Issues and Snags in the Provision of Cross-Border Higher Education: Reflecting on Experiences from East Africa

Acknowledgment


Introduction
Higher education is recognized as a scarce commodity whose investment results in future financial and non-financial returns.In this regard, governments in East Africa and elsewhere are motivated by the perceived social rate of returns in such investment in higher education (Carvalho et al., 2023;Knight & Liu, 2016).One observable feature of the twenty-first century is the remarkable rise in cross-border students, staff, and programs (Knight, 2017).Similarly, online delivery of education programs has become widespread in many nations, and there has been a steady increase in the number of cross-border providers of higher education programs (OECD, 2004).Similarly, the massification of higher education has constrained many nations' capacity to provide access to higher education using conventional delivery modes.There is an increasing number of students following programs that are produced and managed outside the countries where they are offered.Consequently, the global changes in social and information technologies are compelling the introduction of new strategies and paradigms of education (Kim et al., 2010).
In general, various forms of cross-border higher education (CBHE) provide opportunities for improving the skills and competencies of students and boosting the regulation of the quality of domestic higher education in the receiving countries (Carvalho et al., 2023;Odebero et al., 2015).For instance, domestically-provided programs may work more strategically due to the inherent fear of losing potential students to programs run by foreign institutions.In consequence, higher education institutions are deliberately promoting innovative delivery systems and strengthening their collaborations with other institutions and nations in the provision and quality regulation and accreditation of their respective programs (Uvalic-Trumbic, 2008).Indeed, the contemporary importance of international educational mobility induces the promotion of information sharing and the understanding of different institutional and national educational practices and systems.Nonetheless, a significant issue in program mobility is who awards the course credits or final credentials for the program.Probably more important is whether the qualifications are credible for employment or lifelong learning in the receiving country and other countries.
In the East African region, higher education interactions and cooperation originated from the pre-independence era when Makerere University College was the only higher education institution in the area serving students from Kenya, then Tanganyika, and Zanzibar in East Africa, as well as from the then Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (now Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Malawi, respectively) in central and southern Africa (Sanga, 2017).Later, in 1963, university colleges were formed in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as constituent colleges of the then University of East Africa that had been established during the era of independence of the four countries of Uganda, Kenya, Tanganyika, and Zanzibar.Makerere College was the third constituent college of the University of East Africa.In 1970, the University of East Africa was dissolved.The University of Dar es Salaam, Makerere University, and the University of Nairobi were established as separate autonomous national universities for Tanzania, Uganda, and Kenya, respectively (IUCEA, 2008;2011).In the same year, due to the need to maintain collaboration among these universities, the Inter-University Committee (IUC) was established under the auspices of the first East African Community (EAC).The role of IUC was to facilitate contact and co-16 operation among the three universities (universities of Dar es Salaam, Makerere, and Nairobi).
Furthermore, after consultations involving principal secretaries responsible for higher education in Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya, the vice-chancellors of the universities in the three countries met in Nairobi (Kenya) in 1980 to discuss the future of the cooperation of their institutions (IUCEA, 2011).They agreed to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) committing them to maintaining co-operation among their universities within the IUC framework.This MoU led to the transformation of the IUC into the current Inter-University Council for East Africa (IUCEA).
The re-establishment of the East African Community on 30th November 1999 created an opportunity to foster CBHE more effectively in the signatory countries.Maviiri (2006) contends that, although there is a high level of interaction among the East African countries in higher education, they need more rigorous collaboration.Besides the campus public universities, Maviiri further implicitly affirms that liberalization and globalization have compelled these countries to promote the role of private universities and distance education to meet the rapidly growing demand for higher education (Maviiri, 2006).
Educational export and import bring both advantages and challenges not only to the exporting nation but also to the receiving one.For instance, while exporting institutions and nations gain from expanding student enrolments and income through tuition fees, importing nations benefit by supplementing the domestic supply of education, and they gain an educational alternative for their population.However, this phenomenon creates operational threats to the national quality assurance mechanisms responsible for higher education.When most of the imported programs consist of higher education, the impact of low-quality programs on the human resources and socioeconomic development of nations may be significantly detrimental to the national higher education stake.

