Differentiating the Higher

Education System of Ethiopia

Study Report

Addis Ababa

Ethiopia

July 2020
Table of Contents

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................ IV

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... V

FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................................... VI

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................................. III

ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... IV

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1

SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 4

1.1. GENERAL BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................... 4

1.2. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF ETHIOPIAN HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM ............................................................................ 6
1.3. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR DIFFERENTIATING THE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM IN ETHIOPIA .......................................................... 9
1.4. OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
1.5. EXPECTED OUTCOMES ............................................................................................................................................ 11
1.6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................................................... 11
1.7. STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT ............................................................................................................................... 12

SECTION TWO ................................................................................................................................................ 13

1. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE ............................ 13

2.1. CONCEPTUALIZATION OF DIFFERENTIATION .......................................................................................................... 13

2.2 IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENTIATION .................................................................................................................... 15
2.3. COUNTRY EXPERIENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.1.National Experience ................................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.2. International Experience ........................................................................................................................... 19
2.3.3. Summary of Lessons Learned from the Case Countries ............................................................................ 37
2.4. INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS ................................................................................................................. 43
2.4.1. Types of differentiation ............................................................................................................................ 44
2.4.2. Criteria for differentiation ........................................................................................................................ 45
2.4.3. Enabling factors ........................................................................................................................................ 46
2.4.4. Challenges ................................................................................................................................................ 47

SECTION THREE .................................................................................................................................................. 48

DEVELOPING A DIFFERENTIATION MODEL AND STANDARDS .............................................................................. 48

3.1. MODEL FOR DIFFERENTIATING HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM ................................................................................... 48

3.1.1. Characteristic Features of Higher Education System Differentiation Model ..................................... 48
3.1.2. Simulated Conceptual Model for Differentiation of Higher Education .............................................. 49
3.1.3. Description of the Model ................................................................................................................... 50
3.2. SETTING STANDARDS FOR DIFFERENTIATION OF HEIS ............................................................................................. 50
3.2.1. Types of Differentiated Higher Learning Institutions ........................................................................ 50

II
Differentiation Study Report

SECTION FOUR .............................................................................................................................................. 59

4. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................................... 59

4.1. RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................................................................. 59

4.2. SCOPE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................................................. 59
4.3. LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................................................. 59
4.4. DATA COLLECTION PROCESS .................................................................................................................................... 60
4.4.1. Data collection instruments ...................................................................................................................... 60
4.4.2 International benchmarking .................................................................................................................. 61
4.4.3 Fieldwork ........................................................................................................................................... 61
4.5 DATA ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................................. 62
4.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 62
4.7 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 62

SECTION FIVE ...................................................................................................................................................... 66

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................. 66

5.1. DATA SOURCES AND VOLUME ............................................................................................................................ 66

5.2. KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................. 68
5.3. ESTABLISHING ACTUAL MODEL FOR DESIGNATION ................................................................................................ 68
5.4. DESIGNATION OF ETHIOPIAN UNIVERSITIES IN THE DIFFERENTIATED SYSTEM .............................................................. 69
5.4.1. Research Universities ................................................................................................................................ 71
5.4.2. Universities of Applied Sciences ................................................................................................................ 73
5.4.3. Comprehensive Universities ...................................................................................................................... 75
5.5. FOCUS AREA IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................................................ 76
5.5.1 Focus Areas for Research Universities ............................................................................................... 77
5.5.2 Focus Areas for Universities of Applied Sciences ............................................................................... 79
5.5.3 Focus Areas for Comprehensive Universities ..................................................................................... 81

SECTION SIX ........................................................................................................................................................ 82

6. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ....................................................................................................... 82

6.1. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................................... 82

6.2. SUGGESTIONS ...................................................................................................................................................... 83

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 85

ANNEX .............................................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

STUDY TEAM MEMBERS ................................................................................................................................... 140

III
Differentiation Study Report

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of Lessons Learned from the Case Countries………..……….….………… 38

Table 2: Requirements for Establishing TVET Colleges……………………………..…………. 55

Table 3: Requirements for Establishing Liberal Arts Colleges………………..….……………. 56

Table 4: Requirements for Establishing Colleges of Fine Arts………………..…….…………. 58

Table 5: Data Collection Groups…………………………………………………...……………… 61

Table 6: The Five Dimension Used with Corresponding Key Indicators as a Framework.... 63

Table 7: Macro-data Units and Subjects for the Status………………………….………....…... 67

Table 8: University Functions Defined in Terms of Major Dimensions and Indicators...….. 67

Table 9: Ranking Based on U-Multi-rank Tool and Cumulative Scores………….….....……. 70

Table 10: List of Research Universities……………………………………………….………….. 73

Table 11: List of Universities of Applied Sciences………………………………..….....………. 75

Table 12: List of Comprehensive Universities……………………………..………..……...…… 76

Table 13: Scopus Classification of Bands and Band Constituents……………………………. 78

Table 14: Focus Areas in Order of Public Rank…………….…………………..………...……. 78

Table 15: Universities of Applied Sciences, Expected Future Areas of Focus, and Reasons

for Expected Areas of Focus……………….……….………….........……………….. 80

IV
Differentiation Study Report

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure1. The Progressive Choice Education System Model (Quebec)……….………………….....25

Figure 2. Exclusive Choice Education System Model (Ontario, PEI, Nova Scotia,
Newfoundland, etc.)……………………………………….……………………………………….…..… 25
Figure 3. Multiple Choice Education System Model (Alberta, British Columbia, etc.)……….... 25
Fig.4. Conceptual Model for Differentiating Higher Education ………………….………..……….49
Figure 5. U-Multi-rank Sunburst: Performance Indicators……………….……….……………….. 63
Figure 6. Adopted Differentiation Model for Ethiopian Higher Education……………………… 69

V
Differentiation Study Report

FOREWORD
As a country heading to economic,
environmental and social transformations,
intellectual capital has become the most
valuable asset of our time in Ethiopia. Our
mission as leaders of the higher education
sector is to ensure effective and efficient
system that enhance and assure quality in
education to produce self-confident,
committed to build prosperous country,
internationally competent and productive
graduates.

With a 70-year history of Higher Education

that took its birth at the establishment of the
then Addis Ababa University College in Hirut Woldemariam, Professor
1950, Ethiopia has 50 public universities Minister, the Ministry of Science and
today. Higher Education

Historically, higher education institutions in Ethiopia had tended to follow the principles of
differentiation as each one had an institutional focus area of discipline and professional field with
its teaching programs. Accordingly, the then ‘Alemaya College’ was designated to function as an
institution for Agriculture and Mechanical Arts. Similarly, ‘Bahir Dar College’ was designated to
function as a Polytechnic Institute, ‘Gondar College’ was designated for Public Health, ‘Jimma
College’ was designated for Agriculture, and ‘Kotebe College’ was designated for Teachers’
Education, etc. Through time all institutions have gradually grown into comprehensive as they
keep on adding up new programs.

The 1990s brought a significant expansion process in the higher education sector in Ethiopia.
Embarking on a higher education expansion and going through an impressive reform program,
over the last two decades, Ethiopia has transformed its higher education sector. The number of
universities has been increased from only three in 1986 to 50 public universities currently.
Likewise, the private sector has also grown significantly to have over 250 accredited private
institutions. The expansion has contributed immensely to the improvement of access to higher
education. Despite the rapid growth of the sector, however, the quality of education has been
challenged. One notable predicament has been that the institutions have gradually grown into
copies of each other. Regardless of the disparity in recourses, there has been a strong tendency
to run replicated programs across the institutions that has contributed to compromised quality of
education and depletion of our limited resources and efforts. Besides, the practice has unsighted
the institutions not to take the best out of the comparative advantage each one has in its localized
context.

VI
Differentiation Study Report

The Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MoSHE) has been introducing various reform
initiatives to the higher education system to enhance quality and to make its constituent
institutions more effective, innovative and competitive. Differentiation has been identified as a
key instrument that could open up a better opportunity to provide quality education while
promoting effective utilization of limited resources that the country has. Designating an
institution to have its own focus area can play a key role in increasing competitiveness, and
enable an institution to make the best out of its comparative advantage associated to its
respective locality. Moreover, I believe that it can provide a better drive for mobility of students
across the institutions which are located at different locations of the country. In general, there is
demand for higher-order skills and competencies, in both economic and social. Having
institutions designated to certain areas of excellence can play a key role towards ensuring quality
and relevance in our system of higher education. Based on scholarly studies, international
practices, and the qualitative and quantitative data collected from our universities, this study
designates our public universities into three categories: Research Universities, Universities of
Applied Sciences, and Comprehensive Universities. The decision has also given due attention to
the objective reality of the overall situation in our country. Within the three categories, the
universities have been further attached to certain areas of focus identified with their participation.
Based on their geographic comparative advantages, contextual factors, development potentials
and access, each university will have its own focus areas of excellence. Based on the
Implementation Strategy we have developed for this purpose, our universities will phase by
phase reshape and transit themselves into their new respective categories. I believe that
launching a differentiated higher education system in Ethiopia is a historic milestone and a step
forward that can pave the way towards creating more autonomous, innovative, and globally
competitive universities. Of course, there are no quick fixes or easy answers for tackling poor
quality in higher education as quality is a moving dynamic target, and as it depends on multiple
factors.

The efforts of many committed individuals are well recognized especially the role played and
continued determination of the leadership of the top management team, namely, Dr. Samuel
Kifle, Professor Afework Kassu, and Dr. Mulu Nega has been extraordinary. HESC has played a
significant role in making this study possible. My sincere appreciation goes to Dr. Tesfaye
Muhiye, Deputy Director of HESEC. Dr Ebba Mijena‘s role was immense in coordinating and
leading the Differentiation Study Team. Last but not least, my sincere appreciation goes to
Differentiation Study Team, international Advisory Council members, and MoSHE staff for their
valuable contribution during this document preparation and review.

With much gratitude, I urge all within our system to benefit from the globally proven and
especially tailored differentiation model that we have now embarked upon.

With my best wishes.

Hirut Woldemariam, Professor
God bless Ethiopia!
Minister, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education

II
Differentiation Study Report

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MoSHE) expresses its sincere gratitude to HESC
for taking the full responsibility in leading and coordinating the study. The Ministry also extends
its acknowledgement and gratefulness to Dr. Adula Bekele, Dr. Ephrem Tekle, Dr. Genene
Abebe, Dr. Kiros Guesh, Dr. Mekasha Kassaye, Professor Nigussie Dechassa, Dr. Tesfaye
Muhiye, Mr. Tesfaye Negewo, and Dr. Yemataw Wondie for serving as team members of the
study taskforce and providing the initial draft of this Study Report. Jimma University, Federal
TVET Institute (FTI), Aksum University, Addis Ababa University, Haramaya University,
Kotebe Metropolitan University and University of Gondar are acknowledged for allowing their
faculty and staff to participate in this study and report writing. MoSHE wishes to particularly
appreciate the collaboration of Adama Science and Technology University in hosting the study
team and facilitating the work.The MoSHE Review Team members Dr. Eba Mijena, Dr. Ephrem
Tekle, Dr. Haregewoin Fantahun, Professor Mengesha Admassu, Dr. Tesfaye Muhiye, and
Dr. Worku Negash deserve special thanks for their commitment and diligence in preparing the
Study Report for publication.

MoSHE also thanks the generous support provided by GiZ for enabling members of the task
force to participate in field visits and explore international experiences. MoSHE is grateful to the
extensive professional review of the draft document provided by MoSHE Advisory Council
members Professor Damtew Teferra, Dr. Teshome Yizengaw and Mr. Wondwosen Tamrat.

III
Differentiation Study Report



ABBREVIATIONS

AAU: Addis Ababa University

FTI: Federal TVET Institute
HESC: Higher Education Strategy Centre
HEI: Higher Education Institution
HE: Higher Education
ITEC: Integrated Technical Education Clusters
KMU: Kotebe Metropolitan University
MoSHE: Ministry of Science and Higher Education
OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
PAU: Pan African University
PSE: Post-secondary Education
TVET: Technical and Vocational Education and Training
UAS: Universities of Applied Sciences
UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

IV
Differentiation Study Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia commissioned a national

study to review the overall education system of Ethiopia in 2016 that resulted in the Education
and Training Roadmap outlining the unwavering commitment towards transformative changes
in the national education system. Among the various areas identified in the Roadmap for further
intervention and urgent policy shift was the dire need to differentiate the public universities—
which for ages have stagnated from disciplinary and mission redundancy—and transform them
to vibrant 21st century dynamic universities endowed with missions commensurate with the
critical needs of the country.

This study was coordinated by the Ethiopian Higher Education Strategy Centre (HESC), and
drew expertise and experiences of professionals from Ethiopian public universities and
international experts. This executive summary highlights findings and suggestions of the study
on Differentiation of Higher Education in Ethiopia commissioned in February 2019 by the
Federal Government through the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MoSHE).

Rationale

Ethiopian universities currently suffer from massive duplication of disciplines and academic
programs, poor quality of teaching and research, suboptimal use of resources, and lack of
innovative endeavors and competitiveness. The study revealed the need to differentiate
Ethiopian public universities based on critical evaluation of the higher education system and
lessons garnered from global perspectives.

In pursuing the differentiation of national universities, as the main objective of the study,
numerous policy imperatives were envisaged including scaling down of discipline and program
limitations, minimizing homogeneity (isomorphism), diversifying student choices and
admissions, strengthening institutional autonomy, improving the efficiency and quality of
teaching and research, and advancing community engagement.

Methodology

Primary data were collected through field-based questionnaires, benchmarking of seasoned

1
Differentiation Study Report

institutions in Europe, and several rounds of public consultative workshops involving a wide
range of stakeholders including university presidents, members of the university change
councils, academic and professional staff, student representatives, relevant Ministries, and
university communities at large. Furthermore, secondary data were drawn from extensive
literature review that includes diverse experiences in institutional differentiation from 13
countries around the world. The U-multi-rank standard university ranking model and Scopus
publication data were also contextually adapted to identify public universities based on their
mission and focus areas. The methodology provided data and information that guided
suggestions for differentiation Ethiopian public universities.

Major Results

Following findings of the study and a thorough consideration of international practices, a three-
category differentiation system is suggested, viz.1) Research universities 2) Universities of
Applied Sciences and 3) Comprehensive universities. The table below presents the three
categories along with their separate macro-level mission.

Type of university Macro level mission

1 Research Universities Undertaking research and teaching with special focus on graduate
studies.

2 Universities of Undertaking professional, practice-oriented teaching and research;

Applied Sciences focusing on bachelor, and master programs, and sometimes
professional and work-based doctorate.

3 Comprehensive Teaching and research in equal proportions.

Universities

The study and its subsequent suggestions are not exercising or advocating for university
rankings. The study simply tried to categorize and differentiate public universities along their
missions and areas of focus without regard to value or status. The full understanding of this
practice is highly critical to avoid undue confusion and misconception. Apart from the criteria
developed from U-multi-rank standard, data from the Scopus database, the current state of the
university, its local (zonal) considerations and its future potential were aptly considered in
determining its respective category.

2
Differentiation Study Report

The study covered 43 of the 46 universities under the umbrella of MOSHE. Addis Ababa
Science and Technology University and Adama Science and Technology University were not
included in the study as they are considered specialized universities. Borena University is
categorized in the end but, was not included in the study since it was established after the study
was commissioned.

3
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1. General Background

The growing social demand for access to higher education has placed tremendous pressure on the
system in particular and governments in general. Students enter universities with wide ranging
interests, objectives, purposes, and enormous variation in prior preparation, cultural orientation,
and economic resources. Stakeholders, including governments and communities, demand better
quality, increased choice and specialization, effective teaching and preparation of quality
graduates, and leadership in innovation and research. These global experiences strongly suggest
that transformation of the existing higher education institutions and future expansions need to be
guided by principles of diversification and differentiation.

Higher education in Ethiopia started in the 1950s with the establishment of Addis Ababa
University College which became Haile Selassie I University and later renamed as Addis Ababa
University in 1975. Access to higher education has remained limited until the late 1990s. The
Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) was 0.2% until around 1990, among the lowest in the world at the
time. Since 1996, Ethiopia embarked on several higher education sector reforms including
expansion of access in different parts of the country, improving equity and quality, and
enhancing the supply of quality graduates for the economy.

In 2003, GER stood at 0.8% against 4% average for Sub-Saharan Africa (World Bank, 2003).
According to MoSHE’s latest data the GER has reached 13.8% in 2020. This is still low
compared to many African and developing countries. Since 1996, Ethiopia embarked on several
higher education sector reforms to expand access, improve equity, and enhance supply of
quality graduates for the economy (Saint, 2003). One of the major goals of these reforms was
expanding access to higher education. The purpose was to make universities focus on degree
programs. This resulting in a considerable increase in the number of public universities, which
rose significantly between 1996 and 2005 (Yizengaw, 2003; Alemneh, 2007) to reaching 50 in
2019.

4
Differentiation Study Report

The considerable expansion of education in Ethiopia was spurred by government interest in
increasing access to and equity of education to the populace as well as producing qualified and
skilled manpower for driving socio-economic development. Consequently, the country has
registered considerable successes in terms of enhancing access to education to its citizens and
producing graduates at all levels of qualification. This has been achieved through building a
greater number of primary and secondary schools as well as establishing many TVETs and
universities in a relatively short span of time.

However, the expansion of higher education in Ethiopia and the establishment of new ones were
based on mere duplication of governing and management structures, academic programs,
curricula, course content and teaching-learning practices. This has resulted in duplication of
programs and institutional structures, lack of diversity of disciplines and institutional practices
which indicate a high level of isomorphism (uniformity or homogeneity). There appears to be
an element of mimetic isomorphism in Ethiopian higher education system, which stems from
uncertainty from poorly understood specific missions and goals that induce universities to
imitate the work of senior and successful universities. There is also an element of normative
isomorphism, which results in homogeneity as a result of conservative professionalization,
manifested by resistance to emergence of new academic disciplines as a result of strong affinity
and interest in maintaining their own familiar disciplines (Vught, 2007).

A homogeneous higher education system is thought to be less responsive to the diverse needs of
the labor market; less agile to address student interest, less client-oriented, and largely
ineffective. Furthermore, it appears to dampen creativity and innovativeness and leans more
toward conservatism in Ethiopian Higher Education Institutions in the process becoming
oblivious to the shifting needs of society, industry, and the economy. The traditional university
model with a strong academic orientation can only meet the needs and aspirations of a small
segment of the students. Such realities glaringly underscore the need for differentiated system of
higher education, if impact on employment and socioeconomic status is desired (Altbach,
Reisberg & de Wit, 2017). The expansion of higher education coupled with the needs of the
global knowledge economy has necessitated an increased diversification and differentiation in
the higher education landscape.

5
Differentiation Study Report

The current system of higher education in Ethiopia is far from viable considering the urgency to
drive national development as well as the dynamic pace of the global economic imperatives. The
ever-growing rate of unemployment and underemployment in the country could be attributed to
this homogenization that hinders graduates from securing commensurate skills and competencies
required by the labor market. The way forward is to turn the isomorphic system of higher
education into a coherent, diverse and integrated system of quality higher education through
differentiation. What needs to be clearly understood is that differentiating a higher education
system is an enormous political commitment that requires public understanding and active
support, sustained resource, meticulous strategic and implementation plans, and clear guidance
and leadership.

This study was, therefore, commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education to
generate information on the differentiation of higher education in Ethiopia. The Study evaluated
higher education institutions and the current system in the country, conducted detailed literature
review and online research, and drew lessons from global higher education systems through
review of systems in 13 countries and experience sharing visits. Primary data were collected
through field-based administration of questionnaires, and secondary data through extensive
literature review. Public consultative workshops were conducted involving a wide range of
stakeholders in the higher education sector including university presidents, members of the
university change councils, academic staff, student representatives, state ministers of education,
and university communities at large.

It must be clear that the study was not conducted to rank higher education institutions of
Ethiopia. Rather, it was conducted to enable public universities to become autonomous,
accountable, innovative and globally competitive by honing their profile, circumstances,
resources and surroundings.

1.2. Historical Background of Ethiopian Higher Education System

Ethiopia is a country with centuries old traditional education system. However, modern secular
higher education was introduced into the country only as recently as 1950 with the
establishment of its first higher education institution - Addis Ababa University College.
Subsequent to Addis Ababa University College, other higher education and training institutions

6
Differentiation Study Report

continued to open, including Jimma College of Agriculture (1952), Addis Ababa College of
Engineering (1953), Addis Ababa Building Institute (1954), Alemaya College of Agriculture
and Mechanical Arts (1954), Gondar College of Public Health and Training Center (1954),
Kotebe College of Teacher Education (1969), College of Urban Planning (1970), and Bahir Dar
Teachers College (1972). In 1961 Addis Ababa University College became Haile Selassie I
University.

Between 1974 and the late 1990s, two more universities were established. Founded by an Italian
missionary group in 1958, University of Asmara (AU) became a public university in 1979. Also
established were Awasa College of Agriculture (1976), Wondogenet College of Forestry (1977),
Bahir Dar Polytechnique Institute (1978), Addis Ababa College of Commerce (1979). Alemaya
College of Agriculture was upgraded to Alemaya University of Agriculture (the current
Haramaya University) in May 1985 (UNESCO, 1988; Wagaw, 1990). Other junior colleges and
institutes were also established throughout the country - Jimma Institute of Health Sciences
(1982), and Arba Minch Water Technology Institute (1986).And by the end of 1980s, Ethiopia
had three public universities, about 16 colleges and six research institutions, but not a single
private higher education institution until the late 1990s.

In 1986/87, there were a total of 17,831 students in the three universities and other colleges and
institutes (UNESCO, 1988). Another important development of this period was the
establishment of the School of Graduate Studies in AAU in 1978, intended mainly to train
academic staff for the HEIs of the country (UNESCO, 1988; Yizengaw, 2003).

Per the Education and Training Policy (MoE, 1994) the Ethiopian Government supported and
encouraged private provision of higher education in late 1990s. In two decades, the number of
accredited private HEIs (with undergraduate programs and above) rose to 250, enrolling over
17% of the total tertiary education student body (MoE, 2018).

Based on aspirations outlined in the Ethiopian Education and Training Policy of 1994 and
several Education Sector Development Plans developed and executed by the Ministry of
Education, the 1990s and early 2000s became a period of extensive expansion and restructuring
(system overhaul) of higher education in Ethiopia. The expansion and reform of higher
education was aimed at increased access and equity; increased number of graduates; and
improved student mobility across the country and enhanced socio-cultural exchanges among

7
Differentiation Study Report

students. In 2003, the first Higher Education Proclamation (Number 351/2003) in the country
was promulgated.

In addition to national policies and development strategies, the expansion and reform in higher
education in Ethiopia was informed by new directions pursued by UNESCO and the World
Bank. For example, the 1998 UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education sought the
commitment of member states to strengthen HE institutions in accordance with the socio-
economic transformations required for national competitiveness in the globalized economy
(UNESCO, 1988). Towards the end of the 1990s, the Ethiopian government turned its attention
to redefining the mission and organization of higher education in line with national development
goals and poverty reduction strategies. With substantial investment, the government of Ethiopia
embarked on a major program to expand access to higher education, including the expansion of
graduate programs. Accordingly, in 1999, the government commenced its higher education
system expansion program by announcing the establishment of four new regional universities,
namely: Bahir Dar, Debub, Jimma, and Mekelle (FDRE, 1999 a, b, c, d). Upgrading of existing
colleges and establishing new institutions continued in the subsequent years and, in a span of
less than 20 years, the number of public universities increased from two in 1998 to 50 in
2018/19 (MoE, 2018). There are now more than 250 accredited non-government higher
education institutions in the country (MoE, 2018).

For the most part, the history of public universities in Ethiopia has witnessed a steady growth in
enrolment rate. Starting with an intake of 974 students at the establishment of the national
university in 1961, overall enrolment reached 825,003 in 2017/18 (MoE, 2018). The gross
enrolment rate which was below 1% two decades ago, has reached 10.8% in the 2017/18
academic year (MoE, 2018). The education access rate of female students has also gradually
increased, from 20% in 2003/04 to 34% in 2017/18 (MoE, 2017). However, for the most part,
public universities have been exhibiting an increasing level of similarity between them in their
educational provisions and overall direction.

