10 May 2008
column
I was fully aware of fees structures in private universities in Uganda, leave alone those in Tanzania and Kenya--countries I have lived in for long periods and I visit very frequently.
I intentionally avoided comparing fees in a public university with those in a private university.
Price determination in any firm is highly dependent on the basic objectives or philosophy of the firm. That is why there are vast differences amongst prices set by monopolies, oligopolies, firms in competitive markets, and so on.
Comparisons may, therefore, not be useful unless one takes into account the underlying philosophy or ideology.
Any attempt to compare incomparable things is an exercise in futility.
I expect governments in poor countries to offer education (including tertiary education) as an investment, since there is a high, statistically significant correlation between education or skilled labour and development.
A government firm should, therefore, aim at just offering an essential service as the basic ideology. Of course, it should not be a loss-making firm; it should at least break even.
In fact, it is commendable if the firm makes a small surplus, which surplus can be ploughed back to expand the firm. But, definitely, it should not aim at profit maximisation.
I place a public university in this category.
This is why I expect the fixed costs of operating a public university to be borne by subventions. If a government is no longer able to adhere to this philosophy, it should privatize the firms it is unable to cater for with regard to at least fixed costs.
Private firms--maybe, except non-governmental organisations (NGOs)--normally aim at making not a surplus but a profit.
To put it crudely, the firms offer a service or produce a given good in the process of their maximising profits; philanthropy does not come into the picture at all.
If they could generate maximum profits without producing any good or service, they would be fine for costs of production would then be zero or near zero.
Private universities in a way fall in this category. They have no godfather (government) to meet some of their operational costs, yet they need to generate something for their owners.
Breaking even is a very undesirable situation for them. They are in business not for charitable reasons, but to earn something from their investments.
Hence, the price setting mechanism here is not based on variable costs as I argued in the published paper, but on total costs, including at least a 'normal profit'.
The prices set by private firms are, therefore, perfunctorily expected to be higher than those set by non-profit-maximising firms, including universities.
In general, it is, therefore, wrong to compare fees in Makerere University with those in private universities in Uganda.
Fees in one private university can, however, be compared with fees in another private university in the same country or even across borders.
Still on fees, Mr Gilbert Kadilo stated that fees in Makerere have not undergone any revisions since 1996. He implies that, therefore, the fees need revision.
What is the basis? Is the inflation rate now higher than it was in 1996? Are facilities/amenities available to students on a per capita basis more than or superior to what students in 1996 were exposed to?
Or are activities much more enhanced now than ever before (in 1996)? Besides, one still needs to grapple with the issue of the degree of efficiency in revenue collection and resource deployment so as to determine whether or not a given fees structure is optimal or sub-optimal.
Mr Kadilo is conveniently quiet on these salient issues.
As stated in the published paper, I made my thoughts on Makerere University known first and foremost as an alumnus of the university.
To put together the analyses and suggested solutions, I also used my experience as a 'past leader' of the university as well as my professional expertise--which I highly cherish and I am immensely grateful to my peasant parents (belonging to the wretched of the earth) and my country for having enabled me to access the expertise, wealth of knowledge and experience. In this respect, too, I have the moral authority to write on Makerere University and any other institution in beloved Uganda.
My contribution to the university was also not small:
I actively participated in improving the physical and academic infrastructure and the well-being of both staff and students. For example, I managed staff development which was under my docket very efficiently, and organised a viable scholarship system within my department (although some staff members who benefited from the scholarships ended up squandering them due to their failure to complete the higher degrees they were sponsored for).
I did the same for Uganda. For example, as chairman of a four-person Uganda National Examinations Board (Uneb) committee to devise ways and means of preventing examination leakages, I steered the committee to come up with a fairly robust system, following examination leakages in 1995.
There haven't been any massive examination leakages since then, to the best of my knowledge.
This experience was used to ensure that mature age and other examinations in Makerere were also water-tight. These claims can easily be verified by various people, including Mr Matthew Bukenya (Uneb Executive Secretary) and the brand new Chancellor (Prof. Mondo Kagonyera), who was well-known for his impartiality and hard work as chairman of the Appointments Board.
As for circumstances under which I left Makerere University, again, Mr Kadilo should have looked into the records. For instance, I was 'charged' with around 15 counts of wrongdoing, including financial mismanagement, using the title "Professor" illegally, changing my daughter from private sponsorship to government sponsorship, being involved in dubious activities in the process of buying an air-conditioner for my office in the Academic Registrar's building, processing examinations in my house, rather than the office--thus, risking leakage of the examinations, admitting some Banyole illegally, and so on.
Most of these concocted charges were derived from a paper by Ben Byambabazi, the bursar, which appeared in a newspaper (either The Monitor or the New Vision).
The bursar and Prof. David Bakibinga--an ultra-active member of the committee of inquiry unilaterally set up by the then Vice Chancellor (and not by the Appointments Board or Council)--can provide details on this.
A few friends of mine and other people at the university told me that "people in town want you out of the university".
Indeed, one fine morning, one of the "people in town" rang me while I was in my office and asked me:
"Do you see how bad it is to appear in the news media negatively?"
I answered as follows: "Yes, it is bad to appear in the papers negatively; but, it is saddening that I am appearing there without good cause, while you appeared there appropriately. If your papers were brought to me now, I would make the same decision of discontinuing you from the university as I did before."
The highly placed individual just banged the phone unceremoniously on hearing my answer.
Tomorrow read Dr Mukwanason's revealing account of how 'politics' forced him out of Makerere University.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Monitor. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
