USAID CSYA Final Report.pdf

CROSS-

SECTORAL

YOUTH

ASSESSMENT

NORTH

MACEDONIA

Contract No: AID - 72016518Q00005

CROSS-

SECTORAL

YOUTH

ASSESSMENT

NORTH

MACEDONIA

Contract No: AID - 72016518Q00005

July, 2019

This publication was produced for the United States Agency for International Development.

It was prepared by Navanti Group.

AID - 72016518Q00005. Prepared under the authorship of Laurie Zivetz

Project management, Arber Kuci and Aleksandra Jovevska Gjorgjevikj National Survey, GaussPoll, Skopje Statistical analysis, Molly Inman Technical Analyst, Alex Zito

Implemented by Navanti Group 2451 Crystal Drive, Suite 108 Arlington, VA 22202

In partnership with the National Youth Council of Macedonia.

CROSS-SECTORAL YOUTH ASSESSMENT

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations, 7

Executive Summary, 9

I. Introduction, 13

II. Methodology, 15

III. Profile of respondents, 17

IV. What is known about youth migration out of North Macedonia?, 18

V. Education, 22

VI. Employment and entrepreneurship, 29

VII. Civic and political engagement, 35

VIII. Social issues and exclusion, 43

IX. A youth lens on USAID’s current portfolio, 49

X. Conclusions, 54

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1 – Key Findings and Recommendations, 11

Table 2 - Number of respondents in the CSYA, 15

Table 3 – Employment status, 29

Table 4 - Strengthening youth responsiveness in USAID projects, 50

Figure 1 – Focus Group Discussions: Issue Mapping, 16

Figure 2 – Education: Highest level of education completed, 17

Figure 3 – Hollowing out of households in North Macedonia: Profile of households where a youth has migrated in the last five years, 19

Figure 4 – Migration destinations: Households with youth 15-29 who have migrated out of North Macedonia in the last five years, 20

Figure 5 – Reasons for migration according to family members: Households with youth 15- 29 who have migrated out of North Macedonia in the last five years, 20

NAVANTI GROUP

Figure 6 – Why people returned to North Macedonia: National Sample (those reporting they knew someone who has returned), 21

Figure 7 – My education prepared me for employment: National Sample (by age group and employment status), 23

Figure 8 – The one thing I wish I could have learned in school that I did not, 24

Figure 9 – Youth perspectives: Getting a job, 30

Figure 10 – Youth perspectives: Starting a business, 32

Figure 11 – Perceptions: Political agency, 36

Figure 12 – Civic engagement index, 38

Figure 13 – Civic engagement: Mean civic engagement (0-1), 38

Figure 14 – Civic participation: National sample, 39

Figure 15 – The thing that makes me most proud to be a citizen of North Macedonia, 40

Figure 16 – Sense of belonging; National sample, 43

Figure 17 – Self-perceived marginalization index, 44

Figure 18 – Self-perceived marginalization score: Mean marginalization score (0-3), 45

Figure 19 – Languages youth speak and want to learn: National sample, 46

Annexes

Annex 1 – Methodology

Annex 2 – Desk Review

Annex 3 – List of Interviewed Stakeholders

Annex 4 – Steering Committee Members

Annex 5 – List of Focus Group (FG) Facilitators

Annex 6 – List of Reviewed Documents

Annex 7 - North Macedonia CSYA: Results and Recommendations

Annex 8 – Survey Instruments (English versions)

Annex 9 – FGD and KII Forms

Acronyms and Abbreviations

CSO Civil Society Organization CSYA Cross-Sectoral Youth Assessment DUI Democratic Union for Integration EU European Union FES Friedrich Ebert Stiftung FGD Focus Group Discussion ICT Information and Communication Technologies ILO International Labor Organization IT Information Technology LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex MCEC Macedonian Civic Education Center M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MES Ministry of Education and Science MLSP Ministry of Labor and Social Policy MoU Memorandum of Understanding NDI National Democratic Institute NFE Non-formal education NGO Non-Governmental Organization NYCM National Youth Council of Macedonia OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe PLWD People Living with Disability SDSM Social Democratic Union of Macedonia UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund USAID United Stated Agency for International Development VMRO-DPMNE The Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity YEF Youth Educational Forum YGS Youth Guarantee Scheme

Executive Summary North Macedonia has a long history of emigration. An estimated 22% of the country lives in the diaspora, and it is widely acknowledged that the country continues to lose a significant portion of its future leaders and professionals as well as entrepreneurs and laborers — slowing economic development and leaving holes in the social fabric. Migration of young people is widely recognized as an urgent challenge to North Macedonia’s development.