It is necessary that the system begins to accommodate some elements of differentiation if it is to

respond to national needs and development imperatives as well as global competitiveness.
Among others, differentiation in the Ethiopian context is designed to make universities focus on
teaching and research in disciplines where they have particular strengths than handling a cocktail

8
Differentiation Study Report

of disciplines by overstretching themselves to the extent of becoming inefficient and
unproductive. Through differentiation, universities are envisaged to become more efficient,
successful and creative. It should, however, be noted that differentiation requires careful
planning, sustained commitment, thorough implementation, enabling policy framework, follow-
through and evaluation of implemented strategies for further improvement. Ethiopia should learn
from successes and failures of other systems to minimize letdowns as it embarks on
implementing differentiation in its higher education system.

1.3. Justifications for Differentiating the Higher Education System in Ethiopia

Despite the efforts made in the last two decades to expand higher education, there is limited
diversification among public universities in their mission, vision, governance structure, student
admission policy, core activities and disciplinary mix which characterizes their academic
programs. Regardless of their differences in resources and capacities, public and private
universities have also been required to deliver quality teaching, research and community service.
The rapid expansion of HEIs and the resultant massive undergraduate enrolment in Ethiopia has
resulted, in part, in the enrolment of low performing students and short supply of qualified
academic staff especially in Science and Technology fields (Salmi, 2017). Expansion of higher
learning institutions with homogeneity and duplication of academic programs in Ethiopia has
jeopardized the relevance of higher education (Tassew et al., 2017). The existing and newly
emerged public universities tend to be ‘comprehensive’ universities offering a bit of everything
(Ashcroft and Rayner, 2011 in Tassew, et al., 2017). In order to address the challenges of
homogeneity and duplication of academic programs and improve focus and quality, it has
become imperative to assess the current status of higher education and design mechanisms for
introducing the concept of differentiation in the Ethiopian HE system. Differentiation might be
necessary to improve quality and effectiveness and make universities more focused on teaching
and research in disciplines where they have particular strength and where there is national
development interest.

The present advancements, both at national and institutional levels, demonstrate the sector’s need
to orient towards a new frontier and build a more responsive, focused and quality HE system. A
variety of practical suggestions have been made since the early 2000s, if not even earlier,

9
Differentiation Study Report

towards the creation of a differentiated system in Ethiopia. The fifth Education Sector
Development Program - ESDP V (MoE, 2015) and, in particular, the Education and Training
Roadmap of Ethiopia (MoE, 2018) acknowledge the values and need for a distinguished HE
system. Beyond recognizing the benefits of promoting institutional quality and competitiveness,
the envisaged Roadmap illustrates the need for planning multiple approaches of “differentiation”
based on program offerings, functional focus, institutional status, student composition, variation
in student abilities, sources of budget or diversity of institutions, and so on.

Tackling the current homogeneity observed in the Ethiopian higher education system is vital in
order to succeed in producing qualified and skilled manpower that can drive the development
process in the country. This requires diversifying the system both vertically and horizontally.
Differentiation requires an in-depth review of current institutions, their relative strength,
aspiration, institutional culture, resources, and local advantages. The task demands expert
knowledge, long-term vision and engagement of relevant stakeholders. Therefore, differentiating
the higher education system should be undertaken to meet the overall vision of national
development and produce an internationally competitive labor force that supports the present
shift towards the development of a knowledge society.

Differentiation would lead to a condition whereby individual institutions will focus their
attention and energy more on disciplines in which they have potential strength and comparative
advantages. The universities will be able to invest their limited resources in disciplines where
they have already accumulated strong experience, expertise, and facilities rather than engaging
themselves in teaching a cocktail of replicated disciplines at varied and low-quality standards.

A more differentiated system is expected to better accommodate higher education students with
different educational backgrounds and academic achievements. It also increases the level of
effectiveness of higher education institutions and allows higher education institutions to focus
and innovate. Students could find an educational environment in which chances for success are
higher, with better prospects for social mobility and transfer.

As stated earlier, differentiation could reduce and eventually eliminate the discipline mimicry
and homogeneity in fields of study among Ethiopian higher learning institutions and make them
focus on teaching and research efforts in disciplines in which they have historical strength and

10
Differentiation Study Report

comparative advantages for effectiveness. It also has the potential to guide and encourage the
opening of new disciplines that are currently in demand for the socio-economic development of
the country. In a differentiated system, higher learning institutions in Ethiopia will have
opportunities to develop their own specific mission and profile based on national priorities and
create a higher education system in which different types of institutions co-exist and exploit
synergies for effectiveness; with enhanced academic freedom, greater institutional autonomy,
and accountability, as well as national and global competitiveness.

1.4. Objectives

The major objective of this differentiation study is to enable public HEIs to realize their potential
in order to support and lead the socio-economic development of Ethiopia through the advantages
of differentiation. More specifically, the study intends to:

a. Review the higher education institutions (HEIs) and overall system in Ethiopia, in terms of
program types, institutional structures and missions, and overall teaching and research
activities.
b. Collect and analyze data through field-based administration of questionnaires, and a detailed
literature review and online research on differentiation of higher education.
c. Produce a document that could serve as a background source for policy recommendations
and implementation of differentiation of higher education in Ethiopia.

1.5. Expected outcomes

This Differentiation Study Report is intended to produce evidence and experiences that inform
policy decision on the introduction and implementation of differentiation of the higher education
system in Ethiopia. The Report will assist the MoSHE to develop policy documents, and
implementation strategies and plans.

1.6. Limitations of the study

The study focused on guiding differentiation of public higher educational institutions in Ethiopia.
However, it has some limitations, and these include:

11
Differentiation Study Report

 • Although the study focused on public higher education institutions, it did not include all.
The two science and technology universities, viz., Addis Ababa Science and Technology
University and Adama Science and Technology University were not included in the
study.
• The study did not include private higher education institutions in Ethiopia.
• Technical and Vocational Colleges are not part of this study and its recommendations.
• The study has not discussed issues related to articulation among and between higher
education institutions, nationally or internationally.
• The study has reviewed systems in only 13 countries, and the global experience is not
exhaustive enough.

1.7. Structure of the document

This study is organized under six sections. The first introductory section presents the general and
historical background, justification for differentiation and the objectives of the study. Section
two reviews relevant literature including international experiences from selected thirteen
countries and one institution – the African Union’s Pan African University. Section three offers a
tentative model developed from the reviews conducted and sets differentiation standards and
categories. In section four, the study methodology is offered while section five presents the
results of the study. Finally, section six outlines the conclusions and suggestions drawn in the
setting up of a differentiated HE system in the Ethiopian context.

12
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE

2.1. Conceptualization of Differentiation

Meaning

Differentiation in higher education refers to the increasingly different functions and expanding
roles that higher education plays, and the institutions, systems and organizational structures that
are set up to coordinate and govern the expanding and complex reality (Teichler, 2002). It is a
process whereby distinct types of tertiary institutions progressively emerge in response to a
country’s need for educational programs that provide diverse types of skills and knowledge to a
wide range of students with divergent interests and abilities (Saint, 2000; Ne’gethe et al., 2008).
It is also a purposeful means to achieve a desired state of diversity through the active exercise of
judgment and a strategy for spending existing resources with greater impact and better outcomes
(Gibbon 2011; Hicks and Jonker, 2016).

Differentiation versus other concepts

Concepts like diversity and articulation appear synonymous with differentiation. Even if these
two concepts have some things in common with differentiation, they are quite different. The
distinctions between the three are presented below.

Differentiation Diversification Articulation

Differentiation is a process Diversity is a term that Articulation refers to the

whereby distinct types of indicates the variety of entities mechanism that enable student
tertiary institutions within a system mobility within and among the
progressively emerge institutions

Differentiation denotes a Diversity refers to a static Articulation relates to the

dynamic process situation horizontal and vertical
linkages between institutions
and programs

13
Differentiation Study Report

Differentiation is the process Diversity refers to the variety
in which new entities in a of the entities at a specific
system emerge point in time

Differentiation is a concept that should be distinct from a concept of diversity. Diversity is a term
indicating the variety of entities within a system. While differentiation denotes a dynamic
process, diversity refers to a static situation. While differentiation is the process in which new
entities in a system emerge, diversity refers to the variety of the entities at a specific point in time
(Huisman, 1995). The concept of diversity is further illustrated as “the existence of distinct
forms of post-secondary education, of institutions and groups of institutions within a state or
nation that have different and distinctive missions, educate and train for different lives and
careers, have different styles of instruction, are organized and funded and operated under
different laws and relationships to government (Trow, 1995 in Meek et al., 2000).

Another related term to the concept of differentiation is articulation. It refers to the mechanisms
that enable student mobility within and among the institutions that comprise the tertiary system,
for example, academic credit accumulation and transfer, recognition and equivalency of degrees,
recognition of prior learning, and so forth (Ng’ethe et al., 2008). In addition to this, articulation
relates to the horizontal and vertical linkages between institutions, programs and levels in a
sector (Harris, 1996). Differentiated HE system assumes the putting in place of effective
articulation mechanisms.

Types and Strategies

Differentiation processes operate at different levels: they can be internal and external. Internal
differentiation refers to ascribed functions within an individual higher education institution. It
means the development of different function and service areas within a higher education
institution such as the creation of specific segments of further education(Huisman,
1995).External differentiation implies diversification among HEIs. It leads to different missions
and profiles of each institution, together forming a diversified higher education system. External
differentiation could be both vertical and horizontal. “Vertical differentiation” relates to a
hierarchical differentiation of higher education institutions in terms of their performance and
quality, usually reduced to the dimension of achievements in research (The German Council of

14
Differentiation Study Report

Science and Humanity, 2010); whereas the concept of “horizontal differentiation” assumes
multiple functions of higher education institutions in different dimensions. In a horizontally
differentiated higher education system, not all higher education institutions focus on one single
dimension of performance (e.g. research) but profiles of higher education institutions develop,
according to social demands and needs and the dynamics of sciences, which focus on their own
specializations (e.g. practice-orientated training, leading-edge research, distance learning
programs, focusing on one sector of society such as sports, the arts, one scientific field as
technical universities do) (The German Council of Science and Humanity, 2010). Horizontal
differentiation also involves the development of special organizational forms such as university
foundations under public law.

A variety of strategies can be pursued in differentiating an existing higher education system. The
most common approaches are: creation of new institutions, merging or amalgamation of existing
institutions, splitting of existing institutions, and establishing new institutions (Lloyd et al., 2004;
Kyvik S., 2004).

2.2 Importance of Differentiation

Differentiation could lead to different missions and profiles of each institution, together forming
a diversified higher education system. When differentiated, the various forms of institutions co-
exist in a synchronized manner. It is very important to underline the fact that differentiation is
not an end in itself, but a means to align or harmonize societal requirements of an academic
system with the intrinsic logic of science and higher education institutions (The German Council
of Science and Humanity, 2010). Effective implementation of a differentiation policy in a
country’s post-secondary education system has been associated with a number of statements of
significance.

First, differentiation opens up innovative ideas to a system that normally suffers from stagnation
and lack of innovativeness. Differentiation helps to open up new universities with new mandates
to deal with emerging trends or help already existing higher education institutions to make
internal differentiation that would help them to cope with new developments.

Second, increased differentiation in terms of learners has the advantages of helping them choose
the right university (with broader choices in both graduate and undergraduate levels) that would

15
Differentiation Study Report

help them meet their aspirations. It creates a conducive environment for easy and flexible
mobility (for example, through system-wide credit transfer) when they need to. It has the
advantage of transitions between universities (Weingarten and Deller, 2010). It encourages a
heterogonous student population to rise by attracting students of different needs and interests.

Third, differentiation helps the government (Weingarten and Deller, 2010) as one of the
“powerful levers” especially when a country is challenged with limited resources, and allocation
of these resources for prioritized national agenda with the highest possible quality,
accountability, and sustainability.

Fourth, differentiation has the power to increase institutions’ effectiveness and national and
international competitiveness. It aspires to make clear missions and functions, encouraging
distinctions between HEIs, thereby creating strong HEIs which can stand scrutiny in the context
of international competitiveness and collaborations.

Fifth, for the wider taxpaying public, differentiation would bring HEIs into closer scrutiny as to
the proper utilization of public funds, among many others, and that would lead to an increased
transparency in terms of good governance and effective use of resources. Within a wider context,
differentiation is believed to bring higher quality in teaching and research activities in
universities, which in the end accelerates a nation’s development. It serves as a focus strategy
such that a university can target a specific niche to cater to its clientele (Bordes, 2009).

Sixth, differentiation paves the way for diversity that permits crucial combination of elite and
mass higher education. Mass systems tend to be more diversified than elite systems, as mass
systems absorb a more heterogeneous clientele and attempt to respond to a wider range of
demands from the labor market (Trow, 1979).

2.3. Country experiences

2.3.1.National Experience

In the beginnings of the higher education system in Ethiopia, universities and colleges were
established with more or less specialized disciplines, missions as well as levels of qualification in
tiers (diploma, degrees). These included Alemaya University of Agriculture (now Haramaya
University), Kotebe College of Teacher Education (now Kotebe Metropolitan University), Bahir

16
Differentiation Study Report

Dar Polytechnique Institute (now Bahir Dar University), Gondar Public Health College and
Training Center (now University of Gondar). Owing to the expansion drive that started in the
mid 1990s, these higher learning institutions became multi-disciplinary universities. As new
universities were established, they merely duplicated the same programs, curricula,
organizational structures of existing universities, resulting in institutional homogeneity. These
newly established universities not only overstretched themselves to imitate older universities but
have also been producing as many graduates as possible, albeit with hugely compromised quality
despite inflated academic achievements of the graduates.

Although better access and increased graduation rates have been demonstrated, the
dedifferentiation and its consequences in creating homogeneity have become a concern. One of
the impacts is low level competencies on the part of graduates expressed in terms of knowledge,
skill, and attitude. The other is the employability gap of graduates. The third is the meager
national resources expressed in human, material, and financial terms which in combination
repress excellence in a given area of discipline.

The expansion of the higher education system led to a high enrolment rate and admission of
students with diverse abilities and talents into similar programs of study, apparently reducing the
success rates and graduate competencies. Furthermore, it is clear that there is tenuous research
infrastructure, weak integration of teaching and research, poor linkage of research findings to the
community, and low capacity of universities to solve problems of industries and undeveloped
university-industry linkage, which resulted from lack of focus (Tassew, et al., 2017). Such are
the reasons why Ethiopia needs to focus on differentiating its higher education system in order to
mitigate these and related challenges and make the entire system responsive to new
developments and changes.

It is important to acknowledge the positive strides made in creating the two technology
universities, namely, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University (AASTU) and Adama
Science and Technology University (ASTU), which, at least in principle, would be different from
the rest of the public universities. AASTU and ASTU are slated to be sufficiently different from
other technology institutions hosted by other public universities. They are expected to excel in
research and advanced teaching orientation while catering to the widely diverse talents of
students.

17
Differentiation Study Report

The government encourages universities to specialize in some disciplines and establish Centers
of Excellence. Institute of International Coffee Research, Plant and Animal Biotechnology
Research Center and Biomedical Healthcare Innovation Center at Jima University; Renewable
Energy Technology Research Center and Biodiversity and Cultural Diversity Research Centre at
Arba Minch University; Blue Nile Water Institute, Textile and Garment Research Center, and
Energy Research Center at Bahir Dar University; Plant Health Innovation Lab at Hawassa
University; Institute of Mountain Studies, Institute of Climate and Society and Institute of Paleo-
environment and Heritage Conservation at Mekele University are examples of moves towards
centers of excellence. Furthermore, Addis Ababa University has recently launched specialized
programs in water technology, pharmacy, and railway engineering. Haramaya University has
launched specialized programs in Climate Smart Agriculture and Biodiversity Conservation.

In terms of academic programs, while most universities provide education in almost all
disciplines, some appear to have some areas of strength. For example, Mekelle University is a
leader in dry land agriculture and engineering; Addis Ababa, Jimma and Gondar Universities are
reputed for their programs in medicine and health sciences, and Arbaminch, Addis Ababa, and
Bahir Dar Universities are nationally known for their water technology, engineering and
education programs, respectively.

The specific areas of strength and leadership toward developing centers of excellence guide the
effort to differentiate the higher education institutions in the country at national (as prescribed in
ESDPV) and university levels. Until now, however, with the exception of Addis Ababa and
Adama Science and Technology Universities, all Ethiopian public universities are
comprehensive universities. In general, in Ethiopia, the enrolment expansion of higher education
system has not been accompanied by any significant differentiation in institutional governance,
course offerings, admission requirements, or qualifications. Rather, all courses have been
harmonized to consolidate homogeneity and institutional isomorphism.

Institutional and program differentiation is necessary, not only for broadening the array of
courses available to learners, but also for responding to the diverse skill needs of employers and
the job market. Differentiation takes place when autonomous institutions make different choices,
in particular with regard to their institutional mission, curricular emphasis, admission

18
Differentiation Study Report

requirements, staff qualifications, financing mechanisms, and governance arrangements (N’gethe
et al., 2008).

The social demand for higher education in Ethiopia will continue to rise sharply given the high
rate of population as well as economic growth. Experience infers that the effort to establish new
higher education institutions should continue, but care should be taken to address the diverse
student needs and enhance their employability profile in the highly competitive job market; and
fulfil the contemporary and dynamic socio-economic development needs of the country.

2.3.2. International Experience

In the following sections, international experiences in implementing differentiation in the higher

education sector, opportunities it brings to the educational system and potential challenges that
may inhibit the implementation of differentiation are briefly discussed.

The historical trajectories of many countries suggest that the expansion of higher education is
often increasingly connected to institutional differentiation. Processes of institutional
differentiation have various origins and consequences and are driven by complementary and
sometimes conflicting social, political, economic, and cultural rationales which strongly
influence the shape of higher education systems around key distinctive categories such as
elite/non-elite, public/private, vocational/academic and more recently face to face/online
modalities.

Differentiation at its best aspires to reduce unnecessary duplication by assigning each institution
distinct strategic mandates, research profiles, and academic programs (Weingarten & Deller,
2010). It promotes efficiency and effectiveness through incentivizing mechanisms so that each
institution is able to fully exploit its contextual strengths.

The World Bank’s taskforce on higher education recommends a stratified system that marries the
goals of excellence and mass education, allowing both to be achieved within a single system
using limited resources. A stratified system comprises one tier that is oriented toward research
and selectivity, and another tier that imparts a more general tertiary level education to larger
number of students (World Bank 2000). Differentiation and articulation become important
characteristics within tertiary education systems for those that need to shift from elite to mass

19
Differentiation Study Report

access, and those seeking to provide an increasingly sophisticated national economy with the mix
of human resources needed to maximize productivity, efficiency, and overall competitiveness
(Ng’ethe et al., 2008).

In countries where attempts were made to introduce differentiation into postsecondary education
systems, certain paths of differentiation, which we may call modes of differentiation, were
adopted. These modes are ways they use to classify or differentiate their higher education
institutions in general. Some countries divided their postsecondary education (PSE) into simply
teaching and non-teaching-oriented institutions, whereas others designate them academic,
vocational and technical universities or HEIs. In South Africa, for example, PSE is divided into
traditional universities, universities of technology, and comprehensive universities (Department
of Higher Education and Training, 2014).

For the last 50 years, there has been a search for the right mix of equivalence and diversity in
HEIs. On the one hand, higher education institutions should offer equivalent academic standards;
at the same time, there is need for diversity among higher education institutions due to different
expectations from students and other stakeholders, institutional profiles and capacities. In most
Western countries, enrolment started increasing rapidly towards the end of the 1960s. As a result,
HEIs faced the challenges of accommodating the significant growth in number of students within
the existing higher education system. Trow (1979, 2000) identified three phases in the evolution
of higher education: elite system (where participation is less than 15% of the age group), mass
higher education (participation rate of between 15 - 50%), and universal higher education (with
participation of more than 50%).

One serious challenge in mass higher education boils down to the issue of diversity. It became
clear that increasing student numbers cannot be accommodated by simply expanding the existing
elite higher education system. Different countries dealt with the situation somewhat differently.
Many countries established a parallel sector in the higher education system and channeled the
majority of the growth into the new, cheaper, non-university sector. In the 1960s and 1970s
binary systems emerged - such as polytechnics in the UK, Fachhochschulen in Germany, and
Colleges of Advanced Education in Australia. Sometimes the new sector obtained a higher
education status only later. These schools had a distinct characteristic in providing education
with a professional orientation and the cost per student was in general lower than in traditional

20
Differentiation Study Report

universities. The binary system was popular because it allowed handling of the expansion
without much effect on the traditional university sector (Teichler, 2009).

Traditionally, universities in most European countries are perceived as equal in terms of

qualifications they offer to students, and in general performance. Such egalitarianism, however,
was recently put under scrutiny, because current discussions distinguish between horizontal and
vertical diversity. Horizontal diversity means that there are different types of institutions with
their own mission and profile, but they are equal on the higher education landscape (Maarja and
Hans, 2009). Vertical diversity refers to a hierarchy of universities, where diversity is interpreted
as one university being better than the other. In simplified terms the distinction is between
egalitarian models of the continental Europe versus hierarchical model of the United States.

It has become evident that universities in egalitarian systems cannot compete for top positions in
international university rankings, which are led by more hierarchical higher education systems
(USA and UK). Several countries have now undertaken initiatives to create an “elite” group of
universities in their countries that receive more funding and preferential treatment in order to
develop a designation of a “World Class” university. For instance, the Excellence Initiative in
Germany distributes 1.6 billion Euro of additional funding for excellence, about half of which
goes to highly competitive institutions to build up a top-level research profile that could compete
at the world level. Similar initiatives are in place in France and Finland, but also outside of
Western Europe, such as China and Russia (Maarja and Hans, 2009).

In a number of countries, Open Universities play an important role by accommodating the

demand for higher education in a relatively flexible and open way. Most open universities
predominantly offer distance education many of them as an alternative to regular higher
education offerings such as the Open University in UK and the Fern Universität Haagen in
Germany.

Recent writers on social stratification have increasingly regarded fields of study in secondary and
postsecondary education as not just a form of horizontal differentiation to which persons are
allocated on the basis of diverse interests, but a type of vertical differentiation linked to unequal
status origins and tied to unequal labor market outcomes (e.g. Kim, Tamborini & Sakamoto,
2015; Triventi, Vergolini & Zanini, 2017; Zarifa, 2012).

21
Differentiation Study Report

In an attempt to gain more insight into the higher education system of different countries and
learn lessons for improving our own, we have briefly presented below the experiences of some
selected countries.

North and Latin America

2.3.2.1 The United States of America

In general, there are three-tiered higher education differentiated systems in the USA. These are
research universities (focusing on discovery and innovation research), state universities (focusing
on knowledge transfer and research), and community colleges (which are characterized by open
admission, most humane and engaged in assessing, enhancing and promoting adults).

In the US higher education system, for example, one of the youngest teaching and research
universities, Arizona State University, was re-conceptualized through a new design process akin
to business reengineering of the university. The most important undertaking in the differentiation
process was a comprehensive re-evaluation of its academic organization and operations in a
move towards making the university a model “New American University” with a heightened
commitment to egalitarianism, academic excellence, access and maximum societal impact.

The other model is the state differentiation of California. California public universities are
categorized into three higher education systems: The University of California (UC), the
California State University (CSU), and the California Community Colleges (CCC) with
responsibilities of offering academic and vocational instruction (Weingarten, & et al., 2010).
Each system has a unique mission. UC, for example, is designated as the State’s premier public
academic research system. The California Master Plan for Education stipulates that 12.5% of the
graduating high school seniors should be granted admission to one of the 10 University of
California campuses (such as Berkeley, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, etc.). The top
third performers are to join one of the 23 California State University campuses, while all other
applicants are welcome to join any of the 114 community college campuses. The marvel of the
community college system is that it does not reject adult student applicants but trains them all to
qualify, based on their individual choice and performance, for a specific academic or vocational
program. It should be noted here that in California, there are a number of private and
independent higher educational institutions jointly responsible for graduating almost 74% of the

22
Differentiation Study Report

total number of graduates in the State. The California higher education system has been
evaluated as the world leader in especially tackling access and quality issues (Weingarten, & et
al., 2010).

2.3.2.2. Canada

In Canada, the Ontario universities’ research identified four university clusters: the
internationally competitive University of Toronto, six research-intensive universities, nine
mostly undergraduate universities and four “in-between” institutions (Martin and Linda, 2016).

