ცოტაოდენი ფიქრის შემდეგ, გადავწყვიტე, ჩემის აზრით ამ, ძალიან მნიშვნელოვან თემაზე ჩემი აზრები შემოგთავაზოთ ცოტა ვრცლად. ბოდიშს მოვითხოვ დიდი ადგილის დაკავებისთვის და იმისთვის რომ ჯერ ქართულად არ მითარგმნია.
03/06/03
Giorgi Kandelaki
HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM IN GEORGIA
Introduction
In the years after it regained its independence from the Soviet Union, Georgia has launched a number of both relatively successful and futile reforms. But while this tiny `South-Caucasian` republic has been pointed to as an example of relatively successful `post-Soviet` democratization (only the Baltic states have been more successful), Georgian higher education, critical for the success of transition, has not changed much.
This paper sets out to review the evolutionary path of the higher education system in Georgia since the collapse of communism, the current situation and its implications. Finally, it endeavors to draw some conclusions and recommendations on what particular actions could be taken from within the country as well as from without to accelerate the protracted reform process.
Higher Education in Georgia: Past and Present
Although there existed several educational institutions well known throughout the Eastern Orthodox world in medieval times, turbulent history did allow their preservation to even late mid centuries. One of the first acts of the newly established Democratic Republic of Georgia in 1918 was to establish a national university, an establishment that had been previously prohibited by the Tsarist regime. With the annexation of the country by the Red Army in 1921, the fledgling university was summarily incorporated into the system of Soviet higher education with consequences of major effect to this day. In short, the central tenets of this legacy are `over-centralization`, institutional fragmentation and the micromanagement of student career choices.1
Under Soviet rule, educational institutions merely implemented decisions made elsewhere, mainly in the Party. With Party loyalty being the top priority of the state, Georgian higher educational institutions managed to retain some degree of autonomy in other directions. Consequently, the government did not pay much attention to the increasingly obvious instances of corruption within these institutions.
Paradoxically, in spite of the proliferation of both state and private universities that followed the collapse of the Soviet regime, the overall quality of Georgian higher education is said to have dramatically decreased in the past decade.2 Top managers of the system claim credit for maintaining stability within the country's most important tertiary education institutions, but students as well as experts in the field argue that stability came at the unacceptable cost of stagnation and decay.3
Since `1995-1996`, most of the `state-run` universities, like Tbilisi State or Georgian Technical University, have carried out a number of changes repeatedly portrayed as successful reform steps making Georgian higher education more compatible with the higher education systems of the OSCED countries. These changed involved the introduction of 4 2 format of undergraduate/graduate programs and most recently a credit system.
The credibility of such claims, however, is questioned by several circumstances. The admissions system of state universities in Georgia remains principally unchanged: at the beginning of the year, after joint consultations with the ministries of finance and economy and the universities, the Government announced the number of “state orders” they are ready to place in individual institutions and individual departments. In other words, the Government will pay for the students who pass the admissions exams to specific programs with the highest grades. As experts argue, the number of such “orders” is determined not on the basis of specific economic calculations and the requirements of the labor market, but essentially depends on the influence and lobbying power of the provost of a particular university. In addition, this system is a source of major corruption itself. In particular, due to the persistent stereotype in Georgian society that paying for one’s education is not prestigious, many are willing to pay bribes to get “state order” spots.4 As activists of the `newly-established` TSU student `self-government` suggest, the number of students who enter the TSU and other universities without paying bribes is only `15-20`%.5 Such claims might seem undealistic, but they are corroborated by a number of independent experts.6
Most people, as well as experts agree that the system has reached its lowest point of efficiency in decades with an annual average rate of first year graduates not exceeding 4%.7 The following factors have played crucial role in this degradation of efficiency:
1. Lack and mismanagement of finances
