| Subject: NATSCHOL DEAD!! |
Author:
edutok
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 22:50:23 12/17/99 Fri
If this is economic recovery measure in higher education to satisfy the SAP of the World Bank, the new policy if implemented to the full would generate a total revenue of over K40 million a year in higher education, working on aggregated tertiary education enrollment of 15,000 students.
Many of you have had Natschol (government) sponsorship during your time at our public colleges and universities. Some had relatives who studied under the government sponsorship. There was no discrimination as to whether one was from a well-to-do family with both parents having had some formal education perhaps up to high school or college level. Most others were first-generation educated within the family, tribe, village or even from the district. Some parents were relieved that after their struggles paying school fees at the secondary level, they come to find a totally "free" tertiary level education.
What the Natschol sponsorship covered was well below the average student unit cost at the institution. It included tuition, boarding/lodging (accommodation), travel costs (to&from home port/airport) and topping all these was up to recently K26/month living expenses which was perhaps more than most people living a village subsistence life had seen in many moons.
Was that level of student support justified? I think it was justified. Is it still the case? I think the answer is yes and no. How so? "Yes", because as has always been the argument of student activism against "user-pays", many students come from families and communities that have very little, if any, modern monetary income. And the argument is based on the assumption that the government is responsible for developing its human resources and therefore must pay the cost to the individuals who want to get an education at the tertiary level. "No", because times have changed and economic and social status of families and communities have changed as well. Many students now come from second and third generation educated well-to-do families, and many are from rural communities that have economic activities earning monthly income that many urban wage earners couldn't see in their life time. Research in many other developing countries and also in the developed world show the spiraling effect of education, i.e., that those who benefit most from education come from families who have benefitted most also from a good education. So the cycle continues driven by the fact that parents always want to best for their children and the expectation only increases. This raises the question of equitable distribution of benefits. Those who need more help based their resources and economic status should be given greater public help than those who can manage some of the burden on their own. That being the case, is the death of Natschol a good thing? Does the replacement policy accurately address the equity issue? And what about the quality issue? Is the timing right? What are the repurcussions of this change?
There is no question that student financing and support is very much needed now as much as in the past. I believe the death of the Natschol is a good thing. The old Natschol didn't discriminate between the rich and the poor. So one conclusion is that the rich were getting more than their fair share of public support for tertiary education which would directly benefit the individual more than society. And the individual pays next to nothing or nothing at all while the public must pay the total cost of that education. I think the stratified levels of student support is a good strategy. On the surface, it addresses the quality issue (AES= top 5%). Overall, it tries to address unrefinely, the equity issue (HECAS = 48% majority plus TSLS = K3.75 million). The percentage of self-sponsored students (33%) however, perhaps is stretching experience. I am not sure whether at this point, that many students are self-sponsored. Perhaps there is an implementation schedule for this new student support policy which would allow gradual increase to reach the target proportions of students in each category. The announcement of the policy at the end of the academic year is probably strategic and wise as students are on vacation. But that doesn't mean the coming year would be okay.
The repurcussions of this change are many. One thing for sure, their will be another disaster year next year, a busy year for students and administrators trying to outdo each other boycotting classes, disrupting studies, and property destruction,issuing of ultimata and strategizing political maneuvers. Other important issues to do with implementation relate to the timing, the phasing in, and the management data that must be amassed to guide decisions and implementation procedures to make the change helpful towards the human resource development efforts of the country.
Other questions remain. What happens to the average cost of K15,000 on which calculations of the student contributions were based if few students turn up for classes because of economic hardships, irrespective of the loan facility? I think the TSLS will work to retain student enrollment level at the present rate if there was something like K12 million available for the scheme every year to meet the requirements of HECAS and SSS students assuming HECAS students can get a loan equivalent to one third of their dues and SSS can get a loan equivalent to a half of their total dues. The loan installment of K3.75 will not meet the demand for help from the HECAS and the SSS students. The adminstrative mechanism for th TSLS could be a nightmare and more costly than its benefits to the students.
There is need to establish a data base of all income levels of parents (in fact of all families in the country) so that students are targetted appropriately into various economic and student support strata. This is certainly another nightmare.
