Not just
runners. Taekwando too.
|
Four of the highest recipients of Olympics medals
are also permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The US, UK,
Russia and China rank on top not necessarily because they’re superpowers, but
because they field competitors in nearly every sport.
By winning five medals in taekwondo,
African countries demonstrated they too can diversify into new sports and
excel. Though an imperfect analogy, one could apply this lesson to the
performance of African universities in international rankings.
In one ranking, only ten of the world’s 1,000 leading universities are from Africa.
Another survey has
South Africa as the home of eight of sub-Saharan Africa’s top 10 universities.
Many top African universities were created to
train functionaries of the civil service. This influenced their curricula and
teaching methods. The civil service that African countries have inherited from
the colonial era emphasized conformity, not creativity and innovation.
Many top African universities were created in colonial times to
train civil servants, emphasizing conformity, not creativity and innovation.
Most African countries apply standardized
criteria that force universities to conform to the mission of training
graduates for the public sector. This is their main sport. But Africa’s demand
for higher education has changed in two important ways.
First, population growth has increased the demand
for higher education. Second, much of the demand for graduates has shifted from
government to the private sector. The latter requires entrepreneurial people
train to drive change and promote economic dynamism. Africa’s higher education
is hobbled by its historical legacy of functional separation between teaching,
research and commercialization of new products. Colonial administrations
created research institutes to address local challenges. The supply of
graduates was done by their home universities in the UK or France. It was only
at the time of decolonization that training African civil servants became
urgent.
The legacy of function separation and focus on
public service has two debilitating attributes. Universities are defined in law
as predominantly teaching institutions with little opportunity for research.
Without doing research, lecturers can easily become recyclers of outmoded
ideas. This means that every successive graduating class is equipped with less
relevant knowledge than the previous one.
The decline in academic standards among faculty and their students
is built into the system.
The decline in academic standards among faculty
and their students is therefore built into the system. The crisis is more acute
in the rapidly-changing fields of science, technology and medicine. These
trends create loss of confidence in African universities and often drive
students to seek educational opportunities overseas.
Paradoxically, this intellectual entropy or decay
often occurs in close proximity with quality research undertaken in national
institutes and labs. The impact of national research institutes on solving
local problems is limited by its lack of students who can act as the carriers
of new knowledge into the wider society.
There are two important ways to transfer research
results into the economy. The first is through students graduating and entering
the labour market and putting their knowledge to economic and social use. The
second is through startups from universities, many of which can be created by
fresh graduates. Research institutes often house research students from local
universities. But this is a poor substitute for a more robust system where
teaching, research, commercialization and public engagement are housed under a
new generation of graduate innovation universities.
Three-pronged approach
There are at least three ways to create such
universities. The first is to create new universities dedicated to innovation
from scratch. Though desirable, this approach would require large investments,
with nearly US$30 million going to initial construction. Even with the use of
existing facilities, this is still an expensive option.
The second option is to strengthen the research
and commercialization of existing universities, building on on-going
activities. This option can work in a select number of universities, especially
those whose charters allow them to operate as innovation universities.
New innovation universities would be focused and could be embedded
in government ministries.
For example, Jomo Kenyatta University of
Agriculture (JKUAT) is Kenya operates as an innovation university. JKUAT has
created the Nairobi Industrial and Technology Park to advance product development and
commercialization. South Africa’s Stellenbosch University was the developing
world’s first higher education institution to build and launch a satellite.
These examples demonstrate the viability of using existing universities as
innovation champions.
The two approaches could be complemented by
adding graduate education and business incubation to existing national research
institutes. This could be done initially in fields such as telecommunications,
health, agriculture and
conservation. These new innovation universities would be focused and could be
embedded in ministries which would cover their operations from internal
capacity development budgets. They would still be regulated by higher education
authorities but granted the autonomy to operate under different ministries.
Many African ministries have in-house research
institutes that can be upgraded to graduate innovation universities.
Nigeria’s Digital Bridge Institute,
for example, has all the requisite components to function as an innovation
university serving the telecommunications sector. But it would need autonomy
and flexibility to meet its focused objectives without being forced to become a
general purpose federal or state university.
There is precedent for such upgrades. The Ghana Technology University College was founded in 2005 by Ghana Telecoms by upgrading
an existing telecommunications training institute. The Multimedia University of
Kenya has similar roots. There are numerous similar examples in Asia in fields
such as metallurgy, infrastructure, telecoms and transportation.
Creating innovation universities can be pursued
through three practical stages. The first is to formulate a policy framework under
which such universities operate. The second state is to translate the policy
into specific legislative reforms to support the new university species. The
third stage is to experiment by upgrading a few research institutes that have
strong foundations and potential to commercialize products and services.
One of the key indicators of the existence of
quality research in local institutes is the extent of their international
partnerships. Foreign universities and research institutes tend to work with
local researchers with comparable research competence levels. Upgrades the
institutes will also help to strengthen such international cooperation.
Broadening the base of higher education by
creating innovation universities will enhance the quality of teaching, make
research more relevant to social needs and strengthen the direct contributions
of universities to development. In the long run this will help Africa compete
in more higher education categories. Innovation universities could become
Africa’s academic equivalent of its performance in taekwondo.
Professor Calestous Juma is Professor of the Practice of International
Development at Harvard Kennedy School. His latest book, Innovation and Its Enemies: Why People Resist New Technology, was published by Oxford
University Press in July 2016. Twitter @Calestous
Originally published on QUARTZ AFRICA
Originally published on QUARTZ AFRICA
No comments :
Post a Comment