Key principles are set to guide the on-going differentiation process as it transitions into a firmly
differentiated sector (Weingarten, & et al., 2010). Key principles include:

• Teaching, research and community service or that all HEIs have equal value.
• Public funding/national budget allocation to HEIs must be based on government
differentiation plans or differentiation policy framework.
• There should be mission-based relation and collaboration between HEIs.
• There should be cohesiveness in the entire higher education system as a holistic system,
both at system and operational levels.
• There should be evaluation of universities to ensure they meet their expected institutional
goals and missions, based on preset standards and indicators.
• HEIs should be accountable to achieve their objectives and properly utilize their allocated
public funds through rigorous and reliable evaluation or assessment process.
• There must be an agreement between the government and public HEIs on academic
excellence, student enrolment, mix of programs and their expansion, and teaching and
research.
• Government may allocate budget on an incremental basis for excelling HEIs or remove
funding totally based on results of periodic evaluations.
• HEIs should exploit their potential strengths (including socio-geographical advantages)
and niche areas of expertise (endemic knowledge, skills and abilities to the given HEI).
• The government should remain vigilant to emerging issues affecting differentiation to
address them in a timely manner.

23
Differentiation Study Report

What is more, specific principles as regards the relationship between funding and differentiation
are stated below:

• Funding should be tied to desired outcomes (outcome-based, based on mission

statements)
• Public fund should be used effectively, efficiently, and accountably.
• There should be competitions between universities for funding based on their mandates
and the agreement they enter with government.
• HEIs must show some visible or proven commitment for utilizing the fund they are
competing for.
• HEIs are either entitled to an incremental or progressive funding or not entitled to it at all.
A proposal, a model of differentiation called “axes of differentiation”, (Weingarten, & et al.,
2010; Harvey and Fiona, 2010)) has been made to differentiate universities and other HEIs as
outlined below. It should be remarked that the classification made is not mutually exclusive.

• Structural differentiation (based on structure) such as size (large/small), funding

(private/public), and mandate (graduate, undergraduate or mixed).
• Programmatic differentiation (based on program), such as research intensive, teaching
intensive (normal universities), technical/vocational, and comprehensive.
• Modality of delivery or institution modality, such as on-line university, residential
university, and co-op or traditional university.
• Institutional status (based on rankings of some kind), such as prestigious, and less
prestigious (category 1, category 2, etc.).
• Based on the composition of student population, such as bilingual universities,
Anglophone, Francophone, and denominational colleges.

As indicated below, Figures 1,2,3, provinces other than Ontario in Canada have tended to use
one of the three models of differentiation; namely, the Progressive Choice Education System
Model (Quebec), the Exclusive Choice Education System Model (Ontario, PEI, Nova Scotia,
Newfoundland, etc.), and the Multiple Choice Education System Model (Alberta, British
Columbia, etc.)

24
Differentiation Study Report

Figure1. The Progressive Choice Education System Model (Quebec)

Figure 2. Exclusive Choice Education System Model (Ontario, PEI, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland,
etc.)

Figure 3. Multiple Choice Education System Model (Alberta, British Columbia, etc.)

(Source: The Benefits of Greater Differentiation of Ontario’s University Sector, Final Report,
Harvey P. Weingarten & Fiona Deller, by Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario
(HEQCO, 2010).

A good model of differentiation is remarked by many as a model that has the capacity to
generate innovation in reforms and thereby helps institutions to rescue themselves from
stagnation in a system.

2.3.2.3. Chile

In Chile, substantial economic gains have been underpinned in part by a far-reaching reform of
the higher education sector that included a major diversification of educational institutions.

25
Differentiation Study Report

Private tertiary institutions were authorized in 1990 and tertiary education was sub-divided into
three levels: universities, professional institutes, and technical training centers. Unlike vocational
and technical sectors in other Latin American countries where the tertiary level is dominated by
universities with little space for vocational and technical institutions, Chile’s professional
institutes and technical training centers enroll 44% of all students in higher education in the
country. In this sector, almost all institutions are private and a significant majority of them is for-
profit although the law requires universities to be organized as non-profit foundations or
corporations (The Hamburg Transnational University Leaders Council, 2017). Expansion is
possibly the most salient characteristic of the recent evolution of Chile’s higher education:
enrolments more than trebled since 1990, reaching close to 1.2 million students. This puts Chile
at the average enrollment rate I of OECD countries (MINEDUC, 2011).

Europe

2.3.2.4. Germany

The Higher Education Acts in Germany known as the Laendern divides higher education
institutions in the country into four broader categories, namely: universities, universities of
applied sciences, Universities of Cooperative Education, and colleges of art (Kultus minister
konferenz, KMK), (Standing Conference of the Ministers). Universities deal with the full range
of academic disciplines, and focus particularly on basic research, so that advanced study is
mainly oriented towards theory and research. Universities have the exclusive power to confer
doctorate degrees and to employ professors in accordance with the structural and formal criteria
set by the Laendern. Universities in Germany combine both teaching and research. This is called
the Humboldt model. Most of these universities are described as full universities as they
commonly offer a number of programs in many disciplines.

Universities of Applied Sciences and Universities of Cooperative Education concentrate on

engineering and technical subjects, economics, social work and design. Their mission is applied
research and development. The two types of universities have clearly practice- and career-
oriented approach, which often includes integrated and supervised internships in industry,
companies or other relevant partner institutions. If at all, the two differ merely in the intensity of
applied research. In the case of University of Cooperative Education, there is very intense

26
Differentiation Study Report

student engagement with industry compared to engagement level of University of Applied
Sciences students. Colleges of Arts and Music hold study programs for arts, visual arts, drama
and music, directing, production and script for theater, film and other media, as well as design,
architecture, media and communications.

Some universities in Germany tend to have strong technical and engineering focus and they are
called technical universities or universities of technology (The German council of science and
humanity, 2010). A typical university may, for example, be distinguished from other institutions
by aspects such as course offerings in a variety of disciplines, breadth of contents of subjects
and wider range of subjects, conferral of degrees in three levels (Bachelors’, Masters’ and
Doctorate) in many subjects, institutional connection between research and teaching, course
attendance is usually compulsory for students at pre-defined locations. This is typical example of
internal differentiation of university functions.

It should be noted here, however, that other forms, which deviate from the typical university
features also exist in the country. There are, for example, single discipline universities, such as
The Hannover Medical School, The Medical University of Lubek, and The University of
Administrative Sciences Speyer (Weingarten, & et al., 2010).

2.3.2.5. France

The French higher education system is characterized by coexistence of several types of

institutions. Higher education institutions belong to different legal categories, defined in the
Education Code. There are: universities; grands établissements publics (major public
institutions); grandes écoles (elite schools); administrative public institutions; private higher
education institutions or schools. The first-cycle programs consist of: Bachelors’ (3-year-course)
and some short-cycle course (2 years of studies), which correspond to first-cycle level disciplines
such as the industrial, service and paramedical sectors.

Higher education is provided by three main types of institutions: lycées, universities, and
"grandes écoles".Unlike high schools in virtually every other country in Europe, French lycées
have a role that extends beyond the traditional end of high school. Thus, the best and biggest
lycées all have two more years of classes corresponding to the first two years of higher
education. The most prestigious of these are known as "les classes préparatoires" (or prépas) and

27
Differentiation Study Report

are basically a highly selective alternative to the first two years of (generally unselective)
university education. Students in "prépa" are in small classes and have intense programs, often
over 30 hours of classes per week, plus plenty of homework; but the rewards are good, and
students work harder to succeed.

Lycées are also responsible for providing instruction for what is the equivalent of Higher
National Diplomas in the UK, i.e. two-year higher education courses generally, technologically
or vocationally oriented. BTS classes have selective entry, and as in "classes prépas", students
have heavy load of coursework before they get through. The approach tends to be "scolaire", i.e.
as in a school, rather than "universitaire", and classes are small (up to 30 or so). Popular BTS
courses include "mechanics", "trilingual secretairat", "tourism", and so on.

Les Grandes Ecoles are the pinnacle of the French education system. The students are admitted
through competitive examination (concours), the institutions are relatively small, and classes in
them are small as well. Many of the teaching staff in "grandes écoles" are professionals or else
academics from neighboring universities, who do extra teaching at rates well in excess of the
hourly rate paid in universities.

Polytechnique institutions are reputed as one of the world's top "universities" and run exchanges
with other institutions in the same league, for example: MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, ICL,
and others of this league. Another very high ranking school is the Ecole Normale
d'Administration, the ENA, France's top institution for the training of future senior civil servants
(hauts fonctionnaires), top politicians and managers.

2.3.2.6. The United Kingdom

There exist many forms of Higher education institutions in the UK, such as open universities,
small physically operating colleges of arts and music, and polytechnics (Weingarten, & et al.,
2010). According to Weingarten, et al (2010), the UK operates within the market model of PSE.
Assessment of research is made in terms of three factors, namely: the quality of research output,
the wider impact of research, and the vitality of the research environment. Policy stipulations
force HEIs to form consortia to win research funds. Moreover, universities that have larger and
better managed research units are uniquely positioned to win research funds in addition to the
funders’ choice that research fund should go to the very best research institutions.

28
Differentiation Study Report

Asia

2.3.2.7 China

Since the end of 1990s the Chinese higher education system has recorded massive expansion.
Higher education in China is provided by academies, universities, colleges, vocational
institutions, and other collegiate-level institutions, including open universities and career and
vocational schools awarding academic degrees or professional certifications (Yu et al., 2012).

Chinese higher education consists of undergraduate education, both Benke and Zhuanke, and
postgraduate education. The main differences between Benke and Zhuanke education, according
to Article 16 of the Higher Education Law of 1998, lie in terms of specialization and program
duration. Benke education follows a more academic-oriented route, developing the ability to
conduct both practical work and research, and teaches general knowledge of the discipline and
subject area. Zhuanke education, however, is more vocational-oriented and delivers specialized
knowledge designed mainly to develop senior engineers and technicians for the production,
construction, management, and service sectors. In terms of course duration, Benke programs
usually take four years and Zhuanke programs normally last three years. Graduates with Zhuanke
degrees are allowed to pursue their Benke degrees after passing examinations (Zhuanshenben)
organized at the provincial or university level.

Graduate education consists of Masters’ and Doctoral programs. As regulated in the Higher
Education Law, Masters’ education focuses on equipping students with “a strong theoretical
foundation, systematic subject knowledge, relevant skills, methods, knowledge, and abilities to
conduct practical work and scientific research” and Doctoral education aims at equipping
students with “solid and broad theoretical foundation, systematic and intensive subject
knowledge, relevant skills and methods of the discipline, and abilities to independently conduct
creative scientific research and practical work” (Yu et al., 2012). Masters’ education usually
takes two to three years, with three to four years for Doctoral education.

In 1985, a policy document titled, “Decision of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee
on Education System Reform”, was issued by the central government. This policy document was
designed to revise the goals, structures and management of China’s higher education system as a
result of the country’s socioeconomic transformation.

29
Differentiation Study Report

National and local Chinese HEIs can be classified as public institutions (Gongban) and non-
public institutions (Minban). The key difference is that public HEIs receive general funding from
the government and collect tuition fees from students while non-public institutions largely
depend on tuition and fees as primary source of revenue.

2.3.2.8. South Korea

South Korea’s economic success has been attributed to the development of a broad,
differentiated and articulated tertiary education system, a strategically oriented research and
development (R&D) program, incentivized policy for industry in key export areas, and extensive
linkages between higher education and research and development institutions, industry in key
export areas, and extensive linkages between higher education and research and development
institutions, and industry. Differentiation and articulation have been constant themes in the
country’s long-term campaign to develop professional education capacities in support of its
export industries. In 1971, the Korea Advanced Institute was created at the top of the educational
pyramid to provide high quality MSc and Ph.D. programs. In 1976, a sub-system of two-year
vocational junior colleges was created as the market demand for higher skill levels soared which
was followed by a broader two-year junior college system of both public and private colleges in
1979.

In 1977, the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation was set up to fund university research
and award long-term research fellowships. Various Government Research Institutes were
established in the 1980s with mandates to focus on strategic economic areas such as ship
building, electronics, and automotive technology. In 1990, Engineering Research Centers were
created on university campuses, while research and development efforts were promoted through
a competitive funding program, tax credits, and customs duty waivers on research equipment. In
1995, the two-year college diploma was replaced by a two-year associate BSc degree in order to
increase attractiveness and emphasize articulation with the four-year degree programs.

2.3.2.9. Uzbekistan

Higher education institutions in Uzbekistan are accountable to multiple ministries: Pedagogical

universities to the Ministry of Education; health and medical universities to the Ministry of
Health; and agricultural universities to the Ministry of Agriculture. The country has both

30
Differentiation Study Report

bachelor and masters’ degree programs for both academic and vocational streams. A Bachelors’
degree program takes four years to complete while Masters’ degree programs take two years.

Higher education institutions in Uzbekistan are differentiated into three categories: University,
Academy, and Institute. A university as an institution offers both bachelor and masters’ degree
programs in a range of fields. An academy is an institution that offers specific fields of
knowledge and education. An institute offers specific branches of study within one area of
knowledge. A bachelors’ degree is offered as a first cycle program in all Uzbekistan higher
education institutions.

Generally, all higher education in Uzbekistan is classified under six areas and twenty-five
branches of studies (European Union, 2017). This was done after a thorough identification of
priority areas in the country’s economy and national agenda. The six areas are: humanities and
education; economics and law; industry, machinery, construction, transportation and
communication; agriculture and water resources; medicine and social security; service sector/arts
and sports. The key economic priority areas in the country include: agro-industry, energy sector,
telecommunications, chemical industry, and food security (European Union, Uzbekistan;
February 2017).

Africa

2.3.2.10. Egypt

The postsecondary education system in Egypt includes public universities, private universities,
technological colleges, and private higher education institutes offering intermediate and
advanced professionally oriented diplomas. In addition, the system includes specialized
institutions such as Al-Azhar Islamic University and institutions employing new delivery
systems. Eighty per cent of the enrollment is concentrated in public postsecondary education
with the remaining 20% in private institutions. Fewer than 5% of the students in private
postsecondary education are enrolled in universities (Said in Altbach, 2017).

Public demand for higher education increased significantly in 1963 when the Egyptian
government launched a scheme that guaranteed a job in the public sector to all university
graduates. Ever since, the government made a commitment to employ all graduates, irrespective

31
Differentiation Study Report

of the need for personnel or suitable job opportunities. The overstaffing of the public sector led
to the deterioration of services, burdening the system with bureaucracy and inefficiency. The
decision was reversed in the mid-1980s (Said 2003).

By law, all types of educational institutions must have their own core mission. Furthermore, they
are also required to adhere to the global core mission specified in the SDGs 2030, There are
different legislation, acts and decrees that govern public universities, private universities, private
higher education institutes and technical colleges.

Formal Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) in Egypt is provided through
secondary education in industrial, commercial and agricultural schools, in postsecondary
education in technical colleges and middle institutes (formerly known as Middle Technical
Institutes), and in faculties of industrial education known also as Industrial Education Colleges.
In general, TVET education is classified into eight different categories according to the type of
institute: technical colleges, technical health and nursing institutes, private middle institutes,
worker university, integrated technical education clusters (ITECs), and faculties of industrial
education. All these institutes offer two-year programs leading to a diploma; the faculties of
industrial education which offer a bachelors’ degree upon completion of a four-year program are
an exception.

The ITEC model has four main components: a technical secondary school providing three years
of study to students graduating from postsecondary levels, a technical institute providing two-
year intermediate-degree programs, an advanced technical institute that offers three-year
programs that include one-year of on-the-job training and lead to a bachelor degree in
technology, and a vocational training center providing advanced training programs teaching
skills to adults according to labor market needs. This model has been successfully implemented
and is currently being replicated in other geographically distributed governorates (Strategic
Planning Unit, 2012; Said, 2014). Some private higher education institutes offer bachelors’
degrees in arts and sciences that are equivalent to those offered by public universities.

The expansion and investment in this type of education is highly encouraged by the government
to address the expansion of the postsecondary system. These institutes focus on education
programs in specific areas of specialization, unlike private universities that are multidisciplinary

32
Differentiation Study Report

and require larger investments and must respond to strict requirements for official recognition.
The quality of these private institutions, however, has been a challenge. The government
established stringent conditions for granting licensure to these institutes but suspended
requirements for specific numbers of qualified faculty members as mandatory at inception.

To encourage private investment in postsecondary education, the Ministry of Higher Education

and Scientific Research (MOHESR) developed a roadmap to consider education needs by
geographic location with an emphasis on underserved regions. To address challenges emerging
from the concentration of postsecondary education in densely populated urban centers and to
alleviate pressures on the overcrowding of student hostels, the roadmap stipulated at least one
public university per governorate and several private universities, institutions and community
colleges, depending on local needs.

2.3.2.11. South Africa

The Higher Education Sector in South Africa is intended to perform the following three
functions as outlined in the National Development Plan: a) educate and equip people with high-
level skills to meet the employment needs of the public and private sectors; b) produce new
knowledge and assess and find new applications for existing knowledge; and c) provide
opportunities for social mobility while strengthening equity, social justice and democracy to deal
with the injustices brought about by the apartheid system.

The higher education system is profoundly shaped by racial discrimination and the inequalities
of class, race and gender that spawned the systemic exclusion and marginalization of blacks,
coloreds and Indians (Waghid, 2015). The year 1994 marks the culmination of liberation from
Apartheid era and the dawn of transformation for South Africa that terminated legal apartheid
which also ended university isolation (Jansen, McLellan and Greene 2008; Council for Higher
Education 2016).

The new higher education policy kicked off with earnest with the establishment of a National
Commission on Higher Education to develop a policy framework for the transformation of the
new South African higher education, which at the time was comprised of universities,
technikons, and colleges of nursing, agriculture and teacher training. According to Scott (2009)

33
Differentiation Study Report

the national education policy was ‘radically engineered’ with the goal of achieving equity, which
became one of the main pillars of the policy.

Following the restructuring of the higher education landscape after 2005, the number of
institutions decreased from 36 to 23 through a merger process. According to South African
Policy Framework on Differentiation (2014), the phenomenon of differentiation is situated
within the context of market forces, geographical location; and institutional strategies linked to
an applicable mission statement; social or community expectations and pressures; internal
dynamics, legacies and the capacities of the institutions.

South African higher education system has three tiers: Universities, Comprehensive Universities
and Universities of Technology. In 2017, the public higher education sector consisted of 26
universities—differentiated into eleven general academic universities; nine comprehensive
universities and six universities of technology—and 125 private higher education institutions.

Universities focus on niche areas of ‘traditional’ general formative and professional

undergraduate and postgraduate programs and research. Universities of technology emphasize
career-oriented programs, mainly at the undergraduate levels but they also offer postgraduate
degree programs in identified areas of strength. Comprehensive institutions offer a combination
of the two. Currently, South Africa has arguably the most well-developed higher education
system in Africa. With 20 percent enrollment rate and over one million students in the entire
sector—both private and public—it produces the largest share of research and publication on the
continent.

2.3.2.12. Ghana

The new experiences of Ghana show that tertiary study could be completed by any of the
following: four years of university education for a bachelors’ degree; three years of polytechnic
education for a Higher National Diploma; and three years of college education for a diploma in
various disciplines, including teacher education and training, agriculture, and nursing. The
specialized professional tertiary education institutions offer courses (often at the masters’ degree
level) in core professional areas. These include the Ghana Armed Forces Command and Staff
College (graduate courses in defense studies), the Kofi Annan International Peace Keeping
Training Centre (courses in peace keeping and conflict management), the Institute of Local

34
Differentiation Study Report

Government Studies, the National Film and Television Institute, and the Ghana Institute of
Journalism.

In 2016, eight of the ten polytechnics in the country were upgraded to the status of technical
universities to train highly skilled human resources of the type that are not currently available in
the country. The technical universities are intended to be different in orientation from the
traditional universities with a mission similar to that of universities of applied sciences in
Germany and the Netherlands.

The experiences of Ghana show that the technical universities are expected to be practice-
oriented and skills-driven with a focus on providing technology solutions to small and medium
enterprises through practical research rather than engaging in fundamental or cutting-edge
research. The expectation is that technical universities will offer a logical academic and
professional progression pathway at the tertiary level for practically inclined students and lower-
level TVET graduates without departing from the practice-oriented philosophy of polytechnic
education and training. It is also expected that technical universities will enhance the
attractiveness of TVET, in the sense that young people with aptitude for technical education will
no longer see the TVET track as a dead-end, but rather as an avenue for developing their
practical skills to the highest level possible, whether they start as apprentices, artisans or
technicians. However, technical universities will not imitate or mimic traditional universities
(National Council for Tertiary Education, 2014).

The colleges of education, agriculture, and nursing train mid-level professionals at the diploma
level, for teaching at the basic education level, for agricultural extension services, and for the
health delivery services sector. Included in the category of tertiary institutions are tutorial
colleges, distance learning, online, and campuses of foreign-registered institutions that prepare
learners for qualifications awarded by external bodies.

2.3.2.13. Tanzania

Tanzania’s tertiary education system is best described as a binary system consisting of

universities and non-university polytechnic-type institutions. The university system in Tanzania,
perhaps more so than in Kenya and Uganda, is beginning to show some elements of horizontal
differentiation, especially with regard to public universities, each of which is meant to specialize

35
Differentiation Study Report

in specific aspects of development. Thus, the university system displays less isomorphism; both
mimetic and normative than the Kenyan system. The University of Dar es Salaam displays the
most vertical differentiation. However, articulation (harmonization) among universities is poor.
In Tanzania, university education is offered in two broad university categories: (i) public
universities whose existence is based on an Act of Parliament (some of them with constituent
colleges), and (ii) private universities some of which are chartered, and others non-chartered. The
existence of several university colleges indicates some differentiation with decentralization.

Poor articulation exists among the same and between different types of tertiary education
institutions in Tanzania. No formal mechanisms for articulation have been established in such
areas as transferability of credits, staff mobility or collaborative activities, such as research. This
situation is also true for public-private universities and other types of institutions: namely, public
polytechnics, private polytechnics and technical institutes or colleges. At the central level,
governance responsibilities for the tertiary sub-sector are divided among three Ministries: (i)
Education and Culture, (ii) Science, Technology and Higher Education, and (iii) Regional
Administration and Local Government. Other ministries and agencies also exercise direct
influence on the sector.

2.3.2.14. Pan African University

Pan African University (PAU) is a signature program of the African Union Commission
established in July 2010. It focuses on graduate education at MA and Ph.D. levels for students
from member state countries. The objective is to stimulate fundamental and applied research of
the highest quality in areas critical to African technical, economic and social development. The
system is intended to act as center of excellence and regional hubs located in five geographical
areas. The PAU, which currently comprises of five institutes, aspires to attract highly motivated
young Africans who can play transformative leadership roles in the continent.

The Commission identified critical themes within the five institutes of the PAU, as key to the
development of Africa and attainment of the vision of the African Union. These are hosted in the
different PAU Institutes including: Water and Energy Sciences (including Climate Change)
(PAUWES, Algeria); Basic Science, Technology and Innovation (PAUSTI, Kenya); Life and
Earth Sciences (including Health and Agriculture) (PAULESI, Nigeria); Governance,

36
Differentiation Study Report

Humanities and Social Sciences (PAUGHSS, Cameroon); and Space Sciences (PAUSS, South
Africa).Each PAU Institute is partnered with a Lead Thematic Partner to contribute to the
Institute financially, link the Institution with similar institutions in the Partner´s home country
and globally, provide research equipment, mobilize other funders to support its work, and
participate in the advisory board and council of the Institute (PAU, 2020).

2.3.3. Summary of Lessons Learned from the Case Countries

This section summarizes, in Table 1,lessons learned from case countries discussed above as
possible lessons for Ethiopia in its effort for differentiating its higher education sector.

