The Market Model of Financing State Universities in Africa: Some Innovative Lessons from Kenya

The Market Model of Financing State Universities in Africa: Some Innovative Lessons from Kenya

3 month payday loans, car loan emi calculator, discover student loan, loan calc, loan calculator, loan interest calculator, loan payment calculator, savings and loans, simple loan calculator, student loans gov
The Market Model of Financing State Universities in Africa: Some Innovative Lessons from Kenya


helb disbursement 2016/17  - Fredrick Muyia Nafukho, Ph.D..
Department of Vocational and Adult Education University of Arkansas, USA
Paper presented at a Conference on the theme: African Universities in the 21' Century. Organized by University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign and the Council for the Development of Social Science Research In Africa. April 25-27, 2002.

2
Introduction
Given the economic changes taking place world over, African Universities find themselves in difficult economic situations. The market model of financing university education that is being implemented in several African countries including Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Malawi and Nigeria is in line with the current financial changes. In this model, selling their core services - teaching, research and consultancy to the consumers as a way of raising supplemental income is being encouraged. The income raised is expected to partly supplement government grants and subsidies provided to these institutions.


The market model of financing universities shifts power to the consumer and to the units that produce and sell the services (Nafukho, 2001). The model is currently applied in many countries of the world including United Kingdom (UK) and the United State (US). In the case of the UK, the introduction of full-cost fees for overseas students in British higher education in 1980 led to a major shift towards a market model. The British universities focused on provision of customer-tailored programs and spent thousands of money marketing their programs. For instance, every year British universities advertise their programs in several African countries. This is an innovative way of recruiting students from these countries.
In Kenya, private universities like Daystar, Catholic University, United States
International University-Africa, and University of Eastern Africa-Baraton rely on the market
model of financing to run their programs. The state universities that have in the past relied on
bureaucratic model of financing their programs have also resorted to the market model as a
survival strategy. This paper is divided into five sections. The first section looks at Investment

3
in Higher Education for Africa's development. A persuasive argument is made to show that education is the most durable investment that Africa needs for her development. This is followed by section two which specifically looks at Kenya Government's Funding of State Universities.
Declining budgetary allocations to state universities, and hence the need for alternative sources of funding, are provided. Section three provides some successful evidences of the various entrepreneurial projects initiated by six state universities in Kenya. The last section of the paper looks at the conclusions emerging from the innovative income generating projects in Kenyan state universities.
Investment in Higher Education for Africa's Development
Investment in education is central to Africa's development. The main challenge facing African governments is how to successfully build human capital through continued and sustained investment in education. To survive and compete in the electronic age, Africa will not only require literate, numerate and techno-literate citizens, but also highly qualified and trained people. Universities in Africa must therefore take up this challenge (Massaquoi, 1995).
Education is regarded as a vital enterprise by virtually every country in the world. It is through education that a country is guaranteed a constant and relevant supply of human resources to facilitate her development process (Psacharopoulos & Woodhall, 1985; Mbaku 1997; Mbaku 1991). It is also through investment in education that a country's economic and socio-economic issues can be addressed. Governments worldwide invest heavily in education because of its contribution to human development (UNDP, 1996). In Kenya for instance, the largest share of government expenditure (over 30% of the total budget) is spent on education (Eshiwani, 1993; Husen & Postlethwaite, 1994).

4


In the 1980s, the social rates of return to investment in higher education in developing countries were found to be lower than the private rates of return (Psacharopoulos & Woodhall, 1985). However, in the 21st century, the World Bank report entitled: Higher education in developing countries: promise or peril shows that the social rates of return to investment in higher education in developing countries is now higher than the private rates of return (World Bank 2000). While practically all levels of education contribute to the development and prosperity of a country, higher education is now deemed to be the most significant contributor. A university graduate is expected to have higher output levels in terms of both quality and quantity than either a secondary school or a primary school graduate at the work place. Universities in Africa, like in the US and in many other countries of the world, note that:

... universities are expected to play a vital role by preparing graduates with liberal arts backgrounds, problem solving skills, a love for lifelong learning, and professional values and attitudes, making vitally important discoveries; acting as stewards of heritage and culture' and helping society interpret and use information; and enriching personal and community lives (University of Arkansas, 2010 Commission, 2001, p. 9).

