Luhanga, Matthew L.; Makunde, Daniel J.; Mbwette, Tolly S.A.; Chijoriga, Marcellina M.; and Ngirwa, Cleophace A. (2003). Higher Education Reforms in Africa: The University of Dar es Salaam Experience. Reviewed by Mitiku Adisu

Luhanga, Matthew L.; Makunde, Daniel J.; Mbwette, Tolly S.A.; Chijoriga, Marcellina M.; and Ngirwa, Cleophace A. (2003). Higher Education Reforms in Africa: The University of Dar es Salaam Experience. Dar es Salaam University Press. Pp. xv + 203 including Annexes and Bibliography (Paper) ISBN 9976-60-394-0 Reviewed by Mitiku Adisu January 23, 2006 Literature on African higher education is not only dismally inadequate but also disproportionately produced by non-Africans. Any output by African scholars should therefore be greeted with great rejoicing. The authors of the book under review, which includes one female, serve the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM) in various capacities as Vice Chancellor, Dean, Academic Officer, and Department Head, and also lecture in Science and Technology, Human Resources and Finance, Linguistics and Environmental Engineering. Transdisciplinarity seems to be the strength of the book. The material is compiled primarily to share reform experiences of the UDSM (p. xvii-xviii). The book has seven chapters. Chapter 1 sets African higher education in its ‘pre-colonial, pre-independence, and post-independence’ milieu. Though ‘higher education’ flourished in parts of Africa for millennia, its European version arrived on the continent only recently with colonialism. Despite setbacks due mainly to funding, policy, and curricular irregularities, the institution of higher education in Africa remains a major force for public good; a new crop of dynamic leaders such as the present authors bear testimony to this. Another fact, often overlooked, is that African universities grew thirty-fold from a mere six in less than fifty years (pp.2-4). Chapter 2 (1961-1984) narrates the transformation, in less than a decade, of the UDSM from a college of the University of London and later the University of East Africa to an independent national university. That is quite an achievement, all things considered. On the other hand, attention to lower education in general would have provided a fuller picture to the narrative. Colonial education restricted natives from advancing into upper levels; access was, heretofore, according to region, religion, and gender. At independence, the public school system was unified and a policy of ‘liberating education’ took center stage. In an effort to produce self-reliant education, KiSwahili was chosen as the medium of instruction; curriculum was designed to reflect Tanzanian realities and primary education universalized. Chapter 3 (1985-1990) attempts to cover the looming crises brought about by institutional inefficiency, resource constraints, and the changing times. It is interesting that the idea of intervention coincided with Nyerere’s voluntary retirement as president in 1985. Chapter 4 (1990-1995) lays down the acculturation and implementation process and the shape of things to come. Chapters 5 & 6 discuss a phase-by-phase institutionalization of a transformation program (ITP) and the development of a reform model (UDSM ITP Model) and its relative successes. The final chapter recounts the highlights of those experiences. The layout of the book and issues tackled therein are very well thought out. The annexes are useful; the bibliography makes good use of material by African scholars. An index page could only have increased the book’s utility. In the shadows of the Mwalimu It is nearly impossible to understand the history of modern education in Tanzania apart from the role played by Mwalimu Nyerere (1922-1999) whose “eloquence, integrity, and intellectual brilliance” (p.47) continues to provide the spark for public policy debates. Indeed, a leader who is “a true philosopher, president and original thinker” is a rarity in Africa (Mazrui, 2003, pp.136-137). It is not stretching the point, therefore, that in almost every case (political) leadership played a make-or-break role in education reforms; this is despite the fact that economic hardship racked Nyerere’s tenure. On the other hand, his towering presence made UDSM of the 1960s and the 1970s a hub for international scholars (p.48). Such a list would include the Brazilian Paulo Freire (“Pedagogy of the Oppressed”); the Guyanese Walter Rodney (“How Europe Underdeveloped Africa”); the American Robert Moses (“The Algebra Project”, “Radical Equations”) and the Argentine revolutionist, Che Guevara. These were all of the radical left persuasion and in the current East-West ideological rivalry, offered their intellectual acumen in the service of liberation from colonial and neo-colonial injustices. It is also worth remembering that Nyerere was a deeply religious person for whom humanizing social policy meant forging an African brand of socialism (i.e., “Freedom and Socialism”)—in distinction from the merely individualistic, collectivist and atheistic model. At a time when the major rivals in Africa