Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South: Challenges for Policy, Practice and Research 9781136730672, 1136730672

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Dedication
Table of Contents
Figures and tables
Series editors’ preface
Contributors
Acknowledgements
1. Education quality and social justice in the South: an introduction
Why quality?
The EdQual Research Programme
Book overview
Notes
References
Part I: Framing education quality
2. Education quality and social justice in the global South: towards a conceptual framework
The Contested Terrain of Education Quality
Towards a Context Led Model of Education Quality
Reconstructing Education Quality for Social Justice: Some Starting Points
Inclusion
Relevance
Participation
Conclusion
Notes
References
3. Gender equality, capabilities and the terrain of quality education
Introduction
Teaching and learning in the gender and education literature
Reviewing quality in relation to equity, justice and capabilities
Conclusion
References
4. Reconceptualising inclusive education in international development
Introduction
Global inclusionism: an analysis
Defining the ‘global’ in global inclusionism
Global inclusionism as an educational vision
Global inclusionism as social and political transformation
The underlying assumptions of global inclusionism
Global inclusionism: a critique
The capacity critique
The epistemological critique
The disability critique
Situated expertise: the foundation of grounded inclusionism
Conclusion
Notes
References
Part II: Planning and policies for quality
5. Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness: the case for longitudinal datasets
Introduction
Why do we need to evaluate education quality?
Evidence from value added research in China
Evidence from value added research in Zanzibar
Research strengths and limitations
Conclusion
References
6. Teacher professionalism and social justice
Introduction
A conceptual framework
Teachers’ working conditions in low-income, fragile and highly unequal societies
The influence of policy and teaching contexts
Teacher perceptions of self-efficacy in the light of teaching for social justice
Teacher initial preparation, professional development and collegial support opportunities
Conclusion
References
7. Quality and early childhood care and education: lessons from India and Ghana
Introduction
Existing theoretical approaches to ECCE quality
Case studies of Maharashtra and Ghana
The Integrated Child Development Service (ICDS)
Political recognition of the importance of ECCE through governance
Expansion, quality standards and a recognition of children’s entitlement to ECCE
Redistribution through targeted provision
Participation: women and community
Ghana: ECCE Provision and Policy
Political recognition of the importance of ECCE through governance
Agencies of governance and the division between care and education
Redistribution through expansion and universalisation
Recognition and Relevance to Socio-Cultural Contexts within the ECCE Curriculum
Participation: school-community/parent relations and quality
Conclusion
Note
References
8. The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa: does it advance the quality agenda?
Introduction
The South African educational policy context
The Action Plan 2014
The South African experience and global challenges
Concluding comments
Note
References
9. Scaling up by focusing down: creating space and capacity to extend education reform in Africa
‘Going to scale’
Perspectives on ‘Going to scale’
Innovation and reform in African education: enlarging scale
The knowledge base
Empirical research on enlarging the scale of education reforms
The challenge of evaluating outcomes in education
Going to scale: analysis and implications
Successful scaling up
Why ‘scaling up’ fails
There is no blueprint
When is ‘scaling up’ inappropriate or likely to be unviable?
Broadening the focus
Roles of the national government
Roles of the external funding and technical assistance agencies
Locus of authority and responsibility
‘Going to scale’ and participatory local development
What is to be scaled up?
Notes
References
Part III: Implementing quality in schools
10. Leading and managing change in schools
Introduction
Expansion, decentralisation and school leadership
The research process
The impact of action research as a tool for leading and managing change in schools
Leading and managing poverty-related challenges
Project A – Improving reading, writing and communication skills
Project B – Supporting vulnerable pupils
Initiatives promoting gender equity
Conclusion
References
11. Dilemmas of language choice in education in Tanzania and Ghana
Introduction
The research design
Language and classroom interaction
Teacher education for teaching in L2
Stakeholder views on the language of instruction
Conclusion
References
12. Implementing curriculum change: small steps towards a big change?
Introduction
Outcomes-based curricula and child centred pedagogy
Implementing curriculum change: an action research project
Results
Nuzhat
Rozina
Supporting teachers’ implementation of student centric pedagogy within an outcomes-based curriculum
Conclusion
Note
References
13. Participatory professional development: ICT and mathematics education in Rwanda
Introduction
Teaching, learning and ICT in Rwanda
Vision 2020
Teaching and learning mathematics
Professional development, ICT and learning mathematics
A participatory professional development model: the EdQual ICT project in Rwanda
Phase 1: Incorporating ICT into a teacher-centred approach
Phase 2: Shifting towards a student-centred approach to teaching and learning mathematics with ICT
A teacher-perspective on shifting towards a student-centred approach and the role of ICT
Social justice, capabilities and the use of ICTs in mathematics education
Concluding remarks
Notes
References
Part IV: Conclusion
14. Education quality and social justice in the South: priorities for policy, practice and research
Introduction
Revisiting social justice and education quality
Creating enabling environments key priorities
Creating enabling environments: key resource inputs and processes
National debates on education quality
School, home and community links
Improved accountability and parent/community voice
Effective assessment, monitoring and evaluation of quality
An inclusive and relevant curriculum and pedagogy
Developing professional capabilities
Appropriate textbooks and learning materials including ICTs
Investing in basic infrastructure and resources
School feeding, child health and early childhood development
Conclusion
References
Index

Citation preview

Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South

How we understand education quality is inextricably linked with perspectives on social justice. Questions of inclusion, relevance and democracy in education are increasingly contested, most especially in the global South. Improving the quality of education – particularly for the most disadvantaged – has become a topic of fundamental concern for education policy makers, practitioners and the international development community. The reality experienced by many learners continues to be one of inadequately prepared and poorly motivated teachers, struggling to deliver a rapidly changing curriculum without sufficient support and often using outmoded teaching methods in overcrowded or dilapidated classrooms. Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South includes contributions from leading scholars in the field of education and development. The text draws upon state of the art evidence from the five-year EdQual research programme, which focuses upon raising achievement in low income countries, and demonstrates how systems of high quality universal education can be sustained. By exploring recent research initiatives to improve education quality, the importance of supporting local policy makers, educators and parents as agents of change – and students as active inquirers – is highlighted, and the challenge of taking successful initiatives to scale is explained. The book is divided into three main parts: 1. 2. 3.

Framing education quality Planning and policies for quality Implementing quality in schools.

Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South argues that implementing a high quality of education using theories of social justice can inform the understanding of inclusion, relevance and democracy in education. The book should be essential reading for both students and researchers within the fields of international and comparative education, along with educational policy, poverty and development studies. Leon Tikly is Professor in Education at the Graduate School of Education at the University of Bristol, UK. Angeline M. Barrett is a Lecturer in Education at the Graduate School of Education at the University of Bristol, UK.

Routledge Research in Education Series Editors: Madeleine Arnot Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, UK

This series of research-based monographs and edited collections which was set up in collaboration with the late Professor Christopher Colclough contributes to global debates about how to achieve education for all. A major set of questions faced by national governments and education providers concerns how the contributions made by education to reducing global poverty, encouraging greater social stability and equity, and ensuring the development of individual capability and wellbeing can be strengthened. Focusing on the contributions that research can make to these global agendas, this series aims to provide new knowledge and new perspectives on the relationships between education, poverty and international development. It offers alternative theoretical and methodological frameworks for the study of developing-country education systems, in the context of national cultures and ambitious global agendas. It aims to identify the key policy challenges associated with addressing social inequalities, uneven social and economic development, and the opportunities to promote democratic and effective educational change in the name of social justice. The series brings together researchers from the fields of anthropology, economics, development studies, educational studies, politics, international relations and sociology. It includes work by some of the most distinguished writers in the fields of education and development, along with new authors working on important empirical projects. The series contributes significant insights on the linkages between education, the economy, communities, and society, based on interdisciplinary, international and national studies. Selected volumes include critical syntheses of existing research and policy, work using innovative research methodologies, and in-depth evaluations of major policy developments. Some studies will address topics relevant to poverty alleviation, national and international policy-making and aid, while others will be anthropological or sociological investigations of how education functions within local communities, for households living in poverty or for particular socially marginalised groups. The authors explore a diverse range of themes from the challenges associated with providing quality teacher, professional and entrepreneurial education, to those associated with promoting gender equality, reducing gender violence, understanding the impact of poverty on constructions of childhood, or assessing the impact of learner- centred school pedagogies. They offer sharp, critical studies that are intended to have a strategic influence on the thinking of academics, researchers and policy-makers.

Published Titles Education Outcomes and Poverty A reassessment Edited by Christopher Colclough Teacher Education and the Challenge of Development A Global Analysis Edited by Bob Moon Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South Challenges for policy, practice and research Edited by Leon Tikly and Angeline Barrett Learner-centred Education in International Perspective Whose pedagogy for whose development? Michele Schweisfurth Professional Education, Capabilities and the Public Good The role of universities in promoting human development Melanie Walker and Monica McLean Livelihoods and Learning Education For All and the marginalisation of mobile pastoralists Caroline Dyer Gender Violence in Poverty Contexts The educational challenge Edited by Jenny Parkes The ‘Poor Child’ The cultural politics of education, development and childhood Edited by Lucy Hopkins and Arathi Sriprakash Educating Entrepreneurial Citizens Neoliberalism and Youth Livelihoods in Tanzania Joan DeJaeghere Education, Poverty and Global Goals for Gender Equality How People Make Policy Happen Elaine Unterhalter and Amy North For more information on the series, please visit https://www.routledge.com/ Education-Poverty-and-International-Development/book-series/EPID

Education Quality and Social Justice in the Global South Challenges for policy, practice and research Edited by Leon Tikly and Angeline M. Barrett

First published 2013 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2013 Leon Tikly and Angeline M. Barrett The right of the editors to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Education quality and social justice in the global South : challenges for policy, practice, and research / Leon Tikly and Angeline M. Barrett. p. cm. -- (Education, poverty, and international development) ISBN 978-0-415-60354-6 (hardback) -- ISBN 978-0-203-81765-0 (ebook) 1. Educational equalization--Developing countries--Crosscultural studies. 2. Educational sociology--Developing countries--Crosscultural studies. 3. Social justice--Developing countries--Cross-cultural studies. I. Tikly, Leon. II. Barrett, Angeline M. LC213.E379 2013 379.2'609172'4--dc23 2012026852 ISBN: 978-0-415-60354-6 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-203-81765-0 (ebk) Typeset in ITC Galliard Std by Saxon Graphics Ltd, Derby

This book is dedicated to the memory of three valued colleagues: Ndibalema Alphonse, Keith Bishop and Gerardo Moënne, who each contributed to the EdQual research programme and shared their passion for education and research generously.

Contents

Figures and tables xi Series editors’ preface xiii Contributors xv Acknowledgements xvii

1

Education quality and social justice in the South: an introduction

1

A ngeline M . B arrett

Part I

Framing education quality 9 2

Education quality and social justice in the global South: towards a conceptual framework

11

L eon T ikly and A ngeline M . B arrett

3

Gender equality, capabilities and the terrain of quality education 25 S heila A ikman and E laine U nterhalter

4

Reconceptualising inclusive education in international development 40 G uy L e Fanu

Part II

Planning and policies for quality 57 5

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness: the case for longitudinal datasets

59

S ally M . T homas , M assoud S alim and W en J ung P eng

6

Teacher professionalism and social justice Beatrice Avalos and A ngeline M . B arrett

75

x   Contents 7

Quality and early childhood care and education: lessons from India and Ghana

91

R ita C hawla -Duggan , Vrinda Datta and K afui E tsey

8

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa: does it advance the quality agenda?

108

Y usuf S ayed and R ashid A hmed

9

Scaling up by focusing down: creating space and capacity to extend education reform in Africa

121

J oel S amoff, M artial Dembé l é and E . M olapi S ebatane

Part III

Implementing quality in schools 139 10 Leading and managing change in schools

141

G eorge K .T. Oduro, M ichael F ertig and H illary Dachi

11 Dilemmas of language choice in education in Tanzania and Ghana

154

Oksana A fitska , Y aw A nkomah , J ohn C legg , Patrick K iliku, L ydia O sei - A mankwah and C asmir Rubagumya

12 Implementing curriculum change: small steps towards a big change?

168

A njum H alai

13 Participatory professional development: ICT and mathematics education in Rwanda

181

A lphonse U worwabayeho, Jolly Rubagi z a , F ederica Oli v ero and R osamund S utherland

Part IV

Conclusion 197 14 Education quality and social justice in the South: priorities for policy, practice and research

199

L eon T ikly

Index 211

Figures and tables

Figures   2.1 Interacting environments for education quality in Africa   5.1 Schools’ raw scores versus value added scores: Chinese EEHE outcome score (LEA2)   5.2 Comparison of School Residuals from five models: Chinese EEHE outcome score (LEA2)   6.1 Teacher professional identity 13.1 Students’ construction in the dynamic geometry software 14.1 Enabling inputs and processes for a good quality education

15 66 67 77 189 202

Table 5.1 Example of detailed multi-level modeling findings for LEA2 – Chinese Entrance Examination to Higher Educational (EEHE) score: Value Added Model III (2009)

63

Series editors’ preface

This series of research-based monographs contributes to global debates about how to achieve education for all. A major set of questions faced by national governments and education providers concern how the contributions made by education to reducing global poverty, encouraging greater social stability and equity and ensuring the development of individual capability and well-being can be strengthened. Focusing on the contributions that research can make to these global agendas, this series aims to provide new knowledge and new perspectives on the relationships between education, poverty and international development. It offers alternative theoretical and methodological frameworks for the study of developing country education systems, in the context of national cultures and ambitious global agendas. It aims to identify the key policy challenges associated with addressing social inequalities, uneven social and economic development and the opportunities to promote democratic and effective educational change. The series brings together researchers from the fields of anthropology, economics, development studies, educational studies, politics, international relations and sociology. It includes work by some of the most distinguished writers in the fields of education and development along with that of new authors working on important empirical projects. The series contributes significant insights on the linkages between education, economy and society, based on interdisciplinary, international and national studies. Selected volumes will include critical syntheses of existing research and policy, work using innovative research methodologies and in-depth evaluations of major policy developments. Some studies will address topics relevant to poverty alleviation, national and international policy-making and aid, whilst others will be anthropological or sociological investigations of how education functions within local communities, for households living in poverty or for particular socially marginalised groups. In particular, the series will feature sharp, critical studies that are intended to have a strategic influence upon the thinking of academics and policy-makers. Madeleine Arnot and Christopher Colclough Series Editors Centre for Education and International Development, University of Cambridge, UK

Contributors

Oksana Afitska University of Sheffield, UK Rashid Ahmed University of Western Cape, South Africa Sheila Aikman University of East Anglia, UK Yaw Ankomah University of Cape Coast, Ghana Beatrice Avalos University of Chile, Chile Angeline M. Barrett University of Bristol, UK Rita Chawla-Duggan University of Bath, UK John Clegg University of Bristol, UK Hillary Dachi University of Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania Vrinda Datta Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India Martial Dembélé Université de Montréal, Canada Kafui Etsey University of Cape Coast, Ghana Guy Le Fanu University of Bristol, UK Michael Fertig University of Bath, UK Anjum Halai Aga Khan University, Pakistan Patrick Kiliku University of Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania George K. T. Oduro University of Cape Coast, Ghana Federica Olivero University of Bristol, UK Lydia Osei-Amankwah University of Cape Coast, Ghana Wen Jung Peng University of Bristol, UK Jolly Rubagiza Kigali Institute of Education, UK Casmir Rubagumya University of Dodoma, Tanzania Massoud Salim Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Zanzibar Joel Samoff Stanford University, USA Yusuf Sayed University of Sussex, UK E. Molapi Sebatane Ambassador to the United States, Lesotho Rosamund Sutherland University of Bristol, UK Sally M. Thomas University of Bristol, UK Leon Tikly University of Bristol, UK Elaine Unterhalter University of London, UK Alphonse Uworwabayeho Kigali Institute of Education, UK

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of the Department for International Development for funding the Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries (EdQual) Research Programme Consortium from which this book emerged. The perseverance and teamwork of EdQual partners at the Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol, UK; Institute for Educational Development, Aga Khan University; Institute for Educational Planning and Administration, University of Cape Coast, Ghana; Kigali Institute of Education, Rwanda; Marang Centre for Mathematics and Science Education, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa; School of Education, University of Bath, UK; School of Education, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Universidad de la Fontera, Chile generated much of the substance for this book. We also gratefully acknowledge the contribution of headteachers, teachers, education managers and policy-makers in Ghana, Pakistan, Rwanda, South Africa and Tanzania who participated in, and engaged with, our research. We note with thanks the consistently excellent advice and continuous moral encouragement our consortium advisory offered over a period of five years, including Sheila Aikman, Beatrice Avalos, Trevor Coombe, Allister McGregor and Joel Samoff. At Bristol, we are particularly grateful to Nikki Hicks and Ellie Tucker for their consistent helpfulness and good humour. We are grateful to the series editors, Madeleine Arnot and Chris Colclough for their detailed reading of the manuscript and constructive suggestions for structuring the book. Finally we would like to acknowledge the patient attention to detail and insightful feedback that Guy Le Fanu offered on drafts of chapters and the promptness of our editorial assistant Clare Ashworth.

1 Education quality and social justice in the South An introduction Angeline M. Barrett

Why quality? The early years of this century have seen a dramatic expansion of formal basic education in a bid to achieve the second Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of every child everywhere in the world completing a full cycle of primary education. At the same time, five other Education for All (EFA) goals1 have been set in place, one of which is concerned with the quality of education. This latest global movement to universalise primary education is set apart from previous attempts2 by the degree of international monitoring, comprehensively reported in annual EFA Global Monitoring Reports compiled by UNESCO. The 2005 Report (UNESCO, 2004), entitled The Quality Imperative, spelled out the centrality of education quality not only to achieving and sustaining educational expansion (see also Lewin, 2007; Lewin, 2009) but also to ensuring that schooling benefits individual learners and societies. Needless to say, individuals and communities who are economically the most disadvantaged are the least likely to benefit from a good quality education. International, regional and national assessment exercises3 indicate that substantial proportions of primary school students cannot demonstrate even basic levels of literacy and numeracy (UNESCO, 2010, pp.104–105). The overwhelming majority of these children come from low-income households in low- or middle-income countries in the global South. Many are denied access to a good quality education because of unjust distribution of resources. They cannot consistently lay their hands on the most basic equipment at home or school, such as pen, paper, desk and chair. Many are too frequently hungry or absent due to poor health, care responsibilities or the need to be self-reliant to achieve the intended outcomes of schooling (Smith & Barrett, 2011). As well as resources, educational policies and the processes of schooling are decisive in the determining the quality of education. However, educational processes are complex and so policies and initiatives intended to promote social justice do not always proceed as planned. Whilst gender parity in enrolments in schools continues to improve internationally, schools remain sites where gender injustice in wider society is reproduced (Chapter 3, Aikman and Unterhalter) and gendered abuse is tolerated (Leach et al., 2003). Policy-makers are pulled

2  A.M. Barrett between popular demands that the language of instruction in schools be a language that gives access to international institutions, media and formal economies and meets the diverse needs of learners growing up in a range of monolingual, bilingual and multilingual contexts (Chapter 11, Afitska et al.). New curricula intended to be inclusive, to promote democratic values and to develop lifelong learners for rapidly changing global and local contexts also tend to be more complex than the curricula they replace. It is often teachers in remote settings, serving economically disadvantaged pupils, who are least well qualified and least well prepared to implement curriculum change (chapters by Le Fanu; Sayed and Ahmed; Halai). Likewise, new information and communication technologies are increasingly being placed in schools but unless teachers are supported to use them in the classroom their impact on education quality may be limited (Chapter 13, Uworwabayeho et al). As Sayed and Ahmed assert in Chapter 8, “teachers remain central to any quality agenda” and hence many of the chapters of this book focus on the role of teachers in improving quality and making education more socially just. If we value EFA as a development goal or as a human right then we must also insist on education being of a good, or at least acceptable, quality for all. Debates about the quality of education are inextricably entangled with issues of social justice so that any attempt to conceptualise education quality assumes a position on social justice, whether or not this is made explicit. The purpose of this book is to explore the implication of a social justice perspective on education quality for educational processes of teaching, learning, leadership and policy-making. Many of the contributions to the book focus on sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), which is the world region furthest from achieving the second MDG and, with the exception of adult literacy, the EFA goals (UNESCO, 2011). At the same time, its economic position is the weakest with the divide between rich and poor increasing. Nonetheless, the book does have relevance to the global South more generally and includes chapters drawing on experiences from four other world regions (see chapters by Le Fanu, Thomas, Avalos and Barrett and Halai).

The EdQual Research Programme This book emerges out of the a large-scale research programme on education quality in low-income countries, known as EdQual, which was funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) between 2005 and 2011. EdQual set out to generate new knowledge, initiatives and a sustainable research capacity that will assist policy makers and practitioners to improve the quality of education for disadvantaged learners. Most of its research projects worked closely with teachers to develop initiatives for changing teaching practice or improving school quality. However, the scope of the book reaches beyond the theoretical and programmatic boundaries of EdQual and includes contributions from co-authors who were connected to EdQual as external advisors, responsible for monitoring and commenting on activities (Aikman, Avalos and Samoff), as well as authors and co-authors, who had no connection with EdQual research

An introduction  3 (Unterhalter, Le Fanu, Datta, Etsey, Sayed, Ahmed, Dembélé and Molapi Sebatane). Hence, the first part of the book, titled The Quality Debate, offers three different social justice perspectives on education quality, only one of which emerged from EdQual. The second part engages with policy and planning issues for achieving education quality that were beyond the scope of EdQual projects. The third part of the book deals exclusively with EdQual research in schools. EdQual focused on formal basic education, mainly in Anglophone subSaharan Africa. The substantive and geographic focus to a large extent represented the concerns of DFID at the time the programme was tendered. In the wake of the Commission for Africa (2005), set up by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, Africa was high on the UK development agenda.The five counties in which research was conducted – Rwanda, Tanzania, Ghana, South African and Pakistan – were amongst the 25 on which DFID focused its spending. That most of the countries in which EdQual conducted research were Anglophonic4 is, more than anything else, a legacy of the British Empire as is the book editors’ position as academics based within a higher institution in the UK writing about education in the global South (Barrett et al., 2011; Tikly, 2011). EdQual’s research approach and design was informed by an initial set of principles. These were that research on education quality in Africa: 1 2 3

4 5 6 7

8

has an explicit value bases; relates issues of quality to an understanding of the broader historical, socioeconomic, political and cultural context within which they are embedded; is concerned with understanding the role of education systems in both perpetuating and overcoming inequalities including those based on gender, class, ‘race’ ethnicity, language, religion, urban/rural location and disability; is grounded in an analysis of local realities and the understandings and perspectives of learners, practitioners and the communities they belong to; focuses on the processes of teaching and learning and how these impact on the outcomes for different groups of learners; focuses on understanding the change process itself including the local conditions for realising change; seeks to empower policy makers, educators, learners and other key role players through supporting their development as reflective practitioners and agents of change; is self reflexive and self critical concerning our own role as education researchers interested in Africa. (Adapted from Tikly & Barrett, 2007, p.7.)

At a methodological level, EdQual adopted a mixed methods approach to address the overarching aim (Tikly & Barrett, 2007). The School Effectiveness and Education Quality (SEEQ) project undertook multilevel modelling techniques to determine the relative impact of a range of pupil and school level variables on literacy and numeracy outcomes at the end of the primary education cycle across fourteen countries of Southern and Eastern Africa.5 It constructed and compared separate school effectiveness models for six low-income countries

4  A.M. Barrett (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia) and for lowermiddle-income countries (Botswana, Namibia, Lesotho and Swaziland).6 It also explored disadvantage associated with socio-economic status, gender and region in South Africa, Tanzania and Zanzibar respectively. The findings draw attention to the multiple and intersecting nature of disadvantage in education and highlight the importance of context (including differences between countries and regions, urban and rural location) in understanding which learner background and school context variables are associated with relatively poor and high attainment respectively. Importantly, they show that whilst much of the cause of low attainment in literacy and mathematics lies in wider dynamics of poverty and inequality, schools can make a difference to learner outcomes and that this is more the case in Africa than in high-income countries.7 The findings from the school effectiveness component of the EdQual research have been described in detail elsewhere (Smith & Barrett, 2011; Smith et al., 2012; Yu & Thomas, 2008). They are referred to in later chapters, particularly chapter two, where we develop a context-led model of education quality, and chapter fourteen, which attempts to provide a synthesis of the research evidence presented in the book. Emerging findings from the school effectiveness study along with the reviews of the literature undertaken as part of the programme (Barrett et al., 2006; Nikel & Lowe, 2010) provided background context for the more qualitatively oriented projects (reported in part three of this book). These used action research or case study research as a strategy for grounding analysis in the “local realities and perspectives of learners, practitioners and communities” and also for empowering educators through the research process. These projects were to a large extent independent, being designed and led by researchers within different partner countries, consistent with a commitment to African research leadership (for more on this see Barrett et al., 2011). Whilst each focused on different school or classroom processes, they shared in common a central concern with identifying enabling conditions for quality improvement and effective processes for professional development. At the programme-level, project findings were interpreted in terms of the policy priorities of the countries in which research was conducted. The activity of overarching cross-project synthesis and theory development was led by one of the two institutions located in the global North involved in the consortium (University of Bristol). Whilst there were practical and intellectual reasons for this, we are also mindful of the inscription of global inequalities rooted in colonial histories (Tikly, 2004) and view this as a limitation to the realization of our vision for African research leadership.

Book overview As stated above, the remainder of this book is divided into three parts, followed by a concluding chapter. Part one sets out three ways of conceptualising education quality in relation to social justice. In the next chapter, Tikly and

An introduction  5 Barrett present a framework developed over the course of the EdQual programme on the basis of research findings and engagement with literature. They draw on Nancy Fraser’s definition of social justice to define the education terrain along three dimensions of inclusion (access to learning outcomes), relevance (substance of learning outcomes) and participation (processes for setting and monitoring learning outcomes). They view the last of these as the most fundamental. It is only through ongoing, informed democratic debate and advocacy – and only with transparent functioning accountability – that inclusion and relevance can be assured. In chapter three, Aikman and Unterhalter offer a critique of Tikly and Barrett’s framework from the perspective of gender justice. They argue for taking inclusion rather than participation as the most fundamental dimension of quality. They identify quality priorities generated by four distinct understandings of gender equity, arguing that these add to the inclusion-relevance-democracy framework. Whilst Aikman and Unterhalter endorse both human rights and capability approaches to social justice, in the fourth chapter Le Fanu focuses on Tikly and Barrett’s dimension of inclusion. He levels a critical gaze at a rights-based approach to inclusion, which he terms ‘global inclusionism’. Drawing on case studies from sub-Saharan Africa and his own work in Papua New Guinea that illustrate the limited success of new internationally-influenced curricula, he argues for a ‘grounded inclusionism’ that builds on the situated expertise of local stakeholders and shares information on existing good practices between contexts. Part two of the book looks at Planning and Policies for Quality. It starts with Thomas, Salim and Peng setting out an argument for collecting longitudinal data on pupil achievement for the purpose of monitoring and evaluating school quality at both the national and school level. They draw on findings from projects piloting value-added measures of school quality in China and research in Zanzibar. Avalos and Barrett look in more depth at the construction of teachers as professionals and the extent to which, in low-income contexts, they are enabled to work for social justice. Structural barriers to social justice are identified including inadequate systems of reward and remuneration and lack of legal and political representation for all teachers. They conclude by calling for changes to teacher education and professional development, highlighting the influence of the hidden as well as formal curriculum in teacher training institutions. Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) is strongly associated with health and educational performance in later life, particularly for children living in households with low socio-economic status. India and Ghana are two countries that are expanding access to ECCE in a move towards achieving the first Education for All goal. Chawla-Duggan, Datta and Etsey compare the policies being pursued and the implications for inclusion, relevance and representation. Sayed and Ahmed apply a social justice conceptualisation of education to critique South African policy. In its attempt to set a course for redistributing social opportunity in the post-apartheid era they detect a shift from “vigorous civil society participation” to a top-down “managerial discourse on participation”. Consonant with frameworks set out in part one, Sayed and

6  A.M. Barrett Ahmed highlight the centrality of processes, with all their complexity, to education quality and hence the need for quality frameworks with the capacity to analyse complex systems rather than reductionist input–output models that fail to open the black box of processes (Chapter 8, Sayed and Ahmed). Samoff, Dembélé and Sebatane also look to structural issues when arguing, on the basis of their wide-ranging review of education reform in Africa, that it is not the content of successful initiatives that need to be scaled-up but rather the conditions that sustain success, including dynamic local leadership. All the contributions to part three derive from EdQual research projects in schools in Africa and Pakistan. Oduro, Fertig and Dachi describe an action research project that set out to empower primary school headteachers to improve the quality of education for the most disadvantaged learners in their schools. The potential benefits of schools engaging with local communities again emerges as a theme as participating head teachers demonstrated leadership capabilities in mobilising community and parents to support learning at home, provide school meals and to protect teenagers from early sexual debut, amongst other initiatives. It is argued that constructing head teachers as autonomous professionals through management processes and leadership training is a first step to releasing their potential to improve school quality along the dimension of inclusion. Afitska, Ankomah, Clegg, Kiliku, Osei-Amankwah and Rubagumya comment on the teacher education and development implications of their research on language use in classrooms. They report on research in Tanzania and Ghana, which focused on enabling teachers to use language in ways that support pupils in education systems where the language of instruction changes from an African language to English part way through within or at the end of the primary education cycle. They present language of instruction as a contested issue along all three dimensions of inclusion, relevance and participation. Uworwabayeho et al. and Halai both embrace the possibilities of learner-centred teaching and suggest ways forward for promoting pedagogical change through participatory professional development. Halai acknowledges the teacher development challenges and highlights the potential role of higher education institutes through a series of small-scale collaborative initiatives delivered through school clusters. Uworwabayeho, Rubagiza and Sutherland address relevance by setting their research against Rwanda’s vision of developing a knowledge-based economy. They argue that only through more studentcentred teaching and learning can learners acquire ICT capabilities that will allow them to contribute towards Rwanda’s development vision and participate fully in the economic life of Rwanda’s envisioned future. Also acknowledging the challenges of scaling-up they point to the key role of teacher education institutes. In the concluding chapter, Tikly draws together debates and synthesises key findings from earlier chapters of the book. The chapter starts off by elaborating the underlying view of social justice. It is argued that schools alone cannot address the causes of a poor quality of education that, to a large extent, lie in wider realities of poverty and inequality. Rather, Tikly presents a framework in

An introduction  7 which a good-quality education is seen to arise from the interaction between three enabling environments, namely that of policy-making, the school and the home/community. Drawing on evidence and ideas elaborated in earlier sections, priority areas are identified in relation to each. The chapter concludes with some suggestions for further research.

Notes 1 The six EFA goals adopted by governments in Dakar, Senegal, in 2000 are (1) expanding and improving early childhood care and education; (2) universal completion of primary education by 2015; (3) Meeting the learning needs of all young people and adults; (4) 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015; (5) eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2005 and full gender equality by 2015; and (6) improving the quality of education. 2 At the Jomtien World Conference on Education for All in 1990 the target year for achieving universal primary education was set for 2000. The 1961 Addis Ababa Conference of African States on the Development of Education in Africa, supported by UNESCO, set a date of 1980. 3 Examples include surveys by the Southern East African Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality (SACMEQ), Segundo Estudio Regional Comparativo y Explicativo (SERCE) in Latin America, the Annual Survey of Education Report in India, all referenced in the 2010 EFA Global Monitoring Report (UNESCO 2010:104–5). 4 Both French and English were being used in Rwanda, although in 2008 English was made the official language of instruction in all state schools. 5 EdQual has analyzed pupil achievement, pupil background, school context, and school organization data collected for 41,600 Grade six pupils in 2,305 schools in 14 countries between 2000 and 2002. The data was collected by SACMEQ, a consortium of African ministries of education working with UNESCO’s International Institute for Educational Planning. 6 The distinction between low- and lower-middle-income countries was based on how countries are classified according to the Human Development Index by the UNDP. Details are provided in Smith et al., (2012). 7 School effects as compared to learner background effects in the schools covered by the SACMEQ survey ranged from 25 to 70 per cent (reading) and 15 to 69 per cent (mathematics). This contrasts to the situation in high-income contexts e.g., England, where school effects typically account for less than 15 per cent of the total unexplained variation in scores. An exception from the SACMEQ countries is the Seychelles where school effects accounted for 9 per cent of total variation in both literacy and numeracy, a situation more akin to that of high income countries (Yu and Thomas, 2008).

References Barrett, A. M., Chawla-Duggan, R., Lowe, J., Nikel, J. & Ukpo, E. (2006) ‘Review of the ‘international’ literature on the concept of quality in education’. EdQual working paper no. 3, Bristol: EdQual. Barrett, A.M., Crossley, M. & Dachi, H. A. (2011) ‘International collaboration and research capacity building: learning from the EdQual experience’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 25–43. Commission for Africa (CFA) (2005) Our Common Interest: Report of the Commission for Africa, London: CFA.

8  A.M. Barrett Leach, F., Fiscian, V., Kadzamira, E., Lemani, E. & Machakanja, P. (2003) An Investigative Study of the Abuse of Girls in African Schools, London: Department for International Development. Lewin, K. M. (2007) ‘Diversity in convergence: access to education for all’. Compare, 37(5): 577–599. Lewin, K. M. (2009) ‘Access to education in sub-Saharan Africa: patterns, problems and possibilities’. Comparative Education, 45(2): 151–174. Nikel, J. & Lowe, J. (2010) ‘Talking of fabric: a multi-dimensional model of quality in education’. Compare, 40(5): 589–605. Smith, M. & Barrett, A. M. (2011) ‘Capabilities for learning to read: an investigation of social and economic effects for Grade 6 learners in Southern and East Africa.’ International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 23–36. Smith, M., Barrett, A. M. & Tikly, L. (2012) School effectiveness and education quality in Southern and East Africa, Final report. Bristol: EdQual. Tikly, L. (2004) ‘Education and the new imperialism’. Comparative Education, 40(2): 173–198. Tikly, L. (2011) ‘Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in low income countries’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 1–23. Tikly, L. & Barrett, A. M. (2007) Education Quality – research priorities and approaches in the global era, EdQual working paper no. 10, Bristol: EdQual. UNESCO, (2004) EFA global monitoring report 2005: Education for All, the quality imperative, Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO, (2010) EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the marginalized, Oxford/Paris: Oxford University Press/UNESCO. UNESCO, (2011) EFA Global Monitoring Report 2011: The hidden crisis: armed conflict and education, Oxford/Paris, Oxford University Press/UNESCO. Yu, G. & Thomas, S. M. (2008) ‘Exploring school effects across southern and eastern African school systems and in Tanzania’. Assessment in Education, 15(3): 283–305.

Part I

Framing education quality

2 Education quality and social justice in the global South Towards a conceptual framework Leon Tikly and Angeline M. Barrett

The Contested Terrain of Education Quality Recent reviews of the extensive literature on education quality have revealed the complex and contested nature of the term (Barrett et al., 2006; Nikel & Lowe, 2010). Nonetheless, it is possible to identify two broad approaches that have shaped the debate about education quality, particularly in the global South, namely the human capital theory (HCT) and human rights approaches. We briefly outline each with respect to their underlying view of human development, how education quality is conceptualised and key priorities for implementing a good quality education. Each approach is also critiqued and this provides a basis for elaborating our own approach, which draws on and extends existing approaches – particularly the rights based approach – but is based on social justice principles (for a fuller discussion see Tikly, 2011b; Tikly & Barrett, 2011). For exponents of HCT, the central rationale for investing in education lies in the contribution that education can make to economic growth. Here GDP is commonly privileged as an indicator of development. Economists working within a human capital framework have begun to show a keen interest in the quality of education. Hanushek and Wößmannn (2007), Wills et al. (2005) and Vegas and Petrow (2008) claim there is a statistically stronger positive effect of education attainment across a nation on economic growth than for enrolment figures. It has also been argued that countries with the highest levels of inequality in the education sector (of any kind) also have the slowest national growth rates (Wills et al., 2005). Although these findings are based largely on empirical work in high- and middle-income countries, it is claimed that there are lessons for countries within the global South given the deep-seated and pervasive nature of educational inequalities. At a deeper epistemological level human capital theory is informed by rational choice theory in which humans are presumed to act in their own economic best interests and this has led to the proposal of market-led approaches. Hanushek and Wößmann (2007), for instance, emphasize three key areas that reform initiatives will have to address in order to raise quality. These are creating greater choice and competition between schools, which will encourage schools to improve outcomes; greater school autonomy including local decision making, fiscal decentralization, and

12  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett parental involvement; and greater accountability through the publication of school performance data, the use of external examinations and benchmarking including participation of countries in international tests. The empirical evidence linking education quality with growth needs to be treated with caution. As Hanushek and Wößmann (2007) themselves point out, for education quality to lead to increased wages, a strong macroeconomic and labour market environment are necessary (Palmer et al., 2007). Yet, for many countries in the global South large sections of the historically disadvantaged population are unemployed and, increasingly, the macroeconomic environment is vulnerable to global financial crisis (Bhorat, 2004). There is also a contradiction between the concern with educational inequality in human capital theory and some of the market-led ‘solutions’ that are proposed. As highlighted by the 2009 EFA Global Monitoring Report (UNESCO, 2008), there is limited evidence to suggest that greater local accountability and choice results in improved outcomes, particularly for disadvantaged groups. Whilst in some parts of the world introducing a market-led approach, such as the introduction of low fee private schools in India, has assisted in driving up enrolments, this has often exacerbated inequality between schools, regions and individuals (Rose, 2009; Srivastava & Oh, 2010). Within human rights based approaches, the realisation of fundamental human rights is the object of development rather than economic growth. Premised on the principle of entitlement, arguably it is equally influential in international discourse on education and development. This influence is generated by UN agencies and international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) that take human rights legislation, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989), as their starting point and are centrally concerned with inclusion, understood in terms such as seeking out learners; acknowledging what the learner brings; the nature of learning environments; content and distribution of outcomes (Global Campaign for Education (GCE), 2002; Inter-Agency Task Team (IATT) on Education, 2006; UNICEF, 2008). Beyond the right to education, human rights organizations are concerned with rights in and through education (Pigozzi, 2008; Subrahmanian, 2002) and hence, educational processes and the intrinsic benefits of education as well as deferred outcomes. Although historically the emphasis has been on top-down, state and donor-led approaches, which have often focused on ‘negative rights’ (i.e. on ensuring that policy does not discriminate against specific groups or individuals or permit corporal punishment), rights-based discourses have also emphasised ‘positive rights’ to a child friendly learning environment in which learners’ home cultures and languages are respected. In this sense, rights-based discourses have been applied to tackling a range of inequalities such as those related to socio-economic disadvantage, gender, ethnicity or language. The human rights approach has given rise to some rich thinking around education quality, which tends to stress the inclusion of all learners and democratic processes that give voice to children as well as other education stakeholders (Delors et al., 1996; GCE, 2002; Pigozzi, 2008; Tomaševski, 2001; UNICEF,

Towards a conceptual framework  13 2009). Related to this is a commitment to learner-centred teaching and learning (critiqued by Le Fanu in chapter 4 of this volume). Our own thinking on education quality has been influenced by social-justice approaches, which, whilst closely aligned with the rights-based approach, take moral philosophy rather than international legislation as their starting point (see Tikly and Barrett, 2011 for a fuller discussion). In Nussbaum’s terms the approach can be seen as “a species of a human rights approach” (Nussbaum, 2006b, p.78) but, we argue it also has the potential to bridge and extend aspects of both the human capital and rights-based approaches to education quality mentioned above. The underlying view of social justice is based on Nancy Fraser’s work. Fraser defines justice as ‘parity of participation’ She explains “overcoming injustice means dismantling institutionalized obstacles that prevent some people from participating on a par with others as full partners in social interaction” (Fraser, 2008, p.16). By institutionalised obstacles, Fraser is here referring to economic structures that deny access to resources that people need in order to interact with others as peers; institutionalized hierarchies of cultural value that may deny them the requisite standing; and, exclusion from the community that is entitled to make justice claims on one another and the procedures that structure public processes of contestation. However, it is important to add here that a narrow focus on institutional arrangements can blind us to some of the other barriers that may prevent equal participation in social life. For example, as Foucault reminds us, besides institutions, discourses can have their own constitutive effects on what can and cannot be said, who can speak and with what authority, how our understanding of concepts such as education and development are shaped and how individual and group identities are defined. Fraser draws attention to three dimensions of social justice each related to one of the institutional barriers identified above, namely, ‘redistribution,’ ‘recognition’ and ‘participation.’ Briefly, redistribution, relates to access to resources which in our case equates with access to a quality education and the potential outcomes that arise from this. Recognition means first identifying and then acknowledging the claims of historically marginalised groups that in the global South includes, for example, women, rural dwellers, victims of HIV/ AIDS, orphans and vulnerable children, refugees, cultural, linguistic, religious, racial and sexual minorities and indigenous groups. Participatory justice includes the rights of individuals and groups to have their voices heard in debates about social justice and injustice and to actively participate in decision-making. Importantly, for Fraser, this is a prerequisite for realizing issues of redistribution and recognition. The framework is also informed by ongoing work in the area of capabilities and education (for example, Alkire, 2005; Brighouse, 2000; Nussbaum, 2006a; Robeyns, 2006; Walker & Unterhalter, 2007). The concept of capabilities is taken from the seminal work of Sen (for example, 1999, 2009) and Nussbaum (2000). Together with associated concepts of well-being, capabilities have become increasingly influential in mainstream development thinking (Stiglitz et

14  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett al., 2009). Simply put, capabilities are the opportunities that individuals and groups have to realize different ‘functionings’ (i.e. something that a person is or does)that they have reason to value(Sen, 1999; 2009). A capability is a potential functioning, an opportunity or lifestyle option available to an individual that she may or may not choose to pursue.1 As Vizard et al. (2011) point out, capabilities augment human rights by addressing the ethical debates they raise and provide an analytical framework for evaluating the entitlements of individuals and groups. Thus, whereas Fraser’s work provides a means of analysing the barriers to social justice, capability theory is useful for thinking through how education quality can be defined and links discussion of a goodquality education to an overall vision of human development. Within the capability approach, education is both a means and end for development (Sen, 1999) and so, as Vaughan (2007) observes, it is possible to analyse the capability to participate in education as well as the capabilities enhanced through education. Capabilities thus imply more than simply skills in a narrow sense. They also imply the opportunity for an individual to convert whatever resources a person may have at their disposal into achievements or outcomes of different kinds. Besides basic literacy and numeracy other capabilities linked to education might include, for example, access to knowledge, critical thinking, problem solving, emotional literacy and autonomy that – besides their utility in relation to developing useful functionings – have an intrinsic value of their own (Walker, 2006). In this sense ‘education quality’ may be defined in terms of the opportunities to develop the greater capability set that is afforded to different individuals and groups through the processes of teaching and learning. In relation to the EdQual research programme, on which several of the chapters in section three are based (see introduction), the uptake of capability theory as part of our framework for understanding the quality of education happened concurrently with the implementation of the programme as a form of post-hoc theorisation. Thus although the concepts of ‘capabilities’ and of the ‘capability set’ did not overtly influence the design of the various research projects at inception, with hindsight it is possible to identify a range of capabilities with which each project was fundamentally concerned. These included the capabilities of basic literacy and numeracy as well as critical thinking and problem-solving linked to the particular focus of each project (science and mathematics education, the use of ICTs, language and literacy etc). Some of the projects also focused on the development of capabilities amongst teachers and head teachers. As we argue in the concluding chapter, we see these as complimentary for creating enabling environments for the development of learner capabilities.2 Capability theory has not, however, been without its critics. Stewart and Denuelin (2002), for example, have critiqued the “methodological individualism” of the capability approach, which they argue detracts from the policy and research task of establishing just social economic, cultural and political structures. Social structures, Denuelin (2011) argues, delimit individual

Towards a conceptual framework  15 reasoning and the functioning of political democracies. As a social institution, schooling can, and in some cases does, contribute to capability deprivation, often through reproducing existing inequalities.3 Here it is important to recognise that individuals belong to groups based on social class, ethnicity, gender and other markers of identity and inequality and, as Sen himself (2009) has recently reiterated, it is useful to conceive of both individual and group capabilities even if individual capabilities provide the ultimate benchmark for evaluating freedoms. Here we were drawn back to Nancy Fraser’s analysis of the structural and institutional barriers to participation, recognition and participation (above). Our own conceptual treatment of education quality is referenced to the sub-Saharan African contexts and hence, we read capability theory against an analysis of the colonial legacy and of the impact of globalization on the post-colonial world (Tikly, 2001: Tikly, 2011a).