It is on this premise that governments justify their excessive expenditure on higher education. Traditionally, state universities, especially in the developing countries, rely almost
 totally on funds from their respective governments. In Africa, "governments currently contribute about 90% of all funds available to universities" (Waihenya, 1999, p. 19). However,
this trend is changing fast. Most African countries, Kenya included, are steeped in deep
economic crises. Several countries in Africa cannot therefore afford to adequately finance
university education. In Kenya, for example, 57 percent of public funds go to primary education, 16.2 percent to secondary education, and 20 percent to post-secondary education.
This distribution is not proportionate to overall enrollments considering that 89 percent of the

5


students are enrolled at the primary level, 29 percent at the secondary level, and less than 2 percent at the post-secondary level (Republic of Kenya, 1997, p. 135-136). This scenario calls for a shift in the financing of state universities in Kenya, as is the case in several other African countries.

Kenya Government's Funding of University Education

While public universities are being called upon to increase their capacities of self-funding so as not to rely solely on the government, this does not mean that the government is not obligated to finance university education. Kenya, and indeed Africa as a whole, is yet to reach a stage where state universities may enjoy absolute autonomy from the government. As noted:

Whatever the position in more developed countries, the university in Africa occupies too critical a position of importance to be left alone to determine its own priorities. The university is generally set up on the initiative, and at the expense of the government to meet certain objectives. The government too, by virtue of its position of leadership in the task of planning and execution of economic and social programs, is the best placed to determine the priorities for the universities. The African university should, in normal circumstances, therefore accept hegemony of government (Yesufu, 1973, p. 45).

In the context of this paper, the government hegemony suggested above refers more to supervision than control. If the Kenya government has to maintain a supervisory role over the universities, it has to inject some funds into university education. These funds will be augmented by funds raised by the state universities from other sources. In Kenya, this practice
is referred to as cost-sharing, and it has been in place since 1988 (Republic of Kenya, 1997). Thus, for instance, Moi University, in its six-year development plan (1994/1995 - 1999/2000),
states that government grants will cater for approximately 60% of its total recurrent budget,

6


while funds raised through tuition fees, catering and accommodation charges, revenue from income generating units and donor grants will cater for the remaining 40% (Moi University, 1995). Government funding for university education in Kenya is mainly two fold: one, budgetary allocations to universities, and two, loans and grants to university students. The government is still the central actor in the financing of state universities. Saint (1993, p.10), noted:

The government finances the lion's share of university budgets, sets access policies, appoints key officials and insures that standards are maintained through accreditation or other mechanism.

To demonstrate the important role the government plays in the financing of university education, data in Table 1, show the government allocated over Ksh.153,000,000 for development expenditure and over Kshs. 4,3000,000 to recurrent expenditure to the state universities.

Table 1. Budgetary Allocations to University Education 1997/98 Fiscal Year

University    Recurrent    Development    Total
    Expenditure    Expenditure
 University of Nairobi    1,300,000,000    34,400,00                             1,334,400,000

Kenyatta University    772,000,000     16,700,000              788,700,000

Egerton University    786,000,000     23,000,000              809,000,000

Jomo Kenyatta University        278,000,000    22,300,000                             300,000,000
 of Agriculture &
Technology

Moi University                            776,000,000      27,800,000                             803,800,000 
Maseno University    399,000,000       29,400,000     428,400,000   
Total    4,311,000,000    153,600,000        4,464,600,000

7

Source: Republic of Kenya (1998) Budgetary Allocation Estimates. Ministry of Finance. Nairobi. Government Printer.
 Note: 1 US$ = Ksh. 78

The government financial allocations to state universities are not sufficient to pay employee salaries. As a result, the universities use development budgetary allocations to pay for staff salaries. The effect has been non-completion of many development projects started by these institutions. As pointed out:
...none of the universities is short of examples of unfinished projects like libraries, laboratories, lecture and accommodation halls ... consequently, not only are students forced to struggle to raise the ever-rising tuition and accommodation fees, they also have to contend with the leaking roofs, out-dated learning materials, shortage of teaching staff and unkempt hostels among others (Waihenya, 1998; p. 19).