Youth are acutely aware that the country has an outdated education system, as well as high rates of unemployment and underemployment. Deeply rooted patterns of corruption and state capture undermine young people’s confidence in their government and their willingness and interest to participate in shaping the future of the country. Young people tend to live at home even into their late 20’s, and with limited physical spaces to engage socially, spend an average of six hours a day on social media. All of these factors appear to contribute to low grade feelings of exclusion and depression, which are more significant for groups that have been traditionally marginalized—Roma, young people living with a disability, and LBGTI youth. Opportunities for education and employment in other countries are seen to offer greater security and stability. And, while parents appear to encourage young people to temper their ambitions within the country, many also encourage their children to seek better lives outside. As momentum towards EU ascension proceeds, it is likely that youth out-migration will increase unless the country is able to turn these factors around.

USAID in North Macedonia commissioned the Navanti Group to conduct this Cross Sectoral Youth Assessment (CSYA) in order to understand the drivers of youth out-migration and potential incentives to stay or return. The views of young people, age 15-29 are drawn from a national survey and conversations with some 1042 young people, carried out during March-June, 2019. Ethnic minorities, LBGTI, and young people with disabilities were given special attention. A sample of 100 households in which young people had recently already left the country were also included to explore reasons and consequences. The views of educators, politicians, government, academics and international partners help to contextualize the findings.

Half of the young people in the CSYA national survey express the intention to leave the country in the next 1-2 years. The desire to migrate is statistically stronger among young people who are unemployed; those who identify as Albanian and other ethnic minorities; LBGTI youth; and youth who express strong feelings of social exclusion—all findings that are statistically significant. Age and gender do not appear to make a difference in terms of plans to emigrate.

REASONS FOR MIGRATION ACCORDING TO FAMILY MEMBERS

Households with youth 15-29 who have migrated out of North Macedonia in the last five years

(n=100)

- Other includes (in order of occurrence): to continue their education; because they were bored, to open a business; marriage; left with partner; and better standard of living and increased mobility.

- 44% of households receive money from youth who migrate, a third of these households rely on that income for 50%+ of the household economy.

YOUTH PERSPECTIVES: GETTING A JOB

National Sample

(n=800)

YOUTH PERSPECTIVES: POLITICAL AGENCY

National Sample

(n=800)

Lack of well-paying jobs was the most often cited reason for youth out-migration.

Stakeholders across the board believe that the same job can return double the wage in Germany or Malta and bring with it more respect and security than in North Macedonia.

Corruption and broader dysfunctions in the political situation are blamed for feelings of insecurity. The situation in North Macedonia is contrasted unfavorably with receiving countries that are characterized by desirable levels of service predictability and quality, political fairness, and functioning institutions of government.

There are already on-going initiatives in many of the sectors of highest priority to youth.

Multiple projects to address high youth unemployment and encourage entrepreneurship are underway. Recommendations in this report elevate concerns and recommendations raised by youth in the CSYA. They fill gaps, provide connective tissue, build on emerging opportunities, and/or simply encourage continuation of USAID’s already relevant programming.

TABLE 1: KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Key Findings Recommendations

Education

• High levels of enrollment not matched by student attainment.

• Underinvestment in education contributes to aging infrastructure, outdated materials, inadequate teacher training, supervision, and salaries.

• School heads politically appointed; rapid turnover.

• Perception that grades and university entrance can be bought.

• Pedagogy and curricula mismatched with 21st Century life and jobs.

• Social norms and education system elevate academics over vocational training.

• Internships required, desired, but poorly managed.

1. Comprehensive education reform is an urgent long term need for the country.

Short term initiatives to kick start change:

- In-service teacher training in NFE

- Infrastructure improvements, including university dorms; computers

- Development, demonstration of merit-based performance criteria for educators and students

2. Support in-school career counseling initially in concert with MoL, CSOs, Chambers of Commerce.

3. Reinvigorate internship program with training and performance-based incentives for host agencies;

accountability to students.

4. Classroom-based life skills programming, delivered by youth volunteers

5. Mainstream mentoring program for academically struggling students.

6. Mainstream classroom-based sex education

7. Improve school based mental health services

8. Renovate dormitories at public universities

9. Update university materials

Employment and entrepreneurship

• 44% of youth in the national survey who are not in school are unemployed (21% are no longer looking for work).

• Average of 31+ months from graduation to first job; higher for youth with no tertiary degree (ILO, 2016).

• Youth cynical about fair access to jobs and a performance-based career path; see employer exploitation of workers.

• Employers complain that young people lack IT and problem-solving skills.

• Youth skeptical about entrepreneurship; unaware and unconvinced about government incentives;

fear risks.

• Government, business and donor employment, vocational training and entrepreneurship schemes hold promise.

10. Support public awareness on workers’ rights and recourse options, including capacity building for youth section of the Association of Unions.

11. Investigate complimentary extension, training support to ag entrepreneurs with Young Farmer initiative.

Civic engagement

1. Youth in N. Macedonia have moderate to low levels of civic engagement, lower for Roma and youth with a disability but higher for LBGTI youth.

2. Corruption and interference of political parties in all aspects of life blamed.

3. Opportunities limited: municipal Youth Councils and student governments largely dormant.

4. CSOs working to regain capacity and trust under new government.

5. Pending Law on Youth provides framework for productive civic engagement; consultation exposes significant disengagement of youth.

