” is
supposed to be a more politically acceptable way of describing what everyone
calls “quota.” The statement went further to say:
“Under this arrangement, the top ten qualified candidates
from each district were offered places and thereafter, the rest were selected
based on merit and the size of the population of the districts they originated
from to underscore that higher education, like any other form of development,
should be seen to be benefiting the whole country.”
Who qualifies for university: the
true numbers
The number
of students selected into the University of Malawi for the 2012/2013 academic
year is 908. The statement said a total of 8507 candidates sat for the 2012
University Entrance Examinations (UEE). Out of these 6373 candidates passed, representing
a 75% pass rate. For LUANAR, which based its selection on the same students who
had applied to the University of Malawi, 456 students were admitted. It is
important to put these numbers into context.
The number
of students who registered to sit for the 2012 Malawi School Certificate
Examination was 130,000, according to spokesperson for Malawi National
Examinations Board (MANEB), Gerald Chiunda, quoted in a Capital FM Radio online
article. The results are yet to be
released, as of writing in mid-October. But the most recent available figures,
from 2011, show that 102,651 students sat the examination. Of these, 56,273 passed,
representing 54.8 percent pass rate, according Zodiak Broadcasting Station’s
website. Ordinarily, passing the school leaving certificate examination ought
to qualify one for tertiary or higher education.
The
percentage of Malawian youth who ought to be in tertiary institutions, and are
actually doing so is 0.3. It is not difficult to understand why, when you look
at the numbers. In the 2011/2012 academic year only 366 students were admitted
into Malawi’s second public university, Mzuzu. Of these 254 were males (69%), while
112 females (31%). In the recently released numbers for Malawi’s private and
public technical colleges, the Technical, Entrepreneurial, Vocational,
Education and Training Authority (TEVETA) received 16,236 applications. In
their press release of Saturday October 6th, TEVETA announced that
they had admitted 1,580 students.
The question
of whether or not the quota system is expensive is not at the heart of the
matter. The true scandal of Malawi’s higher education system is that almost
fifty years after independence, the country is unable to provide the majority
of her young people an opportunity to access higher education and thereby
contribute to national development. A project at Harvard University that
studies higher education in Sub-Saharan Africa observes that no country has ever
achieved high levels of development with less than 50 percent enrollment of its
university-age population.
Elite entitlement
The demand
for higher education in Malawi has reached insatiable levels, and the country
is woefully prepared for this demand. The biggest reason for this is the
incomprehensible policy of the government paying for people to go to university
even when they can afford it themselves. And there is no requirement for them
to repay the investment. The only countries where this happens are the
wealthiest ones in the global North. Even then, in countries such as the United
States those who qualify for university education but are unable to afford it
are given scholarships or loans.
Student
loans are not a perfect solution either. In the United States, millions of
students graduate with debt burdens that threaten to bankrupt them for decades.
In Britain, tuition fees have tripled, and up to 54,000 potential students who
were expected to enter higher education have been unable to enroll. With youth
unemployment becoming a global problem, student loans are no longer being seen
as a flawless panacea. For Malawi, the solution lies in balancing the lessons
from the US, the UK and elsewhere, with the irreversible need to widen access
and sustainably finance a growing Malawian higher education system.
In the days
following the release of the 2012/2013 selection into the University of Malawi,
elite private secondary schools boasted the numbers of students they had
managed to send to Malawi’s flagship university. Students whose parents just a
few months ago were paying more than K1 million a year for their children to
attend elite secondary schools are now going to be paid K320,000 a year to study
in Malawi’s public universities. Public universities in Malawi pay students
“upkeep monthly allowances of K40,000 per student” according to a recent press
release announcing a raise in the allowances from K33,000 last year.
This is due
to the lopsided logic of Malawi’s publically-funded higher education. This
emanates from two sources. The first one is well meaning: an obligation to
invest in a public good for Malawians who cannot afford to pay for higher
education. But the other one is misguided: a sense of elite entitlement. The
practice elsewhere in the world is to admit all the students who have qualified
for higher education, based on classroom space available. It is up to the
students to look for tuition fees. Those able to afford the fees accept the
offers and register as students. Those unable to afford the fees apply for the
available scholarships or loans, awarded on merit and on need. This is how you
grow a university. It is how everyone else in the world has managed to increase
access to higher education, whereas we have stagnated.
By admitting
students on a non-residential basis and requiring them to pay for
accommodation, public universities are taking steps toward widening access. But
much more needs to be done. The newly established national council for higher
education has its work cut out. As for the ethnic origins of the quota system,
the real issue would have been to investigate the factors that lead certain
districts and populations to do better than others. There are lessons to be
learned from how some parents, communities and social groups encourage
excellence in education. The lessons can be used to afford equal opportunities
to others so as to level the playing field and provide everyone an equal
chance.