Pretending to Progress? Education Reforms in Tanzania

1. Pretending to Progress?Education Reforms in Tanzania Rakesh Rajani HakiElimu 30 April, 2007

2. Outline of presentation • The Official Story • The Official Story, Modified by a Little Reality • Core analysis and What will it take? • Conclusion

3. 1.1 The Official Story: Attention spans • Very low levels of education participation inherited at independence (1961) • Massive enrolment increases in the 1970s (UPE) • Decline through the 1980s and 90s (enrolment, funding, political/program focus) reaching crisis point and consensus that education was priority one (HIPC/PRSP) • Civil society pressure (in Tanzania/internationally) • Coming together 1999-2001, led by WB, leading to the Primary Education Development Plan (PEDP)

4. 1.2 The Official Story: PEDP (2002-06) • PEDP: ‘The Great MDG success story’ • Abolished user fees and mandatory contributions, increasing enrolment by 2 million • Recruited 50% more teachers in 5 years • Built over 40,000 new classrooms • Introduced annual capitation grant of $10/pupil sent to the school level • Emphasized governance, esp. at school level, in the ‘spirit of decentralization by devolution’ • CSO participation explicitly recognized, sector dialogue emphasized

5. 1.3 The Official Story: Sector dialogue • Elaborate machinery in place for both sector and overall development dialogue (ESDP/PRS) • Numerous reviews to monitor progress and take responsive actions (8 in 5 years) • Linked to other reforms (local govt, public financial mgmt, civil service reform, etc), recently dominated by general budget support (GBS) modalities and the push for the ‘big picture’ • Place at the table for donors and ‘domestic stakeholders’/CSOs, with increasing emphasis on CSOs following Paris declaration/new aid architecture

6. 1.4 The Official Story:CSOs in reforms • Seat at the table (various committees), largely at insistence of donors • Meant to represent the voices of the people (NGOs close to the people romance maintained) • This ‘participation’ is serves different needs: • Big picture donors see this as strengthening accountability … traditional donors see it as pilots and innovations • Govt as gap filling and doing what govt cant • CSOs see it as opportunity to determine policy and get funding, and a chance to rub shoulders

7. 1.5 The Official Story: Conclusion then? • Two million more children in school! • Education reform in Tanzania is a great example of how to achieve MDGs • Everybody is involved; there is basic accountability • The reforms and aid are working, Tanzania is a shining star of development • … True, quality of education is a problem, but you cant do everything at once • And of course there are challenges, but overall things are moving well, and certainly much better than in other countries

8. 2.1 Assessing ReformsDiverse Voices? • Key people in Government often absent • Tendency for donor domination in framing issues • Few CSOs invited grudgingly, last minute, as an after thought (lots of invitations getting ‘lost’ in the mail); key constituencies such as teachers’ union often marginalized • Intolerance for critical voices/dissent (explicit exclusion of groups who dare to challenge) • Little actual debate and discussion, more Q and A from donors to government

9. 2.2 Assessing Progress:Strategic Focus? • Meetings address details and miss the big picture • Endless amounts on formats and clarifying expectations when these better handled elsewhere • Even where issues identified (e.g. through reviews) inadequate follow-up; govt does what it wants anyway regardless because the machinery is parallel to govt structure • Lost sight of main purpose which is an education that allows students to think, learn, thrive.

10. 2.3 Assessing Progress:Adequate resources? More money going into education, but: • There is still a large resource gap that means objectives cannot be reached, but no prioritization, leading to funds spent on less important items • Opportunities to make the case for/access greater resources not seized • Opportunities for better targeting (getting value for money) not adequately explored e.g. audits scope narrow aimed at minimizing risk • No predictability of funding • Move to GBS convenient ‘checkout’ from the difficulties of sector for donors

11. 2.4 Assessing Progress:Accountability to Citizens? Better reporting than in past (in Parliament, sporadic fund releases in newspapers), but: • Most reports still not made public (e.g. audit reports, reviews, PETS, PER studies) • Information at local level often missing, late or not meaningful to ordinary citizens • Guidance to school committees often overbearing, micro-managing and contrary to PEDP/LGRP principles • Independent information (from citizens, CSOs, studies) not invited, used