6. National Youth Council of Macedonia (NYCM) has broadest membership base of youth organizations in the country.

12. Reinvigorate student governments

13. Support to Youth Councils with strong M&E to learn what works under Law on Youth.

14. Support to locally-led youth centers, drawing lessons from American Corners.

15. Support and capacity building for NYCM-led national advocacy on targeted youth issues.

16. Joint capacity building to youth wings of political parties.

17. Youth volunteer scheme to promote civic engagement, inclusion.

18. Media literacy in high school curriculum.

19. Young journalist training and mentorship to promote youth voice.

Social cohesion and exclusion

• Youth express high levels of social exclusion (higher for Roma, youth LWD, and LBGTI) which correlates statistically with low levels of civic engagement.

• 72% of youth 15-29 live with parents.

• Lack of social space, sports opportunities particularly acute for youth outside of Skopje.

• Youth consume an average of 6 hours of social media/day (3 hrs/day more than in 2013) (FES, 2018) reflecting isolation; potential for manipulation.

• Dual education system challenges multicultural understanding.

• Youth express a greater desire to learn European than local languages.

• Observers say politicians flame interethnic tensions.

• Insecurity about individual future, limited agency in civic space contribute to “collective depression” amongst youth, though mental health awareness and services limited.

20. Research and public awareness on youth mental health, with a focus on service delivery in schools.

21. Suicide hot line.

22. Edu entertainment with focus on youth issues.

Include youth in production

Other drivers of out migration

• Unpredictability, quality and costs associated with health care.

• Air pollution

23. Health sector reform, with greater quality oversight; retention and supervision of health professionals; transparent implementation of health insurance scheme.

24. Incentives for adoption and development of clean air technology.

25. Public awareness of health risks and mitigation options for air pollution.

Many of USAID’s current projects are already advancing innovative strategies that respond to issues that are important to youth, particularly related to civic engagement, social cohesion, government accountabilities, and broader improvements in the business environment. A number merit consideration for scale, and mainstreaming, for instance in schools. A cross cutting recommendation is the need for more rigor in the monitoring and evaluation of projects designed to reach youth, in order to better understand what works and what strategies are reaching youth most effectively. Enhanced programmatic linkages amongst USAID projects and with other government, civil society and business initiatives that address youth concerns will boost synergies and contribute to their impact on youth.

I Introduction North Macedonia has a long history of emigration. An estimated 22% of the country lives in the diaspora, and it is widely acknowledged that the country continues to lose a significant portion of its future leaders and professionals as well as entrepreneurs and laborers — slowing economic development and leaving holes in the social fabric. Migration of young people is widely recognized as an urgent challenge to North Macedonia’s development.

Youth are acutely aware that the country has an outdated education system, as well as high rates of unemployment and underemployment. Deeply rooted patterns of corruption and state capture undermine young people’s confidence in their government and their willingness and interest to participate in shaping the future of the country. Young people tend to live at home even into their late 20’s, and with limited physical spaces to engage socially, spend an average of six hours a day on social media. All of these factors appear to contribute to low grade feelings of exclusion and depression, which are more significant for groups that have been traditionally marginalized—Roma, young people living with a disability, and LBGTI youth. Opportunities for education and employment in other countries are seen to offer greater security and stability. And, while parents appear to encourage young people to temper their ambitions within the country, many also encourage their children to seek better lives outside. As momentum towards EU ascension proceeds, it is likely that youth out-migration will increase unless the country is able to turn these factors around.

USAID in North Macedonia commissioned the Navanti Group to conduct this Cross Sectoral Youth Assessment (CSYA) in order to understand the drivers of youth out-migration and potential incentives to stay or return. The study was designed to give voice to young people’s concerns and priorities in an actionable format. The views of young people, age 15-29, related to their education, employment options, participation and perspectives on their community and their country’s democracy are drawn from a national survey and conversations with some 1,042 young people, carried out during March-June 2019. Youth who are often marginalized—ethnic minorities, LBGTI, and young people with disabilities- -were given special attention. The views of educators, politicians, government, academics and international partners help to contextualize the findings. A sample of 100 households in which young people had recently already left the country were also included to explore reasons and consequences.

A number of previous studies, in particular a longitudinal study of youth issues in the region by the Fredrich Ebert Stiftung (Foundation) (FES, 2018) also informed this CSYA.

Young people undertook the majority of the data gathering, and the first round of analysis.

Partnership with the National Youth Council of Macedonia (NYCM) and an active Steering Committee of youth experts helped ground the findings and ensure their relevance.

This report begins with a summary of the methodology (details provided in Annex 1), followed by a presentation of what is known about youth out-migration from North Macedonia. Separate chapters present findings related to education, employment, politics, civic engagement/youth voice, and social issues including exclusion respectively. The CSYA has focused on listening not only for challenges as youth see them, but for opportunities for positive change. Each chapter ends with a summary of opportunities that emerged in the course of the CSYA. These include promising government or NGO initiatives and policies or laws that provide a platform for positive youth programming.

