LIVING AUTONOMY OF ETHIOPIAN PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES - THE CASE OF JIMMA UNIVERSITY

Oct 15, 2026

This study assesses the practice of institutional autonomy at Jimma University in Ethiopia. Using a mixed-method design, the research collects data via questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis. Quantitative results from 232 randomly selected instructors and academic leaders are analyzed with mean values, standard deviations, and independent sample t-tests, while qualitative responses are examined through codes and emerging themes. Findings show organizational, academic, and financial autonomy are below formal autonomy, staff autonomy is medium, and overall institutional autonomy is poor; living autonomy diverges from formal autonomy, likely influenced by internal and external environments, so legal provisions alone do not guarantee living autonomy, but the environment-university relationship does.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

Background and definitions of autonomy

Review of Literature

Perspectives on institutional autonomy

LIVING AUTONOMY OF ETHIOPIAN PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES: THE CASE OF JIMMA UNIVERSITY MESAY GERBI BOGALE JEILU OUMER HUSSIEN Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia ABSTRACT This study aims to assess the practice of institutional autonomy at Jimma University in Ethiopia. The study employed a mixed approach by collecting research data through a questionnaire, semi-structured interview, and document analysis. Two hundred and thirty-two randomly selected instructors and academic leaders were contacted through the questionnaire, and nine purposively selected informants were interviewed. The quantitative data were analyzed by using mean values, standard deviations, and independent sample t-tests, while the qualitative data were examined by identifying common codes and emerging themes. The findings indicated that organizational, academic, and financial autonomy practices were lower than formal autonomy. On the other hand, staff autonomy was relatively at a medium level, and the overall practice of institutional autonomy at Jimma University was poor. Thus, living autonomy was found to be different from formal autonomy. The study also found that the influence of the internal and external environment might contribute to the divergence. As a result, legal provisions could not guarantee the university's living autonomy, but the relationship between the environment and the university does. Therefore, in exercising university autonomy, educational leaders and managers should take the interface between the university and its environment into account. INTRODUCTION In recent years, the importance of institutional autonomy in higher education institutions has gained global attention. Higher education institutions acknowledge that institutional autonomy, a crucial component of governance, significantly influences their decision-making and overall operations. When given the freedom and flexibility to adapt, institutions can effectively respond to the changing requirements and expectations of their stakeholders. In addition, they strengthen their role in their contribution to the sustainable development of the nation. According to Levacic (2002), university autonomy is one of the requirements for higher education institutions to be effective and efficient. To respond more quickly to external challenges, address social and economic needs, and manage resources in a more strategic, efficient, and effective way, higher education institutions need autonomy-the ability to independently shape their governance structures within established accountability frameworks. Enders et al. (2013) provide a comprehensive understanding of autonomy by illustrating two dimensions. First, it refers to the institution's self-capacity, highlighting its ability to act independently and make decisions based on its internal resources and expertise. Second, autonomy also pertains to the institution's relationship with its external environment, emphasizing its independence and freedom from external control or undue influence. Hence, Enders and his coauthors indicated that institutional autonomy should be understood from both perspectives. Furthermore, Pruvot and Estermann (2017) described operational freedom and the ability to choose the framework and structure of the decision-making process as examples of institutional autonomy that comprises organizational autonomy, academic autonomy, staff autonomy, and financial autonomy. In this article, "formal autonomy" refers to the legal framework of autonomy Educational Planning | Fall 2024 51 Vol. 31, No. 4 granted by the state through policies, rules, and regulations; "living autonomy" refers to the exercise of the legal framework's granted autonomy. As noted by Shaw (2018), although the policy documents have been articulated to establish autonomous public universities in the four perspectives since the imperial regime, this initiative was suspended during the Derg regime in Ethiopia. The present government, a

FAQs

What is the main purpose of the study on Jimma University?

To assess the practice of institutional autonomy and determine why living autonomy diverges from formal autonomy in Ethiopian public universities.

What methods and sources were used to collect data?

The study used a mixed approach with questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis.

How do living autonomy and formal autonomy differ according to the findings?

Organizational, academic, and financial autonomy practices were lower than formal autonomy, staff autonomy was at a medium level, and overall living autonomy was poor compared with what formal/legal autonomy provides.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by MrHarris58