Government Loans and Grants to University Students
The first 10 years of Kenya's independence (1963-1973) were years of free university education in the only one state university that existed at that time. Students at the University
of Nairobi received tuition fees, book allowances, catering and accommodation fees, and even a cash maintenance allowance from the government. However, by 1974, the cost of meeting these financials obligation had become too burdensome for the government. A university student loan program was therefore established (Eshiwani, 1993; Nafukho, 1994,  Nafukho & Verma, 2001). According to the government, the loan scheme was established with a view to assisting needy students who qualified for university admission to meet their expenses for  boarding, feeding, books, learning materials and personal effects. It was also meant to form a revolving fund out of which the government would continue to assist other eedy students (Ministry of Education, 1988, p. 53). While to date the loan scheme has assisted over 180,000 university students to carry on with and/or complete their studies, its administration is far from

8


being efficient. The establishment of the Higher Education Loans Board (HELB) by an act of parliament in 1995 was a giant step towards streamlining the services of the loan scheme (Nafukho & Verma, 2001, Waihenya, 1999 & Nafukho, 1998).

The HELB is mandated to give loans and grants to university students from poor economic backgrounds. Currently, the maximum amount a student can receive, as a loan in one academic year is Kshs. 42,000. Those who qualify for grants are given Kshs. 8,000 per year. For every amount awarded to a student, Kshs. 8,000 is paid directly to the university as tuition fees. The remaining amount is given to the student in two semester installments. There is also an industrial attachment or teaching allowance for internship of Kshs. 10,700. So far, HELB has made some strides in the right direction. It has decentralized its services to the various university campuses in a bid to bring services closer to its clientele. It has also embarked on a computerization project to facilitate its data collection, recording and storage. This should enhance efficiency in the disbursement and recovery of loans (Nafukho & Verma, 2001). While the university loan program is a very important initiative that the government has taken to finance higher education, the program still needs further refinement and support. As noted:

... at this stage of Kenya's higher education development, there is an urgent need to diversify the university loan scheme. Instead of relying on one major loan scheme, more schemes that target different categories of students should be introduced. [Kenya] should have a loan program that meets the needs of graduate students (Nafukho, 1998, p. 21).

Indeed, since government loans to students are one of the most significant means of financing university education in Kenya, the services of the loan scheme should be ameliorated.

 
9

The Diminishing Government Financial Allocations to State Universities
Government budgetary figures show that university allocations for development expenditure are diminishing every year. This can be mainly explained by the continued poor performance of Kenya's economy since 1992. As data in Table 2 show, apart from Maseno University, the remaining five state universities had their financial allocations from the government decreased between 1997 and 1998. This trend has continued to date.
Table 2. Budgetary Allocations to State Universities by the Government 1997 – 1998
University    1997    1998        Percentage  Change

University of Nairobi    38,700,000    34,400,000    -11.1%
Kenyatta University    20,000,000    16,700,000    -16.5%

Egerton University    91,500,000    23,000,000    -74.8%

JomoKenyatta University of     28,000,000     22,300,000    -20.3% Agriculture and Technology

Moi University    38,500,000    27,800,000    -27.8%

Maseno University    26,600,000     29,400,000    +14.8%

Source: Republic of Kenya (1998) Budgetary Allocation Estimates. Ministry of Finance. Nairobi. Government Printer.
The issue of decreased financial allocations to state universities in Kenya, like in many other African countries, raises serious concerns regarding the quality of programs being offered. A situation has arisen where state universities are now concentrating the little funds available to staff salaries at the expense of library acquisitions, equipment and facility
maintenance and research. It is against such a bleak background that universities are left with
 no choice but to seek alternative sources of funding to ensure their survival. As noted:

10
The realization that the government may not be able to resume
substantial allocations has provoked the institutions into reinventing themselves and set up income generating programs. These programs will not only ensure completion of unfinished projects, but also facilitate the institutions improvement ... as well as enhance learning material infrastructure and maintain high academic standards (Waihenya, 1998, p.19).

This trend is not unique to Kenya alone. In Uganda, state universities have made use of projects that earn additional income to reinforce their budgets. Such projects include guesthouses, part-time programs, sale of application forms, bookshops, flourmills, fees from private students, donations and fund raising. In China, universities now run banks, post offices, painting houses, laundries, computer services and other economic ventures to raise funds for themselves (Passi, 1994). It has been established that self-financing for state universities is a global trend, and that it is imperative for Kenyan state universities to join this trend. Thus, the financial situations in the state universities are bound to get worse unless the universities themselves take the initiative to diversity and improve on alternative sources of funding for their programs. Over-reliance on government funds by state universities in the light of declining economies must be questioned.