II Methodology The CSYA adopted a sequential approach to data collection. A literature review informed a national survey, followed by qualitative data gathering. Table 1 below presents the sample size and provides an indication of the types and numbers of youth and youth experts who participated in this study.

TABLE 2: NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS IN THE CSYA

Participant Survey FGDs KIIs

YOUTH

Youth (15-29) 702 66 (9 FGDs) 5

LBGTI youth 143 8 (1 FGD)

Roma youth 98 7 (1 FGD) 1

Youth PLWD 99

University students 20 (3 FGDs)

Political party/local governance (youth) 12 (2 FGDs) 5

Businesses (youth) 4

Media (youth) 1

International org. (youth) 2

Sub-total YOUTH 1042 113 (16 FGDs) 18

OTHER

Households in which youth had migrated 100

Educators and media 28 (4 FGDs) 1

Government/political party/parliament 6

NGOs 14

Businesses 4

International 4

Total 1142 141 (20 FGDs) 47

The quantitative component included a national randomly sampled national survey as well as subsamples of groups typically considered marginalized. The national sample and Roma youth were gathered based on voter lists which are the most current population-based data sets in the country. LBGTI and PLWD respondents were captured through a snowball approach. Households that included youth who had migrated were identified during the national survey and thus captured at random. Data collection was collected by GaussPoll, a Skopje-based survey agency, and on-line for LBGTI youth. Navanti attempted to include youth living in the diaspora in North America and Europe. However, despite wide dissemination of an on-line survey an insufficient number of responses were received.

The survey included questions related to education, employment, attitudes related to community, country and intentions to migrate. It also included two indexes for measuring civic engagement and social inclusion. Data collection was undertaken in the April-May 2019 period. Survey instruments and details are included in Annex 8.

The qualitative component comprised focus group discussions with youth and educators as well as key informant interviews with a range of respondents who are knowledgeable about youth issues, policies and programs in the country.

Nine youth facilitators—with both Macedonian and Albanian language skills—carried out focus groups in municipalities in Skopje, Shtip, and Gostivar. Sites were selected to achieve ethnic diversity and economic development representative of the country. Focus groups were carried out with youth who were employed, students (high school and university); unemployed (rural and urban); leaders in a youth wing of a political party (both major parties);

as well as with high school teachers and university professors.

In order to capture youth voice, focus group participants created a causality map in response to the statement Young people want to leave Macedonia because…. The session concluded with a brainstorm of recommendations. Participants generally found it easier to identify problems than formulate actionable solutions. More details about the methodology are presented in Annex 1.

FIGURE 1: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

Issue Mapping

III Profile of respondents Random sampling within the national sample and Roma subsample allowed purposive selection to ensure age and gender distribution. The national sample includes 51% female and 49% male respondents, and distribution by age is 15-18 (31%); 20-24 (32%) and 25- 19 (37%). Because of the way the LBGTI and PLWD samples were collected, both groups ended up being slightly older with 44% of LBGTI in the 20-24 age group and 45% of the PLWD in the 25-29 age group.

Young LBGTI respondents in the survey look more akin to, if not slightly better educated than the national sample, whereas young PLWD and particularly the Roma are more poorly educated, differences that were statistically significant.1

FIGURE 2: EDUCATION

All samples

Highest Level of Education Completed

1 The PLWD and LBGTI respondents were not sampled at random which almost definitely skewed the profile of these respondent groups. Both were affiliated with or known to civil society organizations who connected them to the survey, and the majority were Skopje-based. Observers note that LBGTI youth outside of Skopje may not be as well educated.

IV What is known about youth migration out of North Macedonia?

The territory that comprises today’s North Macedonia has been an area of traditional migration for more than a century.2 Most migration between 1945 and 1960 was internal, from villages to urban centers, owing mainly to increased urbanization and collectivization.

The period between 1960 and 1990 was characterized by low skilled labor migration, primarily to Western Europe.3 Since Macedonian independence in 1991, highly skilled, well-educated professionals are also migrating, which has contributed to a brain drain.4

National statistics on migration are partial at best.5 In a report on migration, the European statistics agency, EUROSTAT, noted that between 1998 and 2011, some 230,000 people, or around 10% of the country’s total population, left North Macedonia to live abroad legally.

However, a number of other reports suggest that the number could be closer to 447,000, or 22% of the population (World Bank, 2011; MOES, 2013).

Current migration out of North Macedonia is analogous to other countries in the region, but comparatively much higher than other countries in the EU. The World Economic Forum (2017) Global Competitiveness List ranks Macedonia 129th in terms of its capacity to retain youth talent.

Internal migration. About 10% of respondents in the CSYA national survey had moved in the last five years, reflecting the longstanding rural-urban shift in the country. Internal migrants were most commonly young families (27% included the respondent and a spouse/ children); the respondent and his or her family of origin (21%); or students (11%). A third moved from a rural to an urban area and another half from one urban area to another.