Towards a Context Led Model of Education Quality Capabilities, as conceptualised by Sen, are situated within specific social and geographic contexts and hence, the quality of education can only be evaluated with reference to specific contexts. In general it is possible to identify three levels of environments that together determine the quality of education – although these differ in their implications for education quality between and within countries as we explain. The policy environment tends to act most powerfully at the national level and, in the case of large nations, the provincial or state level, to set official curriculum, train teachers and regulate and monitor quality. The institutional environment of the school mediates and elaborates educational policy through processes of implementation. The home and community environment is possibly the most important in determining children’s learning opportunities and EdQual analysis of SACMEQ II data suggests this is especially true for children belonging to low socio-economic households (Smith, 2011).

Policy environment Quality of education

School environment

Home/ community environment

Figure 2.1 Interacting environments for education quality in Africa. Source: author’s own.

16  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett Starting with the policy environment, we have argued following Ball (1990), that education policy-making in low-income countries is subject to tensions and contradictions within and between three levels of analysis, namely the economic, political and ideological/discursive. The economic level is principally concerned with funding for education and the relationship between the products of education and processes of economic development. HCT tends to treat these as technical issues. Rather, they need to be understood as an aspect of broader political economy of education. Questions to do with the funding of education, for instance, need to be set against analysis of economic globalization, which has led to growing inequalities within and between countries particularly during periods of global financial ‘crisis’. Countries that have successfully integrated into the global economy have prioritized different kinds and level of skills linked to different growth paths and stages of development (Green et al., 2007). Hence, policy relating to education quality also needs to be critically evaluated as a key component of an overall development strategy and clearly articulated with other related areas of policy, including industrial and labour market policy and health (Green et al., 2007, Tikly et al., 2003). At the political level, analysis needs to take account of the nature of the postcolonial state. In many low-income countries, decisions about education policy continue to reflect the dominance of external, donor driven agendas in the context of conditional lending for education. Ferguson (2006) has recently drawn attention to the sometimes subtle processes through which global agendas tend to predominate in civil society too, often through the work of rights-based INGOs. Global agendas are in turn mediated by a variety of national interests. In many African countries redressing the colonial legacy of racially inherited privilege meant creating “a specific patrimonial path of redistribution which divides the indigenous majority along regional, religious, ethnic and at times, family lines” (Bøås, 2003, p.33). The nature of the postcolonial state, in Fraser’s terms, leads to two forms of misrepresentation in the policy-making process. The first ‘ordinary-political representation’, is concerned with the nature of political rules and processes within nation states that deny some citizens the chance to participate fully in decision-making. This can be seen, for example, in the lack of popular participation in educational governance in many countries. The second form is related to globalization and the dominance of global development agendas on national policies and concerns. Fraser describes this as “reframing”. Here the injustice arises when the community’s boundaries are drawn in such a way as to wrongly exclude some people from the chance to participate at all in its authorised contests over justice. The upshot is that many communities in the global South are multiply disadvantaged in terms of being able to influence the form and content of education relevant for their children and in mechanisms for holding both schools and the education system accountable for performance. The ideological/discursive level of analysis focuses on the identification of different interests served by policy and policy making processes. Different groups within the state and civil society appropriate different understandings of

Towards a conceptual framework  17 education quality in sometimes-contradictory ways, that are linked to competing accumulation strategies and hegemonic projects. In South Africa, for example, the adoption of human capital themes in the approach to quality can be seen as linking neo-liberal economic policies and with the interests of an aspirant middle class whilst the articulation of a rights-based agenda and social justice concerns need to be understood in relation to historic struggles on the part of civil society against the Apartheid state (Tikly, 2011a). These agendas can pull in different directions with contradictory implications for policy. Critically, however, they operate increasingly within the context of dominant global discourses that constitute what Foucault describes as a “regime of truth” around how a good quality education can be defined in relation to a neo-liberal world order and the nature of human development. At the heart of this global discourse is human capital theory and, to a lesser extent, a top-down reading of a rights-based agenda. Turning to the community, a social justice perspective develops and extends the way that the context of the community is conceptualised within dominant approaches. Within the human capital approach, for example, the role of parents and of the community is principally to prepare the child for school (through enrolment in preschool, nourishment, protection from disease affecting cognitive performance); to stimulate competition between providers through exercising ‘choice’; to hold the school to account for raising pupil performance; and, as a source of additional resources for the school in the form of fees, to fundraise and contribute labour to school building projects. Within a rightsbased approach, and particularly in relation to the concept of the child-friendly school (Global Campaign for Education (GCE), 2002), communities have a right to participate in school decision-making and schools are supposed to adapt to the needs of different groups of children – for example, nomads, displaced children, girls who are at risk if they travel long distances to school, child soldiers or children in prison (Tomaševski, 2001). Undeniably both a human-capital and rights-based approaches draw attention to potentially important roles for the community. Nonetheless, thinking about the role of the community needs to be deepened and problematised, with the community viewed as a site in which wider structural and discursive inequalities are produced and reproduced. In relation to socioeconomic disadvantage for example, there is a recognition of how different forms of social and cultural capital within the home and community affect the ability of parents to support their children’s learning (Phumbwe, 2011; Smith & Barrett, 2011). Important here is evidence from the EdQual school effectiveness research which highlights the compounding negative effects on literacy and numeracy scores of a range of factors with their roots in the home and the community including having less than two meals a day, poor living conditions, living away from the family home, not having a desk to do homework, no access to books, being involved in forms of child labour and living in a community where the language of instruction in the school is not widely spoken (Smith, 2012). As Unterhalter and Aikman explain in Chapter 3, the community can

18  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett also be a site where gendered norms and practices influence the educational opportunities and decision-making of girls or boys. Extending their concern, it is important to take account of the nature of inequality and injustice facing other marginalised groups. For example, Afitska et al. (in Chapter 11) argue that policy on language of instruction in Africa needs to be responsive to the learning needs of children, who speak an African language as their first language as well as the aspirations of parents for their children to participate in the global economy. Critical here, however, is the recognition that schools themselves are often sites of oppressive and unequal practices many of which have their roots in the colonial past. For example, cultural influences of colonialism are detected in Eurocentric curricula and pedagogies shaped by Western ways of knowing (Hickling-Hudson, 2007; Holmes & Crossley; 2004), the preference for European languages of instruction as languages of global communication and authoritarian school cultures (Hirji, 1980). Referring to work on gender and power, Aikman and Unterhalter highlight how “school relationships might be complicit with gender based violence”. Analysis of the SACMEQ II data reveals that many head teachers report high levels of bullying in their schools and this has a negative impact on achievement (Smith et al., 2011). The practice of corporal punishment is known to be widespread across Africa and other lowincome countries even after the introduction of national legislation to limit its use. In the past, schools have been implicated in fuelling conflict by creating barriers to access to a quality education, through biases in the curriculum and textbooks and through a discriminatory culture in the school for different groups of learners (e.g. Bush & Saltarelli, 2000; Davies, 2004). Schools then need to be safe places, where student voices are listened to and where members of staff strives to enhance learners’ capabilities.

Reconstructing Education Quality for Social Justice: Some Starting Points Much of the discussion in this chapter has been about the institutional and discursive barriers to achieving a good quality education for all. Rather than simply critiquing existing practices, however, it is important to begin to flesh out viable alternatives for policy and practice and many of the chapters in this book are written with this imperative in mind. As a starting point we define three principles that our reading of the literature suggests together define a good quality education. In elaborating these dimensions we draw on insights from HCT, rights-based view of quality, as well as our social-justice approach. Inclusion The first principle is that of inclusion. Inclusion can be considered to relate to Fraser’s dimensions of economic redistribution and socio-cultural recognition. HCT with its emphasis on efficiency and effectiveness tends to focus on the first

Towards a conceptual framework  19 of these whilst the human rights emphasis is on “seeking out the learner” (Pigozzi, 2008; UNICEF, 2008) and adapting to the learners’ needs (Tomaševski, 2001) which draws attention to the latter. In its simplest interpretation, inclusion simply re-states the EFA goal of a complete basic education being accessible to all. However, inclusion also needs to be understood as opportunity to achieve. Distribution of resources is a key question for inclusion and one where economic perspectives that treat resources as finite offer insights. Efficient use of resources, however, cannot simply be understood in terms of units of output and input, as the ability of individuals to convert resources into meaningful capabilities varies. A visually impaired individual for example, may require Braille books in order to learn to read. Rural nomads in Nigeria will require mobile schools and teachers with an understanding of their lifestyle. Considering sustainability extends the principle of inclusion to future generations, requiring long term planning. So, for example, the high drop-out rates and rates of repetition that have made rapid expansion unsustainable in some countries are avoided by preparing schools for increased enrolments and setting up complementary programmes (Lewin, 2007; Lewin, 2009). Inclusion then requires effective distribution of resources so as to enhance the capabilities of all learners, including future generations of learners. The socio-cultural element of inclusion arises because curriculum, pedagogy and management practices influence the ability of learners to convert educational resources into capabilities. Teaching and learning and other school processes often need to be adapted to different groups, particularly historically marginalised groups and to embrace diversity. This includes teachers having strategies for managing mixed ability classes, enabling students to participate in lessons as active knowers and practicing gender awareness. Le Fanu offers a fuller critical discussion of inclusion that focuses on its pedagogic implications in chapter four of this book. Relevance Whereas inclusion concerns those who achieve learning outcomes, relevance concerns the substance of outcomes and also has both a redistribution and recognition strand. A good quality education is relevant to the socio-economic context and human development needs of the individual and society at the same time is meaningful to the various socio-cultural groups to which individuals belong, including national society. HCT expects education to contribute to national development objectives, including those related to health and poverty reduction, and at the level for the individual, increased future earnings and hence, well-being. From a capabilities perspective, a socio-economically relevant education enhances the capabilities of learners to lead sustainable livelihoods in their diverse local environments and to benefit from a globalising world. This definition of relevance is compatible with the concerns of indigenous groups that education should enable them to participate in modern states and a globalised world at the same time as pursuing traditional lifestyles (Aikman, 2011; Dyer, 2001) and with priorities for sustainable development (King &

20  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett Palmer, 2009). Sustainability also stretches thinking around relevance to incorporate a concern for the natural environment and an enhanced understanding of the dependence of human livelihoods on bio-diversity and finite natural resources (Bangay & Blum, 2010). However, capabilities theorists also expect education to build capabilities related to reasoning and public debate. This moves us into the socio-cultural dimension of relevance, the definition of outcomes that relate to the Delors’ (Delors et al., 1996) pillars of “learning to be” and “learning to live together”. Fraser’s definition of recognition includes respect and recognition for marginalized socio-cultural identities and ways of knowing. Consistent with this, post-colonial theorists argue that school curricula should include the histories and knowledge of indigenous communities (Ahlquist and Hickling-Hudson, (2004). Meanwhile, Nikel and Lowe (2010) make the point that within the post-modern era, reflexivity is an important educational outcome and Nussbaum (2006a), taking cosmopolitanism as a starting point, proposes that a good quality education should aim to enable critical thinking, world citizenship and imaginative understanding. Participation Participation concerns the processes by which educational goals are set at the micro, meso and macro levels and who participates in these processes and, hence, underpins the dimensions of inclusion and relevance. It relates to Nancy Fraser’s (2008) social justice dimension of representation and encompasses rights-based concerns for learner voice and the participation of learners and other stakeholders in educational decision-making (UNICEF, 2009). At the classroom level, it concerns the extent of control that learners have over content and classroom processes. At the school level, participation asks questions of the structures of governance and the participation of pupils in schools governance (Harber, 2004) and the relationship between the school and the community. At the national level, educational goals, allied as they are to national development goals, should be a matter of informed public debate and advocacy (Alexander, 2008). Hence, the quality of education then is interdependent with political context, the presence of a free press and the mechanisms through which a society conducts public debate. Accountability and transparency are essential to informed debate. Educational practitioners and managers at all levels, communities and parents need to be linked by multidirectional webs of mutual accountability. Those working within a human capital framework often focus on this aspect of participation as exemplified by The World Bank’s System Assessment and Benchmarking for Education Results (SABER) project, which measures quality of national education systems against pre-determined international benchmarks. Weighting accountability towards top-down control, however, can constrain the space for teacher autonomy, reducing responsive inclusion and curricula relevance at the classroom level (Goldstein, 2004; Tatto & Plank, 2007). By

Towards a conceptual framework  21 contrast, initiatives for evaluating school quality that incorporate open professional and public debate of findings, such as the School Performance Review in Ghana, Uganda and South Africa (Prew, 2010) create an accountability network with pathways of accountability running in multiple directions.

Conclusion The way that the principles of inclusion, relevance and participation are interpreted will differ between education systems and contexts. However, as broad themes they draw together ideas generated by HCT, human –rights-based approaches and social justice perspectives on education and development, as well as those arising from our wider reading around education quality (Barrett et al., 2006). Subsequent chapters of this book, explore how inclusion, relevance and participation have been operationalised and contested in specific contexts and how the contexts of school, community/home and policy interact to influence education quality.

Notes 1 For example, a literate person living in an urban area and with an adequate independent income has the capability to buy and read a newspaper. However, he may choose not to, in which case the functioning of reading the newspaper is not achieved. Sen (1999) argues that development should be measured in terms of capabilities of individuals, rather than achieved functionings. 2 The various capabilities that we ended up studying in the EdQual research program arose from discussion in a series of consultative workshops involving policy makers, practitioners, and representatives of various NGOs, as well as our funders, and in the case of the African-based projects, through processes of collaborative action research. Had we been overtly influenced by capability theory at the outset of the research program we would no doubt have been more mindful of the need to consult with parents and learners too as others who have adopted a capability approach have done (see for example, Walker, 2005; Biggeri et al., 2009). 3 Unterhalter illustrates this with reference to the prevalence of gendered violence against girls by male teachers or pupils in South Africa and consequent exposure to HIV. Unterhalter, E. (2003) Crossing disciplinary boundaries: the potential of Sen’s capability approach for sociologists of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(5): 665–669.

References Ahlquist, R. & Hickling-Hudson, A. (2004) ‘The Challenge to Deculturalisation: Discourses of Ethnicity in The Schooling of Indigenous Children in Australia and the USA’, in: A. Hickling-Hudson, J. Matthews & A. Woods (eds) Disrupting preconceptions: postcolonialism and education, Flaxton, Queensland, Post Pressed. Pp.39–56. Aikman, S. (2011) ‘Educational and indigenous justice in Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 15–22. Alexander, R. (2008) ‘Education for All, the quality imperative and the problem of pedagogy’. CREATE Research Monograph no. 20, Brighton, University of Sussex.

22  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett Alkire, S. (2005) ‘Why the capability approach?’ Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 6(1): 115–135. Ball, S. (1990) Politics and policy making in education: explorations in policy sociology, London, Routledge. Bangay, C. & Blum, N. (2010) ‘Education responses to climate change and quality: two parts of the same agenda?’. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(4): 359–368. Barrett, A. M., Chawla-Duggan, R., Lowe, J., Nikel, J. & Ukpo, E. (2006) Review of the ‘international’ literature on the concept of quality in education, EdQual Working Paper no. 3, Bristol, EdQual. Bhorat, H. (2004) ‘The development challenge in post-apartheid South African Education’, in: L. Chisholm (ed.) Changing class: Education and social change in post apartheid South Africa. Pretoria, HSRC. Pp.31–56. Bøås, M. (2003) ‘Weak states, strong regimes: towards a “real” political economy of African regionalization’, in: J. A. Grant & F. Söderbaum (eds) The new regionalism in Africa. Aldershot, Ashgate. Pp.31–46. Brighouse, H. (2000) School choice and social justice, (Oxford, Oxford University Press). Bush, K. D. & Saltarelli, D. (2000) The two faces of education in ethnic conflict: towards a peacebuilding education for children, Florence, UNICEF. Davies, L. (2004) Education and conflict: complexity and chaos, London/New York, Routledge. Delors, J. et al. (1996) Learning the treasure within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, Paris, UNESCO. Denuelin, S. (2011) ‘Development and the limits of Amartya Sen’s’. The Idea of Justice. Third World Quarterly, 32(4): 787–797. Dyer, C. (2001) ‘Nomads and Education For All: education for development or domestication?’. Comparative Education, 37(3): 315–327. Ferguson, J. (2006) Global shadows: Africa in the neo-liberal world order, Durham NC, Duke University Press. Fraser, N. (2008) Scales of justice: Reimagining political apace in a globalizing world, Cambridge, Polity Press. Global Campaign for Education (GCE) (2002) A quality education for all: priority actions for governments, donors and civil society. (Brussels: Global Campaign for Education). Goldstein, H. (2004) ‘Education for all: the globalization of learning targets’. Comparative Education, 40(1): 7–14. Green, A., Little, A. W., Kamat, S., Oketch, M. & Vickers, E. (2007) Education and development in a global era: Strategies for ‘successful globalisation’, London, Department for International Development. Hanushek, E. A. & Wößmann, L. (2007) Education quality and economic growth, Washington DC, The World Bank. Harber, C. (2004) Schooling as violence: how schools harm pupils and societies, Oxford, Routledge. Hickling-Hudson, A. (2007) ‘Cultural complexity, postcolonialism and educational change: challenges for comparative educators’. International Review of Education, 52(1–2): 201–218. Hirji, K. F. (1980) ‘Colonial ideological apparatus in Tanganyika under the Germans’, in: M. H. Y. Kaniki (ed.) Tanzania under colonial rule. London, Longman. Pp.192–235.

Towards a conceptual framework  23 Holmes, K. & Crossley, M. (2004) ‘Whose Knowledge, Whose Values? The contribution of local knowledge to education policy processes: a case study of research development initiatives in the small state of Saint Lucia’. Compare, 34(2): 197–214. Inter-Agency Task Team (IATT) on Education (2006) ‘Quality Education and HIV & AIDS UNAIDS’ King, K. & Palmer, R. (eds) (2009) Education and sustainable development, special issue International Journal of Educational Development, 29(2). Lewin, K. M. (2007) ‘Diversity in convergence: access to education for all’. Compare, 37(5): 577–599. Lewin, K. M. (2009) ‘Access to education in sub-Saharan Africa: patterns, problems and possibilities’. Comparative Education, 45(2): 151–174. Nikel, J. & Lowe, J. (2010) ‘Talking of fabric: a multi-dimensional model of quality in education’. Compare, 40(5): 589 – 605. Nussbaum, M. C. (2000) Women and human development, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Nussbaum, M. C. (2006a) Education and democratic citizenship: capabilities and quality education. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(3): 385–395. Nussbaum, M. C. (2006b) Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership, Cambridge MA, Belknap Press. Palmer, R., Wedgwood, R., Hayman, R., With King, K. & Thin, N. (2007) Educating out of poverty? A synthesis report on Ghana, India, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and South Africa, London, DFID. Phumbwe, D. (2011) ‘Improving provision of education through school self-help initiatives: lessons from Tanzania’, paper presented at the 11th UKFIET Conference, University of Oxford, 13–15 September 2011. Pigozzi, M. J. (2008) ‘Towards an index of quality education, paper prepared for the International Working Group on Education’ (IWGE). 10–11 June 2008. Available at (accessed 10 September 2012). Prew, M. (2010) ‘Using school performance data to drive school and education district office accountability and improvement: the case of Ghana’. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(6): 728–744. Robeyns, I. (2006) ‘Three models of education: rights, capabilities and human capital’. Theory and Research in Education, 4(1): 69–84. Rose, P. (2009) Special issue: ‘Non-state provision of education: evidence from Africa and Asia’. Compare, 39(2). Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Sen, A. (2009) The idea of Justice, London, Allen Lane. Smith, M. & Barrett, A. M. (2011) ‘Capabilities for learning to read: an investigation of social and economic effects for Grade 6 learners in Southern and East Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 23–36. Smith, M., Barrett, A. M. & Tikly, L. (2011) ‘School effectiveness and education quality in Southern and East Africa’, Final report, Bristol, EdQual. Smith, M. C. (2011) ‘Which in- and out-of-school factors explain variations in learning across different socio-economic groups? Findings from South Africa’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 79–102. Srivastava, P. & Oh, S.-A. (2010) ‘Private foundations, philanthropy, and partnership in education and development: mapping the terrain’. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(5): 460–471.

24  L. Tikly and A.M. Barrett Stewart, F. & Denuelin, S. (2002) ‘Amartya Sen’s contribution to development thinking’. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2): 61–70. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A. & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009) ‘Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress’. Subrahmanian, R. (2002) ‘Engendering education: prospects for a rights based approach to female education deprivation in India’, in: M. Molyneux & S. Razavi (eds) Gender justice, development, and rights. (Oxford, Oxford University Press), 204–237. Tatto, M. T. & Plank, D. (2007) ‘Conclusion. The Dynamics of Global Teaching Reform’, in: M. T. Tatto (ed) Reforming teaching globally. Oxford, Symposium. Tikly, L. (2001) ‘Globalisation and education in the postcolonial world: towards a conceptual framework’. Comparative Education, 37(2): 151–171. Tikly, L. (2011a) ‘A roadblock to social justice? An analysis and critique of the South African education Roadmap’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 86–94. Tikly, L. (2011b) ‘Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in low income countries’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 1–23. Tikly, L. & Barrett, A. M. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 3–14. Tikly, L., Lowe, J., Crossley, M., Dachi, H. A., Garrett, R. & Mukabaranga, B. (2003). Globalization and skills for development in Rwanda and Tanzania, London, DFID. Tomaševski, K. (2001) ‘Human rights obligations: making education available, accessible, acceptable and adaptable, rights to education primers’ no. 3.(Lund/ Stockholm: Raoul Wallenberg Institute/Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency [SIDA]). UN (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by General Assembly of the United Nation in resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989. UNESCO (2008) EAF Global Monitoring Report 2009: Overcoming inequality: why governance matters. (Paris/Oxford, UNESCO/Oxford University Press). UNICEF (2008) ‘Basic education and gender equality: quality of education’. Available at: (accessed 22 January 2010). UNICEF (2009) Manual: Child friendly schools, (New York, UNICEF). Unterhalter, E. (2003) ‘Crossing disciplinary boundaries: the potential of Sen’s capability approach for sociologists of education’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(5): 665–669. Vaughan, R. (2007) ‘Measuring capabilities: an example from girls’ schooling, in: M. Walker & E. Unterhalter’ (eds) Amartya Sen’s capability approach and social justice in education. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), Pp.109–130. Vegas, E. & Petrow, J. (2008) Raising student learning in Latin America: the challenge for the 21st century, (Washington DC, World Bank). Vizard, P., Fukuda-Parr, S. & Elson, D. (2011) ‘Introduction: the capability approach and human rights’. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(1): 1–22. Walker, M. (2006) ‘Towards a capability-based theory of social justice for education policy-making’. Journal of Education Policy, 21(2): 163–185. Walker, M. & Unterhalter, E. (eds) (2007) Amartya Sen’s capability approach and social justice in education, New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Wills, A., Carrol, B. & Barrow, K. (2005) Educating the world’s children: patterns of growth and inequality, Washington DC, Education Policy and Data Center.

3 Gender equality, capabilities and the terrain of quality education Sheila Aikman and Elaine Unterhalter

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to consider the ways in which gender has been used in the discussions of quality education. This critical review is intended to draw out the potential of linking social justice work on quality of education with ideas about equity, the capability approach, and gender justice in order to advance inquiry into gender, women’s rights, learning, teaching and a range of education opportunities and outcomes that take seriously redressing intersecting inequalities. Although a number of initial discussions focused on the narrow elision of quality with test scores or skills for employability, some recent studies have engaged with comprehensive definitions of quality (GCE [Global Campaign for Education], 2002; UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization], 2004; UNICEF [United Nations Children’ Fund], 2007; Nikel and Lowe, 2010). The focus has been on assessing what should or should not be included in a definition of quality. Tikly and Barrett (2011) in contributing to this discussion start from a concern with the purpose of education and pursue a social justice orientation. This leads them to highlight inclusion, relevance and participation in decision-making as key dimensions of quality. However, existing definitions of quality are not engaging with an assessment of particular features of the problem of gender inequality with regard to learning and teaching. Gender is generally subordinated to or secondary within definitions of quality. One result of this is that very limited meanings of gender tend to be deployed. Our aim in this chapter is to consider the literature on gender and education drawing out some of the complexities of the way gender inequalities are analysed. This review contributes to our consideration of gender and social justice and what this means for thinking about quality education. In the first part of the chapter we examine some gender and education literature, which starts from debates about how gender is defined, and we show how many writers consider schooling both as a space for delivering rights or expanding capabilities and for reproducing existing hierarchies and exclusions. However some approaches to writing about gender may be more associated with an optimistic or a pessimistic stance. We then go on to draw on discussions of gender, social justice, gender justice and equity, informed

26  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter by work on the capability approach to consider how we can think about gender equality and teaching and learning. The chapter seeks to draw on discussions of social justice and gender justice to expand the elements of quality developed by Tikly and Barrett. In doing so our starting point is with the notion of quality not as a package of outcomes, but a terrain for gender equality. The dominance of a human capital approach to understandings of quality in education has, in recent times, been amplified and critiqued from a range of perspectives by researchers and other actors concerned with the complexity of local conditions, human rights and the development of capabilities. While standardised assessments of cognitive learning as a proxy for quality learning and assumptions of linear relationships between inputs, processes and outputs still abound, a number of studies have developed more complex and problematised notions of quality (Bivens, Moriarty and Taylor, 2009; Tikly, 2011; Tikly and Barrett, 2011). These studies also call for consideration of gendered identities and how gendered norms can act as barriers to girls’ access to resources and areas of the curriculum (Aikman, Halai and Rubagiza, 2011). They also provide examples of the way that schools, rather than being enabling environments, may be places of abuse and violence for girls and note how barriers to learning experienced by girls are part of the wider environment of the school and community. However, frameworks developed around ‘quality’, whatever the approach or the dimensions of quality identified, tend to fragment the analysis of gender into discrete components or ‘dimensions’ of quality which results in the association of gender with deficits or barriers for girls. This, in turn, means that the gender analysis within educational quality work may be disjointed, superficial and even contradictory to the vision and goal of educational quality. Moreover, when gender comes to mean no more than girls, the wider conceptual vocabulary associated with gendered power relationships, linguistic delineation or identity formation, the intersection of gender and other inequalities and the construction and mutability of gendered relationships are all ignored. In the conventional literature girls require additional inputs from teachers because they are less forthcoming in class, more subject to control by parents and demands on their time for childcare and housework, more at risk of gender based violence, and have less natural aptitude for mathematics and science. Girls have a deficit which quality education fills unproblematically, while with an expanded definition of quality, gender is associated with forms of inequality and exclusion. The stress on quality education entailing inclusion of girl learners and women teachers, making schooling relevant to their contexts, and building participatory spaces for reflection appears to work with similar assumptions to the standard view that is that girls and women teachers lack the capacity for inclusion. But this one dimensional portrayal misses the complex nuance that has emerged over the last ten years in the scholarship on gender and education.

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  27

Teaching and learning in the gender and education literature The literature on gender and education does not start with a definition of quality and try to fit in girls and women or the nature of gender inequalities. Rather it starts with debates about how gender is defined and considers schooling as a space for delivering rights or expanding capabilities or for reproducing existing hierarchies and exclusions. This discussion moves between a number of overviews of approaches to gender and a very diverse literature on how gender inequalities or approaches to equity play out in education (e.g. Leach, 2003; Aikman and Unterhalter, 2005; Skelton, Francis and Smulyan, 2006; Stromquist, 2006; Unterhalter, 2007; Connell, 2009; Francis, 2010). Some studies entail a descriptive focus on gender as a noun denoting no more than numbers of girls and boys (Unterhalter, 2007: 39–55). Other meanings draw attention to structured exclusions and reproductions of unequal power in curriculum, the employment of teachers, or approaches to learning. A third meaning highlights relational exchanges and everyday interactions between girls and boys, women and men in schools, some of which may be more equitable. Relational dynamics associated with gender may be evident in intersecting and reframing inequalities. In a fourth form gender appears in discursive forms in which inequalities appear to make sense, but where conventions about appropriate identities may also be challenged. In this literature ‘quality’ is not the answer to a question posed by the difficulties of girls and gender. It is the ‘quality’ terrain of learning, teaching and assessment that is itself the problem. Forms of analysis of gender inequality and attention to the contextual conditions and relations of girls, boys, women and men are thus a conceptual and empirical response to unfulfilled promises of quality. Some of the difficulties of the quality terrain are ways in which quality is assumed to follow from enrolment. The notion of gender as no more than a descriptive term denoting girls or boys results in the stress on gender parity in national monitoring. This emphasises access, retention and achievement to the neglect of analysis of the gendered power structures that generate problems for particular groups of girls and women, forms of gendered hierarchy and exclusion that amplify other social divisions and questions of empowerment and agency (Unterhalter, 2005). The education and development literature has been dominated by a search for clear and simple policy messages to inform national government policy directives, large scale donors and, increasingly, business leaders in global partnerships, to expand schooling for girls (e.g. World Economic Forum-UNESCO, n.d.). Governments may adopt a policy of enrolling large numbers of girls to meet gender parity targets, resulting in large classes, and under-trained teachers who have limited support. Improving access often works against better quality, if quality is only understood in terms of resources. But this meaning of gender also undermines concerns with equity and rights. Sometimes a quality focus on girls’ or boys’ achievement implies that because in many systems girls do as well as boys in completing school or better in tests of

28  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter reading and language, there are no problems of gender inequality to consider. Writing from the Caribbean has consistently reported boys’ underachievement and highlights poor educational opportunities combined with social and cultural perceptions of masculinities which lead some boys to engage in violent behavior and serious crime (Jha and Kelleher, 2006; Longlands, 2008). But noting these features does not mean that issues of discrimination against girls and women have disappeared. Longlands argues for changing societal norms regarding masculinity in ways that require boys and men as well as girls and women to be empowered to challenge gender stereotypes (Longlands, 2008). This approach goes well beyond a descriptive notion of gender as a noun and quality as merely attainment. An understanding of gender in terms of gendered power structures in education has focused on how various aspects of quality may reproduce or transform unequal relations. Studies document ways in which the curriculum is gendered and question assumptions about what kinds of knowledge are appropriate for girls and boys to learn, and which subjects girls are ‘good’ at and which they are not. The ways that girls are channeled into lower status subjects and career paths (such as professional bias towards teaching and roles of homemakers linked with often low-paid work of women) can be a problem of too much choice in a curriculum (Weiner, 2004; Munshi and Rosenzweig, 2003; UNICEF and UNGEI, 2008). Close examination of the widespread view that mathematics and science are male subjects in which boys perform better than girls indicates that girls’ often lower performance in these subjects can be related to low expectations of them by teachers compounded by their own sense of inferiority through routine use of discriminatory or sexist language (Dunne and Leach, 2005; Moletsane, Mitchell and Lewin, 2010). Many studies of textbooks document how they are complicit with the reproduction of stereotypes about women and men (Page and Jha, 2009). In countries where teachers are heavily reliant on the single textbook, the gendered discourse and portrayal of gendered roles embedded in these texts are influential in shaping girls’ and boys’ experience of schooling (Stromquist, 2007; Mkuchu, 2009; UNICEF, 2009). In Sindh province of Pakistan, women are invisible as teachers in textbooks, even though they constitute more than half of secondary school educators (Ram, cited in ASPBAE [The Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education], 2010: 53). Textbook analysis, nevertheless, can be a reductionist and instrumental activity used to ‘correct’ quantitative imbalances in gender representations with no attempt to engage with underlying power issues about the content and meaning of the curriculum (Rampal and Harsh, 2010). The work on gender and power highlights how sites of exclusion exacerbate each other. A key theme in this work looks at the question of quality in terms of how school relationships might be complicit with gender based violence. A growing research base on different kinds of violence in and around the school is painting a widespread and highly troubling picture of inequalities in the ‘quality’ terrain of the school and the relationships promoted and condoned in

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  29 and around it (Leach and Mitchell, 2006; Aikman, Unterhalter and Boler, 2008; Arnot, Oduro, Swarts, Chege, Wainaina and Casely Hayford, 2010; Parkes and Chege, 2010). An analysis of this literature (Molestane et al, 2010) concludes that there is a need for a transformation of our understandings of gender-based violence “as a gendered practice informed by dominant beliefs about gender hierarchies and authority in schools and other institutions” (p. 15) with implications for curriculum development in and for schools and the construction of girls sexuality. Some of the work on gender and power looks at how unequal power can be transformed. The images of masculinity and femininity which teachers and learners bring with them to the classroom and how are these related to roles, relationships and interactions that are played out both in the classroom and outside are important to understanding the parameters an possibilities for greater gender equality (Braun, 2009; Skelton, Carrington, Francis, Hutchings, Read, and Hall, 2009). Kirk’s work with teachers raised the question of how gender and education can be concerned with not only strategies to encourage girls’ participation but how to develop explicitly gendered theories of teaching and connecting teachers with their own gendered perspectives, concerns, experiences and challenges (Kirk, 2004). In the volume she edited on teachers in South Asia a number of case studies of this are presented (Kirk, 2008). Relational meanings of gender have drawn attention through a number of ethnographic studies to how textbooks are used, rejected or transformed in the practice of teachers and learners (Vavrus, 2003; Maslak, 2008; Morrell, Epstein, Unterhalter, Bhana and Moletsane, 2009). This stress on relational meanings of gender has also highlighted the subordination of particular knowledges associated with care and compassion. Lynch and Baker (2005) examine systematic gender bias in curriculum and pedagogy and the ways that what is seen as feminine tends to be ranked lower in knowledge hierarchies, going together with an inferior status of girls and women. High status subjects, they argue, such as maths and science are linked with a dominance of the written word and logical mathematical thinking and reasoning. This marginalises caring affective work. Women are expected to take on caring work and with this take on its low status, and peripheral position in a curriculum hierarchy. The relational dynamics highlight how inequalities intersect as Balarin and Benavides (2009) illustrate in their work which asks how nationally prescribed competencies in Peru are interpreted by teachers and students in the gendered environments of their locality and classrooms. These relational meanings are also found in work which looks at the gendered uses of language and the choice of a language of instruction, often in multilingual settings marginalising certain languages and those who speak them (Cameron, 1998; Aikman, 1999; Ames, 2010). Gender dynamics and the potential of ideas about intersectionality have opened up the question of learning, teaching and quality to an exploration of complex relationships and contextual nuance regarding the ways in which different inequalities intersect to create particular constellations of disadvantage or prejudice (Unterhalter, 2009a; Unterhalter, 2012). The intersection of gender

30  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter inequalities with inequalities of language, ethnicity and livelihoods indicates that these dynamics come together to produce some of the lowest rates of achievement in school (Lewis and Lockheed, 2007) but we do not know the detail of the processes through which this happens. They interact in different ways in different contexts of cultural hierarchy, economic marginalisation and political subordination and with different histories which shape educational experiences for girls and boys (Dei, 2004; Leggett, 2005; Greaney, 2011). Assumptions can be made, however, about how these different inequalities intersect in ways which further exclude and discriminate against girls. Evidence from the Peruvian Andes illustrates girls’ persistent low educational participation where conditions of rural poverty make unequal demands on their time and labour, a situation which is deteriorating as water and firewood scarcity puts more demands on them (Ames, 2010) while evidence from Vietnam illustrates the way in which girls’ ethnicity can be seen as particularly problematic and holding them back (Aikman, Thap Tran and Nguyen Thu, 2011). Fox (2003) illustrates how a citizenship curriculum in Lao was developed on the assumption that gender equality existed in society but that the life concerns of women’s and girls’, particularly those from ethnic minorities, were ‘conspicuously invisible’ (p.406) highlighting the under representation of women as decision makers, policy makers and curriculum developers. Women and men’s differential burdens of labour and income generation require a gender differentiated analysis: while male migration puts heavy responsibilities and burdens on women in some contexts, in others, international demand for girls’ domestic labour places on them a burden of expectations including certain levels of schooling and fluency in an international language (Aikman, 2009). A fourth framing of gender is associated with post-structural and postcolonial theorising. This work questions grand narratives, for example associated with modernisation and the emancipation of women. It shows how gender is discursively formed and reformed in language and action. Discourses, evident in policy, media, and everyday talk set limits on how it is possible to think about gender identities and whether it is possible to change these. This work draws attention to the essentialised identities ascribed to women and men, to the boundaries which close off discursive frameworks. Mohanty (1988) highlighted how ‘universal images of ‘the third world woman’ (the veiled woman, chaste virgin etc.) are predicated upon (and hence obviously bring into sharper focus) assumptions about Western women as secular, liberated and having control over their lives…. The one enables and sustains the other” (Mohanty, 1988: xx). The moves that make for an essentialism of, for example, the vulnerable, ‘ethnic’ and excluded schoolgirl failed by poor quality schooling, discursively sets this figure against the successful schoolgirl or boy, implying that girls’ achievement at school must be at the expense of boys, and that poor children always fail because of a magical chemistry associated with being poor, rather than as an outcome of particular social conditions. What these discursive processes obscure is how gendered power operates in multiple and diverse sites to exclude and undermine the educational aspirations of girls from poor families.