Entrepreneurial Strategies of Funding Kenyan State Universities
From the foregoing, it is evident that with the diminishing government funding, Kenya's state universities must devise innovative income generating strategies and raise funds to sustain academic programs. Apart from raising funds from students' tuition fees payments, state universities have taken the initiative of identifying and developing entrepreneurial sources of raising additional of revenue. However, there is still much more that can be done. This section of the paper discusses the strategies of self-funding that exist in the public universities.

11
Each of the innovative income generating strategies in the six state universities are examined. Suggestions on how to enhance the existing or planned fund raising programs are made.

As a reaction to declining government revenues, state universities in Kenya have
 introduced Self-sponsored degree programs, parallel degree programs, evening degree
programs, sandwich programs and school-based programs. The students enrolled in these
programs pay the full cost of the degree programs and do not receive any form of government sponsorship. This is in line with the market model of financing higher education. In addition, state universities are now offering consultancy services at a fee. Thus, the state universities have realized the need to supplement government funding by being entrepreneurial in their operations (Nafukho, 2001). This is one of the innovative ways that state universities in Kenya and indeed Africa must embrace to meet the needs of their customers, the students.

University of Nairobi's Income Generating Projects
In response to the challenge of self-funding, Kenya's largest and oldest university, the University of Nairobi, set up the University of Nairobi Enterprise and Service (ONES) in 1996. Its mandate is to coordinate the operations and functions of the university's income generating sectors. Among the very profitable income generating activities include: the Nairobi University Press, the Chiromo Mortuary, the Kibwezi Dry land project and specialized consultancy services at the dental hospital. Others include the coffee farm at Kabete, the horticultural farm, the university cafeterias, and a bakery. The other innovative income generating projects include DNA finger printing, electronics and computer technology, and research and consultancy in various departments. The university has also established a teaching hospital and plans to start an industrial park. There are also plans to invest in real estate and management through the department of Architecture (Barsito, 1996; Waihenya, 1998).

12

TheUniversity of Nairobi also runs successful parallel, part-time, evening school and distance learning degree and diploma programs. The various income generating degree programs started by the University of Nairobi generate over Ksh. 800,000,000 annually. The university has been able to build new learning facilities, acquire new equipment and renovate old buildings. Currently, the revenue generated from income generating activities enables the university to meet 46% of its faculty and staff salaries. The university has over 8,000 students enrolled in self-sponsored degree programs.
Moi University Income Generating Activities
n response to the challenge of self-funding, Moi University set up a committee for Income Generation Units. The author of this paper was a member of the committee. The Committee was charged with coordinating and facilitating the operations of the university's income generating units. These units include the 1200 acre farm at the main campus and the 208 acre farm at Chepkoilel Campus. Products from the two farms include dairy products, poultry, maize, wheat, horticultural produce and tree seedlings. These products are sold both within and outside the university. However, both farms are yet to be fully utilized (Moi University, 1997; Barasa, 1998).
Another major income generating unit at Moi University is the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Eldoret. The hospital, in conjunction with the College of Health Sciences, offer medical and consultancy services to students, staff and the general public at a fee. These services include surgical, pediatric, obstetrics and gynecology, psychiatric, diagnostic laboratories and pharmacy, among others. The hospital mortuary also offers services that include preparation of dead bodies, storage of the bodies, embalming, and post mortem facilities.

13
The introduction of self-sponsored degree programs by Moi University in 1998 was a giant step towards income generation. The programs, which are currently run at the university's town campus, are in high demand. The 1998/99 fees for the program was Kshs. 80,000 and students enrolled in education programs are required to pay in two semester installments of Ksh. 40,000. The university's department of wood science and technology runs another profitable enterprise. The department produces high quality furniture and offers other timber-related services to the public at competitive rates.
Another major source of income for Moi University is the university bookshop. Apart from offering its services to the university fraternity, the bookshop has diversified its services to include the wider community. For instance, in 1999, the bookshop won a lucrative government tender to supply text books to 13 schools in Marakwet district. Over a million shillings was earned from the tender.
Other income generating activities at Moi University include the guesthouses, cafeterias and student dining facilities. The production unit at the department of production engineering generates a lot of income for the university. The completion of the donor funded university garage on the main campus is also bound to boost the income generation capacity of the university. The ultra-modern garage can serve both the university and the neighboring community. The Moi University press, run by the Faculty of Information Sciences is another viable income generating unit. Currently, the services of the press are more confined to the university departments. However, the university press should be expanded and marketed to serve the public at large. This should generate much more income for the university.

