UPE can be improved through partnerships
Apr 20, 2009
NINE years since Universal Primary Education (UPE) was introduced with the vision of Education for All, serious confessions have emerged as to why it registers poor results. Some of the factors are negative attitude towards UPE, unrealistic additional sch
By Richard Kibirige
NINE years since Universal Primary Education (UPE) was introduced with the vision of Education for All, serious confessions have emerged as to why it registers poor results. Some of the factors are negative attitude towards UPE, unrealistic additional school charges and lack of proper policies of inspection to retain and sustain children in school.
However, before imparting education, one needs to know the meaning and relevance of education and who is responsible for the education of the child. The Government is obliged to ensure that quality and basic education is provided at all levels.
Lack of education as indicated by high illiteracy rates and low school enrolment ratios constitutes a dimension of poverty. The relevance of poverty to the right to education is underlined by the fact that UPE is a Millennium Development Goal to be achieved worldwide by 2015.
According to the World Education Forum, (2000), while primary education is oriented towards the acquisition of fundamentals of reading, writing, and mathematics, students at the secondary levels are expected to develop intellectual skills and analyse problems using reasoning and thinking skills which are inaccessible to younger children.
One of the paradoxes of the present situation is that while countries badly need qualified human resources to support their development initiatives, there are very limited suitable employment opportunities for primary and secondary school leavers.
I was attracted to investigate people’s insights on the meaning and relevancy of UPE and the challenges UPE school going children face; and what mechanisms are in place to implement UPE; and how children have been attracted, sustained or retained in schools to enable them compete on equal footing with their better-off counterparts. The research was carried out in Katanga slums next to Makerere University, Kawempe Division.
The community members had this to say on the meaning and relevancy of UPE. Education was perceived as acquiring benefits of schooling. This therefore implies that often survival is their main priority after education what next, to them what will they eat or where they are going to sleep to night matters more than school education.
UPE was viewed as education for all without a clear concept. Within most communities, there was widespread resistance to the quality of UPE. This was attributed to the inadequate knowledge of the meaning of UPE and its relevancy in getting a job after graduation.
Some said, many of UPE graduates can hardly write or spell or copy their names nor speak fluent English as compared to their fellow private pupils from well to do primary schools such as Green Hill Academy, and Namagunga Primary School.
Besides, the equality and traditional perceptions that education can end poverty can be highly defeated by the question of the many street graduates who are unemployed. This negative feeling leaves many parents and guardians to philosophise the relevancy of education in ending poverty.
The research also revealed that there are some loopholes in sensitisation, and monitoring the implementation of UPE due to some negative cultural and religious leaders’ negative feelings towards UPE.
Local partners need to be project owners in order to ensure sustainability. Unfortunately, tribal, religious and village leaders were not involved in the implementation of UPE programme and so they had a negative concept towards UPE. Therefore, consensus needs to be gained and collaboration must be respected.
Research revealed that there are no proper policies of inspection to retain and sustain children in school. Both at local and national education levels there are no policies to follow up registered UPE children.
Generally, at a governance level, formal institutions such as the local councils rarely involve children in their discussions, despite having a secretary of children affairs.
In the extreme cases, some local council officials were simply dismissive of the idea of child participation in school, only referring to the legal age of marriage, voting or qualification for paying graduated tax.
Ways to improve UPE
There have been a number of ways in which education has been imparted in developing countries. Such forms of delivery involve building partnership in education delivery.
Recognising that governments are financially constrained, many countries have enabled the private sector to lead in the expansion of educational opportunities at the tertiary level. Innovative demand-side interventions to promote education for the poor and the girls have been introduced to enhance access.
Piloting intervention methods are also used to enhance education.
In their drive to increase access and quality education, many of the countries have been piloting innovative interventions — not only demand-side financing for the poor and girls, but also community management of schools to allow them have a greater voice in administration and financing and engendering accountability.
There may be no simple criteria for the successful implementation of UPE. This should be a challenge to be taken up.
Currently used education indicators regarding ratios (such as net primary school ratios and teacher-pupil rations, pupil-classroom ratios pupil text books ratios, may be useful to a certain degree in improving the performance of pupils.
Other indicators like proper inspection policies, vocational skills in entrepreneurship, free meals, healthcare for pupils, improved teacher salaries with allowances, role of NGOs, self-help projects or money circles to poor families, good working relationship between the Government and the traditional and religious leaders, may be useful to a certain degree in improving pupil performance with the right information to minimise inclusive and exclusive errors.