Cross-Border Higher Education (CBHE) in East Africa: Benefits and Threats
Conceptually, CBHE can be described as a process in which a higher education institution offers and guarantees a study program in other countries (Carvalho, Rosa & Amaral, 2022).More broadly, CBHE refers to the movement of students, staff, knowledge, programs, education providers, policies, ideas, curricula, projects, research, and services across national or regional jurisdictional borders (Knight, 2007;Sanga, 2017).Yet, as Carvalho et al. (2022) precisely declare, cross-border education is only one aspect of the complex internationalization process.It may include higher education by public and private and not-for-profit or for-profit providers.UNESCO (2005), Knight (2017), and other literature clarify that CBHE encompasses a diversity of modalities in a continuum ranging from face-to-face to distance learning using various technologies, including e-learning.
The growth of CBHE in East Africa is accelerated by many factors, such as the massification of higher education (Sanga & Mi-Lee, 2014), the inability of national systems to offer educational opportunities to all (Odebero et al., 2015), and the global demand for internationally acceptable competencies of knowledge-based and technology-driven economies that escalate the need for relevant high-level skills.CBHE may involve a variety of forms such as franchising, online mode of learning, twinning programs, branch campuses, and joint and dual degree programs (Knight, 2007).
The co-operating institutions, teaching staff, and students benefit from the cross-fertilization of knowledge, skills, and cultures, fostering human understanding and improving the workforce across borders.In addition, CBHE boosts national educational demands to attain an international dimension of research and teaching, which can lead to institutional quality improvement.Njuguna and Itegi (2013) observed that such regional networks strengthen the benefiting countries' ability to compete globally.This is particularly important in this globalization era when African nations are deeply engaged in pursuing Western-type development, sometimes without factoring the issue of appropriateness to their respective local contexts.
CBHE creates opportunities for knowledge and technology exchange and transfer, and it promises to penetrate new markets and has the potential to stimulate competition for scarce resources, especially human capital (Knight, 2017;Odebero et al., 2015).However, the practicality of knowledge and technology exchange is usually disturbing due to the inequalities likely to emerge between collaborators.In this situation, the role of governments becomes imperative in providing the necessary frameworks and procedures that harmonize and strengthen international bonds.
CBHE threatens the nation or institution that provides and receives it.Although CBHE education generally offers an opportunity to choose high-quality courses, deep inequalities tend to exist between the collaborating countries.As Sanga and Mi-Lee ( 2014) have stated, few countries may dominate the global scientific system, and, unfortunately, new technologies are owned by multinational academic institutions from developed countries, making most East African countries dependent on significant literary superpowers.
The absence of collaborative regulation for admission, teaching, assessment, and accreditation mechanisms entails quality risks such as selling and buying fake degrees, which tend to create a negative impression of cross-border education.Against such a backdrop, some institutions have decided to introduce courses both online and compulsory attendance modes for distance learners.Additionally, although it helps in capacitybuilding, human resource development, and achieving practical and relevant education and professional training in a national context, CBHE education can constitute one of the manipulative political strategies (Knight, 2017) and economical devices for fostering educational internationalization and co-operation among nations.

Objectives
CBHE education is one of the comparatively novel areas of study in developing countries.It is rare to find adequate empirical studies that address cross-border education and its related concepts, with East African countries no exception.This paper reflects on the issues and challenges in CBHE in East Africa.The problems and difficulties individual institutions and nations encounter in their efforts to foster the provision and regulation of CBHE appear overwhelming.

Methodology
This paper presents findings from the qualitative content analysis of data from documents and records related to admission policies, living, and tuition costs of various higher education degree programs in the selected countries.Documents belonging to the quality assurance agencies for higher education in the three countries: the Commission for Higher Education, Tanzania Commission for Universities, and National Council for Higher Education for Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, respectively.Moreover, records for the Inter-University Council of East Africa were also deemed vital to supplement the collected data.
The revived East African Community consists of the republics of Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, South Sudan, and the United Republic of Tanzania.Nonetheless, this paper deliberately selected three countries-Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda-based on the assumption that they are the most influential cases within the community regarding higher education systems.These three countries also happen to be members of the formerly dissolved East African Community, and, more significantly, they have well-established and coordinated higher education systems within the community.Although, for some reason, Rwanda is emerging as one of the hotspots for higher education in this region, the cumulative reasons for picking the three countries justify their selection for study.After all, they have a long track record of co-operating in higher education and other areas.