14
Kenyatta University's Income Generating Projects
            Kenyatta University's Income Generating Services Board lists 15 successful income-generating projects. These include the African Virtual University (AVU) project. The AVU project started in 1997, and by 1998 it had fetched Kshs. 7,700,000 and reached Kshs. 9,300,000 in the year 2000. The post-graduate Diploma in Education Program run by the university grossed Kshs. 15,000,000 in 1998. The International Summer School, which has been in operation since 1998 grossed Kshs. 3,100,000 in the first year (Thuku, 1998).

             Other income generating projects at Kenyatta University include a restaurant at its science complex, a students' recreation center, boardroom services and a cultural center. The university has also converted four kitchens into income generating units, and they grossed Kshs. 5,000,000 in 1998. Thus, the existing income generating units in Kenyatta University generate a gross income of Kshs. 120,000,000 annually. The Income Generating Services Board also lists seven proposed projects that include - a slaughterhouse, a bakery, farming, poultry, a piggery, a laundry, and a science workshop. These projects raised an additional Kshs.11,600,000.
             Kenyatta University has also begun self-sponsored and part-time degree programs, which are another source of funds. The university has established consultancy services in various departments. There are also minor activities that the university has embarked on to generate funds, a good example being the sale of waste paper to paper dealers.
Egerton University's Income Generating Projects
Egerton University is primarily an agricultural training institution. Therefore, the university's main income generating projects are agricultural in nature. The university has a 3000-acre farm at Ngongongeri where crop and dairy production flourishes. In 1998, over 1,200 acres of the farm were under wheat, and this acreage has since increased to 1600 acres.

15
The returns from this crop production run into millions of shillings that is extra income for the university. On the same farm there are 600 dairy cows whose average daily yield is between 16 to litres of milk per cow. Some of this milk is sold within the university and to the neighboring community, while the rest is processed at the university's dairy plant. The dairy plant processes dairy products like fresh milk, yogurt and cheese on a large commercial scale. It has the capacity to process up to 5000 kilograms of milk a day. The proceeds from these dairy ventures are a vital additional source of income for Egerton University (Agutu, 1998).
Apart from the Ngongengeri farm, the university also owns the 600 acres Tatton farm, which is presently used for students' practical lessons. The main activities on the farm at present are poultry farming, pig rearing, horticulture and floriculture. These were initially funded through a Chinese grant of Kshs. 15,000,000. Other farms run by the university include the Laikipia Campus farm and the Chemeron farm in Baringo, where wheat and dairy production are undertaken, respectively. The money generated by all these farming units helps ease the burden of financing the university's general operational costs.
There are other income generating units at Egerton University besides the farms. One such unit is the 90 - guest room hotel and housed at the Agricultural Resources Center. The hotel is professionally managed as a profit-making firm. It has a restaurant, a bar, a swimming pool and conference facilities. The hotel charges Kshs. 1,750 for a guest on full board and Kshs. 1,000 for bed and breakfast. It has hosted several national and international seminars, meetings, conferences and workshops, all of which have generated income for the university.
Apart from the hotel, the university's Faculty of Engineering provides commercial services to the community. These include ploughing farms and harvesting wheat, and providing welding, mechanical and electrical services at a fee. The Animal Health Department

16
has also established a veterinary clinic, which serves the neighboring community at a fee. The University has also established the School of Continuing Education that runs computer, secretarial and business courses. These courses are currently offered to the public at the university's premises at the Nakuru Agricultural Show of Kenya (ASK) show ground in Nakuru town. The courses are offered at a charge of Kshs. 6,000 for an unlimited number of packages over an eighty-hour duration. Egerton was also the second university, after Kenyatta University, to join the African Virtual University project.
Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT)
JKUAT is a relatively small and specialized university. The university has established several income-generating projects that include manpower-training programs, agricultural production, production of school science kits, and medical care. The manpower training programs include unique graduate degree, diploma and certificate courses in information technology. The MSc program costs Kshs.. 500,000 as compared Kshs. 1,400,000 fees charged in the United Kingdom for the same program. The JKUAT farm produces maize, rice and livestock products. However, the main income from the farm is derived from its horticultural products that are sold to the cafeterias, staff members, and the neighboring community. The university also produces school science kits for physics, chemistry, and electronics, all of which can be used without electricity. One unit costs Kshs.. 25,000. The JKUAT hospital is also another major source of income. The 50-bed hospital is well stocked with drugs. It charges staff members Kshs. 100 as consultation fees, while outsiders pay Kshs..
200 as consultation fees. Annually, the hospital collects about Kshs. 1,000,000 (Kihuria, 1998). The university has established outreach programs in conjunction with over ten associate degree and certificate level training institutions in the country. This is another

