Topic Guides – HEART

Education for refugees and IDPs in low- and middle-income countries: identifying challenges and opportunities

Tue, 01 Nov 2016 08:00:32 +0000

Executive Summary1. Introduction2. Forced Displacement and Education: A Global Overview3. State of Research, Policy, and Practice in Refugee Eduction4. The State of Research, Policy, and Practice in IDP Education5. Opportunities, Innovations, and Best Practice in Education for Forcibly Displaced PeopleAppendix

This topic guide is designed to support DFID advisors, education specialists, and other partners working on providing education for refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). It provides an overview of the key issues, and signposts relevant sources for further information and reading. Section 1 provides a brief introduction to the guide. Section 2 gives a global overview of forced displacement and education. Section 3 maps the state of research, policy, and practice in refugee education. Section 4 maps the state of research, policy, and practice in IDP education. Section 5 seeks to identify and explore best practice, and existing and potential future opportunities and innovations, in the field of education and forced displacement.

Methodology and evidence base

This guide is based on an extensive (but not systematic) literature review. There are few sources of reliable data, robust evidence, and rigorous research in this field, especially with regard to IDP education and education for refugees living outside of camps. This guide has therefore also drawn upon grey literature, including project evaluations from international agencies working in the field. There remain large evidence gaps regarding the numbers of displaced children and the quantity and quality of education that they receive. The evidence base regarding the effectiveness of education interventions for displaced populations, covered in section 5 of this guide, is very limited. The strength of the evidence base is discussed in Appendix A.

Section 2: Forced displacement and education: a global overview

In 2015 there were 65.3 million people living in forced displacement due to conflict and persecution (UNHCR 2016i). The figure includes those who have fled across borders (refugees) and those who have stayed within their own countries (IDPs). The differences between refugees and IDPs are summarised in table 0.1.

Table 0.1 Summary of the differences between refugees and IDPs

	Refugees	IDPs
Global numbers (2015) (see UNHCR 2016i)	21.3 million refugees 3.2 million asylum seekers	40.8 million internally displaced people, of which 8.6 million newly displaced in 2015
Causes of displacement	Persecution	Armed conflict, internal strife, systematic violations of human rights or natural or man-made disasters
Bodies responsible for ensuring the right to education	UNHCR, host governments, UNRWA for Palestinian refugees	National governments UNICEF for returnees (see UNHCR 1997)
Global legal frameworks and conventions	1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees	1998 UN Guiding Principles on IDPs (not legally binding)
Coordinating bodies	UNHCR, UNRWA	Education Cluster

Displacement is usually long term. In 2012, 75% of refugees had been displaced for more than 5 years. In two thirds of all countries monitored in 2014, over half of all IDPs had been displaced for over three years.

Around half of refugees are under 18; similar data for IDPs is unavailable. However, education counts for only around 2% of humanitarian aid, and makes up 4% of UNHCR’s budget. Education in situations of protracted displacement faces funding shortages

Data availability

The UNHCR is mandated to collect and disseminate global statistics on refugees. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) compiles data on IDPs collected by other organisations but is only able to produce estimates. Little is known about the largest group of forcibly displaced people – IDPs outside of camp situations – regarding the numbers of children and their access to education. In terms of data, this group is virtually invisible to the international community.

Section 3: State of research, policy, and practice in refugee education

This guide focuses on the education of refugees in low- and middle-income countries, where the majority (≈75%) of refugees live, and does not cover education of refugees in high-income countries. The education of Palestinian refugees through UNRWA provides an example of how quality education for refugees in protracted displacement can be successfully delivered at scale, given sufficient resources.

Coordination

The UNHCR Education Strategy 2012-2016 promotes the integration of refugee learners within national systems. UNHCR has established formal partnerships with ministries of education in almost all the countries in which it works, and many host countries have adopted this approach.

Access to education for refugees

According to UNHCR:

Only 1 in every 2 primary-school-aged refugees accesses primary education
Only 1 in every 4 secondary-school-aged refugees accesses secondary education
Only 1 in every 100 refugees accesses higher education or skills-based education
2 million school-aged refugee children and adolescents are out of school

Common barriers to access at all levels of education include shortage of school space, language barriers, curriculum, transport, lack of documentation (e.g. birth certificates, school-leaving certificates), child labour, school fees, and security concerns. Particular challenges for girls include pregnancy and/or marriage, and lack of access to sanitation facilities.

The limited available research suggests that mainstreaming into the host country’s education system has several major advantages compared with creating parallel and/or alternative education provision. Advantages include accountability, standardisation, and recognised certification of educational opportunities. However, the education systems in host countries are rarely equipped to deal with arrivals of refugee learners. National schools are sometimes associated with high costs and non-mother-tongue instruction leading to grade repetition.

Opportunities for higher education for refugees are particularly lacking.

Quality of education for refugees

The quality of education for refugees who are enrolled in schools is often very low, with high student–teacher ratios, poor facilities, and lack of safety for children in schools and on the way to school.

Curriculum: The curriculum of the country of origin is the one that is most relevant to the recently displaced, since qualifications gained can be recognised on their return. But most refugees live in protracted displacement and few return to their place of origin. Integration into the host education system and its curriculum is the preferred norm of the UNHCR. Educators often include elements from the country of origin curricula to teach alongside host country curricula, and may add subjects like human rights and peacebuilding.

Medium of instruction and language learning: Having to learn the language of the host country and adapt to education in a new medium of instruction is a major barrier. Strategies used to address this include the provision of language classes for refugees, and using a bilingual curriculum in refugee schools to support transition into local schools.

Pedagogy and teacher competence: Teachers recruited to teach in refugee schools are often unqualified. Their training courses are often short and do not lead to formal qualifications. In some contexts these teachers lack confidence, and do not see themselves as real teachers. Overcrowded classrooms, lack of materials, and unfamiliarity with the language of instruction also have a negative impact on the quality of teaching.

Assessment: Refugees face a number of challenges concerning assessment. These include:

lack of access to formal assessment opportunities such as national examinations
lack of recognition of certain credentials and qualifications
lack of recognition of prior learning

Protection and wellbeing of refugees in and through education

Education can be a source of protection for refugee children. However, the protective effects of education are diminished when it is of low quality. Schools and other educational interventions can themselves be sites of violence or targets for attack. In addition, teachers who lack adequate training may use corporal punishment to maintain classroom discipline.

Section 4: The state of research, policy, and Practice in IDP Education

The situation of IDPs is often less visible to the international community than that of refugees.

IDPs in camps may have access to non-formal learning spaces or primary schools supported by the international community, but have very limited access to secondary education
IDPs outside of camps tend to receive less access and support from international humanitarian organisations, but may have better access to local schools
Returning IDPs may face challenges in having their learning during displacement recognised
For demobilised child soldiers, education is an important part of the reintegration process, as it provides social and emotional development as well as academic learning

Coordination and funding of IDP education

The legal responsibility for provision of education to IDPs lies with the national government. In the absence of provision by the state, IDP communities often set up their own schools.

International support for education for IDPs is generally treated as a short-term humanitarian response; however, many IDPs live in protracted displacement. Education tends to be a high priority for IDPs themselves, but has tended to be a low priority for humanitarian actors.

The education cluster plays a central role in coordinating support for IDP education. It can provide an effective platform for partnership with the international community and national governments.

Access to education for IDPs

A substantial proportion of IDP children are not enrolled in school, although the exact numbers are unknown. Access to education for IDPs is highly context-dependent.

IDPs face numerous barriers to education, especially girls and women. Many of the barriers are similar to those faced by other conflict and crisis-affected populations, but IDPs are more vulnerable due to the loss of livelihood, home, and possessions. School fees are one of the most significant barriers for IDPs. Other barriers particular to IDPs include:

lack of education providers within or near camps and other IDP settlements
loss of documentation
inability to meet residency requirements for school enrolment

Common strategies used by national governments in providing education for IDPs include:

expanding school capacity in host areas through multi-shift schooling
relaxing requirements for IDPs to have uniforms or documentation for enrolment
fee waivers

Strategies commonly used by the international community, often in partnership with national governments, include:

child-friendly spaces and temporary learning spaces
supplying teaching and learning materials such as “school in a box”
hiring IDP teachers, especially female teachers, to teach in IDP camps
issuing IDPs with temporary documentation
school feeding programmes and take-home rations
providing alternative education classes, including accelerated learning classes
school voucher programmes

In the first instance, UNICEF and other actors often provide Child Friendly Spaces. However, IDP children and families have voiced that they prefer formal education over structured play and non-formal education.

UNICEF uses “school in a box” kits that contain basic teaching and learning materials. It keeps a stockpile which can be rapidly deployed in emergencies. In prolonged displacement, locally procured kits provide a more culturally appropriate and value-for-money approach.

Quality of education and learning outcomes

In many cases the quality of education available to IDPs is far below the INEE’s Minimum Standards for Education.

There are very few studies on the learning outcomes of IDPs. A study in Sri Lanka found that there was a significant learning achievement deficit (1.5 to 3 years) associated with displacement. Evaluations of the Norwegian Refugee Council’s alternative education programmes for IDPs indicate that completion rates and learning outcomes for children in these programmes were similar to or better than those of children in mainstream schools.

Teacher recruitment, training, compensation, and wellbeing

Teachers in schools serving IDPs are often given incentives rather than a salary. International agencies are reluctant to support salaries due to concerns over sustainability and funding. But incentives often fail to attract qualified teachers. As a result, organisations often have to seek new potential teachers and provide basic training. Governments rarely agree to recognise these unqualified teachers, hence teachers in IDP camps can remain reliant on NGO incentives.

Many NGOs have developed their own teacher training courses. The most effective ones tend to place a heavy emphasis on classroom-based support, classroom observations, regular supervision, and ongoing workshops.

Refugees who qualify as teachers under a host country system may find that their government does not recognise their qualifications on their return. Regional certification of teachers can help to address this issue.

Protection and wellbeing of IDPs in and through education

Some IDP schools have become targets for attack and recruitment of child soldiers. However, quality education can also help to protect IDP children, including by:

providing a safe space for children to spend time
teaching skills and knowledge to children to protect themselves from exploitation, health risks, gender-based violence, land mines, and other risks
supporting children’s psychosocial well-being
providing sites where children can receive other support such as vaccinations and counselling

Impacts on host communities and education systems

In many emergencies, schools are used to provide temporary accommodation for IDPs, reducing access to education for host communities. Tensions can arise when IDPs are seen as being in competition for limited resources, or when they are seen as being given preferential treatment.

Gaps and challenges

Evidence and knowledge gaps

There is a need for more robust data, analysis, and research, including data on needs, availability, quality, and outcomes of education for IDPs and refugees living outside of camps.

There is a gap in the research when it comes to understanding the protracted nature of forced displacement and the individual and community educational trajectories and experiences. Robust longitudinal data are lacking.