were the Chinese and the Soviets and his ideological stance was frowned on by both the West and the East, Nyerere, nonetheless, managed to tread a fine geo-political line to shape a unique national identity. How will the current “free” market reforms at the UDSM enrich or equitably reflect the culture of Tanzanians without succumbing to external pressure? The enduring dilemma Generating revenue remains the enduring dilemma of African higher education: the state is always cash strapped or is sidetracked by other priorities; office holders often collude with corrupt multinational groups; external donors lack long-term commitment or impose conditions that may not comprehend local realities. In all cases, access, autonomy, quality of education and human capital are compromised and/or squandered. The authors grapple with serious and present issues, among which are that African universities pursued “the ever-changing Western liberal concepts” and “failed to adapt to African environment” (pp.3-4). This has been a recurring theme in almost every “externally-initiated, commissioned, and supported” reform (Samoff, et al 1996). Following this setup the question is then raised as to “what the future holds for African universities” (p.18). The answer comes as unequivocal “no choice except to develop sufficient ICT (Information and Communication Technology)” (ibid). However, this in turn raises a fundamental problem in the nature of technology itself, in language as an agent of social cohesion and cultural identity formation. What are the socio-cultural ramifications for Tanzania that English, not KiSwahili, is used in ICT delivery system? What are the limits of ICT and prospects for local control and ownership? How will reliance on ICT inhibit or facilitate community learning? Moreover, the lead author is a trained telecommunications engineer and a Chancellor at the UDSM (p.156). How did the fact that the same person is also on the board of a leading international “satellite service provider of voice, data and internet solutions” (INTELSAT) facilitate or impede input from members of the reform team? Will ICT bring about a digital divide that hark back to regional, gender, religious, and class disparities of the colonial era? How should the tension between cooperation (community) and competition (individualism) be managed? Will the need to expand access mean regulating private education? The challenges are indeed immense but they are not restricted to Tanzania alone. It is true that issues do not always fall in neat categories and that often decisions are made before all the data are in. On the other hand, evidence points to the fact that indiscriminate adoption of a reform agenda could result in alienating the same population it is intended to benefit. In light of this, one wonders if “self-initiated and self-driven” reform programs are indeed sustainable in a world of financial uncertainties and incompatible priorities (p. xvii). How will partnering with Ford, Carnegie, MacArthur, and Rockefeller foundations affect direction of research, grant allocation, hiring, inter-university relations, autonomy and camaraderie of faculty? I believe the authors are well aware that the reforms are just beginning. The next challenge may require sustaining the momentum as well as developing a new leadership that will extend and promote Tanzanian ideals and hopes in the coming decades. Education for self-reliance (ESR), as a policy frame of reference, sought to develop “an enquiring mind; an ability to learn from what others do, and reject or adapt it to his own needs; and a basic confidence in his own position as a free and equal member of the society, who values others and is valued by them for what he does and not for what he obtains” (Nyerere, 1968, p.274; Italics mine). What must happen now to ensure that past successes are not undermined in the pursuit for efficiency? The authors convincingly argue that increasing stakeholder role of the local (business) community is indispensable, as is cost-sharing and making research and curricula relevant. It is hoped that such measures will enable students to be creators and not simply consumers of knowledge, especially in the area of employment. This is perhaps easier said than done. But the fact remains that nurturing such an environment is in and of itself commendable. In other words, the development of the private sector to generate revenue is incumbent upon time, extensity and speed of development, commitment and transparency at all levels and luck that natural and socio-economic forces do not conspire to disrupt the process. Cost-sharing has been a contentious and infeasible issue in most of Africa (Ishengoma, 2004). If the past is any guide, local ownership of content and research also may not be sustainable as long as somebody else is paying for them. The USDM Model The authors offer before the gods of reform an “unorthodox” UDSM ITP model (Chapter 6). First, it is claimed that, unlike conventional organizational strategies, reform at the UDSM was launched without prior plan, plea or budget. This, the