Post on 17-Jan-2023
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
HIGHER EDUCATION VOUCHERS IN ALBANIA
Abstract
After being supported for so many years by the state, “used”,
reformed, changed, and politicized it seems that higher education
in Albania now is changing face again. From a public good, higher
education is being transformed into a private good, for the sake
of being more manageable, with the aim of offering a better
quality and a more egalitarian higher education. As a consequence
“quality” and “equity” have become the main points of the
Albanian government’s reform which is trying to implement its
program, among others, through a voucher system.
The paper, discuses the “pros” and “cons” of using a voucher
system in higher education in Albania.
This analysis is important policy wise and culturally interesting
since vouchers in higher education are a controversial concept
and absolutely new to Albania’s cultural, economic and social
background.
The aim of this analysis will be to offer a perspective to the
“working group of voucher system” offering a comparative study of
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
voucher systems implemented abroad especially in ex communist
countries.
The paper will conclude with a general analyses referring to the
changing role of the higher education system in the 21th century.
1.An overview of the Higher Education System in Albania
The beginning of the 1990s followed a relatively peaceful
change in the Albanian economic and political system. Albania
started a process of reform from one of the most Stalinist and
totalitarian communist regimes towards a more democratic form of
government. The road towards the type of society that Albanians
would like to have, with material goods, human rights and
development possibilities for the individual, has not been easy.
Economic development started out with impressive results, but
unfortunately it later emerged that these good results were not
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
really based on any thorough reform of the economic system
(Hagelund 2001, 4).
Higher education, as one of the main institutions which
experienced important transformations during the beginning of
90s, is one of the examples of an institution that is still in
the middle of important changes.
However, we have to admit that higher education in Albania
is quite new. The first institutions were opened after the Second
World War. The pioneer of higher education was the pedagogical
institute which was a two year institution and its aim was to
prepare high school teachers. Later, more higher education
institutions were opened; however, it was only in September 1957
that the first University was established. As the University was
established during the period when the socialist party was
ruling, the main stakeholder of this institution was the state,
and higher education in general was an invention of the socialist
party. There was not a higher education system before the Second
World War. In the past students studied at foreign universities,
mainly in Eastern Europe. Higher education in Albania was
established not only to prepare future students in different
disciplines, but also to spread the philosophy of the ruling
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
party, and in some way to serve as a tool, by preparing the
coming generation with socialist philosophy.
1.2 Important Changes in Higher Education System
The change of the political system in 1992 after the
students strike in 1990 was followed by radical changes in all
institutions in Albania. Higher educations institutions, as one
of the important sources for the diffusion of the socialist
philosophy to the new generation, was undergoing important
transformations. According to Hagelund, the government and the
donor community place a very high priority on education. However,
many problems remain to be solved. The major problem concerns
traditional teaching methods with rote learning and rigid state
curricula which stand in the way of innovation and initiative.
The lack of modern teaching materials and acceptable physical
framework also plague educational institutions (ibid, 8).
1.2.1 University Management
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
The first University Act entered into force in 1994 and in
1999 was replaced by a new Act which, was developed following the
recommendations of foreign experts.
The Act defines the institutional landscape with the
Ministry of Education, state and private educational
institutions, the Rectors’ Conference and the National
Accreditation and Quality Assurance Institute. There are rules
concerning the election of leaders (Rector, Deputy Rector, Deans,
Heads of Department), about governing bodies, budgets, personnel,
students and studies and the division of competence between the
Ministry of Education and the local leaders and bodies. Academic
freedom and the autonomy of the institutions in certain areas
receive explicit mention.
In 2007, after signing the Bologna Agreement (the Bologna
Agreement was signed in 2003 in Berlin meeting) the Act of Higher
Education was replaced with a more advanced one, which was
debated for many months with different actors.
The new things about the new act were the improvement of the
university autonomy and the financial autonomy of universities.
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
In the same act it was stated for the first time the
financing of higher education institution will allocated in a
form of a “grant” as other European universities do.
In the act it is affirmed that universities can use the money
they gain from the student’s fees, and the unused money can be
used in the next academic year.
However, the state takes in consideration the money the
universities has gained from students fees when it is time to
allocate the budget to universities, moreover the Council of the
Prime Minister as well as the public opinion has the right to ask
for transparency of university fiancées.
What was the “hot” topic for the public opinion and the
academics at that time was that the election for university
rectors was decided by the President; consequently the rector was
a president competency (Valmora, 2007).
One of the other concerns regarding the act was the short time
the act would be in practice, it was only for 3 years, and after
three years it was a another act that will substitute the last
one (ibid)
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
Besides the pro and cons of the act, the act in itself for the
first time included the private higher education institutions
(especially in the subsequent articles that enriched the new act)
that were emerging in the last 4 years in Albania.