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  31 The research on girls, boys, gender and schooling we have reviewed here indicates the ways in which curriculum, textbooks and teacher training reproduce gendered hierarchies and exclusion, how school relationships are often complicit with forms of gender based violence or do not do enough to counteract them, how the gendered experiences of teachers are inadequately taken into account in trying to understand how to support the learning of children to develop gender equity and how the intersection of inequalities associated with gender, poverty, cultural and social hierarchies marginalise initiatives for change. In reviewing the problem of the emergence of a global policy agenda on EFA which obliterates diversity, so that the statistical margin of difference between the categories become the meaning of gender, Connell (2010) identifies a number of problems which are partly problems of quality. She points to the problem of the stress on the formal school system, the way in which the focus on girls and women positions boys and men as shadow, and the one-dimensionality of meanings of gender (Connell, 2010: 604–5). In response she suggests the importance of attending to the context of the emergence of this policy focus in particular conditions of globalisation which build on colonisation. She also draws attention to the disjuncture between the stress on deconstruction, gender and diversity in the global metropole and the concern with normative concerns in the global periphery, and calls for theory no longer to be ‘monologue’, but rather negotiated acknowledging ‘the world’s multiple experiences of gender issues’ (Connell, 2010: 608). In this regard she calls attention to the significance of ‘curricular justice as the frontier of gender equity in education’. The curriculum is clearly a key site of engagement for work on gender equality and quality. But in trying to map some features of the terrain of quality education, we feel the range is broader than this. The terrain encompasses different social fields where educational aims are enacted and school is just one of many sites. Gender and other social divisions configure this terrain in processes where wider forms of inequality are reproduced, challenged and transformed. In the next section we look at the social justice orientation of quality education developed by Tikly (2011) and Tikly and Barrett (2011) and discuss how it can be expanded to consider some of the more multi-faceted approaches to thinking about gender we have outlined here and some current discussions of gender justice, equity and capabilities.

Reviewing quality in relation to equity, justice and capabilities In developing a social justice orientation for quality education Tikly (2011) makes several important moves. Firstly, he shows that quality is not a set of single standard measures. He shows how the concept takes different forms in different contexts, responding to pressures of globalisation and formulations associated with human capital theory, the after-burn of colonial relationships, aspirations concerned with inclusion, rights, and capabilities, and particular conditions in specific locales where policy, school and home/community

32  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter environment overlap. Secondly, he argues for a normative basis to quality, which should rest on ‘three inter-related principles that … provide a benchmark against which social justice within an education system can be evaluated’ (Tikly, 2011: 10). The process of generating these principles appears to derive from a review of the literature on the capability approach and Nancy Fraser’s work on justice (Fraser, 1997; Fraser, 2008) and a critique of what he sees as the instrumentalism of the human capital approach and the stress on individualism and top-down delivery he attributes to rights based approaches (Tikly, 2011: 8–9). The third move entails listing the three principles and identifying features of quality each generates. The first principle is inclusion. This entails ‘ensuring that all learners achieve specified learning outcomes. The focus here is not only on access to the necessary resources to learn but on overcoming economic, social and cultural barriers that prevent individuals and groups from converting these resources into desired outcomes or functionings’ (Tikly, 2011: 10). The second principle is relevance. This he defines as ‘learning outcomes [which] contribute to sustainable livelihoods and wellbeing for all learners…valued by their communities and consistent with national development priorities in a changing global context.’ (ibid). The third principle he outlines is for quality education to be ‘democratic’ that is determined through public debate and ensured through processes of accountability. We are in agreement with many of the points made in this article and in other work (Tikly and Barrett, 2011), and share concerns to widen the remit of discussion of quality education, to take account of many different locales and histories. These concerns talk directly to the analysis we have made above regarding the multi-faceted terrain of quality education on which formations of gender as both discursive and distributive play out. We are also in sympathy with a project that takes the normative and positive dimensions of quality education seriously, because we think that engaged work in this area is important to guide policy and practice. However our analysis of gendered relations on the quality terrain, our own work relating to social justice, capabilities, and education (Unterhalter, 2007a; Unterhalter, 2007b; Unterhalter and Brighouse, 2007; Aikman, Halai and Rubagiza, 2011) and our interest in a number of works on gender justice prompt us to raise a number of areas that require further interrogation. The first area relates to a human rights approach. While many authors have commented on how policy associated with education, rights and gender may be poorly communicated and implemented (Fennell and Arnot, 2008; Greany, 2008; Dyer, 2010) or associated with the hypocrisies of powerful nations using international relations as a cloak for exploitative economic or geo-political interests, these deformations of certain practices associated with rights do not in and of themselves discount the usefulness in thinking about the way rights, as Sen points out (2004), entail ethical obligations. Certainly some of these obligations rest with the state and some of the action on the terrain of quality has to be taken by states themselves. The importance of working both with the state and in critical dialogue of its response has been recognised for decades by

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  33 feminist writers on education (Stromquist, 1995). And, importantly, understanding state responsibility for features of rights and gender equality in the realisation of rights, does not rule out bottom up processes for claiming rights in many different settings. However, given the many manifestations of gender inequality on the quality terrain we have outlined above, our view is that without some top-down establishment of frameworks for gender equality and rights in and through education, the more localised processes of change to realise inclusion might not happen or happen only partially. Our second area relates to the definitions of relevance and democracy. In both these areas Tikly gives particular salience to local meaning and associates relevance with sustainable livelihoods and wellbeing ‘valued by communities’ while democracy is linked with ‘public debate and accountability’. Many writers on gender and justice note how a concern with local meanings, without any way of distinguishing between who generates a local perspective, can lead to powerful voices for tradition sanctioning practices which undermine women’s wellbeing or sustainable livelihoods (Okin, 2003; Phillips, 2007) Conventional views of social justice suggest we assess the distribution of quality education in relation to how much it conforms to an existing gendered social order. Thus, in a country where the labour market discriminates against women and considerable normative value attaches to women who remain at home to take care of children, it would not be a social justice problem that girls studied only subjects that would be useful to them as caregivers in the domestic sphere. This might indeed secure their wellbeing and ensure that they arevalued by communities and supported in public debate. But one could question whether this conventional view of relevance and democracy would allow women to realise the widest possible capability set. Rather it might be associated with girls leaving school early as not much learning was considered necessary to take care of a household or children. It is doubtful that under such conditions women would be able to talk up and challenge an unjust distribution of education. If, however, the first of Tikly’s principles has overarching priority and inclusion it will always trump relevance or democracy. But the framework of principles does not specify this and in the absence of any ordering process for reviewing the principles, the problem that the second two may reinforce rather than transform gender norms is troubling. Our third area is associated with the process used for generating the three principles. Tikly (2011) sees human capital theory and human rights approaches as problematic, because of flawed assumptions. But it is not clear what assumptions guide the social justice approach he advocates other than inspiration from the capability approach and Fraser’s work. While we too are interested in these frameworks and argue that a more critical approach is needed for formulating principles. We want to look first at some work on gender justice and then at the question of equity, in order to draw out some of the implications of each for thinking about the terrain quality education. Goetz (2007: 31–2) develops a working definition of gender justice through a review of some of the debates concerning why it is difficult to decided on standards of gender justice, the importance of going beyond equal treatment of

34  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter women and men to some form of affirmative action, and the difficulties for many countries to afford the basic conditions of health and education to secure gender justice. In her view any definition of gender justice should emerge from practice on the ground (Goetz, 2007: 30–31). Her definition entails an end to inequalities between women and men that result in women’s subordination, a distribution of opportunities, resources, and agency to secure dignity, autonomy and choice, together with accountability of power-holders at all levels so that any actions to prohibit women realising their rights will be prevented or punished through some form of redress or restitution. The implications for quality education of this approach points to rigorous work on curriculum, teacher education, and concerted work to address gender based violence in schools, households and neighbourhoods. It requires an examination of how schooling articulates with labour market opportunities, the portrayal of gender in the media, and how school managers and other decision-makers respond to exclusion and subordination of girls at school. This view, which talks to some of the ideas about empowerment articulated in the capability approach (Unterhalter, 2011) goes considerably beyond inclusion and some of the ideas about relevance, democracy, local sites and quality environments Tikly and Barrett develop (Tikly, 2011; Tikly and Barrett, 2011) and suggests a trenchant challenge to gender inequality in schooling and beyond. This approach to gender justice requires the terrain of quality education to be recast through a clear re-ordering of gender relations. A second view of gender justice is developed by Ingrid Robeyns (2009, 2010) in her assessment of the relationship between discussions of justice between Rawls and Sen. She too identifies the nature of relationships on the quality terrain as a key problem for theorising justice. A central feature of Robeyns’ argument concerns her critique of Rawls for the scope of his analysis of justice as fairness, so that the political conception of justice is not seen to apply to the family. Rawls does not see the family as political, but rather as private or voluntary. Robeyns argues for the need to move away from an ideal theoretical mode of arguing about justice to understand how gender injustice works within a family. She points to the ways in which Rawls’ stress on aggregates of family earnings, and lack of concern with care and leisure obscure the injustices with regard to women’s opportunities. Similar criticisms can be made firstly about ideal theoretical models of quality that do not pay attention to particular forms of gender injustice in learning and teaching. Secondly, this alerts us to problems in seeing the family as an unproblematic environment for quality, without examining the ways in which families’ concerns with relevance might sustain injustice. Robeyns shows how a focus on a capability metric draws attention to ‘the range of factors that determine to what extent [a person] can turn … primary good into valuable states of being and doing’ (Robeyns, 2010: 227). For the capability approach justice is not just in formal institutions like school or the labour market, but ‘everywhere’, in the ‘material and non-material circumstances that shape people’s opportunity sets’ (Robeyns, 2010: 228), the contexts people make, and those in which they are placed without choosing. It is this complexity of the terrain of justice and quality that the capability approach

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  35 alerts us to. Thus any principles for advancing quality in education must have a means of discussing questions of gendered distribution and discourse. These two approaches to thinking about gender justice give us a clearer orientation as to how we might go about developing a richer understanding of gender, quality and egalitarian justice in education. We also think there would be some scope for looking more closely at work on equity in relation to the quality terrain. In recent work Elaine Unterhalter has looked at the changing inflections of the meaning of the word equity (Unterhalter, 2009, 2010) drawing out some of the ways in which this suggests thinking about education and pedagogies. In both works she distinguishes equity from above, associated with legislative frameworks and rules, equity from below, which identifies processes of participation and acknowledgement of equal dignity and worth, and equity from the middle which facilitates flows of resources, information and evaluations of choice. The application of this work to educational settings has been most fully developed in relation to thinking about gender issues in higher education (Unterhalter, 2010) but we consider there may be scope in looking at the articulation of the three pedagogies she identifies for discussion of the quality terrain of schooling. She identifies firstly pedagogies of consequence, associated with labour market and political participation, skill formation and equity from above. Secondly she sketches pedagogies of construction associated with reflection on values and context, associated with equity from below. Thirdly she sketches pedagogies of connection, concerned with equity from the middle and ensuring flows of resources and information between differently situated people. These views of equity chime in with the two discussions of gender justice outlined above in that they do not take local meanings as unproblematic and are concerned with multiple spaces for learning and teaching to transform gender inequities.

Conclusion This chapter has set out some difficulties with existing definitions of quality taking account of the multi-dimensionality of approaches to gender and the growing body of research regarding gender dynamics in learning and teaching. In trying to look at how we can draw on discussions of social justice and gender justice in order to expand the elements of quality outlined by Tikly and Barrett (2011) we have sought to initiate discussion of intersecting inequalities, education and gender justice giving attention to the uneven achievements of gender equity in policy and practice. This project requires much more sustained conceptual and empirical work, but in opening up discussion of the issue we hope others may be able to go further.

References Aikman, S. (1999) ‘Schooling and development: eroding Amazon women’s knowledge and diversity’, in C. Heward and S. Bunwaree (eds) Gender, Education and Development, London: Zed. Pp. 65–82.

36  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter Aikman, S. (2010) ‘Grasping rare moments for change: children’s participation in conflict contexts’, in S. Dyer, A. Robinson-Pant, and M. Schweisfurth, M. (eds) Children as Decision Makers, London: Continuum. Pp. 25–34. Aikman, S. and Unterhalter, E. 2005 (eds) Beyond Access: Developing Gender Equality in Education, Oxford: Oxfam Publishing. Aikman, S., Unterhalter, E. and Boler, T. (eds) (2008) Gender, Equality, and HIV and AIDS: A Challenge for the Education Sector, Oxford: Oxfam Publishing. Aikman, S., Halai, A. and Rubagiza J. (2011) ‘Conceptualising gender equality in the research on education quality’, Comparative Education, 47(1): 45–60. Aikman, S., Thap Tran, L. and Nguyen Thu, H. (2011) ‘Report of the Evaluation of Oxfam GB Education Programme in Lao Cai,Vietnam 2007–2010’. Unpublished. Ames, P. ‘Gender, schooling and poverty in Peru: intersecting inequalities and partnerships for girls’ education’, paper presented at the UNGEI E4 Conference: Engendering Empowerment: Education and Equality, Dakar, May 2010. Ames, P. (2005) ‘When access is not enough: educational exclusion of rural girls in Peru’, in S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter (eds.) Beyond Access: Transforming Policy and Practice for Gender Equality in Education, Oxford: Oxfam. Arnot, M., Oduro, G., Swarts, S., Chege, F., Wainaina, P. and Casely Hayford, L. ‘Gender security, gendered violence and social justice: the rights of protection through the education of urban youth in African cities’, paper presented at the UNGEI E4 Conference: Engendering Empowerment: Education and Equality, Dakar, May 2010. The Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education (2010) Make Girls and Women Count: Gender Equality and Education – a Report Card on South Asia, Mumbai and Kathmandu: ASPBAE and UNGEI. Balarin, M. and Benavides, M. (2009) ‘Curriculum reform and the displacement of knowledge in Peruvia rural secondary schools: exploring the unintended local consequences of global education policies’, Compare 40(3): 311–325. Barry, B. and Martravers, M. (2004) ‘Justice’, in E. Craig (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, London: Routledge. Bivens, F., Moriarty, K. and Taylor, P. (2009) ‘Transformative education and its potential for changing the lives of children in disempowering contexts’, IDS Bulletin 40(1): 97–108. Braun, A. (2009) ‘Becoming teachers: gender, biographies and a borderland profession’, unpublished PhD thesis, Institute of Education, University of London. Cameron, D (1998) A Feminist Critique of Language: A Reader, 2nd edition, London: Routledge. Connell, R. (2009) Gender, 2nd edn, Cambridge: Polity. Connell, R. (2010) ‘Kartini’s children: on the need for thinking gender and education together on a world scale’, Gender and Education 22(6): 603–616. Dei, G. (2004) ‘Dealing with difference: ethnicity and gender in the context of schooling in Ghana’, International Journal for Educational Development, 24(4): 343–359. Dunne, M. and Leach, F. (2005) ‘Gendered school experiences: the impact on retention and achievement in Botswana and Ghana, DFID Education Paper No 56’, London: Department for International Development. Dyer, C. (2010) ‘Education and social (in)justice for mobile groups: reframing rights and education inclusion for Indian pastoralist children’, Educational Review, 62(3): 301–3. Fennell, S. and Arnot, M. (eds) (2008) Gender Education and Equality in a Global Context, London: Routledge.

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  37 Fox, C. (2003) ‘No Place for girls? Gender, ethnicity and citizenship education in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic’, Compare, 33(3): 401–412. Francis, B. 2010, ‘Re/theorising gender: female masculinity and male femininity in the classroom? Gender and Education 22(5): 477–490. Fraser, N. (1997) Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the ‘Postcolonial’ Condition. London: Routledge. Fraser, N. (2008) Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Global Campaign for Education (GCE) (2002) A Quality Education for All: Priority Actions for Governments, Donors and Civil Society, Brussels: Global Campaign for Education. Greaney, K. (2008) ‘Rhetoric versus reality. Exploring the rights based approach to girls’ education in rural Niger’, Compare, 38(5): 555–568. Greaney, K. (2011) ‘Education as freedom? A capability-framed exploration of education conversion among the marginalised: the case of out-migrant Karamojong youth in Kampala’, unpublished PhD thesis, Institute of Education, University of London. Goetz, A.M. (2007) ‘Gender justice, citizenship and entitlements. Core concepts, central debates and new directions for research’, in M. Mukhopadhyay and N. Singh (eds) Gender justice, citizenship and development, New Delhi: Zubaan. Jha, J. and Kelleher, F. (2006) Boys’ Underachievement in Education: An Exploration in Selected Commonwealth countries, London: Commonwealth Secretariat. Khandekar, S., Rokade, M., Sarmalkar, V., Verma, R.K., Mahendra, V. and Pulerwitz, J. (2008) ‘Engaging the community to promote gender equality among you men: experiences from ‘Yari Dosti’ in Mumbai’, in Aikman, S., Unterhalter. E., and Boler, T. (eds) Gender Equality, and HIV and AIDS: A Challenge for the Education Sector, Oxford: Oxfam Publishing. Kirk, J. (2004) ‘Impossible fictions: the lived experiences of women teachers in Karachi’, Comparative Education Review, 48(4): 374–395. Kirk, J. (ed.) (2008) Women Teaching in South Asia, New Delhi: SAGE. Leach, F. (2003) Practising Gender Analysis in Education, Oxford: Oxfam. Leach, F. and Mitchell, C. (eds) (2006) Combating Gender Violence in and around Schools, Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Leggett, I. (2005) ‘Learning to improve policy for pastoralists in Kenya’, in S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter (eds) Beyond Access: Transforming Policy and Practice for Gender Equality in Education, Oxford: Oxfam Publishing. Pp.128–148. Lewis, M. and Lockheed, M. (2007) Exclusion, Gender and Education: Case Studies from the Developing World, Washington: Center for Global Development. Longlands, H. (2008) ‘Boys in Schools: masculinities, education and gender equality’, Equals Newsletter, 21(July): 1–2. Lynch, K and Baker, J. (2005) ‘Equality in education: an equality of condition perspective’, Theory and Research in Education, 3(2): 131–164. Maslak, M. (ed.) (2008) The Structure and Agency of Women’s Education, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Mkuchu (2009) ‘Gender roles in textbooks as a function of hidden curriculum in Tanzania primary schools’, unpublished PhD thesis, UNISA. Mohanty, C. (1988) ‘Under Western eyes: feminist scholarship and colonial discourse’, Feminist Review, 30: 61–88. Moletsane, R., Mitchell, C. and Lewin, T. ‘A critical analysis of gender violence and inequality in and around schools in South Africa in the age of AIDS: progress or

38  S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter retreat?’ Paper presented at the UNGEI E4 Conference: Engendering Empowerment: Education and Equality, Dakar, May 2010. Morrell, R., Epstein, D., Unterhalter, E., Bhana, D. and Moletsane, R. (2009). Towards Gender Equality: South African Schools during the HIV and AIDS Epidemic. KwaZulu‐Natal: University of KwaZulu‐Natal Press. Munshi, K. and Rosenzweig M (2006) ‘Traditional institutions meet the modern world: caste, gender and schooling choice in a globalizing economy’, American Economic Review, 96(4): 1225–1252. Nikel, J. and Lowe, J. (2010) ‘Talking of fabric: A multi-dimensional model of quality in education’, Compare. 40(5): 589–605. Nussbaum, M.C. (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Okin, S.M. (2003) ‘Poverty, wellbeing and gender: what counts, who’s heard?’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 31(3): 280–316. Page, E. and Jha, J. (2009) Exploring the Bias: Gender and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, London: Commonwealth Secretariat. Parkes, J. and Chege, F. ‘Girls’ education and violence: reflections on the first decade of the twenty first century’, paper presented at the UNGEI E4 Conference: Engendering Empowerment: Education and Equality, Dakar, May 2010. Phillips, A. (2007) Multiculturalism without Culture, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Rampal, A. and Mandar, H. ‘Lessons on food and hunger: in search of transformative education’, paper presented at the UNGEI E4 Conference: Engendering Empowerment: Education and Equality, Dakar, May 2010. Robeyns, I. (2009) ‘Equality and Justice’, in S. Deneulin and L. Shahani (eds.) An Introduction to the Human Development and Capability Approach, London: Earthscan. Pp. 101–120. Robeyns, I. (2010) ‘Gender and the metric of justice’, in H. Brighouse and I. Robeyns (eds) Measuring Justice: Primary Goods and Capabilities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Pp. 215–236. Sen, A. (2004) ‘Elements of a theory of human rights’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 32(4): 315–56. Skelton, C., Francis, B., and Smulyan, L. (2006) (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Gender and Education, London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Skelton, C., Carrington, B., Francis, B., Hutchings, M., Read, B. and Hall, I. (2009) ‘Gender ‘matters’ in the primary classroom: pupils’ and teachers’ perspectives’, British Educational Research Journal, 35(2): 187–204. Stromquist, N. (1995) ‘Romancing the state: gender and power in education’, Comparative Education Review, 39(4): 423–54. Stromquist, N. (2006) ‘Gender, education and the possibility of transformative knowledge’, Compare 36(2): 145–61. Stromquist, N. (2007) ‘The gender socialization process in schools: a cross-national comparison’, background paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2008, Paris: UNESCO. Tikly, L. (2011) ‘Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in lowincome countries’, Comparative Education, 47(1): 1–24. Tikly, L. and A. M. Barrett (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low-income countries’, International Journal of Educational Development, 41(1): 3–14.

Gender equality, capabilities and quality  39 Tikly, L. and A. Barrett (2007) ‘Education quality: research priorities and approaches in the global era’, policy brief written for the Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, Bristol: EdQual. Tomasevski, K. (2003) Education Denied: Costs and Remedies, London: Zed Books. UNESCO (2004) Education for All: The Quality Imperative, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005, Paris: UNESCO. UNICEF (2007) A Human Rights-Based Approach to Education for All, New York: UNESCO/UNICEF. UNICEF (2009) Towards Gender Equality in Education: Progress and Challenges in Asia–Pacific Region, Bangkok: UNGEI. UNICEF and UNGEI (2008) Making Education Work: The Gender Dimension of the School to Work Transition, Bangkok: UNICEF and UNGEI. Unterhalter, E. (2005) ‘Fragmented frameworks? Researching women, gender, education, and development’, in S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter (eds) Beyond Access: Transforming Policy and Practice for Gender Equality in Education, Oxford: Oxfam Publishing. Pp. 15–35. Unterhalter, E. (2007b) ‘Gender equality, education and the capability approach’, in M. Walker and E. Unterhalter (eds) Sen’s Capability Approach and Social Justice in Education, London/New York: Palgrave. Pp. 87–108. Unterhalter, E. (2007a) Gender, Schooling and Global Social Justice, London: Routledge. Unterhalter, E. (2009a) ‘Gender and Poverty reduction: The challenge of intersection’, Agenda, 81: 14–24. Unterhalter, E. (2009b) ‘What is equity in education? Reflections from the capability approach’, Studies in the Philosophy of Education 28(5): 415–424. Unterhalter, E. (2010) ‘Considering equality, equity and higher education pedagogies in the context of globalization’, in E. Unterhalter and V. Carpentier (eds) Global Inequalities and Higher Education. Whose Interests Are We Serving? Basingstoke: Palgrave. Pp 35–54. Unterhalter, E. ‘How far does this go? Reflections on using the capability approach to evaluate gender, poverty, education and empowerment’, talk prepared for the CIES Gender Committee Symposium, Montreal, May 2011. Unterhalter, E. and H. Brighouse, (2007) ‘Distribution of what for social justice in education? The case of Education for All by 2015’, in M. Walker and E. Unterhalter (eds) Sen’s Capability Approach and Social Justice in Education, London/New York: Palgrave. Pp. 67–86. Unterhalter, E., (2012), ‘Poverty, Education, Gender and the Millennium Development Goals: Reflections on boundaries and intersectionality’ Theory and Research in Education 11, 3, 1–22. Vavrus, F. (2003) Desire and Decline, New York: Peter Lang. Weiner, G. ‘Learning from feminism: education, pedagogy and practice’, paper presented at Beyond Access seminar on Pedagogic Strategies for Gender Equality in Basic Education in Schools, Nairobi, January 2004. World Economic Forum-UNESCO (n.d.) ‘Education’. Online. Available HTTP: (accessed 21 June 2011).

4

reconceptualising inclusive education in international development Guy Le Fanu

Introduction Inclusive education – broadly defined as the provision of good quality ‘Education for All’ in mainstream settings, and more narrowly as the provision of this type of education for persons with disabilities – has acquired increasing prominence in global development discourse in recent years. It has become a justification for, or even the justification for, many development initiatives in the field of education (Le Fanu, 2011). It has become a cause around which coalitions of individuals and organisations have formed – so much so that reference is often made to ‘the global movement’ for inclusive education (Dyson, 1999; Peters, 2004). Inclusive education has also become the subject of extensive and energetic academic discussion, a process that has spawned a vast and growing literature on the subject. Sometimes this discussion has focused on the feasibility and appropriateness of inclusive education in low-income countries and indeed the so-called developed world. On such occasions, passionate debate has often ensued (especially when educational provision for students with disabilities is being considered) debate which, at times, has shed more heat than light on the pertinent issues. In this chapter, future directions for both the theory and practice of inclusive education in international development are outlined. The analysis principally draws upon the richly detailed case study-based literature on educational practice in sub-Saharan African countries. For the purposes of comparison, it also draws upon research carried out in Papua New Guinea, including a study of the formulation and implementation of the new national curriculum (Le Fanu, 2011). At the start of the chapter, the various elements of what I term ‘global inclusionism’– a rights-based approach to the promotion of inclusive education in development contexts – are identified. This involves critical analysis of various policy documents and educational manuals produced by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), an organisation that has played a leading role in the development and promotion of global inclusionism. This approach is then evaluated in the light of the research evidence and several limitations identified. A modified approach is therefore

Reconceptualising inclusive education  41 outlined. This alternative model, ‘grounded inclusionism’, is broadly compatible with the capabilities approach, as developed by social philosophers such as Nussbaum (1992) and Sen (2010).

Global inclusionism: an analysis Global inclusionism is a complex educational paradigm, which has been outlined in various UNESCO publications (UNESCO, 2001, 2003, 2004a, 2004b. 2005). In this section, it is placed in its international context and its key elements and underlying assumptions identified. Defining the ‘global’ in global inclusionism Global inclusionism is a global paradigm because it is globally authoritative – a consequence of its association with UNESCO, an organisation which, like other UN agencies, theoretically transcends the narrow bounds of nationality. This authority is strengthened by UNESCO’s “formal status…as the lead agency in multilateral education” (Jones and Coleman, 2005, p.43). In addition, global inclusionism has been embedded in international agreements emerging from conferences sponsored or co-sponsored by UNESCO. These agreements include: The World Declaration on Education for All (UNESCO, 1990), The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (UNESCO, 1994), and The Dakar Framework for Action (UNESCO, 2000). Global inclusionism is also a global paradigm because it is globally pervasive, permeating international discourse about education (see, for instance, Miles, 2002; Stubbs, 2002; Peters, 2004; World Vision, 2007). This pervasiveness can be partly attributed to its global provenance (see preceding paragraph). It is also a consequence of UNESCO’s ‘educational evangelization’, a process which has not only involved the aforementioned “promotion of normative instruments and statements of principle” (Jones and Coleman, 2005, p.77), but also, for instance, the provision of technical assistance for Ministries of Education around the world and the dissemination of inclusionist thought and practice through the UNESCO website. Global inclusionism is also globally pervasive because it provides a compelling narrative of educational transformation in lowincome countries – a narrative likely to be particularly compelling for the international development community (IDC), as it describes how approaches promoted by the IDC are efficacious in a range of development contexts. Global inclusionism as an educational vision UNESCO’s vision of the school is most comprehensively outlined in Embracing Diversity (UNESCO, 2004b), a manual for stakeholders in schools. This asserts that every school should provide “(an) inclusive, learning-friendly environment (that) welcomes, nurtures, and educates all children regardless of their gender, physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic, or other characteristics” (ibid,

42  G. Le Fanu p.8). Global inclusionists therefore believe that every school-age child should attend their neighbourhood school. This sort of ‘physical inclusion’ has various implications for schools. For instance, they cannot be selective in terms of enrolment – either directly through establishing admissions criteria or indirectly through charging school fees. School and classroom environments must also be physically accessible, both externally and internally. This means that schools need to meet the requirements of students whose impairments impact upon their mobility in various ways. However, physical inclusion is necessary, but not sufficient for ‘full inclusion’. This is because children can be physically present in a school, but still feel alienated from the school in various ways. According to Embracing Diversity (UNESCO, 2004b), physical inclusion therefore needs to be combined with ‘curricular inclusion’. As the term curriculum holistically refers to the totality of students’ educational experiences, curricular inclusion involves providing every child with a full range of meaningful educational experiences, both inside and outside the classroom. Curricular inclusion therefore inexorably leads to ‘experiential inclusion’ – the perception of students that they are participating fully in the rich, multiply layered lives of schools and, in the process, are developing their almost unlimited potential. Embracing Diversity (UNESCO, 2004b) describes the various ways in which schools can develop a “learner-centred” (p.54) curriculum conducive for curricular inclusion – ways which involve the ‘democratization,’ ‘vitalization’, ‘socialization’, ‘systematization’, ‘pluralization’ and ‘universalization’ of the curriculum (my terms, not UNESCO’s). The curriculum should be democratised so “(it) relates to the everyday experience of ALL the children in the school” (UNESCO, 2004b, p.23), and hence is relevant and meaningful. The curriculum should be vitalised in the sense that students participate energetically in a full range of activities which develop their diverse capacities, with the students also being given opportunities to select and construct their own learning activities. The curriculum should be socialised in the sense that teaching and learning become social activities embedded in wider social contexts. And the curriculum should be systematised in the sense that teachers systematically deploy diverse methods in order to promote learning. For instance, in order to be “authentic” (ibid, p.261), assessment should take the form of “anecdotal records” (p.261), “screening tests” (p.262), “portfolio assessment” (p.263), “feedback” (p.268), and “selfassessment” (p.269). Embracing Diversity (as befits its title) places particular emphasis on the pluralisation of the curriculum. This is because “all children are unique” (UNESCO, 2004b, p.150), and therefore have different needs and interests. The manual therefore recommends that teachers, when selecting tasks for their students, differentiate in terms of “content” (ibid p.236), “activity” (p.246), and “product” (p.247). More generally, schools should endeavour to create an ethos of tolerance and respect in which “children…learn that diversity is a gift, not liability” (p.150). However, other UNESCO documents (UNESCO, 2001,

Reconceptualising inclusive education  43 2003, 2005), whilst similarly valuing differentiation, point out the dangers of the wrong sort of differentiation – i.e. differentiation, which highlights the perceived deficiencies of students with special educational needs, and hence encourages stigmatisation. These documents therefore warn that curriculum “modification” (UNESCO, 2001, p.101) should be used “sparingly” (p.102), as this involves “adding or substituting course or content to meet individual students’ needs” (p.101). In short, UNESCO believes the curriculum should be universalised as well as pluralised – i.e. students should access the same ‘core’ curriculum. Special education, with its perceived focus on the deficit-based categorisation of children with disabilities, is therefore seen as largely incompatible with inclusive education (UNESCO, 2001, 2003, 2005). Global inclusionism as social and political transformation UNESCO believes that the above educational vision can be achieved through social activism and broader political interventions, all involving high levels of stakeholder collaboration. The forms these should take within individual countries are described in Open File on Inclusive Education (UNESCO, 2001), a document developed after an international process of consultation. At a local level, inclusive education can be promoted through various sorts of community activism such as lobbying schools, participating in “school governance” (UNESCO, 2001, p.89), mobilising “education authorities and service providers” (p.29), and facilitating “early identification and intervention” (p.122) for children with disabilities. Schools can also transform themselves from within by becoming more reflective, democratic, and outward looking institutions. The above initiatives will at first be dispersed and sporadic but may eventually become widely established practice as a result of a “multiplying ripple effect” (ibid, p.32). At district and national level, policy-makers and implementers, particularly government bodies, can promote inclusive education through rational planning. This can take the form of the re-organisation of educational services so they are more focused and efficient – for instance, through “merging separate structures” (UNESCO, 2001, p.34) and “merging funding streams” (p.112). The “structures of teacher education” (ibid, p.47) may also need to be reviewed, and training made more “systematic” (p.52). Networks of support for schools can be strengthened through the establishment of “school-based teams” (ibid, p.74), “peripatetic services” (p.74), and “resource centres” (p.75). At a national level particularly, appropriate legislation can be passed in which “fairly general” prescription is combined with “detailed regulation and guidance” (ibid, p.31). The above processes can be facilitated by the networking and advocacy of concerned individuals such as “researchers and research students” and “key opinion formers” (ibid, p.29). Open File emphasises that these two levels of inclusion-focused activity are not discrete. For instance, governments can promote awareness of inclusive education through “cascade models” (UNESCO, 2001, p.46) of training in

44  G. Le Fanu which knowledge is progressively disseminated downwards to local communities. Alternatively, local stakeholders can participate in the national policy-making process through (for instance) their membership of parent associations. Whilst Open File has little to say about the role of international development organisations in the promotion of inclusive education, another UNESCO policy-document describes how UNESCO can make “a more effective contribution” through raising global awareness of inclusive education, developing the capacities of national education providers, and highlighting the concerns of “groups who are currently marginalized and excluded” (UNESCO, 2003, p.30). International agreements, drawn up under the auspices of UNESCO, also acknowledge the role that other international development agencies, working in consort with UNESCO, can play in this field (UNESCO, 1990, 1994, 2000). The underlying assumptions of global inclusionism Global inclusionism is based on two assumptions. First, global inclusionism assumes that the educational needs of young people can be met through changing education systems in certain ways, particularly in terms of the curriculum they offer. Second, global inclusionism assumes that such change is possible, given the transformative potential to be found within schools, civil society, governments, and the international development community. The rest of this chapter assesses the validity of these assumptions in the light of research evidence from sub-Saharan Africa and Papua New Guinea. This analysis primarily focuses on curricular inclusion rather than physical inclusion (terms earlier defined in this chapter), as the focus of this book is the promotion of good quality education in low-income countries. However, physical inclusion is discussed because it has a complex, interactive relationship with curricular inclusion.

Global inclusionism: a critique This section of the analysis draws upon case studies of educational practice in sub-Saharan countries and Papua New Guinea. The sub-Saharan case studies consist of analyses of educational practice in individual countries (e.g. Altinyelken, 2010; Mtahabwa and Rao, 2010) and comparative analyses of educational practice in groups of countries (e.g. Moulton, Mundy, Welmond and Williams, 2007). Some of the former examine educational practice in schools (e.g. O’Sullivan, 2004; Barrett, 2007) and others practice in teachertraining institutions (e.g. Vavrus, 2009; Mtika and Gates, 2010). A number of the studies discuss educational provision for students with disabilities and the contexts shaping this provision (e.g. Miles, 2009; Urwick and Elliott, 2010). Several of the studies were generated by the Research Programme on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, otherwise known

Reconceptualising inclusive education  45 as the EdQual Project (e.g. Rubagumya, 2007; Bosu, Dare, Dachi and Fertig, 2009). The principal case study from Papua New Guinea analyses the implementation of a new inclusion-focused curriculum in remote rural primary schools in the Eastern Highlands (Le Fanu, 2011). Some of its principal findings were also published as an EdQual policy brief (Le Fanu, 2010). Reference is also made to other analyses of this country’s education system (e.g. Ako, 2002; Webster, 2002; Crossley, 2010). The sub-Saharan case studies indicate that schools often ‘fail’ to provide the sort of student provision recommended by UNESCO, other international development agencies, and sections of the international academic community. For instance, Mtahabwa and Rao (2010), describing pre-primary education in Tanzania, note how “virtually all communication was initiated and controlled by the teacher” who tended to ask “whole class, lower-order cognitive” (p.231) questions – practices incompatible with the democratisation, socialisation, pluralisation and vitalisation of teaching and learning, identified earlier in this chapter as four of the key principles of learner-centred education. Altinyelken’s case study of Uganda (2010) indicates that these teacher-centred practices tend to continue even when a new inclusion-focused curriculum was introduced – a phenomenon also evident in Papua New Guinea where the researcher observed patterns of teaching and learning in remote rural primary schools for extensive periods of time (Le Fanu, 2011).1 The ‘failure’ of education systems to provide children with disabilities with good quality education is also an area of concern, according to several subSaharan case studies. This was not an issue of concern when the aforementioned research was carried out in Papua New Guinea – but only because the researcher was unable to identify any children with disabilities in the case study schools. In this instance, it can be seen that the absence of physical inclusion made questions of curricular inclusion irrelevant. Based on these findings and further analysis of the case studies, a critique of global inclusionism can be constructed. This critique has three elements: a capacity critique, an epistemological critique and a disability critique. The capacity critique The sub-Saharan research evidence describes how problematic teaching and learning circumstances make it difficult or impossible for teachers to deliver pedagogically demanding, learner-centred curricula, indicating that global inclusionism is infeasible in certain development contexts. In Uganda, the new curriculum encouraged teachers to use “wall charts, flash cards, and sentence cards” to stimulate learning, but these were “supplied to schools in limited amounts” (Altinyelken, 2010, p.156) and too expensive for the schools to purchase. Consequently, the teachers attempted to make their own aids, but found this difficult as they had so many other responsibilities. In Malawi, teachers tried to promote group work, but found this impossible due to large classes and undersized/inadequately-soundproofed classrooms (Mtika and Gates,

46  G. Le Fanu 2010). And in Tanzania, teachers conscientiously attempted to monitor student work, but were unable to do this effectively because there were over 100 students in each class (Barrett, 2010). Ironically, the evidence therefore suggests that the inability of the teacher to promote curricular inclusion was partly the result of physical inclusion – i.e. the increasing enrolment of young people in education systems, largely as a result of the introduction of free primary education (Mundy, 2002; Arbeiter and Hartley, 2007; Urwick and Elliott, 2010). Research from Papua New Guinea indicates that primary teachers have experienced difficulties similar to those faced by their sub-Saharan counterparts (Le Fanu, 2010, 2011). For instance, it was found that they were unable to systematise their teaching by (for instance) expertly deploying a range of assessment and reporting instruments, as required by the new national curriculum. In interviews, the teachers claimed they were unable to perform such tasks because they lacked the necessary skill-sets, the necessary access to resources – particularly information technology, and inexhaustible reserves of time and energy. The inability of teachers to ‘practise learner-centredness’ can not only be placed in the micro-context of teaching and learning circumstances, but also the macro-context of the broader political and social phenomena shaping these circumstances. Whilst global inclusionism assumes that communities will play a major role in promoting inclusive education, the sub-Saharan research evidence indicates that groups of stakeholders may be estranged from formal education systems, which they perceive as irrelevant and unresponsive to their needs (Fife, 2005; Laugharn, 2007; Le Fanu, 2011). Whilst global inclusionism assumes that national governments will deftly intervene to promote inclusion, Moulton and Mundy (2002, p.1) conclude that sub-Saharan governments have often been unable to implement “the comprehensive, multifaceted educational policy reforms being proposed by the international community (due) to the political, economic and physical environment (that) often frustrates such efforts”. Similar concerns were expressed by Transparency International (2010) in their evaluation of the attempts by these governments to make primary education more accountable to stakeholders And whilst global inclusionism assumes that international development agencies are capable of intervening effectively in the field of education, the evidence indicates they can be counter-productively short-termist (Urwick and Elliott, 2002), stubbornly non-cooperative (Welmond, 2002), and naively optimistic (Mundy, 2002). Papua New Guinean studies reiterate these findings and also describe the ways in which these organisations have arrogantly attempted to dictate national education policy (e.g. Ako, 2002; Webster, 2002; Ryan, 2008). In summary, global inclusionism not only over-estimates the inability of hard-pressed education systems to achieve curricular inclusion (as defined by global inclusionism), but also over-estimates the capacity of multi-level support systems to facilitate curricular inclusion. In short, global inclusionism is not only pedagogically impractical in certain development contexts, but socially and politically naïve.