Common challenges to education for refugees and IDPs

Provision of post-primary education and training opportunities for adolescents and youth remains a major gap, requiring increased support from national and international actors, and exploration of innovative means of providing cost-effective access to education for this group.

Given the protracted nature of forced displacement, the international donor community needs to develop medium- to long-term flexible funding and implementation mechanisms for education for refugees and IDPs. Progress has been made through the Global Partnership for Education, and it is hoped that the new education in emergencies platform will address this gap.

Challenges specific to refugee education

Since mainstreaming of refugees into national education systems has become a preferred option, there is an urgent need for relevant and meaningful curriculum and assessment systems and a better understanding of how to meet specific learning needs, including those to do with language of instruction and assessment, disabilities, gender, and ethnicity.

The quality of UNRWA schools relative to other schools in the region has been attributed in part to UNRWA’s teacher training programmes and ongoing support mechanisms, but standards are falling. There is a need to determine how to maintain standards and to transfer lessons learned to other protracted refugee situations.

Challenges specific to IDP education

National capacity to address IDP education needs to be strengthened. This should cover inclusion of IDPs in education sector plans, Educational Management Information Systems and budgets, and contingency planning to reduce the disruption of education in the event of unforeseen future displacement crises.

Improved national-level planning and international support is needed to improve teacher recruitment and compensation in IDP situations, including strategies to retain qualified teachers.

Governments’ legal responsibility to protect IDPs’ right to education needs to be strengthened through the development of legal frameworks at global, regional, and national levels.

Section 5: Opportunities, innovations, and best practice in education for forcibly displaced people

The range of approaches described in section 5 of the report, summarized here in table 0.2, represents a menu of potentially productive strategies, rather than a definitive list of “what works”.

Table 0.2 Potentially productive strategies

Issue addressed	Strategies and interventions
Supporting impacted communities	Support to education interventions initiated by displaced people themselves Cash transfers
Ensuring protection, psychosocial support, and safe spaces, and building resilience	Training teachers and parents to cope with traumatised children, alongside self-regulation exercises for children After-school programmes providing academic support, problem-solving skills and nurturing positive peer relationships. Using schools as a site for delivering mental health interventions
Addressing disruptions in learning	Accelerated learning programmes (ALPs) support overage children to catch up on missed learning time. The Youth Education Pack, developed by the NRC, is a one-year full-time education package which provides training in literacy and numeracy, livelihood skills training and life-skills for youth aged 15-24, who have missed out on schooling
Addressing problems of space	Using mobile money transfers to pay teachers Using mobiles for real-time school data collection Using radio to deliver lesson content Using mobile phones and tablets to enable interactive learning Mobile schools (e.g. schools in a boat or bus)
Building teaching capacity and wellbeing	The Teacher Emergency Package: a package of self-study materials, on-going training and school materials Deploying female teaching assistants to support girls Interagency collaboration in the sharing and development of new teacher training and management resources
Improving higher education	Albert Einstein German Academic Refugee Initiative Fund (DAFI) scholarship programme Learning hubs in Kenyan refugee camps, offering blended higher education courses including humanitarian interpreter training Borderless Higher Education for Refugees (BHER) which provides modular certificated courses that build incrementally to a degree
Strengthening capacity for accreditation and certification	Cross-border and regional examinations Accreditation of distance-learning by universities in the country of origin Development of recognition agreements between governments Use of placement tests to enable students lacking documentation to enrol in the most appropriate grade Working with governments to enable IDPs to sit examinations (e.g. logistical support, changing examination dates to accommodate IDPs)
Improving data and monitoring	OpenEMIS Use of GPS technology to access school data in remote areas Satellite and drone imagery to identify IDP settlements and shelters in hard-to-access areas

Term	Definition
Refugee	According to the 1951 Refugee Convention, a refugee is someone who “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his or her nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail him or herself of the protection of that country.”
Palestinian Refugee	A Palestinian refugee is a person whose residence was Palestine for at least two years before losing home and livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict, or a descendant of such a person. While the definition ‘refugee’ emphasises the legal dimensions of the term, the definition of ‘a Palestinian refugee’ is more operational and exists primarily to identify persons eligible for services from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), who today reside in Gaza, West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon (Feldman 2012). Palestinian women cannot retain or pass on their status to descendants if they marry a non-refugee, though descendants of male UNRWA refugees can (Bocco 2010).
Asylum-Seeker	‘Asylum seeker’ refers to an individual seeking international protection, whose claim to refugee status has not been definitively evaluated as yet. Not every asylum seeker will be recognised as a refugee, but every refugee was initially an asylum seeker (UNHCR 2006).
Internally Displaced Person (IDP)	The most common definition of IDPs is the one presented by the UN Secretary-General in 1992, which identifies them as “persons who have been forced to flee their homes suddenly or unexpectedly in large numbers, as a result of armed conflict, internal strife, systematic violations of human rights or natural or man-made disasters, and who are within the territory of their own country” (Forced Migration Online 2012).
Returnee	A returnee is an individual who was displaced but who has recently returned to her/his country of origin (in the case of refugees) or place of origin (in the case of IDPs) (UNHCR 2006). For the purposes of this topic guide, returnees are discussed in the IDP section, because refugees who have returned to their home country are likely to be displaced within their origin country borders.
Person of Concern	“A person whose protection and assistance needs are of interest to UNHCR. This includes refugees, asylum-seekers, stateless people, internally displaced people and returnees” (UNHRC n.d.).
Separated/Unaccompanied Children	The Inter-agency Guiding Principles on Unaccompanied and Separated Children defines separated children as “those separated from both parents, or from their previous legal or customary primary care-giver, but not necessarily from other relatives. These may, therefore, include children accompanied by other adult family members.” It defines unaccompanied children/minors as “children who have been separated from both parents and other relatives and are not being cared for by an adult who, by law or custom, is responsible for doing so” (ICRC 2004). Children are entitled to special protection under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), but it has proven difficult to include separated children and adolescents within the protective scope of international refugee law (Bhabha 2014).

Top ten countries of displacement	% of caseload[3] internally displaced	% of caseload externally displaced
Syria	66%	34%
Colombia	94%	6%
Israel	0%	100%
Sudan	82%	18%
Iraq	87%	13%
Afghanistan	23%	77%
DRC	83%	17%
Pakistan	83%	17%
Somalia	49%	51%
South Sudan	71%	29%

	Refugees	IDPs
Causes of displacement (according to UN definition)	Persecution	Armed conflict, internal strife, systematic violations of human rights, or natural or man-made disasters
Place of refuge	Outside their own country	Within their own country
Global numbers (2015)	21.3 million refugees 3.2 million asylum seekers	40.8 million displaced by conflict, persecution, generalised violence, or human rights violations (including 8.6 million newly displaced in 2015). This figure does not include those displaced by natural disasters.
Bodies responsible for ensuring the right to education	UNHCR, host governments, UNRWA for Palestinian refugees	National governments UNICEF for returnees (UNHCR 1997)
Global legal frameworks and conventions	1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees	1998 UN Guiding Principles on IDPs (not legally binding)
Regional Instruments	1969 OAU convention governing the specific aspects of refugee problems in Africa 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees	2009 African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala Convention)[6]
Durable solutions	voluntary repatriation integration into the asylum country, resettlement to a third country	return and reintegration in place of origin integration in the area of displacement integration in another part of the country
Monitoring	UNHCR/UNRWA	Responsibility of national governments, collected by national governments and humanitarian organisations (e.g. UNICEF), collated by IDMC
Implementing bodies	UNHCR, host governments, UNICEF, INGOs, NGOs, FBOs, UNRWA	National governments, FBOs, UNICEF, UNHCR, INGOs
Coordinating bodies	UNHCR UNRWA	Cluster (global and national), UN OCHA

Data collection method	Advantages	Disadvantages
School administrative data (used for Education Management Information Systems)	Relatively cheap Collected routinely Comprehensive data for children enrolled in public schools	Prone to over-reporting of enrolment by schools May omit some education providers (e.g. non-formal schools) Reliant on good census data to calculate enrolment rates
Large scale census / household survey (e.g. UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey)	Reliable source of data on school participation rates (more reliable than administrative data) Can disaggregate data by wealth, ethnicity, age and other markers	Expensive Long time lag between data collection and publication Omit children not living in traditional households
Rapid needs assessments	Data available quickly	Less reliable Lack detail Education may have low priority in multisector assessments

UNHCR Document	Year
Organising primary education for refugee children in emergency situations: Guidelines for field managers	1988
Guidelines for educational assistance to refugees	1992
Revised guidelines for educational assistance to refugees	1992
UNHCR Education Field Guidelines	2003
UNHCR Safe School and Learning Environment Guide	2007
Ensuring Access to Quality Education: Operational Guidance on Refugee Protection and Solutions in Urban Areas	2011
Refugee Education: A Global Review	2011
2012-2016 Education Strategy	2012
Education Briefs: 1. Education and Protection 2. Out-of-School Children in Refugee Settings 3. Curriculum Choices in Refugee Settings 4. Mainstreaming Refugees in National Education Systems 5. Refugee Teacher Management 6. Secondary Education for Refugee Adolescents	2015

UNRWA Document	Year
UNRWA Education: Learning Together	2012
Policy Education for Human Rights, Conflict Resolution and Tolerance (also available in Arabic)	2012
Planning and Monitoring for Success	2012
UNRWA Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) programme	2012
Leading for the Future: Professional Development for Head Teachers/Principals	2012
UNRWA School Based Teacher Development (SBTD): Transforming Classroom Practices	2012
Assuring Quality Curriculum in UNRWA Schools	2012
UNRWA Teacher Policy	2013
UNRWA Human Rights, Conflict Resolution and Tolerance (HRCRT) Education (also available in Arabic)	2013
School Health Strategy	2013
UNRWA Inclusive Education Policy (also available in Arabic)	2013

Element	Dimension	Link to Dimension
Meaningful and active pupil engagement	Pedagogy	Teachers do not just transfer knowledge and rely on rote learning, but work with pupils to ensure that they are active participants in the learning process.
Inclusive and respectful learning environment	Pedagogy	Teachers work to create a classroom climate that is welcoming to and safe for all learners, and thus conducive to learning. (This includes the use of non-violent discipline and classroom management strategies).
Differentiated instruction	Curriculum/ Pedagogy/ Assessment	Differentiated instruction refers to the process by which different entry points are available to learners according to differences in knowledge, abilities, skills, etc. It happens at the level of curriculum (what all students learn, what most students learn, what some students learn), at the level of pedagogy (the variety of teaching methods employed by teachers to ensure all students are learning), and assessment (a range of opportunities for students to demonstrate what they have learned). Differentiated instruction is particularly important for ensuring a quality learning experience for refugee learners, because often they come to the classroom with a broad range of learning needs.
Constructive classroom discourse	Pedagogy	Teachers enable students to engage in the active co-construction of knowledge, and work on building positive classroom discourse.
Relevant curriculum and language(s) of instruction	Curriculum	For quality learning experiences to happen, what is taught in classrooms needs to be relevant to learners, not only in terms of building on knowledge and experience they already have, but in ensuring that lessons learned are applicable for their current and future lives and contexts. For refugees, the curriculum question involves decisions around using the host curriculum or the curriculum from the country of origin (or a combination), etc. Often these choices are determined based on availability of officially recognised assessment opportunities. When it comes to language of instruction, research has demonstrated that mother tongue instruction tends to be more effective, particularly for younger learners. The UNICEF EAPRO Language, Education and Social Cohesion (LESC) initiative provides some key ideas about multilingual and mother tongue learning and research (UNICEF EAPRO 2016).
Conceptual learning and critical thinking	Curriculum	According to the proposed model, curriculum should not just contain key facts and figures for students to memorise, but should provide ample opportunities for learners to engage in more abstract and conceptual learning and to develop critical thinking skills that will serve them in real life beyond the classroom.
Varied comprehension checks and assessments	Assessment	According to the proposed model, learners should have the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned in a number of meaningful ways. Where possible, assessment should be formative – i.e. contributing to the overall learning process. Further, while ‘teaching to the test’ should be discouraged, key national and international assessments should be considered to ensure that refugees’ educational achievements are officially recognised through formative, summative, and inclusive processes.

