Instead of teaching certain specialties in numerous universities in parallel within the higher education system, the issue of centralizing them in separate specialized institutes gains relevance in the context of structural reforms. This approach can be justified in terms of more efficient resource allocation, concentration of academic staff and infrastructure in a specialized environment, improvement of teaching and research quality, as well as ensuring the training of personnel in line with labor market demands.
On the other hand, removing specialties from the structure of universities may affect their multidisciplinary environment and academic diversity. In this regard, the issue should be evaluated not only as an administrative change but also as a conceptual choice of the higher education model.
Therefore, the question remains: could teaching certain specialties in separate specialized institutes rather than in higher education institutions be more appropriate in terms of increasing the quality of higher education and resource efficiency?
According to Fariz İsmayılzadə, Deputy Chairman of the Science and Education Committee of the Milli Majlis, MP, who commented on the topic to AzEdu.az, there are various approaches and international practices:
"However, it should be noted that in the modern era, multidisciplinary specialties are becoming increasingly relevant. Science, innovation, and progress develop more rapidly precisely when various fields and disciplines come together to work towards a common goal; as a result, either an innovative product or highly qualified personnel are formed.
The popularization of dual degree and dual specialization programs in recent years is also an indicator of this. As for Azerbaijan, instead of the proposed structural reforms, I advocate for granting greater autonomy to universities. Higher education institutions should define more modern specialties in accordance with labor market demands and be able to operate more flexibly. As the market changes rapidly, specialties must also be updated, and universities must develop flexibly and dynamically in response to the challenges of the modern era".
Vasif Qafarov, Member of the Science and Education Committee of the Milli Majlis, MP, noted that centralizing certain specialties in separate specialized institutes instead of teaching them in numerous universities in parallel can be considered appropriate in terms of more efficient resource allocation in higher education:
"Because in this case, laboratories, equipment, finances, and academic staff for the same specialty are not fragmented across different locations; instead, they are concentrated in a stronger and more focused academic environment. Such an approach can create conditions for improving the quality of teaching and research, forming strong scientific schools, and increasing international cooperation opportunities, especially in fields requiring expensive infrastructure and narrow specialization. At the same time, the specialized institute model can offer advantages in terms of being closer to labor market demands, establishing closer cooperation with the sector, and strengthening the development of practical skills.
However, removing specialties from the structure of universities can negatively impact their multidisciplinary environment and academic diversity, which is one of their main advantages. In the modern world, many fields require an interdisciplinary approach, and a student's development not only within a narrow specialty but also at the intersection of various disciplines is considered a greater advantage. On the other hand, centralization can also weaken regional accessibility, as when some specialties are concentrated in only a few institutes, access to that education for students from regions may become difficult, potentially creating problems in terms of social equality and the distribution of educational opportunities.
Consequently, teaching certain specialties in separate specialized institutes rather than in universities can be an effective means to increase the quality of higher education and resource efficiency. However, this approach should not be applied as a universal model to all fields but should be evaluated as a conceptual decision to be chosen in accordance with the nature of the fields. The most optimal approach is to strike a balance between centralizing narrow fields requiring high technology and expensive resources, and retaining broad fields requiring multidisciplinary development within universities".