Motives for Collaboration in the Provision and Regulation of Cross-Border Higher Education (CBHE)
The history of collaboration in East Africa can be traced back to the colonial period.These countries had and still have the goodwill to collaborate and work together.The current EAC is built on the philosophy whose framework compels establishing and expanding more solid collaborations in all socio-economic sectors, including education.As such, significant numbers of students are exodus, crossing their country's borders in search of higher education.East African countries are presently experiencing a sporadic expansion of the number and enrolment levels in university institutions triggered by the rapid increase in the demand for higher education (Odebero et al., 2015).Likewise, the need for collaborative regional efforts to regulate education is imperative due to the steady growth of student mobility within the region.Furthermore, education has become a global commodity.Hence, there is an overriding need to implement mechanisms that can foster protections and promote the quality of international standards of CBHE.In fact, for many reasons, collaboration appeared to be more desirable than operating as isolated entities.The ensuing paragraphs describe some motives for co-operation in the provision and regulation of CBHE.

Ideological Motives
In this case, the core philosophy underlying the provision of distance education and CBHEis the concept of opening up universal access to educational opportunities and resources, especially to less privileged people and segments of society.Institutions engaged in cross-border education tend to be pragmatic in their approach to inter-institutional co-operation, show a greater willingness to take risks to promote international collaboration, and are open to modern delivery methods (De Wit, 2017).The same philosophy, widening access or democratization of education, compels higher education institutions in East Africa to collaborate and reduce duplication in national efforts to provide and regulate higher education.Countries and their respective higher education institutions are, thus, constantly embracing a global culture of attracting applicants to pursue higher education in their countries.

Academic Motives
Collaboration enables institutions to expand the international dimension of their research, teaching, and provision of other educational services.Knight (2004) argued for the essentiality of such expansion due to the growing inter-dependency among nations in addressing global issues such as terrorism, health, climate change, and crime through collaborative research and scholarly activities.The international and intercultural aspects of the curriculum and the teaching and learning process are also important in their contribution to the quality and relevancy of higher education (Knight, 2004).Thus, one prominent justification for the internationalization of higher education is the preparation of graduates to be internationally knowledgeable and inter-culturally skilled so that they can live and work in more culturally diverse communities globally.
Collaboration in the provision of higher education has the potential to improve the quality of education through the sharing of learning materials, facilities, and approaches (Lambert & Moore, 1996).Moreover, through mutual quality regulation, institutions and nations open educational opportunities to a broader population of learners and educators.Risks and benefits for collaboration vary between sending and receiving countries, developed and developing countries, and among students.However, it is generally acceptable that mutual implementation of quality regulation strategies minimizes the imbalance between brain-wash and brain-gain.It exposes students and teachers to the latest educational technologies and practical insights, as well as intellectual enrichment, broadening of cultural viewpoints, and forging meaningful international bonds.The similarity among East African countries in terms of economic, social, and cultural levels and standards has the potential to facilitate their mutual collaboration in various spheres, including higher education.

Economic Motives
Although academic mobility and education exchange across borders have long been a central feature of higher education, it has recently been recognized as a commodity or service to be traded commercially across borders.Knight (2004) contends that trade agreements through the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) have identified education provision as a profitable trade sector.Therefore, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, international educators were compelled to become more aware of new opportunities and potential risks that trade liberalization could bring to higher education, particularly the international dimension.
Furthermore, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are significantly breaking territorial boundaries that have tended to characterize institutional education.Thus, institutions that wish to become or stay competitive in the global economy should consider regional and international collaboration as a means of gaining reputation and financial power.Even when a cross-border educational activity is non-commercial in purpose, there is still the export value in the country's balance of payments in some ways (Maviiri, 2006).Of course, this will largely depend on the country's strategies to reap benefits from the beneficiaries.There is, however, a precaution pertinent to the economic motives of regional collaboration.The struggle for survival tends to naturally transform higher education institutions into corporate institutions (Findler et al., 2018).The consequence is the likelihood of diverting from the institution's core mission, vision, and goals.