	Role of training finance in meeting policy objective	Explanation
1	Redefined government role	Redefinition of government role (diminished, but still critical), entailing reduced public budgetary support for formal sector institutional training.
2	Funding diversification	Diminished government financing role is to be accompanied by a diversification of sources of financing, greater cost recovery and cost sharing.
3	Cost sharing	Moves towards increased cost sharing, with higher, more realistic training fees (with scholarships for the needy) and perhaps state-backed student/trainee loans.
4	Training levies	Funding diversification measures to include training levies on enterprises.
5	Income generation	Funding diversification measures also include income generation by public training institutions.
6	Decentralisation	Income generation objectives would be furthered through decentralisation of control over public sector providers and greater institutional autonomy.
7	Private sector	Government to encourage private sector provision of training.
8	Funding public training institutions	Replace arbitrary, ad hoc funding arrangements by objective formula funding related to inputs, outputs and outcomes. Consider case for subsidy of selected private training institutions.
9	Trainee/consumer choice	More voice is to be accorded to trainee/consumer choice; vouchers may help develop the demand side of the market where subsidy needs to be retained.
10	Levy-grant	Levy-grant mechanisms to be introduced where formal sector enterprises under-train.
11	Training funds	National training funds to be developed, to take a broader and longer term view of training expenditures in a national context.
12	Training authorities	Where institutionally possible, fully-fledged, autonomous national training authorities to be established.
13	Stakeholders	Increased participation of stakeholders (especially employers) in national training policy formation and execution.
14	Disadvantaged groups	Continuing and enhanced government role in skills development as an integral part of a package of measures to assist disadvantaged groups.
15	Informal sector	Central attention to be paid to largely neglected training needs of small micro enterprises and informal sector producers.

Region	Social (%)	Private (%)
Asia*	11.0	18.2
Europe/Middle East/North Africa*	9.9	18.8
Latin America/Caribbean	12.3	19.5
OECD	8.5	11.6
Sub-Saharan Africa	11.3	27.8
World average	10.3	19.0

IMPACT	A SAMPLE OF THE EVIDENCE
HE is related to positive overall human development.	Studies by Tilak (2003) and Cloete et al. (2011) found that the higher the level of education in a population, the higher the level of overall human development, especially in terms of life expectancy and GDP per capita.
HE has a positive effect on political stability and democratisation.	In a survey of current third-year students in Kenya, South Africa and Tanzania, Luescher-Mamashela et al. (2011) found that HE can enhance democratic attitudes and behaviours. A report from the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2013) also found that HE has a positive effect on democratisation and political stability as graduates are more likely to vote and participate politically. Gaining a degree was found to be a powerful antidote to political cynicism.
HE can support positive developmental leadership and good governance	Research supported by the Developmental Leadership Program (DLP) illuminated unmistakeable links between HE and developmental leadership in Ghana, Somaliland, and Mauritius (DLPROG) (Jones, Jones and Ndaruhutse, 2014). The in-depth case study of Ghana by Jones, Jones and Ndaruhutse (2014) found that quality senior secondary and HE were critically important factors in forming leaders with the skills, values and networks needed to achieve major democratic, economic and media reforms.
HE can positively impact attitudes and practices.	An OECD (2010) study found that higher levels of education impacted positively on various citizenship dimensions, especially in terms of positive attitudes towards immigration. The marginal effect of HE on holding a positive valuation was a 41% compared to only 18% for SE. Findings from a study by Truex (2011) in Nepal show that improving access to HE can reduce the presence of corruption norms and practices.
HE promotes greater social capital	A survey in the USA revealed that, with respect to the number of hours volunteered for community service, within each education group, 22% of those with some post-secondary education give their time to community service activities compared to only 12% of those with only a SE (National Center for Education Statistics, 1995). Bynner and Egerton (2001) using the National Child Development Study in the UK also found a link between HE and participation in community affairs, democratic processes, egalitarian attitudes, parenting and voluntary work.
HE build human capital	HE provides skilled professionals for important public services such as education and healthcare (Tikak, 2003). In this sense, HE has a ‘’dual effect’’ (Oketch et al., 2014) it not only enhances the capabilities of the individual but also the general population through the subsequent work of the graduates
HE positively influences health.	Numerous studies have consistently shown that HE graduates are less likely to smoke, less likely to drink excessively, less likely to be obese, more likely to engage in preventive care, have better mental and general health, lower fertility rates and better nutrition habits (Tilak, 2003; UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2013; OECD, 2010; Oketch et al., 2014 ). HE has also been strongly linked to lower rates of HIV/AIDS across the African region (Giyimah-Brempong, 2010).
HE can empower individuals and groups	Malik and Courtney’s (2011) study in Pakistan proved that participation in HE can open up new options for women as individuals and lead towards significant changes in the direction of greater gender parity. In Eritrea, access to university was found to improve the freedom of women through greater capacity to earn, the avoidance of restrictive marriages and a better choice of future life with regards to career, travel and further study (Müller, 2004).

Issue	Certain sub groups (e.g. disabled, ethnic, racial, cultural minorities and women in some cases) find it difficult to compete for places in the HE system. Equity concerns in HE are widespread across many LMICs given its potential to boost national productivity in the context of the global knowledge economy.
Innovations	Some initiatives aimed at promoting equity in access include affirmative action, targeted scholarships, sensitisation campaigns and even the creation of separate courses, classes or institutions. Uganda’s Makerere University introduced an innovative gender mainstreaming directorate (GMD) and initiative as part of the university’s strategic plan. This initiative highlights the accomplishments of women and works to create a network and infrastructure of support (GMD UM). Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya all implement affirmative action policies for females including weighted admission (Makerere University), women’s allocation to residence hall space (Ghana) or lowering cut-off points for university entrance (Kenya). Initiatives in policy and practice not only target women. An interesting example of an innovation in Mexico to address very limited representation of indigenous groups in HE was the creation of a completely new type of institution from the ground up, including the setting up of new buildings, a newly recruited teaching faculty and new course content and structure. These ‘’Intercultural Universities’’ (UIs) were characterised by indigenous, bilingual and intercultural education alongside close social contact between staff and students (Lehmann, 2013). Their objectives, progress and difficulties encountered to date are discussed in Schmelkes (2009).
Implications	A study by Onsongo (2009) found the affirmative action policies in Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya successfully increased female enrolment in HE. However, although these practices increased equity in admission, they did not receive much support. It was felt that women were being consigned to an inferior status, girls from well-known schools or well-connected backgrounds were benefitting and politicians believed it to be a quota system from which the respective areas they represent should enjoy university admission. A study by Clifford et al. (2013: 32) also acknowledges the potential negative consequences of such policies. Where policies aimed to support one group may have positive outcomes for that specific group, it may have unintended negative consequences on another, for example, women in India. The possible repercussions of affirmative action initiatives need to be considered carefully by policy makers. The World Bank (2000: 41) warns that policies and programmes to increase equity of access for disadvantaged groups will only prove sustainable if they do not undermine the standards of excellence on which HE is based. Merit criteria cannot be relaxed, as awarding degrees or certificates to people who do not deserve them is not in the public interest. The answer, the paper argues, is to combine tolerance at entrance to HE with rigour at exit, with members of disadvantaged groups must receive consistent remedial support during their time in HE.

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
World	107.3	107.6	107.6	107.6	109.8	110.3
High income countries	125.2	125.9	126.2	126.0	125.1	123.5
Middle income countries	101.4	102.0	102.3	102.8	106.6	108.3
Low income countries	61.8	62.8	64.2	66.2	67.6	68.5

GOVERNANCE MODEL	STATUS OF PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES	EXAMPLES
State control	An agency of the MOE or state owned corporation	Malaysia
Semi autonomous	An agency of the MOE, a state owned corporation or a statutory body	New Zealand France
Semi independent	A statutory body, a charity or a non profit corporation subject or MOE control	Singapore
Independent	A statutory body, a charity or non profit organisation with no government participation or control but linked to national strategies and related only to public funding	Australia UK

Quality of evidence:	Size of body of evidence:	Consistency of results:	Context
Variable, covering the full range of research designs, scale and rigour	Medium but highly variable between topics	Mixed but with consistent evidence on many topics	Increasingly global with notable geographical gaps for some topics