The funding of the country’s institutions accounts for only a marginal share of national income. Georgia’s educational expenses constitute roughly a third of what developed countries and half of what developing countries spend. Furthermore, educational expenditure has followed a downward trend. In `1997-2001`, higher education expenses went from 3 to 2.1 percent of the national budget.8 The same figure with respect to Gross Domestic Product has gone from 0.5 to 0.3 percent.9 Consequently, by 2001, government spending per student of the “state sector” amounted to 289 GEL ($129) a year. The funding shortage has manifest consequences for the quality of teaching and learning. The situation is so critical that there is a dansome fear Georgia is wasting a whole generation of human capital.10
Mismanagement of the existing finances has further exacerbated the problem. The administrations of state universities have been reluctant to undertake the measures necessary to optimize staff in accordance with the new realities. Consequently, most big universities are overstaffed. This has an additional damaging effect on the quality of teaching, as most of the existing funds are spent on salaries. Thus, for example, in 2000 payroll funds accounted for 89.3% of overall expenses. As a result, scientific research remains constantly `under-funded` (see Appendix 1). Although the proportion of tuition income has risen recently in dramatic proportions, doubts remain about the transparency of funds management. An inspection by the State Chamber of Audits showed numerous cases of mismanagement and accounting violations at the Tbilisi State University. As the report revealed, in 2001 alone, several millions Lari have been mysteriously “lost”. 11
2. Outdated Curricula and Instructional Methodology
Most of the methods of teaching currently in use at Georgia’s main universities do not promote the development of independent thinking and competent problem solving skills. Instead, course content favors simplistic memorization in the contexts of more than 400 disparate subjects. As indicated by a parliamentary Decree, in the increasingly globalized and `fast-changing` world such static curricula run the risk of outliving their usefulness.
3. Limited flexibility in Career Choices
Career choices are not flexible. The `16-17` `year-old` secondary school graduates are forced to make the pivotal decision of what they want to for the rest of their lives. Frequently, it is parents that end up taking these decisions in lieu of their children. “In the context of the highly specialized programs even at undergraduate level, this leads to prohibitive switching costs when preferences change.”12 In addition, the students become effectively “locked up” within the programs wherein they have initially enrolled and are frequently unable to choose courses not only from other departments, but even from other programs in their own department.
4. Corruption
Corruption is a result as well as a cause of poor education. As discussed above, in most universities it is most frequently encountered at the time of admissions exams.13 According to various estimates, students might be asked to pay bribes of anywhere $200 and $20,000 depending on the prestige of the department.14 Experts suggest the total amount of such illegal revenues for the university administration exceeds $1 million from the admission exams alone.15 In addition, the administrations of universities are believed to have been engaged in insider trading and mismanagement of government funds.16
The existing system is also promoting elitism and social inequality, as only prospective students from `well-off` families are able to hire tutors who are members of the admission commissions. To conclude, the corruption in higher education not only impinges on academic ethics and shapes the perceptions of students right on the threshold of their future alma maters, but also threatens to undermine the morale of several generations. David Usupashvili is one of the seven experts appointed by the Georgian President to draw up an anticorruption program and a legal expert at the Tbilisi Branch of US Center for Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector (IRIS). As he wrote, "Proportionally, the amount of corruption in [Georgian] higher education is less important than, say, in the customs department. But, in terms of influence, it is much worse because it directly impacts on the mentality or the ethic values of those students who every single day witness the situation that prevails in the education system. If the situation [in universities] does not change, I am convinced we will never be able to combat corruption elsewhere, because corruption will become part of our culture."17
Private Universities
1990s were marked by a real boom of private `higher-education` institutions. With their numbers reaching 200 by the `mid-1990s`, Georgia became one of the world leaders in terms of sheer university numbers. However, only a few of these proprietary universities have proven successful. Some, like the Caucasus School of Business have successfully introduced new teaching methods, high salaries for professors, ensuring high employment rates among their graduates.