Reconceptualising inclusive education  47 The epistemological critique The aforementioned critique posits that stakeholders in low-income countries are often unable to implement (supposedly) learner-centred curricula. By contrast, the epistemological critique posits that stakeholders are unwilling to implement these curricula. This is because they are both unhappy about the roles that they are expected to play in the knowledge generation/dissemination process and unhappy about the knowledge which will be generated/ disseminated as a result of their participation in this process. Global inclusionism reflects a ‘bottom-up’ ‘generative epistemology’. This epistemology assumes that learners are creative, heterogeneous, and meaningmaking; that learning is therefore a dynamic, diverse, and purposeful process; that knowledge is protean, pluralist, and contextualised; and teachers should consequently provide their students with stimulating, differentiated, and relevant opportunities for learning. These opportunities should also be sociable, and therefore enable students to collectively critique, synthesise, and embellish their ideas. However, studies of teaching and learning in sub-Saharan Africa suggest the prevalence among many stakeholders of a contrasting ‘top-down’ ‘transmissive epistemology’ (e.g. O’Sullivan, 2004; Arbeiter and Hartley, 2007; Stephens, 2007). This assumes that learners are predominantly passive, homogeneous, and absorptive; that learning is therefore an essentially imitative, repetitive, and decontextualised process; that knowledge tends to be fixed, invariant and contexttranscendent; and teaching should take the form of the top-down transmission of a pre-established body of knowledge and skills – a process characterised by teacher explanation, description, and demonstration. This epistemology tends to permeate education systems at all levels, and, according to some analyses, is possessed by students as well as their teachers, leading to student resistance to attempts by teachers to encourage them to take more responsibility for their own learning (World Bank, 2008; Mtika and Gates, 2010). The same transmissive epistemology has been widely observed in classrooms in Papua New Guinea (see, for instance, Pickford, 1998; Zeegers, 2000; Fife, 2005). Some analysts have attributed this to the resilience of culturallyembedded pedagogical practices which pre-date colonisation, patterns of practice which were ironically reinforced rather than undermined by authoritarian mission-schooling during the colonial era (Guthrie, 2003; Monemone, 2003; Wallangas, 2003). In addition, it has been argued that Papua New Guinea’s experience of colonialism and its subsequent exposure to the so-called modernisation process have resulted in stakeholder-preference for a prestigious ‘Western-style’ curriculum delivered in English, rather than more a more democratic, localised curriculum delivered in indigenous languages, particularly because the former is often perceived as the key to employment in the formal sector (Crossley, 1998; Epstein, 2008; Swatridge, 2004). Similar phenomena have been observed in sub-Saharan countries (Rubagumya, 2007; Alidou, 2009; Altinyelken, 2010).

48  G. Le Fanu It is possible to exaggerate the resilience, prevalence, and monolithism of transmissive epistemology in development contexts (Le Fanu, 2011). And when this epistemology inhibits rather than facilitates learning, it should be critiqued (ibid). However, Western and Western-educated educationalists should not airily discount and disparage grassroots assumptions about teaching and learning, especially as these assumptions often have a situated validity (Guthrie, 2011). Furthermore, transmissive pedagogical practices, dexterously deployed, can be trans-contextually effective. For instance, Torgerson, Brooks and Hall (2006) posit that exemplary instruction (my expression, not theirs), in which students observe and then repeat teacher-demonstrated processes, has proved to be an effective method of developing the reading-accuracy of early readers. The disability critique The capacity critique questions the feasibility of global inclusionism, and the epistemological critique its conduciveness for stakeholders. The disability critique, by contrast, questions the efficacy of global inclusionism – namely the capacity of generic, learner-centred strategies (even if they could be implemented) to meet the special educational needs of many students with disabilities, given the complexity, distinctiveness, and intensity of these needs. The disability critique is outlined in two case studies expressing reservations about the recent attempts by the government of Lesotho to expand its inclusive education programme which was initially confined to ten pilot schools (Johnstone and Chapman, 2009; Urwick and Elliott, 2010). Both the Lesotho studies were based on interviews with teachers and observations of teacher practice. Both studies, whilst praising the commitment of many teachers, highlight their inability to meet the needs of students with disabilities in their classes. The studies therefore recommend increased and improved in-service and pre-service training in special education for teachers, enhanced provision of assistive devices, and the development of external support systems for schools. Urwick and Elliott (op. cit., p.145–146) also recommend increased investment in special schools which at present “offer the only hope of educational advancement…for children with serious hearing, visual, or mental impairments”. In summary, these authors believe that physical inclusion for children with disabilities in Lesotho has not led to experiential inclusion, due to the lack of curricular inclusion (these terms are defined earlier in this chapter). The disability critique challenges the earlier-discussed perception of global inclusionists that special education is largely incompatible with inclusive education. Instead, it argues that responding fully to the special needs of students with disabilities – for instance, by providing them with separate instruction in special skills (such as Braille or sign language) for limited periods of time – facilitates rather than impedes inclusive education, as long as these students are not narrowly defined in terms of their impairments. The underlying assumptions of the disability critique about the educational needs of students with disabilities are reflected in the Convention on the Rights

Reconceptualising inclusive education  49 of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol, which decrees that “States Parties” should recognise “the diversity of people with disabilities” and protect the rights of those “who require the most intensive support” (United Nations, 2006, Preamble). Accordingly, students with disabilities in mainstream schools should be provided with “effective individualised support measures” and opportunities to learn “augmentative and alternative modes, means and formats of communication” (ibid, Article 24). This in turn necessitates the employment of teachers with special education expertise – for instance, in “Sign Language and/or Braille” (Article 24). The passage of this piece of international legislation may signify the emergence of a new, authentically learner-centred consensus about the education of children with disabilities, a consensus which challenges global inclusionism. Situated expertise: the foundation of grounded inclusionism The above critiques indicate that policy-makers and implementers need to adopt a new approach in order to promote inclusive education through international development, an approach which is responsive to both contextual and contextually transcendent realities. In short, global inclusionism needs to be replaced by grounded inclusionism, or rather grounded inclusionisms. In order to identify what forms these inclusionisms should take, close observation of good practice in schools is essential, as this practice represents the deft negotiation of diverse realities by local experts. Barrett (2007) in her study of Tanzanian classrooms found that several teachers, whilst not adopting the learner-centred practices recommended by global inclusionists, were nevertheless teaching in learner-sensitive ways. For instance, whilst dominating the communication process, they made sure that the knowledge they transmitted was integrated with students’ pre-existing knowledge. They also stimulated learning by (for instance) dexterously deploying visual aids and asking challenging questions. Barrett also observed that the very prescriptivism of the teachers’ practice, such as their tight control of the pace and structure of lessons, sometimes enabled rather than impeded learning. In this respect, therefore, their teaching, whilst not learner-centred, was “learning-centred” (O’Sullivan, 2004, p.599). I observed similar phenomena in Papua New Guinea, noting the ways in which certain teachers transmitted information and skills to their students with great sensitivity and subtlety through their command of the communication process (Le Fanu, 2010, 2011). It was also noticeable that the teachers, eschewing the super-complex differentiation recommended by the new national curriculum, still found ways to provide individualised support for their students – for instance, by patrolling the classroom while the students were on task. In short, the teachers practised what might be termed ‘unorthodox inclusion’. During the course of my research, it also became clear that the teachers’ practice was more hybrid than it first appeared, incorporating ‘learner-centred’ elements within a predominantly ‘teacher-centered’ body of practice (Le Fanu,

50  G. Le Fanu 2010, 2011). For instance, at one school, students were required to improve the school environment through demonstrating a skill they had learned in their communities. This task encouraged the democratisation of teaching and learning as it was village-oriented, the pluralisation of teaching and learning as the students could select their own skills, and the socialisation of teaching and learning as many of the students chose to work in groups. Bosu et al. (2009) (see also Oduro et al., chapter 10 in this book) adopt a similar approach to Barrett and Le Fanu, describing the ways in which head teachers in Ghana and Tanzania promoted school-wide (rather than classroombased) inclusion through drawing upon the situated expertise of diverse stakeholders in schools. In order to do this effectively, the head teachers in Ghana disregarded their official handbook, a document embedded in a Western rights-based framework with “an emphasis upon bureaucratic compliance (which resulted) in a stifling of individual…agency” (ibid, p. 7). Miles (2009) transfers this approach to the field of disability, describing how teachers in Zambia endeavoured to accommodate the needs of students with disabilities through contextually appropriate interventions. For instance, she describes how a teacher attempted to include a child with ocular albinism through first overcoming her culturally embedded physical revulsion for the child and then taking “action to address (the) difficulties” (ibid, p.618) arising from the child’s visual impairment. She also describes how another teacher supported the inclusion of a boy with polio by promoting “the construction of an accessible latrine at the school”, although Miles notes that “the cost and logistical challenges associated with the maintenance of (the student’s) callipers continued” (ibid, p.619). The above examples of stakeholder initiative and creativity are truly inspiring, but they are examples of teachers attempting to minimise the negative effects of highly problematic teaching and learning environments. The documentation and dissemination of existing good practice is therefore necessary but not sufficient for the promotion of inclusive education in low-income countries. Broader changes to education systems, societies, and polities are also required. These changes too need to be identified through close and open-minded examination of diverse realities – a process which represents another aspect of grounded inclusionism.

Conclusion At the beginning of this study, the various elements of global inclusionism were identified. It was noted that global inclusionism assumes that inclusive education provision should take certain universal forms. It was also noted that global inclusionism assumes that education systems in low-income countries are willing and able to offer this provision. The validity of these assumptions was then tested in the light of research evidence from sub-Saharan African countries and Papua New Guinea. It was found that global inclusionism over-estimates the capacity of education systems in these countries to offer this provision (the

Reconceptualising inclusive education  51 capacity critique), and it was also found that local stakeholders were sometimes resistant to the underlying epistemology of global inclusionism (the epistemological critique). It was further posited that global inclusionism underestimates the educational needs of some students with disabilities, needs which mainstream education systems in these countries at present are unable to meet (the disability critique). Other investigations have queried the applicability of global inclusionism to other low-income countries (Deng and Holdsworth, 2007; Carney, 2008; Saito and Tsukui, 2008; de la Sablonnière, Taylor and Sadykova, 2009). An alternative model to global inclusionism – grounded inclusionism – has therefore been developed. This posits that inclusive educational provision, in order to be both feasible and authentic, must be sensitive to both contextual realities and context-transcendent realities. This model therefore stresses the need for educational policy-makers to acknowledge the situated expertise of local stakeholders. It also stresses the need for educational policy-makers and implementers to document and disseminate existing good practice in schools. However, this model stresses that there are no ‘quick fixes’ to the problems faced by education systems in low-income countries. Close examination of educational realities and the resultant development of educational policies grounded in these realities are therefore essential. Grounded inclusionism is compatible with the capabilities approach which seeks to maximise “a person’s capability to do things he or she has reason to value” (Sen, 2010, p.231). The approach believes that these capabilities, and strategies for enabling these capabilities, can only be identified through “public reasoning” (ibid, p.394) which acknowledges the value of “local” as well as “global” knowledge (p.407). The capabilities approach also recognises that human needs are not only broadly universal but also situationally diverse (Nussbaum, 1992). When this approach is applied to educational issues, rich and nuanced conceptualisations of educational quality become possible (Tikly and Barrett, 2011). Grounded inclusionism is also compatible with Thompson’s and Popper’s passionate critiques of transcendent theoreticism (my phrase, not theirs) in the social sciences, a theoreticism which has proved incalculably destructive when it has informed policy-making and implementation (Thompson, 1970; Popper, 1995). The incorporation of grounded inclusionism in educational development poses significant challenges for the various participants in this process. For instance, national governments need to resist the uncritical transfer of international policy and practice (Crossley and Watson, 2003), a task that requires them to generate their own situationally-appropriate solutions to the problems besetting their education systems. And international development agencies need to become facilitators of dialogue, disseminators of information, and open-minded investigators of multi-faceted social realities, rather than “teachers of norms” (Finnemore, 1993, p.565). Certain sections of the international academic community also need to become less accepting of the “cultural politics of pedagogy…that privileges certain approaches to pedagogy

52  G. Le Fanu worldwide” (Vavrus, 2009, p.309). However, these participants, if they wish to promote sustainable and authentic inclusive education in low-income countries, have no alternative but to take up this challenge. In the words of John Bunyan: “It is the roughest road, but it leads straight to the hilltops.”2

Notes 1 In 2008 and 2009, the author observed teaching and learning across the grades in two primary schools in the Eastern Highlands of Papua New Guinea. In total, sixtyfour hours of lessons were observed. This enabled the author to compare and contrast the actual practice of the teachers with the practice prescribed in official curriculum documents. During this time, he also carried out individual and group interviews with the teachers and other local stakeholders. This enabled the author to better understand the various factors shaping the teachers’ practice. Fieldwork was combined with analysis of the literature on teaching and learning in pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial Papua New Guinea. 2 The author would particularly like to thank Michael Crossley, Professor of Comparative and International Education at the University of Bristol, for reading the original manuscript and making a number of valuable suggestions which have been incorporated in the text.

References Ako, W. (2002) ‘Factors affecting the formulation and implementation of the 1993 educational reform in Papua New Guinea’, unpublished EdD thesis, University of Bristol. Alidou, H. (2009) ‘Promoting multilingual and multicultural education in francophone Africa: challenges and perspectives’, in B. Brock-Utne and I. Skattum (eds) Languages and Education: a Comparative and Transdisciplinary Analysis, Oxford, Symposium Books. Pp.105–131. Altinyelken, H. K. (2010) ‘Curriculum change in Uganda: teacher perspectives on the new thematic curriculum’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2): 151–61. Arbeiter, S. and Hartley, S. (2007) ‘Teachers’ and pupils’ experiences of integrated education in Uganda’, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49(1): 61–78. Barrett, A.M. (2007) ‘Beyond the polarisation of pedagogy: models of classroom practice in Tanzania primary schools’, Comparative Education, 43(2): 273–94. Bosu, R., Dare, A., Dachi, H.A. and Fertig, M. (2009) ‘School leadership and social justice: evidence from Ghana and Tanzania. EdQual Working Paper no. 17’, working paper written for the Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, Bristol: EdQual. Online. Available at (accessed 18 May 2011). Carney, S. (2008) ‘Learner-centred pedagogy in Tibet: international education reform in a local context’, Comparative Education, 44(1): 39–55. Carnoy, M. (1974) Education as Cultural Imperialism, New York, David McKay Company Inc. Crossley, M. and Watson, K. (2003) Comparative and International Research in Education: Globalisation, Context and Difference, London, Routledge.

Reconceptualising inclusive education  53 Crossley, M. (1998) ‘Ideology, curriculum and community: policy and practice in education’, in L. Zimmer-Tamakoshi (ed.) Modern Papua New Guinea, Missouri, MO, Thomas Jefferson University Press. Pp. 297–313. Crossley, M. (2010) ‘Context matters in educational research and international development. Learning from the Small States experience’, Prospects, 40(2): 421–29. de la Sablonnière, R., Taylor, D.M. and Sadykova, N. (2009) ‘Challenges of applying a student-centred approach to learning in the context of Kyrgyztan’, International Journal of Educational Development, 29(6): 628–34. Deng, M. and Holdsworth, J.C. (2007) ‘From conscious to unconscious inclusion: meeting special educational needs in China’, Disability & Society, 22(5): 507–22. Epstein, S. (2007) ‘Education for life: a baseline study of how the different types of stakeholders in the Madang educational system perceive the new reforms’, a report written for Voluntary Service Overseas Papua New Guinea and Madang Education Authority. Madang: VSO PNG. Fife, W. (2005) Doing Fieldwork: Ethnographic Methods for Research in Developing Countries and Beyond, New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Finnemore, M. (1993) ‘International organizations as teachers of norms: the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and science policy’, International Organization, 47(4): 565–95. Guthrie, G. (2003) ‘Cultural continuities in teaching styles’, Papua New Guinea Journal of Education, 39(2): 57–78. Guthrie, G. (2011) The Progressive Education Fallacy in Developing Countries: In Favour of Formalism, submission draft for Springer Dordrecht. Johnstone, C.W. and Chapman, D.W. (2009) ‘Contributions and constraints to the implementation of inclusive education in Lesotho’, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 56(2): 131–48. Jones, P. and Coleman, D. (2005) The United Nations and Education: Multilateralism, Development and Globalisation, London, Routledge. Laugharn, P. (2007) ‘Negotiating ‘Education for Many’: enrolment, dropout and persistence in the community schools of Kolondièba, Mali’, country-study written for Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity, Brighton: CREATE. Le Fanu, G. (2010) ‘Promoting inclusive education in Papua New Guinea. EdQual Policy Brief No.7’, policy brief written for the Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, Bristol: EdQual. Available at (accessed 18 May 2011). Le Fanu, G. (2011) ‘The transposition of inclusion: an analysis of the relationship between curriculum prescription and practice in Papua New Guinea’, unpublished EdD thesis, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol. Miles, S. (2002) Schools for All: Including Disabled Children in Education, London: Save the Children. Miles, S. (2009) ‘Engaging with teachers’ knowledge: promoting inclusion in Zambian schools’, Disability & Society, 24(5): 611–24. Monemone, T. (2003) ‘Formalistic teaching is not imposed: it is indigenous to Papua New Guinea’, Papua New Guinea Journal of Education, 39(2): 85–90. Moulton, J. (2002) ‘Uganda: external and domestic efforts to revive a derelict primary school system’, in J. Moulton, K. Mundy, M. Welmond and J. Williams (eds) Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paradigm Lost?, Westport, CN, Greenwood Press. Pp.53–86.

54  G. Le Fanu Moulton, J. and Mundy, K. (2002) ‘Introduction: implementation research and educational reform in sub-Saharan Africa’, in J. Moulton, K. Mundy, M. Welmond and J. Williams (eds) Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paradigm Lost? Westport, CN, Greenwood Press. Pp.1–11. Moulton, J., Mundy, K., Welmond, M. and Williams, J. (eds) (2002) Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paradigm lost? Westport, CN, Greenwood Press. Mtahabwa, L. and Rao, N. (2010) ‘Pre-primary education in Tanzania: observations from urban and rural classrooms’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(3): 227–235. Mtika, P. and Gates, P. (2010) ‘Developing learner-centred education among secondary trainee teachers in Malawi: the dilemma of appropriation and application’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(4): 396–404. Mundy, K. (2002) ‘Malawi: externally driven reforms and their adoption during democratic transition’, in J. Moulton, K. Mundy, M. Welmond and J. Williams (eds) Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paradigm Lost? Westport, CN, Greenwood Press. Pp.13–51. Nussbaum, M. (1992) ‘Human functioning and social justice: in defense of Aristotelian essentialism’, Political Theory, 20(2): 202–46. O’Sullivan, M. (2004) ‘The reconceptualisation of learner-centred approaches: a Namibian case study’, International Journal of Educational Development, 24(6): 585–602. Peters, S. (2004) Inclusive Education: An EFA strategy for All Children, New York, World Bank. Pickford, S. (1998) ‘Post-colonial learning: classroom rituals as social and cultural practice’, Papua New Guinea Journal of Teacher Education, 5: 6–14. Popper, K. (1995) The Open Society and its Enemies. Volume One: The Spell of Plato, London, Routledge. Rubagumya, C.M. (2007) ‘A three-tier citizenship: can the State in Tanzania guarantee linguistic human rights? EdQual Working Paper No.5’, working paper written for the Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, Bristol, EdQual. Available at (accessed 18 May 2011). Ryan, A. (2008) ‘Indigenous knowledge in the science curriculum: avoiding neocolonialism’, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(3): 663–83. Saito, E. and Tsukui, A. (2008) ‘Challenging common sense: cases of school reform for learning community under an international cooperation project in Bac Giang Province, Vietnam’, International Journal of Educational Development, 28(5): 571– 84. Sen, A. (2010) The Idea of Justice, London, Penguin Books. Stephens, D. (2007) Culture in Education and Development: Principles, Practice and Policy, Oxford, Symposium Books. Stubbs, S. (2002) Inclusive Education: Where There are Few Resources, Oslo, The Atlas Alliance. Swatridge, C. (1985) Delivering the Goods: Education as Cargo in Papua New Guinea, Manchester, Manchester University Press. Thompson, E.P. (1978) The Poverty of Theory and Other Essays, London, Merlin Press. Tikly, L. and Barrett, A.M. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’, International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 3–14.

Reconceptualising inclusive education  55 Torgerson, C.J., Brooks, G. and Hall, J. (2006) A Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling, London, Department for Education and Skills. Transparency International (2010) Good Governance Lessons for Primary Education, Berlin, Transparency International. United Nations (2006) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol, New York, United Nations. UNESCO (1990) World Declaration on Education For All and Framework for Action to Meet Basic Learning Needs, Jomtien, UNESCO. UNESCO (1994) The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2000) The Dakar Framework for Action. Education for All: Meeting Our Collective Commitments, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2001) Open File on Inclusive Education: Support Materials for Managers and Administrators, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2003) Overcoming Exclusion through Inclusive Approaches in Education: A Challenge and Vision, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2004a) Changing Teacher Practices Using Curriculum Differentiation to Respond to Students’ Diversity, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2004b) Embracing Diversity: Toolkit for Creating Inclusive, Learning Friendly Environments, Bangkok, UNESCO. UNESCO (2005) Guidelines for Inclusion: Ensuring Access to Education for All, Paris, UNESCO. Urwick, J. and Elliott, J. (2010) ‘International orthodoxy versus national realities: inclusive schooling and the education of children with disabilities in Lesotho’, Comparative Education, 46(2): 137–50. Vavrus, F. (2009) ‘The cultural politics of constructivist pedagogies: teacher education reform in the United Republic of Tanzania’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(4): 303–11. Wallangas, G. (2003) ‘Formalism is both indigenous and imposed’, Papua New Guinea Journal of Education, 39(2): 96–100. Webster, T. (2000) Globalisation of Education Policies: The Extent of External Influences on Contemporary Universal Primary Education Policies in Papua New Guinea, (Port Moresby, University of Papua New Guinea Press). Welmond, M. (2002) ‘Guinea: to projectize or not to projectize? Two different donor responses to education reform’, in J. Moulton, K. Mundy, M. Welmond and J. Williams (eds) Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paradigm Lost? (Westport, CN, Greenwood Press). pp. 119–48. World Bank (2008) Curricula, Examinations and Assessment in Secondary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Bank Working Paper No.128, (Washington DC, World Bank) World Vision (2007) Education’s Missing Millions: Including Disabled Children in Education through EFA FTI processes and National Sector Plans, (London, World Vision). Zeegers, M. (2000) ‘Rhetoric, reality and the practicum: reconstructionism, behaviourism and primary teacher education in Papua New Guinea’, Asia–Pacific Journal of Education, 28(2): 149–163.

Part II

Planning and policies for quality

5 Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness The case for longitudinal datasets Sally M. Thomas, Massoud Salim and Wen Jung Peng Introduction A considerable body of evidence exists concerning the important influence of different student intake and school factors on student attainment outcomes (UNESCO, 2004). Therefore, it is important to consider whether these factors are outside the control of the school and, if so, how they can be taken into account when evaluating school performance in low-income countries. The datasets generated by the Southern and East African Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality (SACMEQ) 2000–2002, examined as part of the EdQual research programme, have provided very useful evidence on this issue highlighting the critical role that, for example, family and school resources play in promoting student attainment (Smith & Barrett, 2011; Yu & Thomas, 2008). However, SACMEQ datasets are limited due to the cross-sectional nature of the data collected at one point in time, which means that the progress of pupils at school over a particular time frame cannot be examined nor can we examine the key student, classroom or school factors that may explain differences in students’ progress (Goldstein & Thomas, 2008). In contrast, longitudinal datasets, including students’ individual matched data records from different time points, allow the calculation of what are called ‘value added’ measures. The value added concept rests on the assumption that schools add ‘value’ to the achievement of their students. This approach uses statistical techniques (e.g. multilevel modelling) to produce an estimate of the extra value that is added by schools to student attainment over and above the progress or improvement that might normally be expected. The methodology involves comparing different models to separate out the effect of the school experience on individual student outcomes (what students achieve) and the extent to which student intake characteristics affect student outcomes. Therefore, accurate baseline information about students’ prior attainment is crucial to calculate the value added component, and value added measures can also be ‘fine-tuned’ using additional student background information, such as their gender, ethnicity and social class (Thomas & Mortimore, 1996). Value added measures thus seek to establish whether

60  S.M. Thomas et al. students in some schools make relatively greater or less progress than those in other schools over a specified period of time, such as from beginning to end of primary or secondary schooling or even over just one school year. The most effective schools would be those where student progress exceeds expectation. These measures therefore provide both an indicator of a school’s effectiveness and a tool for head teachers and their staff to use to analyse the extent to which they have effectively raised pupil achievement. Of course in terms of application, similar to other quantitative measures, there are some limitations to value added methodology and approaches to school evaluation that need to be well understood (Goldstein, 1997). These include the issues of measurement error and the need to always consider the uncertainty associated with estimating individual schools value added scores (i.e. via the statistical confidence intervals) so as to take account of these limitations when evaluating the results. Nevertheless, it is the benefits of the value added approach that we want to focus on in this chapter, by providing two examples of research from different low income contexts (China and Zanzibar), which illustrate the need for longitudinal datasets and improved educational evaluation methods to inform and support school evaluation and improvement initiatives. In relation to the EdQual education quality framework outlined by Tikly and Barrett in chapter 2 of this volume and specifically the central role of an enabling policy environment to promote educational quality, we would argue that a key aspect of such an enabling national policy is one that provides the support and resources needed to improve school and educational evaluation methods. Crucially, through new and rigorous evaluation methods more successful, appropriate and context specific improvement interventions can be identified that will create a knowledge base of new evidence relevant to national contexts and enable better informed policy and practice. Furthermore, improving school self evaluation processes is also a key lever identified by Oduro, Fertig and Dachi in chapter 10 of this volume as a means to support effective school leadership. Overall we would argue that improvements to school evaluation methods will stimulate, inform and enhance processes and initiatives aiming to raise student access, outcomes and educational quality – key factors in the drive towards poverty alleviation – as well as assist in achieving wider goals including social justice, cohesion and equal opportunities, especially for girls and disadvantaged students.

Why do we need to evaluate education quality? First it is important to consider briefly – why do we need to evaluate education quality? Scheerens, Glas and Thomas (2003) have indicated three key functions of educational monitoring and evaluation. First is accreditation – to formally regulate desired levels of quality of educational outcomes and provisions, as well as providing valid student assessment data to feed into accountability and improvement evaluation systems. Second is accountability – to hold education systems accountable for their functioning and performance and to support democracy in education. Third, improvement – as a mechanism to stimulate improvement in educational

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  61 practices, teacher development, and organisational learning. In addition, they argued that enhanced quality evaluation processes are required alongside decentralisation – a macro-policy approach favoured by international development agencies such as The World Bank aiming to improve educational quality by allowing schools and local communities greater autonomy and responsibility. It could also be argued that in contexts where educational markets have been created, such as in higher education or where parents are allowed to choose the school their child attends, evaluation systems are required to ensure that providers are responsive to consumer demands (Harvey, 2005). So, if we need to measure educational quality in order to evaluate and improve it, we need methods and measures that are valid, reliable and fit-for-purpose for this information to be meaningful and useful. In this respect previous research indicates that several key questions (adapted from Scheerens, 1992) should be considered in relation to the methodology employed to create educational quality measures or indicators: • • • • • •

From whose perspective is quality judged? Which area of activity within an organisation determines quality? At what level of the organisation is quality analysed? What time period is referred to when quality is measured or judged? What evidence or data are used to form an opinion of quality? What standards or measures are used in order to make quality judgements?

All these questions are important but the last one is critical, particularly in lowincome countries where often the only information available to evaluate education quality is students’ raw examination scores. As practical examples below we outline evidence from two research projects conducted in different low-income countries that have examined the use of value added measures as a way to improve educational and school evaluation practices. In both country contexts – China and Zanzibar – raw measures of pupils’ academic outcomes and entrance levels to higher education are frequently viewed as the only key indicators of school quality, similar to the situation in England in 1990s. As a result schools with disadvantaged intakes tend to be judged unfairly, while complacency is possible amongst schools with more able pupils and it is difficult to identify best practice. In contrast, value added methods are widely regarded as providing fairer and more accurate measures of school effectiveness than the raw results (Thomas, 2010). Drawing on school and educational effectiveness research paradigms, the calculation of value added measures requires the collection and analysis of comprehensive and longitudinal datasets in a common format across all schools either regionally or nationally (see Box 5.1). Value added measures are now commonly available to schools in England and some other developed countries, and are used to inform school improvement initiatives as well as to evaluate school performance for accountability purposes. Therefore, it is important to look closely at the opportunities for enhancing educational quality in low-income countries via innovative school evaluation methods – particularly value added measures.

62  S.M. Thomas et al. Longitudinal datasets are needed to calculate value added measures and these typically comprise the following kind of variables collected in a standard format across all schools: (1) Unique Identifying Codes: for each individual student, class, school, region, (and nation if making international comparisons) (2) Student Outcome Measures: individual student examination or assessment results for different academic subject areas. Ideally further measures will also relate to vocational, affective and/or other key outcomes of schooling. (3) Student Prior Attainment Measures: individual student examination or assessment results from one or more time points before the collection of the outcome measures (usually at least one year earlier and preferably covering a whole phase or total period within a school). (4) Student Background Measures: individual data on student background characteristics such as gender, age, ethnicity, family income, parents’ education and occupation. Including this data in the analysis can be useful to fine-tune student progress measures (often called contextualised value added measures). (5) School/Class Context Measures: individual data on student characteristics aggregated to the school/class level to estimate, for example, mean level of student prior attainment or family income. Also any other type of contextual variable considered to be outside the control of the school or teachers (e.g. school size or location). As with student background measures, including this data in the analysis can be useful to fine-tune student progress measures (often called contextualised value added measures). (6) School/Class Input or Process Measures: quantitative measures relating to any input or process aspects of schooling (such as teacher qualifications or length of school day) collected at one or more time points – ideally before the collection of student outcome data. Generally, this data is NOT included in the calculation of value added measures but is crucial to indicate potential explanations for any observed differences in value added school effects.

Box 5.1  Types of variables needed to create value added measures

Evidence from value added research in China The Improving Educational Evaluation and Quality in China (IEEQC) Project, funded by the UK Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC) and UK Department for International Development (DFID), was conducted by University of Bristol in collaboration with National Institute of Educational Sciences (formerly, China National Institute for Educational Research – CNIER) (Thomas & Peng, 2011; IEEQC, 2011). The project used value added methods and innovative quantitative methodology (multi-level modelling) to investigate school effectiveness in three Chinese regions. It also explored the local application of new school evaluation methods to educational policy and practice in rural and urban senior secondary schools. In terms of impact, the research sought to promote the development of innovation in school evaluation and guidelines for implementation via bottom-up and top-down dialogues

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  63 involving key stakeholders such as policy-makers, Local Education Authority (LEA) officers, teachers and students. A key rationale underpinning the project was that better understanding of education quality and evaluation processes will also contribute to achieving the millennium development goals by promoting wider goals including social justice, cohesion and equal opportunities. The project methodology involved analysis of longitudinal data from 90,000+ students in 120+ schools located in three local authorities to estimate the size and extent of school effectiveness in three geographically (East/West) and socio-economically diverse regions. Regional datasets comprised information for each student including their 2009 Entrance Examination to Higher Education (EEHE), scores matched to their 2006 Entrance Examination for Senior High School scores (EESHS), as well as other relevant student background and school context factors. Multi-level modelling was subsequently used to create contextualized value added scores in four outcome measures (total EEHE score, English, Chinese, mathematics) for the schools in each region. Standard statistical criteria were used to identify the best modelling approach and consistent models were employed across all regions and outcome measures in order to facilitate comparisons. An example of the statistical model results and variables adjusted for in calculating contextualised value added scores for 2009 Chinese EEHE is shown in Table 5.1. In addition to quantitative methods, qualitative interviews were also conducted with 90+ key stakeholders (including policy-makers, teachers and students) to ascertain their perspectives on: (i) the nature of education quality, values and priorities and the impact of local context on educational outcomes; (ii) current methods of evaluating school and student performance and educational quality; (iii) the usefulness and limitations of value added measures for the purpose of evaluating school performance at primary and secondary levels; and (iv) how innovative evaluation methods and value added approaches could be or have been applied and adapted to take account of local contexts and priorities. Table 5.1  Example of detailed multi-level modeling findings for LEA2 – Chinese Entrance Examination to Higher Educational (EEHE) score: Value Added Model III (2009)

Explanatory Variables Fixed Part: Constant Prior attainment: Chinese (zscore) English (zscore) Math (zscore) Female (baseline: boy) Age (zscore in month) Major Arts (baseline: sciences)

Chinese EEHE Standard score Estimate Error

Statistical Significance

0.75

0.27

*

0.15 0.24 0.07 0.24 –0.09 –0.09

0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

* * * * * *

64  S.M. Thomas et al. Table 5.1 continued Explanatory Variables

Chinese EEHE Standard score Estimate Error

Hukou registration place (baseline: city): township/county village Tuition fee status (baseline: normal): extra full tuition fee full/partial scholarship Lived with (baseline: boarder): parents Home school travel time (baseline: < 15 mins): 15–30 mins JHS status (baseline: ordinary): township/county key school provincial/national model school Studied in this school (baseline: SHS Year1): since SHS Year2 since SHS Year3 Father education (baseline: PS): master and above Father occupation (baseline: unit head): professional, technical personnel business service personnel agriculture and water labours production, transport operators teacher Mother education (baseline: Primary School): junior high school SHS, secondary, vocational first degree master and above Mother occupation (baseline: unit head): agriculture and water labours teacher Things at home (baseline: no): yes – a room of your own yes – mobile phone of your own yes – air conditioning/heating yes – car (automobile) yes – recorder/CD player/MP3 yes – motorcycle Books at home (baseline: none):

Statistical Significance

0.06 0.07

0.02 0.02

* *

–0.27 0.16 –0.06

0.02 0.04 0.02

* * *

–0.05

0.02

*

0.06 0.09

0.02 0.02

* *

–0.21 –0.09

0.05 0.03

* *

0.01

0.06

–0.03 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.11

0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04

–0.05 –0.07 0.03 0.11

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.07

* *

0.21 0.15

0.04 0.04

* *

–0.08 –0.17 0.01 –0.06 0.04 –0.03

0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

* *

* * * *

* * *

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  65 Explanatory Variables

Chinese EEHE Standard score Estimate Error

Statistical Significance

11–50 books 51–100 books more than 200 books % student major in art SHS school status Zscore of school mean in 3 subjects Random Part: Level: school Level: student

0.06 0.06 0.14 –0.02 0.12 –0.06

0.03 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.11 0.05

* * * *

0.06 0.69

0.01 0.01

* *

intra school correlation %school variance explained %total variance explained

7.72 73.40 31.83

Notes: School sample size = 54; Student sample size 30,096; Value added Model III included the same fixed set of explanatory variables in the analysis for all 3 LEAs, however only explanatory variables with statistically significant estimates at 0.05 (denoted as *) for at least one LEA are included in this table; All outcome and prior attainment measures have been transformed to normal scores within each LEA cohort (mean=0; standard deviation =1); squared and cubed terms for the prior attainment measures were statistically significant and also included in the model but the results are not presented here.

Major findings from the IEEQC project include first, that for each region and outcome measure significant differences were identified both between and within senior secondary schools in terms of value added scores and, crucially, these measures of school performance provided a different picture of educational quality in comparison to the raw EEHE examination scores. The findings indicate for example that in terms of students’ raw, unadjusted 2009 Chinese EEHE subject scores, differences between schools account for 17–20 per cent of the total variance in student outcomes, across the three LEAs investigated. However, the apparent performance of senior secondary schools changed significantly when comparing raw and value added measures (see Figure 5.1). After controlling for student prior attainment on entry to senior secondary school and other student and school context factors outside the control of the school, 28 to 39 per cent of the total variance and 63 to 93 per cent of the school variance in students’ 2009 Chinese EEHE scores was explained (see Table 5.1 for an example of contextualised Value Added model III results from one local authority). Of the remaining total variance, 2 to 9 per cent was attributable to differences between schools thereby demonstrating a school effect, particularly in western China where the largest school effects were observed. Importantly, this is a low estimate given that for other student outcomes, such as total EEHE score, the equivalent figures are somewhat higher: 5–15 per cent (Thomas & Peng, 2011) suggesting that a larger school effect may be observed when all

66  S.M. Thomas et al. Chinese raw and value added scores – value added III 0.90

Chinese value added score

0.60

0.30

0.00

–0.30

–0.60

–0.90 85.00

90.00

95.00

100.00

105.00

Chinese raw score

110.00

115.00

correlation r = 0.55 (LEA2)

Figure 5.1 Schools’ raw scores versus value added scores: Chinese EEHE outcome score (LEA2)

EHEE student outcome measures are considered together. Figure 5.2 provides a useful overview and illustrates the results from five different models used to examine school effects on 2009 Chinese EEHE outcome score for one local authority, after controlling for different explanatory variables in the analysis. In addition, by extending Value Added model III analyses, evidence of differential school effects were found by examining the correlations between school value added scores for different academic subjects (English, Chinese and mathematics) and different student groups (high vs. low attainers on entry to senior secondary school). Across three local authority datasets these non-perfect correlations ranged from 0.70 to 0.95 for different academic subjects and from 0.45 to 0.53 for high/low attainers. This suggests that a range of value added measures are required for different subject outcomes and groups of students to reflect the full complexity of school effects. It also reveals important within school differences in effectiveness – key evidence in evaluating the reality of equal opportunities for all students in all subject areas. It is also pertinent to note that many Chinese stakeholders interviewed considered it crucial to extend the evaluation of student outcomes beyond just examination performance to include all-round development and non-academic outcomes such as vocational and attitude measures. This is in line with Western concerns but seems to go much further, due in part to a national policy emphasis

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  67 Type of feedback – Chinese

2.00

Chinese value added score

1.00

0.00

–1.00

–2.00 Raw

Student background

Prior attainment

Type of model

Value added II

Value added III (LEA2)

Notes: Results of five model types are displayed: (1) Raw: no explanatory variables are controlled for in the model; (2) Student background: only student background explanatory variables such as age, gender and home possessions are controlled for in the model; (3) Prior attainment: only student prior attainment explanatory variables (at entrance to senior secondary school) are controlled for in the model; (4) Value Added II: student prior attainment and background explanatory variables are controlled for in the model; (5) Value Added III: student prior attainment, student background and school context explanatory variables are controlled for in the model.

Figure 5.2 Comparison of School Residuals from five models: Chinese EEHE outcome score (LEA2)

on the importance of students’ all-round development: Intellectually, morally, psychologically and physically. However, it was also widely recognised by stakeholder interviewees that the overwhelming focus of parents and students is on raw examination results and entrance rates to Higher Education as the key indicators of school quality, even though the Chinese government has sought to change this viewpoint, so far with limited success. With this issue in mind stakeholders also reported that value added measures would provide an important and welcome addition to current school evaluation systems in China, but these measures and associated information, also need to reflect local priorities and raise awareness of the limitations such as measurement error. Cultural issues (e.g. Confucian thinking), the intense competition between students given limited HE opportunities and the emphasis on improving equity,

68  S.M. Thomas et al. especially in terms of the rural–urban/East–West gap, are examples of issues that are likely to play a very critical role in how any value added (longitudinal) or other new educational evaluation systems are perceived in China. Nevertheless, stakeholders also emphasised that a new government focus on school self evaluation and school improvement would be welcomed, as well as reform of HE entrance requirements to reduce the spotlight on raw examination scores, as long as this was combined with widespread and comprehensive training to support teachers’ use of new evaluation concepts and methods. Broader lessons learned from the IEEQC project in terms of developing longitudinal datasets and evaluation methods include the obvious point that data quality and validity are crucial. Rigorous and systematic data collection procedures, over two or more time points in a consistent format, are required to ensure data quality and this takes time, expertise and resources to plan and implement. In particular the use of unique student, class and school identifiers are required to easily match data records over time. There is also a need for explicit agreements between schools, administration and research organisations taking responsibility for data collection and management. Moreover it is clear that differences in context, examination systems and curriculum content between Chinese provinces and cities (particularly at educational levels below senior high school), mean that creating a national value added system would be very difficult. However value added evaluation systems are feasible for regions or cities so initially establishing regional longitudinal databases within a nationally agreed framework is likely to provide the most valid and fruitful approach.

