Policy Brief 89221 May 2014 Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education “The role of education for me and my family is that education will change my life and my family into a better life. I’m proud that my parents can send me to senior high school, but I must be better than them.” (Senior high school student from Denpasar) 1. Introduction and Context Gaining access to higher education remains an aspiration for a large majority of students in Indonesia, seeing it as an essential pathway to follow to meet their hopes for a better future. The Higher Education Law No. 12/2012, passed by the Indonesian Parliament on July 13, 2012, intends to assist in this process. The Law is pro-poor (stipulating that 20% of the students in higher education should be drawn from the lowest socio-economic quintile of the population -- unlike the current practices of less than 5% of the lowest socio-economic quintile enrollment), mandates financial assistance for these students, and also requires the provision of services for students with special needs. Students with the least chances of participating in higher education are those In order to fulfill its pro-poor mandate, the Higher from lower social and economic status Education Law now requires specific policy recommendations to dramatically enhance the equity The debate about where and how governments of access to – and the opportunity for success in – should invest in education has raged for decades. higher education, especially for children of groups On one side are those who argue for strong support normally excluded from such education; these to basic education (usually towards universal recommendations will guide the development of the primary education but also now for early childhood regulations that will support the implementation of education) in order to guarantee that all citizens have Law No. 12/2012. an equal opportunity to gain the foundation essential for further learning and later success in life. On the Those who complete primary education face further, other, are those who insist on more investment often difficult transitions – to larger, more distant, in higher education in order to provide strong more demanding, and more competitive junior professional and technical leadership for the nation secondary and then senior secondary schools. This, and, increasingly, ensure a competitive edge for the combined with the inability of families to pay for nation in a globalizing world. Those who argue for the costs of education (both formal and informal), investing in the middle – secondary education, both which inevitably increase with higher levels of academic and vocational – are also making an ever education1, means that disadvantaged students stronger case for support. become more and more under-represented in the system. Ultimately, because they have not been able The argument for investing more in higher education to make successful transitions from lower to higher is strengthened to the extent that this investment levels of education, they are unable to enter and take is seen as not only improving the quality of higher advantage of higher education. education – and thus of the life chances for the few -- but also ultimately contributing to greater equity in Although the Gross Enrolment Rates (GER) for access to higher education and thus in opportunities primary school in Indonesia are more or less uniform for later social and economic mobility. This requires across socio-economic quintiles, the gap between the narrowing of traditional and often increasing the highest quintile (Q-5) and the lowest (Q-1) is over disparities between sexes, between socio-economic 20% for junior secondary school (2010 figures), 53% and majority/minority ethnic groups, and between for senior secondary, and 62% for S1 programs. regions.. It is this argument that explicitly – and unusually -- underlies the government of Indonesia’s plans for higher education. 1 As quoted in the Jakarta Post of May 31, 2013 (p. 4), the Ministry indicated that the annual expenditure of a primary school student was IDR 910,000; for junior high school, IDR 1.39 million; and for senior high school, IDR 1.66 million. 2 Policy Brief Table 1: GER by income brackets, using Susenas data [BPS 2008 and 2010]2 Quintile-1 Quintile-2 Quintile-3 Quintile-4 Quintile-5 GER 2008 2010 2008 2010 2008 2010 2008 2010 2008 2010 Primary 106.05% 104.75% 106.05% 103.83% 106.46% 102.23% 105.43% 102.69% 103.93% 99.18% Junior 63.86% 75.33% 79.48% 88.62% 84.94% 92.69% 91.41% 95.63% 89.23% 96.81% secondary Senior 23.21% 36.08% 42.95% 59.13% 57.65% 72.90% 67.16% 84.19% 74.09% 89.09% secondary D1-D2 0.46% 0.28% 0.85% 0.49% 1.51% 1.03% 2.01% 1.79% 2.49% 1.84% D3-D4 0.07% 0.18% 0.61% 1.10% 0.90% 1.61% 2.87% 4.47% 10.34% 9.29% S1 3.76% 2.54% 6.00% 6.37% 11.02% 13.88% 22.54% 28.32% 55.41% 64.66% S2-S3 0.00% 0.05% 0.00% 0.13% 0.20% 0.07% 0.11% 0.21% 1.92% 2.43% Figure I: Gross Enrollment Rate by Level of Education, 2010 120% 100% 80% Gross Enrollment Rate 60% 40% 20% 0% SD SMP SMU Higher Ed Poorest 20% Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Richest 20% Source: Susenas 2010 Thus, students least likely to gain access to higher to and succeed in higher education in Indonesia, the education in Indonesia are those of low socio- Ministry can take several actions: economic status; such status also intersects with  clearly define and map the groups most geographical location/rurality/remoteness, ethnic frequently excluded from the education and linguistic status, and system: where they live, why gender to produce even In other words, the educational experiences they are excluded, and how higher levels of educational and future life chances of students differ serious is the nature of their exclusion – exclusion both greatly based on the intersections of many exclusion from the system (the issue of access to higher education) forms of exclusion – and these lead to serious ensure that the Ministry’s and from learning (the inequities in access to, and success in, higher Education Management issue of quality, of the education. Information System (EMIS) institution itself and of the identifies those groups learning gained in it). In other words, the educational most excluded from the system, beginning experiences and future life chances of students differ (at least) with attendance in early childhood greatly based on the intersections of many forms of education (PAUD) centres/pre-schools; this exclusion – and these lead to serious inequities in requires accurate disaggregation of education access to, and success in, higher education. 