CHALLENGES FOR HE	BARRIERS IN LMIC CONTEXTS	PATHWAYS FOR REFORM
5.1. Provide mass HE to all citizens: The growing demand for HE requires a balanced growth on the supply side of staff (academic and administrative) and facilities (including infrastructure)	Increasing the supply of HE in LMICs is hampered by many factors. The increasing demand for HE has not been accompanied by corresponding funding (World Bank, 2010, van Deuren, 2013) so there are inadequate resources to invest in institutions, infrastructure and facilities (Johnstone, 2011).⁶⁴ There are also challenges in finding qualified academic staff due to competition from the labour market. Graduates, especially with higher degrees, are also in demand by the private sector and the government (Ashcroft and Rayner, 2011)⁶⁵ where salaries tend to be higher. In many LMICs a number of new providers (including private for-profit institutions) have emerged to meet the demand for HE but in several countries, this increase has coincided with a relaxing of state regulation with implications for quality and effectiveness of such institutions.	Increasing the supply of HE in LMICs requires increased funding and a more innovative approach. Berkeens-Soo (2009) argues that increasing the supply of HE cannot be achieved by simply expanding the existing elite HE system but requires efforts in both ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ diversity. However, this presents challenges in acquiring the necessary finance (see 4.9) and managing a complex and diversified system (4.10). Others contend that meeting increased demand can be achieved through innovative delivery modes such as the use of ICT (USAID, 2014).
5.2 Be globally competitive: The internationalisation and the subsequent commercialisation of HE around the world has meant that HEIs in LMICs are in competition with those in HIC.	In the context of rising demand, the lack of capacity and existing weaknesses in many HE systems in LMICs means that countless HEIs are now at crisis point. This has opened the doors to an influx of foreign entities looking to offer academic programmes to students in DCs. Although there are some benefits to this, as Naidoo (2007) points out, foreign providers are often exempt from domestic regulations and may view these international programmes as money making schemes, focusing on scale and cost effectiveness rather than on quality or relevance and so deliver ‘’off the shelf’’ products, with poor pedagogy and assessment that are unsuitable for the local context. It may also mean that national public universities may lose income, and the necessary support for HE capacity building may not be forthcoming (Ibid.). The internationalisation of HE has also caused internal ‘brain drain’ concerns, as international branch campuses often recruit qualified faculty members from existing public institutions (Schendel and McCowan, 2015).	Altbach and Knight (2007) believe LMICs are currently at crossroads and need to take measures to ensure international programmes and practices benefit the public and are not just a profit making centre. Naidoo (2007) agrees and suggests LMICs implement regulatory frameworks which require HEIs to respond to local needs in an international context and which contribute to the public good.
5.3 Adapt learning to the knowledge age: In line with the demands of the global knowledge economy, HE is expected to impart to students the skills, knowledge and dispositions related to innovation and the ability to learn how to learn (life-long learning)	Transforming ways of teaching and learning presents a challenge to HE systems in DCs which generally have outdated, irrelevant and knowledge based curricula, which fail to transfer up to date knowledge and skills and which are delivered through traditional pedagogical approaches with learning assessed through summative knowledge based recall tests (van Deuren, 2013, Wang, 2012). As a result, employer surveys report that in LMICs HE graduates are weak in problem solving, business understanding, using a computer and teamwork skills (The World Bank, 2009).	There is a need for HEIs to build and maintain relationships with organisations in the labour market to develop updated competency based curricula reflecting their needs and including new forms of teaching and learning aimed at training professional skills and attitudes (The World Bank, 2003) (see 5.4). By raising the level and quality of HE, LMICs may be able to stimulate innovation, promote the diversification of products and services, and maximise returns from capital assets through more efficient allocation and management (The World Bank, 2009).
5.4 Increase labour market relevance: The increased relevance of HE for economic development urges the need for graduates qualified for the new type of labour market.	Rapid expansion in HE, coupled with moderate growth in suitable employment opportunities, has resulted in considerable unemployment among recent university graduates in a number of LMICs. Most of these countries suffer from slow growth of the formal sector, which is traditionally the employer of first resort among highly skilled workers. The relatively faster growing informal sector, on the other hand, cannot effectively absorb the rapidly growing numbers of HE graduates (Majgaard and Mingat, 2012). This is compounded by the mismatch between the supply and demand of graduates. In many LMICs there is an uneven distribution of students across disciplines. SARUA (2012) reports that in the Africa region, registrations for the study of humanities and social sciences are high whereas those for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) along with business, management and other commercial fields remain low in most LMICs. In East Asia, LMICs also have an uneven distribution of HE students across disciplines. In Cambodia, for example, whereas around 58% of HE students are enrolled in social sciences, business and law, approximately 10% are studying science and 15% engineering and manufacturing (Di Gropello et al., 2011).	Whilst some argue that HE should continue to support a wide diversity of disciplines to nurture all of the competencies necessary for a well-functioning society (Smith, 2014) others suggest that enrolment quotas and/or providing scholarships for particular disciplines should be set up in an attempt to incentivise the study of such subjects (Altbach et al., 2009). Others suggest that HE systems in LMICs in particular should engage in and strengthen entrepreneurship education in order for HE to contribute to economic development (Ibid.).
5.5 Provide high academic quality and capacity	It is a challenge for LMICs to transform the ways of learning and assessment in HEIs as the academic capacity is already low. Under investment and limited funding have restricted institutional ability to hire additional lecturers to cope with the rising student numbers, which has resulted in large class sizes at many institutions. Limited funding has also led to a rapid decline in the wages of academics. As a result, many faculty members find supplementary jobs, which limit their time for teaching, mentoring and research and others opt to leave the sector altogether in search of more highly paid positions (Holm, 2012). The lack of postgraduate programmes in many contexts, as well as a decline in the prestige of the profession, has also left very few new faculty members in the “pipeline” (Tettey, 2010; Tilak, 2013). As a result, the majority of university teaching staff worldwide now have only a bachelor’s level degree (Altbach et al., 2009). In addition to these human resource implications, declining funding has curtailed the ability of institutions to invest in their infrastructure or maintain their libraries.	More and better qualified academic staff is needed but there are problems in recruiting and retaining them (see 4.12). Furthermore, academic staff at HEIs need to be given the time and attention to engage in continuing professional development so they themselves can learn and use new skills and forms of teaching and assessment as included in a new curricula. The World Bank (2009) calls on LICs to slow down the pace of expansion and shift their attention to propping up the quality of their HE systems, but this is a challenge in view of rising demand (4.1) and international competition (4.2).
5.6 Generate effective and relevant research: In the current knowledge economy, a priority of many governments is to make sure that their top HEIs are operating at the cutting edge of intellectual and scientific research and development.	HE systems play a critical role in training the professionals, scientists and researchers needed by the economy and generating new knowledge in support of the national innovation system (Di Gropello et al., 2011), however, international rankings and research output indicate that HE systems in LMICs are not providing research of adequate quality to boost technological advancement in business. Exploring the challenges involved in setting up globally competitive universities in African countries, Salmi (2011) found that conditions for research have been severely compromised by poor remuneration, heavy teaching loads, the inability to mentor young faculty, and inadequate infrastructure. The interactive and reinforcing nature of under-funding, variable quality and relevance, and nonuse and nonsupport of local research presents a bottleneck to research and research capacity development (Van Deuren, 2013).	Van Deuren (2013:11) provides four pre-requisites for strengthening HE research output and relevance in LMICs. These include (1) better qualified staff (2) a stronger relationship between teaching and research (3) availability of adequate infrastructure and supportive funding and (4) building university – industry linkages. However, achieving all of these present challenges in themselves as indicated by other sections of this chart.
5.7 Provide a more equitable HE system: The need for social equity to achieve poverty reduction for sustainable development has increasingly been recognised and HE systems are now required to supply education to a greater mix of students than in the past	Despite rising enrolment in HE and the demands for social justice, equity concerns are still prevalent across LMICs and access to HE is often restricted to a small proportion of the population (often referred to as elites) leaving certain demographic groups poorly represented. Context, gender, family wealth, region of origin, race/ethnicity and disability can be significant barriers to access. These are largely related to issues of the quality of earlier schooling, funding mechanisms and institutional admissions policies. It is not only a case of equal access to HE in general for underserved populations but equal access to the same kinds of institutions and HE programmes as students from the elite groups, and an equal chance to complete HE. Annex E examines these issues in more detail.	Patterns of inequity are not easily erased and require aggressive policies which are well thought through and designed (Di Gropello et al., 2011). It also requires the collection and analysis of more high quality, disaggregated data so that policymakers are well informed about why certain groups are more vulnerable than others and what can be done about it (ibid.).
5.8 Educate a more diversified student body: Massification, internationalisation and the demand for social justice has led to a more diversified student body, including students from diverse demographic sub groups and international and part time students, and it is expected that the student population will become more varied (Altbach et al. (2009).	Increased access to a more diversified student body has created additional challenges for HE systems in LMICs as new groups of school leavers entering HE are often not well prepared for study at this level (Johnstone, 2011). The lack of readiness is the result of limited academic opportunities originating at earlier levels of education. Historically, underserved populations access lower quality primary and especially secondary education and this has been found to be a stronger predictor of HE quality and completion than a student’s socioeconomic status. The lack of preparation negatively affects both access and completion. In terms of access, successful performance in HE entrance examinations is linked to prior academic experience. For example, in Vietnam, students from disadvantaged groups score lower marks on the National University Entrance Examination (without this being related to ability) and are less likely to enrol in high-quality HEIs (World Bank, 2011). Annex E provides more detail on the issue of completion.	HE expansion needs to be linked to efficiency improvements in primary and in particular secondary education and in the transition from secondary to HE. The World Bank (2010) suggests that to promote the inclusiveness of HE, governments in LMICs need to fully understand the interrelationship between education levels and adopt a comprehensive vision of the sector as a whole. Within HEIs, different forms of teaching and support mechanisms may be required to increase completion rates but this will either require new and different academic staff or increase the burden on existing staff (Ashcroft and Rayner, 2011).
5.9 Increase funding: Expanding demand and enrolment along with the acknowledged need for quality improvement of HE systems in LMICs requires additional budgets and adequate financing.	Financing the expansion, diversification and quality improvement of HE system presents many challenges for LMICs, which already struggle to provide even the most basic of resources to all its citizens. According to Johnstone (2013) the worldwide costs of HE are high and are increasing at rates greater than prevailing rates of inflation and government revenues in most countries. With surging HE costs and enrolment growing more rapidly than financial capabilities, public funding is not sufficient to meet demand. Increasing constraints on public spending has also led to debates about the legitimacy of any public subsidies or financial support for HE which can be seen as a ‘luxury’ (Schendel and McCowan, 2015) as it seems to bring more private than public benefits (Marginson, 2011) and those public benefits may be lost through human capital flight (Kapur and Crowley, 2008). This has put pressure on governments to minimise public support for HE and, as a result, expenditure per student in HE has declined at the same time that student numbers have increased (The World Bank, 2010). This has had an adverse impact on quality including faculty staff retention.	In response to these financial pressures a number of solutions are suggested at policy and practice levels for both the cost and revenue side. These include sharing costs among all stakeholders – students, taxpayers, parents and future employers (Altbach et al., 2009).
5.10 Transform governance structures at the systems level: As demand for HE continues to grow and governments acknowledge the role of HE in promoting development, it is important to ensure that the system is managed in an effective way.	In the past, HE systems in most LMICs have had highly centralised legal frameworks. However, this can make it difficult for HEIs to be responsive to changes in the labour market and limit their contribution to economic and social development (USAID, 2014). Therefore many countries now recognise the need to change to new forms of governance. This presents a challenge in terms of what model of management to implement. Whereas central control system limits flexibility, loose oversight can lead to low quality education with minimal return on the investments for students and the public (Susanti, 2010). Moreover, as HE systems are becoming more complex with different types of institutions, including many private ones, pursuing different goals and student bodies, and managing and monitoring the sector is more demanding and requires more specialisation, which puts pressure on government staff in LMICs. Management and governance of private HEIs is particularly challenging and is discussed in more detail in annex G.	It is generally recognised that the state is not the best arbiter of how HEIs should operate and the management of complex academic communities cannot be done effectively by remote civil servants (Fielden, 2008). Therefore, LMICs should (and have) moved away from a central control model to an advisory or supervisory model where the state regulates and monitors the HE system. There are however, many different models, which could be adopted, depending on need and context. These are discussed in section 7.
5.11 Transform governance and management at the institutional level: The growing trend of autonomy and accountability of HE systems in LMIC has introduced new tasks for HEIs, which require new ways of working, planning, budgeting, decision making and monitoring.	Strong leadership and effective institutional management are critical to the quality and effectiveness of HEIs especially in an autonomous system. Unfortunately, due to the limited authority given to institutions in the past, most HEIs in LMICs suffer from poor, inefficient and highly bureaucratic systems with poorly trained and qualified personnel and inefficient, ineffective and outdated management and administration infrastructure (USAID, 2014). This makes performing the new tasks very challenging.	As institutions acquire greater autonomy, there is a clear need to strengthen the leadership and management skills of senior HEI leaders and administrators. Leadership capacity building needs to focus on developing the qualities relevant to the new challenges facing HE, including those similar to a CEO, as HEIs are now similar to major enterprises in a competitive global market (Di Gropello et al., 2011).
5.12 Increase the supply of human capital: A critical goal of HE in LMIC contexts is to increase the supply of human capital to contribute to national socio-economic development.	Increasing the supply of human capital relevant for national development is a challenge for LDCs countries when the best of the human capital leaves, or migrates, to other countries. This ‘human capital flight or ‘brain drain’ is often a consequence of increased social mobility acquired through participation in HE, combined with a lack of employment opportunities and poor salaries in home countries. The opportunities for migration have increased as a result of globalisation and the internationalisation of HE.	Most papers acknowledge the need for policies and practices to be adopted by both destination countries and countries of origin. Kapur and Crowley (2008) examine a variety of options and argue that the first and foremost priority to stem the brain drain is ensuring security and political stability but where that is not a major issue, reforming HE is crucial to retaining talent.

