Methods of Financing University Education and Their Implications on Access, Quality and Completion Rates: An Experience Shared from Undergraduate Education Students, Maasai Mara University, Kenya

Demand for higher education in Kenya has increased despite insufficient funding from the Government. This led to the cost-sharing policy where both the Government, the students, and their households share the costs of higher education. Students are provided with loans through Higher Education Loans Board (HELB). Public universities are supported through capitation grants to meet development and recurrent expenditure. The household contributes towards tuition and upkeep of their students. At Maasai Mara University, it has been observed that at the end of every semester, some students defer their examinations due to fee balances implying that there are gaps in the existing methods of financing a university education. This study, therefore, investigated the effectiveness of the financing methods and their implications on students’ access, completion rates, and quality education based on students’ experiences at the University. The study used a descriptive survey design. The target population was 950 education students who were in their third and fourth years of study. Stratified random sampling was used to select 315 students to participate in the study. Data were collected through questionnaires and interview guides for the class representatives. Documents were also analyzed. The study found that the majority of the students depended on HELB and support from their households to finance their education. The amount of loans allocated to students was inadequate and multiple sources of funding are required to meet the full costs of education. Students from poor backgrounds resorted to menial jobs which affected class attendance and learning outcomes. Other students deferred their examinations affecting academic progression. The study concluded that the current methods of funding university education were not dependable as they negatively affected students’ access, academic progression, completion rates, and quality of learning outcomes. The study recommended the need for an alternative financial support system for students from poor families to complete their studies on schedule.