2 data by gender, region, administrative level, socio-economic quintile, and ethnic/linguistic In order to ensure that children of all disadvantaged status with a special focus on children with groups have an equitable opportunity to gain access disabilities 2 Cited in Moeliodihardjo, B. Y. 2013. Equity and Access in Higher Education. p. 10. Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education 3 who had decided whether or not to continue to higher education had financial constraints in doing so; this ranged from 53% in the wealthiest category to 94-95% in the two lowest income categories.3,4 The latter, even those with high ability and aspirations, face strong competition for a place in the highly desired public universities and so are pushed more often to cheaper but lower quality private institutions. Some kind of financial support is therefore essential to improve the access of low- and even middle socio-economic students, especially those with an average level of academic achievement, to better quality institutions. Financial support in Indonesia is The Ministry’s Education Management Information System (EMIS) needs almost exclusively focused on personal (rather than to identify groups most excluded from the system, beginning (at least) with bank) borrowing, most often from family members, attendance in early childhood education (PAUD) centres/pre-schools and on scholarships. Loan schemes, most likely targeting students from the middle quintiles, have  develop programs to promote inclusion at all been discussed in Indonesia and even tried out, but levels of the education system (e.g., for children designing effective methods of selecting students with special needs, children who do not speak for loans, managing the large number of potential the language of instruction when they enter borrowers, and collecting on loan repayments school, children of the extreme poor, etc.) post-graduation have proven difficult to do. As mechanisms for such repayments (e.g., tax systems  define specific measures (including enrolment and salary deductions) become more efficient, and achievement targets per group) to increase attempts to develop feasible loan schemes should be the access of normally excluded children to further explored. education, beginning with participation in pre-school programs and ending with equally Because personal loans are not always possible, opportunities to enter and succeed in higher scholarships remain the major source of financial education. support for higher education. The BIDIK MISI full These actions are essential in making Indonesia’s scholarships program implemented by Ministry of entire education system more inclusive. This policy Education and Culture (MOEC) in 2010 subsidized brief will focus on the last stage of this process 20,000 students. The number of recipients has been -- the challenges to promoting equity in higher increasing in subsequent years. In 2012, there were education and on policies to address these 90,000 students receiving the full scholarships. In challenges. 2013, there will be an additional 50,000 new recipients of BIDIK MISI scholarships. 2. Make Higher There is also a variety of the Directorate General Education Affordable for Higher Education (DGHE) scholarship schemes covering approximately 180,000 students with partial The major constraint to more equitable access to scholarships along with private, philanthropic, and higher education in Indonesia – whether academic, regional government schemes (for an additional professional, or technical -- is financial. A recent 90,000 students) available to provide such support. survey of over 1800 senior secondary school students But there are several problems with these schemes: from nine provinces indicated that over 73% of those 3 Myriad. 2013. Improving Access and Equity to Indonesian Higher Education for Candidates from Economically disadvantage Backgrounds. 4 This is especially true for students coming from vocational schools (who often feel more able and confident to enter community colleges and perhaps polytechnics than universities) and from B and C accredited schools (who think polytechnics and perhaps poorer quality universities may be within their reach). 4 Policy Brief  There is often limited knowledge about  Scholarship payments are often made late available scholarships, especially among leading to uncertainty when funds will arrive students living in rural and remote areas and – a particularly serious problem for poor from lower socio-economic quintiles. students who depend on them for most of their expenses.  The provision of scholarships is based more often on merit than on financial need so that  Many higher education institutions (HEIs) have they do not target the lowest quintiles of the not yet internalized the fact that, given the population and therefore do not necessarily 2012 Law, “equity” must become an essential increase equity in higher education. dimension to their vision and mission. As a result, many such institutions lack a dedicated,  They largely cover only a portion of the costs of well-resourced, and professionally staffed unit higher education (e.g., covering tuition costs charged with managing scholarship programs or topping up students’ living allowances) so and monitoring and assisting scholarship are of limited use to the lowest quintiles of the recipients. student population. Policy Recommendations:  The DGHE, HEIs, and secondary schools should provide potential applicants more complete information about the range and availability of financial assistance.  