Diplomatic Motives
Many countries have realized the role of higher education in establishing and sustaining diplomatic relations by using soft power rather than force.Soft power relies on the strength of ideas and culture to influence the friendship and disposition of others (Knight, 2004).Usually, institutions and governments in countries with well-developed higher education are taking initiatives to receive students from many developing countries.Some universities in less well-developed higher education also seek relationships with other, more prestigious institutions to raise their visibility in global rankings.
Bilateral and multilateral co-operation, even in the education sector at the national level, tends to have diplomatic motives as well.For instance, nations may agree to establish international collaboration to reduce trade barriers and increase economic activity among themselves.Moreover, collaboration helps to fight unemployment and promote sustainable development, especially in developing countries.

Issues and Challenges in Cross-Border Higher Education (CBHE) in East Africa
Establishing and managing the provision and regulation of incoming and outgoing educational programs entail multiple constraints.Despite the strengths of mutual collaboration for the provision and regulation of CBHE, East African countries encounter various issues and challenges that may deter the efficacy of the provision and regulation of CHBE.Whereas most challenges are internal to the countries and the region, others are externally oriented, as described in the subsequent sections.

Influence of the Global North Hegemony
Despite the colonialism theory, which propounded the paternalistic practice of government that exported civilization, the African education problem dates back to the colonial period of the 19th century (Okoli, 2013).It was pointed out that some economists regard the colonial system as an extra economic hegemonial relation designed entirely for exploitation.Thus, many have recognized that colonization has a continuing impact on Sub-Saharan Africa's experience of the global economy.The identification of present structures in African education as a fallout of subjugation, colonialism, oppression, and exploitation is therefore incompatible with democratic and self-determination endeavors.
In this context, the Global North consists of countries that are mainly former colonial powers, and the Global South consists of formerly colonized countries, which include all the East African countries.Some authors classify the Global North as Developed Countries or First World Countries and the Global South as Developing Countries or Third World Countries.What is clear is that the regulation of higher education is increasingly becoming a global venture in a field characterized by significant asymmetries (Zapp & Ramirez, 2019).Belonging to countries of the Global South, higher education institutions in East Africa are predominantly prone to adopting uncritically approaches to regulating higher education applied in the Global North primarily because the diffusion of ideas and educational reform practices is progressively unidirectional-from the North to the South.One must question who establishes 'global/international' standards for quality and who benefits from such diffusions from the Global North.
The most likely option for implementing CBHE from a broader international perspective is for the East African countries to experience a widening gap between themselves as losers and the North as winners.For instance, the United States, followed by Europe, has been the leading exporter of accreditation and educational regulation guidelines and standards (Jackson et al., 2010).As a result, there is an extrinsic desire for every institution to become a world-class university, a phenomenon that is contentious but powerful and pervasive.Consequently, universities and other higher learning institutions invest heavily in marketing and branding campaigns to acquire recognition and boost enrolments.Whether the internationalization of regulation of higher education promotes collaboration and joint problem-solving or exacerbates competition and power struggles depends on an individual nation's preparedness for globalization.Whereas the Global North seems to depict aggressive competition, the East African countries are typically passive recipients of global ideas from the North.Thus, under such international power differences between the North and the South, can serve as a tool for perpetuating those differences instead of leveling the playfield.

