Scholars in the Marketplace. The Dilemmas of Neo-Liberal Reform at Makerere University, 1989-2005: The Dilemmas of Neo-Liberal Reform at Makerere University, 1989-2005

Chapter One - The reform Process: The First Phase

Chapter One T H E R E F O R M P R O C E S S : TH E F I R S T P H A S E Uganda was exceptional among British twentieth century colonies to have a resident university. Makerere University, first established as a vocational school in 1922, was envisioned not as a national university but as a university for Britain’s East African colonies. It evolved from a technical school to a rather expensive, small-scale, residential institution in the post-Second World War period. The purpose was to train a tiny elite meant to take the reins of leadership in the newly independent country. Students admitted to Makerere received a full scholarship, covering tuition and full board, health and transport and, indeed, even an allowance known as ‘boom’ meant to cover their personal needs. The scholarship was offered on the basis of merit rather than need. From the point of view of the students who got the fellowship, entry into Makerere was an extraordinary opportunity. But from the point of view of the society at large, the small numbers of those admitted to Makerere were evidence of extraordinary privilege. It was clear to many that, if utilised fully, the teaching facilities of the university could support many more students. Just because Makerere the hotel was full did not mean that Makerere the university also was. S C H O L A R S I N T H E M A R K E T P L A C E 2 The first serious discussion on the need to reform this elitist colonial constitution was at the time of independence in 1962. It focused on two issues: first, the need to Africanise the academic staff, and then, the relevance of teaching programmes. But there was hardly any discussion of reforming either university finances or university governance. This was partly because of the assumption, common to the nationalist era, that the university was an institution for the training of human resources for the newly independent nation, and therefore needed to be seen and run as one of several apparatuses of the newly independent state. But the delay in raising this question also reflected the protracted nature of the political crisis in Uganda: the university too hopped from one crisis intervention to another. Even when reform came, it was more an ad hoc response to a crisis situation than the outcome of a deliberated process. When reform did come to Makerere University, it came—not surprisingly—in the aftermath of a failed intervention. The NRM (National Resistance Movement) government that came to power in 1986 attempted to change the university in top-down fashion. Initial plans called for putting all incoming students through ‘ideological classes’ at a school at Kyankwanzi run by cadres of the ruling movement. That project failed. Then a set of changes, calling on students and their families to pay a small share of their expenses while at the university (referred to as cost-sharing) was decreed. When students questioned the changes, either the rationale for them or the autocratic manner of introducing them, government responded with force, deploying armoured personnel carriers in 1989, and armed police who shot students in 1990.1 The confrontational approach led to a crisis in the short run and to farreaching internally-introduced changes in the medium term. The university went through a dramatic and fundamental change in the 1990s. Often referred to as a reform, this change was driven TH E RE F O R M PROCESS : TH E FIRST PH A S E 3 by a process of deep-seated privatisation at one of Africa’s leading public universities. Rather than the result of dictation from on high, the process was shaped by multiple forces, both on the ground and those in high decision-making circles: students, staff, administrators, Ministry officials, outside consultants, the country’s President, and the World Bank. Those on the ground—particularly the academic staff, students and key administrators—played a central role in the process in the early stages. But the alternatives from which they chose were not freely arrived at; they were framed, and thus limited, by government policies and practices. In line with recommendations from the World Bank, government put a tight squeeze on funds for higher education. Within that context, student action, supported by staff, blocked off the alternative known as cost-sharing: that students...