37
Differentiation Study Report

Table 1: Summary of Lessons Learned from the Case Countries

No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the

Ethiopian Context
• Tier based HE system
• In California, each university system orientated towards
has a different mission addressing a market
• The California system is vertically economy (research
differentiated as only very few of the universities) and providing
seniors graduating from high school equal opportunities for
join prestigious universities citizens (community
• The Californian system considered colleges)
leader in the world for its capacity to • Egalitarianism, academic
address access and quality excellence, access and
1 USA maximum societal impact.
• Only few or limited universities in the
system run world class programs • Research intensive
• Each research university must focus universities
on unique and differentiated research • Purposeful and
and learning environments that differentiated university
address the needs of their particular mission
regions or settings
• Each research university
must focus on unique and
differentiated research and
learning environment

• Public universities, private colleges,

private religious universities, and
private career colleges
• Public universities, private
• A number of principles adopted to
colleges, private religious /
guide the differentiation process
theology universities, and
aggressively
private career colleges
2 Canada • Had principles of funding that govern
• A number of principles
the differentiation process and the
adopted to guide the
funding procedures
differentiation process and
• Adapted a five-dimension horizontal
funding procedures
differentiation called axes of
• Axes of differentiation
differentiation
• Maintain three models of vertical
differentiation that govern PSE

38
Differentiation Study Report

 No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the
Ethiopian Context
system structure from secondary
schools all along universities, then
graduation and then to the labor
market; namely, progressive choice,
exclusive choice and multiple-choice
education system model
• A good model of differentiation is the
one that generates innovation in
reforms and keeps an institution
dynamic
• Three types of PSE: universities,
professional institutes, and technical
• Differentiation is jointly
training centers
planned with key
• Differentiation planned jointly with
3 Chile stakeholders
key stakeholders (lateral ministries)
• Grants are competitive
• Grants are competitive
• Strong vocational system
• Benchmarking of international
of higher education
universities conducted
• Student loan and grants available
• Universities (comprehensive
• Universities that combine
universities) offering many stipulated
both teaching and research
programs as a rule at BA, MA and
• Universities of applied
Ph.D. levels
4 Germany sciences (teaching-
• Universities of technology with high
focused)
focus on technology
• Colleges of arts and music
• Single discipline universities
• Single discipline
• Universities of applied sciences
universities
• Colleges of arts and/or music
1. Highly differentiated both vertically
and horizontally • Highest level of standard
5 France 2. Special arrangement made to train achieved in TVET
future elites of the country • Strong preparation for
3. High standard achieved for technical elite education
training
The United • The idea of open university • Open university
6 • Small colleges of arts and music • Market model of post-
Kingdom
• Polytechnics secondary school

39
Differentiation Study Report

 No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the
Ethiopian Context
• Market model of PSE • Consortia formation by
• Consortia formation by universities to universities to win fund
win fund • Research funding
• Assessment of research is made in framework
terms of three factors: the quality of
research output, magnitude of impact
of research, and vitality of the
research environment
• Research fund goes to the very best
research institutions
• Clear distinction between
• Differentiation in terms of
academic and technical
specialization, program duration,
higher education system
7 China mission, and management
• World-class Universities
• Articulation between HEIs
• Articulation
• The use of different types of
• Different types of
differentiation criteria
differentiation
• National priorities identified prior to
differentiation (export areas)
• National priorities
• Advanced institutes created as part of
identified prior to
vertical differentiation (MSc and
differentiation (export
Ph.D.)
areas)
South • Establishment of foundations for
8 • Research institutes
Korea Funding differentiated institutions
mandated with strategic
• Research institutes mandated with
economic areas
strategic economic areas such as ship
• Introduced tax credits, and
building, electronics and automotive
customs duty waivers on
technology
research equipment
• Introduced tax credits, and customs
duty waivers on research equipment
• University management depending on • Areas of studies
focus and missions; health determined on the basis of
universities under the ministry of national economic
9 Uzbekistan health, etc. priorities
• BA four years, MA two years • Management and
• University, academy, and institute accountability of
• Higher education is limited to six universities linked to

40
Differentiation Study Report

 No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the
Ethiopian Context
areas and 23 branches of studies affiliated ministries
• Areas of study determined based on
priorities of national economy
• Specialized institutions such as Al-
• Institutions have specific
Azhar Islamic University
core mission
• All educational institutions by law
• Effort made to ensure the
must have their own core mission at
quality of postsecondary
10 Egypt the same time, they are required to
education through stringent
adhere to the global core mission
exam administration
specified in the SDG 2030
• Critical observance to
• The system of examinations and
regional and global
evaluation are centralized and subject
development agenda
to administrative control
• Rigid binary divide between
universities and (polytechnic-type)
technikons.
• Three institutional types: universities,
technikons (known as “universities of • Mandate areas of HEIs
South technology”), and “comprehensive” clearly demarcated
11 institutions • National Qualifications
Africa
• Mandate areas of HEIs clearly Framework developed and
demarcated implemented
• National Qualifications Framework
developed and implemented
• High engagement of international
providers
• Specialized professional tertiary
• Specialized professional
education institutions (often at the
tertiary education
masters’ degree level) in core
institutions
professional areas
• Polytechnic law
• Polytechnic law was enacted
12 Ghana • Staff interchange between
• Staff interchange between universities
universities and
and polytechnics
polytechnics
• Technical universities offer logical
• Qualifications awarded by
academic and professional progression
external bodies
pathway at the tertiary level
• Mission differentiated
• Technical universities intended to be

41
Differentiation Study Report

 No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the
Ethiopian Context
different in orientation from the
traditional universities with a mission
similar to that of universities of applied
sciences in Germany and the
Netherlands
• Tutorial colleges, distance learning,
online, and campuses of foreign-
registered institutions that prepare
learners for qualifications awarded by
external bodies
• Each HEI specializes in specific • Each HEI specializes in
aspect of development specific aspects of
• The university system displays less development
isomorphism; both mimetic and • Governance
normative responsibilities for tertiary
• Governance responsibilities for sub-sector are divided
tertiary sub-sector divided among among Ministries,
three ministries: (i) Education and Regional Administration
13 Tanzania Culture, (ii) Science, Technology and and Local Government
Higher Education, and (iii) Regional • Teacher Institute of
Administration and Local Education (TIE) -
Government, and other ministries responsible for curriculum
• Teacher Institute of Education (TIE) - development
responsible for curriculum • National Higher Education
development Policy in 1999.
• National Higher Education Policy in
1999.
• Differentiation of areas of studies
critical for economic and social
development of Africa.
• The provision of joint degree • Identification of national
Pan-African programs priorities
14
University • Establishing a network of universities • Joint degree programs
in different AU countries • Centers of excellence
• Focus on emerging technologies and
innovation
• Establishing centers of excellence

42
Differentiation Study Report

 No. Country Key Experience Possible Lessons for the
Ethiopian Context
• Research priorities identified from
regional and international policy
framework and conventions

2.4. International Classification Systems

A number of comparative international classification systems of universities exist. In this study,

two classification systems, Carnegie and U-map are taken into consideration.

The Carnegie Classification System, developed in 1970, was historically used to make
classifications of the American Higher education system, while the U-Map classification system
was characteristically used to classify European universities. In 1973, six categories of
universities were envisaged by Carnegie System known as the Basic Classification: associate
colleges; doctorate granting universities; masters’ colleges and universities; baccalaureate
colleges; special focus institutions; and tribal colleges. The Carnegie System has gradually
improved its classification system based on new developments in the higher education sector
such as the opening up of new universities in new areas and the closure and merger of existing
universities. In 2005, it changed the previous format into a multiple parallel classification format
which does not immediately classify universities but, makes classification of classification
systematics or parameters. The new classification parameters comprised: undergraduate
instructional programs; graduate instructional programs; enrollment profile; undergraduate
profile; size and setting classification; and basic classification. The parameters of the
classification are simply based on three key questions which are addressed in terms of what is
taught, the composition of the student body, and the institutional setting (The German Council of
Science and Humanity, 2010).

The U-map uses a multi-dimensional classification framework for classifying institutional

diversity in Europe. In Germany, it uses five categories of classification to organize legally
established and institutionally independent higher education institutions. These categories

43
Differentiation Study Report

include teaching and learning, research, knowledge transfer; international orientation; and
regional engagement.

It is evident from the foregoing discussion that different countries differentiate and articulate
their higher education system based on their specific needs and contexts. Be thatas it may, for
effective implementation of differentiation and articulation, the following preconditions need to
be met:

1. political commitment;
2. formulation of a legal policy framework;
3. provision of a differentiated governance system;
4. provision of appropriate funding structure and infrastructure;
5. participatory approach and involvement of key stakeholders.

2.4.1. Types of differentiation

Differentiation in higher education system can be both vertical and horizontal. Vertical
differentiation, as stated above, refers to the ranking of institutions by dimensions such as
research intensity or reputation alluding to stratified hierarchical system where institutions differ
in their value and prestige, perceived or real (Huisman, 1995). The frequently used terminology
of vertical differentiation relates to hierarchical differentiation of higher education institutions in
terms of their performance and quality, usually reduced to the dimension of achievement in
research.

Horizontal differentiation assumes multiple functions of higher education institutions in different

dimensions. In a horizontally differentiated higher education system, not all higher education
institutions focus on one single dimension of performance, for example in research, but profiles
of higher education institutions develop according to social demands and needs from the
dynamics of sciences, which focus on their own specialization (Huisman, 1995).

Ayalon et al. (2005) posit that higher education institutions are viewed as horizontally
differentiated in terms of their specific educational goals, modes of academic and managerial
operations, and types of academic programs” (p. 189), incorporating mission and administrative
objectives and effectiveness into their definition of an educational ecosystem. In the African

44
Differentiation Study Report

context, Ng’ethe et al (2008) and Matsuzuka (2013) argue that, “horizontal differentiation is
generally a response to increased demand for student access to higher education. But vertical
differentiation is normally a reaction to labor market needs for a greater diversity of graduate
skills and levels of training” (p. 17).

As revealed in many countries, vertical differentiation that uses shared quality standards could
increase the disparity in the quality of, and demand for higher education (Matsuzuka, 2013).
Horizontal (functional) differentiation that follows the rule of comparative advantage, however,
can potentially alleviate such disparities while realizing cost efficiency. At the national or
regional level, universities through networking can meet the comprehensive needs for higher
education and can develop synergy to tackle capacity problem. Since the market enlarges,
particularly in a global market with more players assuming the same function, vertical
differentiation will occur within the framework of horizontal differentiation.

There are both horizontal and vertical differentiation methods within and among institutions,
with horizontal differentiation driven by issues of access, and vertical by the labor market. The
first relates to student choice of higher education institution. The second relates to the needs from
the labor market for different skills and competencies. Differentiation between public and private
higher education, and within private higher education, between not-for-profit and for-profit
institutions, is a central manifestation of horizontal differentiation.

2.4.2. Criteria for differentiation

Common criteria and factors for a sound differentiation of a higher education system in a country
include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Skilled manpower needs and accordingly prioritization of study programs;

2. The extent of diversity in achievements, talents, and overall profiles of students;

3. Strength of respective institution in performance and resources;

4. Enrollment figures;

5. Regional, demographic and socio-economic conditions, current and future;

6. Framework for articulation and harmonization among and between HE institutions;

45
Differentiation Study Report

7. Healthy and strategic competition for resources;

8. Active engagement in internationalization to exchange knowledge and best practices; and

9. Regular review of policy and guidelines.

2.4.3. Enabling factors

Literature reveals that the following factors, among many others, can be considered as enabling
or facilitating factors for effective differentiation to be in place:

First, of paramount importance, is the availability of government policy documents that show
both the interest and commitments of government to introduce differentiation in their higher
education system. This is critical as policy readiness presupposes the success of a new initiative
as the initiative is likely to be backed with strong government support.

Second, the proliferation of market-driven courses and programs as major changes taking place
in many African universities make it imperative for public universities to immediately address
the needs. If they do not do so, their survival will be threatened due to lack of income and
consequently reduced budget from government.

Third, the rise of industry demand for skilled and employable graduates in today’s knowledge
economy should challenge universities to revise their old-fashioned traditional missions and
methods. Greater level of competition is unavoidable for increased productivity through research
and innovation (UN, 2004)).The demand of the new 21st Century labor market calls for skills
and abilities such as critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration, communication, creativity,
imagination, citizenship, digital literacy, proactive leadership and personal development (p. 17,
The British Council, Teaching for Success, Continuing Professional Development (CPD)
Framework for Teachers, www.teachingenglish.org.uk).

Fourth, the development of national, regional and international initiatives for collective thinking
globalized and harmonized human resource development and internationalization of higher
education where student and staff mobility are the crux of the matter in terms of sharing global
knowledge and skills.

Fifth, effective and efficient governance system for HEIs must be in place ensuring transparency,
academic freedom, and administrative autonomy.

Sixth, an exit strategy must be devised to address unwanted outcomes that may appear with the

46
Differentiation Study Report

implementation of the differentiation policy.

Seventh, demand for innovation is fast increasing at an international scale. Innovation comprises
factors such as the key people, knowledge, capital and investment, and the environmental factor,
many of which require higher education as the key instrument of change (UN, 2004).

2.4.4. Challenges

The process of differentiation is fraught with many challenges.

1. To begin with, Universities tend to insist on their existing established reputation and
market brand thus they may simply gesture ceremonial responses to new differentiation
initiatives, if they do not reject it outright. The propensity to continue business as usual,
buttressed by isomorphic forces, is deep (Milian et al., 2016).
2. Extreme differentiation may affect past and current successes; consequently, the move to
differentiation should be progressive and incremental. Far reaching differentiation may
also constrain institutional aspirations.
3. Differentiation schemes, without complementary funding models, may not be successful.
4. Decisions towards a differentiated higher education system require greater commitment
from and exhaustive compromise with a multitude of players.
5. Unless clear and feasible performance indicators are put in place for evaluation,
differentiation may face challenges throughout the implementation phases.
6. A third-party involvement in contentious situations, typically between a government
body and an institution, is vital in the differentiation process.
7. Such massive undertakings as differentiation require strict planning, prolonged period,
high level discipline as it involves considering and resolving numerous critical and
contentious issues in the implementation process.

47
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION THREE
DEVELOPING A DIFFERENTIATION MODEL AND STANDARDS
3.1. Model for Differentiating Higher Education System

3.1.1. Characteristic Features of Higher Education System Differentiation Model

A differentiation model developed for a given higher education system can be described as a
viable, socio-culturally and economically grounded model that has to be longitudinally and
cross-sectionally feasible addressing the entire postsecondary education system and covering all
diversity parameters. It can have the three dimensions of differentiation organically integrated:
horizontal (both mission wise and subject-wise such as generalist and specialist), vertical (in
terms of level of abilities and competencies), and regulatory characteristics (in terms of
financing, ownership, legal frameworks, etc.). It can also create an egalitarian model in the sense
that it addresses the needs of all citizens at all times equally and fairly. A differentiated system
acknowledges that both the individual student’s ability and the academic standards of the HEI
they join affect their success or failure in higher education. Such a system can have the capacity
to powerfully and continuously generate all options and opportunities, and pathways for citizens
to enjoy access to higher education depending on their ability and interest; create a cost-effective
model; and be aligned with the long-term trends of the national human resource requirement
plans, goals, and strategies.

Such systems also recognize and capitalize on the demographic attributes of students, teachers,
staff, management and the local community as key members of the ecosystem; and recognize the
diverse needs of today’s students and their interests, according to the six interest categories:
aspiring academics (achieving), coming of age (transitioning), career starter (thinking
practically), career accelerator (advancing), industry switcher (changing career) and academic
wanderer (seeking degree).

Differentiated systems empower HEIs to enjoy academic and governance autonomy; ensure that
all higher education providers in the country (public, private, international, etc.) work in a
harmonized framework of partnership and alignment; reflect the educational philosophy of
Ethiopia (education fundamentally geared towards serving society, solving societal problems by

48
Differentiation Study Report

providing each citizen opportunities); align funding with performance, and recognize the need
for core public funding to public HEIs.

3.1.2. Simulated Conceptual Model for Differentiation of Higher Education

Figure 4.Conceptual Model for Differentiating Higher Education

49
Differentiation Study Report

3.1.3. Description of the Model

The simulated higher education model depicted in Figure 4 is one condensed from the literature
review. As can be seen from the model, students can join the higher education system either after
successfully passing the secondary school leaving national exam or directly from junior TVET
colleges. This is with the assumption that students after completing Grade 10 have two options:
(1) They continue to grades 11 and 12; take school leaving national examination at the end of
grade 12, and go to university or join senior TVET, Fine Arts Colleges, or Liberal Arts Colleges
depending on their performance in the national exam; or (2) They join junior TVET colleges
from Grade 10 and then either advance to senior TVET colleges or proceed directly to the labor
market. Within the higher education system, there are senior colleges, special institutes,
universities of applied sciences, comprehensive universities, and research universities.
The Model depicts that the higher education system is represented within the inner circle. From
the Model, one can note that graduates at each level can join the labor market or proceed to
further their education. Note that the higher education system is differentiated using the criteria
presented in oval shapes within the outer circle. This initial Conceptual Model was further
reviewed and refined to evolve into a more suitable and final model depicted in section five
further below.

3.2. Setting Standards for Differentiation of HEIs

3.2.1. Types of Differentiated Higher Learning Institutions

From the desk reviews and international experiences, higher learning institutions can potentially
be classified into the following six categories (research universities, universities of applied
sciences, comprehensive universities, TVET colleges, liberal arts colleges and colleges of fine
arts). These categories are briefly expounded on to represent international practices so we can
draw lessons in designing a differentiation model for the Ethiopian higher education system.

3.2.1.1. Research University

Research universities are places where not only existing knowledge is transferred, but also where
new knowledge is intensively discovered. They focus on graduate education and research. They

50
Differentiation Study Report

particularly deal with developing research capability, research performance, and the research
productivity by academics, alongside technology transfer and postgraduate training.

Altbach (2011b, p. 11) indicates that research universities “are elite, complex institutions with
multiple academic and societal roles. They provide the key link between global science and
scholarship and a nation’s scientific and knowledge system”. The discovery of knowledge
pursued in these universities requires a network of distinguished scholars who actively engage in
research activities in order to understand the unknown. Research universities can be research
extensive and/or research intensive. They may be oriented more towards graduate education,
mainly Masters’ and Ph.D. programs, but with relatively less focus on undergraduate teaching.
What characterizes research universities is not the quality of their undergraduate education or
their ability to transmit knowledge. Instead, it is their ability to conduct basic research and
discover new knowledge and applications contributing to global knowledge and quality of life.
Beyond that, research universities conduct rich post-graduate research programs.

A research university achieves academic excellence through exemplary teaching, well-equipped

laboratories, the ability to use cutting-edge technology, well-funded projects and broadly,
through high quality training and research programs. The research-oriented university is not only
a place that creates the scholarship for teaching and research, but also a place to serve the local
and global community. A research university also feeds new applicable knowledge and
collaborates with the industry sector of a nation.

Altbach (2017) considers a research university as a concept rather than just a discrete institution
– a concept with academic staff and students at its core who commit to pursuing knowledge
through teaching, and basic and applied research. A research university is expected to distinguish
itself as par excellence in teaching and research which others can emulate. In other words, it is to
serve as the national hub for coordinated research activities. Research university is, therefore, an
institution of higher education that undertakes research for technology adaptation and
development, and for the incubation of business ideas unceasingly. Another expectation from
research universities is the production of highly qualified teachers and researchers who are in
high demand given the recent expansion of universities across Ethiopia.

51
Differentiation Study Report

The core values of research universities include meritocracy; organized skepticism; the
willingness to entertain most radical of ideas, but subject claims to truth and facts and to most
rigorous scrutiny; the discovery of new knowledge; the belief that discoveries should be
available to everyone and that those that make discoveries should not profit from them; the peer-
review system that relies on experts to judge the quality of proposed research that’s seeking
funding; and academic freedom and free inquiry, without which no great university can be
established. Major characteristics of research universities are more interaction with graduate
students, state of the art research facilities, and wide variety of majors, distinguished faculty and
international reputation.

3.2.1.2. Universities of Applied Sciences

Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS) are higher education institutions with professional-
oriented study programs. Students at these institutions focus on learning how to apply their
theoretical knowledge in practice. Various projects, work placements, and internships in national
and international companies are part of the degree programs offered at these universities.

A university of applied sciences mostly focuses on providing professional degrees at Bachelors’

and Masters’ levels. It may occasionally offer professional and work-based doctorate degrees,
including in collaboration with other universities. Thus, a university of applied sciences is
typically teaching-oriented. Fields of study such as engineering, technology, law, economics,
social sciences, mathematics and natural sciences, health sciences, agro-food sciences, business,
etc. are often given by universities of applied sciences since they are meant to produce skilled
graduates in the professional areas needed by industries (The German Council of Science and
Humanity, 2010).

The term "University of Applied Sciences" indicates an attempt at translating the name
"Fachhochschule" for the international audience. The issue with this wording is that they
are different from the classical universities. They give vocational degrees geared at preparing
students to enter the workforce directly. These degrees are typically valued in industry and
government or healthcare settings, not so much in academic ones.

In some countries, a vocational university more precisely grants professional degrees like
professional bachelors’ degree, professional masters’ degree, and professional and work-based

52
Differentiation Study Report

doctorates. The term is not officially used in many countries and an assignment to a certain type
of university in a certain country's educational system is therefore difficult.

The majority of courses in UAS have vocational program of learning, giving students practical
experience in the field and a range of essential skills. Universities of applied sciences have the
mission to train professionals with emphasis on labor market needs and conduct research and
development activities that support instruction and promote regional development.

The faculties that could be included in UAS may include:

• Faculty of Engineering
• Faculty of Business and Economics
• Faculty of Health
• Faculty of Applied Social Sciences and Law
• Faculty of Applied Natural Sciences
• Faculty of Technology
• Faculty of Digital Media and Creative Industries
• Faculty of Education
• Faculty of Sports and Nutrition

3.2.1.3. Comprehensive University

A comprehensive University is an institution of higher learning committed to teaching, research
and community engagement. It engages in teaching as well as research with equal magnitude,
involving Ph.D., masters’ and bachelors’ degree programs. The distinction between a
comprehensive university on the one hand, and research university on the other, lies in the
proportion of teaching and research they perform, whereby the former engages in teaching and
research in equal proportion and the later more in research than teaching by providing a higher
proportion of Ph.D. and masters’ education.

3.2.1.4. TVET Colleges

Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) is an education and training scheme that
provides the necessary knowledge and skills for employment. It uses many forms of education
including formal, non-formal and informal learning, and is said to be important for social
equity and inclusion, as well as for sustainable development. TVET courses are vocational or

53
Differentiation Study Report

occupational by nature meaning that the student receives education and training with a view
towards specific range of jobs, employment or entrepreneurial possibilities. Under certain
conditions, some students may qualify for admission to University of Applied Sciences to
continue their studies at a higher level in the same field of study given at the TVET College.
Key principles inherent in TVET system include:
• Relevance to labor market;
• Strong involvement of private sector;
• Good access for trainees;
• High quality of delivery;
• Secure and uninterrupted financing; and
• Inclusion of core work skills.
TVET colleges have high focus on employability of students and are most effective at preparing
students for employment in very wide range of fields. They prepare individuals for the
workplace as well as further and higher education opportunities. The education and training is
vocational and occupational, and offers a route that can be followed towards becoming a worker
in a skilled trade. While universities specialize in theoretical training, TVET colleges are good
choice for students who want practical training. The following major criteria distinguish TVET
colleges:
Curriculum: TVET colleges offer an extremely wide range of vocational courses, preparing
students for a number of careers. They offer courses in industry fields such as agriculture,
management, business, commerce, engineering, manufacturing and technology, hospitality,
services, education, training and development, building, construction and security.
Requirements for admission: As part of the Higher Education system, TVET colleges accept
students who have completed high school education. In some countries such as South Africa,
university graduates can also enroll for courses at TVET colleges for more practical exposure.
Admittance to technical or vocational school usually requires high school diploma or simply
completion of high school.
Learning environment: Students enjoy TVET colleges because they are able to concentrate on
subjects of their choice. As opposed to classroom setting, vocational students learn in labs,
studios, automotive garages, airport hangars, salons, retail and other work sites. The days will be

54
Differentiation Study Report

spent learning and practicing actual skills used in selected occupations. The requirements for
establishing TVET colleges is provided in Table 2.

Table 2: Requirements for Establishing TVET Colleges

No. Category Performance Indicator (Minimum Requirement)

1 General Staff profile: 50% or more BA/BSc holders; 50% or more MA/MSc
features with industry experience or relevant experience

Student profile: students with technical/vocational background: 15%

Student composition: 75% or more, two-year diploma holders (Level
3) and 25% or more three-year advanced diploma holders (Level 4)
15%

Employability of graduates: 100%

2 Teaching/Lear Teaching load: 70% teaching, 20% technology adapt/modify/innovate
ning University-Industry Linkage: per implementation guideline
and transfer (Project-research-based
Environment
Staff-student ratio: 1:25

State-of-the art Workshops/laboratories: 35%

Scholarly resources (Digital libraries, academic books, e-books,

journals, ICT facilities): 25%
Infrastructure (Electricity, water supplies, ICT facilities, etc): 20%
Internships/Externships/Apprenticeship: 20%

3 Involvement Involvement in Technology copying/modifying/innovating and

in Knowledge/ transferring/Knowledge transfer: 80%
Technology
Number of spin-off (Income generation through consultancy services,
Transfer
production, innovations, etc): 20%
4 Community Community-College joint development project: 50%
Engagement Community oriented Projects by students: 25%
Service Learning: 25%
5 Innovation Disseminated technologies: 20%
Culture Facilities and structure for innovation: 30%
Inter-institutional/Industry collaboration: 10%
Innovation policy and strategy: 10%
Reward system: 10%
Innovative Fund: 20%

55
Differentiation Study Report

3.2.1.5. Liberal Arts College

Liberal Arts Colleges exist to teach undergraduates and only undergraduates. That's far different
from universities that are designed to focus chiefly on faculty research and graduate students. By
definition, liberal arts colleges provide students an overview of the arts, humanities,
mathematics, natural sciences, and social sciences. While at large universities professors are
often evaluated for their research and publishing work first, and for teaching second, teaching
has top priority at most liberal arts colleges. Admissions standards at liberal arts colleges vary
widely spanning from schools that practice open admissions to the most selective colleges.
Liberal arts colleges provide both a 2-year diploma program and a four-year degree program.
The Diploma of Liberal Arts offers students an opportunity to acquire a breadth of knowledge in
the Liberal Arts. Upon graduating, the graduates may continue on to complete their Bachelor of
Arts degree.