The writer is a member/researcher
Haki-Afrika Uganda Chapter, Makerere University
NINE years since Universal Primary Education (UPE) was introduced with the vision of Education for All, serious confessions have emerged as to why it registers poor results. Some of the factors are negative attitude towards UPE, unrealistic additional school charges and lack of proper policies of inspection to retain and sustain children in school.
However, before imparting education, one needs to know the meaning and relevance of education and who is responsible for the education of the child. The Government is obliged to ensure that quality and basic education is provided at all levels.
Lack of education as indicated by high illiteracy rates and low school enrolment ratios constitutes a dimension of poverty. The relevance of poverty to the right to education is underlined by the fact that UPE is a Millennium Development Goal to be achieved worldwide by 2015.
According to the World Education Forum, (2000), while primary education is oriented towards the acquisition of fundamentals of reading, writing, and mathematics, students at the secondary levels are expected to develop intellectual skills and analyse problems using reasoning and thinking skills which are inaccessible to younger children.
One of the paradoxes of the present situation is that while countries badly need qualified human resources to support their development initiatives, there are very limited suitable employment opportunities for primary and secondary school leavers.
I was attracted to investigate people’s insights on the meaning and relevancy of UPE and the challenges UPE school going children face; and what mechanisms are in place to implement UPE; and how children have been attracted, sustained or retained in schools to enable them compete on equal footing with their better-off counterparts. The research was carried out in Katanga slums next to Makerere University, Kawempe Division.
The community members had this to say on the meaning and relevancy of UPE. Education was perceived as acquiring benefits of schooling. This therefore implies that often survival is their main priority after education what next, to them what will they eat or where they are going to sleep to night matters more than school education.
UPE was viewed as education for all without a clear concept. Within most communities, there was widespread resistance to the quality of UPE. This was attributed to the inadequate knowledge of the meaning of UPE and its relevancy in getting a job after graduation.
Some said, many of UPE graduates can hardly write or spell or copy their names nor speak fluent English as compared to their fellow private pupils from well to do primary schools such as Green Hill Academy, and Namagunga Primary School.
Besides, the equality and traditional perceptions that education can end poverty can be highly defeated by the question of the many street graduates who are unemployed. This negative feeling leaves many parents and guardians to philosophise the relevancy of education in ending poverty.
The research also revealed that there are some loopholes in sensitisation, and monitoring the implementation of UPE due to some negative cultural and religious leaders’ negative feelings towards UPE.
Local partners need to be project owners in order to ensure sustainability. Unfortunately, tribal, religious and village leaders were not involved in the implementation of UPE programme and so they had a negative concept towards UPE. Therefore, consensus needs to be gained and collaboration must be respected.
Research revealed that there are no proper policies of inspection to retain and sustain children in school. Both at local and national education levels there are no policies to follow up registered UPE children.
Generally, at a governance level, formal institutions such as the local councils rarely involve children in their discussions, despite having a secretary of children affairs.
In the extreme cases, some local council officials were simply dismissive of the idea of child participation in school, only referring to the legal age of marriage, voting or qualification for paying graduated tax.
Ways to improve UPE
There have been a number of ways in which education has been imparted in developing countries. Such forms of delivery involve building partnership in education delivery.
Recognising that governments are financially constrained, many countries have enabled the private sector to lead in the expansion of educational opportunities at the tertiary level. Innovative demand-side interventions to promote education for the poor and the girls have been introduced to enhance access.
Piloting intervention methods are also used to enhance education.
In their drive to increase access and quality education, many of the countries have been piloting innovative interventions — not only demand-side financing for the poor and girls, but also community management of schools to allow them have a greater voice in administration and financing and engendering accountability.
There may be no simple criteria for the successful implementation of UPE. This should be a challenge to be taken up.
Currently used education indicators regarding ratios (such as net primary school ratios and teacher-pupil rations, pupil-classroom ratios pupil text books ratios, may be useful to a certain degree in improving the performance of pupils.
Other indicators like proper inspection policies, vocational skills in entrepreneurship, free meals, healthcare for pupils, improved teacher salaries with allowances, role of NGOs, self-help projects or money circles to poor families, good working relationship between the Government and the traditional and religious leaders, may be useful to a certain degree in improving pupil performance with the right information to minimise inclusive and exclusive errors.
The writer is a member/researcher
Haki-Afrika Uganda Chapter, Makerere University