Education stakeholders urge changes to university funding model
Education
By
David Njaaga
| Sep 12, 2024
Stakeholders in education want the government to consider changes to the new university funding model to improve access and equity.
They say if left as it is, the model could hinder opportunities for many students from vulnerable backgrounds.
In a town hall meeting at Machakos University organised by KTN on Thursday, September 12, stakeholders voiced their concerns and criticisms of the current system.
Higher Education Loans Board (HELB) Head of Lending King'ori Ndegwa said while the model aims to address financial disparities, it still presents challenges.
“Some students use their upkeep money for fuel, while others struggle to afford necessities. That is why we have allocated a generous upkeep to vulnerable students,” explained Ndegwa.
He also noted issues with student IDs affecting loan applications and clarified that funding now more accurately reflects programme costs.
On his part, Emanuel Manyasa, Executive Director of Usawa Agenda, called for better communication between the government and students.
“It is not fair for the government to tell students what they need to know without engaging them directly. Students are intelligent enough to process the truth,” said Manyasa.
He added that the new funding model should be transparent and responsive to students' needs.
Prof. Romanus Odhiambo, Vice Chancellor of Meru University of Science and Technology, encouraged students to persist despite financial challenges.
“The fruits of education are often very sweet, but the path to achieving them is tough,” noted Odhiambo.
He assured that the government is reviewing the funding model to address concerns and improve accessibility.
The model divides students into five bands based on family income. Band One, for the most financially disadvantaged, covers 95 per cent of fees through scholarships and loans, while Band Five requires families with a monthly income exceeding Sh120,000 to pay 40 per cent of the fees.
Critics argue that this approach may limit access to higher education for many vulnerable students.