17
innovative source of income for the university.
Maseno University Income Generating Projects
Maseno University was a constituent of Moi University from 1990, until the year 2000 when it attained full status. Of the six state universities, it is the youngest. Income generating projects at Maseno University include a direct degree entry program. The direct degree entry program admits students who meet university admission requirement after the government-sponsored students' admission. The program is unique since both groups of students attend same lectures and have access to all the equipment and learning facilities. However, the direct entry degree students pay the full cost of university costs and are not government sponsored. The other income generating activities at Maseno University include school based post¬graduate diploma in education, evening degree programs, and sandwich holiday based graduate degree programs. Non-educational income generating projects at Maseno University include, a guesthouse, cafeterias, bookstores on campus and in Kisumu town, copying services, shuttle services for faculty, staff and students between Siriba and Maseno campuses and sale of agricultural produce.
Conclusion
The main advantage of the market model of financing state universities is that the model makes these institutions of higher learning become more responsive to changing economic and social realities. Thus, universities can no longer offer programs that are not in demand. The model also forces universities to be innovative and to launch programs that meet the felt 'needs' of society. This makes the institutions respond to societal needs. They in turn become more efficient and effective by providing the output demanded by the economy.
For the market model to achieve its objectives, the following assumption must be met:

18
consumers (students) are well informed about their subjects and program choices, they are influenced by the labor market implications of subject and program choices, and the labor market itself functions efficiently. This is not the case in Kenya especially at this time of economic depression. Also, because of lack of career and counseling programs in Kenya's education system, a majority of students joining universities do not know in which programs to enroll. Quite often, students on government sponsorship are forced to enter programs in which they have no interest by the state universities' Joint Admission Board.
This implies that the market model has disadvantages that must be addressed if it has to achieve its objectives of providing efficient and market driven degree programs. The main disadvantage of relying on the market model of financing universities is that the model is inequitable because it denies access to students unable to meet the direct cost of university education. In countries like the United States where the model has worked successfully, there exist a number of student financial aid sources. Thus, the students who require loans obtain them and there are different types of scholarships, student work programs etc. In the Kenyan case, while the model is currently being applied, we must think of innovative ways of raising funds to assist brilliant but needy students.
The model may also lead to sub optimal investment in education. Since the initial costs of establishing a university are very high, few individuals in a country like Kenya may opt for university establishment as a business venture. Therefore, because of the important role that investment in education plays, the government must provide a lead in the supply of university education. This means that we must have state universities, which are mainly funded by the tax payer's money. There is also a danger that responsiveness to student demand may have undesirable effects, for example, by lowering admissions standards in institutions that are no

19
longer, attracting students.
The other disadvantage of the model is that the orientation of state universities toward student demand is likely to promote teaching at the expense of research and publication. This will in turn affect the total output of the university. The lecturers, who are in most cases poorly remunerated, may devote all their time to teaching to make additional money to make ends meet. Thus, lecturers are paid per hour for teaching students enrolled in Income generating projects. The more hours the lecturer has the more money earned. This is quite exhausting and leaves the lecturers with no time for research, publication and consultancy. To reduce teaching fatigue, the additional income generated from the market model of funding state universities should be used to offer a good salary package to faculty and staff working in these state universities. This could reduce the brain drain that state universities in Kenya and the whole of Africa currently face.
Despite, the limitations of the market model of funding universities, its positive effects are already being witnessed in Kenya's higher education system. Kenyan state and private universities are moving in the right direction by relying on the market model of financing their academic programs. The way forward is for state universities to ensure access of higher
education to many students who have been denied this opportunity in the past. The institutions must endeavor to promote lifelong learning that teaches students how to learn throughout their lives. With thousands of nontraditional students enrolling in the universities, there is need for new areas of study in the teaching of adult learners. Thus, andragogical approaches of teaching and learning must be established (Knowles, Holton & Swanson, 1998). If both the students and their instructors are to benefit from the market model of financing state universities in Africa, there is need for a paradigm shift in the teaching in higher education in

20
Africa.
References

Aduda, D. (1996). "The Noose Tightens on Loan Defaulters" in the Daily Nation (November 16, 1996). Nairobi: Nation Newspapers Limited.

