site.btaWhat Do You Reap When You Sow Universities?

How many universities would be too many in Bulgaria? The news about the inauguration of a new branch of Sofia University in the seaside city of Burgas, which will offer two programmes, one in music and dance and one in religion and theology, was received with a mix of ridicule and enthusiasm. The case is indicative of the course of development of higher education in Bulgaria over the last few years, which is marked by wastefulness, lack of control over the quality of education (disguised as academic autonomy of universities), and lack of a vision about the system's future development, the Institute for Market Economics (IME) says in an analysis.

The core of the problem

Although it is difficult to pinpoint the core of the issue, it has to do with the funding pattern, which is based on almost 100% public funding and depends on the number of students enrolled in certain specialties, the IME says. The payment required from students is limited to what is often a small state tuition fee, and their admission to the university guarantees that they will graduate and will receive a diploma. This pattern provides a strong incentive for universities to expand and for students to turn a blind eye to the deficiencies of the system, and even to look deliberately for the easiest way to obtain a graduation diploma. The funding of universities is only partly linked to their rating, which is why the positive effect of the linkage is limited. The absence of a reliable and independent external institution guaranteeing that there are real skills and knowledge behind the diplomas, combined with the lack of personal motivation to seek and support higher quality, has created a situation where universities are mushrooming, although they offer overlapping "lucrative" programmes taught by underqualified educators. The system is also plagued by regional distortions and a failure to offer study courses that correspond to the needs of the labour market, while many of the existing specialties are "protected" for no valid reason. As a result, we get graduation diplomas deprived of real value, an exodus of young people to foreign universities, and economic sectors experiencing a shortage of skilled labour despite the large number of people with higher education.

According to the IME, higher education comes closer to the definition of a "private good" compared to secondary education, because the private benefit it brings is greater than the public benefit. The private benefit consists in better opportunities to find a job, a higher future income, and even a higher social standing. University education is almost entirely subsidized by the state, which means that we all pay for those few people who study theology, for example. This involves a transfer of resources from non-beneficiaries to beneficiaries, which is justifiable to some extent, because, after all, higher education does bring some public benefit in addition to the private benefit. The public benefit may consist in a more intelligent and better-educated population, the availability of specialists in specific academic and public fields, and higher labour productivity. However, the transfer of resources from non-beneficiaries to beneficiaries reaches very high levels in Bulgaria, the IME notes. The country has 54 higher education establishments, according to the National Statistical Institute (or 52, according to the rating system of the Ministry of Education and Science), and 38 of them are run by the state.

What should be done?

The IME makes the following recommendations about what the state should do in the field of higher education:

1) Incorporate education quality assessment into the funding formula. The weight of the rating system should be increased.

2) Streamline the funding pattern, partly by giving students a more important financial role.

3) Make the establishment of new universities contingent on limiting the operation of existing universities. The establishment of new universities should require an assessment of the regional labour market to take account of the need for specialists, shared funding, the costs and the benefits.

4) Abolish the practice of designating a huge number of "protected specialties", which makes their protection practically meaningless.

In conclusion, the IME notes that what matters is quality, not quantity. The inability (or reluctance) to promote and control quality in relevant ways results in wasting public resources and a zero effect.