1.2.2 Latest developments in Albanian Higher Education
The landscape of higher education has completely changed in
Albanian due to the incensement in numbers of private higher
education institutions. In this academic year in all the country
there are fifteen public universities, and twenty nine private
universities, in which are enrolled 80.696 students in public
universities, and 22.238 students in private universities
(Instant, 2009).
The system of education, and higher education
Private versus public universities
Cons and pros
1.2.3 Quality assurance and Evaluation
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
2.Vouchers System in Higher Education
The idea of vouchers according to McEwan, Patrick J were
proposed by Thomas Paine in The Rights of Man west 1967 (McEwan,
2000) and previously in France towards the end of the ninetieth
century.
However the first voucher model was released by Milton Friedman
(1955: 1962) and again during the War and Poverty, there were
other authors that gave “voice” to the policy debate like Chubb&
Moe 1990, Cookson, 1994 up to Peterson & Hassel in 1998, beside
the developments in the late nineteen’s there were other
personalities who concentrated on vouchers like Vicky Lee &
Elyssa Wang, Bahram Bekhradnia & William Massy, meanwhile
concrete policies of vouchers, specially in higher education,
have started to practice in Europe.
From literature review there is a common point regarding
vouchers, that there is not a single voucher policy, but many,
referring to Bekhradnia and Massy there are 4000 scenarios of
vouchers in education.
But what is a voucher in higher education?
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
According to the report of University State of New York “The
Vouchers System and Higher Education in New York State” (New
York, 1970) a voucher system in higher education would provide
education grants (vouchers) directly to student rather that
grants to public institution of higher education. On the other
hand it is supposed that the institutions would then retain their
present level of income by raising tuition to approximate the
full cost of the instruction. Subsequently, it is never stated in
the literature that the state by introducing vouchers would cover
the full cost of higher education in private and public
institutions.
Nevertheless, the reasons for proposing vouchers in higher
education are not entirely ideological (Bekhradnia & Massy,
2009), it is assumed that the support for vouchers goes hand –in
–hand with the free market economic models, and the arguments
proposed in their favor are common to other such liberal
positions.
According to Bekhradnia & Massy it is argued from the proponents
of vouchers that:
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
- Increasing the power of the consumer and reducing that of
the supplier will increase the competition and consequently
will improve the quality and efficiency;
- Putting vouchers in the had of the students candidates will
empower them by increasing their choice;
- Providing vouchers to students candidates as a “privilege”
will have a psychological effect by making them aware of the
value of education, consequently the vouchers will widen
participation and increase demand;
- If the vouchers are introduced will increase the amount of
private funding in higher education, as individuals are
required to top up the voucher to mach the fees that
universities charge;
- Because the government no longer need to fund universities
directly the amount of bureaucratic controls will be
reduced.
2.1 Vouchers in ex dictatorial countries
Although the literature on the vouchers in education is quite
vast, full of examples and literature review, in the case of
higher education there are only some examples that refer to
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
vouchers in American higher education1, Australia2 in Chile,
Georgia and Hungary.
However, the examples of Chile, Georgia and Hungary are only
introduced for those students with the highest entry scores
(Bekhradnia & Massy, 2009).
Nevertheless, there is an interesting experiment in Russia
which started in 2002 “About Experiment on the Transition of
Several Higher Education Institutions to Financing by using State
Personified Financial Certificates” which regulates the course of
the vouchers experiment (Kleshchukova, 2005).
The main principles of the experiment (referred as GIFO) mean
an obligation of the state to finance the course of the study of
the school-leaver in university. As mentioned by the author
every academic year the value of the financial obligations is
determined for every category of students by the Ministry of
Education of the Russian Federation, divided by 5 categories
where each category had its price (ibid, 33).
1 In Colorado, where vouchers have been applied in the earnest andcomprehensively as the Government’s mechanism for channeling public funds tohigher education institutions. 2 In Australia there were two committees gathered in 10 years (in 1987, 1997)and the review of the two committees did not recommend the introduction ofan education voucher system in higher education.
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
Higher education institutions in this case are allowed to set
their own prices for each educational program, each higher
education institution that takes part in the experiment is
obligated to determine and declares prices for each specialty,
education program and form of education.
Students, who have received GIFO of the first category study
for free, no matter what price is determined by the institution.
It is important to mention that GIFO depends only on the results
of Standardized State Examination and does not depend on the
students’ achievements during their study at the higher education institution.
The reason why I choose Russian voucher experimental model in
higher education to take as an example for comparing the future
model of vouchers in Albanian higher education, derives from some
reasons listed below:
1. Although the great difference in the population and culture,
the two countries were under the same political system for
nearly 50 years, consequently the same political system
influenced very much higher education institutions, politic
and educational culture;
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
2. Higher education institutions charged no fees, and higher
education was expected to be a public good;
3. The transition period, after the dictatorial system ended,
was very common in reference to higher education
institutions, like masification, the emerging of private
higher education system, etc;
4. The rationale in building the voucher scheme, based on the
results of the Standardized State Examination.