1950s-1960s	Initially assistance to HE was used primarily to provide graduate training in donor countries. Later it was used to establish new HEIs in recipient countries with over 200 being built during the decade by various international donors.
1970s-1980s	Assistance to HE declined due to the results of rate of return studies, which showed lower returns to investment in HE in comparison with primary levels. Fears over the brain drain, structural adjustment and capture of HE by elite groups also contributed to the neglect.
1990s	External donors adopted a unified approach for primary education and education for all (EFA). HE was on the agenda but not high up.
2000s	The rapid progress towards EFA and an increasing demand for skilled labour contributed to an expansion of education at all levels. Other studies emerged, such as the OECD 2008 report (Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society) which argued that HE is a vital asset to the global community and for national development. Many donors are now following a dual track of investing in primary and post-secondary education with a renewed emphasis on investing in HE.

LOOKING BACK		LOOKING FORWARD
Reviews and evaluations of HE development programmes by Creed et al. (2012), Oketch et al. (2014) and Clifford (2013) found it very difficult to draw any broad conclusion about the effectiveness of different types of HE interventions for development or what makes for a good intervention under the different types identified. This was mainly because there was all too often a lack of well managed monitoring and evaluation systems, at both programme and project levels, from which evaluations of external investments in HE draw their data.		As knowledge generated from M&E is necessary to demonstrate the performance of programmes, to steer implementation towards the intended result and for informing future investments, it should be taken seriously right from the design stage of any education sector investment in HE. Different types of intervention will have different conditions for success and this will involve different types of M&E and impact assessments.
A review of HE programmes in Africa by USAID (2014) found that reforming institutions and strengthening institutional performance is one of the most challenging aspects in development and can lead to a ‘capability trap’ where countries or institutions mimic best practice but are actually ‘all show and little real action’, and this is one of the biggest causes of implementation failure.		It is possible to create the right conditions and incentives to build institutional capacity with external assistance (financial and/or technical) but to do so requires careful thought and attention to the role of external assistance and a focus on how to approach HE capacity strengthening, rather than on what should be invested in. Development advisors and consultants from international agencies should avoid recommending best practice mechanisms that cannot possibly work in the setting they are proposed for and stop insisting that countries making changes run before they can walk (Pritchett, et. al., 2010)
Drawing from Mozambique’s experience with international aid to HE for the purpose of capacity building in teaching and learning, Chilundo (2006) found that the main weakness in most programmes leading to implementation failure was a lack of local ownership and input.		It is important to formally involve all stakeholders (government, civil society, national and international partners and HEIs) and engage in constant dialogue with national stakeholders and international partners, as only this can lead to the successful design and implementation of international aid.

POTENTIAL PARTNER	MOTIVATIONS FOR HE	MOTIVATIONS FOR PARTNER	EXAMPLE OF PARTNERSHIP
Higher education institutions (e.g. HEIs in developed or HICs with HEIs in less developed or LMICs)	(In LDCs) Provide staff with opportunities for professional development; promote internationalisation; institutional capacity building; help to attract more funds; and receive assistance in the achievement of national development goals Africa Unit (2010).	(In DCs) For internationalisation: to create opportunities for staff to work in new and different socio-political and cultural environments giving a competitive advantage in what is becoming an increasingly global market for HE (ibid.) For development: to develop the capacity of HEIs in LMICs to accelerate poverty reduction in their local, regional and national context and promote sustainable development (British Council, 2015).	The partnership between University of Bradford, UK and University of Jos, Nigeria (annex I). The Global University Network for Innovation (GUNi) is a partnership created in 1999 with 208 members from 78 countries to strengthen the role of HE in society.
The public sector (e.g. local and national government)	HEIs can increase their service to society by influencing policy and practice through research, consultancies and secondments. Working with the public sector can increase research funding available for disciplines in relevant areas such as education, environmental protection and health; this can contribute to improving the relevance and practical teaching of HE subjects including initial teacher training, medicine, nursing and law.	Knowledge production and transmission are vital for a modern society and receive a lot of attention from policy makers, especially in light of budget constraints that are pushing governments to reduce public spending and increase efficiency of public policies and service. National and local governments can use the results of research conducted by HEIs to improve efficiency in public services in areas such as education and health and for wider civic benefit. HEIs are often internationally wired and have global connections, which can be harnessed for civic benefit. HEIs can also be important to the local economy (Local Government Association, 2013).	It is difficult to provide a specific example of how HE research has improved policy and practice in the public sector as there is no direct linear relationship between research and practice and research and policy. The processes by which research findings are transformed into practice are subtle, difficult to trace and often take a long time so the link is not always made (Nutley et al., 2007). However, other kinds of partnerships, such as consultancies or secondments, have provided more tangible benefits. The East African School of Library and Information Science (EASLIS) has implemented knowledge transfer of information management practices through its internship programme since 2006 (Magara et al., 2011).
Private Sector e.g. business, industry	The private sector can provide HE with additional resources such as providing internship positions for students; making their staff available for guest lectures, bringing their expertise to universities; working together with HE to establish standards to inform the curriculum and educational experience of students in relevant fields; be supportive in the creation, support, and staffing of research laboratories through gifts, donations, and research funding; provide facilities and services and increase the relevance of HE (Creso, 2013).	HE can provide skills and knowledge to the private sector such as giving technical assistance to local firms; can ensure that graduates have the skills and knowledge required to effectively contribute to the workforce; support faculty to engage in consulting and commercialisation activities and conduct research relevant to business and industry (Ibid.)	The Corporate Graduate Link (CoGL) at the University of Zambia. (UNZA)
Civil Society e.g. citizens groups, associations, NGOs, not-for-profit research institutes and independent think-tanks (as actors of civil society)	Civil society participation deepens the contributions of HEIs to human and social development through their research and teaching functions. It can contribute to the relevant and practical teaching of HE subjects particularly in the social sciences and on issues such as gender sustainability, peace and global citizenship, climate change, human rights, democratisation, governance and transparency; it can increase research funding available for social and human disciplines in relevant areas.	HE can contribute to the local and international social and global human development agenda by bringing research expertise to generate practical and useful knowledge through its research and service functions. HE students often volunteer for local community charity work in areas such as conservation, helping the elderly, organising recycling, supporting people with disabilities and working with children.	Kenyatta University’s, Kenya Community Outreach and Extension Program (COEP). (COEP)