While economics and education are important reasons for internal migration, the draw of stimulation in the city life appears to be just as important.

Young people in the CSYA complain that there are no places to gather, no cultural life, few recreational options, poor infrastructure and fewer employment options in the cities and rural areas outside of Skopje.

2 Suzana Bornarova, Verica Janeska, “Social Impact of Emigration and Rural-Urban Migration in Central and Eastern Eu-rope,” April 2012, https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=8845&langId=en

3 Karolina Bielenin-Lenczowska, “From pechalbari to iselenici: Migration history of Macedonians, University of Warsaw, http://aemi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/macedonian-history-of-migration-1.pdf

4 Ibid.

5 An EU country report on social impact of emigration and rural-urban migration notes that “in these circumstances, the scope of emigration could be approximated only through the foreign data sources from international institutions and receiving countries.”

Who wants to emigrate? Half of the young people in the CSYA national survey express an intention to leave the country in the next 1-2 years. These findings resonate with other studies which put the aspiration to leave the country even higher (InfoCenter, 2016;

FES, 2018).

Results from the CSYA study suggest that desire to migrate is statistically stronger among young people who are unemployed; amongst those who identify as Albanian and other ethnic minorities; amongst those who identify as LBGTI; and amongst youth who express strong feelings of social exclusion—all findings that are statistically significant. Age and gender do not appear to make a difference in terms of plans to emigrate.

Only 20 of the 800 youth in the CSYA survey had migrated out and returned to North Macedonia, though an unknown number had traveled overseas before. The FES (2018) study found that while youth want to move overseas, the majority have not lived, traveled or studied abroad for more than six months, and amongst those who express a desire to emigrate, 44% had taken no concrete steps to move.

The CSYA included interviews with 100 families in which a young person had already migrated out of the country, most in the last three years. The sample is demographically reflective of the population of North Macedonia in terms of ethnicity and where the families live. As shown in Figure 2, these households mirror a national demographic, which is increasingly hollowed out by the growing absence of youth in their productive years.6

FIGURE 3: HOLLOWING OUT OF HOUSEHOLDS IN NORTH MACEDONIA

Profile of households where a youth has migrated in the last five years

(n=100 )

In most of the families in this sample of households, one child had migrated. Nonetheless, in just over a quarter of the families two or more children had emigrated. In 37% of households, parents expected another child to migrate in the coming years. Some 58% of the youth were reportedly 24 years or younger when they left the country; 19% were 19 years or younger. Only 21% of parents expected to migrate themselves.

High school teachers in Skopje say that parents encourage their children to leave the country. Said one: They say ‘Get out of here…save yourself’.

6 This finding is largely anecdotal since a census has not been carried out in North Macedonia since 2002.

Where do they want to go? No national data on the numbers of people leaving the country or their destinations was found. Anecdotal information from the CSYA suggests that the EU received the majority of young migrants from North Macedonia, with Germany a major destination and other Anglophone countries also an important (FES, 2018; InfoCenter, 2016).

FIGURE 4: MIGRATION DESTINATIONS

Households with youth 15-29 who have migrated out of North Macedonia in the last five years

(n=100)

- Other EU member states (non-Germany, Malta, or UK) include Sweden (5), Austria (4), Croatia (4), France (2), Slovenia (2), Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, and unspecified.

- Other includes Switzerland (5), Montenegro, Norway, Qatar, Russia, Turkey.

Why youth emigrate? The reasons offered by families for why young people in their family had left the country were heard repeatedly in this study. They represent a complex combination of the push and pull factors explored in this report.

FIGURE 5: REASONS FOR MIGRATION ACCORDING TO FAMILY MEMBERS

Households with youth 15-29 who have migrated out of North Macedonia in the last five years

(n=100)

Youth migration is to some extent related to demands of the household economy. Amongst the 44% of families who received money from children working overseas, about a third rely on that income for half or more of the family livelihood; for another third it represents 10% or less. At the same time, families also affirm that widely held frustrations with prevailing political and lifestyle challenges contributed to decisions for their children to leave the country. The unpublished National Strategy on Outmigration of Professionals (2013-2020) (MoES, 2013) outlines a number of push factors including the overall socioeconomic situation in the country, levels of unemployment, poor working conditions including unfair treatment of employees (disrespect), limited opportunities for career advancement. These factors were expressed repeatedly by young people and others in the course of the CSYA.

Corruption and broader dysfunctions in the political situation are blamed for feelings of insecurity. The situation in North Macedonia is contrasted unfavorably with receiving countries that are characterized by desirable levels of service predictability and quality, and political fairness and functioning institutions of government.

At the same time, youth leaders in a number of focus groups acknowledged that moving abroad is something of a trend amongst young people.

Those who have left share only positive things about their experience, that it’s better for them abroad. It doesn’t mean it’s true.

