The call by Welwitschia University Chancellor Scholastika Iipinge for the Namibia Students Financial Assistance Fund (NSFAF) to fully fund students at private higher education institutions deserves serious consideration.
It also demands a more honest national conversation about what “equal treatment” in tertiary education actually means.
At the heart of the issue is a principle that should be difficult for any government committed to expanding access to education to ignore: a student’s access to financial assistance should not be determined primarily by whether the accredited institution they attend is publicly or privately owned.
If a Namibian student is pursuing an accredited qualification in nursing, law, education, commerce or another field identified as important to national development, the question should be whether that student meets the requirements for assistance, not whether the institution happens to be a public university or a private one.
Yet the matter is not as simple as demanding that NSFAF pay every private institution’s full tuition bill. Public funds must be protected, and the government has a responsibility to ensure that financial assistance is directed towards quality education, national priorities and students who genuinely need support. The answer, therefore, cannot be an uncritical blank cheque to private universities.
But neither can the state continue to promote the language of equal opportunity while maintaining a funding model that leaves students at private institutions dependent on parents and guardians to cover substantial shortfalls.
That is not equality. It is a form of unequal access dressed up as financial assistance.
The reality is that many families cannot afford to “top up” tuition fees. Namibia remains a deeply unequal society, with high unemployment, stagnant household incomes and a cost-of-living crisis that has placed enormous pressure on families. For many households, the difference between partial and full funding is not a minor inconvenience. It can determine whether a student remains enrolled, drops out or graduates with crippling debt.
The state must also recognise the reality of Namibia’s higher education landscape. Private institutions are no longer peripheral players. They educate thousands of Namibians and, in many cases, provide capacity that the public university system alone cannot accommodate. If the government wants more young people to obtain qualifications, particularly in critical fields such as healthcare, education and technical professions, it must make use of all credible and properly regulated institutions.
This is particularly important in light of the alarming revelation that 2 683 nursing graduates across the country have failed the national licensing examination. That figure should immediately shift the national conversation from merely asking how many students graduate to asking what kind of education they receive and whether graduates are competent to serve the public.
Funding must therefore follow quality, not ownership.
A private institution should not receive public money simply because it is private. Equally, a student should not receive less support simply because he or she is enrolled at a private institution that has met the relevant accreditation and professional standards.
The most sensible solution is to establish a transparent, standardised funding formula. NSFAF could determine a maximum funding amount for each accredited programme based on the actual cost of delivering that qualification. A nursing student, for example, could receive the same core tuition support whether enrolled at an eligible public or private institution, provided that the programme is accredited and meets the necessary professional standards.
Where a private institution charges tuition above the approved funding ceiling, the institution—not automatically the student or the taxpayer—should be required to justify the difference. This would introduce accountability and prevent institutions from simply inflating fees because government is paying.
A second solution is for NSFAF to adopt a voucher or student-centred funding model. The funding would be attached to the eligible student and could be used at any accredited institution that meets defined quality standards. This would create greater choice for students, encourage competition among institutions and ensure that public funding follows the learner.
Such a system would also force institutions to compete on the basis of quality, affordability, graduate outcomes and professional examination performance. The alarming nursing examination statistics demonstrate why this is necessary. Accreditation should not be treated as the end of the quality conversation. Institutions must also be measured by whether their graduates can actually perform in the professions for which they were trained.
The private sector, meanwhile, cannot continue to be treated merely as a potential source of employment after graduation. Chancellor Iipinge is correct that companies should invest in students before they enter the labour market. Businesses constantly complain about skills shortages, yet too often wait until young people have completed their education before attempting to recruit the best talent.
Industry-sponsored scholarships, apprenticeships, internships and work-integrated learning programmes should become a more central part of Namibia’s skills development ecosystem. Companies should identify the skills they will need five or ten years from now and invest in developing those skills today.
However, the responsibility ultimately remains with the state. The government cannot promise expanded access to tertiary education while leaving the financing system fragmented and inequitable. Nor can it indefinitely rely on parents and guardians to subsidise national skills development.
The central question is not whether private universities should receive special treatment. It is whether Namibian students should receive fair treatment.
A student is a Namibian student before he or she is a student of a public or private institution. If the qualification is legitimate, the institution is properly accredited and the student meets the relevant financial and academic requirements, assistance should be based on those factors.
But full funding must come with full accountability. Institutions must meet measurable quality standards. NSFAF must operate transparently. Students must be supported according to clear and consistent criteria. And government must regularly evaluate whether its funding is producing competent graduates capable of contributing meaningfully to the economy and society.
Namibia cannot afford to confuse access with success. Funding more students is important. Ensuring that they receive quality education and can pass the professional examinations required to serve the country is even more important.
The debate sparked by Welwitschia University should therefore not become a narrow dispute between public and private institutions. It should be the beginning of a broader reform of tertiary education financing.
The principle should be simple: fund the student, regulate the institution, measure the outcomes and protect the public purse.
That would be a far more credible definition of equal treatment.