CHALLENGES		POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Cultural differences	A number of studies reviewing partnerships in HE found that one of the most complex challenges in establishing and maintaining a partnerships is brought about by difference in missions and visions, constituencies, demands and ways of working between HEIs and partners which makes it difficult to agree and harness their respective requirements for working effectively with each other. This can even occur between educational institutions which operate in different education and socio-cultural contexts (Africa Unit, 2010; AAU, 2012; Latham, 2009; Tandon, 2007).	To alleviate the challenge presented by cultural differences, the Africa Unit (2010) stresses the importance of engaging in a thorough pre partnership process including identifying the needs and motivations for a partnership from the outset and the need for partners to understand each other’s cultural and working environment. Other studies suggest that successful cooperation requires the selection of the right partner in the first place (Boereni, 2000).
Sustainability issues	Empirical research conducted by the British Council (2015a) to review UK – Africa partnership schemes, found that many were unsustainable because of the project-oriented short term nature of the partnership and funding scheme. Once funding ended, so did the partnership. This was found to particularly affect teaching and learning partnerships compared to research partnerships.	An empirical study by Boeren (2000)[1] which examined the sustainability of Dutch support to HE capacity building in LMCs provides a list of nine major requirements and conditions for sustainable partnerships. Prominent among these is the need to re-orient partnerships from project based to product focussed. In this way partnerships will be more flexible and dynamic, rather than time bound.
Lack of resources	Other challenges include the lack of necessary resources to carry out the partnership. The Africa Unit (2010), in examining partnerships between UK and African HEIs, found that “time”’ to carry out all the activities was the major challenge (Latham, 2009). The costs of contracting with other actors, especially the private sector, were often found to be high when compared to the scope and size of the benefits of the partnership programme.	The British Council (2015a) study found that in order to ensure the long term sustainability of partnerships the time scale and funding factor needs to be realistic and sufficient and plans for future funding should form part of the project proposal. The Africa unit (2010) recommends that staff time should be funded so they have the time available to fulfil their partnership responsibilities.
Weak institutional capacity	Another major challenge to the development of partnerships relates to weak HE institutional capacity. An empirical study by the AAU (2012) found that most HEIs do not have the structures and qualified academic and management staff to engage productively and effectively with partners in the private sector and government.	Respondents in the AAU (2012) study believe that a strong leadership at the HEI level is necessary as a first step to building institutional capacity. This was followed by the establishment of an administrative structure and environment, to support partnerships with the ‘outside world.’ HEIs need to build academic expertise that mirrors national economic and industrial sectors and human development issues and for HEIs to engage in more applied research and teaching.
Lack of confidence	Partly as a result of the lack of capacity, the AAU (2012) study found that industry had no confidence in HEIs as potential partners to input into the innovation process. This has led to a reliance on foreign technologies and some suspicion of local innovations. HEIs are therefore not viewed as sources of useful information and expertise.	The Africa Unit (2010) suggests that partners have clear agreements about their roles and responsibilities in the partnership and about what they bring to the table. These roles and responsibilities should reflect what each institution is realistically able to do which is dependent on their capabilities and skills (current and anticipated). Support should be provided if this reveals weakness in capacity training. The study also argues for flexibility in the partnership and that it should be prepared to change and adapt roles if necessary as the capacity and leadership of each partner develops.
Power and resource differentials	The British Council (2015a), the Africa unit (2010) and Tandon (2007) all found that power, resource and funding imbalances could be a major challenge to effective partnerships. The British Council (2015a) found that power differentials often led to a paternalistic attitude of some UK HEIs and this was a challenge to maintain the partnership.	Given historically unequal power relations, it is crucial that one partner is not seen to be setting the agenda of the partnership and that partnerships should have equal benefits for both partners. Although these do not need to be symmetrical (Africa unit, 2010), PHEA (2010)emphasises the importance of partnerships which respond to Africa HEI demand and treat consultation as key to effective support.
Governance issues	Many informants in a study by Cresno (2013) on HE – industry partnerships in Africa specifically mentioned the lack of a clear policy framework establishing the role of HEIs in society and its contributions to national development as a challenge to establishing partnerships, especially with the private sector, as it meant that many potential partners in society did not understand the role of HE and what it could do.	The need for a clear national policy framework from governments that encourage partnerships is a strong message that emerges from the literature. Participants in an empirical study by Cresno (2013) call for a ‘national policy on innovation’ or a ‘national research policy’ which defines, in specific terms, the role of the HEIs and how they relate to other sectors of the society; deemed important for national development. They also emphasise the need to implement and monitor the policies once they are developed.

Issue	Demand for HE in LDCs is growing and is expected to continue to grow (Altbach et al., 2009; World Bank, 2010), meaning there is a need for continued expansion of the system.
Innovations	Many initiatives aimed at increasing the reach of HE in the literature involve the use of information and communications technology, such as e-learning, online distance learning (ODL), massive open online courses (MOOCs) and blended learning. Kepler, for example, is a nonprofit university programme designed for the developing world. Launched in Rwanda in 2013, it uses accredited courses from leading United States universities to meet the needs of the Rwandan market. Kepler works in close consultation with the Rwandan private sector to identify the skills needed by graduates, and during the course students have the opportunity to choose internships with potential employers and develop employment-specific skills. Other interesting case studies include the South African Institute for Distance Education (SAIDE), funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (http://www.oerafrica.org) and the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa (PHEA) Educational Technology Initiative (ETI), a multi-year initiative addressing HE e-learning in African universities (PHEA). Another solution has been the provision of a larger, more diversified, more connected and more complex HE system with HEIs pursuing different goals and audiences. These include ‘niche’ institutions (Schendel and McCowan, 2015) or private HEIs. Private institutions can absorb the spill over from the pool of fully qualified but unsuccessful applicants to public institutions. Ethiopia has undergone unprecedented expansion of its HEIs. Whereas the number of public universities grew from two in 1991 to a high of 22 in 2007, the private domain grew more quickly with 64 accredited private HEIs in the same period. Private HEIs can offer a limited range of programmes, which also tend to be more market driven. ‘Ashesi’ is an exciting example of a successful private university in Ghana which offers a small, highly focused curriculum (see ashesi and ashesi-ghana).
Implications	ICT represents a unique opportunity to HE to reach more students and to offer more students with courses that are on a par with those delivered by world-class universities. However, there are many implications for both policy and practice. A report by Escher et al. (2014) examined the use of MOOCs in boosting HE in Africa and found that they raise issues of access and affordability and to reach their full potential, several technological, cultural and administrative challenges need to be addressed. In order to benefit from online coursework, students must be familiar with both the use of a computer and the norms of self-guided instruction Kapur and Crowley (2008) and have access to electricity and connectivity which cannot be assumed for LMIC contexts particularly those from less advantaged backgrounds. A review of the progress and impact of ICT use in MOOCs, ODL and blended learning in HE in Asia by UNESCO (2014) found that only 5% of the students who enrolled actually completed the course. USAID (2014) provides a thorough discussion on the benefits, challenges and implications for policy and practice of using e-Learning in LMIC contexts and is worth reviewing. Private HEIs are often supported for their ability to react more flexibly to ‘market demand’ (World Bank, 2010) and the idea that they can provide a better quality education, given their access to alternative (i.e. non-governmental) sources of funding and the market-based competition that can be fostered between providers (ibid.). However, this is not often the reality. In many LMIC contexts there has been a proliferation of private providers of a very low academic standard, Brazil being a case in point (McCowan, 2007) (see annex J). The expansion of private provision can also exacerbate problems of quality within the public sector. New private institutions often recruit faculty from existing public universities (Schendel et al., 2013) which negatively affects standards across the sector, as faculty members become less able to devote their full attention to teaching or research at any one institution. The solution to these perceived or real quality problems suggested by Gyimah-Brempong and Ondiege (2011: 44) is close regulation and governance of these institutions such as in South Africa.

Issue	As demand for HE continues to grow and governments acknowledge the role of HE in promoting development, it is important to ensure that the system is managed in an effective way.
Innovations	In the recent past, many LMIC governments have undertaken new reform measures related to the governance and management of the HE system. A variety of alternative governance models are possible ranging along a continuum from, at the one end, a state control model, where the centre seeks to control HE systems, to, at the other end, a state supervisory model where the centre monitors and regulates them (Fielden, 2008). Most countries have recently moved along the spectrum and put the accent on the supervisory model focussing primarily on autonomy and greater institutional enterprise (Di Gropello et al., 2011). According to Fielden (2008) most of these countries have the following elements: (1) legislation that establishes HE as independent entities, (2) withdrawal of the state from certain direct control and management functions, (3) the creation of buffer bodies or agencies to carry out some of the financial control and supervision functions, (4) the adoption of funding models that give institutions greater freedoms and encourages them to develop new sources of income, (5) the creation of external quality assurance agencies and, (6) the development of new forms of accountability through reporting on performance and outcomes in achieving national and institutional goals. For example, in Ethiopia, the 2003 HE proclamation granted autonomy to HEIs in finance and internal organisation, establishing linkages and the administration of personnel. It introduced a block grant system enrolment based budgeting and cost sharing process. In Ghana, reforms initiated in 2007 included new institutional evaluation procedures, the merging of courses, the introduction of a credit system, cost recovery measures and new finding formula, the creation of new governing bodies and buffer institutions, new staff recruitment procedures and the transition from staff from civil service to HE employees. A culture of centralised planning and bureaucratic decision making is deeply rooted across all areas of public service provision in Socialist Viet Nam, but moves towards autonomy and decentralisation in HE has also taken place for the purpose of achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness. Annex K presents a simple typology of four models for governance of public HE with examples of countries implementing them. For a discussion of the regulation of private HEIs see annex J.
Implications	Varghese (2013) examines national reforms and resulting governance models of HE in five African countries, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa and found that in most instances they have helped to improve the governance and operational efficiency of HEIs and reduced reliance on the state for funding. The reforms in Ghana for example were found to have helped promote a greater sense of responsibility among staff and students and stimulated intellectualism. They also strengthened the decision-making process at the faculty level and enhanced teaching and research. The reforms in Ethiopia however, received some criticism. Many feel that some of the reforms have led to a paradigm shift from academic competency to operational competence. The study concludes that the best role for the state is to develop a framework for operation and regulating the system rather than in terms of financing, managing and controlling HEIs. A similar study of governance reforms in Asian countries by Varghese and Martin (2013) also found that reforms in the governance of HE systems in most, but not all countries, have generally had a positive impact resulting in more active and creative HEIs. The study provides a number of lessons learned for countries looking to move towards autonomy, including (1) autonomy policies as requiring coherent national policies, both horizontally (across departments and ministries) and vertical (centre to region) (2) the introduction of autonomy to be progressive with multiple reform layers, each building on the previous one (3) autonomy to first be piloted in a limited number of HEIs (4) autonomy to be considered as the means to an end and not as the ultimate aim, and (5) the understanding that there is no one model for ideal governance reform in HE.

Issue	With greater autonomy many HEIs need support to help them fulfil the new tasks it involves such as setting up priorities, developing strategies and study programmes, mobilising resources and creating new structures for greater institutional governance.
Innovations	Although a wide variety of capacity building initiatives exist, there seems to have been an almost exclusive focus on training as the prime method given its simplicity in planning and funding (James, R. & Wrigley, 2007). Other possible interventions include technical advice, support to project management and support for lobby and advocacy work (Datta et al., 2012). A number of international donor interventions aim to improve HEIs institutional governance and management, mostly through the development and exchange of ‘best practices.’ The USAID funded HE Programme (HEP) in Afghanistan is an example of an initiative to improve general leadership and administration, financial management and external stakeholder collaboration (USAID HEP). The emergence of new forms of cross border education provides a number of opportunities for institutional capacity building. Institutional partnerships, for example, can be used to develop capacity in management and governance. Although many partnerships rely on historical links between Northern and Southern institutions, South-South partnerships have also emerged. China, for example, has cultivated a number of partnerships with universities in Africa, establishing institutes on many campuses and investing in training programmes across the continent (King, 2010).
Implications	Experience has shown that institutional capacity building is challenging and success largely depends on the relationship between actors, the context and the measures chosen. What works in one context will not necessarily work in another. Therefore, a strong emphasis is needed on understanding the country context (DfID, 2010). Nevertheless, although each context is different, there are some common themes about how to build capacity in the literature. Most studies recommend a ‘multi actor perspective’ in containing different methods such as action learning, experimentation, mentoring coaching and advise (van Deuren, 2013). Ashcroft and Rayner (2011) write about capacity development in SSA and propose a process of critical enquiry using an action research model. Van Deuren (2013) presents a list of 10 general principles to be applied in capacity building interventions taken from a review of the literature. These include (1) local ownership and leadership, (2) relation to national priorities and systems, (3) external support focusing on facilitation and investment in local leadership, (4) capacity building as requiring knowledge and profound understanding of local context, (5) a readiness to adapt to local situations using open discussions, (6) a long term perspective while not forgetting short term action plans and interventions, (7) a comprehensive systems wide approach, (8) being prepared for changing needs and flexibility, (9) mutual trust and a relational approach, and (10) relevant systems for monitoring and evaluation.