The lack of response to the on-line survey for diaspora respondents may reflect a disinterest in dismembering the image from the reality, reflecting broader cultural norms related to risk avoidance and failure, discussed below. But this would need more investigation to validate.

FIGURE 6: WHY PEOPLE RETURNED TO NORTH MACEDONIA

National Sample (those reporting they knew someone who has returned)

(n=229)

The unpublished National Strategy (MoES, 2013) also acknowledges a worldwide phenomenon of “talent hunting” across most developed countries. Visas offered by programs to Germany and availability of Bulgarian passports have enabled both skilled and unskilled citizens of North Macedonia to emigrate. Established family or friend anchors in receiving countries enables migration and selection of destinations. The FES (2018) study suggests that 62% of youth expressing a desire to migrate had an invitation from someone living in the country of choice.

Return. In a hopeful sign, 26% of the young people in the national survey know someone who has returned after leaving North Macedonia—some of them with the intention to invest in the country. The CSYA reached out to a few such returnee entrepreneurs, as described in Chapter VI. Returnees are in the minority, however, and broader findings suggest the country will have to work hard to attract talent back.

V Education Macedonia enjoys one of the highest student enrollment and completion rates in the Balkans and boasts some 19 universities with 58,083 students enrolled in 2016/17.7 But enrollment achievements are not matched by attainment outcomes. Amongst 15 year old students from 70 countries that participated in the Program for International Study Assessment (PISA) exam in 2015/16, Macedonian students scored third from last in math, science and reading (OECD, 2016). Anecdotally, rates of functional illiteracy including amongst university students are as high as 19%. Longitudinal findings from the FES study (2018) suggest that the time youth devote to studying dropped between 2013 and 2016.

Structural issues within the education sector contribute to the situation.

• The Ministry of Education and Science (MES) is seen as under-capacitated, with frequent turnover due to political reasons.

• Schools and universities are under resourced with aging infrastructure and outdated materials and equipment. Older youth attending the biggest high school in Gostivar, for instance, say that students bring buckets to school because the roof is damaged.8 University students and graduates complain bitterly about the crumbling student dormitories that have come to represent broader neglect and broken promises for improvements in the country’s education system.

• Teachers9 and professors are underpaid10, poorly supervised and often appointed and promoted based on political or family connections. Many complain of too much administrative work which cuts into their teaching time. Party oversight make teachers feel vulnerable, and introduces incentives for teacher performance that have nothing to do with student attainment outcomes.11 At the same time, many young people want teachers to be more carefully vetted and monitored and, some suggest those whose expertise is outdated should be forced to retire.

• High school heads are nominated by municipalities, often on the basis of political affiliation, which also contributes to rapid turnover.

7 FES, 2018

8 The mayor reportedly promised to repair it, but then politics changed and the new mayor has installed a roof in the sports hall instead.

9 High school teachers are commonly referred to as “professors” in N. Macedonia. This terminology has been retained in quotes only in order to distinguish between primary and high school educators (teachers) and university “professors”.

10 This view, put forward by a cross section of teachers, students and other observers is not corroborated in a recent report by the OCED (2018) that suggests that teacher salaries in North Macedonia is higher than other Western Balkan coun-tries, comparing favorably with other European countries.

11 Amongst many examples, One female student shared that her high school teacher who was teaching Biology was the best one, and she also received some state award for the best teacher. But lately she opened NGO and started to work there because, as she said, political party VMRO asked her to take party membership card but when she refused they fired her.

• There is a widely held perception that grades and entrance to university can be bought.12

Youth seem clear about the heavy hand of political parties in their education; 75% of CSYA respondents say political leaders are indifferent to quality education. These factors also contribute to a view of education as only partially relevant to employment. Comments from two young people:

I didn’t care whether I learned anything or not, as I think that education is not crucial for finding a good job.

Students have good grades because of corruption. Influential people in the city are asking the professors to give good grades even if the students don’t deserve the grades.

Even some high school teachers who took the initiative to talk to their students about job hunting skills say students don’t see such skills as relevant, because students see people getting jobs through connections.

Findings from the national survey suggest that younger respondents and those holding more secure public sector jobs are more optimistic about education-to-work, as shown in Figure 7. Young people who are no longer in school and still looking for a job appear less convinced that their education prepared them for the job market.

FIGURE 7: MY EDUCATION PREPARED ME FOR EMPLOYMENT

National Sample

BY AGE GROUP

BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS

(n=800) (n=565) excludes current school and university students

Pedagogy. Youth and educators are nearly unanimous that education in North Macedonia does a poor job of preparing youth for in demand jobs (Mojsoska-Blazevski, 2016). The pedagogy is overly theoretical, based on rote learning, and many of the students in the CSYA note that some of the subjects they are required to study are irrelevant to their interests and their lives. The curriculum has changed several times over the last decade.

Students old enough to have lived through these changes and even some high school teachers seem skeptical about whether they have contributed to improvements. Some suggest changes have been bitsy; too much is imported from other countries; promotes mediocracy. One member of a political youth wing notes:

12 The percentage of youth respondents in the FES survey who expressed the view that grades and exams could be bought doubled between 2013 to 55% in 2018.