Atkinson, G.B.J. (1983). Economics of Education. London: Hodder and Stoughton Limited.

Barsito, K. (1998). "HELB misunderstood, maligned" in the Kenya Times (March 14, 1998); Nairobi: Kenya Times Media Trust Limited.

Barsito, K. (1999). "Interest on varsity Loans up" in the Daily Nation (July 5); Nation Newspapers Nairobi: Limited.

Baxter, C., O'Leary, P.J., and Westoby, A. (1977). Economics and Education Policy: A Reader. New York: Longman Inc.

Bush an, K. (ed.) (1991). Kenya Uhuru Factbook. Nairobi: Newspread International.

Cohn, E. and Geske, T. G. (1990). Economics of Education. New York: Pergamon Press. Dennison, W.F. (1984). Educational and Financial Resources. London: Croom Helm Limited.

Eshiwani, G.S. (1993). Education in Kenya since Independence. Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers.

Johnes, G. (1993). The Economics of Education. London: The Macmillan Press Limited.

Knowles, M.S., Holton, E.F. III, & Swanson, R.A. (1998). The Adult Learner: The definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Hinemann.

Muya, W. (1996). "Criticism of Student Loan Body off Target" Daily Nation November 30, Nairobi: Nation Newspapers Limited.

Mbaku, J. M. (1997). Institutions and reform in Africa: The public choice perspective. Wesport, CT: Praeger.

Mbaku, J. M. (1991). State control, economic planning and competition among interest groups for government transfers in Africa. The Journal of social, political and economic studies 13 (2), 181- 194.

Nafukho, F. M. (2001). A Comparison of the Efficiency and Equity Implications of University Loan Programs in the United States of America and in Kenya. Journal of Third World

 
21
Studies, XVIII, 2, 187-207.

Nafukho, F. M. (1999). The Role of Universities in Promoting Cooperation between Social and Pure Scientists for Human Development in Kenya. Journal of Third World Studies XVI. 1, 87-100.

Nafukho, F. M. (1998). "Diversify Student Loans' Scheme" Daily Nation (November 2); Nairobi: Nation Newspapers Limited.

Nafukho, F. M. (1996). "Structural Adjustment Programs and The Emergence Of Entrepreneurial Activities Among Moi University Students" in the Journal Of Eastern African Research & Development. 26, 79-90.

Oirere, S. (1996). "Loans Board, Students Trade Accusations" Kenya Times (December 21), Nairobi: Kenya Times Media Trust Limited.

Postlethwaite, T.N. and Husen, T. (1994). "Financing Public Education: Practices and Trends" in The International Encyclopedia of Education (2" a edition). New York: Pergamon Press.

Psacharopoulos, G. and Woodhall, M. (1985). Education for Development: An Analysis of investment Choices. Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press.

Republic of Kenya. (1996). Economic Reforms For 1996-1998: The Framework Policy Paper. Nairobi: Government Printer.

Republic of Kenya. (1996). Economic Survey. Nairobi: Government Printer.
Republic of Kenya, (1997). National Development Plan. Nairobi: Government Printer.

Republic of Kenya, (1988). Report of The Presidential Working Party on Education and, Manpower Training for the Next Decade and Beyond; Nairobi: Government Printer.

Republic of Kenya, (1995). "The Higher Education Loans Board Act 1995" in The Kenya Gazette Supplements Acts 1995 No. 47(Act No. 4); Nairobi: Government Printer.

Senelwa, K. (1999). "Board set to hike rates on its loans" in the East African Standard (June 19, 1999); Nairobi: The Standard Limited.

Waihenya, K. (1998). "Funds: It's do, or die for Varsities" in the Daily Nation (November 2, 1998); Nairobi: Nation Newspapers Limited.

World Bank, (1988). Education in Sub-Saharan Africa; Washington D.C.: World Bank.

World Bank, (2000). Higher Education in Developing Countries: Promise and Peril. Washington D.C.: World Bank.


With the information we provide about   helb disbursement 2016/17

, We hope you can be helped and hopefully set a precedent with you . Or also you can
see our other references are also others which are not less good about  PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID)


, So and we thank you for visiting.


open student loan :   ahero.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=cshe&action=downloadfile&fileid...

Comments