Differences in Critical Policies and Systems of Education
Despite the similarities in many aspects, the general education systems and national educational philosophies of the three countries differ in certain fundamental elements.These differences affect prospective students' smooth crossing of the borders for higher education.For instance, Tanzania has adopted a 1-6-4-2-3 education system, while Uganda follows a 7-4-2-3 system.
On the other hand, Kenya follows an 8-4-4 system: eight years of primary education, four years of secondary education, and at least four years of higher education.These differences have a direct repercussion on student exchange across these countries.Sometimes, students are compelled to do either a bridging program or a matriculation examination before they are admitted to higher education studies in a neighboring country.Under these circumstances, the quality of education may mean different things to different institutions and partner countries.
Similarly, as mentioned in Odebero et al. (2015), when the pressure from the World Bank compelled governments in Sub-Saharan Africa to privatize higher education, so did the demise of middle-level colleges as most of them collapsed into universities and constituent colleges.The consequence of the collapse of middle-level colleges can be felt in the constriction of students' admission to higher learning institutions.

Diluted Autonomy of Higher Education Institutions And National Regulatory Agencies
Autonomy and the powers of national regulatory agencies are not uniform across these countries.Moreover, there is a notable proximity between universities and national structures of power, which in East African situations has occasionally tended to curtail academic freedom and intellectual expansion among students and staff.Indeed, several cases of serious government encroachment on higher education recruitment and renewal of lecturers' contracts, higher education budgets, and institutions' administrative procedures in general (Sifuna, 2012).Although the governments are gradually withdrawing from supporting higher education, their political influence on managing higher education remains.
Additionally, the dichotomy among national quality assurance systems creates another challenge.Kenya's Commission for Higher Education (CHE) is an example.Prioritizes the standards (provider's commitment, design of curriculum, instruction, and course materials development, staff support, student support, evaluation and assessment, and advertising) and procedures for quality assurance of open and distance learning programs (CHE, 2008).On the other hand, Tanzania's and Uganda's agencies are silent.Tanzania and Uganda apply the same procedures and standards for conventional, open, and distance learning programs.

Institutions' and Nations' Reluctance to Support and Promote Cross-Border Higher Education (CBHE)
In some cases, institutions and governments are worried that student mobility and foreign education could lead to the displacement of local students by international students (Njuguna & Itegi, 2013).Likewise, CBHEtends to cater to an affluent upper market, which explains why most students seeking it are privately sponsored.Implicitly, students from poor economic backgrounds are technically left out.

Misinterpretation of Liberalization Policies of Education
Liberalization policies of education have resulted in a rapid proliferation of higher education institutions, especially private ones.As a result, nations are witnessing a massive increase in the launching of universities and the transformation of existing nondegree-offering colleges into universities.Arguably, some of these institutions are not worthy of the name university.Coupled with massification, whereby the numbers of students surpass the available infrastructure and facilities, effective higher education management is definitely at a crossroads.The problem of degree mills has, thus, become a critical concern for higher education quality regulation agencies in this region.
Furthermore, due to the pressure from competition for impressive university ranking, institutions may cheat and provide exaggerated data to regional and international agencies on what they offer to gain the desired recognition.The consequence of this challenge is that higher education institutions are likely to provide exaggerated information about, for example, program content and their delivery and claims on the local recognition of the same.Seemingly, pressure from university ranking systems and advocacy for global competition also accelerate the provision of exaggerated data.Every higher learning institution is struggling to become a world-class university literally by any means.

Disparities in the Levels of Technology
New technologies have been influential in increasing accessibility to education and have opened new avenues for cross-border education.Due to advances in ICT, collaboration in providing and managing quality higher education is sometimes regarded as irrelevant because ICT facilitates an unrestricted penetration of knowledge and technology across borders.In addition, East African countries have different ICT policies and certainly differ in the levels at which they have integrated technology in education.These differences may have some implications for the extent to which harnessing the benefits of CBHE is attainable.Reliable ICT infrastructure will generally create a favourable environment for easy export and import of cross-border higher education.

Poor Co-Ordination of Roles Played by Various Bodies for Higher Education
Agencies of higher education regulation in East African countries delineate the roles played by, for instance, the national governments, professional and academic bodies and student bodies too passively.This anomaly can be rectified by comparing it with other international guidelines and standards such as guidelines and standards stipulated by the OECD and UNESCO's joint guideline (Uvalic-Trumbic, 2008).This is a constraint because education regulation is a shared responsibility among many stakeholders, from student bodies to national governments.
Other deterrents include the unequal costs of higher education in East Africa.For instance, the significant presence of students from Kenya, Tanzania, and elsewhere in Uganda's higher learning institutions is mainly attributable to the relatively low cost of higher education in Uganda (Odebero et al., 2015).Additionally, the duration of stay in a university may deter collaboration efforts because even when tuition fees are harmonized, the overall costs may vary due to differences in the duration of stay at a given university.