Liberal arts colleges focus on broad skills in critical thinking and writing, not narrow pre-
professional skills. Rather than emphasizing a specific course of study or professional training,
liberal arts colleges aim to expose students to a wide range of courses in the humanities, and both
physical and social sciences. Although the curriculum varies from college to college, a student's
coursework at a liberal arts college would include many or all of the following subjects: history,
philosophy, religion, literature, physical sciences (e.g., biology, chemistry, and physics), social
sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, history, economics, politics), the arts (theatre, music, art),
languages, and mathematics. Liberal arts colleges tend to stress the importance of teaching by
faculty and usually have smaller enrollments. Table 3 outlines the requirements for establishing
Liberal Arts Colleges.
Table 3:Requirements for Establishing Liberal Arts Colleges

No. Category Performance Indicator (Minimum Requirement)

1 General Staff profile: 50% or more BA/BSc holders; 50% or more

Features MA/MSc holders
Student profile: Completion of secondary school
2 Teaching/Lear State-of-the art workshops/laboratories: 35%

56
Differentiation Study Report

 ning Teaching load: 80% teaching, 10% research, 10% community
Environment engagement
Learning resources: 25%
Staff-student ratio: 1:35; Infrastructure: 20%
Internships/Externships/Apprenticeship: 20%

3 Community Community-College joint development project: 75%

Engagement Service Learning: 25%

3.2.1.6. Colleges of Fine Arts

Colleges of Fine Arts consist of usually four professional schools: Arts, Dance, Music and
Theatre, Film and Television. The mission of Colleges of Fine Arts is to prepare students to
create, teach, participate in, understand and value the arts. Put simply, a fine arts college is a
school that educates students in the visual and/or performing arts.

Fine Arts faculty members sustain excellence in teaching, creative expression, and research in
the arts and are a source of creation, knowledge, and inspiration about the arts. Many fields of
study fall under fine arts and are appropriate for students who are artistically inclined. Most
colleges require that students possess already established skills in area of the arts they wish to
study. Students are asked to present their portfolio to demonstrate interest and talent. Students
pursue rigorous programs designed to develop technical and analytical skills necessary to create
art in one of the four disciplines: drawing, painting, printmaking, photography, or sculpture. The
program focuses on developing students’ skills as artists, creative thinkers, designers and
problem solvers. The primary degrees available under the fine arts umbrella are painting,
sculpture, animation, photography, printmaking, dance, film and television, music, and theatre.
See Table 4 for requirements for establishing Colleges of Fine Arts.

57
Differentiation Study Report

Table 4: Requirements for Establishing Colleges of Fine Arts

No. Category Performance Indicator (Minimum Requirement)

1 General Features Staff profile: 50% or more BA/BSc holders; 10% or more MA/MSc
holders; 40% or less diploma or certificate holders with relevant experience
Student profile: completion of secondary school or certificate from junior
TVET college or demonstrable talent
Student composition: Two-year diploma

2 Teaching/Learning Workshops/laboratories: 35%

Environment
Learning resources (digital libraries, academic books, e-books, journals,
instruments, ICT) (facilities): 25%
Infrastructure (electricity, water supplies, ICT facilities, etc.): 20%
Internships/Externships/Apprenticeship: 20%

3 Community Community-College joint development

Engagement
Service Learning: 25%

58
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION FOUR
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

4.1. Research design

This research project involved several distinct phases, each phase with its own distinct outcomes.
The phases collectively have produced their own generic outcomes, specification of criteria for
differentiation, and development of policy brief, and a holistic policy framework for
implementation.

The research design work involved a step-by-step development of a model through which
scientific and effective study can be conducted. The research design involved literature review,
international benchmarking, design for data collection tools, procedures for fieldwork, data
collection and analysis. The study objectives were derived from the Terms of Reference (ToR)
prepared by MoSHE. An explanatory mixed research design was employed applying both
quantitative and qualitative approaches to enable more complete and synergistic utilization of
data. Mixed design was chosen as it incorporates elements of both qualitative and quantitative
approaches that help elucidate research problems better than either approach separately
(Creswell, 2010).

4.2. Scope of the study

Forty-three public universities were included in the study. The process followed was
instrumental in informing universities about the essence and necessity of differentiation. The
data generated were, naturally, used to help place universities into specific categories.

4.3. Literature review

An outline was developed for undertaking a desk review of the literature with particular focus on
research and publications that came out in the last decade. Topics such as conceptualization of
differentiation, differentiation models, challenges and opportunities with the models, national
and international perspectives and experiences, strengths and weaknesses of HEIs, and current
status of Ethiopian HEIs, were topics short-listed for review.

59
Differentiation Study Report

These topics were believed to generate clearer understanding and viable criteria for
differentiation in the Ethiopian context. The literature reviewed had aimed at exploring
approaches, processes, and structures, strategies and challenges of differentiation in other
different countries. It also provided experiences as regards to how they differentiated
universities, the challenges they faced, and strategies they followed to overcome challenges.

4.4. Data collection process

4.4.1. Data collection instruments

The study objectives dictated the nature of data collection and the types of data sources
(informants) used. Accordingly, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from
Ethiopian higher education institutions, policy makers, and researchers. Qualitative data were
collected through consultative workshops with institutional managers, council members,
academics, staff, student representatives and community leaders.

The qualitative data collection explored respondents’ views on the concept and necessity of
differentiating HEIs; competitive and comparative advantages of institutions for more fitting
categorization; readiness of universities to accept recommended category; strength and
weaknesses of universities; opportunities, limitations and challenges of classifying a HEI in a
given category. Quantitative data were obtained from 43 public universities in a survey
conducted by a team of experts using a checklist and a questionnaire developed for this purpose.
Moreover, additional quantitative data were collected from self-assessment inventory sheets
developed for the same purpose.

The information and analysis from the literature review were used to draft preliminary criteria
for differentiating higher education institutions in Ethiopia. The data collected from the
consultative workshops were also used to further refine the draft criteria developed. The
universities were then categorized in accordance with the refined criteria. Consultative meetings
with MoSHE, university presidents, and relevant stakeholders were repeatedly conducted ahead
of final categorization of the institutions.

60
Differentiation Study Report

4.4.2 International benchmarking

Following preliminary insights on the phenomenon of differentiation from multiple sources, it

was felt necessary to visit selected foreign universities to gain firsthand experience of what a
differentiated system looks like. This was intended to garner experiences in strategic approaches
to differentiation, appreciate coping mechanisms and underscore their significance for
contextualizing the phenomenon in Ethiopian universities. The program of the five-day visit,
which explored international benchmarking exercise and provided extensive knowledge, was
used in drafting the criteria and in the development of instruments used for data collection.

4.4.3 Fieldwork

Within Ethiopia, eight groups of university teachers were recruited to collect data as classified
under Table 5 below. Efforts were made to minimize bias in data collection procedures by
managing subjectivity and enhancing credibility. To this effect, data collectors, which comprised
interviewers and consultative workshop leaders; data encoders; and supervisors, were trained
prior to deployment. Orientations were provided on the nature of data collection tools, guidelines
for the data collection and student satisfaction surveys. The data collection effort was tightly
scheduled in order to deliver results in time.

Table 5: Data Collection Groups

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
1. Jimma 1. Jinka 1. Gondar 1. Axum
2. Mizan- Tepi 2. Hawassa 2. Debretabor 2. Adigrat
3. Bonga 3. Dilla 3. Debark 3. Mekelle
4. Addis Ababa 4. Bule Horra 4. Mekidela 4. Raya
5. Kotebe 5. Arbaminch Amba 5. Woldiya
Group 5 6. Welayta
Group 6 5. Wello
Group 7 Group 8
1. Kebri Dehar 1. Sodo
Gambella 1. Wachamo 1. Bahir Dar
2. Jigjiga 2. Asossa 2. Werabe 2. Debremarkos
3. Dire Dawa 3. Metu 3. Meda Welabu 3. Injibara
4. Haramaya 4. Dembi Dolo 4. Arsi 4. Selale

61
Differentiation Study Report

 Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
5. Oda Bultum 5. Wollega 5. Welketie 5. Debrebirhan
6. Semara 6. Ambo

4.5 Data analysis

The quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS and presented using descriptive and inferential
statistics. Qualitative data gathered through consultative workshops were transcribed, coded,
categorized, interpreted, analyzed and integrated with quantitative data.

4.6 Ethical considerations

Individual informants who participated in this study were effectively anonymized and their
consent secured ahead of their participation.

4.7 Research instruments

Carnegie Classification and U-Multi-rank models are the two commonly used approaches to rank
and classify universities. The Carnegie Classification Model classifies universities and colleges
under one dimension - the type and level of program they offer using secondary data available
from online sources. However, U-Mutli-rank Model (Figure 5) covers five higher-level
dimensions with several indicators against which a university’s performance is assessed. (Basic
facts about U-Multi-rank Model are available at https://www.umultirank.org/study-at/valencian-
international-university-rankings/). Unlike Carnegie Classification Model, U-Multi-rank’s data
collection process requires the willingness of universities to fill out questionnaires and make the
data available for the intended purpose. The five higher-level dimensions are: teaching and
learning, research involvement, involvement in knowledge transfer, international orientation,
and regional engagement. These dimensions are depicted in the Figure 5 and Table 6:

62
Differentiation Study Report

Figure 5: U-Multi-rank Sunburst: Performance Indicators

The U-Multi-rank Model was adapted in order to assess, describe and rate universities in
Ethiopia as a whole, as well as across programs they offer. The adaption was made in such a way
that the study team listed out and compared the dimensions and indicators along current practices
in Ethiopia. Following the exercise, the study team made deletions, insertions, and modifications
so as to make the dimensions, key indicators and tools relevant to Ethiopian context, for
example, Community Engagement was used as proxy dimension for Regional Engagement. The
five dimensions used are shown in Table 6.

Table 6: The Five Dimensions Used with Corresponding Key Indicators as a Framework
Dimensions Key Indicators (tools)
TL1. Name and number of undergraduate programs
Teaching and

TL2. Name and number of postgraduate programs

TL3. Academic staff profile
learning

TL4. Student Profile

63
Differentiation Study Report

Dimensions Key Indicators (tools)
TL5. Completion rate
TL6. Educational facilities
TL7. Quality of teaching and learning process
R1. Number of research papers completed in 2010 E.C
R2. Proportion of staff who participated in research in 2010 E.C
R3. Research budget (government + external source) in 2010 E.C
R4. Research publications
R5. Research publications in reputable journals
R6. Research citations in reputable journals
R7. External research income
R8. Post-doc positions
Research Involvement

R9. Established centers of excellence

R10. Research centers/stations
R11. State-of-the art labs
R12: Research impact (level of solving local community
problems)
KT1. Number of research projects conducted in collaboration with
industries and/or government sectors
Knowledge Transfer

KT2. Income from private sources

Involvement in

KT3. Number of patents awarded

KT4. Number of spin-offs
KT5. Graduate companies (companies established by graduates)
Int 1. International joint bachelor programs
Int 2. International joint masters’ programs
International orientation

Int 3. International joint Ph.D. programs

Int 4. Student mobility
Int 5. Staff mobility
Int 6. International joint publications
Int 7. Joint international projects/research

64
Differentiation Study Report

Dimensions Key Indicators (tools)
Int 8. Campuses overseas
Int 9. Facilities and amenities (accommodation, recreation
facilities, meeting facilities, ICT facilities, etc.) for international
students and staff
CE1. Service-learning programs
CE2. Community oriented projects by students
engagement
Community

CE3. Internships /externships

CE4. Community oriented project by staff
CE5. Community–university joint development projects

65
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION FIVE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The international experience depicts two major forms of implementing higher education
differentiation within an existing system. One is assigning missions and objectives to universities
as they form; the other, reforming universities with revised objectives and missions. There are
also possibilities where both forms may be exhibited or at work. In the Ethiopian context both
forms may be considered as Ethiopia may consider establishing new universities with articulated
specific objectives and it may also evaluate the missions of universities already in place and
tailor those missions to the societal needs of the country.

This study aimed at re-evaluating the vision and mission of universities already in operation and
attempted to categorize them or differentiate them into specific university or higher education
categories on the basis of their major objective. This section presents key findings of the study
along this line.

5.1. Data sources and volume

In order to get a comprehensive understanding of higher education in Ethiopia, past and present,
four strategic tools were used, prior to the actual task of differentiating public universities. The
first was conducting desk-review. This review was valuable to analyze numerous national policy
documents authored by scholars both within and outside the domain of differentiation. The
exploratory review examined international higher education differentiation experience from over
13 countries representing every continent.

The second tool used was international benchmarking that allowed visits to selected countries
with successful track records on differentiation. Notable insights were gained from the various
systems explored.

The third strategic tool utilized was a series of consultative meetings and workshops with key
stakeholders in the higher education sector such as university presidents and senior officials in
Ethiopia. The intention here was to collect broad-based information on status of individual
universities and the way forward.

66
Differentiation Study Report

While the above sources yielded qualitative data, the fourth strategic tool was essentially
different. It used university rankings based on largely quantitative data collected from each
public university that participated in the study. The identification of priority areas of studies for
universities (in terms of macro referents, such as band and empirical research orientation, etc.)
was augmented by the Scopus data to gain further insight on some indicators for the ranking.

Table 7 below illustrates the macro data units and the number of public universities which were
selected to participate in the ranking process. As Table 7 indicates, a total of 43 public
universities were included in the study. The same table also illustrates how massive the SPSS
generated data was when computed in terms of data cells from all indicators and sub-indicators.

Table 7: Macro-data Units and Subjects for the Status

No. Macro-data units/elements Number/Quantity

1 Number of public universities in the study 43
2 Number of dimensions of higher education indicated in the U-multi-rank tool 5

3 Total number of indicators under all dimensions of higher education 71

4 Number of variables counted in all indicators 665
5 Data sources 10,024
6 Number of data cells deciphered from the data collected using SPSS 6,700,000

Further breakdown of university ranking dimensions into indicators and sub-indicators would
highlight the scope of the university ranking and its depth of investigation as illustrated in Table
8. The U-multi-rank indicators were organized across the fundamental five established functions
of universities worldwide.

Table 8: University Functions Defined in Terms of Major Dimensions and Indicators

No. Dimension type Number of Potential

Indicators/questions
1 Teaching-learning 33
2 Research 15
3 Knowledge transfer 5
4 International orientation 9
5 Community engagement (regional engagement in the original U- 5
multi-rank list of indicators)
6 Additional parameters developed by the study team for this purpose 4
as it was needed to make some adaptation to the Ethiopian context

67
Differentiation Study Report

 5.2. Key findings

As indicated in the sections above, the study considered several strategies before finalizing the
differentiation categories. Data secured from the reviewed strategies were used as effective
predictors in regard to the categories. Universities were designated into the future focus each
should pursue. Data garnered from university ranking was not sufficient or complete to make the
final decision on what category a particular university should be differentiated into.

The designation into a category, therefore, was not made lightly. It was rather a culmination of
numerous evaluations and careful consideration of predictors. In the sections below, the results
found from each strategic tool is described and discussed. A cross-sectional data comparison was
also made ahead of the final decision.

5.3. Establishing Actual Model for Designation

Based on the literature review, a tentative conceptual model for differentiation was discussed
earlier (Figure 4). International experience proves that each country ought to create its own
differentiation process and model. From the six categories described in section two, three of the
categories covered colleges of different types (TVET, Liberal Arts, Fine Arts). The Ethiopian
reality, on the other hand, be it from the Higher Education Proclamation (1152/2019) or its long
history, suggests that there are three suitable categories with reduced number of preconditions.
This situation made it clear that one must construct a fitting classification model for the
Ethiopian higher education system. Figure 6 details the actual model developed.

68
Differentiation Study Report

 Practical Differentiation Labour
Model Market/Employ

Student
admissio
Alignment
with Mission
priority
Social
equity Research
Multidisci
University
plinary
Uniqueness
uniss University of

Applied Sciences
Staff Specialized
profile
Comprehensive
University
International
Orientation
Strategic
locational
Institutional Advantage

culture

Secondary

Figure6: Adopted Differentiation Model for Ethiopian Higher Education

This actual differentiation model directs the establishment of different differentiation categories
in the Ethiopian Higher Education System. In this model the inner circle depicts three well-
defined categories: 1) Research University; 2) University of Applied Sciences and 3)
Comprehensive University. The outer circle emphasizes the preconditions for their
establishment.

5.4. Designation of Ethiopian Universities in the Differentiated System

Given the Ethiopian higher education historical background, current higher education realities,
review of the country’s experiences, as well as lessons from international experiences, it is
suggested that the three categories of universities would be designated as research, applied
sciences, and comprehensive universities. This would be appropriate to differentiate the public

69
Differentiation Study Report

university system in Ethiopia. TVET colleges, liberal arts colleges and colleges of fine arts and
other post-secondary institutions were deemed not suitable for the Ethiopian context.

For the purpose of categorization, a U-multi-rank system was employed, where scores of each
university for indicators and sub-indicators were computed individually and then the total sum of
scores of each university was compared against scores of other universities. Those scores were
computed at various levels such as indicator level; dimension level, program level, college level,
band level, and finally university level. A five-dimension band scheme (teaching and learning,
research involvement, involvement in knowledge transfer, international orientation, and
community engagement) was adopted from the Ethiopian Ministry of Education. Table
9illustrates universities by aggregate scores and based on the U-multi-rank tool. This should not
be taken as an attempt to rank Ethiopian universities.

Table 9: Cumulative Scores of Ethiopian universities based on U-Multi-rank Tool

University Cumulative Points University Cumulative Points

(/330) (/330)

Bahir Dar 184 Wollega 85

Jimma 183 Asossa 81

Gondar 179 Semara 76

Haramaya 175 Dire Dawa 75

Addis Ababa 167 Kotebe 73

Hawassa 166 Woldiya 65

Mekelle 132 Arsi 64

Debre Markos 129 Metu 58

Arba Minch 126 Bule Hora 57

Wollo 121 Oda Bultum 53

Dilla 116 Injibara 46

Aksum 113 Selale 39

70
Differentiation Study Report

 University Cumulative Points University Cumulative Points
(/330) (/330)

Ambo 110 Debark 38

Adigrat 106 Worabe 38

Debre Berhan 104 Gambella 37

Wolaita Sodo 98 Mekdela Amba 34

Jigjiga 97 Kebri Dahar 32

Wolkite 97 Bonga 31

Debre Tabor 96 Raya 31

Wachemo 96 Dembi Dollo 28

Mizan-Tepi 93 Jinka 26

Madda Walabu 92 Borena N/A

The 44 public universities were categorized into the three categories identified earlier, Viz.
Research Universities, Universities of Applied Sciences, and Comprehensive Universities. The
table shows 43 universities and that is because Borena University was added afterwards. As
stated earlier, the two science and technology universities are considered specialized universities
and thus not included in this list.

In addition to the scores, the decision on categorizing universities in the three groups of
differentiation has also considered factors such as: stated missions of the university, opinions and
information collected from various stakeholders, social and political ramifications, adequate
preparedness and requisite capacity to fit any one of the categories.

In Ethiopia, universities are entitled to be degree granting institutions offering both

undergraduate and graduate programs in different proportions. Because of this, horizontal
differentiation is exercised with vertical integration within and among universities.

5.4.1. Research Universities

The core values of research universities include meritocracy; academic freedom and free

71
Differentiation Study Report

inquiry; discovery of new knowledge; peer-review system; and the pursuit of truth.

Based on literature review, assessment of the current situation of higher education in Ethiopia
and lessons drawn from international experiences, it is suggested that a Research University in
Ethiopia should strive to have:

• a teaching staff profile of at least 50% Ph.D. holders, with annual publications in
reputable journals;
• a significant number in Ph.D. and Masters’ students (Ethiopian and international),
preferably 30% or more enrolled in graduate programs;
• joint Masters’ and Ph.D. programs with overseas institutions;
• demonstrable academic and research collaborations with local, regional and international
partners;
• at least 5% of its total annual budget allocated for research, mobilized from local/public
and external research funding sources and including resources mobilized through local,
regional and international competitions;
• educational facilities commensurate with its teaching and research missions, including
laboratories, workshops, computer centers and ICT infrastructures, classrooms, digital
libraries, reference books and scientific journals (hard copy and e-books/journals), and
research centers and field research facilities; and
• development projects that are designed and implemented in collaboration with local
communities, national and regional government agencies, and industry and business.

Most Ethiopian universities need a focused and sustained policy and significant budgetary
support from the government in order to encourage the existing institutions to meet these
parameters and to function as effective universities.

Based on the U-multi-rank tool cumulative scores (as shown in Table 10), eight Ethiopian
institutions are categorized under Research Universities. Although these institutions do not fully
meet the requirements and international practices, the study observes that they can be shortlisted
for incubation and have the commitment and institutional readiness to build their overall capacity
to effectively qualify as research universities in the near future. Table 10 presents the list of
universities categorized as research universities.

72
Differentiation Study Report

Table 10: List of Research Universities

No. Name of university Location/Region

1 Bahir Dar Amhara Regional State

2 Jimma Oromia Regional State

3 Gondar Amhara Regional State

4 Haramaya OromiaRegional State

5 Addis Ababa Addis Ababa Administration

6 Hawassa SNNPR

7 Mekelle Tigray Regional State

8 Arba Minch SNNPR

5.4.2. Universities of Applied Sciences

Given the lack of sufficient data that would enable the research team to assign universities as
universities of applied sciences, it was noted that almost all universities could be assigned anew
to the category of applied university owing to the dire need of the country as verified in several
studies and policy documents. It was stressed that such a group for applied universities would
alleviate the chronic shortage for middle-level technical, vocational, and professional workforce.

As noted earlier, universities of Applied Sciences are the backbone of progress and economic
strength. They focus on programs that are practical in nature. The research conducted at these
universities should be applied and translated to address practical solutions.

Ethiopian Universities of Applied Sciences are institutions of higher education that focus on
professional programs and applied research and fulfill the following criteria:
• Provide tertiary education and grant academic degrees at all levels (85% undergraduate,
15% graduate students, and sometimes professional and work-based doctorate degrees) in
application-oriented and professional study programs in engineering, technical
disciplines, business-related studies, health, social work, and design areas;
• Have a staff profile of 75% MA/MSc holders and 20% or more Ph.D.; with at least 5% of

73
Differentiation Study Report

 its teaching staff having industry/business experience;
• Faculty are expected to have a 70% teaching load, a 10% community engagement, and a
20% technology application, innovation and transfer;
• Staff-student ratio is expected to be 1:25;

• UAS should have educational facilities commensurate with its teaching and research
missions, including laboratories, workshops, computer centers and ICT infrastructures,
classrooms, digital libraries, reference books and scientific journals (hard copy and e-
books/journals), and research centers and field research facilities;

• Universities of Applied Sciences are expected to align their curricula with the world of
work, collaborate closely and establish strong linkage with industry and business.
Curricula at UAS should emphasize integrated and supervised student practical
experiences in industry, business, enterprises or other relevant institutions;
• Universities of Applied Sciences may employ industry experts to train their students and
provide opportunities of apprentice in industry and business for their students to gain
technical expertise and experience;
• Most students of UAS should have technical and vocational background, and Universities
of Applied Sciences are expected to develop skills and experiences of their graduates
towards increased employability and job creation;
• UASs are expected to have a student composition of 85% undergraduate and15% in
graduate (MA/MSC and Ph.D.) programs;
• UASs are expected to establish strong linkages with business and industry and should
engage in collaborative applied research with industries (preferably constituting at least
60% their overall research projects and 10% of research funds);
• Students are expected to be engaged in a community-oriented project activity and service
learning, at least 25% of their time; and
UASs are expected to promote culture of innovation, by dedicating at least 30% of their
facilities for innovation work.