The vouchers schemes as was pointed out in the paragraphs
above are different, but one of the points that is common in the
philosophy of vouchers is the aim the voucher system has.
From the beginning vouchers aimed in bringing equity, improving
quality and efficiency in higher education, however the hidden
objective of the vouchers especially in the countries that it is
introduce; is to optimize state budget expenditures for
education; to distinguish the “good” higher education
institutions from the “bad” ones, so prestigious universities
will flourish and unpopular would disappear (ibid, 36).
Beginning from the main and obvious objectives of the voucher
system equity, improving quality and efficiency in the Russian experiment. The
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
author concluded that although there was an improvement regarding
equity in reducing the number of wasted years of study, because of
GIFO there is a trend that students will attend most popular programs of study, and in
10 -15 years those who will take pure science education will to a large extend come
from rural background, and as professionals receive limited pay
for their skills.
This effect happens mainly because pure science programs are
not very popular among students. This means that students with
the GIFO of third category and lower are admitted to free of
charge places, in this case higher education institutions will
survive by expanding admission to popular programs, while pure
science will suffer a decline.
In regard to the quality and efficiency, the evaluation is
more difficult because the quality the efficiency of teaching and
research can not be easy measured, however the example
Kleshchukova brought in referring to an interview made with the
Rector of Mari State Technical University3 G. Oshchepkov was very
interesting. The rector pointed out that a higher education
institution can not function without constant minimal financial
guarantees. In his opinion GIFO creates a situation of3 Mari State Technical University was one of the universities in which the experiment of vouchers began
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
instability. If such a voucher model will be implemented the
participating institution will have changing faculty staff and
unstable salary level . In other words, a voucher system can
negatively affect the possibility of long term strategic
planning, which is needed for improving performance in the
institution (ibid, 65).
2.1.1 Pro and con of voucher system in Albanian Higher Education
In 2005 the Albanian government gave to education and
especially to higher education a higher priority, placing
education in the top of the government agenda for the coming 4
years.
One of the most important reforms that occurred in higher
education in the years that followed was the increase of
student’s number in higher education system in general. Compared
with the number of students in 2005, the increase is nearly three
times (Musai, 2010).
As a consequence of the “mass higher education” the
government and the society in general has to face, beside the
inappropriate university infrastructure, lack of university
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
personal (especially high qualified academics) also a great
difficulty in financing and supporting higher education.
Having a different structure of higher education, which is
no more considered to be a public good, but also a private one,
having a great emerge of private higher education, it is
necessary to think of a new models of financing higher education.
Besides different ways of financing higher education, one of the
most “attractive” is the voucher model, which according to the
specialists has 5 objectives 1. The contribution in the financial
growth 2. Efficiency 3. Equity 4. Better governance and 5.
Financial stability (ibid)
Thinking of Jongbloed scheme “pro and cons of vouchers”
(Jongbloed, 2004) and bringing his analyses of vouchers in the
Albanian reality we will have:
Pros
1. Introducing the vouchers in higher education will strength
the student choice, and consequently will strength the
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
responsibility of such students in choosing a more
“realistic” and profitable education (study program ) 4 ;
2. Increase the efficacy of provision, in a way that higher
education institutions will respond better to the society
and the markets needs;
3. Increase the quality of provision, will force higher
education institutions (private and public, without
neglecting public higher education institutions ) to work
harder on quality issues, and as a consequence offer a
better quality in education;
4. Increase the private contribution to cost of education
(topping up the vouchers). Coming from a “socialist”
philosophy, although the last trends with private higher
education institutions, most of the parents and student
candidates still think that higher education is a still a
public good, and the state has to take care of their
education. Nevertheless, with the mass philosophy in higher
education the state can not support higher education,
4 It is a tread in the last ten years in Albania that students prefer toattend programs in social sciences, especially in law, political science,international relations, and economics with the aim to have high paid jobs.Nevertheless, there is a great number of unemployed people in the market thatfinish the “fancy” study programs without any prospective in finding aqualified job.
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
therefore other stakeholders (like student fees, in topping
up the vouchers) will be a great support for the system.
Although the advantages of vouchers in Albanian higher
education there is the other face of vouchers that specialist
has to consider before implementing the system. Referring
again to Jongbloed scheme and to the experience of the Russian
voucher model, in regards to equity, improving quality and efficiency the
prospective disadvantages might be.
Cons
1. Need for government regulations to protect subjects,
individuals, quality and equity. Referring also to the
Russian model of vouchers, there is always a threat in
regards to pure science study programs, in the experiment
mentioned above in Russian universities there was a trend
where higher education institutions were planning to expand
admission to popular programs, because in this way they will
get more students and consequently more money.