Higher education institutions should internalize the importance of equity in their vision and mission (and see it not only as in compliance with Law 12/2012) in order to make their financial assistance programs better targeted and more effective.  These institutions should establish a unit dedicated to manage their scholarship programs, with adequate organizational infrastructure, funding, human resources, and authority. Such a unit would function inter alia to disseminate scholarship information to local secondary schools, select recipients based on scholarship criteria, determine the amount of support per student, develop an annual plan for scholarship management, and monitor recipients’ academic progress.  A similar unit should also be established in DGHE to plan and implement in a more systematic way the range of scholarship schemes available, always with a special focus on promoting more equitable access to higher education. The functions of this unit should ensure that university leaders internalize the need to promote equity in their institutions and also promoting, funding, and building the competence of scholarship units in individual higher education institutions. Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education 5 3. Proactively Help the Extreme Poor to gain Access to Higher Education To seriously address the issue of inequitable access to  few local role models of successful university higher education, especially among children of the graduates very poor, more deliberate and proactive efforts must  the absence of affirmative action programs be put in place. Such efforts should already begin proactively seeking out and nurturing during senior secondary school and even earlier5. promising students from the lowest quintiles Children with academic potential but relatively low performance compared to more advantaged peers  the limitation of most scholarship schemes to will often simply give up on any chance of entering students who are already admitted to higher higher education. There are several reasons for this: education and therefore the lack of funds available to help poorer students prepare for,  the often poor quality of their primary and apply for, and make a successful transition into, secondary education; e.g., overcrowded, higher education. understaffed, and poorly resourced primary schools, and secondary schools with relatively An exception to this is the innovative “Bidik Misi” undertrained and uncertified teachers and scheme of the DGHE, for both S1 and D3 programs, poor facilities (libraries and laboratories) which targets high school students from poor  the lack of encouragement from parents families before they graduate. Applications can and other family be submitted online, criteria members who may related to family income are There are some doubts, however, as to the not understand the sometimes verified by home extent to which these scholarships are importance of higher visits, funds are provided actually reaching Q-1 students, and the education or who lack both to manage the selection scheme has not apparently succeeded information about process and to settle students in establishing a better balance of the range of higher from remote regions in their recipients coming from Java and Sumatra education choices universities, and a minimum compared to eastern Indonesia. and the availability of GPA of 3.0 is required to retain financial assistance to the scholarship. By 2013, make such education feasible for their children almost 140,000 students 7 (e.g., recent research showed a gap of 20% -- received these scholarships. There are some doubts, from 78% to 58% -- from the wealthiest to the however, as to the extent to which these scholarships poorest secondary school students concerning are actually reaching Q-1 students, and the scheme the importance they placed on having a higher has not apparently succeeded in establishing a better education degree) 6 balance of recipients coming from Java and Sumatra compared to eastern Indonesia. 5 The Scholarship for Poor Students program (Bantuan Siswa Miskin - BSM) already does this at lower levels of the system but could be expanded in funding and coverage, with improved targeting and perhaps providing a transition bonus; e.g. 100 percent of the cost for all poor students from SD to SMU, providing a transition bonus for those moving from SD to SMP and from SMP to SMU. This would ensure that cost is not a reason for dropping out. 6 Myriad. 2013. Improving Access and Equity to Indonesian Higher 7 Jakarta Post. op.cit. The Minister indicated that the Bidik Misi Education for Candidates from Economically Disadvantaged scheme’s budget would be increased to IDR 53.4 million in the Backgrounds next budget. 6 Policy Brief Data related to gender issues in education (i.e., both access/participation and achievement) should be disaggregated by location, ethnicity, socio-economic status,etc., in order to identify where gender parity has still not been achieved – with a special focus on all types and levels of higher education Policy Recommendations:  In order to increase the number of candidates applying from and being accepted to higher education from the Q-1 and Q-2 income brackets, they should become the primary target for an expanded full scholarship program while partial scholarships, in general, should be focused on higher income Q-2 and Q-3 students.  Within the available budget, the Bidik Misi scheme should be expanded with stronger monitoring of its coverage of and impact on Q-1 and Q-2 students and with research on the extent to which students from eastern Indonesia are disadvantaged in the scheme’s administration and, if they are, recommendations for achieving a better balance of regional representation.  