By James Tooley
Last fall the High-Level Plenary Meeting of
the UN General Assembly brought together more than 170 heads of state—“the
largest gathering of world leaders in history”—to review progress toward the
Millennium Development Goals. It was, we were told, “a once-in-a-generation
opportunity to take bold decisions,” a “defining moment in history” when “we
must be ambitious.”
One of the
internationally agreed-on development goals the heads of state reviewed was
the achievement of universal primary education by 2015. The UN was not happy
with progress. There are still officially more than 115 million children out of
school, it reported, of which 80 percent are in sub‑Saharan Africa and Southern
Asia. But even for those lucky enough to be in school, things are not good:
“Most poor children who attend primary school in the developing world learn
shockingly little,” the UN reported.
Something had to be done. Fortunately, the UN could call on Jeffrey D. Sachs, special adviser on the Millennium Development Goals to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and author of The End of Poverty. He’s also director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. He proposed as the way forward “Quick Wins,” which have “very high potential short-term impact” and that “can be immediately implemented.” Top of his list is “Eliminating school fees,” to be achieved “no later than the end of 2006,” funded through increased international donor aid. To the UN it’s as obvious as motherhood and apple pie.
But the UN’s
“Quick Wins” are backing the wrong horse. For the past two and a half years
I’ve been directing and conducting research in sub-Saharan Africa (Kenya,
Nigeria, and Ghana) and Asia (India and China). And what I’ve found is a
remarkable and apparently hitherto unnoticed revolution in education, led by the
poor themselves. Across the developing world the poor are eschewing free,
disturbed by its low quality and lack of accountability. Meanwhile, educational
entrepreneurs from the poor communities themselves set up affordable private
schools to cater to the unfulfilled demand.
Take Kibera,
in Nairobi, Kenya, reportedly the largest slum in Africa, where half a million
people live in mud-walled, corrugated iron-roofed huts that huddle along the
old Uganda Railway. Kenya is one of the UN’s showcase examples of the virtues
of introducing free basic education. Free Primary Education (FPE) was
introduced in Kenya in January 2003, with a $55 million donation from the World
Bank—apparently the largest straight grant that it has given to any area of
social services. The world has been impressed by the outcomes: Former
President Bill Clinton told an American prime-time television audience that the
person he most wanted to meet was President Kibaki of Kenya, “because he has
abolished school fees,” which “would affect more lives than any president had
done or would ever do.” The British chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown,
visiting Olympic Primary School, one of the five government schools located on
the outskirts of Kibera, told the gathered crowds that British parents gave
their full support to their tax money being used to support FPE.
Everyone—including Sir Bob Geldof and Bono—raves on about how an additional 1.3
million children are now enrolled in primary school in Kenya. All these
children, the accepted wisdom goes, have been saved from ignorance by the
benevolence of the international community—which must give $7 billion to $8
billion per year more
so that other countries can emulate Kenya’s success.
The accepted
wisdom, however, is entirely wrong. It ignores the remarkable reality that the
poor in Africa have not been waiting helplessly for the munificence of pop
stars and Western politicians to ensure that their children get a decent
education. The reality is that private
schools for the poor have emerged in huge numbers in some of the
most impoverished slums in Africa and southern Asia. They are catering to a
majority of poor children, and outperforming their government counterparts,
for a fraction of the cost.
I went to
Kibera to see for myself, with a hunch that the headline success story might be
concealing something. In India I had seen that the poor were not at all happy
with the government schools—a recent study had shown that when researchers
called unannounced on government schools for the poor, only in half was there
any teaching going on at all—and so were leaving in huge numbers to go to
private schools set up by local entrepreneurs charging very low fees. Would
Kenya be any different? Although the education minister told me that in his
country private schools were for the rich, not the poor, and so I was misguided
in my quest, I persevered and went to the slums. It was one of Nairobi’s two
rainy seasons. The mud tracks of Kibera were mud baths. I picked my way with
care.