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
2. Considering quality and equity, the Albanian government
before implementing any voucher model, has to offer a clear
perspective to students and parents of higher education
quality in regards to programs and institutions.
Only after making a transparent evaluation of each program
and institution, the government has to take in
consideration also how to secure equity, where each student
has the possibility (although the geographic position) to
study in the program he/she chooses, having a voucher
support.
3. Large variations in enrolment and funding may lead to under
–utilization of capital and insecure jobs for teachers. In
reference again to the experiment in Mari State Technical
University, and to his rector G. Oshchepkov who pointed out
that a higher education institution can not function without
constant minimal financial guarantees. Policy makers in
designing the voucher scheme have to take in consideration
that higher education institutions need a minimum budget, to
guarantee their every day activity.
4. According to Bekhradnia & Massy there is also a risk with
the present arrangements in funding higher education, that
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
universities may feel to admit more students and have lower
standards, and there is concern too that universities and
their staff may feel increasing pressure to award more
favorable degree results in order to remain attractive to
students.
5. Bekhradnia & Massy also pointed out a very interesting
disadvantage that refers to a wide voucher implementation
scheme, which according to the authors the Government loses
its most powerful tool for steering the higher education
system in the national interest.
In the case of the Albanian “fragile”5 higher education
system, the immediate shift of steering from the government
to the student (from public to private stakeholder) will
bring a great confusion in regards to the future of the
system.
Conclusions
Although vouches remain a serious alternative approach for
funding higher education, before implementing a large scheme
5 Fragile it is used in the context that Albanian higher education, asanalyzed in this paper also, is quite young and has been for these 20 years inthe middle of strong and difficult political and economical changes
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
of vouchers the Albanian Government in my opinion has to first
1. Evaluate the quality of higher education programs and
institutions; 2. Increase the quality of secondary education
in order to build a solid ground in respect to equity; 3.
Secure information to students for higher education
institutions, in regards to quality and programs they offer;
4. Secure a financial guarantee for teaching and research to
higher education institutions in order to support their
existence; 5. Guarantee equity in the system for students
coming from more disadvantage social classes;
Beside the need for initiating a different scheme of
financing higher education (like vouchers) the policy makers
have to consider that a full implementation of vouchers will
differ the landscape of Albanian higher education, where the
state is not any more a stakeholder but a spectator.
Before implementing a large scale of vouchers the policy
makers have to consider ( like Jongbloed & Koelman pointed out
) that the choice of intervention mechanisms will not be a
matter of economic theory, but also a matter of social and
political arguments. Consequently any change in funding higher
education mechanism will influence in political and social
clime of the country.
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
REFERENCES
Barr, N (2002), Funding Higher education Policies for Access andQuality, House of Commons Education and Skills Committee. SixthReport of Session 2001-2002 ss. 1-31
Bekhradnia & Massy (2009), Vouchers as a mechanism for funding
higher education, Higher Education Policy Institute.
Bureau of Research in Higher Education and Professional EducationAlbany (1970) Voucher System and Higher Education in New York State, TheUniversity of the State of New York
Carnoy, M (1998), National Voucher Plan in Chile and Sweden: Didprivatization reforms Make for Better Education?, ComparativeEducation Review, Vol . 42, nr 3.
Clark, B ( 1998), Entrepreneurial Pathways of UniversityTransformation & Ch. 7: The Problem of UniversityTransformation, Pergamon Press pp 127-148 .
MPhil. Elona Mehmeti Institution: Albanian University
Email: mehmetielona@gmail.com/mehmetielona@albanianuniversity.edu.al
Gogo, V ( 2007), “Ballë për Ballë për arsimine lartë” “Face to Face for highereducation”, “Koha Jone”, available athttp://www.kohajone.com/html/artikull_4930.html
Hagelund, B (2001), Higher Education in Albania, University ofCopenhagen. Faculty of Social Sciences. p. 1-24.
Instant (2009), “Instituti i Statistikes në Shqipëri” “Statistic Institute in Albania”
Jongbloed, B (2004), Funding higher education: options, trade-offs anddilemmas, CHEPS
Jongbloed, B & Koelman, J (2000), Vouchers for higher education? ,CHEPS Kleshchukova, M (2005) , Merit Based vouchers for higher education in Russia,Hedda Program McEwan, Patric J (2000), The Potential Impact of Large-Scale Voucherprograms, Teachers College, Columbia University
Musai, B (2010), “Arsimi i lartë përballë sfidës së financimit”“Higher Education facing financial challenge”
Teixeira, P.N & Johnstone, D.B. & Rosa, M.J & Vossensteyn, H,Cost – sharing and accessibility in Higher Education: A Fairer Deal?