Roadmap Project Higher Education Progress and Issues Astana June 2014 Dr. Mary Canning Former Lead Education Specialist World Bank Member: 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 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

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

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

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 Kazakhstan 2013 expenditure

Research & Innovation Progress 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 Education Mobilisation 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) 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 Student Mobilisation of Resources

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 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 Education Allocation 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, 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 Challenges With 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.