Profits and Pragmatism

Ishmael Munene

doi:10.1177/2158244015612519

Abstract

The increased commercialization of higher education is a theme that has attracted considerable global attention. In response to changes in traditional sources of funding, many universities, public and private, have opted to source revenue from the marketplace. This article delves into the complexities of the entry into the marketplace by Kenyan and Ugandan universities. The local and international impetus for this movement in both countries and not in Tanzania are discussed, the perverseness and limits of commercialization delineated, and the positive and negative consequences of commercialization chronicled, all within the shifting global paradigm of higher education development. The Kenyan and Ugandan context cautions that ensuring a healthy mix between entry into the marketplace and the retention of the core mission of universities remains a critical challenge for governments and university administrators.

Highlights

Of the many reconfigurations that have come to characterize the university in the 21st century, none is, perhaps, more transformative than the marketization of the university
The gargantuan paradigm shift in university interaction with the market has generated a ripple effect that has resulted in the redefinition of role and mission of the institutions. When it comes to university–market interaction, a clear dichotomy exists in the three east African countries of Kenyatta University (Kenya), Tanzania, and Uganda
Marketization of universities is more dominant in Kenya and Uganda, and less pronounced in Tanzania

Summary

Introduction

Of the many reconfigurations that have come to characterize the university in the 21st century, none is, perhaps, more transformative than the marketization of the university. 17 28 31 38 40 44 42 53 54 50 48 computer, and information technology and medical sciences This “dual-track” tuition fee policy in Kenya’s and Uganda’s public universities is a response to both market demand for university education and revenue-enhancement requirements by the institutions. Government-sponsored students are charged the same tuition fees regardless of the cost of the academic programs; for such students, expensive programs such as medicine, veterinary medicine, engineering, and pharmacy cost the same as programs such as humanities, education, business, and social sciences despite the real differences in the actual costs of mounting and running the programs This implies that the running of high-cost scientific and technological programs for students on state scholarships has to be subsidized from other revenue sources, further distorting the market value of academic programs. As a cure for AIDS represents a potential goldmine for the university, it is little wonder that the university risk exposure quotient remains a low priority for the administrators (Munene & Otieno, 2008, p. 475)

Findings

Conclusion

Discussion