UNIVERSITY AUTONOMY AND THE LIMITS OF REFORM IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Already in Article 1 of the draft law, it is defined that the law regulates “the fundamental principles of higher education, university autonomy, academic freedoms, organization, financing, and students’ rights.” Although this sounds very good, we also have many other articles that are so well formulated that if a foreigner were to read them, they would be surprised by the high level of formulation of these legal provisions.

By: Luisa RESIDI

The latest changes that have taken place in the Law on Higher Education in the Republic of North Macedonia are believed to have been perceived as reform in education only by policymakers, and no one else, apart from them, agrees with them.

Education at any level must necessarily begin to carry out reforms in order to join the EU, or at least to come closer to European standards. However, the changes that have been introduced, apparently, take back the development that has been made in education for centuries.

Perhaps such criticism may seem harsh, but I have never heard that the Ministry should have supreme power over universities, so that they function in the best possible way, when the Ministry itself and the ministers continuously commit not only violations of laws, but also of the Constitution.

As a student, I would suggest that reforms should not start from the head to the shoes, but from the shoes to the head. Some may even ask what this means. If the head is the brain of the country, it will be wasted if the feet do not take it to the right place… and where are our feet taking us?

So, the disagreement between educational institutions and the ministry is not found in the gap of non-transparency, but in the inability to find the thread.

However, I am returning to the draft law, which claims to increase quality, strengthen meritocracy, and modernize universities.

Legal regulation and the gap between theory and practice

Hypothetically, we should be somewhere at a European level of development. But here theory is placed on a pedestal, while practice, which can only be partially monitored during implementation, is left aside. Thus, a mismatch is created between “students’ freedoms and rights” and reality.

Nepotism and the risk of institutional reproduction

To further aggravate the existing tension, the current attempt to fight nepotism falls apart, because with this law, nepotism can be supported through certain conditions. I am not saying that parents and children cannot share the same passion for academia or work side by side with high productivity, but let us be honest: does such a naive goodness exist in our country? Of course not. This would be misused to such an extent that it would cross every expected limit.

Particularly noteworthy is also Article 5, paragraph 3, which says that “full professors remain members of the academic community even after retirement.”

In some cases, they may mentor up to three doctoral candidates each year, which to some extent may be considered positive, especially if you are retired. But this becomes problematic when compared with the reason why the legal reforms are being made: modernization, innovation, and development of human capital. In this case, a paradox is created, where under the pretext of preserving specialized staff, the new generations of academics are penalized in practice.

The balance between experience and scientific productivity

I am not saying that there is no need for their academic experience, but this is in no way justified by the addition of mechanisms for selecting university staff solely in order to make the renewal of the scientific and academic staff almost impossible.

In the state we are currently experiencing as a country, the last of the options would be to offer jobs to pensioners, when young people are struggling to find jobs with minimum wages, and are even fleeing entirely to a country which, at the very least, is implementing the laws it has formulated.

Academic experience in higher education is being valued many times more than the scientific productivity possessed by the new generations, who, with resources from the most diverse sources and efficient use of resources, under proper mentoring and evaluation, are capable of producing dozens of papers in record time. This productivity is what European standards value, not their total demotivation.

Article 24 and structural inequalities

Another very sensitive aspect is read in Article 24, where certain conditions are set for the implementation of third-cycle studies and inter-university cooperation. Although at first glance these criteria seem like neutral academic standards, in practice they produce structural inequalities between universities.

Universities such as “Mother Teresa” University and the University of Tetova do not have the same historical, financial, and institutional capacities as the older state universities. For this reason, the very high criteria for the development of doctorates and scientific research will negatively affect their academic advancement.

This part directly affects ethnic and linguistic equality in the country’s education system. If Albanian universities are limited in the development of the third cycle of studies, then the possibility of creating a new Albanian academic elite within the country is also limited. This may have a long-term impact on academic representation, scientific development in the Albanian language, and the real autonomy of these institutions.

University autonomy and political influence

Then, in Articles 7 and 8, the law guarantees university autonomy and academic freedom, including the freedom of critical thought, internal organization, and the choice of study programs. However, how much autonomy public universities have is open to discussion, because they are most heavily influenced by political parties.

And now, this even higher control mechanism, I think, has clear aims, namely that everything that will continue to be done in academia will depend on party elites, from the selection of staff to the accreditation of programs. So the principle of equality and transparency falls completely apart from the moment this law enters into force, and the road to the EU moves hundreds and hundreds of months further away.

But what if this mechanism is seen from a more positive angle? Nevertheless, in academia, no external factors should decide, except student assemblies and senates.

But how functionally fair these bodies will be is also a big question mark, since they too will be directly influenced in their decisions by the ministry.

Lack of public trust and the link with politics

The great lack of public trust that this mechanism will work comes as a result of the fact that academia itself should be involved in politics only as civic engagement, and not as part of party elites that manage to create billions in denar of wealth alongside students.

Another very important aspect is linked to the students themselves. In Article 28, the law guarantees the right to quality education, protection from discrimination, participation in decision-making, and support for students’ physical and mental health. But with regard to this aspect, functional psychological counseling centers for students are not available even in the best universities in the country. Therefore, great attention should be paid to this aspect. On the other hand, when this law protects against discrimination, it should be borne in mind that the Albanian side encounters marked difficulties in professional advancement because of the testing of language skills more than years of academic experience when it comes to advancement through licenses or even state exams, which is discrimination on ethnic grounds. As long as a faculty accredits a program in the students’ mother tongue, it should then also provide the opportunity for implementation.

Since everything is perfect with us, but only in theory.

Infrastructure conditions and the labor market

Apart from these, students in different places face inadequate infrastructure conditions, a lack of literature, worthy laboratories, as well as a gap between market demand and accredited study programs.

As for professional work, it is something that should be given attention not only in higher education, but mainly in secondary education, with the aim of advancing and motivating students toward more professional subjects, for which we are seeing a shortage in the market.

Improving these points in the student part would affect the improvement of the quality of student life.

What is the ministry honestly undertaking regarding the phenomenon of “brain drain,” or is it doing everything possible for this phenomenon to deepen?

The secrecy in these reforms is that we remain where we have not been, but return a little back, where one person decides and the others can do nothing except applaud.

This reform has both positive and negative effects.

I do not want to mention the positives, because they are not very relevant in the sea of other negative aspects.

But at least we are moving toward the European dream, right? While European standards fulfill students’ dreams by offering them unforgettable studies, our state has confused something while creating its strategy and is fulfilling something for our students… but for us, only disappointments.

The text was developed within the project “Advocacy for Inclusive Development,” financially supported by the Government of Switzerland through the Civica Mobilitas programme.

The content of this text is the sole responsibility of the Forum for Reasonable Policies, IOHN and BIRC and in no way can be considered to reflect the views of the Government of Switzerland, Civica Mobilitas or the implementing organisations.

This post was originally published on this site