Within a few
minutes, I found what I was looking for. A signboard proclaimed “Makina Primary
School” outside a two-story rickety tin building. Inside a cramped office Jane
Yavetsi, the school proprietor, was keen to tell her story: “Free education is
a big problem,” she said. Since its introduction, her enrollment had declined
from 500 to 300, and now she doesn’t know how she will pay the rent on her
buildings. Many parents have opted to stay, but it is the wealthier of her poor
parents who have taken their children away, and they were the ones who paid
their fees on time. Her school fees are about 200 Kenyan shillings (about
$2.80) per month. But for the poorest children, including 50 orphans, she
offers free education. She founded the school ten years ago and has been through
many difficulties. But now she feels crestfallen: “With free education, I am
being hit very hard.”
Jane’s
wasn’t the only private school in Kibera. Right next door was another, and then
just down from her, opposite each other on the railway tracks, were two more.
Inspired by what I had found, I recruited a local research team, led by James
Shikwati of the Inter-Region Economic Network (IREN), and searched every muddy
street and alleyway looking for schools. In total we found 76 private schools,
enrolling over 12,000 students. In the five government schools serving Kibera,
there were a total of about 8,000 children—but half were from the middle-class
suburbs. The private schools, it turned out, even after free public education, were still serving a large majority
of the poor slum children.
A Typical Experience?
Was Jane’s
experience typical since the introduction of free primary education? Most of
the 70- odd private-school owners in Kibera reported sharply declining
enrollment since the introduction of FPE. Many, however, were reporting that
parents had at first taken their children away, but were now bringing them
back—because they hadn’t liked what they’d found in the government schools. We
also found the ex-managers of 35 private schools that had closed since FPE was
introduced, 25 of whom said that it was FPE that had led to their demise.
Calculating the net decline in private-school enrollment, it turned out that
there were many, many more children who had left the private schools than the
3,300 reported to have entered the government schools on Kibera’s periphery and
who were part of the much celebrated one million-plus supposedly newly enrolled
in education.
In other
words, the headlined increase in numbers of enrolled children was fictitious:
the net impact of FPE was at best precisely the same number of children
enrolled in primary school—only that some had transferred from private to
government schools.
I discussed
these findings with senior government, World Bank, and other aid officials.
They were surprised by the number of private schools I had found. But, they
said, if children had transferred from private to state schools, then this was
good: “No one believes that the private schools offer quality education,” I was
told. British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Commission for Africa agrees:
conceding that mushrooming private schools exist in some unspecified parts of
sub-Saharan Africa, it reports that they “are without adequate state regulation
and are of a low quality.”
But why
would parents be as foolhardy to pay to send their children to schools of such
low quality? One school owner in a similar situation in Ghana, where we later
conducted the research, challenged me when I observed that her school building
was little more than a corrugated iron roof on rickety poles and that the government
school, just a few hundred yards away, was a smart, proper brick building.
“Education is not about buildings,” she scolded. “What matters is what is in
the teacher’s heart. In our hearts, we love the children and do our best for
them.” She left it open, when probed, what the teachers in the government
school felt in their hearts toward the poor children.
Exploring
further in Kenya, my team and I spoke to parents, some of whom had taken their
children to the “free” government schools, but had been disillusioned by what
they found and returned to the private schools. Their reasons were straightforward:
in the government schools class sizes had increased dramatically and teachers
couldn’t cope with 100 or more pupils, five times the number in the
private-school classes. Parents compared notes when their children came home
from school and saw that in the state schools pupil notebooks remained unmarked
for weeks; they contrasted this with the detailed attention given to all
children’s work in the private schools. They heard tales from their children of
how teachers came to the state school and did their knitting or fell asleep.
One summed up the situation succinctly: “If you go to a market and are offered
free fruit and vegetables, they will be rotten. If you want fresh fruit and
veg, you have to pay for them.”
Perhaps
these poor parents are misguided. Certainly that’s what officials believe. But
are they right? We tested 3,000 children, roughly half from the Nairobi slums
and half from the government schools on the periphery, using standardized tests
in math, English, and Kiswahili. We tested the children’s and their teachers’
IQs and gave questionnaires to pupils, their parents, teachers, and school
managers so that we could control for all relevant background variables.
Although the government schools served the privileged middle classes as well
as the slum children, the private schools—serving only slum
children—outperformed the government schools in mathematics and Kiswahili,
although the latter had a slight advantage in English. But English would be
picked up by privileged children through television and interaction with
parents. When we statistically controlled for all relevant background
variables, the private schools outperformed the government schoolchildren in
all three subjects.