Based on the U-multi-rank tool cumulative scores (as shown in Table 11), fifteen Ethiopian
institutions are categorized under Universities of Applied Sciences.

74
Differentiation Study Report

Table 11: List of Universities of Applied Sciences

1. Ambo University 6. Debre Markos University 11. Samara University

2. Aksum University 7. Dilla University 12. Wolaita Sodo
3. Arsi University 8. Dire Dawa University University
4. Asossa University 9. Jigjiga University 13. Wolkite University
5. Debre Berhan University 10. Kotebe Metropolitan 14. Wollega University
University 15. Wollo University

5.4.3. Comprehensive Universities

As the name makes clear, comprehensive universities are institutions of higher learning with dual
obligations of teaching and research. These universities typically include strong undergraduate
divisions that award bachelors’ degrees, but graduate and professional schools are also common
that award masters’ and doctorate degrees. Comprehensive universities normally balance the
teaching and research obligations but may tend to focus more on the teaching side. However,
they still conduct useful and high-quality research as a matter of practice. Comprehensive
universities are comprehensive in their program offerings and so may operate multi-disciplinary
programs.

Based on literature review, assessment of the current situation of higher education in Ethiopia
and lessons from international experiences, it is suggested that a Comprehensive University
should strive to:

• balance the teaching and research obligations with a focus more on teaching;
• be comprehensive in their program offerings and so can operate multi-disciplinary
programs;
• have a staff profile of at least 20% Ph.D., with annual publications in reputable journals;
• enroll about 80% students in undergraduate programs and no more than 20% students in
graduate programs;
• have at least 3% of its total annual budget allocated for research, mobilized from
local/public and external research funding sources and including resources mobilized
through local, regional and international competitions;
• have educational facilities commensurate with its teaching and research missions,
including laboratories, workshops, computer centers and ICT infrastructures, classrooms,

75
Differentiation Study Report

 digital libraries, reference books and scientific journals (hard copy and e-books/journals),
and research centers and field research facilities;
• have demonstrable academic and research collaborations with local, Regional and
international partners; and
• have development projects that are designed and implemented in collaboration with local
communities, national and regional government agencies, and industry and business.

Based on the U-multi-rank tool cumulative scores (as shown in Table 12), twenty-one Ethiopian
institutions are categorized under Comprehensive Universities.

Table 12:List of Comprehensive Universities

1. Adigrat 8. Gambella 15. Mizan-Tepi

2. Bonga 9. Injibara 16. Oda Bultum
3. Bule Hora 10. Jinka 17. Raya
4. Borena 11. Kebri Dahar 18. Selale
5. Debark 12. Mekdela Amba 19. Wachemo
6. Debre Tabor 13. Madda Walabu 20. Worabe
7. Dembi 14. Metu 21. Woldiya
Dollo

5.5. Focus Area Identification

It has been indicated that the purpose of differentiation in Ethiopia is to tackle the problem of
homogenization and to enhance diversification. With differentiation, distinct types of HEIs
emerge with different missions and profiles. This could be possible if HEIs develop their own
focus areas out of which centers of excellence would surface. Focus areas, from this angle, mean
broad spectrum of program bands.

In each of the groups of differentiated university categories, there is a need to identify major
focus areas for teaching and research. Such identification would help the strengthening or
creation of centers of excellence, specializations and investment priorities. Such efforts would
also strengthen current niches of strength, help program selection by students, and facilitate
collaborations with stakeholders, development partners and sister institutions locally and abroad.

76
Differentiation Study Report

The study has used the current BAND identification that the Ministry employs to further identify
and suggest priority and focus areas for each university, particularly those grouped under
Research Universities and Universities of Applied Sciences. Since the study has not made any
suggestion on specialization of focus area for Comprehensive Universities these institutions are
expected to cover broad and general education programs and research areas. However,
depending on the specific geographic and socio-economic realities of their locations, each
comprehensive university may develop some unique features ultimately dictating its focus.

5.5.1 Focus Areas for Research Universities

Two parameters of band strength and research output were employed to identify focus areas for
research universities. However, because of data inconsistency in band strength, only research
outputs are used to determine prospective focus areas of research universities.

Research performance indicators vary from country to country, and from developed countries to
developing countries. The nature of performance indicators depends on the objective of research
in a country. Research organizations in developing nations, for example, use research objectives,
national research policy, requirements of funding agencies and the needs of industry as
performance indicators for R & D, while developed countries use citations, patent counts and
patent citations, and publication counts (Igel, 2003). One of the popular bibliographic databases
for measuring or indicating research performance of universities is the Scopus data base (Table
13). The Scopus consists of citations and abstracts from journal articles collected from as many
as 5,000 research journal publishers. It focuses on compiling citations and abstracts from peer
reviewed journal articles all over the world.

The fact that Scopus focuses on articles that are peer-reviewed and have undergone rigorous
scientific analysis and scrutiny makes Scopus publication relatively more reliable. The task force
has extracted relevant data from the Scopus database that helped identify universities’ potential
areas of research and their relative strength in research performance.

77
Differentiation Study Report

Table 13: Scopus Classification of Bands and Band Constituents

Band type Health Agriculture and Physical Sciences and Social Sciences and
Life Sciences Engineering Humanities

Constituents Medicine, Agriculture and Engineering, Earth and Social Sciences,

Immunology and Biological Plant Sciences, Economics-
Microbiology, Sciences, Chemistry, Computer Econometrics,
Pharmacology, Biochemistry, Sciences, Physics and Business, Arts and
Nursing, Genetics, Astronomy, Energy, Humanities, Multi-
Neurosciences, Molecular material Sciences, disciplinarians,
Dentistry, Health Biology, Mathematics, Chemical Phycology, Decision
Professions Veterinary Engineering, Sciences
Environmental Science

The study took into due consideration the overlapping band classification between the Ministry
of Education and that of the Scopus database and took insights from each set of data source in
their own way (the MoE-band based ranking made in this study and the Scopus band-based
analysis of research publications) to determine the research orientation of the top-ranking public
universities. Therefore, as can be deciphered from Table 13, some band areas such as health,
agriculture and life sciences, and engineering (Physical and STEM related sciences), social
sciences and humanities recurred with important degree of frequency (see relative percentages
that indicate the share of each university to the total number of national publications in the same
field) as the specialized areas of those indicated universities, though the degree of specialty
varies from university to university.

Table14: Focus Areas in Order of Publication Status

First Second Third Fourth Additional

Addis Health Physical science Social science Agri. and life science Center of
Ababa and STEM and humanities Excellence in
Teacher
Education

Jimma Health Agri. and life Physical science Social science and Center of
science and STEM humanities Excellence in
Teacher
Education

Gondar Health Agri. and life Social science Physical science and
science and humanities STEM

78
Differentiation Study Report

Hawassa Agri. and life Health Physical science Social science and Center of
science and STEM humanities Excellence in
Teacher
Education

Haramaya Agri. and life Social science and Physical science Health
science humanities and STEM

Bahir Dar Physical science Social science and Agri. and life Health Center of
and STEM humanities science Excellence in
Teacher
Education

Mekelle Physical science Agri. and life SC Health Center of

and STEM science Excellence in
Teacher
Education

Arba Physical Sciences Health Agriculture and Social Sciences and

Minch and Engineering Life Sciences Humanities

There was high chance for universities selected to continue as centers of excellence in teacher
education, in addition to focusing on some of the priority or relative strength areas indicated in
Table14. The universities hosting teacher education programs are Addis Ababa University, Bahir
Dar University, Hawassa University, Jimma University, and Mekelle University.

5.5.2 Focus Areas for Universities of Applied Sciences

Like the specification of focus areas made for the research universities, it is essential to identify
the focus areas for universities of applied sciences. Again, geographic and contextual factors,
development potentials and access were some of the key issues considered in the specification of
future expected areas for the universities of applied sciences as depicted in Table 15.

79
Differentiation Study Report

Table 15: Universities of Applied Sciences, Expected Future Areas of Focus, and Reasons for
Expected Areas of Focus

No. Universities Justifications Focus Areas

1 Aksum Economic corridor, archaeology, mining Technology, engineering, mining,

industry, tourism tourism and archaeology

2 Dilla Horticulture, agro-processing, agro- Agriculture, natural resource

forestry, education, etc. mgmt. Health, teacher education

3 Dire Dawa Economic corridor, industry park, plants of Engineering and technology,
industries, potential for business, railway Business and Economics
technology, etc.

4 Wolaita Agro-industry, natural resource Engineering and technology,

Sodo management, health, mining, culture and agriculture, geology, humanities
tourism, fishery

5 Asossa Proximity to Renaissance dam, Fishery, Engineering and technology,

water technology, mining, agro- processing, agriculture, geology, humanities
tourism, bamboo production

6 Samara Livestock, manufacturing, tourism, agro- Agriculture, mining, tourism

processing, archaeology

7 Ambo Agro-processing, industry, mining, Mining, agriculture, engineering

proximity to central market, agriculture and technology

8 Debre Industry zone, proximity to central market, Engineering and technology,

Berhan strength in health education Business and Economics, highland
agriculture, other Health sciences

9 Jigjiga Potential livestock production Livestock, agro-industry and

natural resource management.

10 Kotebe Urban development Urban development, education

11 Wollega Agro-processing, mining, manufacturing Agriculture, Agro-processing, agri-

business,

12 Wolkite Biotechnology, engineering, breweries, Technology, Business and

horticulture, bottled water industries, agro- Economics, Agriculture
processing etc.

80
Differentiation Study Report

No. Universities Justifications Focus Areas

13 Wollo Institutional culture (IOT) and proximity to Technology, social sciences and
industrial zone humanities

14 Arsi Agro-industries industrial park, agricultural Technology, engineering,

potential, health etc. agriculture, health

15 Debre Agro-processing, agricultural potential, art Agriculture, agro-processing,

Markos manufacturing, humanities

5.5.3 Focus Areas for Comprehensive Universities

Comprehensive universities offer a variety of programs focusing on both undergraduate and

graduate programs with equal strength. They focus both on teaching and research activities in a
balanced manner. While they focus on broad array of programs including in natural sciences,
health, and social sciences; engineering and technology fields may not be their strong suite.
However, they are not necessarily expected to mimic one another nor duplicate programs. Where
possible, each university is expected to focus on distinguishing areas and earn a reputation for
their institution.

81
Differentiation Study Report

 SECTION SIX

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

6.1. Conclusions

This study was commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MoSHE) with
the purpose of assessing local and international higher education experiences in order to provide
a mechanism for the introduction of a differentiated higher education system in Ethiopia. The
study involved evaluating the current status of higher education institutions (HEIs) and the HE
system in Ethiopia. It also included conducting a desk review of available literature including a
review of systems in 13 countries, and experience sharing visits. The study was guided by the
directions indicated in the Education and Training Roadmap, and the need to differentiate the
Ethiopian higher education system with clear missions and focus, in the interest of reorganizing
it to better serve the national development goals of the country. The overall study exercise has
provided a variety of conclusions, chief among which are the following:
1. Ethiopian universities currently suffer from massive duplication of disciplines, poor
quality of teaching, lack of focus, limited program choices, and lack of innovative spirit.
Public universities are unduly overstretched with preoccupation in offering a cocktail of
disciplines that heavily strain optimal use of resources.
2. The current system produces insufficient skilled manpower.
3. Differentiating the higher education system of Ethiopia is both a timely and essential
undertaking.
4. A three-category differentiation system was eventually conceived that includes 1)
Research Universities 2) Universities of Applied Sciences and 3) Comprehensive
Universities.
5. Differentiation should be implemented in an integrated fashion, with a phased approach,
buy-in from stakeholders and institutions, and full political support.
6. Differentiating higher education will require sustained effort in mobilization of resources.

82
Differentiation Study Report

6.2. Suggestions

Successful implementation of proposals included in this study requires that MoSHE provides
clear policy support (drafting Policy document, Policy Briefs and Implementation Strategies);
and conducts consultative and public awareness forums to get buy-ins by HEI leaders and
Boards, regional/local governments and communities, Federal agencies, and other stakeholders.
Furthermore, the Ministry should, through appropriate policy, ensure academic freedom of
higher education institutions, facilitate institutional autonomy, provide guidance on fulfilling
institutional accountability, and continuously review and adapt contextual factors such as
geographic and socio-demographic dynamics.

The Ministry should develop a clear implementation strategy framework to guide the
differentiation process; design a series of strategic and operational plans (including reorganizing
merit-based leadership, mechanisms of student enrolments, teaching staff needs, etc.); and
institute systems of periodic review, performance measurement and incentive mechanisms. The
Ministry should also prepare a clear transition strategy for smooth and effective adjustment
under the new differentiation designation.

The MoSHE should clearly articulate how the eight proposed Research Universities will be
supported by policy and resources to further identify specific specialized areas to become centers
of excellence in the interest of national development priorities.

In the true spirit of higher education reform, the Ministry ought to encourage the higher
education system to be fully oriented toward student success. Given the heterogeneity of student
talent, students should be challenged by competitive admissions criteria and entrance exam
results. As well, the system should be well developed such that students are given the
opportunity to individually enroll in the institution and discipline of choice based on their interest
and aptitude.

It is imperative that the Ministry supports institutional improvements with budgetary support –
capital and running costs to fulfill staff/faculty requirements, and facilities/infrastructure.
Furthermore, the differentiated higher education system will benefit greatly if the Ministry
institutes clear guidelines for attracting the Ethiopian Diaspora and Friends of Ethiopia to teach
and research in Ethiopian universities; mobilize resources from bilateral and multilateral

83
Differentiation Study Report

agencies and promote and support international collaboration and partnerships for faculty
training abroad (e.g. sandwich programs), joint curriculum and degree-awards, joint research,
and institutional development projects.

Ethiopian higher education institutions should discuss the policy direction and its
implementation with the university community and stakeholders to embrace the reform and
ensure its effective implementation. HEIs should strive to identify challenges of implementation
of the policy and provide input to MoSHE; review current programs and activities of their
institution; review Senate legislations and other institutional policies; and mobilize university
communities and other stakeholders for effective implementation.

With MoSHE’s leadership, HEIs and the Higher Education Strategy Center should continue
conducting further studies to better inform and make necessary adjustments during the
implementation of the policy of differentiation of higher education in Ethiopia. The MoSHE
should also urgently address policy considerations for specialized institutes such as the two
Science &Technology universities and private HEIs that are not covered in the current study.
Based on needs of the economy and national development strategies, the Ministry should further
consider opening new types of “specialized” institutions, such as a Teacher Education
University.

84
Differentiation Study Report

REFERENCES
Alemneh, T.Y. (2007). The Ethiopian Higher Education: Creating Space for Reform. St. Mary’s
UC Printing Press.
Altbach, P. (2011). The past, present and future of the research university. In P. Altbach & J.
Salmi (Eds.), The Road to Academic Excellence: The Making of World-Class Research
Universities (pp. 11–32). Washington: The World Bank.
Altbach, P.(2017). Postsecondary Systems, Massification, and the Research
University.International Higher Education, No. 91
Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & de Wit, H. 2017. Responding to Massification Differentiation in
Postsecondary Education Worldwide, Vol 3., p199.
Ayalon, H., & Yogev, A. (2005). Field of study and students’ stratification in an expanded
system of higher education: The case of Israel. European Sociological Review, 21(3), 227–
241.
Bordes, J. (2009). Strategic management Assignment: Building and Sustaining competitive
advantage. Unpublished.
Council of Ministers regulations (No. 60/1999). Federal Negarit Gazeta, 6th Year (No. 12, pp.
1194–1199).
Council on Higher Education, 2016. South African higher education reviewed: Two decades of
democracy.
Creswell, J., 2010. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches, 2.
DHET (Department of Higher Education and Training) (2014). Policy framework on
differentiation in the South African post-school system. Republic of South Africa.
European Union (2017). Overview of the higher education system Uzbekistan
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia [FDRE]. (2003a). Higher education proclamation No.
351/2003. Federal Negarit Gazeta 9(72), 2235-2263.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia [FDRE]. (2003b). Higher education cost-sharing
Council of Ministers regulation No. 91/2003. Federal Negarit Gazeta 9(85), 2335- 2339.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia [FDRE]. (2009). Higher education proclamation No.
650/2009. Federal Negarit Gazeta 15(64), 4976-5044.

85
Differentiation Study Report

Federal Negarit Gazeta of The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (2019). Higher
Education Proclamation (1152/2019). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
FDRE [Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia]. (1999a). Bahir Dar university establishment
FDRE [Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia]. (1999b). Debub university establishment
Council of Ministers regulations (No. 62/1999). Federal Negarit Gazeta, 6th Year (No.
14, pp. 1206–1211).
FDRE [Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia]. (1999). Education sector development
program (action plan) II (ESDP II). Addis Ababa: MoE.
FDRE [Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia]. (1999c). Jimma university establishment
Council of Ministers regulations (No. 63/1999). Federal Negarit Gazeta, 6th Year (No.
15, pp. 1212–1217).
FDRE [Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia]. (1999d). Mekelle university establishment
Council of Ministers regulations (No. 61/1999). Federal Negarit Gazeta, 6th Year (No.
13, pp. 1200–1205).
Gibbon, T et. al. (2011). Higher Education and an Expanded Post-School Education System in
Shaping the Future of South Africa’s Youth. Center for Higher Education Transformation.
Harris, J. 1996. Articulation and Transfer into and within a South African Higher Education
System. National Commission on Higher Education, Task Group 5, Technical Committee
4, Paper 3.
Harvey, P. and Fiona, D. (2010). The Benefits of Greater Differentiation of Ontario’s University
Sector. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO), Canada.
Harvey P. Weingarten, President & CEO Fiona Deller, Research Director Higher Education
Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)
Huisman, J. 1995. Differentiation, Diversity and Dependency in Higher Education. Utrecht
Jansen, J., McLellan, C. and Greene, R. (2008) 'South Africa', in D. Teferra and J. Knight, (eds.)
Higher Education in Africa: The International Dimension, Accra/Boston: AAU, pp. 387–
420.
Hicks, Mand Jonker, L (2016). The Differentiation of the Ontario University System: Where are
we now and where should we go? Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO).
Canada

86
Differentiation Study Report

Kim, C., Tamborini, C. R., & Sakamoto, A. (2015). Field of study in college and lifetime
earnings in the U.S. Sociology of Education, 88(4), 320–339.
Kyvik, S., 2004. Structural changes in higher education systems in Western Europe. Higher
Education in Europe, 29(3), pp.393-409.More explanation is needed on the criteria of
horizontal differentiation
Lloyd, D. and Wallace, J., 2004. Imaging the future of science education: The case for making
futures studies explicit in student learning.
Maarja Beerkens-Soo Hans Vossensteyn 2009. Higher education issues and trends from an
international perspective. Deel II. Rapport bv Commissie Veerman
Martin, J., Oksanen, R., & Takala, T. (2000). Preparation of the education sector development
program in Ethiopia. Paris: Association for the Development of Education in Africa
(ADEA).
Matsuzuka, Y., 2013, March. Horizontal and Vertical Differentiation in the Global Market for
Higher Education: An economic perspective. In Higher education forum: a COE
publication (Vol. 10, pp. 71-80).
Meek, V.L., Goedegebuure, L. and Huisman, J., 2000. Understanding diversity and
differentiation in higher education: an overview. Milian et al., (2016). Barriers to
differentiation: Applying organizational studies to Ontario higher education. Canadian
Journal of Higher Education. Volume 46, No.1, 2016. Pages 19-37.
Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) (2011) Integrated Early Childhood Development Strategic
Plan 2011/12-2015/16.

MoE(2018). Education Statistics Annual Abstract 2010 E.C. (2017/18). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

MoE (2017). Education Statistics Annual Abstract 2010 E.C. (2017/18). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

MoE (2015). Education Sector Development Program V- ESDP V. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

MoE, Transitional Government of Ethiopia (1994). National education and training policy. Addis
Ababa: St George Press.
National Council for Tertiary Education. (2014). Students’ Enrolment, 2011/2012 in Publicly
Funded Universities in Ghana. Accra, Ghana.: Adwinsa Publication.
Ng’ethe, N, Subotzky, G. and Afeti, G. (2008). Differentiation and Articulation in Tertiary
Education Systems. A Study of Twelve Countries. The World Bank.

87
Differentiation Study Report

Igel, C.(2003) Neuroevolution for reinforcement learning using evolution strategies. In:
Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2003). Volume 4.
Olaniyan, D.A., & Okemakinde, T. (2008). Human Capital Theory: Implications for educational
development. Pakistan Journal of Social Science, 5(5), 479-483
Said, M. E. (2003). Higher education in Egypt. In D. Teferra & P. G. Altbach (Eds.), Handbook
for higher education in African countries (pp. 285–300). Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Said, M. E. (2014). Vocational education and training policies affecting Egyptian rural
communities. In H. Handoussa (Ed.), Analysis of Social Policies Affecting Egyptian Rural
Communities, (pp. 137-160). Cairo: AfDB.
Saint, W. and Capper, J (2000). Tertiary distance education and technology in Sub-Saharan
Africa (No. 20992, pp. 1-50). The World Bank.
Said, A.M., Paim, L.H. and Masud, J. (2003). Environmental concerns, knowledge and
practices gap among Malaysian teachers. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher
Education.
Saint, W (2003). 'Tertiary Distance Education and Technology in Sub Saharan Africa', in
Damtew Teferra and Philip Altbach, eds, African Higher Education: An International
Reference Handbook, Bloomington: Indiana University
Saint, W (2000). Tertiary Distance Education and Technology in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Education and Technology Technical Note Series, Vol. 5, No. l. Washington, D.C.: The
World Bank. Salim, Jamil (2017). Improving performance of Ethiopian Universities in
Sciences and Technology. A Policy Note. World Bank Group. 112p
Scott, S., 2009. Making sense of everyday life. Polity.
Strategic Planning Unit (2012). Postsecondary vocational education and training (PVET) in
Egypt: Country background report. Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE). Retrieved from
http://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/mhe-spu.org/ Content Pages/2473387763.pdf
Tassew Woldehanna, Tesfaye Shiferaw, Gebregziabher Debeb, Bekele Workie, Gemechis File
Duressa and Tefera Tadesse (2017). Roadmap for Education Development in Ethiopia:
Desk Review on the Theme of Higher Education. Education Strategy Center, Ministry of
Education, unpublished report

88
Differentiation Study Report

Teichler, U. (2002). Erasmus in the Socrates programme. Findings of an evaluation study. Bonn,
Lemmens.
Teichler, U (2009). Internationalisation of higher education: European experiences. Asia Pacific
education review, 10(1), pp.93-106.
The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (2001). The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The United States of America.
The German Council of Science and Humanities (2010). Recommendations on the differentiation
of higher education institutions. Wissenschaftsrat.
Triventi, M., Vergolini, L., & Zanini, N. (2017). Do individuals with high social background
graduate from more rewarding fields of study? Changing patterns before and after the
‘Bologna processes. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 51, 28 –40.
Trow, M., 1979. Aspects of diversity in American higher education. On the making of
Americans, pp.271-90.
Trow, M., 1979. Elite and mass higher education: American models and European
realities. Research into higher education: Processes and structures, pp.183-219.
UN (2004); Challenges of Change in Higher Education, Peter A.J. Englert, International Center
for Climate and Society, University of Hawaii (unpublished presentation)
UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization]. (1988).
Ethiopia— higher education: Development of university education. Paris: UNESCO
Van Vught, F. 2007. Diversity and Differentiation in Higher Education Systems
Van Vught, F., 2007. Diversity and differentiation in higher education systems. In CHET
anniversary conference (Vol. 16).
Vught (2007). Diversity and Differentiation in Higher Education Systems. Cape Town.
Wagaw, T. G. (1990). The development of higher education and social change: An Ethiopian
experience. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Waghid, Y., 2015. Are doctoral studies in South African higher education being put at risk?:
leading article. South African Journal of Higher Education, 29(5), pp.1-7.
Weingarten and Deller, (2010). The British Council, Teaching for success, Continuing
professional Development (CPD) Framework for teachers, www.teachingenglish.org.uk).
Weingarten, H.P & Deller, F. (2010). The Benefits of Greater Differentiation of Ontario’s
University Sector, Final Report. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)

89
Differentiation Study Report

World Bank. (2003). Higher education for Ethiopia: pursuing the vision. Washington DC:
Author.
World Bank, (2000). Higher Education in Developing Countries: Peril and Promise. Task Force
on Higher Education and Society. Washington, D.C.
World Bank 2000. World Development Report 1999/2000: Entering the 21st Century. Oxford
University Press, New York.
Yizengaw, T. (2003, September 23-25). Transformations in higher education: experiences with
reform and expansion in Ethiopian higher education system. Keynote paper at the Regional
Training Conference on Improving Tertiary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Things That
Work! Accra, Ghana
Yu, K., Stith, A., Liu, L. & Chen, H.Z. (2012). Tertiary Education at a Glance. Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
Zarifa, D. (2012). Choosing fields in an expansionary era: Comparing two cohorts of
baccalaureate degree-holders in the United States and Canada. Research in Social
Stratification and Mobility, 30(3), 328–351.