When I was a student at university, I noticed that those who were standing out as the best students were actually average, and those who were average were actually the best.

Knowledge is not being rewarded, discipline is. Theory is being learned by heart. There are talented people who don’t look at the world the same as the rest. The education system should notice these people. The benefit will be much bigger if the education system helps them develop.

Along the same lines, one university professor reflects:

The key goal of education today is the development of critical thinking. But I’m breaking a sweat until I manage to get a few words out of the students. No one has told them that they need to think about what they’re studying. We need to find the golden middle between the East where no one allows the students to think and the West where it’s all about their own opinions.

Non formal education (NFE) was mentioned repeatedly as a pedagogy (promotes critical thinking) and a type of intervention (promotes opportunities for applied learning). Echoing other, one FGD participant notes:

There are a lot of private trainings for basic skills that should have been learnt in school.

A range of civil society organizations and even businesses offer targeted technical training, for instance in programming and other IT-related skills, entrepreneurship, and vocational training. Many of these NFE programs use the practical, problem solving approach that students like.

What youth missed. As part of the survey, young people were asked to write down one thing they would have liked to have learned in school that they didn’t learn. As shown in Figure 8, many wished for more practical skills and guided practice.

FIGURE 8: THE ONE THING I WISH I COULD HAVE LEARNED IN SCHOOL THAT I DID

NOT WAS:

(n=800)

* Other includes (in order of occurrence): vocational and skilled trade; sports; sciences; to continue my studies;

and arts.

Many wanted to learn languages, and IT skills featured prominently as well.13 Forty-four percent (44%) would like to study art or music. A few also talked about broader life skills, 13 In a specific question in the national survey about IT, 66% of respondents said they would like to learn IT-related skill.

including resilience How to become better at dealing with life; To be persistent, and several focused on the pedagogy To know how to study. Notably, 35% struggled to suggest anything, which may suggest these respondents are too close to the situation to reflect on the “what else”, or as one despondent respondent notes: Nothing special.

Nonetheless, when young people sat together in focus groups, they had many ideas for what they wanted to learn in school, aside from academic topics.

• Sex education and mental health topics and services were mentioned repeatedly by young people and educators.

• Some pointed to the need to build skills and strategies to address bullying in school.

• Many also cited the need for computer and media literacy. One mentioned financial literacy.

• Political party youth leaders suggested the education system would benefit from subjects related to ethics, democracy, civic education and psychology. Along these lines, one Albanian activist reflected:

When we speak about the education system, we say that it is both for character and education —edukativo-arsimor—but in the last ten years this aspect of education has been lost.

Many older students, particularly those in university or recent graduates pointed to outdated curriculum and materials. Notes one CSYA respondent:

We need to learn more about the human body in the study of medicine, not other useless things. And teachers need to be younger....not those who don’t even know how to open a computer.

One student in electrical engineering is using books from the 1990s. At the same time, students in computer science say they are being taught with material and using approaches that are 10 years out of date--learning programming rather than how to think as a programmer. University students are unanimously unhappy that text books in higher education are outdated and often available only in other languages (particularly Serbian).

Students are aware that conditions are better in nearby countries and unfavorable comparisons with education systems in Germany, Scandinavia and even Bulgaria were shared.

Career readiness. Students receive little information about their career options, and schools do not offer many of the soft or technical skills for 21st Century jobs. Employers in North Macedonia struggle to fill positions needing computer and vocational skills and complain that young people don’t have basic job skills. One youth admits:

There are students finishing economic studies who don’t know what an invoice is.

Young people and teachers recognize that vocational training is seen as undesirable given prevailing attitudes about blue collar work. The education system does little to encourage students to specialize in vocational areas despite the high demand for construction, plumbers, electricians, metal workers, farmers etc. At the same time, a disproportionate number of students study law without relevant available jobs after graduation. Youth leaders in a political party sum it up this way:

Among us there is one unwritten rule that everyone who finishes high school should enroll in university. Personally, I don’t agree with this. Abroad there are vocational schools which are preparing students for jobs. A degree from university here doesn’t mean that the student is prepared for employment.

Current government regulations prevent youth on government scholarships from working, even during summer holidays, reportedly to protect jobs held by older people.

Prolonged education appears to be a way for society to avoid having to grapple with youth unemployment, and for youth to have to grapple with decision making and fiscal independence.

Internships are required at most high schools and all universities in North Macedonia. This emphasis on applied learning is widely regarded as a positive element of the curriculum and one that in principle could provide students workplace experience in their field and even a stepping stone to future employment. Youth, educators, as well as business and public sector observers are quite cynical about the way internships are managed, however.

The matching process is often inadequate, and receiving agencies are typically not well prepared to train interns and see interns as a burden. Information about internship opportunities are not readily available or accessible to youth. Reflecting on their internship experiences, university students in Shtip remember an often-repeated story from the CSYA:

We didn’t learn anything. We were just making coffee and buying food for the employees.