Issue	To a large extent, access to HE in most LDCs is restricted to the higher socio-economic groups as entry is determined by highly competitive exams and often the ability to pay. This issue has become more pronounced in recent years, as HEIs are increasingly charging fees in order to address their substantial financial shortfalls.
Innovations	Initiatives to address the poverty dynamics of HE include the provision of scholarships, student loans, stipends and even opening outreach centres in poverty stricken areas. Some countries, such as Kenya, have elected to introduce ‘parallel streams’, in which large numbers of fee-paying students enrol alongside those assuming free-of-charge places. Others, such as Brazil, have chosen to expand access by stratification, maintaining free public universities but allowing for the rapid expansion of a private sector to absorb the majority of the demand. Prouni meaning ‘university for all’ is a Brazilian educational policy regarding increasing access to higher learning for the low income population. The policy is designed to encourage universities to allocate unfilled places free of charge to low-income students in return for exemption from tax payments (De Araujo, 2012).
Implications	Although there is some suggestion that the parallel system in Kenya has contributed immensely towards the financial stability of public universities and enabled them to supplement their funds, other evidence indicates that such a system has eroded the quality of HE as lecturers are overwhelmed by the large number of students and cannot deliver to the expected standards (The Nation Report), (Wangenge-Ouma, 2007). Whilst the policy in Brazil has increased enrolment in HE amongst poorer students, there are concerns that it only involves private institutions (De Araujo, 2012) and only addresses issues of enrolment not retention meaning that a high dropout rate amongst the poorest students still persists (McCowan, 2007).

Issue	Massification and increasing access for disadvantaged groups has led to the diversification of the student body and the entry of new student populations with more limited academic preparation. As a result, there is often a lower retention and completion rate amongst these groups with the privileged classes retaining their relative advantage in HE in nearly all nations (Shavit et. al., 2007).
Innovations	The literature offers few examples of innovations at HE level in LMIC contexts to address HE readiness. However, there are some initiatives directed at secondary level. The Higher Education Readiness programme (HER) in Ethiopia is a small scale enterprise supported by the Institute of International Education which works with young women in secondary school from underserved communities with scholarship support combined with innovative leadership and life skills training to help them complete their secondary education and equip them with the tools needed to continue on to university (Ethiopia HER). There are some initiatives in HIC contexts which are designed to prepare students for HE study in the UK and these may have some relevance for LMICs. INTO is an independently-owned company partnered with and providing study centres at a number of universities to allow international students the opportunity to study in the UK, China and the US by offering university preparation and English language modules. Courses provided by INTO at the University of Exeter have been proven to help international students’ progress to undergraduate and graduate degrees in the UK (INTO Exeter).
Implications	The skills needed for preparedness differ between and within countries and even between subjects studied. Therefore, there is no one size fits all solution. A report by Altbach et al. (2009) suggests the focus of innovations should move away from access and readiness to completion. Accountability in HE he argues should not be based on enrolment but outcomes with links to funding. The World Bank (2000) also recommends a focus on completion and the provision of ‘catch up’ programmes. Nevertheless, the consensus in the literature is to improve the links between secondary school outcomes and HE and the need to establish mechanisms to do that, rather than on ‘catch up’ programmes. An empirical study by the British Council (2015b) on university preparedness in Mexico provides a list of factors that influence readiness for HE at primary and secondary schools which policy makers should consider. The report emphasises the need for secondary schools to develop both cognitive and non-cognitive (soft) skills in students, such as language, communication, interpersonal skills, as these are all predictors of success in HE and will give students the ability to adapt to the nature of study at HE.

Topic Guides – HEART

Education for refugees and IDPs in low- and middle-income countries: identifying challenges and opportunities

Methodology and evidence base

Section 2: Forced displacement and education: a global overview

Section 3: State of research, policy, and practice in refugee education

Section 4: The state of research, policy, and Practice in IDP Education

Section 5: Opportunities, innovations, and best practice in education for forcibly displaced people

Section 1: Introduction

1.1 Introduction and overview

1.2 Methodology and sources used for this review

1.3 How to use this guide

Section 2: Forced Displacement and Education: A Global Overview

2.1 What is forced displacement?

2.2 Patterns of forced displacement

2.3 Trajectories and duration of forced displacement

2.4 Education and forced displacement

2.5 Problems with data collection and monitoring in the field of forced displacement

2.6 Coordination of education in emergencies and forced displacement

2.7 Funding for education in emergencies and forced displacement

Section 3: State of Research, Policy, and Practice in Refugee Education

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Coordination of refugee education

3.3 Funding of refugee education

3.4 Access to education for refugees

3.4.1 Primary and secondary education

3.4.2 Higher education

3.4.3 Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE)

3.5 Quality of refugee education and learning outcomes

3.5.1 Curriculum issues

3.5.2 Pedagogy issues

3.5.3 Assessment issues

3.6 Protection and wellbeing of refugees in and through education

3.7 Current gaps and challenges

Section 4: The State of Research, Policy, and Practice in IDP Education

4.1 Introduction

4.2 IDP contexts

4.2.1 IDPs in camp-like contexts

4.2.2 IDPs integrated into host communities

4.2.3 Returning populations

4.3 Coordination and funding of IDP education

4.4 Access to education for IDPs

4.4.1 Primary education

4.4.2 Alternative basic education

4.4.3 Post-basic education

4.5 Quality of IDP education and learning outcomes

4.6 Teacher recruitment, training, compensation, and wellbeing

4.6.1 Remuneration for IDP teachers

4.6.2 Teacher recruitment and training

4.6.3 Returnee teachers

4.7 Protection and wellbeing of IDPs in and through education

4.8 Integration versus segregation of IDP education

4.9 Impacts on host communities and education systems

4.10 Current gaps and challenges

Section 5: Opportunities, Innovations, and Best Practice in Education for Forcibly Displaced People

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Note on the evidence base

5.3 Supporting impacted communities

5.4 Ensuring protection, psychosocial support, and safe spaces, and building resilience

5.5 Addressing disruptions in learning

5.6 Addressing problems of space

5.7 Building teaching capacity and wellbeing

5.8 Improving higher education

5.9 Strengthening capacity for accreditation and certification

5.10 Improving data and monitoring

Appendix

Appendix A: Assessing the Strength of Evidence

Appendix B: Glossary of Key Concepts

Appendix C: UNHCR Structural Information

Appendix D: Education for Palestinian Refugees

Appendix E: Key UNRWA Education Policy and Strategy Documents

Appendix F: The International Response to the Syrian Crisis in Higher Education

Appendix G: Principles of Learner-centred Education

Skills

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Definition and description of skills

2.3 Youth bulge

2.4 Skills development in context

2.5 Life skills

2.6 Skills and employment

2.7 Skills attainment

Issue	Expanding demand and enrolment in HE, combined with increasing constraints on public funding, debates about the legitimacy of public financial support for HE in lower-income contexts and the recognised need for quality improvement of HE, have motivated governments to minimise public support for HE and to find innovative and sustainable financing mechanisms.
Innovations	The most common financing mechanisms are based on cost-sharing initiatives such as tuition fees. These are being implemented for HE in many LMICs (and indeed HICs). These can be effective. In China, for example, a large scale cost recovery initiative was implemented in the mid-1990s. As a result, whilst per capita expenditure on HE doubled, the level of Government support declined. The share of total costs paid by students doubled, with fees increasing by over 200% (Li, 2007; Zhong, 2005). Whilst cost sharing initiatives have increased revenue for HE, they have jeopardised the ability of some students to participate. Therefore, such schemes are often accompanied by student loans and financial aid for low-income students. Tanzania, for example, introduced a cost-sharing policy that expects beneficiaries to contribute gradually to the cost of their education. Different types of loan systems have been implemented. The most popular seem to be deferred loans, where students are responsible for repaying tuition fees in the future. Deferred loans fall into two types, the ‘mortgage type’ and the ‘income contingent’ (ADB, 2009: 18). The latter is where students sign a contract when they enter university and promise to pay a share of their earnings to particular investors for a fixed period after they graduate. Such policies are in operation in Ethiopia, Botswana and Lesotho (The World Bank, 2010) and seem to be the preferred option for many educationalists. Some countries such as Vietnam have comprehensive and complex packages for charging fees and for fee reductions (Di Gropello et al., 2011). Other innovations include dual track policies where a certain number of free (or almost free) places are offered based on particular criteria, for example, performance related or means tested. Uganda, for example, retains government funding for a limited number of places and uses a private entry fee paying scheme for the remaining places (Ibid.). Other types of dual rack systems involve variable fee rates where tuition fees are set differently for different programmes of study. In China for example, fees for science and engineering are less than for languages and medicine (Di Gropello et al., 2011). Rather than tuition fees, some countries charge user fees. In Nigeria, student contributions are made through a variety of fees including examination fees, registration fees, library fees and hostel maintenance fees, to name a few. In some cases, public private partnerships are being used to improve the efficiency of HE services provided to students such as meals, housing, and transportation, such as those found in the Ivory Coast (see annex L). Such PPPs can ensure public expenditure is allocated as a priority to academic activities and research rather than to the provision of services to students. In the USA, lotteries have become a significant source of funding for HE (Altman, 2010). HE has also been diversified to offer lower cost and more effective delivery alternatives, such as distance education and private provision, which have been discussed elsewhere. Marketisation has also become an important way for HEIs to generate revenue from private sources. In this sense, HE is seen as a commodity that can be sold. Strategies include HE-owned for profit companies, co-ventures with private non HE institutions, attracting investment by international companies in HE franchises, the admission of full fee–paying students, opening branches in other countries and franchised degree programmes or curricula. Many LMICs now host HEIs from MDCs or use foreign curricula. They use this to gain prestige, attract more students and gain income. HEIs in MDCs also try to attract students, however, usually international students, to earn profits by charging high fees (Altbach and Knight, 2007).
	It is not just a case of attracting more private funding that is important but better allocating the public funding that is available. In a few cases, impressive reforms to improve internal efficiency have been implemented, and governments are adopting more effective budget management practices, including formula, performance or competitive funding. The Ghana Education Trust Fund (GET) described in annex M is an interesting example of one such innovation.
Implications	In terms of the financing of HE, the World Bank (2010) makes a strong case for a comprehensive approach combining a number of different methods to ensure more financially sustainable HE systems. The way in which the measures are combined and the pace at which the reforms are implemented will depend on the situation and constraints specific to each country. Experience shows that reforming the financing of HE is challenge, and can generate controversies, tensions and meet institutional resistance. Therefore, policy makers should carefully present the arguments, assess the impacts of proposed solutions, and engage in a wide consultation so that stakeholders are better informed. In addition, reforms should be implemented incrementally (ADB, 2009).

