Institutional Opportunities for Staff Recruitment Retention and Development

Institutional Opportunities for Staff Recruitment, Retention and Development: A Case Study of Makerere University, Uganda.

A paper to be presented at the University Leaders Forum: Developing and Retaining the Next Generation of Acedemics, Accra Ghana: November 2008.

By Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza (Ph. D) 1 st Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic Affairs) and Associate Professor of Law, Makerere University.

History Ø 1922 established as a Technical School Ø 1963 became a College of the University of East Africa – offering courses leading to awards of the University of London Ø 1970 became an independent University Ø Original Motto: Let Us Be Men

Present Context Ø To be a leading institution for academic excellence and innovations in Africa Ø To provide world class innovative teaching, learning, research and services responsive to National and Global Needs. Ø Repositioning Makerere to Meet Emerging Development Challenges (2008 -18 Strategic Plan) Ø Motto: We Build for the Future

Human Resources Ø Total of 1, 381 academic staff Ø Student population of 34, 550 Ø Ratio: 1: 27 Ø 40% student population - female

Minimum Qualifications for academia POSITION QUALIFICATION PUBLICATIONS TEACHING EXPERIENCE GRADUATE SUPERVISION Professor Ph. D 11 10 years 9 students Associate Professor Ph. D 6 8 4 Senior lecturer Ph. D 3 3 1 Lecturer Ph. D Assistant Lecturer Masters - - - Teaching Assistant Bachelor’s Degree (1 st Class/2 nd Class Upper Div) - - -

Retention: Staff Development Opportunities Available The Staff Development Policy Ø Staff Development Fund Ø 5% of tuition by privately sponsored students is allocated for Staff Development: since 1996/97 Academic Year Ø In addition each student contributes Ug Shs. 5, 000 (3 US$) to SD Fund per year. Ø IGF: reduce dependency on external sources Ø Last 5 years: Ø

Waiver of Tuition for staff Ø University provides a waiver of tuition for members of staff. Ø Encourages many members of staff to take up graduate study at Mak. Ø In some cases individual academic units directly sponsor their staff for graduate training. Ø Last 5 years:

5. 4 The University Priority List Ø Allocation of SD Funds based on identified needs. Ø Identification first by academic units: based on priority training needs of unit Ø Units submit their priority lists to the Staff Development Committee (SDC) Ø Final Priority identification by the SD Committee Ø Priority lists periodically revised to reflect changing needs of academic units/university.

Guiding Factors In considering applications for funding, the Committee takes into account the following factors: - Availability of funds (those already on study must complete b 4 new commitments are made) - Financial Cost of programme applied for: effect on fund - Academic qualification sought: Ph. D vs Masters - Number of years in service - Performance record - Availability of vacancies on completion of the course -The staffing level of the department or field. Ø

Ø Study at Makerere preferred Ø Within the African region Ø Other areas of the world. Ø Sandwich programmes encouraged: less abscondment, cheaper, empirical research in Uganda, opportunities for joint supervision/enhancement of supervision skills

Ø Ph. D is given Priority Ø Priority given to first time beneficiaries – if staff has been trained thru SD Fund at one level, may be required to look elsewhere.

Masters Degree Programmes Ø A number of departments have now launched graduate programmes at Masters Level. Ø Members of staff encouraged to train locally at Mak. Ø Where programme is not available at Mak can be elsewhere

Study Leave Ø Staff who secure training opportunities on full-time basis are required to apply for study leave, before proceeding for studies. Ø Staff who proceed for training without University Authority are deemed to have absconded and risk termination of service.

6. 1 BONDING OF STAFF ON TRAINING Ø Ø Authority Staff on permanent terms go for further training with the authority of the University Council All sponsorship (self, department, Institute, School, Foreign or from SDF) is deemed to have been granted with the authority of the University Council. Therefore all staff taking further training must be bonded. Study leave is deemed to have been granted on the signing of the bond form

Bonding Period Ø Obliged to work for Mak for specific period on completion of study leave - 1 year for training lasting 4 -9 months; - 2 years for Masters Program; - 3 years for Ph. D program; Pro- rata to study leave period Recovery from retirement benefits!

Salary and Housing Ø Basic Salary is paid to members of staff on approved study leave Ø Housing - A member of staff in University housing retains unit while on training (family use). Ø Staff not housed by the University continue to receive their housing allowance.

3. 8 SD Policy: Gender Ø “There should be no discrimination between male and female members of staff. All members of staff should be given the opportunity to train. ” Ø Gender Terrain at Mak

Table 2: Status by gender in the Academia: 12 th October 2008 % of women Male Female Total Number Professors 43 3 46 6. 52 Assoc. Professors 73 13 86 15. 11 Senior Lecturers 149 45 194 23. 19 Lecturers 312 109 421 25. 89 Assistant Lecturers 241 117 358 32. 68 Teaching Assistants 183 93 276 36. 69 TOTAL Ø 1001 380 1381 27. 51 Note: Presence of women in the high echelons still very low. Only 12. 12 % are at Associate Professor and Professor levels.