It should be noted, however, that the small size of such successful educational establishments has been the chief reason why they have failed to influence the overall development of higher education in Georgia. Thus, for example, the total number of student in the six leading private schools is only 794 students compared to the almost 100,000 in the state sector.18
Principal Actors in Georgian Higher Education
Top managers of state universities
According to the current law on Education of Georgia, the provosts of state universities are elected by the academic councils of their institutions, but require the approval of the President.19 This provision has enabled Eduard Shevardnadze, a former First Secretary of the Communist party of Georgia for more than two decades and a former foreign Minster of the USSR, to bring politically loyal individuals with solid past party “experience” to such positions. While enjoying considerable support from the President, these individuals have been resolutely resisting all efforts to reform the system, particularly that of admissions. Not surprisingly, the `top-level` managers of state universities have also denied the allegations on corruption.
Students
After playing a major role in the struggle for independence in the end of 1980s, Georgian students had not shown any activism until 2000. The first elections for a student government independent of the administration were initiated by a relatively small group of students in April 2000. These elections were quickly denounced by the administration as “destructive and disrespecting the university traditions.” This body undertook several controversial activities. For example, believing corruption to be the most severe problem of the educational system, this group carried out a survey of 1000 students at the Tbilisi State University, asking them to name the 200 most corrupt members of the administration. The list was published, but elicited no reaction from the `decision-makers`. In addition to a number of `anti-corruption` and `pro-reform` rallies, the group also mounted a legal challenge to the `provost-decreed` admissions regulations; the court proceedings are still under way.20 At the same time, the effectiveness of such activism has been limited , since--as the members of the student `self-government` as well asand experts agree—the number of students who have been admitted through the various corrupt mechanisms and are therefore a priori loyal to the administration and opposed to reform has reached 80%.21 At various occasions, especially during the elections for the student `self-governance`, managers succeeded in encouraging groups of students to denounce reform appeals, thereby portraying the reform confrontation as one not between the administration and the students, but as a “quarrel” of two student groups.
`Non-Governmental` Organizations
Prior to 2001, NGO activism in higher education could be characterized as fragmented. NGOs mainly limited themselves to publicly denouncing corruption practices and the administration’s opposition to reform, as well as to occasionally supporting the reformist student groups. NGO pressure for reform was somewhat organized and bolstered with the establishment of the International Institute for Education Policy, Planning and Management under the auspices of the Open Society Georgia Foundation. With substantial assistance from the Council of Europe, this ad hoc coalition successfully lobbed parliamentarians to block the passage of the Bill of the Law of Georgia on Higher Education which was proposed by the Council of Rectors, a body comprised of the provosts of state universities and controlled by the President of Georgia. Experts considered this draft to be “the demonstration of the government’s unwillingness to tackle corruption”22
Instead, the Parliament adopted a Decree on the Main Directions of Higher Education Development in Georgia—essentially a concept paper laying out the founding principles of higher education development in Georgia. Following the adoption of the decree, the Institute established a task force of 22 members to draft the actual new law on higher education. The work was completed in late February 2003, and the document was submitted to Parliament. Parliamentary hearings are scheduled for late spring. The draft can be justifiably called revolutionary, as it introduces a number of major institutional changes to the system. The introduction of a national standardized secondary school graduation exam is one of these innovations. With these exams, the authors of the Bill hope to curb “traditional” corruption in admissions exams and the `above-mentioned` system of “state orders” left over from Soviet times. In addition, an independent accreditation body consisting of 7 experts to be established under the new law will manage the accreditation of individual educational programs in accordance with strict criteria. The council will hire groups of experts, possibly from outside Georgia, for the accreditation of particular programs.
International Involvement
Throughout 1990s, a number of donor organizations carried out more than a few educational programs in Georgia. The Open Society Georgia Foundation, for example, in one year alone has supported more than 600 scientists and students. US and European governments, as well NGOs and individual universities have enabled hundreds of Georgians to study and conduct research in the United States and Europe. (These programs include IREX, Edmund S. Muskie, `OSI-UEP`, Fullbright in US, DAAD in Germany). Additional donors include the EU and the World Bank, which are active in the field of `inter-university` cooperation, technical support and program design and funding. Interestingly, with the gradual increase of corruption in Georgian universities, the number of `inter-university` exchange programs has steadily declined.
