In late 2025 and early 2026, Georgia’s government introduced major changes to the country’s higher education system, targeting admissions, institutional authority, and academic freedom, and drawing strong reactions from universities, students, and international observers alike.
At the center of the changes is a policy they call “one city, one faculty.” Within this framework, state universities are being reorganized into institutions with clearly defined academic focuses, and student quotas are being reassigned according to each university’s designated role. The result has been a steep reduction in student intake at some universities, alongside the elimination of programs considered outside their assigned fields.
The impact is particularly severe at Ilia State University, a multidisciplinary institution renowned for its research, humanities, and international programs. The government’s new decree has cut its undergraduate intake from 3,828 to just 300 students, a drop of roughly 92 percent. The university will be able to admit students only to pedagogy programs and selected STEM fields accredited by ABET. This has eliminated many of its humanities, social science, life science, and interdisciplinary programs, sparking immediate concern among faculty and students.
The government’s new decree has cut ISU’s undergraduate intake from 3,828 to just 300 students, a drop of roughly 92%
Ilia State University leaders have criticized the move. In an official statement, they said the changes were “unconstitutional, and undermined higher education in Georgia, university autonomy, and academic freedom.” They warn that the decree destroys internationally recognized research areas and academic programs.
Ilia State University Rector Nino Doborjginidze described the decision as unconstitutional and expressed concern over the years of work that had built the university’s international reputation. Deputy Rector Giorgi Gvalia added, “There is complete unity within the university community… we will use every legal mechanism available because we believe it is illegitimate and contradicts the Constitution of Georgia.”
Students joined faculty in protest throughout February. One student representative told the assembled demonstrators that they “unanimously demand the withdrawal of the so-called reform, the preservation of university autonomy, and the right to full-fledged education.” It is a concern felt by many that the reform not only reduces opportunities at Ilia State University, but also threatens the quality of higher education countrywide.
The government has defended its approach on economic grounds. Education officials have claimed that Georgia’s previous student intake “did not align with labor market needs,” leading to graduates struggling to find jobs in their fields. The reforms, they say, are intended to better match university programs with employment opportunities, with each university assigned areas aligned with its traditional strengths.
Within this framework, Tbilisi State University has been designated for exact and natural sciences, humanities (excluding pedagogy), law, business, and social sciences, while the Georgian Technical University will focus on engineering. Tbilisi State Medical University is to handle medical programs, and other regional universities have been assigned agricultural, language, or local specialties.
Officials are also changing the way public universities are funded. Parliament has approved amendments replacing the traditional grant-based system with a state-order model, in which the government itself decides both the number of students each university can admit, and the programs it may offer. Critics argue that this centralization further limits university independence and academic freedom.
The reform has drawn reactions beyond universities. Political figures, analysts, and academics warn that concentrating faculties could limit student choice and weaken Georgia’s ability to meet European academic standards. One opposition lawmaker criticized the government for failing to present “coherent arguments as to why the universities are being merged,” and called for clearer justification. International academics also urge the government to “rethink this educationally harmful proposal” and to involve stakeholders throughout the higher education system.
Education officials have claimed that Georgia’s previous student intake “did not align with labor market needs”
For employers and businesses, the changes carry practical consequences. Georgia’s universities have long supplied talent across engineering, policy, business, and other sectors. A reduction in certain disciplines could shrink the pool of skilled graduates and limit the country’s ability to respond to evolving economic needs. Despite assurances from the Ministry of Education that students’ choices would not be restricted and that international accreditations would remain intact, uncertainty remains about how the new model will affect long-term competitiveness and innovation.
The reforms, introduced with the stated goals of aligning education with labor market needs and improving efficiency, have sparked one of the most heated debates in Georgia’s educational policy in recent years. They have forced students, faculty, and employers to rethink how the country will balance specialization, university independence, and workforce development in the years ahead.
University critic and sociologist Iago Kachkachishvili called the changes a “black stain on Georgia’s university life,” warning that they sharply reduce access to fields like social and political sciences and compromise the country’s tradition of multidisciplinary higher education.
As Georgia moves forward, the nation faces the difficult task of balancing its economic priorities with the preservation of academic freedom, institutional autonomy, and the opportunities that have long defined its universities.
By Katie Ruth Davies
