Higher education: Balancing financial need and fairness

Higher education: Balancing financial need and fairness

Ardimas Sasdi, Staff Writer, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta,
ardimas@thejakartapost.com

Several leading state-run universities have finally embarked
on a bold, forward looking but controversial step towards self-
reliance in finance, with a launch of a new selection system for
students at undergraduate level.

The new policy, designed as a cure to serious financial
difficulties, was the brain child of top-notch, state-run
universities and institutes. The financial problems deteriorated
after the government drastically slashed budget allocations for
education in the wake of the financial crisis in 1997, which sent
Indonesia's economy to near collapse.

Experts have said that educational institutions, including
higher education institutions, must address this crucial
financial issue that had shackled their development in order to
grow into a healthy organization.

Making state-run universities and institutes self-reliant in
finance, which automatically translates into independence in
managing their own affairs, was not imaginable in the past as
Soeharto's regime imposed tight controls on strategic
institutions deemed as a potential breeding ground for anti-
government movements.

But since the reform era, which evolved after the downfall of
Soeharto in 1998, higher education has enjoyed greater freedom.
The corporate change gained speed last year after the Ministry of
Education issued a policy, which led to a change in status of
four leading state-run universities and institutes into state-
owned incorporated entities, as part of a pilot project to make
state-run higher education self-reliant financially.

The four institutions are the University of Indonesia (UI) in
Jakarta, Gadjah Mada University (UGM) in Yogyakarta, Bandung
Institute of Technology (ITB) and the Bogor Institute of
Agriculture (IPB) -- all regarded as flag carriers for the 45
state-run and 1,846 privately-owned higher learning institutions
in the country.

In line with the new policy, the four institutions have
initiated several changes, albeit slow and not dramatic. The
changes included the election of members Wali Amanah, a local
badge for Board of Trustees, the direct election of rectors and
the establishment of an academic audit agency (BAA).

The other objective of this corporate change is to make state-
run institutions more accountable to their stakeholders --
students, the government and the community as the end-users of
their outputs amid concerns over the deteriorating quality of
Indonesia's educational institutions.

The steps taken by UI, ITB, UGM and the Semarang-based
Diponegoro University (Undip) to open the new selection system
for students at the undergraduate level to generate their
originally earned income should be viewed from this perspective.

Under the new scheme courses offered to students at
undergraduate level can now be categorized into three --
"regular", "non-regular" and "extension". Each category carries
different financial obligations.

UI set an entrance fee of between Rp 25 million (US$3,100) and
Rp 75 million for students enrolled in the special program called
Program Prestasi dan Minat Mandiri (self reliant program for
achievement and interest), specially designed for students from
the families of upper middle and high income earners. The lowest
rate is set for those taking social sciences and the highest
payments for those taking medicines. The school fee for these
special students at UI is set Rp 7.5 million ($950) per semester
against Rp 475,000 paid by a regular student accepted through the
usual selection system.

ITB set an entrance fee of Rp 45 million for a non-regular
student and a school fee of Rp 3.6 million per annum, while Undip
in Central Java, collected the highest entrance fee of between Rp
15 million and Rp 150 million per student for the special
program.

UI, ITB, UGM and Undip differ in the way they select
prospective students who enroll at this special programs and the
quota of seats allocated for the "rich" students. UI, for
example, selected the prospective students for the special
program through the normal entrance tests with a total number of
seats of 600 or 20 percent of 3,000 spaces available, while Undip
reserved 40 seats or 2 percent of 3,304 students it will accept
in 2003. Undip imposed no entrance test for its special students.
UGM held a separate entrance test for 32 "non-regular" students,
while ITB organized the program for non-regular students in
cooperation with Bank Niaga.

Executives of the universities said the funds received from
the non-regular students would be used to cover operational
costs, including to raise salaries of lecturers and
administrative staff, which are low compared to financial rewards
received by professionals at private firms or multinational
companies. The salary of a professor with experience at a state-
run university is around Rp 2.8 million (US$380) per month.

Up to now the universities have yet to unveil how they will
organize courses for the "few and privileged" students. Also
conspicuously absent was an explanation of how the universities
will raise standards of education amid public concerns about the
standards and organizational practices at state-run higher
education.

The experience of the writer studying at the graduate program
at a leading state-run university a few years back showed that
students of the regular program, although not perfectly analogous
with the problems at undergraduate level, felt they were
discriminated against against students of the non-regular
executive programs in view of treatment and attention. Students
of regular programs also complained they were unfairly treated by
lecturers, who were more generous in giving marks to students
from executive programs.

These allegations have not been validated yet, but it is only
natural for lecturers as human beings -- if the claims were true
-- to pay more attention to students of the executive programs,
who pay them more.

This must be anticipated by university administrators as the
public now becomes more critical, demanding accountability on
almost anything.

So in order to make this new scheme successful and avoid
unnecessary problems, each appointed university must design the
selection system for aspiring students for this new program as
rigorously, transparently and as cleanly as possible, and ensure
that its implementation is not done at the expense of the
teaching process of the old regular program.

Second, the new scheme must promote fairness and justice so
that it does not aggravate social jealousy in Indonesia's diverse
community. Until now bright students from the majority placed
high hopes in entering state-run universities and institutes due
to their limited financial resources.

Third, strike a balance between the aim to earn a new source
of funding and the commitment to promote the quality of education
through concrete programs.