Evidence from value added research in Zanzibar The School Effectiveness and School Self Evaluation in Zanzibar (SESEZ) Project was funded by DFID and conducted as part of the EdQual research programme via a PhD studentship (Salim, 2011). As in China, this ambitious project used value added methods involving innovative longitudinal datasets and quantitative methodology (multi-level modelling) to investigate secondary school effectiveness in Zanzibar. The aim was to examine the applicability of value added measures in a low-income country context and investigate, for the first time in this region, the range and extent of school effectiveness using a longitudinal methodological approach. The possible explanations of any differences observed in school effects and the relevance and potential for using value added measures to enhance evaluation processes in Zanzibar were also explored. The project methodology involved survey and interview data collected from 7,356 students and 110 head teachers, including student background characteristics and school context information, which was subsequently matched to students’ national assessment outcome data (Form 4 examination results taken at age 18 years) and their prior attainment (Form 2 examination results taken at age 16 years). Multi-level modelling techniques were used to calculate contextualised value added measures of relative student progress, which were

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  69 additionally tested against head teachers’ views on educational processes, and other school factors, in order to determine possible explanations of the observed differences in school effects. Interviews were subsequently conducted with education stakeholders (policy-makers, school inspectors and head teachers) to explore their perceptions and experiences on educational quality, effective schooling and school evaluation processes, as well as whether value added approaches could be applied to improve external evaluation and school selfevaluation processes. Major findings included first, that school effectiveness research methodologies employed mostly in Western contexts can be replicated and usefully applied in Zanzibar so as to support school improvement processes and contribute to the international knowledge base (Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000). The findings indicated that statistically significant differences do appear to exist between Zanzibar secondary schools in terms of effectiveness. Across eleven different Form 4 academic outcomes 7 to 39 per cent of the total variance in students’ performance was estimated to be attributable to differences between schools, after adjusting for factors outside the schools’ control including students’ Form 2 prior attainment and their background characteristics (including gender, age and family income indicators) and school context factors. These estimates of school effects are generally somewhat greater than countries such as UK and China (Thomas & Peng, 2011). In contrast, school effects in Zanzibar are potentially smaller than in some Sub-Saharan African countries like South Africa, Kenya, Namibia and Uganda, although so far only limited (cross-sectional) comparative evidence is available and mostly only for primary schools, which are smaller and may be expected to be more variable than secondary schools (Lee, Zuze and Ross, 2005). Within individual schools there is also evidence of differential effectiveness for different student groups (by prior attainment and gender) as well as across curriculum subject areas. Importantly head teachers’ views on school process factors were found to explain some of the differences in schools’ value added results and highlighted the significant positive influence of key factors, such as effective monitoring of student achievement, progress and homework, and the presence in schools of significant numbers of experienced and well-qualified teachers. In contrast, a negative influence on value added performance was indicated by, for example, low teacher morale, insufficient academic emphasis and little support from school management committee or parents and community members. Significantly, the methods employed may be usefully seen as a national pilot for developing a value added school evaluation framework to inform better evaluation policy and practices in Zanzibar, to promote systematic record keeping of student attainment and progress, and to support less effective schools in achieving equitable learning outcomes. This is because by itself self-evaluation is a form of teacher development since it stimulates teachers to reflect on their practices. Moreover, value added measures could feed into efforts to improve accountability and to assist policy-makers to identify where best to focus improvement efforts and limited resources. However, given this is the first large-scale longitudinal

70  S.M. Thomas et al. study of school effectiveness in Zanzibar, any interpretation of the results requires careful consideration of the methodological limitations, as well as the low-income country context. As noted in the IEEQC China project, rigorous data collection procedures to ensure data quality, especially the quality of student assessment data, are crucial. In this respect Zanzibar stakeholders raised some pertinent student assessment issues, some of which related to the Form 2 examinations. These included concerns about: the quality of assessment instruments and teacher assessments; the adequacy of assessment record keeping; the match between curriculum and assessment design and purpose; teachers’ capacity, knowledge and skills in student assessment; whether the language of instruction and assessment is appropriate for students (i.e. their home language); and political manipulation of pass marks. Given student examination results are key indicators of student outcomes used in most national educational evaluation systems, the findings emphasise that fit-for-purpose student assessment is a critical area for development and improvement in Zanzibar and most likely for other similar low-income countries. Clearly, educational quality cannot be monitored and evaluated very meaningfully if the reliability and validity of key measures cannot be clearly demonstrated. Finally, stakeholders highlighted the importance of the following for education quality: good leadership by head teachers; well-qualified teachers and high standards of teacher professional development; the development of a more responsive curriculum which reflects the Zanzibar context; better resources; and the decentralisation of powers to lower levels of education management and administration in order to promote ownership, commitment and distributed leadership.

Research strengths and limitations Research has highlighted the lack of empirical evidence of school effects in China and Africa and the need to use more sophisticated methods to evaluate and contextualise educational quality (Peng & Thomas, 2006; Yu & Thomas, 2008; Thomas et al., 2012). Therefore, more broadly we hope our research examples illustrate the need for longitudinal datasets and improved evaluation methods to assist schools and teachers in low-income countries to evaluate their practice and inform improvement strategies aiming to raise educational quality as well as to promote fairness in the education system. A strength of the research discussed in this chapter is that it is fairly unusual because longitudinal value added studies are rare in the two countries examined. Other strengths of the research include: • •

The size of the sample/datasets used whereby a complete or representative national or regional cohort of students and schools was employed. The range and longitudinal nature of data collected whereby students’ prior and outcome attainments were collected at two time points and in four or more curriculum subjects, as well as additional student background characteristics and school context variables in order to create contexualized value added measures of school effectiveness.

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  71 •

•

The collection and analysis of school process variables alongside value added measures to explore possible links and potential explanations of any differences observed between schools in terms of effectiveness. The use of a mixed methodology and evidence from both quantitative and qualitative research methods to provide complimentary sources of explanations and illustrations of ‘what works’ in promoting educational quality in different country contexts.

As for limitations, it is of course important to acknowledge that longitudinal value added measures can only provide imperfect estimates of school and other educational effects, although they undoubtedly provide better estimates of school performance than the raw scores. As noted earlier, technical data issues, such as measurement error and other possible errors in the data, underline the importance of always considering the statistical significance of the results (Goldstein, 1997). Moreover, their value is defined by the quality, reliability and validity of the data analysed. To harness the benefits of longitudinal data for school evaluation and improvement purposes, reliable and valid student assessment systems are clearly crucial to provide appropriate baseline and outcome measures. The implications for education systems in low-income countries, particularly where national examination and assessment systems may be weak (or not even exist at lower secondary or primary levels) are to prioritise resources on improving the validity and rigor of key student assessment instruments and processes. Nonetheless, it is important to note that, irrespective of any on-going revision and improvement of current student assessment systems, value added approaches are feasible, straightforward and relatively inexpensive to implement if the expertise is available and assessment systems have been adapted or set up with this in mind (e.g. via use of unique ID codes to facilitate matching of student data records). Importantly, value added results can provide key evaluation evidence regarding the quality of the assessment system itself and inform confidential school self evaluation processes, as well as provide a method of estimating school quality for external purposes. However, the latter should be considered with some caution until the validity of the student assessment system is clearly established.

Conclusion We hope these research examples provide insight into an important approach to improve school and educational quality through improving educational evaluation systems. Our illustrations emphasise the usefulness of longitudinal datasets and value added indicators as a powerful alternative methodology to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of schooling irrespective of context, and this methodology could be seen as a universal instrument for improving the quality of education. However, value added approaches need to be adapted and tailored to the specific educational objectives, priorities and stage of development of the country concerned. Differences may be manifested in terms

72  S.M. Thomas et al. of the types of assessment outcomes examined, the variables controlled for in the analysis, and the level of sophistication of the analysis (Scheerens, Glass & Thomas, 2003). In low-income country contexts, where resources to conduct evaluations are likely to be restricted, a first step may be a value added approach using assessment and administrative data that focuses on only a few key variables and a single educational phase before consideration of scaling up to a more comprehensive school evaluation system. It may be appropriate to focus initially on the secondary phase, as in our two examples in China and Zanzibar, where assessment systems and unique student IDs for Higher Education Entrance and prior secondary school attainment are already in place and readily available, so as to develop expertise and procedures that could be applied later at other levels. As mentioned in the introduction, a key weakness of the few national and international monitoring systems that do exist in low income countries such as SACMEQ, supplemented more recently by donor funded monitoring surveys such as Uwezo (2012) in Africa and Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) (2012) in India, is that the evidence is largely cross-sectional. Therefore, in our view, more could be done to prioritise the linking of data records over time to create longitudinal datasets, which requires advance planning and agreements but otherwise may involve relatively little additional resources over and above the costs of original data collection. Overall, there remains a critical need to recognise educational effects more broadly and fully in terms of conducting analyses across different phases in the education system (e.g. early years/primary/ secondary/HE) as well as across different system levels whereby the effects of class and region are evaluated, in addition to school and student effects. In summary, the evidence indicates that there is a need for the governments of low-income countries, and their lenders and donors such as the World Bank, to invest in national assessment systems and to strive to improve the transparency and synthesis of assessment objectives and validity and reliability of student assessments, alongside implementing longitudinal data collection and monitoring systems with the aim of designing evaluation strategies best suited to a nation’s socio-cultural context and economic realities. We argue that this approach will strongly support better decision-making and actions that target support on the most vulnerable students – those making inadequate or least progress at school – and on related educational improvement initiatives. Furthermore, we would also support Tikly and Barrett (2011) by concluding that, alongside use of longitudinal and value added approaches, enhancing the context specificity, transparency and contribution of all stakeholders in synthesizing best assessment practices and designing educational evaluation systems, whilst simultaneously broadening the outcomes considered to be relevant in the context of quality education, (e.g. including an individual’s capabilities as well as their educational attainment) will promote both quality and social justice in schools. This will better enable young people to acquire the skills, knowledge, and orientations necessary for lifelong learning and active participation in communities and societies.

Monitoring and evaluating school effectiveness  73

References ASER (2012) Key findings from the study. Inside primary schools: teaching and learning in rural India. Policy Brief. Available at (accessed 12th March 2012). Goldstein, H. (1997) ‘Methods in school effectiveness research’. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8(4): 369–395. Goldstein, H., & Thomas, S. M. (2008) ‘Reflections on the international comparative surveys debate’. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 215–222. Harvey, L. (2005) ‘A history and critique of quality evaluation in the UK’. Quality Assurance in Education, 13(4): 263–276. IEEQC (2011). Improving educational evaluation and quality in China website. Available at (accessed 1st July 2011). . Lee, V. E., Zuze, T. L., & Ross, K. N. (2005) ‘School effectiveness in 14 sub-Saharan African countries: links with 6th graders’ reading achievement’. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(1): 207–246. Peng, W. J., Thomas, S. M., Yang, X., & Li, J. (2006). ‘Developing school evaluation methods to improve the quality of schooling in China: a pilot “value added” study’. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(2): 135–154. Salim, M. (2011). ‘Exploring issues of school effectiveness and self-evaluation at the system and school levels in the context of Zanzibar’. PhD thesis, University of Bristol. Scheerens, J. (1992) Effective Schooling: Research, Theory and Practice, London, Cassell. Scheerens, J., Glas, C., & Thomas, S. M. (2003) Educational Evaluation, Assessment and Monitoring. A Systemic Approach. Lisse, Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers. Smith, M., & Barrett, A.M. (2011) ‘Capabilities for learning to read: an investigation of social and economic effects for grade 6 learners in Southern and East Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 23–36. Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2000) International Handbook of School Effectiveness Research. Abingdon, Routledge. Thomas, S. M., & Peng, W. J. (2011) Improving educational evaluation and quality in China. Final report to ESRC. Available at (accessed 12th March 2012). Thomas, S. M., & Peng, W. J. (2011) Using value added feedback for accountability and school improvement purposes. Paper presented at UKFIET biannual conference, 13–17 September 2011, Oxford. Available at (accessed 12th March 2012). Thomas, S. M., & Mortimore, P. (1996) ‘Comparison of value added models for secondary school effectiveness’. Research Papers in Education, 11(1): 5–33. Thomas, S. M. (2010) ‘Assessment and the evaluation of institutional effectiveness’ in Penelope Peterson, Eva Baker, Barry McGaw, (eds), International Encyclopedia of Education. Volume 3.. Oxford, Elsevier. Pp. 172–180. Thomas S. M., Salim, M., Munoz-Chereau, B., & Peng, W. J. (2012) ‘Educational quality effectiveness and evaluation: perspectives from China, South America and Africa’ in Christopher Chapman et al. (eds), School effectiveness and improvement research, policy and practice: Challenging the orthodoxy? Abingdon, Routledge. Tikly, L. (2011) ‘Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in low income countries’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 1–23.

74  S.M. Thomas et al. Tikly, L., & Barrett, A. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 3–14. UNESCO (2004) EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005: Education for All. The Quality Imperative. Paris, UNESCO. UWEZO (2012) Are our children learning? Numeracy and literacy across East Africa. Official report Available at (accessed 15th March 2012). Yu, G., & Thomas, S.M. (2008) ‘Exploring school effects across Southern and Eastern African school systems and in Tanzania’. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 283–305.

6 Teacher professionalism and social justice Beatrice Avalos and Angeline M. Barrett

Introduction Internationally, there is a growing recognition of the centrality of teacher professionalism to education quality, even when quality is narrowly defined in terms of student performance in tests (UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization], 2004; Carnoy et al., 2007). As the recent and influential McKinsey Report (Mourshed et al., 2010) on education improvement across 20 education systems in low- and middle- income countries, including Ghana, Jordan, Madhya Pradesh in India and Chile asserted, educational improvement essentially means changing processes of teaching and managing schools and this requires teachers not just to develop technical skills but to also internalize new ways of thinking about learning. In this chapter we argue that a social justice perspective on education quality necessarily entails understanding teacher professionalism as involving engagement with social justice issues and this has implications for teacher education and management. Barrett and Tikly, in the introduction to this book, define a socially just education as inclusive, economically and socio-culturally relevant, and democratic. Within academic literature, the concept of teacher professionalism has its own set of meanings, involving on the one hand discussions on the extent to which teaching is a profession and on the other, the definition of professional practice. Briefly, we hold here that teaching is a profession in the sense defined by Abbott (1988) as having a specific field of work (teaching) socially recognised and therefore with a specific jurisdiction, in relation to which teachers’ knowledge-base and capabilities entitles them to reason, to make decisions and to practice. Professional behaviour on the other hand, cannot be so clearly defined. It has to do with the quality of the criteria that orients teacher reasoning, the knowledge at teachers’ disposal, the beliefs and emotions associated with their work, and the degree to which professional decisions are feasible depending on the contextual conditions in which teaching occurs. In this chapter we explore these criteria from a social justice perspective. Teachers’ and learners’ experiences of education quality are closely related. In order for teachers to offer learners a quality education that is socially just, they need preparation, working conditions and ongoing support that enables them as

76  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett professionals. We start with a conceptual framework for professional self-identity that helpfully identifies the elements at work in teacher professionalism and how it can serve the purposes of education for social justice. In the light of this framework we examine, on the basis of existing research, the extent to which teachers are able to act professionally, particularly in contexts where many learners are disadvantaged. We conclude by highlighting key conditions for enabling teachers to be committed and motivated to teach for social justice.

A conceptual framework Central to teacher professionalism are teachers’ view of themselves in relation to their work as educators, the extent to which they feel able to do a reasonably good job, the extent to which they feel satisfied, and the extent to which they consider they must grow and improve. All this falls under the concept of ‘personal identity’ which, as expressed by Castells (1997), is a construction based on certain cultural attributes to which priority is given over others. Teacher identity has been discussed extensively in the literature, but perhaps its most important recognised components have to do with the set of beliefs and meanings attributed to being an educator, something, which is constructed and reconstructed during the teaching career (Ball and Goodson, 1985; Beijaard et al., 2004; Barrett, 2008). While it is possible to think in terms of one overarching teacher identity concept, the truth is that for each teacher, it takes different forms or sub-identities at a time and over time, in line with contextual factors and interpersonal relationships (Beijaard et al., 2004; Day, 2008). A teacher may identify with a particular mode of being a primary teacher for the initial school grades, and vary this perception when she moves to teach upper grades; or may suffer an identity conflict when his or her perception of what is key in teaching is re-defined by others in a way that conflicts with such a perception (Osborn, 2008). In this sense, identity is also related to who has the power to define a teacher or anybody else’s personal identity (Castells, 1997). When outside authority attempts to restructure teachers’ self-identities, a teacher may accept and restructure their self-view (legitimating identity), may resist as occurred in some cases in Apartheid South Africa (Weber, 2007) or may redefine or reconstruct identity in different and new terms (projecting identity). Teachers’ professional identity is thus a construct with cognitive components embodied in role definitions and meanings and emotional components expressed as motivation and feelings of well-being. It is fed through the degree to which teachers feel that they have the knowledge and capacities required for their tasks or perceptions of self-efficacy. In turn, self-efficacy is fed through professional development opportunities, including initial teacher education, and through social recognition of the quality and importance of their work (status, respect, reward system). Teachers will act professionally in line with how these various components interact and how they are recognised in the policy context in which they work. The following figure (Figure 6.1) illustrates these interactions and represents, through the outer circle, the factors that affect

Teacher professionalism and social justice  77 Status respect rewards

Professional development opportunities

Professional identity: cognitive & emotional elements

Self-efficacy perceptions

Policy & teaching contexts

Figure 6.1  Teacher Professional Identity

teachers’ sense of identity and work including existing policy structures and training opportunities. In addition, more personal and localised factors, such as career stage, religion or family values, may influence individual teachers’ identity, but they are beyond the scope of this chapter. For teachers to offer an education that is socially just, commitment to social justice must therefore be embedded in the meaning and in the emotional components of their professional identity. That is, it needs to be constructed and re-constructed by every teacher in the light of their knowledge base, their working conditions, the policy contexts and messages, and their emotional commitment to this purpose. To teach in the light of social justice, it is not enough to recognise that this is an important goal resulting from principles of distributive justice, but to experience feelings against injustice as well as of empathy with those who live, think and act differently or who experience exclusion of any sort. In the words of Maxine Greene (1998, p.xiv): To teach for social justice is to teach for enhanced perception and imaginative explorations, for the recognition of social wrongs, of sufferings, of pestilences wherever and whenever they arise. It is to find models in literature and in history of the indignant ones, the ones forever ill at ease, and the loving ones who have taken the side of the victims of pestilences, whatever their names or places of origin. It is to teach so that the young may

78  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett be awakened to the joy of working for transformation in the smallest places, so that they may become healers and change their worlds. In contexts where many learners are disadvantaged, teaching for social justice includes raising learners’ critical consciousness of the social forces that circumscribe their own life opportunities. In the field of education and development, feminists and indigenous activists have been at the forefront of such efforts to promote social justice in education. For example, the Tuseme (‘Speak Out!’) clubs, run by the Forum of African Women Educationalists (FAWE) in secondary schools in several African countries, facilitate girls (and in some cases, boys) to analyse and publicly challenge the gendered educational and social forces obstructing academic and social participation (Mlama, 2005). Meanwhile, indigenous activists lobby for an education that enables them to participate in national and global social life but also recognises and sustains their own culture, language and knowledge (Aikman, 2011). However, much research in low-income countries and highly unequal middle-income countries, reports that teachers are poorly motivated and have low morale (e.g. VSO [Voluntary Service Overseas], 2002; Bennell and Akyeampong, 2007). This raises the question of what conditions would allow teachers to have the passion described above by Greene and the knowledge and self-efficacy perceptions to raise learners’ critical understanding of social justice. It also raises the question of the extent to which these conditions are available to teachers serving disadvantaged learners. Applying the definition of education quality presented by Barrett and Tikly in chapter two to teachers, it follows that enabling teachers to teach for social justice requires ensuring that their career and professional learning opportunities are inclusive; that their own livelihoods are sustainable and their socio-cultural identities are respectfully recognised (relevance); and that their voices as professionals are heard in educational debate, whilst their work is governed by fair and transparent systems of accountability (democratic). In the light of these requirements we now turn to examine the extent to which conditions for social justice exist for teachers working in economically disadvantaged societies, drawing on existing research pertaining to the elements of the professional identity conceptual framework above.

Teachers’ working conditions in low-income, fragile and highly unequal societies In the last ten years or so there have been a number of studies that focus on teachers and their working conditions around the world (VSO, 2002; UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2006; Bennell and Akyeampong, 2007; UNESCO, 2008). In low-income countries, this focus has been prompted in part by concerns about high absenteeism and low morale amongst teachers, and the detrimental impact this is having on the achievement of EFA. The McKinsey report (Moursehd et al., 2010) identified appropriate reward and remuneration structures as an essential ingredient of successful reform. Estimations of whether

Teacher professionalism and social justice  79 teachers receive salaries that are commensurate with their level of preparation and their work responsibilities are complicated on account of the different criteria used for these assessments. However, there is evidence of decline over time in teacher salaries and particularly in the period 1997–2005 in countries such as Chile, Indonesia, Thailand and Uruguay, according to a review of eight countries (Iliukhina and Ratteree, 2009). Also the recent Pôle de Dakar UNESCO report (2009) concludes that in real terms teacher salaries in lowincome English and French-speaking African countries appear to be stagnant or in decline. Particularly in the period 2000–2005, the lowering of salaries is attributed to EFA requirements and aggressive policies that reduce salaries to cover costs (ActionAid, 2006). This has left many early career teachers or teachers with dependents in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa living in poverty (Bennell and Akyeampong, 2007; Mulkeen, 2010). While there are obvious differences in how the salary issue manifests itself in different contexts, if unsatisfactory remunerations are added to poor working conditions such as high pupil–teacher ratios, then teacher motivation and sense of well-being diminish. On these issues, there are a number of studies that report on teacher perceptions in low-income countries and fragile contexts as well as in better-off country situations (e.g. Robalino and Körner, 2005; Tenti Fanfani, 2005; Liu and Ramsey, 2008). Among these is the comprehensive set of country case studies, synthesised by Bennell and Akyeampong (2007), that found respondents identifying low salaries as the key cause of poor motivation in ten out of twelve low-income countries in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Other studies have shown the effect on teacher morale and perceived social status of salaries below those of civil servants or workers in other economic sectors (VSO, 2002; Welmond, 2002; Benveniste et al., 2008). For contract or ‘para’ teachers, the situation is magnified by even lower salaries and insecure contracts (Pandey, 2006). In fragile or conflict-afflicted contexts, if compensation is late in arriving or simply never arrives, as occurred during wars in Sudan and Liberia, teacher motivation may understandably dwindle to almost nothing (Sommers, 2004; IRC [International Rescue Committee], 2007; Kirk, 2008). Low teacher motivation as a product of unsatisfactory salary conditions may be overcome if other factors facilitate their work, such as community recognition or a strong commitment to teaching observed in the International Rescue Committee’s (IRC) study of Liberian teachers (IRC, 2007). Studies in Africa have found that for individuals committed to teaching as a vocation, recognition and appreciation from the community supports positive professional identity (Barrett, 2005; Tanaka, 2010). Such commitment in turn is associated with ‘well-being’, a physical and psychological condition resulting from basic needs such as food, shelter and clothing being met (IRC, 2007). Commitment to teaching and to the young may also be a main reason for selecting the teaching profession, over and above salary considerations as found in studies on Chilean future teachers and serving teachers (Avalos and Matus, 2010; Avalos and de los Ríos, 2010). On the other hand, poor relations between the school and

80  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett community can erode a sense of pride in professional identity and low remuneration can have knock-on consequences for perceived status within local communities (VSO, 2002). Teacher motivation is assisted by collegial relationships and the possibility offered by their schools and working conditions (especially allocated time) to engage in such activities. Also important is the support provided by specialised staff to meet situations of extreme misbehaviour or violence in schools and classrooms, as well as dealing with pupil differences and their complex requirements. For teachers working in rural schools, the social support of colleagues may ameliorate the hardships associated with remote postings, for example by sharing meals, accommodation or making a staff collection when a teacher is affected by illness or bereavement (Barrett, 2005; Tanaka, 2010). Whilst friendships between staff may be an important factor in retaining teachers in remote schools (Hedges, 2002), the benefits do not always extend to professional support in teaching and learning activities. To a large extent, establishing a culture of professional collegiality within a school depends on skilled school management and facilitative support from local education managers (Ngcobo and Tikly, 2010; see also Oduro, Fertig and Dachi, chapter 10 in this book).

The influence of policy and teaching contexts The policy contexts in which teachers work and especially the messages transmitted about what are considered appropriate outcomes of teachers’ work have an effect on how teachers reconcile their definitions of identity with such demands. Over the last decade and a half, one of the greatest changes to teachers’ work in low-income countries has been the universalisation of primary education, confronting them with large classes and a greater diversity of learners, including more learners from homes where parents have had very little or no education and, in some countries, a wider range of ages (Croft, 2006; Ramachandran et al., 2005; Kamunde, 2010). Bennell and Akyeampong (2007) note that whilst this has led to increased resource flows through donors and government prioritisation of primary education, it has already increased workloads, which, particularly for teachers in the lower year groups, where enrolments tend to be highest, can diminish teachers’ sense of self-efficacy (discussed below) and hence, motivation. Ramachandran et al. (2005, p.39) describe the worst-case scenario in Rajasthan, India, but it is a scene repeated across low-income countries: The most dismal picture was in schools with only two teachers and lots of children. Teachers could not cope with the situation and had simply given up. There were teachers who were indifferent to the children and did not really care if they learnt to read and write. Many countries, ranging from Tibet to Rwanda, have made profound curricular changes within the last decade. New curricula tend to be structured around

Teacher professionalism and social justice  81 transferable competencies rather than the reproduction of knowledge within stable disciplinary boundaries. Associated with this change is an expectation that teaching should become more interactive and learner-centred, with the teacher cast as facilitator of learners’ own knowledge construction rather than transmitter of specified texts. In this way competencies/outcomes-based curricula are supposed to promote democratic and inclusive classrooms, compatible with the goals of Education for All and ideals of rights-based education (Tabulawa, 2003). However, in many under-resourced education systems, curriculum reform is yet to be successful in transforming classroom practice (Chisholm and Leyendecker, 2008). As Halai argues in chapter 12 of this book, a central reason for this is that teachers are not adequately prepared to implement curricular change that is complex and requires from teachers extensive pedagogical skills and theoretical knowledge, with profound implications for their sense of self-efficacy (discussed below). Another policy change has been the increase in standardised school achievement measurements and the use of results from these tests to reward teachers monetarily (performance pay) or to imply that they are mainly responsible for low learning results. In Chile, a recent nationally representative study of teachers’ perceptions of the profession found them to be highly resentful at what they consider to be a narrow view of their role. Teachers, especially those who work in poorer schools, contend that their mission is not just to secure improvements in language and mathematics test scores but also to ensure a broad education of learners, avoid school drop-out, and provide their students with the social and emotional skills that will enable them to cope with societal demands and find a productive place in the labour market (Avalos and de los Ríos, 2010). While there is some experimental evidence to suggest that performance-related pay can increase pupil performance in India (Muralidharan and Sundararaman, 2006; Kingdon and Teal, 2007), these studies by economists do not look at classroom practices and learner identity. Thus they do not reveal the kind of backwash effects that educational researchers have associated with high stakes testing in high-income contexts (Goldstein, 2004; Rea-Dickins and Scott, 2007). Tikly and Barrett have already argued in the second chapter of this book that the participation of teachers, along with learners and other stakeholders, in decision-making is key to a good quality education that is socially just. Mpokosa and Ndaruhutse (2008) observe that many teachers in rural and remote locations, in particular, feel that they are not consulted by managers or policymakers, but at the same time offer examples of school management successfully including teacher participation. In conflict-affected countries, teachers may be targeted for expressing political views. Novelli (2009) draws attention to the most extreme case of Colombia, where criticism of government-led reform by the teachers’ union has prompted death threats and a number of ‘disappearances’ effected by far-right paramilitary organisations. The former UN special rapporteur on the right to education, Katarina Tomaševski (2001), highlighted teachers’ right to participate in professional associations and trade unions that

82  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett represent their interests politically. Here again, the position of contract teachers is problematic as they are typically less well represented by unions then regular teachers (Govinda and Josephine, 2004). They often have little legislative protection and hence limited legal recourse if salaries are paid late or they are dismissed at short notice, despite usually doing the same jobs as regular teachers (Robinson and Gauri, 2010). At the same time, stratification of the teaching force can splinter unions and undermine their ability to negotiate terms of employment with the State. This is one of the main reasons that Educational International, the international federation of teacher unions, is opposed to employment of teachers on fixed-term contracts and the unnecessary use of under-qualified teachers (Education International, 2004). The principle of democratic participation also places responsibilities on teachers, requiring that they be responsive to the concerns of parents and the community served by the school as well as professionally accountable. Jansen (2004) has argued that resistance of the South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU) to whole school evaluation, although understandable in that it is rooted in historic mistrust of surveillance dating back to the apartheid era, undermines “substantive accountability” (ibid, p.64). Parents should not be solely dependent on published performance of students’ grades in exit-point examinations when making judgments about school quality. They need to be knowledgeable about how their children’s schools work towards quality. Training school committee members in how to oversee school quality can be effective in creating local accountability and restoring trust and communication between school and community (Welford and Mosha, 2002; Save the Children UK, 2008). Teaching for social justice also involves empowering learners within schools, facilitating them to voice their views and to participate in school governance (see contributions to Cox et al., 2010).

Teacher perceptions of self-efficacy in the light of teaching for social justice Teacher self-efficacy has been described as the beliefs and confidence teachers have in their capacity to produce effects in students through teaching actions, within the limits of the socio-cultural context in which they work (Dellinger et al., 2008). Self-efficacy is obviously affected by how teachers perceive their level of preparation and the extent to which they work in conditions that enable them to perform as professionals. The external policy environment and the extent to which this environment places upon them demands they feel able to meet also affect teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy operates at its best when there is harmony between teacher identity definitions and the perception of their capacity to educate in line with these definitions. It suffers when teachers are judged narrowly by a certain type of results rather than by others considered by them to be equally important. In a review of studies on teachers’ meanings regarding their practice, van den Berg (2002) noted that contrasts between policies and conditions for implementing these policies impact on teachers’ self

Teacher professionalism and social justice  83 assessment. For example, policies that require teachers to respond to individual pupil differences may clash with teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions if they teach large classes, with in adequate resources or have not been trained in personalised teaching and learning strategies. Continuously changing policy environments may cause teachers to implement what is possible and ignore the rest or simply resist all changes. In the wake of Education for All, teachers in many countries are expected to improve learning outcomes whilst accommodating a greater diversity of pupils within their classrooms. Those who work in under-resourced schools with poor populations in low-income, fragile or highly unequal societies may perceive the task as beyond their capacities. When working conditions are unacceptable, many teachers will not rise to the challenges of their job but fall back on familiar rote teaching strategies and feel justified in taking unauthorised absence. Determining what constitutes acceptable conditions in different school contexts and ensuring these are maintained is an important component of policy that addresses teacher self-efficacy. This includes appropriate deployment of teachers, ensuring they have multi-grade preparation if they are to be placed in one-room schools or that they have the linguistic and cultural requirements for the schools in which they teach. Teachers will develop greater resilience in difficult contexts if their profession is recognised and valued and they feel themselves to be adequately prepared. However, this is not always the case, especially in situations where minimally prepared teachers are employed to deal with shortages. In these contexts, there is need to find ways to enhance teachers’ capabilities – for example, by encouraging the development of mentoring partnerships between experienced teachers and volunteer or contract teachers. In some Francophone countries of sub-Saharan Africa, such as Chad and Niger, which are expanding basic education from a low enrolment base, contract teachers necessarily make up more than half the work force in primary schools and are likely to remain a substantial proportion for at least a generation (Bonnet, 2007). Nevertheless, while shortages of teachers may justify the need to employ under prepared teachers, their use should not be purely driven by a need to cut costs (Pandey, 2006). Priority needs to be given to establishing proper employment legislation, a clear career structure for contract teachers, and relevant certified professional development opportunities (Duthilleul, 2005). Clear career structures, which reward commitment, expertise and leadership responsibilities and not just academic credentials, are likely to strengthen teacher professionalism. However, as Mulkeen (2010) observed in his study of eight subSaharan countries, many systems reward academic credentials, creating a situation where professional status is more strongly tied to academic qualifications than a commitment to teaching. Also, overly bureaucratic systems can diminish the value placed on the essential business of teaching children. As an extreme example, a study in India found that most teachers defined a motivated teacher as someone who, “comes to school every day, does what he is told and provides information the higher ups want” (Ramanachandran et al.,

84  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett 2005, p.38). On the other hand, in some Latin American countries, exceptional classroom teaching is recognised through teacher awards or invitations to share expertise with colleagues. This serves as an incentive for teachers working in demanding contexts at the same time as raising the public image of the profession (see Unda, 2002).

Teacher initial preparation, professional development and collegial support opportunities As noted above, teacher perceptions of self-efficacy and agency are related to how secure they feel about their knowledge base and their teaching strategies. And these in turn are closely related to their initial preparation and professional development opportunities, including the quality of their secondary school learning. Not only should teacher preparation provide grounding in relevant content knowledge and pedagogical skills but also an understanding and concern for social justice. However, serving teachers in many countries had their initial in-service training in residential teachers’ colleges characterised by authoritarian cultures. In a study of teacher education in six countries, Lewin and Stuart report that goals relating to professional responsibility and interpersonal skills were mostly left to the ‘hidden curriculum’: This may sometimes promote positive attitudes; for example, Malawi students noted the opportunity ‘to share ideas, work together and get to know people from other tribes and areas’ as one of the best things about college, and Ghanaian students appreciated some of the social and moral aspects of their training. On the other hand, the strict rules and authoritarian attitudes in many African colleges seem unlikely to develop independence, personal and social responsibility, or a sense of professional agency. (Lewin and Stuart 2003, p.74) Teacher training institutions can also take a lead in modelling and promoting democratic organisational cultures and practices for schools, as illustrated by Schweisfurth’s (2002) reflections on an initiative to promote understanding of democracy in a teacher education college in The Gambia. In order to understand social justice issues in education, pre-service and inservice teachers need to be challenged to bring their underlying beliefs to conscience and reflect on them critically. Hickling-Hudson (2011) describes how in her own practice, she sets out to disrupt student teachers’ preconceptions through exploring with them the legacies of empire, violent aspects of schooling and the politics of educational aid. In conjunction with practicum experiences that expose them to social difference and diversity, student teachers can be facilitated to recognise learners’ diverse socio-cultural identities and examine their own attitudes towards them. This may also occur through work in and with different communities involving small projects that centre on the analysis of local realities of schools and learners, practitioners and communities. These

Teacher professionalism and social justice  85 kinds of experiences have been built into in teacher education programmes that prepare students for work with minorities such as indigenous learners in Chile (Quilaqueo et al., 2005). Zeichner (2009) describes programmes at the University of California, Los Angeles, the University of York in Toronto and Pedagogia da Terra in Brazil where teacher education practicum experiences are specifically constructed so future teachers may experience and understand contexts with different racial and cultural composition. At the point when the middle classes were expanding in many OECD countries, teaching tended to attract people from low-income backgrounds aspiring to climb the social ladder (Lortie, 1975). A similar pattern has been observed in low-income countries where a large proportion of entrants to teacher training colleges have reported that their parents were not employed in the formal sector (Akyeampong and Stephens, 2002; Lewin and Stuart, 2003). Hence in low to middle-income contexts, teacher education could usefully facilitate critical analysis of the obstacles student teachers have encountered in their own educational journeys. Such awareness may enable teachers to support the growth of children and young people in different social and economic situations. Similarly, giving future teachers the opportunity to practice in different contexts will help them to develop a greater resilience and sense of selfefficacy in challenging postings. Such a focus should also be a key element in teacher professional development and in their collaborative work in schools. The principle of inclusion that applies to children’s participation in education, similarly applies to teachers’ access to professional growth opportunities. Gender balance in recruitment, and even more especially deployment to rural/urban settings, is a subject of much debate in mainstream education and development literature. There is also some concern over the recruitment of teachers from marginalised ethnic groups (for example, UNESCO, 2006; UNESCO, 2008). Mpokosa and Ndaruhutse (2008) note the under-representation of teachers with disabilities and consequent shortage of teachers able to sign for learners with hearing impairments. When it comes to professional development and promotion of serving teachers, teachers in remote postings are less likely to access opportunities. Clearly, it is logistically much more difficult to provide professional development opportunities when schools are sparsely distributed over wide areas, where communications infrastructure is poor, and travel is expensive and time-consuming. However, unless specific initiatives are targeted at providing these teachers with development opportunities and representation in national debate, a large number of them will continue to be less than professional in their practice.

Conclusion When it comes to developing education systems in low-income countries, there is a tendency for top-level planners to take a technocratic approach that focuses on the challenges of training, deploying and managing teachers within the limits of constrained budgets. Such an approach pays scant attention to the need

86  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett to create conditions that foster a robust sense of professional identity and commitment to social justice. Hence, the solution to teacher quality challenges is seen to lie only in such large-scale strategies as crash training programmes, creation of contract teacher posts and performance-related pay. Unless consideration is also given to those aspects of teacher education and management that shape teachers’ professional identity and sense of self-efficacy, these large structural schemes are likely to lead to only limited quality improvement. Nurturing a sense of professional teacher identity that includes a determination to work for social justice is not necessarily expensive but does require an understanding of institutional level practices and a willingness to work out, in collaboration with educational professionals, how to change these. It demands looking hard at not just the formal but also the hidden curriculum of teacher training institutions and working with teacher educators to ensure that these places are inclusive and foster reasoned public debate and respect between diverse socio-cultural groups. It demands looking at how the practicum is actually implemented and finding ways to support the development of student teachers as reflective practitioners able to work with diverse learners and in disadvantaged contexts. It demands supporting local and school level managers to be innovative leaders, ready to listen to and engage in reasoned debate with the teachers they manage. It demands creating legal frameworks that protect all teachers from exploitative contracts and provide them with effective political representation through functioning trade unions that are free from corruption. However, other changes entail costs and so tend only to be implemented in wealthy countries or countries like Cuba and, historically, South Korea, that choose to prioritise education (UNESCO, 2004). Foremost in importance is providing all entrants to the profession with an extended training and on-going professional development that offers them in-depth knowledge of subject matter, educational theory and social justice issues in education, as well as opportunities to develop and carry on developing advanced pedagogical and pastoral skills. The challenge of achieving Universal Primary Education in sub-Saharan Africa and other places, has led to the rapid introduction and roll out of distance education programmes for under-qualified teachers. Such programmes could be viewed as an opportunity to create modules that stimulate reflection on learners’ contexts, the forms of disadvantage they face and the appropriate instructional response. Another key area is the development of reward and remuneration structures that are sufficient to make teachers’ resilient to the challenges of educational change and difficult postings and that reward commitment, expertise and leadership. Whatever concerns may exist regarding the costs involved in raising teachers’ salaries, these need to be set against the ethical and practical implications of sending teachers, including contract teachers, to postings far from their established support networks with incomes that keep them close to or below the poverty line. Essentially, the task of improving education quality, as understood from a social justice perspective, is integrally linked with enabling teachers to be committed, accountable and reflective professionals.