But there
was a further twist. The private schools outperformed the government schools
for considerably lower cost. Even if we ignore the massive costs of the
government bureaucracy and focus just on the classroom level, we find the private
schools are doing better for about a third of teacher-salary costs: the average
monthly teacher salary in government schools was Ksh. 11,080 ($155) compared
to Ksh. 3,735 ($52) in the private schools.
Free primary
education in Kenya, a showcase example of the UN’s “Quick Wins” strategy, has
simply transferred children from private schools, where they got a good deal,
closely supervised by parents, with teachers who turn up and teach, to state
schools, where they are being dramatically let down. One parent was clear what
the solution was: “We do not want our children to go to a state school. The
government offered free education. Why didn’t it give us the money instead and
let us choose where to send our children?” For this parent, a voucher system was
the obvious way forward, putting her right back in control.
Perpetual “Aid”
Perhaps some
will argue that these are teething problems and the UN’s “Quick Wins” need time
to bed down. The evidence does not support this either. Take Nigeria, for
example, which introduced its free primary education act in 1976. Ever since,
state education has been backed by huge dollops of international aid, but it
doesn’t seem much to celebrate.
Drive across
the low highway viaduct over toward Victoria Island, in the bustling city of
Lagos, for instance, and you’ll see the shantytown of Makoko, home to an
estimated 50,000 people, sprawling out into the black waters below. Wooden huts
on stilts stretch out into the lagoon; young men punt; and women paddle dugout
canoes down into narrow canals weaving between the raised homes. Across the top
of the shantytown, there is a veneer of drifting smog created by the open fires
used for cooking. Again, it’s the last place that you’d expect to witness an
educational revolution taking place. But, again, that’s precisely what’s
happening.
To get to
Makoko by road, you’ll need to turn off Third Mainland Bridge, into the
congested Murtal Muhammed Wayand sharply into Makoko Street, easing past the
women crowding the streets selling tomatoes, peppers, yams, chilies, and
crayfish. At the end of this road, there is the entrance to two parallel and
imposing four-story concrete buildings. These buildings contain three public
primary schools, originally church schools nationalized by the state in the
1980s, all on the same site, designed by the state officials to serve the whole
population of Makoko.
Visiting
these three public schools is a dispiriting experience. Our visit was a
scheduled one; the schools had had time to prepare. But even so, in most of the
classrooms, the children seemed to be doing very little. In one the young male
teacher was fast asleep at his desk, not aroused even when the children rose to
noisily chant greetings to their visitors. In others the teacher was sitting
reading a newspaper or chatting with someone outside the door, having written
a few simple things on the board, which the class had finished copying. In one
of the three schools, Grade 1 had 95 children present, three classes put
together because of long-term teacher absenteeism. The children were doing
nothing; some were also sleeping; one girl was cleaning the windows. The one
teacher was hanging around outside the class door. No one, certainly not the
headmistress, seemed remotely embarrassed by any of this. I asked the children
what lesson they were doing—when no one responded, the head teacher bellowed at
the pupils to get an answer; “It is a mathematics lesson,” she reported,
pleasantly, without any sense of incongruity, for no child had a single book
open.
This one of
the three schools alone could accommodate 1,500 children. The headmistress
told us that parents left the school en masse a few years earlier because of
teacher strikes. But things have improved, and children have returned, she
said, with 500 now enrolled. On the top floor of the stark building, however,
there were six classrooms empty, all complete with desks and chairs, waiting
for children to return. “Why don’t parents send their children here?” we asked
the headmistress. Her explanation was simple: “Parents in the slums don’t value
education. They’re illiterate and ignorant. Some don’t even know that education
is free here. But most can’t be bothered to send their children to school.” We
innocently remarked that we’d heard that, perhaps, parents were sending their
children to private schools instead, and were greeted with laughter: “They are
very poor families living in the slum ….They can’t afford private education!”