authors would argue, gave them the flexibility to adapt to a constantly changing environment. In short, the model is said to be “self-initiated and self-driven”. Despite the rhetoric, there is nothing new about these claims. For example, power struggle and resistance to changes is a given in situations like this; changes presuppose uncertainties; getting opposing factions on board is as much a function of packaging the arguments as ensuring one’s job security. The model is, in short, illustrative of a good business plan and the demands of restructuring organizations in a transitional low-income country context. In fact, the emphasis on uniqueness of the model often betrayed an urge on the part of the authors to insert autobiographical snippets (pp, 150, 155-6, 63-64). This raises the question of whether or not assessing a reform project by participants is the best way to gauge its veracity. The uniqueness of the UDSM model is rather due to the fact that the processes and personalities involved are unique to the historical moment, culture, and Tanzanian demographic landscape. This statement applies to every polity. Again, there is nothing novel about the present report. By the same token, the idea of replicating the model should be scrutinized with the same rigor as externally-funded prescriptions. In other words, Africans are as different from one another as they appear to be similar. Conclusion Nevertheless, one observes a line-up of positive qualities in the UDSM experience. First, the current leadership is highly qualified and committed to have undertaken the reform agenda. Second, the working relationship with the political leadership is good; not many African universities can make such a statement. (Some may disagree, quite understandably, that close political relations and appointments compromise autonomy). Third, academic priorities were shaped in consideration of pressing social issues (in this case, HIV/AIDS). Fourth, research relevance and output was linked to tenure and pay structure. Consultancy opportunities to faculty, in addition, positively impacted out migration and morale. Fifth, the leadership collaborated, not competed, with private educational institutions in the effort to expand enrollment they alone could not provide at the tertiary level. Sixth, increasing business sector participation and growing university-community relations helped to integrate learning with long-term implications. Seventh, the ‘UDSM experience’ is a testament to what a committed, articulate, and market savvy leadership could do to exercise relative control over a vision and its realization. The real issue is, in the end, if current achievements and the nearly fifty percent annual donor budgetary support could be sustained without compromising core ideals; if past successes complement future goals; if focus on “free” market education led to the neglect of one’s cultural history; if the local economy could grow fast enough to absorb future shocks; and if external funding will allow academic research and curricular autonomy. Or even more pressing is that the post-independence unified education system could break down to relegate a large portion of the population to pre-colonial conditions. What is the contingency plan in the event that funding commitments are abandoned mid-river or if, as in the past, higher education for Africans is deemed a luxury? Such are the environments with which African education reformers must contend. Hopefully, the experience of the UDSM will once again attract attention and generate lively debates. References Brock-Utne, Birgit. (1995). The Role of Higher Education in Africa. Paper presented at the Nordic Association for the Study of Education in Developing Countries. Conference held at the Agricultural University of Norway at As. Ishengoma, Johnson. (2004). Cost sharing in Higher Education in Tanzania: Fact or Fiction? Journal of Higher Education in Africa. Johnstone, D. Bruce, Arora, A. & Experton, W. (1998). The Financing and Management of Higher Education: A Status Report on World Wide Reforms. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Levidow, Les. (2001). Marketizing Higher Education: Neoliberal Strategies and Counter-Strategies. Cultural Logic, 4(1). Mazrui, Ali A. (2003). Towards Re-Africanizing African Universities:Who Killed Intellectualism in the Post Colonial Era? Turkish Journal of International Relations, 2(3 & 4), 135-163 Nyerere, Julius K. (1968). Freedom and Socialism. Dar es Salaam: Oxford University Press. UNESCO/GTASE. Analyses, Agendas and Priorities for Education in Africa. A Review of Externally Initiated, Commissioned and Supported Studies of Education in Africa, 1990-1994 (and its summary). Prepared by Joel Samoff with N'Dri Thérèse Assié-Lumumba in collaboration with Lucila Jallade, Marc Cohen and the Steering Committee of WGESA, 1996, 324 pp., Paris. About the Reviewer Mitiku Adisu was for many years involved in youth training and development in Ethiopia. He has a doctorate in Higher Education Leadership and Policy from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.