Teacher professionalism and social justice  87

References Abbott, A. D. (1988) The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. ActionAid (2006) Cancelling the Caps: Why the EFA Movement Must Confront Wage Bill Caps Now, Cairo, ActionAid International. Aikman, S. (2011) ‘Educational and indigenous justice in Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 15–22. Avalos B. and de los Ríos, D. (2010). ‘Teacher identity construction in reform driven contexts: a Chilean study’, paper presented at the XIV WCCES, Istanbul, Turkey, June 2010. Available at (accessed 3 August 2011). Avalos, B. and Matus, C. (2010) La Formación Docente en Chile Desde una Óptica Internacional, Santiago, Ministry of Education. Ball, S. and Goodson, I. (1985) ‘Understanding teachers’ concepts and contexts’, in S. Ball and I. Goodson (eds) Teachers’ Lives and Careers, London and Philadelphia, The Falmer Press. Pp.1–26. Barrett, A.M. (2005) ‘Teacher identity in context: a comparison of Tanzanian with English primary school teachers’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol. Barrett, A.M. (2008) ‘Capturing the différance: primary school teacher identity in Tanzania’. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(5): 496–507. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P.C. and Verloop, N. (2004) ‘Reconsidering research on teacher professional identity’. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2): 107–128. Bennell, P. and Akyeampong, K. (2007) Teacher Motivation in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, London, Department for International Development UK [DFID]. Benveniste, L., Marshall, J. and Araujpo, M. C. (2008) Teaching in Cambodia, Washington DC: The World Bank and the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport, Royal Government of Cambodia. Castells, M. (1997) The Power of Identity, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers. Chisholm, L. and Leyendecker, R. (2008) ‘Curriculum reform in post-1990s subSaharan Africa’, International Journal of Educational Development, 28(2):195–205. Cox, S., Dyer, C., Robinson-Pant, A. and Schweisfurth, M. (eds) (2010) Children as Decision-makers in Education: Sharing Experiences across Cultures, London, Continuum. Croft, A. (2006) ‘Prepared for diversity? Teacher education for lower primary classes in Malawi’, in A.W. Little (ed.) Education for All and Multigrade Teaching: Challenges and Opportunities, Dordrecht, Springer. Pp.103–126. Day, C. (2008) ‘Committed for life? Variations in teachers’ work, lives and effectiveness’. Journal of Educational Change, 9(3): 243–260. Dellinger, A.B., Bobbett, J.J., Oliver, D.F. and Ellet, C.D. (2008) ‘Measuring teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. Development and use of the TEBS-Self’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24: 751–766. Duthilleul, Y. (2005) Lessons Learnt in the Use of Contract Teachers. Synthesis Report, Paris, IIEP/UNESCO. Education International (2004) ‘Resolution on the recruitment and retention of qualified teachers, Fourth World Congress of Education International, Porto Alegre (Brazil), 22–26 July 2004’. Available at: (accessed 18 March 2011).

88  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett Greene, M. (1998) ‘Introduction: Teaching for social justice’, in W. Ayers, J.A. Hunt and T. Quinn (eds) Teaching for Social Justice, New York, Teachers College Press. Pp. xxvii–xlvi. Goldstein, H. (2004) ‘Education for all: the globalization of learning targets’. Comparative Education, 40(1): 7–14. Govinda, R. and Josephine, Y. (2004) Para teachers in India: A Review. Paris: UNESCO/IIEP. Available at (accessed 1 February 2011). Hargreaves, L., Cunningham, M, Hansen, A. McIntyre, D., Oliver, C and Peel, T. (2007) ‘The Status of Teachers and the Teaching Profession in England: Views from Inside and Outside the Profession’. Final report of the Teacher Status Project. Nottingham, Department for Education and Skills, UK. Hedges, (2002) ‘The importance of posting and interaction with the education bureaucracy in becoming a teacher in Ghana’. International Journal of Educational Development, 22(3–4): 353–366. Hickling-Hudson, A. (2011) ‘Teaching to disrupt preconceptions: education for social justice in the imperial aftermath’. Compare 41(4): 453–465. Iliukhina, N. and Ratteree, B. (2009) ‘Employment and careers, teacher salaries, teaching and learning conditions’, paper prepared for the 10th Session of the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts on the Applications of the Recommendations Concerning Teaching Personnel, Paris, September 2009. IRC (2007) Teaching Well? Educational Reconstruction Efforts and Support to Teachers in Postwar Liberia, New York, IRC. Jansen, J. D. (2004) ‘Autonomy and accountability in the regulation of the teaching profession: a South African case study’, Research Papers in Education 19(1): 51–66. Kamunde, F.N. (2010) ‘The role of the headteacher in the implementation of free primary education in Kenya’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol. Kingdon, G. and Teal, F. (2007) ‘Does performance related pay for teachers improve student performance? Some evidence from India’, Economics of Education Review, 26(4): 473–486. Kirk, J. (2008) ‘Teacher management issues in fragile states: illustrative examples from Afghanistan and Southern Sudan’, background paper prepared for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009 – Overcoming Inequality: Why Governance Matters. Paris: UNESCO. Availableat (accessed 31 January 2011). Lewin, K.M. and Stuart, J.S. (2003) ‘Researching teacher education: new perspectives on practice, performance and policy. Multi-Site Teacher Education Research Project (MUSTER) synthesis report’, London, DFID. Liu, X. S. and Ramsey, J. (2008) ‘Teachers’ job satisfaction: analyses of the Teacher Follow-up Survey in the United States for 2000–2001’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5): 1173–1184. Lortie, D. (1975) Schoolteacher, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Mlama, P. (2005) ‘Gender and education for rural people’, paper presented at the Ministerial Seminar on Education for Rural People in Africa: Policy Lessons, Options and Priorities, Addis Ababa, September 2005. Available at (accessed 28 January 2011).

Teacher professionalism and social justice  89 Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C. and Barber, M. (2010) How the World’s Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting Better, McKinsey & Co. Mpokosa, C. and Ndaruhutse, S. (2008) Managing Teachers: The Centrality of Teacher Management to Quality Education. Lessons from developing countries, Reading and London, CfBT and VSO. Mulkeen, A. (2010) Teachers in Anglophone Africa: Issues in Teacher Supply, Training and Management, Washington DC, World Bank. Muralidharan, K. and Sundararaman, V. (2006) Teacher Incentives in Developing Countries: Experimental Evidence from India. Available at (accessed 3 August 2011). Ngcobo, T. and L. P. Tikly (2010) ‘Key dimensions of effective leadership for change: a focus on township and rural schools in South Africa’. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(2): 202–228. Novelli, M. (2009) Colombia’s Classroom Wars: Political Violence against Education Sector Trade Unions, Brussels, Education International. September 2009. Osborn, M. (2008) ‘Teacher professional identity under conditions of constraint’, in D. Johnson and R. Maclean (eds) Teaching: Professionalization, Development and Leadership, Dordrecht, Springer. Pp.67–81. Pandey, S. (2006) ‘Para-teacher scheme and quality education for all in India: policy perspectives and challenges for school effectiveness’. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32(3): 319–334. Pôle de Dakar (2009) Universal Primary Education in Africa: The Teacher Challenge, Dakar, UNESCO-BREDA. Quilaqueo, D., Quintriqueo, S. and Cárdenas, S. (eds) (2005) Educación, Currículum e Interculturalidad: Elementos sobre Formación de Profesores en Contexto Mapuche, Temuco, Chile, Universidad Católica de Temuco. Ramachandran, V., Pal, M., Jain, S., Shekar, S. and Sharma, J. (2005) Teacher Motivation in India, London, DFID. Rea-Dickins, P. and Scott, C. (2007) ‘Washback from language tests on teaching, learning and policy: evidence from diverse settings’. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 14(1): 1–17. Robalino, M. and Körner, A. (2005) Condiciones de Trabajo y Salud Docente. Estudios de Caso en Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, México, Perú y Uruguay, Santiago, Chile, UNESCO/OREALC. Robinson, N. and Gauri, V. (2010) ‘Education, labor rights and incentives: contract teacher cases in the Indian courts. Policy Research Working Paper 5365, July 2010’, Washington DC, World Bank. Save the Children UK (2008) Making Schools Inclusive: How Change Can Happen – Save the Children’s Experience, London, Save the Children. Schweisfurth, M. (2002) ‘Democracy and teacher education: negotiating practice in The Gambia’, Comparative Education, 38(3): 303–314. Sommers, M. (2005) Islands of Education. Schooling, Civil War and the Southern Sudanese (1983–2004), Paris, UNESCO/IIEP. Tabulawa, R. (2003) ‘International aid agencies, learner-centred pedagogies and political democratisation: a critique’. Comparative Education, 39(1): 7–26. Tanaka, C. (2010) ‘An exploration of teacher motivation: a case study of basic school teachers in two rural districts in Ghana’. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, School of Education, University of Sussex.

90  B. Avalos and A.M. Barrett Tenti Fanfani, E. (2005) La Condición Docente. Análisis Comparado de la Argentina, Brasil, Perú y Uruguay, Buenos Aires, Siglo Veintiuno Editores. Tomaševski, K. (2001) ‘Human Rights Obligations: Making Education Available, Accessible, Acceptable and Adaptable’. Right to Education Primers No. 3, Lund/ Stockholm: Raoul Wallenburg Institute/Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Unda, M. P. (2002) ‘The experience of teacher expedition and teacher networks: new modes of training’. Prospects, 32(3): 333–346. UNESCO (2008) Overcoming Inequality: Why Governance Matters. EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009, Paris and Oxford, UNESCO and Oxford University Press. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2006) Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needs for 2015, Montreal, UNESCO Institute for Statistics. van den Berg (2002) ‘Teachers’ meanings regarding educational practice’, Review of Educational Research, 72(4): 577–625. VSO (2002) ‘What Makes Teachers Tick? A Policy Research Report on Teachers’ Motivation in Developing Countries, London, VSO. Weber, E. (2007) ‘Globalization, “Glocal” development and teachers’ work: a research agenda’. Review of Educational Research, 77(3): 279–309. Welford, G. and Mosha, H. (2002) ‘Incentive grants, management training, and teacher change in Dar es Salaam’, in S.E. Anderson (ed.) Improving Schools through Teacher Development Case Studies of the Aga Khan Foundation Projects in East Africa, Lisse, Swets & Zeitlinger. Pp.185–224. Welmond, M. (2002) ‘Globalization viewed from the periphery: the dynamics of teacher identity in the Republic of Benin’. Comparative Education Review 46(1): 37–65. Zeichner, K. (2009) Teacher Education and the Struggle for Social Justice, New York, Routledge.

7 Quality and early childhood care and education Lessons from India and Ghana Rita Chawla-Duggan, Vrinda Datta and Kafui Etsey Introduction Early childhood has been on the international agenda for some time. Recognition has occurred through Education For All (EFA) conferences (Jomtien, 1990; Delhi, 1993; Amman, 1996; UNESCO, 2000), influential neuroscience research (e.g. the report of the Carnegie Institute’s Task Force 1994; Mary Young’s World Bank publication on early child development 1996) and a general consensus that the brain develops most rapidly in the first years of life alongside the view that environmental stimulation positively affects the developing brain (Shonkoff and Phillips, 2000). Additionally, longitudinal studies have shed light on the impact of early interventions, life experiences and parenting on long-term behaviour (Brooks-Gunn, Fuligni and Berlin, 2003) and the importance of preschool quality for child development (e.g. NICHD [National Institute of Childhealth and Human Development] Early Child Care Research Network, 2000; Sylva et al., 2004). Global mandates of child rights which are essentially concerned with the right to live and develop to one’s fullest potential have also gained impetus, although the implementation of a childrights approach within early childhood policies and practices is still in its infancy (Woodhead, 2009a, 2009b). Finally, there are the Dakar Declaration (UNESCO, 2000) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) (United Nations, 2000). The former includes the EFA goal of “Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children” (UNESCO, op. cit., p. 8) and five of the MDGs are related to the education, nutrition and health of young children. To culminate, the 2007 EFA Global Monitoring Report on Education for All (UNESCO, 2006b) was devoted to Early Childhood Care and Education1 (ECCE) stressing the importance of policy, finance and governance for promoting the quality of services (Rao and Sun, 2010). Despite the so-called “arrival of ECCE” (Myers, 2010) and increasing coverage rates worldwide, UNESCO (2010) claims that good quality early childhood services remain inaccessible to the majority of the world’s young children; and whilst ‘preschool’ may have become the fastest growing sector within the field of education, differences in the quality of preschool education

92  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. persist. They are rooted in differences in the social origins of young children and the urban and rural locations of settings. Considering the important role of ECCE in learning and education, the inability to participate in quality preschool education from the very start almost certainly disadvantages vulnerable and disadvantaged young children as a population, and as such has been named a “Zone of Exclusion” from the goal of Education for All (Lewin, 2007). Attention to quality in preschool therefore holds importance for social as well as educational reasons, and as such the scope of ECCE actually lies beyond the confines of preschooling. This is because all young children, and especially the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, require multiple needs to be met for ECCE quality which include their health, nutrition, learning and care. The chapter begins with an outline of existing theoretical approaches to ECCE quality and the added value that the EdQual framework provides. We then apply the EdQual definition of quality (see Tikly and Barrett, Chapter 2 in this book) to the analysis of ECCE policies in case studies from Maharashtra in India and from Ghana in Africa. The conclusion identifies issues that arise from our comparative analysis and potential areas upon which to focus for research, policy and programme development in ECCE quality.

Existing theoretical approaches to ECCE quality Current debates about ECCE quality are broadly represented through three theoretical approaches: human capital, post-modern and human rights. Human capital approaches have given policy makers a powerful economic rationale for focusing on ECCE (see, for example, Schweinhart, 2004, 2005). Investment in quality foundational years is associated with greater social returns – that is, returns across society – compared to post-basic levels that deliver relatively higher private returns (UNESCO 2006b). The most broadly disseminated, systematic, and mature body of data regarding the long-term effects of early childhood programmes comes from a small number of longitudinal evaluations of ‘compensatory’ programmes for children aged three to five from ‘disadvantaged’ backgrounds in the United States, Europe, and Australia (Myers 1992). The best known is the High/Scope Perry Pre-school programme of 1962–67 in Ypsilanti, Michigan (Schweinhart et al., 2004, 2005). Others include the Carolina Abecedarian Project (Barnett and Masse, 2007) and the Chicago Child–Parent Centres (Temple and Reynolds 2007). Comparable rigorous long-term evaluations of the quality of early childhood programmes in developing countries are less readily available (UNESCO 2007), although there have been more studies during the last ten years (Myers 2006; UNESCO 2007). The greater social return, yielded primarily through increased productivity and cost savings (Myers 1992), demonstrated in the studies cited, is the main rationale cited for public investment in early years at an international level. Early childhood educational research that draws upon a human capital theoretical approach in such studies views quality as universally defined; that is,

Quality and early childhood care and education  93 as inherent, absolute and objectively measurable (Myers 2006). By extension it sets criteria for quality, against which standards are set for evaluating early childhood provision. In its favour it argues that what, and to what end, children learn may vary but certain quality criteria apply across contexts (Siraj-Blatchford, 1999; Sylva et al., 2004). The Global Monitoring Report 2007 (UNESCO, 2006b) for example, lists: focusing on and offering support to parents in children’s earliest years; integrating educational activities with other services; providing relevant educational experiences during preschool years and easing the transition to primary school (Rao and Sun, 2010). Indeed Moss (2005) commends this coherence: Coherence involves shared beliefs, principles, and objectives across groups of people and fields of human endeavor. Its value lies in its contribution to solidarity: a relationship of shared understandings, responsibility and purpose that permits a sense of common identity and enables collective action to further shared interests and goals. Coherence is…a necessary condition for fighting injustice and inequality. (Moss 2005, p.1. cited in Myers 2006). However, the risk lies in coherence becoming a consensus that smothers difference or an imposed set of beliefs and goals expressing the interests and perspectives of a hegemonic group that leaves no space for diversity and creates, rather than resists, injustice and inequality (ibid). It is in this respect that studies about early childhood provision drawing upon human capital approaches, do not acknowledge context in terms of history, diversity, subjectivity and experience and uncertainty in a changing world (Moss and Pence 1994; Penn, 2005; Myers 2006), and researchers from this position may too often assume that the characteristics of children observed in one situated study are universal. Hence notions of developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) (Viruru 2001, p.20) have been promoted in early childhood provision. However, the DAP movement has been critiqued as grounded in Euro–American perspectives of learning and giving voice to a majority middle-class culture in the United States (ibid; Polakow, 1992). According to the alternative ‘postmodern approach’ (Dahlberg, Moss and Pence, 1999) quality is a socially constructed, contextually dependent concept, dependent on values, beliefs, and goals and, by association, it is context directed. Ontologically it emphasises multiple truths, uncertainty and the coexistence of many distinct points of view from which to describe reality (Dahlberg, Moss and Pence, 1999). Consequently, education quality can only be identified through stakeholder participation. Stakeholders’ participation in decisionmaking are a key component in the “discourse of meaning making” (Dahlberg, Moss and Pence 1999, p.106), a process involving dialogue and reflection grounded in personal experiences, difference and particular contexts to understand the meaning of ECCE quality. The rationale underpinning this alternative approach therefore proposes that a universal definition of quality

94  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. cannot accommodate the diversity and subjectivity that exists in our world. Certainly, if one starts from the premise that quality means different things to different people, then establishing one national definition of quality and a national set of standards is impossible. Consequently, one of the difficulties of this position is its operationalisation for the practical purposes of comparability (Myers, 2004). The basis for the human rights approach is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, with its four principles: “the right to survival and development, to non-discrimination, to respect for views and feelings, and the best interests of the child” as primary considerations (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1989, Articles 2, 6, 12). The child is no longer viewed as a recipient of services, beneficiary of protective measures, or a subject of social experiments (Woodhead, 2009a). Instead each child is entitled to ECCE and, by implication, caregivers, communities, and the State have a responsibility to realise that entitlement. The three theoretical positions individually offer valuable contributions to understanding the meaning of ECCE quality. They are respectively associated with the development of standards, an understanding of context, and a moral commitment to young children’s rights, and whilst they have been presented as mutually exclusive, given that for example, a view of quality which values diversity contrasts with one that, defines quality in terms of standardized results on international comparative tests (Myers 2005); within early childhood research there is a concern about the tension between positions and how they may be reconciled. Moss (2005) for example, has set out the tension between diversity (at the core of postmodernism) and coherence (a feature of the human capitalist approach) that can either breathe life and balance into, or unfortunately restrict, the process of defining and evaluating quality (Myers 2006, p.9). The problem therefore is how to move beyond the particular theoretical approaches and combine them into an integrated perspective. The EdQual framework builds on all three ways of thinking. Tikly and Barrett’s framework for researching educational quality combines Fraser’s notion of social justice (Fraser, 2008) and Sen’s (2009) capability approach (see Tikly and Barrett, chapter 2 in this volume). It is underpinned by the principles of relevance, democracy and inclusiveness, and is a context led model (Tikly, 2011). The quality of education depends on the three environments of policy, school and home/community (see Tikly and Barrett’s conclusion to this book). We draw upon the EdQual framework in order to explore how its conceptual application can overcome limitations of existing dominant theoretical positions and provide a basis for the development of national policies and programmes in ECCE. We illustrate the potential of the EdQual approach through the analysis of two case studies of ECCE provision, one from Maharashtra in India and one from Ghana. We focus on the application of Fraser’s (2008) three dimensions of ‘redistribution’, ‘recognition’ and ‘participation’ within the framework (see Tikly and Barrett, 2011). Redistribution is concerned with the ability of learners to access and benefit

Quality and early childhood care and education  95 from a quality education and potential outcomes that come from this (ibid). Recognition refers to the identification and acknowledging of the claims of historically marginalised groups (ibid). Finally, the notion of participation involves the ability to give voice to individuals and groups, by allowing them to actively participate in decision-making (ibid).

Case studies of Maharashtra and Ghana Maharshtra and Ghana both have similar development needs for their most vulnerable and disadvantaged populations of young children. These include: fighting infectious disease; tackling the major causes of malnutrition; and nurturing children in safe environments that enable them to be physically healthy, mentally alert, emotionally secure, socially competent, and able to learn. Both are concerned with issues of survival, protection and care, yet many of the same conditions of poverty and stress that previously put children at risk of dying continue to put them at risk of impaired physical, mental, social and emotional development in their earliest months and years (Myers, 1992). Both country contexts are therefore addressing MDGs by ensuring young children’s rights to go beyond ‘survival’ to include equitable entitlement to health, education, protection (from any form of abuse, neglect and discrimination) and equity in the provision of ECCE quality. We examine how government agencies in both contexts interpret ECCE and the strategies they use in order to achieve their goals. We explore ideological tensions in the two country contexts, how they are played out; and why there is some way to go to achieving ECCE quality, recognising that they are historically at different stages of ECCE policy and provision, accompanied by different models. The Maharashtra case study focuses upon the largest and most significant early childhood intervention programme in India, the Integrated Child Development Service (ICDS). Ghana does not have a similar formal intervention, since the formal provision of ECCE is a new development. The Integrated Child Development Service (ICDS) Initiated in 1975, ICDS was conceptualised in response to the National Policy for Children’s acknowledgement (GoI 1974) that while poverty alleviation and community development projects should continue, focused, child-centred interventions were required to address the inter-related needs of children and women from disadvantaged communities. The current policy aims to universalise ICDS throughout India, in line with EFA Goal 1 from Jomtien 1990 (Universal access to learning) (UNESCO, 2010) and EFA Goal 1 in the Dakar Framework for Action, 2000 (to expand ECCE) (UNESCO, 2010). Recognising that early childhood development constitutes the foundation for human development, ICDS is designed to promote the holistic development of children up to the age of six through strengthening the capacity of caregivers and communities, and improving access to basic services at the community level (GOI, 2000). The

96  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. programme provides an integrated approach for converging basic services for improved child care, early stimulation and learning, health and nutrition, water and environmental sanitation, targeting young children, expectant and nursing mothers, women and adolescent girls. It offers a powerful community-based outreach system that functions as the convergent interface between disadvantaged communities and other government programmes such as primary health care and education (ibid, 2000). It is delivered through integrated children’s centres (anganwadis) throughout India. In this chapter the focus is on Maharashtra, the second most populated state in India with 97 million inhabitants (9.7 crores, 43 per cent urban) (GOI [Government of India], 2001).

Political recognition of the importance of ECCE through governance In India, democratic participation has increased due to popular demand and legislative measures such as the passage of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts in 1992. Those changes promoted decentralisation, local governance, and women’s political participation and explain the democratic focus of ICDS. One of the intentions behind ICDS is that local governments directly supervise women and children’s development. In Maharashtra for example, local government bodies implement rural and tribal projects. This process allows programme contextualisation through the development of locally relevant strategies that enhance outcomes for women and young children. Being a large state, Maharashtra is faced with the challenges of addressing regional and district level differences. At the national level in 2006, ministerial responsibility for ECCE was transferred from the Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, to the Ministry for Women and Child Development. Their role is to provide centralised funding for the ICDS and they are mandated to promote the legislative and administrative decisions of the GOI to universalize ECCE along with other services for children, with quality (Kaul and Sankar, 2009). As a result of this shift in decision-making responsibility, the relationship between ECCE and primary education has weakened (Datta, 2001). Consequently, the contribution of ECCE to improving enrolment, retention and school readiness in primary education may not be so well-recognised in policy-making.

Expansion, quality standards and a recognition of children’s entitlement to ECCE A further tension that persists in the existing governance of ICDS is between the central and state levels of governance and the implication that this holds for addressing the principles of recognition in ECCE as part of children’s rights. Whilst central government holds responsibility for funding ICDS the state level has responsibility for its implementation. This restricts the state level’s ability to successfully develop supportive policies. In Maharashtra, whilst the central

Quality and early childhood care and education  97 government has contributed towards enhancing the honorarium for the ICDS workers and also provided financial support for supplementary nutrition elements of the ICDS programme, the rapid expansion of the ICDS programme, associated with a commitment towards universalisation has resulted in a high number of vacant posts (nearly 12 per cent of anganwadi posts were vacant in 2007). This has led to increasing pressures on existing human resources because those additional responsibilities arising from expansion fall to existing ICDS employees. In the state of Maharashtra then, universalisation in terms of expansion has not created the necessary conditions at state and district programme levels to guarantee young children’s rights to a quality ECCE. One result of this lack of recognition is poor quality in terms of standards and this has especially affected the preschool component of the ICDS (World Bank, 2004; Citizens’ Initiative for the Rights of Children Under Six, 2006).

Redistribution through targeted provision ICDS targets low-income tribal, rural, and urban populations and its projects are sanctioned on the basis of population distributions in these areas, identifying the neediest communities, in line with the principle of redistribution. Each ICDS project aims to cover about 100,000 people in each of the rural and urban areas and 35,000 in tribal areas. Of the 451 ICDS projects in Maharashtra, 66 are located in tribal areas, 297 in rural areas and 88 in urban locations, covering about 62 per cent of the 0–6 year olds in the state. There are also 7,490 minianganwadis in smaller communities in remote areas. Access to early years’ provision is therefore appropriately recognised and redistributed within the ICDS programme, in terms of provision for a range of different marginalised communities at the state and local level. In its Tenth Five Year Plan (2002– 2007) the GoI made slums in urban/semi-urban areas a priority, followed by tribal and backward rural areas. In Maharashtra this step was considered essential as almost 2.6 million (26 lakh) families in urban areas live below India’s poverty line, with little or no access to basic amenities, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates in women and young children. It has also been noted that the use of ICDS services in urban areas such as Mumbai, is affected by the wider options that are available to parents (Datta, 2001). For example, when anganwadis are set up in homes, the programme’s provision is more likely to be organised flexibly with irregular delivery. In such situations, parents prefer to send their children to private, unregulated fee paying preschools and only make use of the healthcare and nutrition elements of the ICDS programme. So whilst there is provision for marginalised groups and communities, there is poor uptake of the programme within the urban context, and the private sector is considered preferable to the public sector by many parents.

Participation: women and community

98  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. Whilst the ICDS is a community-based program, it is also a focal point for women’s development in families through its promotion of female literacy, family planning, and income generation activities. The ICDS worker helps mothers to build their capabilities for child care, through home visits, group meetings and the maintenance of their children’s developmental records. ICDS has influenced the formation of self-help groups and also mobilised women to consider alternative livelihoods. Such activities increase the capabilities of families to provide for their children’s needs, lower their dependency on welfare programmes, and also develop greater understanding of children’s needs by wider community members. Since the ICDS is also a village level programme, local authorities participate, support and guide its functioning. In this respect, the ICDS can be seen as a change agent at the village level where the village community context can act as an enabling environment for ECCE quality through enhanced maternal capability. Whilst the influence of ICDS on women’s mobilisation is clear, it would be a stronger testament to the principles of participation if we could demonstrate the reverse influence of mothers and communities on design and decision-making within ICDS. This brief overview identifies some of the tensions currently in existence within the ICDS programme in Maharashtra: related to the role of governance in the recognition of ECCE, the presence of alternative providers in the urban context as a site where redisdistribution is of concern, and to possibilities of maternal participation in the design and development of ICDS. The next section turns to the case study of Ghana. Ghana: ECCE Provision and Policy Ghana has a population of approximately 18.4 million, of which 64 per cent live in rural areas. The country has gone though several periods of political turmoil before arriving at its present democratic form of government (Pagano, 1999). The urban–rural divide within the country is significant in terms of early childhood systems of care and provision (ibid). Traditionally, delivery of childcare, health nutrition, early education, and family support has been through the family, community or kindergartens (Aidoo, 2008). More recently, Ghana has seen the development of centre-based provision in the peri-urban and urban areas as a result of the increasing mobility of families, women’s increased participation in the formal economy and policy changes in education.

Political recognition of the importance of ECCE through governance The Government of Ghana has taken steps to promote ECCE as part of wider educational developments and to satisfy international goals. To promote and achieve EFA goals, it has developed an Education Strategic Plan (2003–2015), which says all primary schools should provide two years (for ages four to six) of fee-free kindergarten (KG) schooling from 2015 as part of an extended

Quality and early childhood care and education  99 compulsory basic education cycle (Government of Ghana, 2004). As this initiative is part of the ‘free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (fCUBE)’ policy introduced in September 1995, it remains under the governance of the Ghana Education Service (GES). Meanwhile, the Ministry of Women and Children’s Affairs (MOWAC) is responsible for a National Early Childhood Development policy (Government of Ghana, 2004) in integrated nursery settings concerned with children’s cognitive and physical development, including immunisation and nutrition. There is therefore a two-tier policy directive in operation in Ghana; one that addresses KG preschooling as a part of primary education from the age of four and another that addresses the integrated needs of young children including nursery provision leading up to KG schooling. The National Early Childhood Development policy aims to protect children’s rights to develop their full cognitive, emotional, social and physical potential stating that “this relatively new approach promotes and protects the right of the young child to survival, growth and development” (GoG 2004, p.2). Whilst there is a clear recognition of the importance of the rights of the child, the policy does not explicitly address ‘quality’, focusing instead on providing a rationale, policy goals, objectives and targets, institutional arrangement, roles and responsibilities, implementation strategies; and costs and financial implications (Boakye et al., 2008).

Agencies of governance and the division between care and education The Global Monitoring Report 2007 (UNESCO, 2006b) drew attention to the need for good governance in order to achieve EFA Goal 1, but one of the major challenges to the development of ECCE is the lack of collaboration and coordination between principal agencies of governance (ibid). In Ghana, these include MOWAC, GES and Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare (MESW). The Department of Social Welfare is responsible for registers and regulates all state care centres, crèches and nurseries, whilst the GES holds responsibility for teaching, learning, curriculum development and the payment of salaries to nursery practitioners and KG school teachers within the state sector. MOWAC is the umbrella organisation with responsibility for overseeing the activities of GES and Social Welfare. At the moment, there is a need for clear-cut roles and responsibilities between the sectors in order to avoid confusion in the regulation and provision of services. Currently, governance divides the provision of care and education, each rooted in different views of children’s needs. Whilst Social Welfare is primarily associated with an integrated approach to child development with multiple needs but emphasises care as its goal, GES sees preparation for primary school entry as its primary goal. It is therefore more engaged with the school context. This poses potential risks because early childhood education differs from the process of schooling, as young children do not cease to have multiple needs after the age of four. Schools, whose goals are scholastic, are not always in a position to look after the

100  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. needs of very young children (Cerisara, 1999; Goldberg, Schultz and Piel, 1996; Scarr and Weinberg, 1996). The EdQual framework represents this diagrammatically by three circles representing enabling environments (the policy, school and home contexts) that need to be brought together (see Figure 14.1 in Tikly’s conclusion to this volume). A lack of co-ordination at the national level of governance constitutes a major obstacle to eliminate the dichotomy between care and education (Freitas et al., 2008). The EdQual framework advocates greater engagement with the home/community context, to address the potential risks.

Redistribution through expansion and universalisation School effectiveness research (e.g. Yu and Thomas, 2008) highlights the role that certain inputs play in the development of education quality as they impact on equitable learning outcomes for disadvantaged learners, a position partly informed by human capital approaches. In Ghana access to an ‘appropriate syllabus’, suitably trained teachers and investment in infrastructure are amongst the key inputs equated with the improvement of early KG school learning under the fCUBE programme. A centralised curriculum is intended to ensure that ‘appropriate’ content is delivered by KG schoolteachers. KG teacher training issues have been addressed through the selection of seven diploma-awarding teacher-training colleges and the introduction of ECCE programmes in two universities (the University of Education, Winneba and the University of Cape Coast). One consequence of the recognition of the importance of early years within national policy is a general increase in enrolment in KG (both private and state) by 38.5 per cent in 2005 compared to previous academic years. In terms of its implications for equity, the increase in enrolment in state KG was higher (71 percent) compared to a reduction in enrolment (25 per cent) in private KG provision (Adamu-Issah, Elden, Forson and Schrofer, 2007), suggesting a flow from private to state provision when state provision becomes available. Possible explanations for this occurrence are that it is because private is relatively costly or that quality is perceived to be lower in the private sector. Perhaps the most troubling area of concern in the development of ECCE centres and KG education in Ghana concerns the urban–rural divide, reinforced by a lack of basic inputs in rural areas. Existing problems in the primary sector, which include under-resourcing and inequitable distribution of resources (UNESCO, 2006a), are in danger of being extended to the kindergarten cycle. Whilst there is ample evidence to show that suitably qualified practitioners for example, play an important role in the raising of quality standards as they impact on outcomes for disadvantaged learners, at the present time, a number of untrained KG and nursery practitioners are employed in rural areas. Class sizes remain large and in most rural schools there is no assistance for the untrained practitioners. In most rural ECCE centres and KG classes, the adult–child ratio remains at 1:30 or 1:50. These are difficulties associated with rapid expansion

Quality and early childhood care and education  101 and the problems of one goal, universalisation, that takes little account of different starting points for different contexts and populations (Lewin, 2007). This leads to low quality and hence can be unsustainable as it escalates drop-out rates and repetition (ibid; Rao and Sun, 2010).

Recognition and Relevance to Socio-Cultural Contexts within the ECCE Curriculum The development of education quality depends on the wider context of debate, accountability, assessment and monitoring of quality, as part of policy development and the development of a relevant and inclusive curriculum and pedagogy. Within the early years’ policy provision in Ghana guideline documents set quality criteria within KG contexts. However, current guidelines fail to address key indicators of quality highlighted in research on ‘effective’ early years’ provision (Siraj-Blatchford, 1999; Sylva et al., 2004), including indicators associated with developmentally appropriate practice (DAP). DAP broadly refers to the need to design learning environments founded on developmental psychology theory and certain (usually Piagetian) theories of development (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp and Copple, 1997). It has been critiqued for privileging certain ways of knowing that do not recognise the diverse qualities of children and their families in a global context (Yelland and Kilderry, 2005) and, as such, risks failing to be inclusive. It is grounded in Euro–American perspectives of learning and as a cognitive psychology development paradigm there are claims that it has assisted in the perpetuation of white middle-class views of the world and how these can be universally achieved (ibid, 2005). As such it denies legitimacy to the experiences of other people, especially those in low-income countries (Viruru, 2001). Despite these criticisms, DAP is considered by professionals in Ghana to provide valuable insights for provision of ECCE quality in Ghana but one which, to be relevant, needs adapting to the socio-cultural context. The issues of relevance in terms of culturally and linguistically appropriate practices are currently being debated with respect to ECCE pedagogy in Ghana amongst stakeholders from various organisations involved in KG programmes. The intention is to finalise contextually-relevant standards of quality within document guidelines (GoG 2003), which will be used to license KG institutions in the future. Clearly then, there is strong concern in Ghana to develop better learning outcomes through the development of standards, which are made accountable through licensing, but also to contextualise pedagogical practice so that is relevant through a recognition of young children’s needs and therefore responsive to their socio-cultural identities, in order that they feel valued. Such issues are currently being addressed through dialogue and debate.

Participation: school-community/parent relations and quality

102  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. A key process for ensuring quality education is the linking of home and school. In Ghana, existing quality issues of poor relations between some primary schools and parents/community are in danger of being extended to the KG cycle. The ability to establish relationships of trust with mothers especially is a potential strength of the social welfare sector’s approach with its emphasis on care as its goal in child development. However, headteachers in Ghanaian rural schools, have expressed strong concerns about the lack of parental engagement, for example many parents fail to attend Parent–Teacher Association meetings, in order to discuss their young children’s educational progress (Etsey, 2009). This could be a consequence of the perception that schooling is irrelevant or of low quality. Clearly, this presents a challenge to participation and hence, also to relevance. The development of participatory processes that facilitate changes in attitudes towards the value of ECCE will be central in order to rise to this challenge. In summary, three main issues face the development of quality ECCE in Ghana. First its divisions in governance with a two-tier system split between different government bodies may affect its ability to be recognised in terms of being responsive to the needs of vulnerable young children disadvantaged by ‘poverty’. Principal agencies could start to draw on each other’s strengths in order to avoid the risks associated with the lack of collaboration between enabling environments, and therefore recognise those needs, which include care and education. Second, the challenge of rapid expansion associated with universalisation of KG schooling under the fCUBE policy, coupled with underresourcing particularly in rural areas, is in danger of exacerbating existing inequalities in the basic schooling system rather than achieving equitable redistribution. Finally, the inability to establish trust between home and schoolbased KG environments undermines meaningful participation in decisionmaking. This highlights the importance of drawing on the relative strengths of the social welfare approach when establishing KG programmes. Ghana is at an early stage in its development of ECCE policy. However, a lengthy participatory process of diverse stakeholder review in its policy development has resulted in improved policy and quality, and made the process more participatory, with an increased sense of ownership (Boakye et al., 2008). Participation in policy making will help to ensure that the social justice principles of recognition and redistribution are also observed in ECCE in Ghana.

Conclusion A social justice perspective can provide a new way of thinking about ECCE quality in the development context and assist in the identification of research areas and policy-making at the micro level. In examining how Maharashtra and Ghana have come to view ECCE and the policy frameworks developed to achieve their goals, one of the strongest ideological tensions relates to the purposes of ECCE and in particular, whether its main goal is to meet multiple

Quality and early childhood care and education  103 or solely cognitive needs. Our comparative analysis has shed light on the view that the approach taken to identify and achieve those goals is dependent on policy context and existing governance structures. Additionally, when we think about young children’s learning, questions are raised about what children should learn (Katz, 2002), what their needs are and how they are best met. These are not straightforward questions associated with the purely cognitive needs of young children and in our view there are no universal answers. But grappling with them will assist in making strategic decisions to facilitate the development of quality ECCE in terms of standards and equality of outcome. The existing equity difficulties within both country contexts make it even more challenging to reach the goals of a quality ECCE. In countries faced with equity challenges related to the recognition of gender, ethnicity and especially poverty, young children become the most disadvantaged and are least likely to have access to a quality early childhood programme (DfID, 2009). ICDS is acting to address existing social inequalities. Ghana’s policy, commendable in the fact that it has created schooling opportunities for young children who might otherwise have been excluded from primary grade one, risks exacerbating existing inequalities by building on school infrastructure that is already distributed unequally. If the home is a site which produces and reproduces wider economic, political and cultural inequalities (Tikly, 2011; see also Chapter 14), so too are ECCE settings. From a social justice perspective, it is imperative to identify, understand and break down barriers to participation and belonging, enabling young children and families to access learning. The process facilitates the development of strategies that address learning gaps and creates enabling learning environments for a quality early childhood experience, so that disadvantage is not exacerbated and that inequity and educational poverty are not transmitted to the next generation (Rao and Sun, 2010). Such issues are more commonly addressed under the umbrella of inclusion (UNESCO, 2010), with questions about how young children are helped to learn, achieve and participate fully in their education (Florian, 2007). At the wider global level, the purposes of ECCE in Ghana and in Maharashtra are aligned with international goals. At the national-programme level, policies for achieving these goals and how resources are used, are ideologically influenced by notions of inclusiveness, relevance and democracy, but in practice, both countries experience different sets of barriers to the achievement of quality ECCE associated with the principles of social justice. Our analysis suggests that in applying the EdQual three contexts model and Fraser’s three dimensions of social justice to education quality in early childhood, it is possible to identify areas for research and development. These are first the interpretation and implementation of the early years’ curriculum, its associated purposes and theoretical underpinnings; and second, the social influences on young children’s learning, particularly relating to the enabling relationships between the home, school and community environments. Tikly’s (see the concluding chapter to this book) framework of interacting enabling environments is particularly pertinent for ECCE where interventions are delivered not just through formal institutions

104  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. but also directly into the home/community environments. This conceptual approach provides a way to theorise links between education and ECCE and will reposition how the MDGs are perceived and applied in the development of quality ECCE programmes. It highlights the role of ECCE in contributing to the second MDG of universal primary education. It also highlights the need for micro –policy-making that allows for local contextualisation of ECCE programmes, so that they are responsive to the diversity of needs within a single country or, in the case of large countries, at the state level.

Note 1 We use the term ECCE as synonymous with Early Childhood Care and Development (ECCD), which encompasses all the supports necessary for a child’s survival, protection and care to ensure optimal development from birth to age eight (Evans et al., 2000), in order to place child care programmes, interventions, and preschools into a broad early childhood framework.

References Adamu-Issah, M., Elden, L., Forson, M. and Schrofer, T. (2007) ‘Achieving Universal Primary Education in Ghana by 2015 : Reality or a Dream’, UNICEF Working Paper, June 2007. Available at (accessed 4 August 2011). Aidoo, A.A. (2008) ‘Positioning ECD nationally: trends in selected African countries’, in M. Garcia, A. Pence and J.L. Evans (eds) Africa’s Future, Africa’s Challenge, Washington, DC, the World Bank. Pp.29–48. Barnett, W.S., and Masse, L.N (2007) ‘Early childhood program design and economic returns: Comparative benefit-cost analysis of the Abecedarian program and its policy implications’. Economics of Education Review, 26(1) pp.113–125. Boakye, J.K.A., Etse, S., Adamu-Issah, M., Moti-Medha, D., Matjila, J. and Shikwambi, S. (2008) ‘ECD policy: a comparative analysis in Ghana, Mauritius and Namibia’, in M. Garcia, A. Pence and J.L. Evans (eds) Africa’s Future, Africa’s Challenge, Washington, DC, World Bank. Pp.169–185. Bredekamp, S. (1987) Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8, Washington DC, National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bredekamp, S. and Copple, C. (1997) Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs, Washington DC, National Association for the Education of Young Children.. Brooks-Gunn, J., Fuligni, A.S. and Berlin, L.J. (eds) (2003) Early Child Development in the 21st Century: Profiles of Current Research Initiatives, New York, Teachers College Press. Carnegie Task Force on Meeting the Needs of Our Youngest Children (1994) Starting Points: Meeting the Needs of Our Youngest Children, New York, Carnegie Corporation of New York. Cerisara, A.B. (1999) ‘Educar e cuidar: por onde anda a educação infantil?’. Perspectiva, 22: 11–22. Citizens’ Initiative for the Rights of Children Under Six (2006), Focus on Children under Six, New Delhi, Citizens’ Initiative for the Rights of Children Under Six.