Table 3: Percentage of female Academic Staff in Science based disciplines October 2008 % of female Male Female Total Number Professors 31 1 32 3. 1 Assoc. Professors 52 8 60 13. 3 Senior Lecturers 107 21 128 16. 4 Lecturers 176 56 232 24. 1 Assistant Lecturers 132 62 194 32. 0 Teaching Assistants 113 56 169 33. 1 Ø Note: It must also be mentioned that the number of female academia in science based disciplines is dismally low : 33. 13%

Affirmative Action? Ø Imperative that in its promotion of scholarship and training, the university applies affirmative action to help address gender imbalances. In 2008 -2018 strategic plan it has been agreed that the success measures to be used in evaluating our success would be: -Percentage of women in academia and non-teaching positions increased to 40% by 2018 -Increased % of female academia with Ph. Ds. Ø Establishment of a special fund for academic & administrative female staff for sabbatical, exchange visits, attachment and training. Ø

Justification? Call for increase of women in top management and in the high echelons of the academia is based on the assumption that women’s participation at such levels would improve their opportunity to influence the policies and direction of the institution. Ø This would hopefully translate into student and employee focused gender responsive policies. Ø

Justification Ø I also contend that although gender parity is not synonymous with gender equity, “within a gender – balanced professoriate, there is increased likelihood both males and females will be involved in the establishment of practices intended to promote equity. ” Ø Further still an increase of female academia would create more beneficial conditions for scholarly activity among female students. ” Ø The availability of female academia would also ensure mentoring of female students and may result in more women choosing careers in universities.

Quality Assurance Ø Gender parity in the professoriate is an issue of quality assurance, for “in a post-secondary environment that focuses on students as consumers, administrators must realize that their “customer” can best be served by a more diverse, gender balanced professoriate” Ø “Given the makeup of the current student population in universities, efforts to make university positions attractive to women is essential”

Research Ø Research on the codes and rituals that hold women back Ø Research on informal hierarchies and norms of institutions that continue to thwart academic women Ø and this, (I argue) - by universities as the renowned knowledge hubs.

General Challenges Low salary scale vs private industry – Legal Profession (Private Practice, Judiciary); - IT and Engineering Professions (Telecommunication Service Providers) - Medical profession (Government Consultants vs Professors) Ø High minimum requirements: Ph. D Ø Limited post doctoral research opportunities Ø Lack of Mentoring Culture Ø Abscondment by personnel already trained by Mak. Ø

Mentoring of young academia in Higher Education Ø “While definitions vary, a mentor is generally someone already experienced in a role new to a mentee. The mentor guides, advises, teaches, counsels and is supportive of the mentee. Ø We note that in Greek mythology, Mentor was a friend of Odysseus. When Odysseus left for the Trojan War he placed Mentor in charge of his son, Telemachus, and of his palace. Mentor was thus among other things, a tutor to Telemachus.

Often said Ø It is often said that many of the world’s successful people have benefited from having a mentor. It is said that Aristotle mentored Alexander the Great. One can thus state that mentoring is a vehicle for leadership development. Ø Need to Institutionalize mentoring of young academics

Mentoring: Gender Specific Concerns Ø The value of mentoring is that it can increase the participation of socially marginalized groups (in this case women) in leadership positions. It helps a less experienced person climb the ladder, to reach her full potential.

The feminization of mentoring. Ø Several women have with time learnt how to function in a male world, but we must nevertheless acknowledge that women’s experiences and perspectives are different from those of their male colleagues. Ø There is a need to understand take seriously the perspectives and experiences of women. Ø We must therefore provide a feminist critique of the conceptualization of mentoring. What should you consider when mentoring a woman rather than a man? This calls for re-visiting the accepted (in fact male) models.

Ø To what extent is the "original" concept based on male models and have women leaders appropriately integrated gender concerns into the concept? Have we successfully provided new models for feminist oriented mentorship? Ø For example, “Some studies have found differences from the traditional male model of mentoring when women are involved, suggesting that informality and friendship are more characteristic of successful mentoring of women” Ø All these are questions we must answer if we are to succeed in using mentoring as a mechanism for ensuring women’s visibility in high echelons of the university academia and top management.

The Africanisation of the concept. Ø In addition to the feminization of mentoring, I believe that there is need for an “African” critique of the concept of mentoring. The ensuing questions would be: - To what extent is mentoring a universal as opposed to a cultural specific concept? - Is the concept of mentoring as it is presented and understood today alien to the African culture? - How can we ensure that we capture cultural specific concerns?

Concluding Remarks Ø Stanza 2 of Mak. Anthem Ø Do not forget through all d years those who have gone thru the gates of Makerere Ø Give them the pride Ø Give them the joy Ø Oh! To remember Ø The Gates of Makerere

Chorus Ø Makerere, Makerere Ø We Build for the Future Ø The Great Makerere Ø Great, Great and Mighty Ø The Walls Around Thee Ø Great, Great and Mighty the Gates Besides Thee.