12. 2.5 What does this mean for CSOs? • Constant battle to get a foot through the door • When inside, struggling to get heard and be respected, but still second class citizens, pressure to conform to be ‘in the in’ • Enormous time spent trying to keep up with documents, meetings, preparing drafts • Challenge to know how to communicate with wider constituencies, (conceptual, volume, last minute and communication) … all for a dysfunctional process that delivers little

13. 2.6 in the meantime…the state of education? • Repetition and drop out increasing (28% of the cohort) – Uganda its about 50% • Attendance much lower than enrolment, but data not compiled at national level • Still no room for children with disabilities, etc • More books in school, but often locked in cupboards to protect them • Pedagogy still rote learning (students copy notes), teacher often not in the classroom • Private tuition and cramming for examinations has increased (deepening inequities) • Violence and sexual harassment rife

14. 2.7 Assessing progress:Modified conclusion then? • Reform machinery does not work … but we all need to maintain an illusion that it does • donors need it to hang contracts and disburse • govt grudgingly to get the funds and • CSOs because its our chance to be involved • Lots of schooling, but little learning • Expectations of education not being met … primary school leavers failing to cope … so now we transfer expectations up, that secondary education will do what primary could not • A big hollow hoax?

15. 3.1 Analysis: What are core problems? • Inadequate grappling with how change happens – throwing ‘dialogue’ and technical solutions at what are essential political and institutional problems • Govt lacks the strategic leadership and political incentives to get the house in order, and largely resent public accountability • Donors unable to deal with inherent conflict of interest in their role and reluctant to deal with the political significance of their role/actions • CSOs lack conceptual and historical analysis/clarity about our roles, as well as political and organizational clout to move matters when others not willing

16. 3.1 Analysis (cont.)What are core problems? • Collective failure of imagination about the purposes and meaning of education: • we focus largely on inputs and quantities (enrolment, classrooms, teacher:pupil ratios, book:pupil ratios) • Tools for assessing progress measure the wrong things (MDGs, national examinations) • There is hardly any focus on what really matters – learning and capabilities for all – what are pupils able to do? • Failure at all levels (global movement/national; govt, donors, CSOs, public)

17. 3.2 Moving forward: What is needed? • Focused, open government leadership not afraid to exercise vision, direction, embrace different voices, focus on results • A radical simplification of the ESDP/PRS/GBS consultation machinery to make it more simple, oriented to foster debate, results focused, and truly open to public

18. 3.2 Moving forward (cont.) What is needed? • Donors able to get out of current funk and exercise strategic support that • is about results not modalities • fosters national public debate (rather than endless meetings in the club) • funds independent work/CSOs in a way that fosters strategic thinking and action • CSOs who are able to scale up independent monitoring, analysis, and public engagement

19. 3.3 Two HakiElimu examples: Media • Investigative journalism, targets vs. realities, official reports vs. rural realities • Weekly radio/TV programs that show situation on the ground, give space to historically marginalized voices e.g. Sauti ya Watu • 1 minute advert spots that provoke, not preach

20. 3.4 Two HakiElimu examples: Friends of Education • Aim is to turn private concern to public action • Any person can join, free, provide you care and want to make a difference; currently 26,000 friends • Get a card, quarterly packet of materials • Opportunity to ask questions, referrals • Tools to monitor, analyze and disseminate progress • Connect you to media (letters to editor) • Opportunity to join with others (address book) • Document what ordinary people are doing to change, share through popular pubs/media

21. 4.1 conclusion: education is politics • Change isn’t driven by research evidence, arguments, reviews, lobbying, pilot projects or dialogue … it happens: • when people are aware, stretched to think, organizing, taking action • where there is public pressure that cannot be ignored • when authorities see it is in their interest to pay attention to the right questions • People don’t know everything, and we’ve especially lost the plot on the quality/purposes of education … so ‘ask the people they will tell you’ is not enough. That is why leaders can get away with it without a public outcry

22. 4.2 conclusion:it’s the imagination, stupid • We need to fire up the public imagination, ask questions that surface the contradictions, foster true debate that ratchets up learning and understanding • This is a very different business from what we are used to (its closer to political/social movements than programs, projects, logframes, SWAps) – it’s about how ideas come to be public • Governments don’t do this; whether donors can support initiatives that foster this is uncertain

23. 4.3 conclusion The true test facing civil society today is whether we will be able to marshal the analysis, vision and public engagement • to stimulate debate that turns schooling into learning • that creates public pressure (incentives) for governments and donors to do the right things