Quality and early childhood care and education  105 Dahlberg, G., Moss, P. and Pence, A. (1999) Beyond Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care: Postmodern Perspectives, London, Falmer Press. Datta, V. (2001) ‘A study of urban early childhood programmes’, report sponsored by UNICEF. Etsey, K. ‘High Quality Early Childhood Education: The missing pieces in Ghana’s Early Childhood Education (ECE)’, paper presented at the University of Cape Coast, 2009. Evans, J., with Myers, R.G. and Ilfeld, E. (2000) Early Childhood Counts: A Programming Guide on Early Childhood Care for Development, Washington, DC, World Bank. Florian, L. (2007) ‘ Reimagining special education’, in L. Florian (ed.), The Sage Handbook of Special Education, London, Sage Publications. Fraser, N. (2008) Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World, Polity Press, Cambridge. Goldberg, L., Schultz, T.W., and Piel, M. (1996) ‘Three commentaries on the proposals’, The Future of Children, 6(2): 137–143. Government of Ghana (2003) Education Strategic Plan 2003–2015, Volume 1: Policy, Targets and Strategies, Accra: Ministry of Education. Available at . Government of Ghana (2004) Early Childhood Care and Development Policy, Accra: Ministry of Women and Children’s Affairs. Government of India (2000) Achievements, Challenges, Aims and Strategies, New Delhi, The Government of India. Government of India (2001) Census of India. Available at (accessed 26 October, 2008). Government of India (n.d.) Tenth Five Year Plan (2002–2007), Volume II: Sectoral Policies and Programs, New Delhi, Planning Commission, Government of India. Government of India (1974) National Policy for Children, No.1–14/74-CDD- New Delhi the 22nd August, 1974, New Delhi, The Government of India). Katz, L. (2002) ‘A developmental approach to the curriculum in the early years’, in A. Pollard (ed.) Readings for Reflective Teaching, London, Continuum. Pp.146–149. Kaul, V. and Sankar, D. (2009) Early Childhood Education and Care in India, New Delhi, National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA). Lewin, K. (2007) ‘Diversity in convergence: access to education for all’. Compare, 37(5): 577–599. Moss, P. and A. Pence (eds.) (1994) Valuing Quality in Early Childhood Services: New Approaches to Defining Quality. New York, Teachers College Press. Moss, P. (2005) “Diversity and Coherence”. A paper presented at the 40th Rosa Sensat Summer School, Barcelona, Spain. (Mimeo) cited in Myers. R.G. (2006), ‘Quality in program of early childhood care and education (ECCE)’ Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2007, Strong foundations: early childhood care and education. Available at Myers, R. (1992) The Twelve who Survive, London,Routledge. Myers, R.G. (2004) ‘In search of quality in programmes of early childhood care and education (ECCE)’, paper commissioned for Education For All Global Monitoring Report 2005. Available at (accessed 4 August 2011)

106  R. Chawla-Duggan et al. Myers. R.G. (2006) ‘Quality in program of early childhood care and education (ECCE)’. Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2007, Strong foundations: early childhood care and education. Available at Myers, R. G. (2010) ‘Reflections on the use of the Global Development Reports with an emphasis on reports containing information about early childhood care and development’, Norrag news online, NN43: 52–54. Available at (accessed 19 June 2011). NICHD (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) Early Child Care Research Network (2000) ‘Characteristics and quality of child care for toddlers and preschoolers’. Applied Developmental Science, 4: 116–135. Office of the United Nations High Commission for the Rights of the Child (1989) United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, New York, United Nations. Pagano, A. (1999). ‘Strategies to strengthen early childhood development programs in Ghana, West Africa’. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 20(2): 121– 124. Polakow, V. (1992) ‘Deconstructing the discourse of care: young children in the shadows of democracy’, in S. Kessler and B. B. Swadener (eds), Reconceptualising the early childhood Curriculum: Beginning the dialogue, New York, Teachers college press, Pp.123–48 Penn, H. (2005) Unequal Childhoods: Young Children’s Lives in Poor Countries, London and New York, Routledge. Rao, N. and Sharma, A. (2002) ‘Early childhood services in India: challenges and prospects for their development’, in L. K. S. Chan and E. Mellor (eds), International developments in early childhood services, New York, Peter Lang. Pp.97–117. Rao, N. and Sun, J. (2010) ‘Early childhood care and education in the Asia–Pacific region: moving towards Goal 1’, WCECCE Asia Pacific Regional Report. Available at (accessed 13 October 2010). Scarr, S. and Weinberg, R.A. (1986) ‘The early childhood enterprise: care and education of the young’. American Psychologist, 41(10): 1140–1146. Schweinhart, L.W. (2004) ‘The High/Scope Perry preschool study through age 40: summary, conclusions, and frequently asked questions’, Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation. Available at (accessed 4 August 2011). Schweinhart, L. J., Montie, J., Xiang, J., Barnett, W. S., Belfield, C. R. and Nores, N. (2005) Lifetime Effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through Age 40, Ypsilanti, Mich., High/Scope Press. Sen, A. (2009) The Idea of Justice, London, Penguin. Shonkoff, J. P. and Phillips, D. (2000) From Neurons to Neighbourhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development, Washington, DC, National Academy Press. Siraj-Blatchford, I. (1999) ‘Early childhood pedagogy: practice, principles and research’, in P. Mortimore (ed.) Understanding Pedagogy and its Impact on Learning, London, Paul Chapman. Pp.20–45. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E.C., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Taggart, B. (2004) The Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE) Project: Findings from pre-school to end of Key Stage 1, London, Department for Education and Skills/ Institute of Education, University of London.

Quality and early childhood care and education  107 Temple, J. A., & Reynolds, A. J. (2007). ‘Benefits and costs of investments in preschool education: Evidence from the Child–Parent Centers and related programs’. Economics of Education Review, 26(1), 126–144. Tikly, L. (2011) ‘Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in lowincome countries’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 1–23. Tikly, L. and Barrett, A. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 3–14. United Nations (2000) United Nations Millennium Declaration, Document A/ RES/55/2, New York, United Nations. UNESCO (2000) The Dakar Framework for Action: Education for All – Meeting our Collective Commitments, World Education Forum, Dakar, Senegal 26–28 April. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO (2006a) Ghana Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) Programmes, Geneva: UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Available at (accessed 4 August 2011). UNESCO (2006b) Strong Foundations: Early Childhood Care and Education. Global Monitoring Report 2007, Paris, UNESCO. UNESCO (2007) ‘Good governance of early childhood care and education: lessons from the 2007 EFA Global Monitoring Report’, UNESCO policy briefs on early childhood No. 40, Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO (2010) EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching The Marginalized. Paris, UNESCO. Viruru, R. (2001) Early Childhood Education: Postcolonial Perspectives from India, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Woodhead, M. (2009a) ‘Pathways through early childhood education in Ethiopia, India and Peru: rights, equity and diversity’, Young Lives Working Paper 54, London, Department for International Development. Woodhead, M., Ames, P., Vennam, U., Abebe, W. and Streuli, N. (2009b) Equity and Quality? Challenges for Early Childhood and Primary Education in Ethiopia, India and Peru, The Hague, Bernard van Leer Foundation. World Bank (2004) ‘Snakes and ladders: factors influencing successful primary school completion for children in poverty context’, report prepared for South Asia Human Development Sector, South Asia Region, September 2004. New Delhi, World Bank. Yelland, N.J. and Kilderry, A. (2005) ‘Against the tide: new ways in early childhood education’, in N.J. Yelland (ed.) Critical Issues in early childhood, Buckingham, Oxford University Press. Pp.1–13. Young, M. E. (1996) Early child development: Investing in the future, Washington, DC, World Bank. Yu, G. and Thomas, S. (2008) ‘Exploring school effects across southern and eastern African school systems and in Tanzania’, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(3): 283–305.

8 The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa Does it advance the quality agenda? Yusuf Sayed and Rashid Ahmed Introduction South African education has witnessed different attempts to engage with quality and one of the most recent policy attempts is the National Department of Education’s Action Plan 2014 (DOE [Department of Education], 2010). It is an attempt to respond to some of the challenges in South African Education and, more broadly, it can be viewed as part of the policy mapping and restructuring of the Zuma presidency that witnessed changes in the Education Ministry. Drawing from some of the more recent reviews of education quality (Tikly and Barrett, 2007; Barrett, Chawla-Duggan, Low, Nickel and Ukpo, 2006) we evaluate this attempt to engage with education quality and identify two related questions for our analysis. First, we focus on how quality is defined in policy texts Specifically, we examine how the conceptualisation of quality in the text relates to current approaches to education quality. Second, we evaluate the processes the document identifies to improve quality. The focus here is on which processes are identified in the text, the extent to which they address current challenges in South African education and how they map onto the broadened conceptualisation of quality that we articulate. The exploration of current education reform efforts to improve quality in South Africa provides an illuminating account of the disjuncture between policy intention and practice as well as highlighting a narrowing of the notion of education quality to testing learners on a limited range of learning outcomes. Whilst these are important, as this chapter argues, there is a need to ensure that student learning includes other education aims such as citizenship, tolerance, and respect – aspects which are ignored in current global education and development discourses. This chapter is divided into three main sections. In the first section we selectively review the literature and present our conceptualisation of quality. The second section provides an overview of South African policy activity in the postapartheid period. In this section we attempt to place the plan in an historical context and identify the major approaches to education quality in South Africa. The focus in the third section is on the Action Plan 2014 (DOE, 2010). Our analysis locates it within the South African policy trajectory and focuses on how issues of quality are addressed in the text. We conclude with a discussion of the

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  109 key issues emerging from the South African experience and how these resonate with global attempts to engage with education quality. The focus on quality in more recent scholarship has highlighted both the contestation and complexity in defining quality (O’ Sullivan, 2006; Barrett et al., 2006; Alexander, 2008; Tikly and Barrett, 2007; Tikly, 2011). These debates significantly broaden our conceptualisations of quality. The broadened conceptualisation of quality locates quality within a social justice approach to education that moves beyond simply an emphasis on human rights. It defines educational goals very broadly in terms of human capabilities and emphasises aspects like ‘participation’, ‘redistribution’ and ‘recognition’ (Barrett et al., 2006; Nussbaum, 2006; Tikly and Barrett, 2009). It is the social justice approach to education quality that we draw on in particular because it significantly broadens the quality lens and the aspects highlighted have particular relevance for the South African context. Participation in the social justice framework counters the dominant, top-down managerial discourse on participation. In the South African context it speaks to the shift from vigorous civil society participation to the current managerial discourse on participation. South African education is marked by enormous inequities and ‘redistribution’ is relevant for addressing the challenges associated with these inequities. South African education is characterised by racial division that,excludethat excludes the majority and ‘recognition’ is helpful for extending this to the diverse contexts and changing forms of marginalisation in South Africa. The broadened conceptualisations locate quality as a multi-dimensional construct with complementary dimensions (Nikel and Lowe, 2010). This multidimensional conceptualisation also suggests contradictions and complexity with the possibility that progress in some areas can set in motion processes that undermine quality in other areas (Sayed and Ahmed, 2011). The volume of scholarship on what can be done to improve quality is out of step with this multi-dimensional conceptualisation. These dimensions (like equity) are either not considered to be part of the process to improve quality or considered as peripheral to the quality endeavour. Furthermore, when these processes are considered they are framed within narrower parameters. For example, the technocratic framing of participation as governance is more restricted than the debates around participation present in approaches like the social justice approach. Our analysis attempts to locate processes of educational improvement within a broader, multi-dimensional conceptualisation of quality. The 2005 EFA Global Monitoring Report (UNESCO, 2004), which focuses on quality, identifies some of the key processes associated with quality. There is an acknowledgement that outcomes are influenced by knowledge and infrastructure, school management and governance, human and physical resources, an enabling environment and education sector policy, all of which should revolve around the central teaching-learning dyad. Alexander (2008) argues that these processes should not be reduced to a school effectiveness framework which conceptualises quality as input or outcome without sufficient attention to process or context. The challenge however, is to retain the focus on

110  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed the teaching-learning dyad, while simultaneously acknowledging the complex relationship between all the processes involved in educational outcomes. We selectively review some of the literature that focuses on what can be done to improve quality. The current global focus on teacher training reinforces the idea that teachers remain central to any quality agenda (UNESCO, 2004; O’Sullivan, 2006; Barber and Mourshed, 2007; Tatto, 2007; Larsen, 2010). Scholarship revolves around two axes, teacher competencies, i.e. the ability to interpret and implement curricula guidelines; and factors influencing teacher competence, like teacher motivation, conditions of service and challenges facing teachers like HIV/AIDS. The consensus is that teachers do matter, but there is less consensus about what aspects of teaching matter (Rivkin, Hanushek and Kain, 2005; Barber and Mourshed, 2007). Avalos and Barrett (forthcoming) conceptualise teacher professionalism broadly as one which encompasses aspects such as teacher status, self-efficacy perceptions, professional identity and policy, teaching contexts and professional development opportunities. They significantly broaden teacher boundaries by a consideration of teaching for social justice. In terms of curricula and pedagogy, the central questions revolve around which curricula and which pedagogical approaches produce the best outcomes. We focus on the extent to which current curricula changes are in step with the broader conceptualisation of quality. The distinction in the literature between what is basic and absolutely necessary and what is basic and desirable (IBE [International Bureau of Education], 2006) is helpful. By defining absolutely necessary learning “…essential to fostering the personal and social development of the student, allowing them to carry out their life projects and facilitating social inclusion…” (IBE, 2006, p.2), possibilities for aligning curricula with social justice concerns emerge. In terms of pedagogical approaches, these have been polarised between teacher-centred, placing students in a passive role, and child-centred, understanding students as the core of the class. Child-centred pedagogy is usually related to active participation and interaction by students, co-operative learning, and open-ended instruction (UNESCO, 2004). Outcomes are far more broadly defined and include processes like critical thinking. The processes and outcomes in a child-centred pedagogy resonate with the broader conceptualisations of quality. However, there is a debate about the efficacy of the two approaches (Dembele and Lefoka, 2007) and some advocate a structured pedagogy, a “combination of direct instruction, guided practice and independent learning” (UNESCO, 2004, p.153) which avoids the extremes, and that is considered a good method for learning to “read, mathematics, grammar, mother tongue, sciences, history and, to some extent, foreign languages” (UNESCO, 2004, p.153). While some of the processes identified above do contribute to better educational outcomes, it is how they are interpreted that must be problematised. In his analysis of World Bank policies and the underlying human capital approach that informs this, Torres (2003) suggests that quality improvement is

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  111 conceptualised in terms of single variables, without a corresponding analysis of the complex inter-relationships between these and their contextualised nature. Thus, when attempting to improve performance in numeracy and literacy, pedagogical approaches should be aligned to the achievement ofoutcomes such as critical thinking, personal and social development, inclusion and social justice. Achieving these outcomes necessitates an engagement with diversity, which is understood as processes to facilitate the inclusion of the marginalised ‘other’. However, any form of inclusion of the ‘other’ reflects and is reflective of power, wealth and access to resources.

The South African educational policy context The transformation of South African education was a massive policy undertaking with over 160 policy texts constituting bills, acts, green and white papers and notices and calls for comments (Sayed and Kanjee, forthcoming). It can be argued that this entire policy exercise is an engagement with quality in that it entailed the transformation of an inequitable racially divided and fragmented system. The focus for this chapter is on the more explicit and specific engagements with quality in policy texts and the different approaches to quality. Sayed and Kanjee (forthcoming) mentions four approaches to overcoming educational failure that can be identified in the South African context. The first approach is described as ‘getting back to basics’ and ‘a pedagogy of the poor.’ The primary problem is identified as the rash of innovations and change that have destabilised the system, and the introduction of polices that are inappropriate for marginalised groups. In line with the shift in the international education agenda, the proposed solution is an emphasis on literacy and numeracy and “…drilling learners in fundamentals…” (DOE, 2010. p.20). The second approach focuses on the failure of effective monitoring and supervision at the level of schools and teachers. Teachers and schools are pinpointed as failing and the proposed solution is to institute measures against poorly performing schools and developing contracts to assess and review performance. This can be described as a managerialist discourse and solution. The third approach suggests that vigorous civil society participation provided the motive force for educational transformation and the gradual erosion of this participation is seen as the key problem. The proposed solution is the injection of voice and civil society participation that reclaims lost educational spaces. The fourth approach focuses on the present system of governance in education. The current national and provincial systems, as well as the location of ministries and portfolios, are deemed to be the primary problem and changes in educational governance at this level are considered to have beneficial outcomes to current educational challenges (Sayed and Kanjee, forthcoming). We have sketched above the current education policy terrain in South Africa noting the different policy prescriptions and solutions advanced to remedy the education crisis. We now turn out attention to the Action Plan 2012, which is the most recent long-term vision for education improvement in South Africa. As

112  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed we review this plan, we note how it reflects a ‘getting back to basics’ approach, narrowing notions of education quality to measurable cognitive gains in selected learning areas and subjects. The Action Plan 2014 The Action Plan 2014 locates itself within the 2009 medium-term strategic framework emanating from the presidency and the “…Green Paper on national strategic planning in relation to the envisaged country plan South Africa Vision 2025…” (DOE, 2010, p.43). The Action plan is a significant milestone in the South African policy landscape. It very directly acknowledges and attempts to address the challenges in South African schooling summarised as the ‘toxic mix’ (Bloch, 2009). The ‘toxic mix’ is a reference to the variety of problems that adversely affect educational outcomes in South Africa. In a review of the literature, Fleisch summarises some of these as: Children’s long-term health problems related and unrelated to chronic and pervasive poverty in its many savage manifestations, learning in an additional or foreign (second) language and/or poorly planned code switching, inadequate access to and use of classroom resources and various aspects of poor teaching all contribute to the patterns of educational underachievement among our nations disadvantaged schoolchildren. (Fleisch, 2008, p.139) The Action Plan 2014 also clearly aligns itself with national strategic priorities and is the first long-term vision of education in South Africa. It attempts to address all relevant stakeholders and respond to diverse challenges. It provides a clear, output-oriented framework, as the first section identifies 13 output goals and 14 related processes (also termed ‘goals’ in the text of the Action Plan). The 13 output goals primarily target improved numeracy and literacy in both primary and secondary schooling. Of the 13 output goals one deals with ensuring enrolment in schooling until age 15, one targets access to early childhood development (ECD) and another targets access to further education and training. The remaining goals focus on improving numeracy and literacy. The focus on numeracy and literacy is clearly a response to South African pupils’ performance in assessments including the Grade Three and Grade Five national assessments and the regional and international SACMEQ and TIMMS exercises. In short, the text affirms the notion that quality involves improved literacy and numeracy among students, and identifies corrective processes for achieving this improvement. Another focus of the Action Plan is the improvement of assessment, monitoring, and supervision. According to the text, this will primarily be achieved through Annual National Assessment (ANA), a process that started in 2008 for Grades One to Six, and will eventually include Grade Nine. The administration of the tests will be externally managed (rather than by the schools as is the case at present). ANA will generate a database that will be used to improve performance, with the results being available to schools, district officials, and civil society. In terms of assessment, ANA is expected to achieve a

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  113 wide range of outcomes. It is expected to improve teacher assessment practices, enhance teacher performance, ensure the education system focuses on the achievement of learning outcomes, and help district officials make better decisions about resource allocations and support. District offices are meant to “improve the frequency and quality of the monitoring and support services provided…” (DOE, 2010,. p37). However, the extent to which this conceptualisation of assessment, monitoring and supervision will lead to improved educational quality is debatable. This discourse is presented as a magical wand for many ills and it is assumed that creating a database will automatically improve quality. This singular focus prevents an engagement with multiple processes and outcomes and fails to acknowledge the magnitude of the challenges facing the educational system. For example, district offices may lack the capacity to provide highquality support for schools (as recommended by the Action Plan) (Ahmed and Sayed, 2009). Furthermore, given these challenges it is unclear whether outputs like the full ANA rollout can be achieved. The recommendation of Alexander (2008) that educational quality should not only be assessed through measurable indicators is relevant here. The focus on output goals (or measurable indicators) prevents an engagement with important issues about quality. For example, there is acknowledgement that it is the ‘quality of (Early Childhood Care and Development (ECD)’ rather than simply access to ECD that influences outcomes but progress in this area is subsequently reduced simply to increase access to ECD (from 51 per cent in 2008 to 100 per cent in 2014). This could be reflective of both the inability to engage with what is meant by ‘a quality ECD’ and also suggest that enrolment figures are a clear cut indicator, while ‘quality ECD’ is more difficult to assess and quantify. The processes (referred to as goals), which are intended to achieve the output goals, cover teachers, learner resources, whole-school improvement, school funding, school infrastructure and support services, and are similar to the processes identified in the 2005 EFA Global Monitoring Report focused on quality (UNESCO, 2004). Four of the processes deal with teachers and cover areas such as teacher recruitment, teacher competence, working conditions and salaries. There are, however, two significant omissions. First, the document does not engage with the magnitude and complexity of some of the challenges facing teachers, challenges which have led to high levels of teacher dissatisfaction as reflected in the series of strikes held by teachers in 2010. Second, no substantive solutions are offered to address some of the identified challenges. Whilst it can be argued that these issues have been addressed elsewhere – for instance, atthe Teacher Development Summit in 2009 (Education Labour Relations Council, 2009) and in the Report to the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training on 12 May, 2010 – the failure of the Action Plan to engage with these issues is surprising nevertheless. Sayed and Kanjee (forthcoming) identify participation as one of the approaches to reversing negative educational outcomes. South African educational history is marked by vigorous civil society participation during the

114  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed Apartheid era and certainly in early policy formulation. The absence of vigorous civil society participation may be reflective of the negotiated settlement and the firmly capitalist path followed in the post-apartheid period (Bond, 2000). At the level of schooling it has presented as a decentralisation of schooling (Ahmed and Sayed, 2009) and selected stakeholder participation (Barnes, 2006). There is no departure from previous governance policy in the Action Plan and participation is again presented as administrative and financial management. The vision of governance as executive management is also clearly spelt out in the Action Plan, which claims, “where learners learn and there is a sense of harmony is often a school with an outstanding school principal” (DOE, 2010, p.32). The text further specifies that good leadership largely involves financial management, and improved training in financial management is therefore identified as a focus for government intervention. This is also identified as an area in need of private sector-school partnerships. The private sector is encouraged to develop management training for school principals. Like previous policies, the Action Plan concludes that parental involvement “…in school governance is fairly good…” (DOE, 2010, p.33). Participation is conceptualised through voting, and the document cites a 2009 study that claimed two thirds of parents have at some time voted for school governing body members, although the available evidence suggests that this claim is exaggerated (Sayed and Soudien, 2003). The major concern however is that this discourse of participation as management and voting does not reflect South Africa’s own education history of vigorous civil society participation in education. The curriculum is briefly discussed in part B of the Action Plan, which begins with the striking statement, “(the) curriculum lies at the heart of the schooling process…” (DOE, 2010, p.57). The document continues: “…the curriculum must be educationally sound and based on appropriate pedagogic theory…It must be practical, easily understandable and implementable in the context of South African schools” (DOE, 2010, p.57). The Action Planrecommends learning programmes to guide teachers, a balance between “prescription and opportunities for innovation” (DOE, 2010, p.57), and the provision of more opportunities for e-learning. However, in order to promote educational quality, the Action Plan needed to discuss curriculum issues in much greater detail. In particular, attention needs to be paid to language of instruction in schools, which remains one of the biggest barriers in South Africa. Scholarship also consistently points to the racism in South African schools (Metcalfe, 1991; Carrim, 1992, 1995; Soudien, 1998, 2007; Carrim and Soudien, 1999). For instance, it has been pointed out that teacher training institutions are not adequately training teachers for dealing with diverse classroom contexts (Hemson, 2006), there is an absence of diversity in curricula (McKinney, 2005), school choices still seem to be governed by conflating ‘race’ with quality schooling whereby ex-Model C (previously Whites only school) are seen to epitomise good quality (Ndimande, 2005), and the pervasive, ingrained racism of the Apartheid past referred as ‘knowledge in the blood’ (Jansen, 2009) is often not even recognised in education. This failure to

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  115 engage with diversity in the Action Plan embeds the notion of an ahistorical, decontextualised learning subject (Silbert, 2009) and like previous policy/texts asserts the primacy of middle class, ‘Western’ values in policy texts (Sayed and Soudien, 2003). The engagement with school resourcing (the goals dealing with school funding and school infrastructure and support services) makes no direct reference to the two-tier education system in South Africa referred to in other policy texts. Scholarship consistently points to two education systems in South Africa (Motala, 2003, 2006, 2009; Ahmed and Sayed, 2009) and a tale of two qualities (Sayed and Ahmed, 2011). Consideration of inequities seems to be addressed through goals that focus on improving infrastructure, utilisation of current funding and access to health and poverty reduction interventions. What is of concern is how far short these measures fall in terms of redressing current inequities. For example, there is no consideration of additional resources, and access to health resources is specified as access to learners having their eyes tested. Similarly, the only identified poverty reduction intervention is access to the National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP). While both of these interventions are necessary they fall far short in terms of the many challenges facing South African schools. One of the biggest omissions is the failure to address the enormous gaps in teacher quality between public and other schools (Tikly, 2011).

The South African experience and global challenges The recent global focus on quality (UNESCO, 2004; Barrett et al., 2006; Tikly and Barrett, 2007; Alexander, 2008) is crucial. In low- and middle-income contexts they facilitate an engagement with both access and quality. However, balancing access, equity, social justice, and outcomes within a broadened conceptualisation of quality is an enormous challenge—as the South African experience illustrates. We highlight some of the key issues from the South African experience that are relevant for other contexts. Our analysis of the Action Plan 2014 identifies the dominance of a human capital approach to education in policy formulation. One of the strongest criticisms of this approach is the failure to engage with education as a social system and the primacy of managerial and economic considerations to overcome educational challenges (Lauglo, 1996; Klees, 2002; Torres, 2003). Lauglo (1996) argues that the attempt to generalise from models that are confined to limited inputs and outputs and rely on quantifiable data is not helpful. This framework limits an engagement with the many dimensions of quality, fails to foreground issues like equity, diversity and exclusion, and is unable to generate solutions that acknowledge education as a social system. One of the most striking aspects of the text is the almost exclusive focus on literacy and numeracy. In the South African context it has prevented a consideration of other educational outcomes and processes and represents a departure from earlier policy engagements, which demonstrated a potentially broader vision of education (Sayed and Ahmed, 2011). This focus must also be

116  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed understood as nation states’ attempts to compete in the global economy (Tatto, 2007). The emphasis on domains like numeracy can be understood as a focus on knowledge fields of importance in the global economy (Stromquist and Monkman, 2002). This ‘back to the basics’ approach, whilst appealing to policymakers, is problematic. The presentation of this discourse as ‘pro-poor’ is symbolic rather than substantive. Like the pro-poor symbolism of the user-fees policy (which charges school fees based on the wealth ranking of the school and of the individual parent), this symbolism masks the negative consequences of this discourse and confines quality to narrow parameters. There is consensus about the important role that assessment and monitoring can play in improving outcomes (Barber and Mourshed, 2007) and international, regional and national benchmarking can all help to address issues of quality. However the South African context, like other contexts, suggests the presence of the less helpful aspects of this process. Quality is defined by measurement and processes that cannot be measured appear to be excluded. Moreover, there is little engagement with how outcomes might be interpreted or even how they could facilitate the quality agenda. The focus also is clearly on assessment rather than on the link between assessment and monitoring to facilitate better outcomes. This is alarming as it signals a shift to an even greater gulf between assessment and pedagogy. Tatto (2007) suggests that the accountability that emerges from national and international benchmarking can be helpful, but may result in global indicators of quality at the expense of local, participatory educational reforms. These global indicators also create competition amongst nations to achieve high rankings on these measures. In the Action Plan, the description of the curriculum as one that can “… help learners to understand their country, Africa and the world and think critically in ways that are a far cry from the narrow memorisation required of most learners before 1994” (DOE, 2010,p.9) is symbolic. The reverse seems to be true. The focus on literacy and numeracy in the text and the specificity in other policy texts like the Foundation for Learning Document (DOE, 2008) suggests processes that attempt to develop teacher-proof curricula. The Foundations for Learning Document focuses on instructional time and specifies the activities teachers are required to implement during this time. It even includes specifications like “check understanding and encourage learners to respond to the text through focused questions” (DOE, 2008, p.7). These policy emphases highlight some of the global concerns about curricula, pedagogy and teacher training. Tatto (2007) suggests that teacher reform policies are usually instrumentally targeted at improving outcomes (like pupil achievement) with little consideration given the quality or processes. Policy reforms also tend to construct teachers either as professionals or bureaucrats. The definition of a teacher as a professional highlights pedagogy, professional autonomy, and teacher discretion to make educational decisions. Avalos and Barrett (chapter 6 in this book) emphasise the importance of the teacher as a professional and the emphasis on teaching for social justice considerably expands the boundaries for pedagogy and professional roles and provides a useful way forward for the

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  117 quality agenda. By contrast, the definition of teacher as bureaucrats suggests that educational outcomes are too important to be left to the teacher, and policy reforms should focus on ‘scripting’ good teaching (i.e. develop teacher-proof curricula). The concern about the South African policy pathway and the global shift is the uncritical acceptance of the latter path. The human capital approach and the accompanying cost considerations have had an enormous impact on ‘best practices’ in education. Torres (2003) identifies some of the consequences, such as investment in infrastructure rather than human resources, improved teacher-learner ratios, and investment in technology. The South African experience suggests an uncritical acceptance of many of these proposals, as reflected in the Action Plan’s positions on e-learning and teacher/learner ratios. The Action Plan argues that teacher/learner ratios cannot be reduced significantly because of the comparatively high salaries of teachers, and therefore suggests that in the medium term the ratios should only be reduced by a few points beyond the current level of around 33. The cost rationale is similar to World Bank proposals and does not even start to engage with the complexities present in South African schooling. First, there is often an enormous discrepancy between fee charging and non-fee charging schools in terms of teacher–learner ratios. Secondly, because of the influx of second language speakers into previously disadvantaged schools (i.e. the movement of ‘African’ learners into previously ‘Coloured’ or ‘Indian’ schools), teacher– learner ratios can be as high as 55, with the majority of students being second language learners. Adherence to current teacher–learner ratios does not even start to address these kinds of realities. The impact of current school resourcing policies like user-fees and the impact on quality must also be highlighted. The decision to charge user-fees has created enormous inequities (Ahmed and Sayed, 2009; Motala, 2009) and a tale of two qualities (Sayed and Ahmed, 2011). The departure from this policy in South Africa with the no-fees school policy is potentially helpful to the poor, but is still unable to address what is essentially the privatisation of public schooling. The key question then is whether the broadened quality agenda can be realised with this policy in place. Whilst there is a need to acknowledge limits to school resourcing, what considerations should govern education resourcing policy? One of the debates that has emerged in the South African contexts is whether school resourcing should be capped. South African educational spending is benchmarked against other countries and policy options accept that the education budget is capped. The counter argument is that all South African policy is framed within the South African constitution which guarantees the right to education. To achieve this right there should be no limit on education expenditure because it is enshrined as an unqualified right in the South African constitution, by which all education policy texts abide (Wilson, 2004; Veriava, 2005). The uncritical acceptance of the assumptions of finite resources in educational reform is clearly not helpful. The key challenge then is to balance broader conceptualisations of quality with policies on school resourcing that assume finite resources.

118  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

Concluding comments Tikly (2011) suggests that the education roadmap (which was drawn up in 2008 in by a group on stakeholders co-ordinated by the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) and which outlines a Ten Point Programme for education reform) is essentially a technical document and the Action Plan can be described similarly. Our analysis has highlighted that in key areas like defining quality, school resourcing, and teaching and learning policy formulation is framed within narrow input–outcomes parameters without a substantive engagement with key educational processes. Moreover, South Africa like other countries, in trying to balance the global–local dialectic, seems to uncritically accept some of the global policy pathways. Our chapter has highlighted some of the areas of contestation and points of policy engagement. We have argued that the current trend, local and global, of defining quality in terms of outcomes like numeracy and literacy do not help the quality agenda. While broadening our conceptualisation to include areas like social justice poses a challenge, it is this pathway that needs to be pursued. Alexander (2008) suggests that improving quality is often reduced to a school effectiveness framework and our analysis supports this argument. A critical engagement with these processes is to generate alternatives (for example, teaching for social justice) as well as a consideration of how processes outside of the school effective framework (like equity and diversity) are crucial. The broadened conceptualisation of quality usefully counters the current global dominance of the human capital approaches as promoted by organisations like The World Bank.1

Note 1 We would like to thank Renee Klink and Janine Abrahams, without whose help we would not have been able to complete the manuscript.

References Ahmed, R. and Sayed, Y. (2009) ‘Promoting access and enhancing education opportunities? The case of ‘no-fees schools’ in South Africa’. Compare, 39(2): 203–218. Alexander, R. (2008) Education for All, The Quality Imperative and the Problem of Pedagogy, CREATE Pathways to Access, Research Monograph No. 20, Brighton, Centre for International Education, University of Sussex. Barber, M., and Mourshed, M. (2007) ‘How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top’, McKinsey and Company. Available (accessed 30 March 2011). Barrett, A., Chawla-Duggan, R., Lowe, J., Nikel, J. and Ukpo, E. (2006) ‘The concept of quality in education: A review of the ‘international’ literature on the concept of quality in education’, EdQual Working Paper No. 3, Bath/Bristol, University of Bristol and University of Bath. Barnes, T. (2006) ‘Nation-building without mortar? Public participation in higher education policy-making in South Africa’, Perspectives in Education, 24(1): 1–13.

The 2014 Education Action Plan in South Africa  119 Bloch, G. (2009) The Toxic Mix: What’s Wrong with South African Schools and How to Fix It, Cape Town, Tafelberg. Bond, P. (2000) The Elite Transition: From Apartheid to Neoliberalism in South Africa, (cottsville., University of KwaZulu-Natal Press. Carrim, N. (1992) Desegregation in Indian and Coloured Schooling, Johannesburg, Education Policy Unit, University of the Witwatersrand. Carrim, N. (1995) ‘From “race” to ethnicity: shifts in the educational discourses of South Africa and Britain in the 1990s’. Compare, 25(1): 17–33. Carrim, N. and Soudien, C. (1999) ‘A critical antiracism in South Africa’, in S. May (ed.) Critical Multiculturalism: Rethinking Multicultural and Antiracist Education, London, Falmer. Pp.153–190. Dembele, M., and Lefoka, P. (2007) ‘Pedagogical renewal for quality university primary education: overview of trends in sub-Saharan Africa’. International Review of Education, 53: 531–553. Department of Education (2008) ‘Foundations for Learning Campaign 2008–2011, Notice 306, 14 March’, Pretoria, Government Gazette No 30884. Department of Education (2010) ‘Action Plan to 2014: towards the realisation of Schooling 2025 – the shorter version’, Pretoria, Department Of Education. Education Labour Relations Council (2009) ‘Teacher Development Summit 2009’. Available at (accessed 29 December 2010). Fleisch, B. (2008) Primary Education in Crisis: Why South African School Children Underachieve in Reading and Mathematics, Cape Town, Juta & Co. Hemson, C. (2006) Teacher Education and the Challenge of Diversity in South Africa, Cape Town, HSRC Press. International Bureau of Education (2006) ‘Education Innovation and Information, No. 122’. Available (accessed 21 January 2009). Jansen, J. D. (2009) Knowledge in the Blood: Confronting Race and the Apartheid Past, Cape Town, UCT Press. Klees, S. J. (2002) ‘World Bank education policy: new rhetoric, old ideology’. International Journal of Educational Development, 22(5): 451–474. Larsen, M. (2010) ‘Troubling the discourse of teacher centrality: a comparative perspective’. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2): 207–231. Lauglo, J. (1996) ‘Banking on education and the uses of research. A critique of World Bank priorities and strategies for education’, International Journal of Educational Development, 16(3): 221–233. McKinney, C. (2005) Textbooks for Diverse Learners: A Critical Analysis of Learning Materials Used in South African Schools, Cape Town, Human Sciences Research Council Press. Metcalfe, M. (1991) Desegregating Education in South Africa: White School Enrolments in Johannesburg, 1985–1991: Update and Policy Analysis, Johannesburg, Education Policy Unit, University of the Witwatersrand. Motala, S. (2003) ‘Review of the financing, resourcing and costs of education in public schools: A commentary’. Quarterly Review of Education and Training in South Africa 10(1): 2–13. Motala, S. (2006) ‘Education resourcing in post-apartheid South Africa: the impact of finance equity reforms in public schooling’. Perspectives in Education, 24(2): 79–93. Motala, S. (2009) ‘Privatising public schooling in post-apartheid South Africa – equity considerations’. Compare, 39: 185–202.

120  Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed Nzimande, B. S. (2005) ‘Cows and goats no longer count as inheritances: the politics of school ‘choice’ in post-apartheid South Africa’. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Madison-Wisconsin. Nikel, J. and Lowe, J. (2010) ‘Talking of fabric: a multi-dimensional model of quality in education’. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5): 589–605. Nussbaum, M.C. (2006) Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership, Cambridge, MA, Belknap Press. O’Sullivan, M. (2006) ‘Lesson observation and quality in primary education as contextual teaching and learning processes’. International Journal of Education Development, 26: 246–260. Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E. A. and Kain, J.F. (2005) ‘Teachers, schools, and academic achievement’. Econometrica, 73(2): 417–458. Sayed, Y. and Ahmed, R. (2011) ‘Education quality in post-apartheid South Africa policy: balancing equity, diversity, rights and participation’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 103–118. Sayed, Y., Kanjee, A. and Nkomo, M. (eds) (forthcoming) Education Policy Change and School Reform: The Search for Education Quality in South Africa, Cape Town, HSRC Press. Sayed, Y. and Soudien, C. (2003) ‘(Re) framing education exclusion and inclusion discourses: limits and possibilities’, Bulletin 34: 9–19. Silbert, P. (2009) ‘National education policy and the learning subject: exploring the gaps’, Perspectives in Education, 27(4): 385–394. Soudien, C. (1998) ‘“We Know Why We are Here”: the experience of African children in a ‘coloured’ school in Cape Town’, Race, Ethnicity and Education 1(1): 7–29. Soudien, C. (2007) Youth Identity in Contemporary South Africa: Race, Culture and Schooling. Claremont, New Africa Books. Stromquist, N. and Monkman, K. (2002) ‘Defining Globalization and assessing its implications on knowledge and education’, in N. Stromquist and K. Monkman (eds) Globalization and Education, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield. Pp.3–25. Tatto, M. T. and Plank, D. N. (2007) ‘The dynamics of global teaching reform’, in M.T. Tatto (ed.) Reforming Teaching Globally, Oxford, Symposium. Pp.267–277. Tikly, L. (2011) ‘A roadblock for social justice? An analysis and critique of the South African Education Roadmap’, International Journal of Educational Development, 31: 86–94. Tikly, L. and Barrett, A.M. ‘Education quality: research priorities and approaches in the global era’, paper presented at 9th UKFIET Conference, Oxford, September 2007. Tikly, L. and Barrett, A.M. (2009) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’, EdQual working paper No. 18, Bristol, EdQual. Torres, R. (2003) ‘Improving the quality of basic education? The strategies of the World Bank’, in E. R. Beauchamp (ed.) Comparative Education Reader, New York, Routledge Falmer. Pp.299–328. UNESCO (2004) EFA Global Monitoring Report: Education for All – The Quality Imperative, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Veriava, F. (2005) ‘Free to learn: a discussion paper on the School Fee Exemption Policy’, in A. Leatt and S. Rosa (eds) Targeting Poverty Alleviation to Make Children’s Rights Real, Cape Town, Children’s Institute. Pp.267–291. Wilson, S. (2004) ‘Taming the constitution: rights and reform in the South African education system’, South African Journal on Human Rights, 20: 418–447. Available at (accessed January 2008).