The reach of this scheme should be extended to the beginning of senior secondary school (Grade 10); these schools should work with district office staff to identify students with future academic potential and motivation (rather than only current academic achievement) and provide support to receive additional tutoring/lessons from “cram schools” or local LPTK. Higher education institutions should collaborate in this process by working with the district office to seek and support students with high potential.  Adequate information regarding all higher education opportunities (including community colleges and polytechnics as well as universities) and financing options should be made widely available, especially to children with high potential but from low income brackets; this should be accompanied by a public information campaign directed at families from lower income brackets to raise their awareness of the feasibility of their children gaining access to higher education. 4. Overcome other Barriers to Educational Access Financial constraints are only one factor in creating narrow the educational choices available to girls. inequitable access to and exclusion from higher Even when enrolment rates at the undergraduate education. There are many other barriers to such level are at parity (or even favour girls), disparities access including the following: may appear in graduation rates, in the professional courses available to (or welcoming of ) girls, and in 1. Gender. Although national aggregate statistics do opportunities for higher degrees. not show serious disparities in access to education by gender, the intersection of gender with a rural, remote location (more risk in getting to school) and with cultures, traditions, and religious beliefs that prescribe different roles for girls and boys may Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education 7 Policy Recommendations:  Data related to gender issues in education (i.e., both access/participation and achievement) should be disaggregated by location, ethnicity, socio-economic status, etc., in order to identify where gender parity has still not been achieved – with a special focus on all types and levels of higher education.  Measures to reduce any identified disparities (including to the disadvantage of males) should be developed. 2. Rurality/remoteness/region but also the sheer lack of information about the Almost 58% of those admitted to universities possible options open to them. This is exacerbated, from the lowest quintile come from rural areas of course, by geographic location with students compared to 28% of the highest quintile. But from less developed regions of eastern Indonesia students from rural and remote areas face special being disadvantaged. Table 2 indicates that over problems – not only the lack of nearby higher time the percentage of scholarship recipients from education institutions (which, if they exist, are eastern Indonesia has, in fact, decreased while the more often poor quality private institutions) percentage for Java has steadily increased. Table 2: Distribution of scholarship recipients [DGHE-a 2012 and DGHE-b 2012]8 Year of admission 2010 2011 2012 Sumatra 26.3% 22.1% 18.9% Java 43.8% 48.8% 54.0% Kalimantan 7.0% 7.8% 8.6% Sulawesi 12.9% 13.3% 11.2% Bali 3.9% 2.7% 2.7% Maluku 2.5% 2.5% 1.9% NTT + NTB 2.3% 1.8% 1.5% Papua 1.2% 1.1% 1.2% 8 Moeliodihardjo, B. op.cit. p. 20-21 Policy Recommendations:  Special efforts should be made to ensure that senior secondary students in rural/remote/ disadvantaged areas have adequate information about higher education and scholarship options.8  Private institutions of low quality in remote areas and eastern Indonesia with a large percentage of students from disadvantaged groups should be given priority in terms of quality improvement. 9 8 Policy Brief In partnership with local governments and private education providers, Community Colleges has the potential to expand access for higher education 3. Ethnic/linguistic status official language in school, have difficulty in Despite the 700+ languages spoken in Indonesia, mastering literacy in the national language. The including some languages spoken by many repetition and, eventually, the dropout rates of millions of people, there is virtually no government such children are usually considerably higher than or community interest in promoting mother- those who speak the national language at home, tongue based education and initial literacy in the thus narrowing the base of linguistic minorities mother tongue. Although teachers from linguistic who eventually master Indonesian and thus are minorities may (for good or bad) be given priority able to gain university admission. Even those for employment at the district level, this does not who succeed may find that despite their ability in often translate into the use of local languages in Indonesian, the difference between the culture of formal instruction and initial literacy. their home/ethnic group and that of the university, often combined with lower socio-economic status, As a result, many children whose home language can be an obstacle to an easy transition into, and is different from that of Bahasa Indonesia, the eventual success in, higher education. Policy Recommendations:  In the short-term, higher education institutions should examine the extent to which students entering from regions where Indonesian is not a language of everyday use are academically disadvantaged and provide remedial instruction for those who are.  In the longer-term, the Ministry should seek to identify existing programs in the country which promote mother tongue-based instruction at the stage of initial literacy, assess their impact on the mastery of Indonesian, and explore the possibility of developing more such programs to ensure greater mastery of Indonesian. Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education 9 In addition to the specific recommendations listed through to senior secondary. The majority of above, there are several key strategies9 aimed courses are designed to raise the aspirations of generally at promoting inclusion and improving students with little or no knowledge of higher access to higher education. These include the education. Some outreach programs (such following: as that of Binus University in Jakarta) provide students with preparatory courses (with  Community colleges offer a new – and less academic credit) prior to university enrolment. expensive and competitive – option for  Equivalency has been addressed through disadvantaged students. But they are relatively the Indonesian Qualifications Framework, little known. Community colleges also offer and this needs to be expanded to include the possibility of providing a second chance equivalency and recognition of prior learning for adults and supporting young people for those students wanting to continue higher and adults to develop a range of skills for education and enter through community employment, further education and training. colleges. The introduction of community  Compensatory programs add points to colleges through partnerships with local student academic scores. Targeted students governments and private higher education can include any of those from the above providers offers the potential to expand access disadvantaged groups – especially those who and include large numbers of students new to have attended schools in remote and rural higher education. The acceptance of Paket C locations in areas of high poverty. of the Community Education program of the  Second chance programs offer adults the Ministry as equivalent to a senior secondary opportunity to enter higher education and education certificate would also assist in this provide remedial foundation courses or other process of equivalency. courses in order to improve academic skills  Open and distance learning through, for or enable potential students to sit a test to example, the Open University, also provides determine academic potential. an opportunity for individuals (many of  Outreach programs can be developed by whom are already working) to gain university higher education institutions and designed certification. for students at all levels of schooling, primary 9 Adapted from Gale et al (2010). 5. Go beyond Access to Success Being included in higher education by gaining access what are more urban, cosmopolitan, heterogeneous to the system is only one part of the challenge. towns and cities, requiring much more independent Ensuring that disadvantaged students are also living , and to larger, more academically rigorous included in learning and gaining the kind of education and competitive campuses, requiring much more they require is also essential. Students from distant independent study. parts of Indonesia, from rural and remote areas, and from poor areas often find difficult the transition to 10 Policy Brief Policy Recommendations:  Support programs, from the district office and/or from local HEIs, should be developed to assist students from disadvantaged groups to make a successful transition to higher education. Such programs must start with providing adequate information about higher education options and scholarship schemes. These can also provide tutoring, orientation, academic skills development and other strategies – perhaps beginning even at year 10 or 11 for students with academic potential.  Support programs should also include a range of “bridging” or orientation activities at the HEI (from a few days to several months) that introduce students to the university environment, facilities, subjects, and activities and also provide those who need them stronger foundational study skills and content (especially in language). Such programs can also help identify students at risk of failure and provide additional assistance as needed.  This kind of support should continue throughout the student’s university career to ensure they succeed in their studies and get as much as possible out of the experience.  Institutions should develop a range of strategies to ensure that the quality of teaching and learning is not reduced when more heterogeneous cohorts of students enter. Teachers and lecturers will need to develop skills to understand the needs of and successfully teach a broader variety of students with differing needs. References Jan Edwards, (2012). Access and Equity in Higher Education in Indonesia. World Bank: Jakarta Gale, T., S. Sellar, S. Parker, R. Hattam, B. Comber, D. Tranter and D. Bills (2010) Interventions early in school as a means to improve higher education outcomes for disadvantaged (particularly low SES) students. Commissioned research by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Commonwealth of Australia. Helen Keller International (2012) Indonesia. Access date 29th July 2012. http://www.hki.org/working-worldwide/ asia-pacific/indonesia/ Moeliodihardjo, B. Y. 2013. Equity and Access in Higher Education. World Bank: Jakarta. Steff, M, R Mudzakir and Andayani (2010) Equity and access to Tertiary Education for students with disabilities in Indonesia. Washington D C: World Bank. Equity, Access and Success in Higher Education 11 As parts of its support for the Indonesian Tertiary Education, DFAT (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, previously known as AusAID) through the World Bank has funded studies to support the Directorate General for Higher Education’s strategic planning and provide on-demand policy recommendations. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of Indonesia and the Government of Australia. Human Development Sector World Bank Office Jakarta Indonesia Stock Exchange Building, Tower 2, 12th Floor Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 52 – 53 Phone: (021) 5299 3000, Fax: (021) 5299 3111 www.worldbank.org/id/education