THE HIDDEN COST OF EDUCATION IN NORTH MACEDONIA

AUTHOR: ENIS SHAQIRI

We talk a lot about education: reforms, new laws, investments in schools, scholarships and digitalisation. Whenever a debate opens up about the future of the education system, one of the first answers is that we need to invest more.

But before asking for even more money, perhaps we should ask something simpler: what are we getting in return for what we are already spending?

In the 2026 Budget, around 45.8 billion denars, or approximately €744 million, have been allocated to the Ministry of Education and Science. A significant share of these funds also goes towards higher education.

Meanwhile, the number of pupils is not increasing. Quite the opposite. At the end of the 2024/2025 school year, there were 178,918 pupils in primary education, 1.3 per cent fewer than a year earlier, while secondary education had 65,476 pupils, or 0.8 per cent fewer. In the 2025/2026 academic year, 55,036 students were enrolled in the first cycle of higher education.

At first glance, having fewer pupils and students could also mean an opportunity for a “better system”: more space, more attention for each pupil and less pressure on schools. But the reality is more complicated.

According to UNICEF, 90 per cent of pupils in North Macedonia attend schools located in just 30 per cent of school buildings. This means that some facilities are overcrowded, while others have very few pupils. Two-thirds of central schools operate in two shifts, and some even in three, while by the age of 14, pupils in North Macedonia have received nearly 900 fewer hours of instruction than the OECD average.

This shows that the problem is not only the number of schools, but also how the entire school network is organised. Closing a rural school is not simply a matter of shutting down a building. For a family, it may mean additional kilometres of travel every day, transportation costs, lost time and, in some cases, fewer opportunities for a child to have the same access to education as a peer living in a city.

That is why reorganising the school network cannot be based solely on tables showing the number of pupils. We also need to look at what happens to a child when a school is closed or when they have to travel farther to attend school.

But the cost of education does not end there.

While the state allocates billions of denars to education, part of the cost remains outside the public budget and falls directly on families.

A study by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung on the costs of raising children in North Macedonia estimates an average annual expenditure of 196,833 denars for a child aged 15–18, that is, a secondary school pupil. This is an indicative estimate based on the families included in the research and cannot be interpreted as an official cost for every family in the country.

This amount also includes expenses that we often overlook when we say that public education is free: school supplies, food, learning materials, transportation, school activities, private lessons and language courses. According to the study, these categories alone amount to around 103,600 denars per year.

But the financial burden continues after secondary education. For students who have to travel to university, transportation can become another significant expense for their families.

In some European student transport systems, the cost paid by students is considerably lower. In Germany, for example, the Deutschland-Semesterticket at some universities costs around €37.80 per month and is valid for local and regional public transport across the country. In Slovenia, the subsidised monthly student pass ranges from €25 to €55, depending on the distance, while the difference is covered by the state.

In North Macedonia, by contrast, a student from Tetovo may pay more than €105 per month just to travel to Skopje. From Kumanovo, the cost is around €100, while from Gostivar it is around €130. Thus, in a country where living standards and wages are significantly lower, the cost of getting to university can be several times higher than what a student pays in some European systems.

This is why the cost of education cannot be measured only by school or university fees. It also includes the journey to the educational institution, the time spent travelling and the expenses that families have to cover on an ongoing basis.

The FES study also records an average expenditure of 19,516 denars for the purchase of a digital device. Parents involved in focus groups noted that laptops and computers have become part of the routine requirements for homework, presentations and access to online materials.

So, when we say that public education is free, that is true in the formal sense of the public service, but not necessarily in terms of the real cost borne by a family.

And this brings us back to the system itself.

UNICEF links the loss of instructional time to the way the school network is organised and to the widespread use of shifts. When 90 per cent of pupils are concentrated in just 30 per cent of school buildings, the system is not necessarily making efficient use of its space, staff or pupils’ time.

When we then look at learning outcomes, the problem becomes even more apparent.

In PISA 2025, 15-year-olds in North Macedonia scored an average of 380 points in mathematics, 357 in reading and 378 in science. The OECD averages were 463 in mathematics, 461 in reading and 482 in science. In science, 64.3 per cent of pupils were classified as low performers, meaning they did not reach the basic level of proficiency, Level 2.

PISA does not capture the entire education system and cannot be used as its sole measure. But the results show that a very large share of 15-year-olds are not reaching the basic level of knowledge and skills they need to apply in real-life situations. Only 36 per cent reached at least Level 2 in science, compared with 74 per cent across the OECD. In mathematics, the figure was 32 per cent, while in reading it was 26 per cent.

The conditions in which students learn also remain a problem. In PISA 2025, school principals reported that for 52 per cent of pupils, a lack of educational materials, including textbooks, IT equipment, libraries or laboratory materials, hindered teaching at least to some extent. For 17 per cent of pupils, physical infrastructure was also a problem.

But the problem does not end with pre-university education.

Then comes university, where the cost for families becomes even more concrete. In 2023, only 62.3 per cent of recent graduates aged 20–34 in North Macedonia were employed, compared with 82.4 per cent in the EU. This indicator covers recent graduates who completed their education one to three years earlier and are no longer in education or training. University is certainly not the only factor determining employment, but such a gap raises a reasonable question about the link between what is taught and what the labour market demands.

For a family, a degree is not just a document. It represents years of spending on transportation, materials, equipment, accommodation for those studying away from home and, often, financial support until the completion of their studies.

For the state, meanwhile, education involves much more than that: schools, universities, salaries, infrastructure, public funding and administrative resources. In other words, the real cost is greater than what we see in a single budget line.

And if, after all of this, some young people end up outside education and the labour market, the cost continues.

In 2024, around 22.6 per cent of young people aged 15–29 in North Macedonia were neither employed nor in education or training. United Nations data for the country identify this as one of the important indicators of the social and economic situation of young people.

That is why the debate on education should not remain limited to the question of whether we should provide more money.

Of course, schools need to be renovated, teachers need to be paid, universities need to be funded, and pupils need to have the equipment and conditions they require. But money is only a means. What ultimately matters is what pupils and students are able to achieve with the opportunities the system provides them.

In the end, how much is education costing us?

It is not just the figure in the budget.

It is also what families pay, the time a pupil loses, the hours of instruction that are missing, the knowledge that is not acquired, the degree that does not easily translate into employment, and the years of a young person’s life spent outside education and the labour market.

So perhaps the most important question is not only how much we are investing in education, but how much of what we invest is actually being transformed into knowledge, skills and opportunities for our young people.

This text was developed within the project “Representation for Inclusive Development,” financially supported by the Government of Switzerland through the Civica Mobilitas program.

The content of this text is the sole responsibility of the Forum for Reasonable Policies, IOHN, and BIRC and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of Switzerland, Civica Mobilitas, or its implementing organizations.