But she is
entirely wrong. Continue past the three public schools, past where the tarred
road ends at a raised speed bump, and enter Apollo Street, too muddy for a
vehicle. Here you’ll need to pick your way carefully, squelching your way from
one side of the street to the other, avoiding the worst excesses of the slime
and mud and excrement and piled rubbish. Walk alongside the huts visible from
the highway—homes made of flat timbers, supported by narrow slithers of planks
sunk into the black waters below—and you’ll come to a pink plastered concrete
building with colorful pictures of children’s toys and animals, and “Ken Ade
Private School” emblazoned across the top of the wall.
Ken Ade
Private School, not on any official list of schools, so unknown to government,
is owned by Mr. Bawo Sabo Elieu Ayeseminikan—known to everyone as “B.S.E.”
B.S.E. had set up the school on April 16, 1990, starting with only five
children in the church hall, parents paying fees on a daily basis when they
could afford to do so. Now he has about 200 children, from nursery to primary
6. The fees are about 2,200 Nigeria naira ($17) per term, or about $4 per
month, but there are 25 children who come for free.“ If a child is orphaned,
what can I do? I can’t send her away,” he says.
Philanthropy and Commerce
His motives
for setting up the school are a mixture of philanthropy and commerce—yes, he
needed work and saw that there was a demand for school places from parents
disillusioned with the state schools. But his heart also went out to the
children in his community and from his church—how could he help them better
themselves? True, there were the three public schools at the end of the road,
but although they were only about a kilometer from where he set up his school,
the distance was a barrier for many parents, who didn’t want their girls
walking down the crowded streets where abductors might lurk. But mainly it was
the educational standards in the public school that made parents want an
alternative. When they encouraged B.S.E. to set up the school 15 years
earlier, parents knew that the teachers were frequently on strike—in fairness
to the teachers, protesting about nonpayment of their salaries. We arrange to
meet some parents, visiting in their homes on stilts. The parents from the
community are all poor, the men usually fishermen, the women trading in fish,
or selling other goods along Apollo Street. Their maximum earnings might
amount to about $50 per month, but many are on lower incomes than that. The parents
tell us without hesitation that there is no question of where they send their
children if they can afford to do so—to private school. Some have one or two of
their children in the private school and one or two others in the public
school, and they know well, they tell us, how differently children are treated
in each. One woman said: “We see how children’s books never get touched in the
public school.” Another man ventured: “We pass the public school many days and
see the children outside all of the time, doing nothing. But in the private
schools, we see them everyday working hard. In the public school, children are
abandoned.”
And of
course, Ken Ade Private School is not alone in Makoko. In fact, it is one of 30
private primary schools in the shantytown. I know, because I sent in a research
team, graduate students from Nigeria’s premier university, the University of
Ibadan, to find as many of the schools as they could. In the 30 private schools
found, enrollment was reported to be 3,611, all from the slum itself, while the
enrollment in the three public schools was reported to be 1,709, but some of
these children came from outside Makoko. That is, the great majority, at least
68 percent, of all schoolchildren in Makoko attends private school.
Whether it’s
in Nigeria or Ghana, which started its own free primary education process in
1996, or India, where free primary education dates back to 1986, in poor areas
my researchers found exactly the same story: the majority of poor
schoolchildren attend private schools that outperform the state schools for a
fraction of the teacher-salary cost.
Not only is
the UN backing the wrong horse, it is also missing a trick: for the existence
of private schools for the poor provides a grassroots solution to the problem
of achieving universal basic education by 2015—without the huge dollops of aid
supposedly required. If so many children are in private unregistered schools,
then education for all is much easier to achieve than currently believed.
Dramatically, in Lagos State, Nigeria, the experts tell us that 50 percent of
school-aged children are out of school. My research suggests that it is only 26
percent—the remainder in private unregistered schools, off the state’s radar.
But all of
this is a success story that’s not being celebrated. And perhaps the reasons
why are obvious. National governments are threatened by the existence of this
counterrevolution in private education, for if they can’t get basic education
right, then people might wonder: what can they do? Aid agencies might wonder whether they have
been backing the wrong horse for decades. And development experts feel
ideologically snubbed: they believe that the poor need aid channeled through
government schools; they’re offended that instead, the poor seem to have their
own ideas about how educational needs can best be provided. But poor parents
know what they are doing. They want the best for their children and know that
private schools are the way forward. The question is: will anyone with power
and influence listen to them?
No comments:
Post a Comment