90
Differentiation Study Report

 PHOTOS OF CONTRIBUTORS

Top Leaders of MoSHE

Professor Hirut Woldemariam

Minister, Ministry of Science

and Higher Education

Professor Afework Kassu

State Minister, Ministry of Science
and Higher Education

Dr. Samuel Kifle

State Minister, Ministry of Science

and Higher Education
Dr. Mulu Nega
State Minister, Ministry of Science
and Higher Education

91
Differentiation Study Report

 MoSHE Differentiation Study Team

Left to right
Back: Dr. Mekasha Kassaye, Dr. Adula Bekele, Dr. Tesfaye Muhiye, Dr. Genene Abebe,
Professor Nigussie Dechassa,, Dr. Ephraim Tekele, Dr. Guesh Kiros
Front: Dr. Yemataw Wondie, Tesfaye Negewo

The Study Team Participating in a Workshop

92
Differentiation Study Report



The study team at one of its study Study Team Conferring with MoSHE Top
visits in Mannheim, Germany, July Management
2019

MoSHE Differentiation Editorial Team

Left to Right
Professor Mengesha Admassu, Dr. Tesfaye Muhiye, Dr. Haregewoin Fantahun,
Dr. Worku Negash, Dr. Ephraim Tekle, Dr. Ebba Mijena

93
Differentiation Study Report

Annex I: Profiles of Ethiopian Public Universities

Name of University: Addis Ababa Science and Technology University

Year Established:2011 (2003 E.C.)
Location: Addis Ababa
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges => 5, Institutes => 1
Number of Programs:

Undergraduat Masters Ph.D. Total
e
22 35
36 93

Number of Students:

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total

Assistant Professors Professors
M sF M F M F M F M F M F T
3 1 180 36 105 8 20 0 4 0 312 45 357

Number of Admin Staff: M=> 225, F=>298, T=>523

Centers of Excellence:
1. Artificial Intelligence & Robotics Center of Excellence
2. Bioprocessing Center of Excellence
3. Construction Quality &Technology Center of Excellence
4. High-Performance Computing and Big Data Analytics Center of Excellence
5. Mineral exploration, extraction and processing Center of Excellence
6. Nanotechnology Center of Excellence
7. Nuclear Reactor Technology Center of Excellence
8. Sustainable Energy Center of Excellence
Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all Centers of Excellence area.
Vision: AASTU aspires to be internationally recognized Ethiopian hub of science and technology with a
strong national commitment and significant continental impact by 2025.

Website: www.aastu.edu.et

94
Differentiation Study Report

Name of University: Adama Science and Technology University
Year Established: 2005 (1998 E.C.)
Location: Adama
Distance from Addis Ababa: 100 km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges/Schools => 5, Divisions => 1
Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
20 22 13 55

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total

Assistants Professors professors

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
20 2 22 414 29 443 3 150 47 2 49 17 0 17 645 36 681
Academic Staff Profile by Rank

No BSC MSc Ph.D. BSC, MSc, Ph.D.

1 22 443 216 3:65;12
Number of Admin Staff: M = 818, F =1001, Total =1820
Centers of Excellence:
1. Space Science Institute
2. Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences
3. Institute of Water Resources and Irrigation Engineering
4. Transport and Vehicle Engineering
5. Electrical System and Electronics
6. Urban Housing and Development
7. Advanced Manufacturing Engineering
8. Advanced Material Science and Engineering
Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all research areas of academic programs and centers of excellences.
Vision: ASTU aspires to be the first choice in Ethiopia and the premier center of excellence in applied science and
technology in Africa by 2025.
Website: www.astu.edu.et

95
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Addis Ababa University
Year Established: 1950 (1943 E.C.)
Location: Addis Ababa
Number of Campuses: 15, Colleges 10, Technology Institutes 2, Teaching and Research Institutes 4,
Research Institutes 7, Schools 19, and Teaching Hospitals 2.
Total Number of Students
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
17,868 10,887 28,75 11,38 4,359 15,74 2,025 31 2,344 31,28 15,565 46,847
5 9 8 9 2

Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Sub-specialty Total
73 212 96 23 41 445

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate
Lecturers and Assistant Associate
Assistants Professors Grand Total
Ast. Lecturers Professors Professors
(I & II)
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
130 74 30 32 12 12 44
48 40 88 290 1598 98 843 17 3 2,529 2,977
8 5 4 1 4 7 8

Number of Admin Staff: M =1480, F = 3015, Total = 4,495

Health Professionals of Tikur Anbessa Staff: M = 457, F = 745, Total = 1,202
Technical Assistants: M = 103, F = 35, Total = 138
Joint International Published Research:5,170 Articles from 2014-2018, and among them 4, 656
articles are indexed by SCOPUS from 2014-2019.
Centers of Excellence: 9, (1) African Railway Research and Education Excellence Center, (2)
Biomedical Engineering Excellence Center, (3) African Center of Excellence for Water Management, (4)
Center of Excellence for Post-Conflict Society (5) Center of Excellence for Land and Water Resource, (6)
Center of Excellence for Governance, (7) Institute of Peace and Security, (8) Center of Excellence for
Drug Trial – Africa, (9) Aklilu Lemma Institute of Biotechnology.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Space Science, Health Sciences, Leadership and other centers of
excellence.
Vision: Addis Ababa University aspires to be ranked among the top ten preeminent African graduate and
research universities by 2023.
Website: www.aau.edu.et

96
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Adigrat University
Year Established2011 (2004E.C.)
Location: Adigrat
Distance from Addis Ababa: 900km
Number of Colleges: 7

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
12428 6766 19194 311 80 391 12739 6846 19,585
Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Total

50 14 64

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
149 66 215 440 85 525 59 8 67 7 1 8 655 160 815

Number of Admin Staff: M => 478, F => 964, Total => 1,442

Centers of Excellence: 1. Beles Institute of Chemical Engineering, 2. Digital Library Center

Hawzien, 3. Agriculture Research and Technology Center, 4. ICT Center, 5. Medicine and
Health Sciences, 6. STEM Center.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Tourism, Health Science, Chemical Engineering, Animal
Production.

Vision: To become the best Beles Institute that improves the socio-economic and environmental
contributions of cactus internationally by 2030.

Website: www.adu.edu.et

97
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Ambo University
Year Established:2005 (1998E.C.)
Location: Ambo
Distance from Addis Ababa:130km
Number of Campuses: 4, Colleges =>4, Institutes => 3, Schools => 3

Total Number of Student

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
15482 10419 25901 1925 315 2240 13 3 16 17,420

10,737
28,157

Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D Total
95 55 4 154
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant
Assistant Lecturer Professor Others Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
101 18 119 169 12 181 4 0 4 46 8 54 320 38 358

Number of Admin Staff: M =>422, F => 304, Total =>726

Centers of Excellence:1. Innovation and Technology Incubation Center, 2. Technology and
Business Incubation Center.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: 1. Indigenous Medicine, Plant Science, Urban Land Use
Planning, Disaster Risk Management and Sustainable Development, forestry, Biology,
Cadastral Surveying Geomatics, Horticulture, Nursing, Psychology, Environmental
Science, Governance and Development Studies, Mechanical Engineering, Pharmacy,
Special Needs, Agribusiness & Value Chain Management, Medical laboratory Science,
Rural development, Agriculture extensions, Tourism Management, Agricultural Economics,
Computer Science/ Information Technology, Industrial Engineering, Veterinary Science/
Vet Lab. Technology, Food process Engineering and Post-harvest, Land Administration &
Surveying.
Vision: To become a renowned university of choice in East Africa by 2025.
Website: www.ambou.edu.et

98
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Arbaminch University
Year Established: 2003 (1996 E.C.)
Location: Arbaminch
Distance from Addis Ababa: 435 km
Number of Campuses: 6, Colleges = 6 Institutes = 2 Schools = 4, and 1 Sport Academy

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total

M F T M F T M F T M F T

21834 11157 32991 3434 422 3856 130 6 136 25398 11585 36983

Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total

76 101 22 199

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex (on duty):

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
1 1
101 33 134 670 130 802 218 5233 39 0 39 81 19 1046 179 1225

Number of Admin Staff: M = 2,227 F = 2,621 Total = 4,838

Total Number of Research Staffs (on duty):

Research Lab Technical Assistant Associate

Researchers Total
Assistants Researchers Researchers
11 10 15 7 43
Centers of Excellence
1. Water Resource Development Research Center
2. Biodiversity and conservation research
3. Neglected Tropical Diseases Research center,
4. Cultural diversity and Language research
5. High land Fruits and Vegetables research
6. Livestock and Fishery Research
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Water Resources management, High land Fruits and
Vegetables, Livestock and Fishery, cultural and social Anthropology, Geo informatics
Vision: Aspires to be one of the best universities in Ethiopia, among the top 30 in Africa, and one of the well-
known universities in the world in teaching, research and community service by 2033.
Website: www.amu.edu.et

99
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Arsi University
Year Established: 2014 (2007E.C.)
Location: Assela
Distance from Addis Ababa: 175km
Number of Campuses: 4, Colleges = 5, Institutes =1, Schools = 1

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
5598 4336 9933 1655 301 1956 0 0 0 7253 4636 11889

Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Total

41 22 - 4 67

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex (active):

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Grand Total

Assistants Professors Professors

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T

31 19 50 305 89 394 104 5 109 13 1 14 453 114 567

Number of Admin Staff: M = 930, F = 962,Total = 1892

Centers of Excellence: Agricultural Sciences, Environmental Sciences, Health Sciences and
Technology.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Dairy farm, Agricultural & Environmental sciences, and
Health Sciences.
Vision: Arsi University aspires to be among the leading East African Universities and
recognized university in the world by 2033.
Website: www.arsiun.edu.et

100
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Assosa University
Year Established: 2011 (2004E.C.)
Location: Assosa
Distance from Addis Ababa: 660 km
Number of Colleges:7, Institutes/Research Centers 3, Schools 3

Total Number of Students:

Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
7833 3580 11413 360 50 410 0 0 0 8,193 3,630 11,823

Number of Programs:

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Number of Admin Staff: M =>897, F =>983, Total => 1,880

Centers of Excellence: Agriculture and Natural Resource Conservation, Geology and Mineral
(Mining), Health and Indigenous Knowledge.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Natural Resource Management. Geological Science and
Mining, Livestock Production, Mango Production and Processing, Indigenous knowledge,
Health and Infectious Diseases, Tourism Management.

Vision: To be one of the top ten universities in Ethiopia by 2025.

Website: www.asu.edu.et

101
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Aksum University
Year Established: 2005 (1998E.C.)
Location: Aksum
Distance from Addis Ababa: 1038km
Number of Colleges: 8

Number of Students:
Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
15010 9119 24129 2452 361 2813 17462 9480 26,942
Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Total

65 29 94

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
320 105 425 616 90 706 66 0 66 1 0 1 1003 195 1198

Number of Admin Staff: M =>1070, F =>756, Total => 1826

Centers of Excellence:5, Archaeology and Tourism Excellence center, Main Campus,

Medebay Zena Health and Demographic Surveillance, Natural Resource Center of
Excellence (Agriculture, Water and Mine), Shire Campus, Selekleka Research Center,
Textile and Garment Center (Adwa Campus).
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Archeology, Tourism, geology, Agriculture and water and
Mining Engineering. Smart climate integrated watershed management, Strengthening
Education for Mining in Ethiopia, Healthy Housing for the Displaced, Peace, Security and
Rule of Law, Agricultural transformation, Archaeology and Heritage Management.

Vision: To be a university of first choice for high quality learning and research environment
and a genuine sense of community by 2020.
Website: www.aku.edu.et

102
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Bahir Dar University
Year Established: 1999 (1992E.C.)
Location: Bahir Dar
Distance from Addis Ababa: 560km
Number of Campuses: 9, Colleges = 5, Institutes 4, Schools 2, Faculty= 2, Academies = 2
Total Number of students
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
22715 12391 35,106 5748 1355 7103 615 63 678 29078 13809 42,887
Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Total
112 145 57 7 321
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:
Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
24 17 41 896 220 1116 369 35 404 94 1 95 11 0 11 1394 273 1667

Number of Admin Staff: M = 2432, F =2992, Total = 5,424

Centers of Excellence:14,Energy Research Centre, Washera Radar &Geo-Space Research
Centre, STEM Centre, Textile & Garment Research Centre, Biotechnology Research Institute,
Blue Nile Water Institute, Entrepreneurship Development & Incubation Center, Institute of
Pedagogical & Education Research, Institute of Economic Research, Geospatial & Technology
Center (GDTC), Mecha Health Research Center, Abay Cultural & Language Development
Center, BDU Arbitration Center, and BDU Free Legal Aid Center.
Bahir Dar University has already been chosen as National Center of Excellence (CoE) in:
Teacher Education & Leadership Studies, and Textile Engineering.
Bahir Dar University has already been chosen as Regional Center of Excellence in: Land
Administration, Maritime, and Disaster Risk Management & Sustainable Food Security
Studies.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: All departments.
Vision: The vision of Bahir Dar University is to become one of the ten premier research
universities in Africa by 2025.

Website: www.bdu.edu.et

103
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Bonga University
Year Established: 2017 (2010E.C.)
Location: Bonga
Distance from Addis Ababa:465km
Number of Colleges: 5
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M => 2,323, F => 1,340, T => 3,663
Number of Programs: Undergraduate =>26

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant
Assistant Lecturer Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F Total
37 12 49 148 35 183 4 2 6 189 49 238

Number of Admin Staff: M =>385, F => 530, Total =>915

Centers of Excellence: Natural resource conservation and utilization with particular focus on
coffee.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Natural resource development and conservation, Natural
resource management, flora and fauna.

Vision: To be the first among the leading higher education institutions of Africa in Natural
Resource Management and Utilization by 2030.

Website: www.bongau.edu.et

104
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Bule Hora University
Year Established: 2010 (2003E.C.)
Location: Bule Hora
Distance from Addis Ababa: 464km
Number of Colleges: 8, Schools => 1

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
12801 28316 41117 371 13 384 13172 28329 41,501

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 57, Masters => 6, Total => 63

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant
Assistant Lecturer Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F Total
238 30 268 280 23 303 15 1 16 533 54 587

Number of Admin Staff: M => 861 F => 942 Total => 1,803

Centers of Excellence: 1. Animal Range Science/Plant Science/,2.

Geology, Social,3. Anthropology/Medical Science.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Mining, Archeology, Animal Sciences

Vision: To be a center of excellence in mining, animal production as well as indigenous

knowledge research and one of the recognizable universities in Ethiopia by 2025 G.C.

Website: www.bhu.edu.et

105
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Debark University
Year Established: 2017 (2010E.C.)
Location: Debark
Distance from Addis Ababa: 834km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges => 4. Schools =1
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M => 1,590, F =>
1,293, T => 2,883
Number of Programs: Undergraduate: 23

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
29 4 33 150 33 183 3 0 3 1 0 1 1 0 1 184 37 221

Number of Programs:
Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T
14 3 17 7 1 8 21 4 25

Number of Admin Staff: M=> 317, F=> 168, Total=> 485

Centers of Excellence: To be a Center of Excellence in Tourism and Highland Agriculture.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Tourism, High Land Agriculture and Business Development.

Vision: To be one of the top 15 Ethiopian universities by 2030.

Website: www.dku.edu.et

106
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Debre Berhan
Year Established: 2006 (1999 E.C.)
Location: Debre Berhan
Distance from Addis Ababa: 130 km
Number of Colleges: 10, Institutes = 2, Schools = 0

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Postgraduate Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
14,513 8,357 22,870 1,917 720 2,637 15 0 15 16,445 9,077 25,522

Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
53 51 2 106

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate
Assistants Lecturers Professors Professors Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
18 27 45 485 152 637 199 14 213 11 0 11 713 193 906

Number of Admin Staff: Male = 665, Female = 585, Total = 1,250

Centers of Excellence: Highland Agriculture and Agro-processing, Engineering and Technology,

Business and Economics, Agriculture and Environment Protection and Other Health Science.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: All Departments, Specifically Enhancing Productivity and
Environmental Sustainability; Quality of Education; Historical and Cultural Heritage Management;
Entrepreneurship, Business Management and Marketing; Building Human Security; Technology
Adaptation, Development, and Transfer; Emerging and Advanced Computing Technology; Business
Process Automation and Localization, and Health, Nutrition, and Welfare.

Vision: Debre Berhan University aspires to be one of the best universities in Ethiopia by 2020.

Website: http://www.dbu.edu.et

107
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Debre Markos University
Year Established:2006 (1999E.C.)
Location: Debre Markos
Distance from Addis Ababa: 300km
Number of Colleges: 10

Total Number of Students:

Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
5119 3239 8358 1284 299 1583 4 0 4 6,407 3,538 9,945

Number of Programs: Undergraduate= 54, Masters= 45, Ph.D. = 1, Total = 100

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
175 35 210 557 72 629 95 4 99 0 0 0 827 111 938

Number of Admin Staff: M =853, F =689, Total = 1,542

Centers of Excellence: 7: Crop Production and agro-processing Cen

Culture, literary and language, Entrepreneurship and marketing, Livestock production and agro-
processing, Natural resource and conservation and ma, Public health, Teachers' education

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all Centers of Excellence.

Vision: Debre Markos University strives to be one of the top ten universities in Africa by 2025.

Website: www.dmu.edu

108
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Debre Tabor
Year Established: 2011 (2004 E.C.)
Location: Debre Tabor
Distance from Addis Ababa: 667km
Number of Colleges: 6

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
9799 5700 15499 264 35 299 10063 5735 15,798

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 41, Masters => 7, Total => 48

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
93 26 119 334 44 378 9 0 9 2 2 438 70 508

Number of Admin Staff: M =>585, F =>347, Total =>932

Centers of Excellence: Engineering and Computer Sciences, Agriculture and

Environment/Natural resource Management, Medicine and Health Sciences.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In the area of center of excellence.

Vision: Debre Tabor University strives to become one of the icons of quality education and
nationally reputable university in Ethiopia by 2020.

Website: www.dtu.edu.et

109
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Dembi Dolo University
Year Established: 2017 (2010 E.C.)
Location: Dembi Dolo
Distance from Addis Ababa: 624km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges => 6, Schools =3

Total Number of Students:

UnderGraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
1,882 1,371 3,253 259 39 298 2,141 1,410 3,551

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 36, Masters => 7, Total => 43

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Number of Admin Staff: M => 344, F =>341, Total => 685

Centers of Excellence: Institute of International Coffee research Center, Medicine and Health
Science, Natural Resource Conservation, Indigenous Knowledge, Mineral Mining and
Center of Excellence of Teachers and Education Management.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: - In all centers of Excellence areas.

Vision: Dembi Dolo University aspires to be one of the top ten ranked universities in Ethiopia
and one of the renowned universities in Africa by 2026.

Website: www.dedu.edu.et

110
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Dilla University
Year Established: 1994 (1989E.C.)
Location: Dilla
Distance from Addis Ababa: 360km
Number of Campuses: 2, Colleges=>8,Schools => 2

Total Number of Student

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
19441 8005 27446 1722 292 2014 8 0 8 21,171
8,297
29,468

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 54, Masters =>40, Ph.D. => 1 Total => 95

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
62 28 90 534 109 643 79 5 84 2 0 2 677 142 819

Number of Admin Staff: M =>1231, F =>971, Total =>2,202

Centers of Excellence: 1, Coffee Research Center, 2. Botanic Science.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Plant Science, Biodiversity, Natural Resource and Botanic
Development.

Vision: To be one of top ten universities in East Africa in teaching-learning, research, and
community service by 2025.

Website: www.du.edu.et

111
Differentiation Study Report

Name of University: Dire Dawa University
Year Established: 2006(1999E.C.)
Location: Dire Dawa
Distance from Addis Ababa: 515 km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges: 5, Institutes: 1 Schools: 7
Number of Programs: Undergraduate: 49, Masters: 30, Total: 79

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F Total M F Total M F Total M F Total
12,204 6,147 18378 1147 322 1,469 0 0 0 13, 6,496 19,847
351

Academic Staff Profile by Rank &Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors
Others Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors (Sub-
specialty)
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
34 8 42 46 6 53 7 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 8 16 1,04
2 7 9 6 7 3 4 2 8 2 5
3

Number of Admin Staff: M=427, F= 858 Total= 1,285

Centers of Excellence:
Interest Areas for Collaboration: All fields of Study.
Vision: Dire Dawa University strives to be the premium choice university in the nation,
competent in Africa and internationally accredited in science and technology by 2025.
Website: www.ddu.edu.et

112
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Gambella University

Year Established: 2014 (2007 E.C.)

Location: Gambella

Distance from Addis Ababa: 767 km

Number of Campuses: 2, Colleges = 2, Faculty = 3, Institutes = 0, Schools = 2

Number of Programs: Undergraduate =31, Masters = 4, Total = 35
Total Number of Students
Under graduates Masters PhD Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
3926 1833 5759 253 16 269 - - - 4179 1849 6028

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
269 40 309 189 21 210 21 - 21 12 1 13 5 - 5 496 62 558

Number of Admin Staff: M =>204, F =>439, Total => 643

Centers of Excellence: Research and Academics.

Interest Areas for Collaboration:

• Staff and student exchanges
• Research collaborations
• Community services collaborations
• Joint programs
Vision: Envisages becoming one of the recognized academic and research centers in Africa by 2030.
Website: www.gmu.edu.et

113
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: University of Gondar

Year Established: 1961 (1954 E.C.)

Location: Gondar

Distance from Addis Ababa: 738 km

Number of Colleges: 7, Faculties => 1, Institutes => 2, Schools => 1
Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
85 129 29 243

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
24931 15533 40466 5345 1429 6774 191 28 219 30469 16990 47459

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

GA-I GA-II Assistant Lecturers Assistant Associate Pro Grand

Lecturers Professors Professors fessors Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
2
1 4 7
114 135 51 56 0 1 1 229 9 9
31 19 50 67 28 95 429 182 611 3 212 5 7 52 9 97 5 2 0 1 1 4 9 3

Number of Admin Staff: M => 2081, F => 2994, Total => 5,075

Centers of Excellence: 9, Biotechnology, Intelligence Center, Tourism Department.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Capacity building for faculties, Capacity building for university leaders;
Experience sharing; Material support (teaching aids, medical equipment and diagnostic facilities), some
equipment not available in the market while we need them badly. For example, dialysis machine and its
chemical are not readily available in the market. Shortage of high skilled manpower especially at Ph.D.
level.

Vision: University of Gondar strives to be the leading societal problem-solving university in Ethiopia by
2025.
Website: http://www.uog.edu.et

114
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Haramaya University
Year Established: 1953 (1946E.C.)
Location: Haramaya
Distance from Addis Ababa: 510 km
Number of Campuses:4, Colleges= 9, Institutes =1, Academy = 1, Schools = 14

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Masters + Specialty Ph.D. Postgraduate Diploma and Total
Medicine Certificate
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
17331 7208 24539 4225 388 4613 406 63 469 770 159 929 22732 7818 30550

Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Subspecialty Postgraduate Diploma, Certificate and Total
Special Programs
74 105 28 - 4 6 217

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex (only on duty):

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
269 84 353 541 80 621 247 11 258 58 0 58 17 2 19 1132 177 1309

Administrative Staff and Health Professionals (Non-Academic):

Staff Type M F T
Administrative Staff 2371 2792 5163
Health Professionals
282 242 524

Total 2653 3034 5687

Centers of Excellence: 4, 1. Advocacy Skills Center, 2. Africa Center of Excellence for Climate Smart
Agriculture and Biodiversity Conservation, 3. Environmental Policy Center, 4. Social Justice Center.

Interest Areas for Collaboration:

Vision: Haramaya University strives to be one of the leading African Universities with international
reputation by 2025.