It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that the systemic impact of these programs on the process of `higher-education` reform in Georgian has been very modest. To be truly effective, international donors should focus more on meeting the policy and institutional challenges of reform. Some pressure on the Georgian government, which is compactly connected to the `top-level` managers of state universities by a `tight-knit` network of nepotism and cronyism, would be helpful as well.
Conclusion
Having outlined the history of higher education in Georgia since the fall of communism and inspected the contemporary situation, this paper suggested that four reasons effectively caused the sharp decline in efficiency in Georgia’s higher education: lack and mismanagement of funds, outdated methodology of instruction, limited career choices and corruption. The paper also addressed the issues of student activism and international involvement and the reasons for their limited success.
The parliamentary hearings on the draft of the Law on Higher Education, scheduled for late spring 2003, will crucial in determining whether an effective reform of higher education could be launched at long last. Therefore, Georgian society at large, the `non-governmental` sector and their foreign partners should exercise maximum pressure on the Government and the Parliament of Georgia to make the right decision.
ENDNOთს
1 Decree of the Parliament of Georgia on Main Directions of Higher Education Development in Georgia (Tbilisi: Nekeri Publishers, 2002) p. 42.
2 `Jean-Christophe` Peuch, Georgia: “The Clock is Ticking as Higher Education Eaten Away by Corruption”, Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty, (reposted on the Eurasianet, URL:
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insi...v111002a.shtml)
3 Jaba Devdariani, “Running in Place: Tbilisi State University is Proud of its Traditions, but the Students Demand an Outlook Towards the Future, Not the Past”, Transitions Online, 07/15/01
4 “Tbilisi State University – Pride or Shame?’ A statement by the TSU Student `Self-Government`, 24 Hours, 08/18/02.
5 Ibid.
6 `Jean-Christophe` Peuch, “Georgia: “The Clock is Ticking as Higher Education Eaten Away by Corruption”
7 Ibid.
8 Zaalishvili. S. Analysis of Financing of Georgian Higher Education System, a paper presented to the task force on the Law on Higher Education. p3.
9 Ibid.
10 Decree
11 Report of the Chamber of Control of Georgia of the inspection of the Tbilisi State University. Tbilisi, 2002.
12 Decree of the Parliament of Georgia on Main Directions of Higher Education Development in Georgia, p.43.
13 Tbilisi State University: Pride of Shame? 24 hours.
14 Tea Dgebuadze, “Inadmissible Circumstances of Admission Exams”, 24 Hours, 07/15/02.
15 Tbilisi State University: Pride or Shame?
16 Revaz Bakhtadze, “TSU Management Engaged in Insider Trading”, Civil Georgia 10/21/02. URL:
http://www.civil.ge/`cgi-bin`/newspro/full...037826610,88700.
17 `Jean-Christophe` Peuch, “The Clock is Ticking”..
18 Iago Kachkachishvili, Research of Private Higher Educational Institutions in Georgia, a paper presented to the task force on the law of higher education, 2002. p. 10.
19 Law of Georgia on Education, Web site of the Parliament of Georgia, URL:
http://www.parliament.ge/LEGAL_ACTS/ganatl1.html. date accessed: 17/02/03.
20 `Jean-Christophe` Peuch, “The Clock is Ticking”. See also, for example, Nino Kharadze, “Students Sue the University Administration”, Khvalindeli Dge, 08/01/02.
21 `Jean-Christophe` Peuch, “The Clock is Ticking”.
22 Personal interview with Mr. Mikhail Chashkhunashvili, Executive Director of the Open Society Georgia Foundation, New York, 07/10/02 See also comments of Balazs Varadi, Dept of Political Science, Central European University on this document.
* Source: Zaalishvili. S. Analysis of Financing of Georgian Higher Education System, a paper presented to the task force on the Law on Higher Education. p3