Prospects for Synergism in the Provision and Regulation of Cross-Border Higher Education (CBHE)
Provision and regulation of CBHE by single-country initiatives are cumbersome unless combined efforts from neighboring countries are considered.Notwithstanding the deterrents discussed, East African countries have vast opportunities that, if wisely harnessed, can allow CBHE to be more effectively provided and regulated within the region.
In 2005, the Inter-University Council for East Africa embarked on establishing an agency that would cater to issues about the regulation of higher education within the region.This move was prompted by the global need to promote higher education benchmarks internationally.National higher education regulatory agencies of the founding member countries collaborated in efforts aimed at actuating this idea.Consequently, the three East African higher education regulatory agencies-Kenya's Commission for Higher Education, the National Council for Higher Education in Uganda, and Tanzania's Commission for Universities-signed a memorandum of co-operation in 2006 in a bid to streamline and harmonize higher education accreditation, quality assurance practices, and procedures in the region.A harmonized regulatory system for East Africa, currently being developed, would help ensure standards and the comparability of CBHE among member countries.Successful development of an East African Quality Assurance Framework will also serve as a yardstick to ensure that higher education graduates in member countries attain the skills and competencies needed to be relevant to and competitive for jobs in the region and globally.
The recent political will of the government leaders of East African countries to invigorate a solid East African Community provides an excellent opportunity for expanding collaboration in political, economic, socio-cultural, and educational sectors.Following the East African Community revival, many higher education institutions are intensifying their ties across the region.In other words, higher education institutions can seize this unique opportunity to work together and sustain their role as think tanks within the area.More significantly, some top government leaders and educational experts have been passionately advocating for harmonizing the system of the provision and regulation of higher education in East Africa.
East African countries' most prominent public universities (Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, Makerere in Uganda, and Nairobi in Kenya) have a long, shared, and rich history.With their common history and multiple perspectives, they can synergistically share their experiences to address regional educational issues with the most significant collective voice impact.These prominent universities have the potential to provide leadership in offering high-quality higher education at a reasonably affordable cost and a less 'restrictive residency model' (Chetro-Szivos, 2010) to promote CBHEwithin the East African region.Based on their history and local dynamics, public institutions deserve to assume a leadership role in the education sector despite the growing importance of private higher education institutions in this region.

Conclusion
The global trend of higher education programs and student mobility signifies that providing cross-border education programs is increasingly becoming imperative in East Africa.One key argument of this paper is that institutions and nations ought to begin focusing on institutional and regional collaborations before rushing to fiercer global collaborations or competitions.Implicit in this argument is the need to strike a balance between localization and regionalization on the one hand and internationalization or globalization of the CBHE system on the other.

Recommendations
Member countries need to realize that, despite their many similarities, the goals of providing and regulating higher education should be relevant to the respective country's circumstances in the first place.Moreover, the provision and regulation of CBHE in East Africa require an assessment to determine the scope of conformity with other international guidelines and standards, such as those stipulated by the Commonwealth of Learning, the OECD, and UNESCO.After all, globalization pressure presents a paradox regarding collaboration and competition.Thus, balancing the need for co-operation and competition among institutions and nations is seemingly tricky for many educational leaders and managers.Finally, it is high time East African Community members implemented Article 102, especially clauses d, e, and g of the East African Community Treaty (East African Community, 2007, p. 76), which requires partner nations to: 1. Develop such standard programs in primary, intermediary, and tertiary education and a general program for adult and continuing education in partner states as would promote the emergence of well-trained personnel in all the sectors relevant to the aims and objectives of the community; 2. Harmonise curricula, examination, certification, and accreditation of education and training institutions in the partner states through joint action of their relevant national bodies charged with the preparation of such curricula; 3. Encourage and support the mobility of students and teachers within the community.