Website: www.haramaya.edu.et

115
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Hawassa University
Year Established: 1976 (1969 E.C.)
Location: Hawassa
Distance from Addis Ababa: 273 km
Number of Campuses:7, Colleges = 10, Institutes = 2, Schools = 7

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
25,974 10,910 36,884 5,431 901 6,332 209 40 249 31,614 11,851 43,465

Number of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Total
102 114 21 6 243

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
214 112 326 785 142 927 285 38 323 79 2 81 14 0 14 1377 294 1671

Number of Admin Staff: M = 3711, F = 3080, Total = 6,791

Centers of Excellence: 11: Centre of Excellence for Teacher Education and Educational
Leadership, Centre of Excellence for Rift Valley Basin Study & Development, Centre of Excellence for
Entrepreneurship Development & Technology Transfer (COEE), Centre of excellence in forestry, Centre
of Excellence for Hotel Management, Centre of Excellence in Food Science & Human Nutrition, Centre
for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), Technology Business Incubation
Centre, Agriculture Business Incubation Centre, Employability Development & Carrier Radiance Centre
and Centre for Animal Bio-technology.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: Agriculture, Climate change & environmental Protection, Natural
Resource Management, Maintaining cultural diversity and heritage, Gender affairs, Public
health,Education,Technological innovations, Water quality, Fishery & aquatic life, Medicinal plants &
traditional knowledge, Entrepreneurship and Staff capacity building.

Vision: Hawassa University aspires to be one of the top ten research universities in East Africa by 2030.

Website: www.hu.edu.et

116
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Injibara University
Year Established: 2017 (2010E.C.)
Location: Injibara
Distance from Addis Ababa: 447km
Number of Campuses: 1 Colleges = 4, Institutes = 0 Schools = 0
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M = 5322, F = 4080, T = 9,402
Number of Programs: undergraduate: 26
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:
Graduate Lecturers Assistant Professors Grand Total
Assistants Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
8 1 9 161 39 200 5 1 6 1 1 175 41 216

Number of Admin Staff: M =154, F =118, Total = 272

Centers of Excellence: A Hub for Green Development, Entrepreneurship & Enterprise
Development, ICT-based Quality Education, Awi Culture & History, Indigenous
Knowledge.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all areas of centers of excellence.
Vision: Injibara University aspires to become one of the best universities in Ethiopia and
renown university in Africa by 2030.
Website: www.inu.edu.et

117
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Jigjiga University
Year Established: 2006 (1999E.C.)
Location: Jigjiga
Distance from Addis Ababa: 620km
Number of Colleges: 8, Institutes=> 1, Schools=>3

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
17978 7411 25389 1210 111 1321 19188 7522 26,710

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 64,Masters => 22,Total => 86

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
331 60 391 494 40 534 65 3 68 2 0 2 892 103 995

Number of Admin Staff: M =>778, F =>1122, Total =>1900

Centers of Excellence: East African Child Development Research Institute, Institute of

Pastoral and Agro-pastoral Development Studies.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Pastoral and Agro- pastoral studies.

Vision: To be a reputable higher institution recognized in science and technology with special
emphasis in pastoral and agro-pastoral education, research and community engagement in
East Africa by 2025.
Website: www.jju.edu.et

118
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Jimma University
Year Established: 1960(1952 E.C.)
Location: Jimma
Distance from Addis Ababa: 350km
Number of Campuses: 8; Colleges = 6; Institutes = 6; Schools =1
Total Number of Students:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
F T M F T M F T M F T
12283 34,804 5600 981 6581 592 60 652 28,713 13,324 42,037

Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Specialty Sub-specialty Total

70 140 54 13 5 282
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
355 135 490 754 142 896 356 33 389 84 5 89 18 0 18 1567 315 1882

Number of Admin Staff: M=> 2287, F=> 3872, T=> 6,308

Centers of Excellence: Community-Based Education; Health Monitoring and Evaluation; Health System
Research; Child Health And Nutrition; Infectious and Tropical Diseases; Soil Transmitted Helminths (STH);
Drug Quality and Therapeutics; Mycobacteriology; Molecular Biology; Plant and Animal Biotechnology;
Teacher Education and School Leadership; Coffee Research; Oromo Studies; Resilience and Climate Change;
Field Epidemiology, Demographic and Health Surveillance, Systematic Review and Meta-Data Analysis (JBI);
Horticulture and Postharvest Management; Zoonotic Diseases; Agri-Business Leadership; Entrepreneurship and
Innovation Leadership; Information and Digital Technology Solutions; Innovations In Biomedical Engineering;
Renewable Energy; Material Science Engineering; Industrial Engineering And Technology; Hydrology; Road
Safety; Numerical Analysis and Differential Equations; Traditional Herbal Medicine; Food Microbiology;
Astrophysics; Medical Physics; Sport Management and Athletics Coaching.
Interest Areas for Collaboration: JU aspires for collaboration and partnership in all centers of
excellence areas.
Vision: To be one of the premier universities in Africa and renowned in the world by 2025.

Website: www.ju.edu.et

119
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Jinka University
Year Established: 2017 (2010 E.C.)
Location: Jinka
Distance from Addis Ababa: 750 km
Number of Colleges: 4
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M => 2620, F => 1001, T =>3,621
Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 17
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:
Graduate Lecturers Assistant Professors Technical Grand
Assistants Professors Assistants Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
26 0 26 166 29 195 3 0 3 1 0 1 4 1 5 200 30 230

Number of Admin Staff: M => 340, F => 339, Total => 679

Centers of Excellence:

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Livestock (production, health, nutrition, and breeding),
biological and cultural diversity, information technology, sugar technology, irrigation
technology, solar energy, entrepreneurship, and crop production (oil seeds, spices, legumes,
root crops, fruit trees, vegetables, and cereals).

Vision: Jinka university aspires to become one of the top 15 public higher education institutions
in Ethiopia by 2027.

Website: www.jku.edu.et

120
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Kebri Dehar
Year Established:2017(2010E.C.)
Location: Kebri Dehar
Distance from Addis Ababa: 979km
Number of Colleges: 4, Institutes =>0 Schools =>0
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M => 1066, F => 538, T => 1,604
Number of Programs: Undergraduate=> 17

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate
Assistant Lecturer Grand Total
M F T M F T M F Total
102 10 112 69 16 85 171 26 197

Centers of Excellence: Mining and Petroleum Extraction, Sheep and Goat Research Center,
Pastoral Community, Business and Value Chain Development.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Pastoral Development in dry land areas, Mining and
Petroleum Engineering, Training and Business Development.

Vision: To be the leading higher education in Ethiopia for natural resource management and utilization,
pastoral and agro-pastoral community education, research and technology transfer by 2030.

Website: https://www.kdu.edu.et/

121
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Kotebe Metropolitan University
Year Established: 1959
Location: Addis Ababa
Number of Campuses: 4, Colleges =>3, Faculty => 4, Academy =>1,Institutes =>0, Schools
=>2
Number of Programs: Undergraduate = 36, Masters = 24, Total = 60

Total number of Students

undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Grand total

M F T M F T M F T M F T

4,834 5,614 10,448 2232 555 2787 0 0 0 7066 6169 13,235

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Undergraduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grant

Assistants Professors Professors Total

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T

83 34 117 335 103 438 98 13 111 6 1 7 0 0 0 522 152 674

Number of Admin Staff: M= 293, F= 403, T= 696

Centers of Excellence: 2,1. Education, 2. Urban Development.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all Centers of Excellence areas in: Education and Urban
Development.

Vision: Kotebe Metropolitan University aspires to be a leading African Metropolitan University

by 2035.

Website: www.kmu.edu.et

122
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Madda Walabu
Year Established: 2007 (1998E.C.)
Location: Robe
Distance from Addis Ababa: 430km
Number of Colleges: 8

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
14147 7441 21588 1604 259 1863 15751 7700 23,451

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 50, Masters => 26, Total => 76

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Others Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
171 50 221 396 34 430 63 1 64 3 3 0 8 8 641 85 726

Number of Admin Staff: M =>616,F =>728, Total => 1,344

Centers of Excellence: Agriculture including Natural resource and biodiversity management,

Culture, Heritage and Tourism, management, Health Sciences.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Joint research and capacity building in area of excellence.

Vision: To be one of the top five societal problem-solving universities in Ethiopia by 2025.

Website: http://www.mwu.edu.et

123
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Mekdela Amba University
Year Established: 2017 (2010E.C.)
Location: Tulu Awlia
Distance from Addis Ababa: 475km
Number of Campuses: 2, Colleges = 6, Institutes: 0, Schools: 0
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M = 3043, F = 2404, T = 5,447
Number of Programs: Undergraduate = 22

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistants Lecturers Assistant Professors Grand total
M F T M F T M F T M F Total
66 16 82 194 46 240 6 0 6 266 62 328

Number of Admin Staff: M =266, F =167, Total = 433
Centers of Excellence: Agriculture (livestock production, barley, highland fruits production),
food security, Agro-processing, ICT and Engineering, integrated rehabilitation of the ecosystem,
Natural Resource management, Indigenous Knowledge, cultural heritages development, Mineral
exploration.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Agriculture, Agro-processing, food security, Mining,

Natural resource management, Culture and truism, and all program relate.
Vision: Mekdela Amba University aspires to be ranked among the top three best universities in
Ethiopia by 2025E.C.
Website: www.mkau.edu.et

124
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Mekelle University
Year Established: 1987 (1980 E.C.)
Location: Mekelle
Distance from Addis Ababa: 783 km
Number of Campuses: 6, Colleges => 7, Institutes =>11, Schools => 10
Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
16042 9046 25088 1267 389 1656 278 21 299 17,587 9,456 27,043

Number of Programs:

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturer Assistant Associate

Professor Others Grand Total
Assistant Professor Professor
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
314 115 429 816 192 1008 436 40 476 85 4 89 5 2 7 - - - 1656 353 2009

Number of Admin Staff: M => 1633, F => 2782, Total => 4415

Centers of Excellence: Dryland agriculture, and natural resources, Health sciences, veterinary, humanities,
business and economics, law and governance, science and technology, environment, gender and development
studies, geo-information and earth observation sciences, paleo-environment and heritage conservation,
pedagogical sciences, population studies, water and environment, mountain research energy.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Mountain research and development, natural resource management, energy
renewable, animal breed improvement, improved seed, education, technology assisted health service and
capacity building.

Vision: By 2025, Mekelle University aspires to become one of the top 25 universities in Africa.

Website: www.mu.edu.et

125
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Mettu University
Year Established: 2011 (2004E.C.)
Location: Mettu
Distance from Addis Ababa: 600km
Number of Campuses = 2, Colleges = 6, Institutes = 1, Schools = 1
Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
8130 4760 12890 508 60 568 8,638
0 0 0 4,820 13,458

Number of Programs: Undergraduate= 43, Masters= 17, Total= 60

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Associate Professor = 1(male)

Number of Admin Staff: M = 673, F = 738,Total = 1,411

Centers of Excellence: 6; Institute of coffee Research Centre, institute of spice research Centre,
Institute of Oromo Studies, Biodiversity and forestry, Traditional Medicine. Energy Centre.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all departments.

Vision:- To be one of the top ten universities by offering quality education in Ethiopia by 2020.

Website: - www.meu.edu.et

126
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Mizan-Tepi University
Year Established: 2006 (1999E.C.)
Location: Mizan
Distance from Addis Ababa: 581 km
Number of Campuses:3, Colleges = 6, Institutes =0, Schools = 3
Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
11,841 5,137 16,978 482 38 520 0 0 0 12,323 5,175 17,498

Number of Programs: Undergraduate= 42, Masters= 25, Total= 67

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Number of Admin Staff: M = 1,273, F = 1,594: Total = 2,865

Centers of Excellence: Natural Resource Conservation and Enhancing cultural values.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Natural Resource Conservation.

Vision: To be the leading education and research higher educational institution with centers of
excellence in natural resources and cultural value utilization for development by 2025.

Website: www.mtu.edu.et

127
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Oda Bultum University
Year Established: 2015(2008E.C.)
Location: Chiro (Assebe Teferi)
Distance from Addis Ababa: 318km
Number of Campuses: Colleges= 5, Institutes = 2 Schools = 1
Number of Programs: Undergraduate = 35
Total Number of Students
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
3524 1801 5325 32 --- 32 --- --- --- 3556 1801 5357

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Grand Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
117 27 144 201 36 237 12 --- 12 1 --- 1 331 63 394

Number of Admin Staff: M = 337, F = 343,

Centers of Excellence: 1. Natural Resource Development & Management, 2. Center for

Entrepreneurship and Business Incubation, 3. Social Justice Center, 4. Land
Administration.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Natural Resource Development.

Vision: Oda Bultum University strives to be the leading center of excellence in Ethiopia and
East Africa in agro-industry and land resources by 2035.

Website: www.obu.edu.et

128
Differentiation Study Report

Name of University: Raya University
Year Established:2017 (2010E.C.)
Location: Maychew
Distance from Addis Ababa: 651km
Number of Colleges:5

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total

M F T M F T M F T M F T

2,136 1,131 3,267 174 10 184 - - - 2,310 1,141 3,451

Number of Programs: Undergraduate= 23, Masters =3, Total = 26

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professors Grand Total

Assistants Professors Professors

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T

28 9 37 151 32 183 19 1 20 1 0 1 1 0 1 200 42 242

Number of Admin Staff: M = 154, F = 121, Total = 275

Centers of Excellence: Agriculture, Business and Economics.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In the fields of agriculture.

Vision: To be one of the top ten ranked public universities in Ethiopia by 2030.

Website: www.rayu.edu.et

129
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Salale University
Year Established: November 2015 (2008 E.C.)
Location: Fiche
Distance from Addis Ababa: 114km
Number of Campuses:3,Number of Colleges: 5, Institutes: 0,Schools: 0
Total Number of Students: Undergraduate M = 2815, F = 1869, T = 4,684
Number of Programs: Undergraduate: 31

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate
Lecturers Professors Grade Total
Assistants Professors Professors
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
62 14 76 310 65 375 18 3 21 3 0 3 0 0 0 392 82 474

Number of Admin Staff: M = 346, F = 341, Total = 687

Centers of Excellence: Livestock Production and Productivity, Highland Fruits, Mining, and
Culture and Tourism

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Dairy production and processing (focus on cattle), fattening
and poultry production, equine production (health, breeding, nutrition and cultural events for
tourism attraction), highland fruits and vegetable production, industrial crop production and
processing, highland pulse crops production, animal feed production, animal reproductive
biotechnology, watershed management, biodiversity conversation, zoonotic diseases,
archaeology and heritage management, social trafficking, human nutrition, human
reproductive health, traditional medicine, indigenous knowledge, environmental protection,
bio-mining, agricultural products and marketization.

Vision: Salale University aspires to become a leading university in livestock production and
productivity, culture and indigenous knowledge studies by 2030.

Website: www.slu.edu.et

130
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Samara University
Year Established: 2006(1999 E.C.)
Location: Samara
Distance from Addis Ababa:580 km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges => 7, Schools => 1

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
5450 2901 8351 431 54 485 5881 2955 8,836

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 40, Masters => 7, Total => 47

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
198 90 288 257 37 294 24 2 26 16 0 16 495 129 624

Number of Admin Staff: M => 555, F => 678,Total => 1,233

Centers of Excellence: Pastoral and Agro-Pastoral Sustainability Development, for Afar

Studies, for Geology, Energy, and Tourism.

Interest Areas of Collaboration: Pastoral and Agro pastoral community development.

Vision: Samara University aspires to be the leading university in pastoral and agro-pastoral
community development in East Africa by 2030.

Website: www.su.edu.et

131
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Wachemo University
Year Established: 2011 (2004E.C.)
Location: Hossana
Distance from Addis Ababa: 227km
Number of Campuses:3, Colleges = 7, Institutes = 0, Schools = 1

Total Number of Student

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
15240 8230 23470 501 95 596 0 0 0 15,741 8,325 24066

Number of Programs: Undergraduate = 54, Masters = 14, Total = 68

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

1190

Number of Admin Staff: M = 415, F= 371, Total = 786

Centers of Excellence: 7, Agro-processing, 1. Enset conservation center, 2. Highland fruit and

vegetable center, 3. Crop research Center, 4. Biodiversity and forest research center,
5. Livestock research center, 6. Power Engineering, 7. Indigenous Knowledge Studies.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Crop Science, Livestock development, Biodiversity,

forestry and power engineering.

Vision: Wachemo University aspires to become one of the first-class universities and home of
brilliance in Ethiopia by 2025 E.C.

Website: www.wcu.edu.et

132
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Werabe University

Year Established: 2017(2010E.C.)

Location: Werabe

Distance from Addis Ababa: 170km

Number of Colleges:4, Institutes= 2, Schools = 1

Total Number of Students

Undergraduate
M F T
3494 2207 7702

Number of Programs: Undergraduate = 29

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Others Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Tota

55 21 76 186 41 227 7 1 8 1 0 1 2 0
2 12 7 19 263 70 l 333

Number of Admin Staff: M = 272, F = 643, Total = 915

Centers of Excellence: Space Science, Agriculture, Health

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Agricultural productivity, Environment, Health, Tourism,

Technology.

Vision: Werabe University aspires to be one of the best and chosen universities in Ethiopia by 2025.

Website: www.wru.edu.et

133
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Wolaita Sodo University
Year Established: 2006 (1999E.C.)
Location: Wolaita Sodo
Distance from Addis Ababa: 320km
Number of Colleges: 11
Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
21847 10468 32315 2104 182 2286 24 2 26 23,975
10,652 34,627
Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D Specialty Total
55 41 2 2 100
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:
Graduate Assistant Associate
Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Others Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
211 33 244 416 65 481 136 8 144 14 0 14 1 0 1 110 30 140 888 136 1024

Number of Admin Staff: M = 1477, F =1628, Total = 3105

Centers of Excellence: Wolaita Sodo University focused in Medical tourism and Molecular
Biology; Plant and Animal Production and Health; Legal Education and Consultancy Services;
Technology Innovation, Intelligence and Exchange Knowledge.
Interest Areas for Collaboration:
1. Joint research and development projects
2. Faculty exchange for teaching graduate students, advising graduate research and short-
term capacity building trainings in research
3. Student exchange with particular emphasis to Ph.D. research and training opportunities
4. Capacity building projects: Improving the leadership capacity through staff shadowing
and coaching arrangement
Vision: Wolaita Sodo University aspires to become one of the best five universities nationally
and top ranked university in East Africa in research based academic excellence by 2030.
Website: www.wsu.edu.et

134
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Woldia University
Year Established: 2011 (2004 E.C.)
Location: Woldia
Distance from Addis Ababa: 520km
Number of Campuses: 2Colleges =2 Institutes = 1 Schools = 1 Faculty = 4

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Grand Total

M F T M F T M F T M F T
17701 13538 31239 260 24 284 - - - 17961 13562 31323

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 49, Masters => 9, Total => 58

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
60 14 74 444 44 488 25 0 25 1 0 1 1 0 1 531 58 589

Number of Admin Staff: M = 401, F= 67, Total= 468

Centers of Excellence: Bio-cultural diversity and tourism, Fruit and vegetable research.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: High land Fruits and Vegetables research, Livestock and
tourism, Anthropology.

Vision: Woldia University aspires to be a leading university in Ethiopia by 2027.

Website: www.wldu.edu.et

135
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Wolkite University
Year Established:2011 (2004E.C.)
Location: Wolkite
Distance from Addis Ababa: 172 km
Number of Campuses: 1, Colleges => 7, Schools => 1

Total Number of Students:

Undergraduate Masters Total
M F T M F T M F T
9382 5077 14459 377 31 408 9759 5108 14,867

Number of Programs: Undergraduate => 48, Masters => 6, Total => 54

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associate

Assistant Lecturer Professor Professor Professor Others Grand Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
202 53 255 409 52 461 42 8 50 1 0 1 1 0 1 8 0 8 663 113 776

Number of Admin Staff: M => 435, F => 498, Total => 933

Centers of Excellence: Enset, Indigenous Knowledge

Interest Areas for Collaboration: Communicable & Neglected tropical diseases,

Environmental Health, Safety and occupation: Indigenous Knowledge, Culture and
Tourism.

Vision: Wolkite University aspires to be one of the top 10 universities in East Africa by 2035.

Website: www.wku.edu.et

136
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Wollega University
Year Established: 2006 (1999 E.C.)
Location: Nekemtie
Distance from Addis Ababa: 328km
Number of Campuses:3, Continuous and Distant Education Coordination Centers => 12
Total Number of Students
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
17611 10346 27957 3869 469 4338 124 6 130 21604 10821 32,425

Number

of Programs:
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D Total
98 79 10 187

Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Lecturers Assistant Associate Professor Total

assistants professors professors s
M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T
108 36 144 479 89 568 129 8 137 29 1 30 0 0 0 745 134 879
Number of Admin Staff: M = 1312, F = 973, Total = 2285

Centers of Excellence: Manufacturing and engineering; Science, technology, innovation and

research; ICT and digital engineering; Energy, biodiversity and environment; Agriculture
(livestock & crop-production), food security and climate change; Agro-processing and
agribusiness; Entrepreneurship, business and technology incubation; Coffee and Horticultural
crops; Irrigation, soil and water resources management; Public health and disease surveillance;
Oromo Language and Culture; Indigenous knowledge and development; Social studies and
development; Social sciences and education; Health Sciences; Environment, conservation and
tourism.

Interest Areas for Collaboration: In all areas of centers of excellence and specialization.
Vision: Wollega University aspires to be one of the top 25 universities in Africa by 2033.
Website: https://www.wollegauniversity.edu.et/

137
Differentiation Study Report

 Name of University: Wollo University
Year Established: 2004 (1997 E.C.)
Location: Dessie
Distance from Addis Ababa: 401 km
Number of Campuses: 2, College => 10, Schools => 2
Total Number of Student
Undergraduate Masters Ph.D. Total
M F T M F T M F T M F T
16940 9284 26224 2595 500 3095 5 0 5 19,540 9,784 29,324
Number of Programs:

Undergraduate Masters Ph.D Specialty Total
80 86 2 2 170
Academic Staff Profile by Rank and Sex:

Graduate Assistant Associat

Assistant Lecturer Professor
eProfessor Grand Total

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F Total
237 85 322 527 86 613 120 9 12 8 0 8 892 180 1072
9

Number of Admin Staff: M => 867, F => 614, Total => 1,481

Centers of Excellence:

Technology, Biotechnology, Health Sciences, Culture, Art and Indigenous Knowledge, Agriculture and
Natural Resource Management, Science and Mathematics Teacher Education, Peace, Development and
Justice Education, Business Leadership and Industrial Development.

Interest Areas for Collaboration:

Biotechnology; climate change and adaptation; nutrition and food security; infectious disease
and tropical medicine; non-communicable diseases; health informatics; tropical animal health and
production; climate smart agriculture, agro-forestry and carbon sequestration; soil and water
conservation and integrated watershed management; biodiversity and conservation; STEM education;
mining and geological studies; material science, nanotechnology; electrochemistry and solar cells;
Internet-of-things and artificial intelligence; cloud computing and renewable energy; agro-processing
and manufacturing; teacher education and professional development; migration & population dynamics;
peace security and development studies; good governance; culture, arts and indigenous knowledge; eco-
tourism; institutional capacity and leadership.
Vision: To be one of the top five universities in Ethiopia in teaching, research and services by 2025.
Website: www.wu.edu.et

138
Differentiation Study Report

 139
Differentiation Study Report

 Study Team Members
Adula Bekele, Ph.D. Jimma University
Ephrem Tekle, Ph.D. MoSHE
Genene Abebe, Ph.D. FTI
Kiros Guesh, Ph.D. Aksum University
Mekasha Kassaye, Ph.D. Addis Ababa University
Nigussie Dechassa, Ph.D., Professor Haramaya University
Tesfaye Muhiye, Ph.D. HESC, Team Leader
Tesfaye Negewo, M.SC. HESC
Yemataw Wondie, Ph.D. University of Gondar

MoSHE Editorial Team

Eba Mijena, Ph.D. MoSHE

Epraim Tekle, Ph.D. KMU
Haregewoin Fantahun, Ph.D. MoSHE
Mengesha Admassu, Ph.D., Professor MoSHE
Tesfaye Muhiye, Ph.D. HESC
Worku Negash, Ph.D. MoSHE, Team Leader

Advisory Council Reviewers

Damtew Teferra, Ph.D., Professor University of Kwazulu-Natal, SA
Teshome Yizengaw, Ph.D. Indiana University, USA
Wondwosen Tamrat, Associate Professor St. Mary University

140
Differentiation Study Report