The “No-Academic-Fee” policy: A promise of access, a shadow of discrimination

By Felix HAMMOND

Ghana’s new government, swept into power on a platform of economic reset and social progress, has made waves with its proposed “No-Academic-Fee” policy for first-year students in public tertiary institutions.

While the policy undoubtedly aims to broaden access to higher education, it casts a long shadow of discrimination, raising serious concerns about fairness, equity, and the very fabric of educational opportunity in Ghana.

The promise and the pitfall

The “No-Academic-Fee” policy, as presented in the 2025 budget, is designed to alleviate the financial burden on students entering public universities.

By eliminating or subsidizing academic fees, the government hopes to open doors to higher education for deserving students who might otherwise be priced out. This aligns with a broader commitment to social inclusion and economic empowerment.

However, the policy’s exclusive focus on public institutions creates a clear and undeniable disparity. Ghanaian students who choose to attend private universities, often for reasons of programme specialization, location, or philosophical alignment, are effectively penalized for their choice. They must bear the full burden of academic fees, placing them at a significant financial disadvantage compared to their peers in public institutions.

The case for discrimination

The discriminatory nature of the “No-Academic-Fee” policy is rooted in several key factors:

• Unequal Opportunity: The policy creates an uneven playing field, granting preferential treatment to students in public institutions while neglecting those in private universities. This undermines the principle of equal opportunity, which should be a cornerstone of any equitable education system.
• Restricted Choice: Students from lower-income backgrounds, facing financial constraints, may feel pressured to attend public universities, even if private institutions offer programmes that better suit their academic interests or career aspirations. The policy effectively limits their educational choices based on affordability rather than merit.
• Erosion of Private Institutions: By making public universities more financially attractive, the policy risks undermining the long-term viability of private tertiary institutions. These institutions play a vital role in Ghana’s education landscape, providing diverse learning environments and specialised programmes that complement those offered by public universities.
• Constitutional Concerns: The policy’s discriminatory effect may violate constitutional principles of equal access to education and the right to choose one’s education freely. Legal challenges may arise if the policy is perceived as infringing on these fundamental rights.
• Funding Disparity: The “No-Academic-Fee” policy not only benefits students attending public universities, but also simultaneously weakens the very institutions that provide crucial alternatives. By directly subsidizing public education through fee waivers, the government inadvertently drains resources away from private universities, creating a significant funding disparity that jeopardizes their ability to contribute to Ghana’s higher education landscape. A thriving higher education ecosystem requires a healthy mix of public and private institutions. Public universities excel in providing broad access and foundational knowledge, while private universities often offer specialized programs, innovative teaching methods, and a more personalized learning environment. By undermining the financial viability of private universities, the “No-Academic-Fee” policy threatens this vital diversity and limits the choices available to Ghanaian students. It is a zero sum-game with no apparent gain.

The citizen-centric approach: prioritizing students over institutions

The inherent problem with the “No-Academic-Fee” policy is that it creates a system where the state’s resources are primarily directed toward institutions, rather than the individual citizens who seek to benefit from higher education. This approach is fundamentally flawed because it:

Limits Student Choice: As we’ve discussed, it forces students to prioritize affordability over programme quality or institutional fit, restricting their educational opportunities.

Creates an Unlevel Playing Field: It unfairly advantages students in public institutions over those in private institutions, regardless of their individual needs or qualifications.

Ignores the Value of Diversity: A vibrant higher education ecosystem requires a diverse mix of institutions, each with its own strengths and specializations. The “No-Academic-Fee” policy risks homogenizing the system by making private institutions less competitive.

Empower students through portable support

A citizen-centric approach, on the other hand, prioritizes the needs and aspirations of individual students. It recognizes that the state’s primary responsibility is to ensure that all qualified Ghanaians have the opportunity to pursue higher education, not to dictate where they should pursue it. This can be achieved through:

• Accreditation as the Foundation: The government’s primary role should be to establish and maintain rigorous accreditation standards for all tertiary institutions, public and private. This ensures that students are attending legitimate and quality-assured programmes, regardless of the institutional affiliation.
• Needs-Based Student Aid: Replace the “No-Academic-Fee” policy with a comprehensive system of needs-based scholarships, grants, and loans that can be used at any accredited tertiary institution in Ghana. This would provide targeted support to deserving students, allowing them to choose the institution that best meets their needs and aspirations.
• Income-Contingent Loan Repayment: Implement income-contingent loan repayment plans, allowing graduates to repay their student loans based on their future earnings. This reduces the financial risk associated with higher education and makes it more accessible to students from low-income backgrounds.
• Tax Credits for Educational Expenses: Provide tax credits or deductions for tuition expenses, further reducing the financial burden on families and encouraging investment in higher education.

The benefits of a citizen-centric approach

Shifting the focus to the citizen offers numerous benefits:

• Enhanced Student Choice: Students are empowered to choose the institution that best aligns with their academic goals, career aspirations, and learning style.
• Increased Competition and Innovation: Institutions, both public and private, are incentivized to improve their programmes and services to attract students, leading to greater competition and innovation in the higher education sector.
• Improved Equity: Students from low-income backgrounds receive targeted support, ensuring they can succeed in higher education regardless of their institutional choice.

By prioritizing the citizen and focusing on accreditation and portable student support, Ghana can create a more equitable, dynamic, and effective higher education system that empowers all its citizens to reach their full potential

A fair, equitable, and inclusive education system will promote economic opportunity, foster social mobility, and strengthen the foundations of a vibrant and democratic society. Ghana must move beyond discriminatory policies and embrace a vision of educational equity for all.

The post The “No-Academic-Fee” policy: A promise of access, a shadow of discrimination appeared first on The Business & Financial Times.

Read Full Story