One thing to note in the present cost structure is that the boarding and lodging costs vary according to groups while tuition seems to remain constant. What implications would this have on distance education? Are the institutions also preparing their programs to be delivered by distance and distributed processes? If that is one purpose of this, I hope another policy initiative is put into place to facilitate expeditious development of distance education so that students have the option of residing on campus or living away from campus. This is also another opportunity for private real estate developers/owners to provide housing affordable for students to live close to the institution, only if pricing is competitive.
There are of course other questions which I hope the formulators have taken into consideration. My only hope is that this has a proper implementation schedule so that students are properly prepared to cooperate with this. Otherwise, our institutions could be ghost organizations with no students or at best, with a small number of students which can affect the average student unit cost up.
What do you think?
*********************************************
Govt scraps Natschol
Govt announces new scholarship scheme
By MELANIE VARI
PORT MORESBY: The life-blood of PNG's tertiary students for the last
25 years -- National Scholarship Scheme (Natschol) -- has been
abolished. This was announced yesterday by the Minister for Education,
Research, Science and Technology, Prof John Waiko.
The good news, however, is that the Morauta government, in a policy shift,
has come up with a new scheme called the Tertiary Education Study
Assistance Scheme (TESAS) to replace it.
Prof Waiko told reporters here that Natschol had outlived its original
purpose, which was to localise expatriate positions in the job sector.
Instead, Prof Waiko said, "TESAS is designed to continue the
Government's commitment to support tertiary students financially but at the
same time students will have to take responsibility in paying for part of
their education," he said.
He also made it very clear that the 'User-Pay Policy' would remain.
Prof Waiko said he had made a submission to the National Executive
Council (NEC) earlier this year suggesting the changes to the education
scheme, and it was approved this week.
He said the Government will continue to provide funds for the scheme
because it realises the importance of human resource development.
He said that educating a student at university or other tertiary education
levels here and overseas was very costly, and therefore this scheme would
benefit a lot of parents who cannot afford to pay their children's school
fees.
"For example, in Australia it costs $20,000 (K35,511) a year to educate
one medical student, while in PNG it costs the State K21,000 a year and
K15,000 for the Arts/Humanities stream," he pointed out.
He said that Natschol students only paid K300, while the State put in
K2,700 per student per year and these costs compared to the unit costs
borne by the universities and other tertiary institutions to run the
institutions yearly was no way comparable.
He said that the Government paid more per student per year compared to
what the students paid and therefore, he and the Minister for Planning and
Implementation, Moi Avei, directed the Commission for Higher Education
to review the whole higher education student support scheme.
Prof Waiko said that the TESAS was divided into five categories:
Academic Excellence Scholarship (AES): This will cover the top 5
per cent of students enrolled in tertiary institutions. They will be
given full scholarships but will be required to pay 1 per cent of the
average unit cost of tertiary education, which is K150 for board and
lodging. The distribution of the AES will be based on the manpower
requirements of the nation.
Higher Education Contribution Assistance Scheme (HECAS): This
will cover 48 per cent of the total tertiary student enrollments.
Students will be required to pay 7 per cent of the average unit cost of
tertiary education, which is K1,050 for board and lodging (K450)
and tuition (K600) while the State meets the balance. The distribution
of these scholarships will be according to the country's manpower
needs.
Self-sponsorship: This category will cover 33 per cent of the total
tertiary student enrollments. Students will be required to pay 25 per
cent of the average unit cost of tertiary education, which is K3,750
for board and lodging (K3,150) and tuition (K600) while the State
meets the balance.
Private Sector/Corporate Sponsorship: This category will cover 13
per cent of the total tertiary student enrollments. Students will be
required to pay 50 per cent of the average unit cost of tertiary
education, which is K7,500 for board and lodging (K6,900) and
tuition (K600) while the State meets the balance.
Tertiary Student Loan Scheme (TSLC): This facility has been set up
to assist parents who aren't able to meet the fee increases in tertiary
education. Students will be required to pay 50 per cent of the total
university/college fees up front.
The Government has allocated K3.75 million for this scheme.
Next Page | Return To The Main Page
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