Even some bosses asked us “what are you doing here?” It was the same in high school.

Youth report that students are often asked if they want a signature to verify that they showed up at the internship. Some also complained that internships were not paid.

When we realized we wouldn’t learn anything, but just sit for eight hours, of course we started to ask for the signature on the first day.

Equity. Students with Macedonian and Albanian heritage do not attend class together in public elementary and high schools in North Macedonia. Parallel delivery of education to support ethnic/linguistic and cultural identity has historical and political origins. The bifurcated system is also credited with reinforcing ethnic divisions in the country. At the same time, Albanian students in the CSYA who attend mixed classes expressed feelings of discrimination in school14. Other youth note that economic status and family connections also inform how teachers treat their students. Roma youth and PLWD advocates also complain about discrimination in the classroom and the system.

Education and migration. Quality of education is a direct and indirect factor pushing youth to migrate out of Macedonia. Two thirds of respondents in the national survey expressed the desire to study abroad (compared to just over a third who wanted to shift to a different school in Macedonia). Overseas education is also a stated goal of the Government of North Macedonia, which has set a goal of 20% of graduates of higher education studying abroad (Bozhinovska et al, 2015 cited in FES, 2018). The Bologna process and other programs of the EU such as Erasmus, Tempus, Erasmus Mundus and Marie Curie (FES, 2018) offer opportunities for youth to study or gain exposure abroad. The benefits of these programs for the country are not completely clear. While ideally these investments in youth will cycle back into the country’s labor force, anecdotally, securing an opportunity to study abroad is seen by many as an opportunity to secure a future in another country. On the other hand, a recent tracer study carried out under the auspices of the National Agency for European Education and Mobility found that training abroad often resulted in return, particularly amongst those with vocational skills. These returnees had gained contacts and language skills that benefited them and the country.15

14 While public schools completely separate Macedonian and Albanian students, in some places Albanians can participate in Macedonian classrooms. Some private schools offer mixed classes, but the language of instruction is often English.

15 Conversation with Lidija Dimovska, Director, National Agency for European Education and Mobility, North Macedonia

Opportunities The CSYA confirms broad agreement about the nature, depth and urgency of the need for education reform in North Macedonia. Students and former students have a range of firmly held concerns. Educators recognize their students are being short changed and can name the multiple reasons, as well as their own frustrations with their jobs. The CSYA also surfaced a number of hopeful signs:

• A recent UNICEF (2019) report on education reform in North Macedonia and commitments made by the Prime Minister to addressing education issues.

• Wide appreciation for the value of internship, mentoring and apprenticeships in preparing students for the workforce. Universities have agreements and MoUs in place with multiple agencies for potential internships.

• The EU is financing three centers of excellence which will provide vocational training to students across North Macedonia. These are poised to open in 2020.

• The Ministry of Labor and Social Policy (MLSP) is working with a range of development partners (including USAID) to provide in-school career advice at the end of elementary school.

• There is a new Law on Internships in place16 which may offer a framework for redressing current challenges in making practicum meaningful for youth.

• USAID’s MCEC Project (Youth Ethnic Integration) has developed an interactive curriculum and materials on civic education, which the MoES is looking to in terms of its pedagogical potential in general.

• A number of civil society organizations and donor agencies have school-based programs that address some of the pedagogical challenges raised by youth and educators in this section. These NFE initiatives may offer models of what works.

• The Government of North Macedonia’s One Society initiative includes steps to address stereotypes and cultural bias in the curriculum, and more blended classrooms for Macedonian and Albanian students, as well as PLWD.

Recommendations

1. Comprehensive education reform is the #1 priority for addressing young people’s concerns, though it is unlikely to benefit current students. As above, reform should embrace a learner-centered pedagogy and include experiential learning opportunities;

teacher training and retraining; more robust merit-based selection and supervision of teachers; well-structured internships; relevant, current learning materials; infrastructure upgrades. Appointment, promotion and supervision of teachers and school heads should be delinked from local government and carried out based on performance-based criteria. The language requirements for students from different ethnic backgrounds could be accommodated without isolating groups from each other and curriculum and teacher training include a focus on values, inclusion, problem solving skills. More transparent entrance exams for university would be welcomed.

Recognizing that this may represent a significant undertaking in a less than optimal environment17, USAID may wish to consider projects that could address some of the issues, while at the same time laying building blocks for broader reform efforts.

16 This was noted by USAID during the review of this report, and had not been raised before. It will be important to consid-er the dimensions of such a law in the design of any program to improve internships.

17 Funding for education remains a low priority for the government, and leadership in the education space changes fre-quently and most often based on reshuffling of political coalition membership. To avoid fluctuations of the past, genuine reform will require a steady long term commitment to a strategy.

Some of these elements could be introduced immediately, including:

• Introducing effective non formal education strategies in classrooms via in service…