Issue	Equipping its workforce with the right skills is an important part of LMICs’ efforts to accelerate economic growth and further modernisation. However, numerous reports indicate mismatches between supply and demand of graduates in LMICs and consequently high graduate under and unemployment.
Innovations	Innovations designed to better connect HE with the labour market are quite widespread and some examples of how developing nations have been trying to achieve this through partnerships with the private sector have been discussed previously in this guide. Other examples, which have been established in HICs but may have implications for LDCs include national policies and close monitoring of the supply of demand for HE graduates. In Sweden for example, the National Agency for Higher Education publishes an assessment of the future balance in the labour market. Annual reports have been published since 2003 indicating the proportion of university graduates that have been successful on the labour market (12-18 months after graduation). In the case of surplus or shortage of graduates, the number of places offered in different programmes is adapted (de Weert, 2011). Governments have also set up enrolment quotas and/or provided scholarships for particular disciplines, in an attempt to incentivise the study of certain subjects. For example, the UK Government provides additional funding support to broad subject areas that have been identified as both strategically important to the country and vulnerable in terms of their longer term sustainability. These strategically important and vulnerable subjects (SIVS) include STEM, MFL and quantitative social sciences (de Weert, 2011). Botswana has a similar policy. Some HEIs work directly with the private sector to tailor the content of the courses it offers. The partnership between the North Carolina Community College and the Manufacturing Association is acclaimed as an extremely successful example of collaboration (Pillay, 2010). Many LMICs see entrepreneurship as a way of reducing high unemployment rates and as central to economic growth and development and include it in the HE curricula. In Kenya, entrepreneurship education is offered at undergraduate, graduate and PhD levels (Gyimah-Brempong and Ondiege, 2011).
Implications	A study by the IPPR (2013) found that many industries and businesses engage with universities only when it comes to recruitment. That is too far late to have any real impact. They should be connected to what students learn from their first day on campus if they don’t want to be disappointed by a lack of skills upon graduation. However, Gyimah-Brempong and Ondiege (2011) believe this is because most countries only really pay lip service to HE-industry links or when it suits them and it should be taken more seriously. Much of the literature reviewed suggests that connecting HE to the labour market requires serious and concentrated national efforts and policy. Di Gropello et al. (2011) advocates for more public intervention in HE to mend the disconnect between HE and industry. However, a recent empirical study by the British Council (2015) involving young people found that HE may have to adapt to another new reality as students no longer see their future in conventional salaried employment. Entrepreneurship and social enterprise have become the new valued areas of interest.

Issue	Student or graduate mobility and migration in the form of ‘brain drain’ is one of the reasons many donors shy away from extending aid to HE, as it was thought that foreign study programmes combined with domestic universities producing larger number of graduates than the labour market could absorb, encouraged the migration of the educated in LDCs to MDCs.
Innovations	One way to alleviate the brain drain is to better connect HE to the labour market and improve the quality of HE in LDCs. More targeted attempts to ease student migration include UNESCO and Hewlett Packard’s Brain Gain Initiative (UNESCO-HP) which attempts to build a sustainable university e-structure for science involving Africa and the Arab states and the Teacher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa initiative (TESSA). The IOM 2001 Migration and Development for Africa programme, emphasises short-term visits and the transfer of knowledge through the internet and diaspora groups rather than focus on the permanent return of skilled migrants to developing nations in Africa as has happened in the past. IOM and the Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa (CODESRIA) also has an initiative where diaspora academics mentor post graduate students (CODESRIA). A paper by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2007) summarises a number of options that could be employed by both destination countries and countries of origin. The paper emphasises that policies in the country of origin need to encourage graduates to stay in order to help in the development process. Examples of policies that could be introduced include tying HE funding to the proportion of graduates who work in the country, selecting people to study abroad from only those who are currently employed in the country and holding their positions for them, forgiving or reducing student loans for graduates who do not emigrate, and ensuring meritocracy in a transparent way in job markets.
Implications	International donors and national governments should always take into account the possibility of student migration in their policy and practice in HE capacity building. However, a current study suggests that whether a country gains or losses in the brain drain depends on country-specific factors and there is no one size fits all solution (Docquier, 2014). Therefore, the international community and policymakers should gauge the costs and benefits of the brain drain in their specific context in order to design appropriate responses.

Issue	Research is a core function of HE and a well-developed system for research and knowledge generation is important within the emerging knowledge economy. However, limited investment in HE in LMICs has restricted their ability to fully participate in the global research community, and research output in terms of quality and quantity is generally low (Di Gropello et al., 2011).
Innovations	A number of initiatives have been undertaken to improve the research capacity of HE in LMICs. These include strengthening graduate study programmes, improving the management of research, providing funding and linking with other institutions and academics to conduct research and exchange good practice and increasing the distribution and access to academic journals. Some specific examples include the Irish Aid/Higher Education Authority project ‘’Doctoral Training for Development in Africa Initiative,’’ (IE) aimed to build HEI research capacity specifically for poverty alleviation and the achievement of the MDGs. The project tested three different models of partnerships, Africa led, bilateral and multilateral (Uduma, O. et al., 2012) all of which proved successful. The South Africa–Netherlands Research Programme on Alternatives in Development (SANPAD), a doctoral research preparation programme for candidates on the African continent, aimed especially at black women (Smit et al., 2013) is another successful example. The DfID funded Capacity Strengthening Initiative: UK-Africa Consortia with the Royal Society is aimed at funding scientists who want to develop collaborative research consortia between the UK and SSA (Royal Society-DfID). Examples of innovative research networks include the Regional Initiative in Science and Education (RISE) and the Collaborative Research Support Programs (CRSP) which is described in detail in annex N.
Implications	Evaluations of the doctoral training programmes conclude that their success was largely because they were mutually beneficial, locally led and based on a long term, multi-source funding with capable partners and these areas should be taken into account when building research capacity. A study by the British Council (2015a) also suggests that these are all major elements of effective partnerships for developing research capacity. In examining the challenges facing building research capacity for development, specifically in Africa, Sawyerr (2004) concludes that there are two elements that need to be addressed. They include an active component (skills, competencies, attitudes and values of researchers) and an environmental component (societal, institutional, material and management) – and initiatives which selectively focus on only one of these will not transform the research scene. Only initiatives that address them all, Sawyerr (2004) argues, will remove the knowledge deficit in HE in LMICs and yield substantial and immediate gains, and this should be taken into account.

Issue	The expansion of HE combined with the lack of funding has had an adverse effect on the quality of the programmes that HE in LDCs offer and there are concerns that they are not producing the technical, behavioural, and thinking skills required to increase productivity and growth in the modern world.
Innovations	Innovations to improve the academic capacity of HEI have focussed on new forms of teaching and learning for new students, new learning goals and new curricula. In recent years, there have been many attempts and regional partnerships designed to support improvements in the quality of teaching and learning in HEIs in LMIC contexts, for example, the Inter-University Council for East Africa, 2010 (IUCEA). A number of donor projects have attempted to improve teaching quality, such as the USAID funded Decentralized Basic Education Two (DBE2) project in Indonesia. The project responded to requests from a number of universities and developed a training programme on teaching methodologies specifically for teaching in HE. The Active Learning for Higher Education (ALPHE) programme was developed in partnerships with HEIs in Aceh and expanded to other provinces. By the end of the project in 2011, the programme had reached 117 HEIs. The final evaluation of the project found that ALPHE had been very successful in improving practice and that many HEIs had institutionalised or integrated the programme into their own CPD training for lecturers (USAID DBE2).
Implications	Experience has shown that fostering academic capacity and quality in teaching in learning requires long term investment and that the results are not as immediate as support for other components. A study by Schendel (2013)in Rwanda, clearly demonstrates the need for continued and sustained efforts at improvement. A review of quality teaching in HE for the OECD by Henard and Roseveare (2012) found that fostering quality teaching in HE is a multi-level endeavour and requires support at three inter-dependent levels: the institution wide level (management and government, policy design and quality assurance mechanisms), the programme level (actions designed to measure and enhance the design, content and delivery of teaching programmes) and the individual level (helping lecturers to achieve their missions and encouraging them to innovate and adapt student oriented practices). Innovations which focus on only one of these levels to the exclusion of the others may be doomed to failure.

	5. Full integration of governance, finance, service delivery, training etc.; at all levels through to service users, led by national policy and/or lead ministry
	4. Partial integration, joint policies and/or combined services, including national, municipal or community-based initiatives
	3. Active inter-sectoral collaboration e.g. via joint planning office, shared training, quality standards, inspections, etc.
	2. Basic coordination of roles, goals and delivery, with effective inter-sectoral communication at ministry and municipal levels
	1. Sector based services with minimal connection between policies, services, professionals, etc.
	0. Fragmentation amongst sectors and providers at all levels.

Does the programme including the use of technology have clearly articulated educational outcomes?
Does the theory of change explain how the outputs (of technology, materials, training and so on) will contribute to improved educational outcomes?
Is the programme design, including the use of technology, supported by credible theories of student learning and teacher development?
How well does the functionality of the planned technology fit with the desired teacher development and curriculum practices it is intended to support?
How appropriate is the technology to the context? (Consider requirements of infrastructure, technical support, technical training, cost, durability, retrofitting etc.)
Are there alternative technologies (or non-technological approaches) that might be more effective, more cost-effective or more appropriate to context?

Is the programme design including the use of technology likely to deliver the desired educational outcomes?
Is there a reasonably even balance between a) technology b) materials for classroom and teacher development use c) support to teachers and schools, and d) monitoring and evaluation, reflected in programme activities and budgets?
Do plans for teacher development and support focus primarily on curriculum and pedagogy, not technology (e.g. ‘pedagogy first’ principle for edtech (UNESCO, 2013c, p.13))?
Do plans for teacher development and support align with known best practices (e.g. Westbrook et al., 2013)? Is professional development aligned with classroom practice? Is follow-up support and monitoring adequate (in service training), after initial training (pre-service training)? Are there formal and informal mechanisms for teacher peer support? Are there mechanisms for engaging support of headteachers, school management committees, local education officers and wider school communities?

Does programme research deepen understanding of what happens in classrooms and schools, participants’ experiences or relevant contexts?
Does programme monitoring track implementation of new activities and/or technology use in classroom practice?
Does programme evaluation move beyond outputs and access to technology?
Does programme evaluation evidence changes in teaching practice or learning outcomes?

Are key cost drivers understood?
Are VFM metrics in place?
Are Economy, Efficiency and Effectiveness analysed?
Given expected or probable learning outcomes, does the programme offer VFM?