9 Scaling up by focusing down Creating space and capacity to extend education reform in Africa 1

Joel Samoff, Martial Dembélé and E. Molapi Sebatane ‘Going to scale’ Start small but think big. That is a promising approach to innovation and reform for education in Africa, where available resources often cannot meet expanding demand, schools are under-equipped, well-prepared teachers and effective instructional materials are in short supply and both access and quality remain uneven among different segments of the population. ‘Going to scale’ has been the advice and the injunction in African education for several decades, both within and outside the continent. Begin with an initial effort in a particular school or district. Prepare the ground well, with careful planning, extensive communication among those involved and adequate funding. Monitor and assess the results. Modify the practice to respond to local settings and in light of preliminary outcomes. Then, as it becomes clearer what has worked and what has not, expand the pilot to other settings. ‘Go to scale.’ Eventually the entire education system becomes the site for the reform. For national educators, enlarging an effective small-scale innovation is an attractive strategy for broader reform. Beginning with a pilot focuses attention and energy, provides a controlled testing ground for trials and assessment, limits the risk should an initiative prove unviable and establishes the pattern that can subsequently be replicated throughout the country. In an early and influential paper, Myers argued that international agencies focused on going to scale as they committed themselves and thus their public image to nationwide programmes that reached the poorest of the citizenry and were frustrated that the small-scale demonstration or pilot projects they funded seemed to have limited impact on education policy and programming, “often despite their successful outcomes” (Myers, 1984, p2). The challenge, therefore, was to scale up. That thinking persists. Nearly two decades later, a United Nations panel on girls’ education included among the critical next steps “understanding the importance of scaling up.”2 A workshop organised by the Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE) in 2004 focused in part on enlarging the scale of innovations and reforms supportive of girls’ education. More broadly, going to scale was the central theme of the 2001 biennial meeting of the Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA).

122  J. Samoff et al. That challenge has proved difficult to achieve. As we shall see, there are few documented cases of pilot education reforms in Africa that have been effectively scaled up to become nation-wide pro­grammes. Indeed, some very promising initiatives proved difficult or impossible to sustain, even at their small scale, after the departure of their initial leaders or the end of their initial funding. Evidence is problematic here. Anecdotes abound. But determining success requires both time and reliable evidence. Accessible systematic empirical research on scaling up promising education initiatives in Africa is unfortunately quite limited. As Uvin and Miller note, most of the literature is normative and anecdotal.3 Those involved in the pilot speak enthusiastically of its successes. Participants and commentators offer suggestions for enlarging scale, often with near certitude about what will and will not work. Yet, there is little independent empirical research or comparative assessment. One result is that contemporary discussions of scaling up are eerily repetitive, with little apparent attention to why decades of insistence on the importance of scaling up has not led to more and more effective scaling up. Until an initiative has survived the departure of its initiators, the depletion of its initial funding and perhaps a change of government, it cannot reasonably be judged successful. As well, some initiatives may be viable precisely because they are small. Responsive to local needs and demands, well adapted to a local setting and guided, managed and perhaps funded by the local community, reforms of that sort flourish where they are nourished and wither where they are not. It is important, therefore, to review efforts to enlarge the scale of education initiatives and reforms in Africa. Our primary concern in this review is not to suggest a right path or correct course of action. Rather, our concern is to understand better the complexities of enlarging the scale of promising education initiatives by exploring findings, highlighting major themes, and framing issues for discussion, research, and the negotiations essential to education reform. Like ‘appropriate technology’, ‘appropriate scale’ in education, it turns out, may be large, small, or somewhere in between.

Perspectives on ‘Going to scale’ Our first task is to clarify the terminology. Definitions and typologies prolifterate. The profusion of terms and categories reflects both different meanings and, more important, different perspectives on scaling up. ‘Going to scale’ is of course not the only approach to innovation and reform in education. Some reforms begin not as small pilots but as nation-wide initiatives. An education ministry, for example, may adopt a new curriculum at all teacher education institutions. Initiatives of that sort, which may be an effective strategy for expanding and improving education, generally have a guiding philosophy and management structure that differ sharply from reforms begun as limited pilots in selected locations. Since we are concerned with the challenges of enlarging scale, simultaneous nationwide initiatives are not our primary focus here.

Scaling up by focusing down  123 ‘Scale’ has multiple senses and uses in the education reform literature. Harrington and White point out that scale may refer to the level at which a reform is undertaken (village, district, region), to the analytic perspective from which reforms are assessed (a nationwide reform may be assessed from the perspective of the village), to the investment strategy (small vs. large investments), to the breadth of a reform’s impact (a reform begun in a village may have district-wide consequences, while a nation-wide reform may have limited impact), or to the extent of community involvement (a village-level initiative may have limited or broad community participation) (Harrington and White, 1999). Even for a single organisation or institution, ‘going to scale’ can have several meanings, including expanding the number of people affected (organisational scaling) and expanding the number of activities (functional scaling). Some authors understand ‘going to scale’ to involve changing the focus of a reform, from project replication (undertaking the same activity at multiple sites) to building grassroots movements and community organisations to influencing the policy process. Accordingly, the ostensibly very simple question –what is the scale of that reform? – can in practice be several different questions. A reform focused at the village level, for example, can have large-scale investment. That same reform could have large- or small-scale participation by the local community and could have a larger or smaller impact on the society, whatever its primary locus. Several researchers have sought to categorise efforts to enlarge scale. In his widely used typology, Myers differentiates scale by expansion (replicating effective pilots), scale by explosion (a reform implemented simultaneously across the country) and scale by association (combining multiple reforms differentiated in local settings) (Myers, 1984; Myers 2000). Drawing on Korten (1980), Myers associates replication with a learning process approach that begins with learning to be effective (efficiency and coverage are initially low and problems and mistakes high), proceeds to learning to be efficient (reducing the input requirements per unit of output) and then progresses to learning to expand (recognising the importance of local fit and pacing the expansion to match organisational capabilities). Rather than asking how scaling up is accomplished, Uvin and Miller characterise what is scaled up (Uvin and Miller, 1994). Scaling up may focus on structure: organisations expand in size or constituencies (quantitative scaling up); on programmes: organisations expand the number and type of their activities (functional scaling up); on strategy: organisations move beyond service delivery towards empowerment and change in the structural causes and contextual roots of underdevelopment (political scaling up); or on the resource base: organisations increase their financial and institutional base (organisational scaling up). Since most often African educators and their external funding sources understand ‘going to scale’ to mean expanding an apparently successful small pilot into a countrywide programme, replication is our primary concern here.

124  J. Samoff et al.

Innovation and reform in African education: enlarging scale Africa has been the site of many imaginative, exciting and sometimes dramatic innovations in education. But apparently relatively few of those initiatives that started small have been successfully expanded into national programmes. Indeed, many have not survived beyond their enthusiastic initiation or beyond their initial, often externally provided, funding or beyond the departure of the initial leader. We sought, therefore, to survey the literature on education reform in Africa, concentrating on empirical research on scaling up education reform. That turned out to be a far more difficult task than we had anticipated and itself a problem for scaling up education reform in Africa. The knowledge base Research on education reform in Africa is both rich and poor. It is rich in that it is voluminous, often imaginative and insightful and continuing. It is poor in that once completed, research on education in Africa often disappears from view. Consequently, even though many people in many places, both African and non-African, are involved in studying education in Africa, it is difficult for anyone anywhere to develop an inclusive, clear picture of that research. It is even more difficult to focus on a crosscutting issue like scaling up. As Maclure notes: This underscores a common thread that links almost all of the research highlighted in the ERNWACA [Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa] documents – namely, that the dissemination of African educational research, in whatever form it has been presented, has been exceedingly limited and is thus generally unknown or quickly discounted as lacking credibility. (Maclure, 1997, p.117) The conditions associated with effective education reforms and with successful efforts to enlarge their scale are especially poorly documented. Note that we distinguish here between participants’ and observers’ notes and assessments on the one hand and on the other, systematic and thorough empirical research. While reports and commentaries prepared by those most involved in education reforms do provide important insights and understandings, they cannot play the same role as more detached comparative and critical analyses. Equally important, since our review suggests that initial efforts often seem quite successful, careful assessment requires attention to reforms and efforts to enlarge scale after the initial bubble of enthusiasm has passed, and perhaps after the launching leadership has been succeeded and national education officials have changed. The very effort to enlarge scale may itself obscure or devalue systematic study. Those involved in scaling up may be so enmeshed in their efforts and so excited by the apparent progress that they do not document carefully what is happening

Scaling up by focusing down  125 and cannot subsequently explain fully how they achieved their objectives. As well, national officials may move so quickly to enlarge apparently successful pilots that they ignore evaluations and other studies. In addition to books and professional journals, we sought reports of independent systematic comparative research in development knowledge databases created by external agencies. Those databases, we found, emphasise the agency’s own or commissioned research and generally do not distinguish among observations, commentaries, participants’ accounts and systematic independent research. To date, it seems, these initiatives to collect and disseminate development knowledge have been fundamentally disempowering.4 In sum, we have found that in a literature on education reform that is more extensive than is commonly realised, there is very limited research on efforts to enlarge the scale of education reforms and consequently little well grounded and critical understanding of what is happening and why. The knowledge that has been developed is difficult to access and not widely shared. As well, information and knowledge – the two are not the same – are significantly tilted towards, and often shaped and managed by, the external funding and technical assistance agencies. It seems clear that improving the knowledge base on education and reform initiatives requires radical changes in the approach to the generation, storage and dissemination of knowledge. Empirical research on enlarging the scale of education reforms As we have noted, our primary concern was to identify systematic empirical research on efforts to enlarge the scale of education reforms and thereby to go beyond the reports of a reform’s initiators and managers and its initial period of enthusiasm and high energy. Broad and energetic searches of several sorts, including books and relevant professional journals, as well as databases developed by UNESCO, the International Institute for Educational Planning, the World Bank, and the Educational Resources Information Center, identified few empirical studies explicitly focused on enlarging scale in education in Africa. For example, in the collection assembled for the World Bank’s earlier Global Education Reform web site, enlarging scale was neither a Key Issue nor a Type of Reform. So too for the major topics and sub-topics on its current education web page.5 Reviews of education sector studies and other documents with limited circulation only infrequently focus direct attention on enlarging scale and do not indicate clearly which of those studies address going to scale empirically and critically (Samoff with Assié-Lumumba, 1996; Chikombah et al., 1999; Tilahun et al., 1999; Agyeman et al., 2000; Sebatane et al., 2000; Ilboudo et al., 2001). That search is even more challenging for the many studies of education reform undertaken by African researchers that circulate locally and often remain unpublished.6 Many of the innovative education programmes and projects in Africa have been lauded as success stories. Relevant cases have been collected, for example within UNESCO’s Co-operative Action Strategies in Basic Education in Africa

126  J. Samoff et al. project. In 1999 ADEA solicited national reports and studies in its Prospective Stock-Taking Review of Education in Africa, with special attention to breakthroughs on access, quality and capacity building (ADEA, 1999). One would expect that all or most of these reform efforts would now be much larger in scale. Yet, apparently few are. While some indicate plans to scale up, others do not. Since neither ADEA nor anyone else followed up, we can neither report on efforts to enlarge the scale of those initiatives nor explore their trajectory. Two recent contributions to the literature on education reform exemplify the challenge for research on enlarging scale. ‘Scaling up girls’ education’ seemed to be a recent paper focused on our major concerns (Unterhalter et al., 2004). The title proved to be the promise, not the premise. Drawing on case studies, Unterhalter and her colleagues report on an effort to develop a methodology for measuring and assessing progress towards gender equality in education. While this paper enhances understanding obstacles to equality and how to address them, it provides little empirical analysis of the four cases and neither data nor analysis on efforts to enlarge scale. The Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE) hosted a consultation in 2004 that addressed enlarging scale.7 Several papers reported on pilot studies across the continent, with firsthand information on origins, experiences and progress to date, with sections on lessons learned and implications for going to scale. While these papers help us understand education reform in Africa, they are concerned with recent initiatives that were still in the glow of their initial enthusiasm. Consequently their comments on enlarging scale were prospective and speculative and neither constituted nor reported on empirical research on efforts to proceed beyond the pilot stage. In short, often papers and conferences whose titles suggest they include empirical research on enlarging scale turn out to be reports on the pilots with some reflection on what might come next. Excitement and enthusiasm remain unaccompanied by independent and sustained studies.

The challenge of evaluating outcomes in education Compounding the difficulty of exploring efforts to enlarge scale is the challenge of assessing outcomes in education. Evaluating education is always a daunting challenge. People and institutions simply refuse to hold still. Nor should we expect them to. We value adaptation and accommodation, flexibility and responsiveness, self-reflection and self-critique, and the ability to use experience to modify conception, structure, content and practice. That education flux is often in tension with the standard evaluation model, which presumes a reasonably orderly progression from initial assumptions to goals and objectives to indicators to measures to observations to findings to recommendations, distinguishing independent from dependent variables and relying generally on the manipulation and analysis of quantitative data. For education that is particularly problematic. Education is at its core contextual. Learning is the result of connections, interactions, responses, shared experiences, and empathy, not clinical detachment. In education, process is

Scaling up by focusing down  127 more important than outcome. That education flux also frustrates the common effort to identify ‘best practices’ and ‘lessons learned’ in one setting and apply them in others, another form of enlarging scale. Since education is contextual, negotiated, and as much process as outcome, the synthesised best practices, detached from the settings that made them effective, easily become stultifying straitjackets rather than useful guides to action. It is of course possible to learn from other settings, understandings, approaches and practices. That is the driving dynamic of this paper. But what are often termed ‘lessons learned’ must be adapted and tuned to the local context. As well, education innovations may be more pronouncement than practice and even when implemented, may have a short political life. Focusing on the promises, or worse, equating promises with practices, renders impossible both monitoring and evaluation. The analytic challenge here is formidable. Little of the empirical research on education innovation and reform in Africa focuses explicitly on enlarging scale. Innovations proliferate, some well planned and supported but many with inadequate preparation, political support and funding. Since education is contextual, locally contingent and regularly renegotiated, and since education outcomes always have multiple origins and causes, it is difficult to determine whether scaling helped, hurt or made no difference.

Going to scale: analysis and implications What do we learn from our review of efforts in Africa and elsewhere to enlarge the scale of innovations and reforms in education and other spheres of development? To address that query we combine the findings of a wide range of studies, both primary and secondary, and our own observations on the cases reviewed.8 Successful scaling up In their critical overview of support to education reform, Healey and DeStefano (1997) argue that most school reform initiatives are in one way or another demonstrations or pilots or models. They point out that pockets of good educational practice can be found almost anywhere, suggesting that what is deemed good education is not primarily a function of esoteric knowledge (ibid, p.2 [original emphasis]). Rather, innovative teachers, initiative-taking and perhaps politically influential parents, risk-taking and non-conformist head teachers, and progressive communities can all be sources for effective innovations in education. Imaginative reforms can thus be found throughout the world, often amidst poverty and other very trying circum­stances. At the same time, good education practices cannot be found everywhere. Indeed, reform initiatives are pilots precisely because the mix of ingredients that lead to school improvement varies in time and place and because notwithstanding years of research attention to approach and strategy, the most effective learning results

128  J. Samoff et al. from creative interactions among teachers and learners, that is, more from interactive process than from prior planning, “if school reformers really did know how to create good schools, the scale-up problem probably would not exist…there are no magic bullets…” (ibid, p.7). The pilot character of education reform is particularly clear in Africa, where education has become heavily dependent on external assistance. Since that assistance is predominantly focused on technical improvements and since external agencies commonly envision limited duration funding for specific activities, nearly all projects are pilot, demonstration or experimental. Unfortunately, Healey and DeStefano (1997) report, evaluations indicate that at best half or perhaps as few as one out of ten reform initiatives have been sustained. With that sobering statistic, let us consider what seems to work. The common wisdom in many studies is that three factors are critical to enlarging the scale of an education reform: (1) a charismatic leader dedicated to the reform and committed to its expansion, (2) strong interest and demand in the communities at the sites targeted for expansion, and (3) sufficient funding, which may in practice be limited resources available from local sources. In the absence of one of those factors, scaling up is far less likely to succeed. Beyond those critical features, several other factors seem to be associated with successful scaling up. Especially important are (i) a clear, explicit, visible, and reiterated political commitment to support both the reform and efforts to enlarge its scale and (ii) clear accountability for outcomes. Also consequential are: (iii) significant and sustained local involvement in decision-making and implementation and as a result, (iv) local ownership of specific elements of the reform; (v) organising pilots as learning experiences; (vi) expectation to enlarge scale from the outset of the pilot; (vii) flexible, iterative planning; (viii) strong links among community and other organisations; and (ix) effective infrastructure, including availability of facilitators, trainers, animators and support staff. A context supportive of effective enlargement of scale generally also includes a simple information system that can provide rapid and focused feedback, continuity in leadership and participation, recognition that resolving the tension between teacher and school autonomy on the one hand and external direction on the other must be continually negotiated rather than achieved once and for all, and opportunities to reflect on and celebrate accomplishments during the scaling effort. Why ‘scaling up’ fails As we have noted, Healey and DeStefano (1997) estimate that at most half, or perhaps only one out of ten, education reform initiatives have been sustained. Scaling up apparently has a similar record. Why? To explain unsuccessful reform and scaling, most research and evaluations focus on antecedents and inputs, with much less attention to implementation and almost none to longer term effects, whether positive or negative. As Maclure

Scaling up by focusing down  129 notes in his synthesis and review of education research in west and central Africa: In terms of content, ERNWACA research has focused heavily on the antecedents and conceptual weaknesses of reform policies and on the contingencies that result in less-than-expected outcomes. Yet there is little analysis of the process of implementation. Likewise, there appears to be little understanding of the impact that educational innovations and reforms have on the key actors charged with implementing them, and on the school populations and local communities that are the targeted beneficiaries of educational change. The residual effects of efforts to generate positive change, and perceptions of relative success or failure at different levels of educational bureaucracies and in local communities, still remain largely undisclosed. [original emphasis] (Maclure, 1997, p.105) Seeking to explain unsuccessful efforts to enlarge scale, nearly all commentators point to the absence of one or more of the three major factors we identified earlier: leadership, local interest and demand, and funding. The common reports are that while particular activities could be replicated in new sites, the dynamic leadership that made those activities effective in the pilots could be neither found nor created in the new sites, that the perceived local need that mobilised and energised participation in the pilots did not emerge in the new sites, and that funding, often available for the pilots from external sources, was not sufficient to sustain the expansion. None of the research reports covered in the Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA) papers provides any indication of fundamental reforms that have been disseminated and institutionalised effectively in national education systems. Instead, educational reform appears as a parade of piecemeal innovations that often create a flurry of activity for short periods of time in a limited number of schools within fairly restricted geographical areas. Unfortunately, as the ERNWACA documents attest, without strong institutional and resources bases, efforts to reform and innovate are usually abandoned or relegated to perpetual pilot status. (Maclure, 1997, p.102) As above, it is useful to combine the findings of a wide range of studies and our own observations on the cases reviewed to summarise other factors associated with ineffective reform and unsuccessful efforts to enlarge scale. Especially important are (i) limited public involvement in the reform; (ii) insufficient political commitment; and (iii) little or no direct accountability for outcomes. In some settings (iv) initiatives are hijacked, commandeered, or redirected by local or national government or other institutions. Also significant are (v) organisational, management and implementation problems; (vi) obstacles rooted in applicable laws, statutes and regulations; (vii) inadequate communication, especially between the organisations charged with

130  J. Samoff et al. implementing the enlargement of scale and local communities; (viii) insufficient relevant knowledge; and (ix) decision-making focused on immediate crises rather than longer term developments, on distributive politics rather than education and learning and on regulating behaviour rather than on encouraging change. That list could be longer. Most problematic, however, may be not specific factors but rather the core assumptions about commitment to, and support for, enlarging scale. Indeed, some observers argue that scaling up, especially in the form of efforts to replicate or reproduce effective reforms in multiple settings, is an inherently flawed approach. Drawing on the experiences of the Swedish Working Life Fund, Malvicini and Jackson develop that critique forcefully: Pilots rarely go to scale. While designers hope that government or local people will replicate successful model programs, scaling up remains rhetoric particularly in large donor-funded initiatives, where there is little budget or interest after the donor withdraws. Why? Communities with thriving pilots usually have a great measure of social capital invested and created by program processes. There are high degrees of local creativity, enthusiasm, pride, and trust present in the process of designing and implementing innovative programs. After the ‘awards are given’ or the ‘book is published’ or the ‘conference held’ to celebrate the accomplishments of the pilot, it is perhaps less likely to be replicated. [original emphasis] (Malvicini and Jackson, 2000, citing Gustavsen et al., 1996) There is no blueprint Let us summarise, sensitive to the risks of generalising. Put sharply, there is no general blueprint for enlarging scale. Success depends on responsiveness to the local setting, on strong local organisation and on reform understood as a learning process. That requires organisations that embrace error, plan with the local community and link knowl­edge building with action. Some education reforms are much more amenable to national initiation and management than others. Reforms that are seen as largely technical and that do not threaten local interests (for example, modifying the curriculum and pedagogy for teaching basic science) can be more readily led by education officials than reforms perceived as potentially destabilising and threatening to the local community (for example, increased access for girls or religious or ethnic minorities), which may be initiated by national officials but which are ultimately more dependent on local leadership and community involvement. From the perspective of enlarging scale, decentralised management has a dual edge. On the one hand, local management and control may be essential for a reform to take root and expand. On the other hand, local management and control risk strengthening the influence of local opponents to the reform, encouraging pro­grammes in particular areas to lose sight of the larger goals of the reform, and permitting orientations in different settings to diverge so widely

Scaling up by focusing down  131 that they overwhelm central management and support capacities. As well, scaling up, especially in the form of replication, may be, and perhaps often is, in tension with participatory development and local ownership of development initiatives and programmes.

When is ‘scaling up’ inappropriate or likely to be unviable? We began with the notion that scaling up – start small, think big – is widely thought to be an effective strategy for experimenting with new ideas and extending the reach of education reforms. In some circumstances, that is surely so, though perhaps far less often than has been anticipated. In other circumstances, however, scaling up is inappropriate or likely to be unviable.

Scaling up may so increase costs or so reduce revenue that the reform becomes unsustainable. While it is commonly assumed replicating pilots brings economies of scale, the evidence on that is unclear. Initial economies of scale may be superseded by rising unit costs as expansion includes those who are more difficult to reach. As well, the communities involved in the pilot efforts may be unwilling to fund activities elsewhere, while at the new sites there may be insufficient local support or involvement to generate needed funding.

Scaling up risks distracting key leadership and spreading managerial and other capacities so widely that they can no longer cope. A strong and persisting thread of the education reform literature is the importance of leadership. School heads who are effective in mobilising their communities and energising their staffs will not necessarily do equally well with district, regional or national responsibilities. Indeed, some of the attributes and behaviours that made them effective – ability to take the initiative in initially unsupportive circumstances, willingness to challenge authority, persistence in the face of criticism and adversity – will be unwelcome in the national education system and may be severely curtailed or sanctioned. So too for enlarging scale. Managerial and administrative systems appropriate to a province or a country are not simply large versions of village level oversight. At the same time, national managerial and administrative systems may not be sufficiently sensitive to the content and the form of the reform to sustain the initiative developed at the pilot sites.

Scaling up may outpace the expansion of the needed support infrastructure.

Where the needed infrastructure, including knowledge and skills not available in local communities, is not available, or cannot cope with the demand, scaling up may collapse in a disorderly heap, discouraging all involved and perhaps depleting the fertility of the education soil for further reforms. Scaling up risks undermining the initial reform. Whether by distracting its leadership, or overwhelming its managerial and administrative capacities, or severing its ties to its local communities, or reducing its revenue base, or exposing it to new political controls, efforts to enlarge the scale of the initial reform may instead kill it.

132  J. Samoff et al.

Scaling up may generate new and ultimately fatal political opposition. Precisely because education is so central to contemporary society, efforts to change it often challenge vested interests. The national political system may be able to accommodate those challenges when they remain localised and few. Scaling up risks – indeed may require – generalising those challenges. Feeling threatened, political elites and organisations may shift from cautious tolerance of the reform to implacable opposition. If so, then rather than extending the reach of the reform, scaling up may terminate it.

The conditions conducive to reform may be specific to its initial setting and absent elsewhere. Frustration about unmet demand, or a politically active

community, or a resourceful and resilient church, co-operative or other local institution may be critical to the effectiveness of a pilot but unique to a particular setting. The enabling conditions of effective reforms are often not universal or universally reproducible. In practice, the most useful scale may be the smallest scale.

Broadening the focus Thus far we have been concerned with why replication fails and when replication may be an inappropriate strategy for enlarging education initiatives. We need now to broaden our explanatory frame. Extended analysis of the domains discussed below is beyond the scope of this paper. We note them briefly here, therefore, both to highlight them and to help to frame studying and discussing them. Roles of the national government What are the appropriate roles of the national government in efforts to scale up education reforms?9 Linear and technical responses are common. Education reform requires planning and organisation, knowledge and expertise, funding and infrastructure. Governments can do that. But governments can also impede a process that must have strong local roots and participation. The literature and experiences we have reviewed suggest that the appropriate roles for the national government in enlarging the scale of education reforms are: specifying broad objectives and providing resources; linking programme planning and implementation – establishing appropriate institutions, appointing key personnel and then providing discretion to leaders; monitoring progress and performance; providing continuity and stability; and curbing the power of local elites, especially through institutionalising democratic decision making, ensuring accountability and strengthening local institutions. We must not be naive. Education reform, and therefore scaling up, is as much political as it is technical. Governments are unlikely to take actions that jeopardise their security of tenure. Indeed, those in power have periodically shown themselves to be more apprehensive about a literate and articulate citizenry than about the incapacities induced by illiteracy and persisting poverty.

Scaling up by focusing down  133 Capacity constraints – institutions, personnel and resources – are also important. Often, however, inadequate capacity is a result of continuing dependence on external support and outsourcing rather than an irremediable lack of skills. Far from unachievable, serious education reform, we believe, is itself a strategy for increasing government capacity and accountability. There are two important implications here. First, the general commitment to democratic deliberation, participation and accountability are important for education reform at smaller and larger scales. Second, a government genuinely committed to education reform must create space for it. Societies that cannot tolerate citizens who stand up and say (often in a loud voice and unpleasant tone) ‘The old way is wrong. Here is a better way.’ cannot learn or develop. Roles of the external funding and technical assistance agencies Education in Africa, and especially education reform, has become heavily dependent on external finance.10 What, then, are the appropriate roles of the external funding and technical assistance agencies in efforts to enlarge the scale of education reforms? Since foreign aid is important to both recipients (funds for activities that both expand education and reinforce leaders’ legitimacy) and providers (for some, a liberal ethos of development partnership, for others a strategy for managing the integration of African countries into the global political economy), it cannot be wished away or ignored. Several implications follow. Funding agencies must address explicitly the risk that setting objectives, methods and assessment measures will effectively block local initiatives and undermine local authority and accountability. They should view pilot projects as venture capital investments – with great optimism, continued funding through initial adversity and likely a high failure rate. Aid must go beyond technical inputs to include explicit and energetic support for democratic and participatory decision-making and to insist on transparency and accountability to the local community. While we believe there is a continuing role for external agencies in education reform, we do not accept uncritically some agencies’ claims that their development expertise and advice are more important than their funding. Indeed, we think there is a strong case for separating the funding and advisory roles. Locus of authority and responsibility As we have noted, development advisers, decision-makers and practitioners commonly assume that education reforms must ‘go to scale.’ If learning is fundamentally a local process, and if local participation and ownership are essential for effective reform, where should authority and responsibility for enlarging scale lie? Several related themes that have emerged from our analysis warrant noting briefly here.

134  J. Samoff et al. •

• • •

•

The appropriate balance between central direction and local autonomy is likely to vary over time and circumstances, perhaps even within the same setting. Notwithstanding laws and regulations, the location of authority and responsibility are often negotiated. Like education reform, scaling up is necessarily a political process. While detailed prior plans and clearly specified lines of authority are attractive to national governments and external agencies, they may in practice impede education reform and efforts to enlarge its scale. While they can clearly play important roles in education reform and enlarging its scale, non-governmental organisations cannot replace government, external funding and technical assistance agencies or local communities. Relying on NGOs can reduce transparency and accountability, weaken local capacities, and undermine citizens’ efforts to insist on the government’s responsibility for providing education as a public good.

‘Going to scale’ and participatory local development Pro­grammes without significant local participation cannot be maintained or sustained, however imaginative their conception and however well funded their initiation. Notwithstanding the development community’s rhetorical commitment to participatory local development, there are important tensions between a strong local role and the common notion of going to scale (replicating effective pilots). Put sharply, (1) education reforms that flourish because they have strong local roots may wither after the departure of charismatic leaders and the exhaustion of the initial funding, and (2) ‘going to scale’ cannot be accomplished by launching programmes in new settings with neither local participation nor local ownership. Where the reform is externally driven or more responsive to foreign funders than to the local communities, it is likely to be more incapacitating than capacity building, to be poorly integrated into national development strategies, and unlikely to secure the political support necessary to see it through challenge and adversity. We must not romanticise that process. Local communities may be dominated by rent-seeking, self-aggrandising, unaccountable local elites who can invoke a host of sharing norms and other redistributive mechanisms to ensure that their status is not challenged. Clearly, there are important roles for outsiders in education reform and enlarging its scale. Ultimately, however, local participation, ownership and accountability matter more.

What is to be scaled up? Scaling up in education is intended to expand access and improve quality for more people over a wider geographical area, and to do so in ways that are efficient, equitable and sustainable. Given education’s critical role, the strategies

Scaling up by focusing down  135 adopted to promote education reform by enlarging the scale of effective pilots must address the broader development objectives of empowerment, equity, social transformation and sustainable change. Both the general literature and the studies of African experiences emphasise that scaling up success stories rest on both systemic and specifically local elements. The initial reform addresses a well-understood local need and responds to significant local demand. The reform itself is largely locally derived and is led, nurtured and often protected by leaders who are charismatic, forceful, inventive, and able to build political coalitions to support and shelter the reform. The reform is adequately fi­ nanced, with sufficient funding that continues beyond the initial allocation. Most important, there is significant local ownership of the reform. The importance of the local roots of this process suggest that mechanically replicating the specific elements of the reform in other settings will only rarely lead to a viable and sustainable outcome. Attempting to replicate the reform itself (i.e., take it to scale) inevitably violates some of the very conditions that render certain innovations successful in the first place. The fact is that people’s educational aspirations, needs, and contexts differ from place to place. Accordingly, what works in one location won’t necessarily work in another. And even in those instances where an ‘outside’ innovation addresses some of the specific needs and aspirations of a particular location, its fate is still precarious, for unless there is widespread ownership of the innovation (a factor largely engendered through the development of local solutions), chances are that it will not become a permanent feature of that location’s educational landscape. (Healey and DeStefano, 1997, p.11) Accordingly, rather than replicating the specific elements of the reform, what

must be scaled up are the conditions that permitted the initial reform to be successful and the local roots that can sustain it. That challenge involves finding

ways to generate widespread and locally rooted demand for the reform and to support an informed and inclusive locally based deliberation over the content and form of the reform. That challenge also requires finding ways to make political space for the reform and to protect it from vested interests who perceive it as a threat and a bureaucracy whose efforts to routinise change often smother it. At the same time, those directly involved in the reform must understand reform as a continuing process rather than a specific outcome and must structure it to embed learning at its core.

Notes  1 Earlier versions of this chapter were presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Association for the Development of Education in Africa, at meetings of the Comparative and International Education Society and the African Studies Association, and at the Oxford International Education Conference.

136  J. Samoff et al.   2 The ECOSOC High Level Segment on Africa: Girls’ Education Panel, convened on 1 June 2001, included senior officials from UNICEF, UNFPA, and WFP and the former Executive Director of the Forum of African Women Educationalists. Available at http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/know_sharing/flagship_initiatives/ecosoc. shtml (accessed 21 July, 2004).   3 That is the premise of their instructive overview, which they characterise as ‘a first scientific look at scaling up’ (Uvin and Miller, 1994). See also Uvin and Miller (1996).   4 A fuller discussion is beyond the scope of this chapter. For an overview of what seems problematic in this orientation, see Samoff and Stromquist (2001). Wilks develops a sharp critique of the World Bank’s Development Gateway (Wilks, 2000). Other research offers a more positive assessment of progress to date (King and McGrath, 2000, 2003).  5 The World Bank’s Global Education Reform website was archived as a toolkit in 2005. The current Education page is available at go.worldbank.org/U9VBTV35X0 (accessed 17 July, 2010).  6 Maclure’s work provides a useful entry point for research on education in Africa (1997; 2006). Another is the Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA), which commissioned country studies for its 1999, 2001 and 2003 Biennial Meetings (ADEA, 1999, 2001, 2003). For an overview of education in Africa more generally that highlights problems and challenges, see Samoff with Carrol (2007).   7 The Policy Consultation on Scaling Up Good Practices in Girls’ Education, Nairobi, 23–25 June 2004, organised within the United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative. For the agenda see http://213.225.140.43/human_development/agenda.pdf (accessed 13 September, 2004).  8 Recall that we are concerned here with efforts to replicate effective pilot reforms. Government-initiated national campaigns also have a role in education reform, a subject beyond the scope of this analysis.   9 The literature on aid to education in Africa grows steadily. For an overview of the consequences of persisting reliance on that external support, see Samoff (2007). 10 Samoff (2009) explores further the dysfunctions of foreign aid.

References Agyeman, D. K., Baku, J. J. K., and Gbadamosi, R., assisted by Addabor, E., AdooAdeku, K., Cudjoe, M., Essuman, A. A., Gala, E. E. K., and Pomary, C. (2000) Review of Education Sector Analysis in Ghana 1987–1998, Paris: UNESCO for the ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis. Association for the Development of Education in Africa (1999) Partnerships for Capacity Building and Quality Improvements in Education, Paris: ADEA. Association for the Development of Education in Africa (2001) What Works and What’s New in Education: Africa Speaks! Report from a Prospective, Stocktaking Review of Education in Africa, Paris: ADEA. Association for the Development of Education in Africa (2003) The Challenge of Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in Sub Saharan Africa, Paris: ADEA. Chikombah, C.E.M., Chivore, B.R.S., Maravanyika, O.E., Nyagura, L.M., and Sibanda, I.M. (1999) Review of Education Sector Analysis in Zimbabwe 1990–1996, Paris: UNESCO for the Working Group on Education Sector Analysis. Harrington, L. and White, J. (1999) ‘Taking it higher: Thoughts on scaling up within problem-solving approaches to research on INRM’, CIMMYT Natural Resources

Scaling up by focusing down  137 Group; Center for International Forestry Research. Available at (accessed 21 July 2007). Healey, F. H. and DeStefano, J. (1997) ‘Education reform support: a framework for scaling up school reform’, Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute, Policy Paper Series. Ilboudo, K. E., Compaoré, M., Ouédraogo, B., Somda, P., Kaboré, O., Ouédraogo, A., Kinda, F., and Kaboré, B. (2001) Analyse Sectorielle du Système Educatif: Revue Nationale des Études en Education entre 1994 et 1999, Paris: UNESCO for the ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis. King, K. and McGrath, S. (2000) Learning to Make Policy: Development Cooperation Agencies and Knowledge Management, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University, Centre for African Studies. King, K. and McGrath, S. (2003) Knowledge for Development, London: Zed Press. Korten, D. (1980) ‘Community organization and rural development: a learning process approach’, Public Administration Review, September–October: 480–511. Maclure, R. (ed.) (1997) Overlooked and Undervalued: A Synthesis of ERNWACA Reviews on the State of Education Research in West and Central Africa, Washington: USAID. Maclure, R. (2006) ‘No longer overlooked and undervalued? The evolving dynamics of endogenous educational research in sub Saharan Africa’, Harvard Educational Review, 76(1): 80 109. Malvicini, P. and Jackson, J. (2000) ‘Emerging at scale: breaking the star-case monopoly’, in Going to Scale: Can We Bring More Benefits to More People More Quickly? Silang: International Institute of Rural Reconstruction. Myers, R.G. (1984) ‘Going to scale’, paper prepared for UNICEF for the Second InterAgency Meeting on Community-based Child Development, New York, October 1984. Available at (accessed 8 August 2011). Myers, R. (2000) ‘Going to scale: expansion vs. association’, in Evans, J.L., Myers, R.G. and Ilfeld, E.M. Early Childhood Counts: A Programming Guide on Early Childhood Care for Development (World Bank Institute Learning Resources Series), Washington: World Bank. Available at (accessed 23 August 2001). Samoff, J. (2007) ‘Institutionalizing international influence’, in Arnove, R.F. and Torres, C.A. (eds) Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local, 3rd edn, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Pp. 74–77. Samoff, J. (2009) ‘The fast track to planned dependence: education aid to Africa’, paper presented at International Political Science Association XXI World Congress, Santiago, Chile, July. Samoff, J. and Stromquist, N.P. (2001) ‘Managing knowledge and storing wisdom? New forms of foreign aid?’ Development and Change, 32(4): 617–642. Samoff, J., Dembélé, M. and Sebatane, E.M. (2011) ‘“Going to scale”: Nurturing the local roots of education in Africa’. EdQual working paper no. 28. Bristol: EdQual. Samoff, J., with Assié-Lumumba, N’D.T. (1996) Analyses, Agendas, and Priorities for Education in Africa: A Review of Externally Initiated, Commissioned and Supported

138  J. Samoff et al. Studies of Education in Africa, 1990–1994, Paris: UNESCO, for the ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis. Samoff, J., with Carrol, B. (2007) ‘Education for All in Africa: still a distant dream’, in Arnove, R.F. and Torres, C.A. (eds) Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local, 3rd edn, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Pp. 357–388. Sebatane, E. M., Ambrose, D. P., Molise, M. K., Mothibeli, A., Motlomelo, S. T., Nenty, H. J., Nthunya, E. M. and Ntoi, V. M. (2000) Review of Education Sector Analysis in Lesotho 1978–1999, Paris: UNESCO for the ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis. Tilahun Workineh, Tirussew Teferra, Ayalew Shibeshi, and Malcolm Mercer. (1999) Studies of Education in Ethiopia: An Inventory and Overview of Education Sector Studies in Ethiopia 1994–1997. Paris: UNESCO. Unterhalter, E., Kioko-Echessa, E., Pattman, R., Rajagopalan, R., and N’Jai, F. (2004) Scaling up Girls’ Education: Towards a Scorecard on Girls’ Education in the Commonwealth, London: University of London, Institute of Education, and Oxfam GB. Uvin, P. and Miller, D. (1994) Scaling up: Thinking through the Issues, Providence, RI: World Hunger Program Research Report. Available at HTTP (accessed 12 August 2001). Uvin, P. and Miller, D. (1996) ‘Paths to scaling up: alternative strategies for local nongovernmental organizations’, in Human Organization, 55: 344 353. Wilks, A. (2000) A Tower of Babel on the Internet? The World Bank’s Development Gateway, London: Bretton Woods Project.

Part III

Implementing quality in schools

10 Leading and managing change in schools George K.T. Oduro, Michael Fertig and Hillary Dachi

Introduction The global quest for social justice in education and its effects on socio-economic policies of Sub-Saharan Africa have led to significant country-level changes in basic education curriculum, leadership and management. The Millennium Development Goals have also created a momentum towards Education for All (EFA), with the aim of ensuring that no child is denied access to school education due to gender, cultural, religious and other factors. In both Ghana and Tanzania, a key response of central governments has been to conform to international trends as recommended by the International Monetary Fund and The World Bank by decentralising administrative responsibilities to district and school levels (Nkrumah, 2000; Crook, 2003; Smoke, 2003; Crawford, 2008). A consequence is that additional administrative responsibilities have been placed on schools just as enrolments have expanded dramatically and teachers are expected to implement radically reformed curricula (see chapters by Le Fanu and Halai in this volume). In Ghana, schools are required to provide effective leadership for implementing the country’s Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (FCUBE) programme which seeks, among other things, to promote social justice by making quality teaching and learning available for all children and actively involving communities in school management (MOE [Ministry of Education], 2011). Similarly, in Tanzania, schools are expected to implement the country’s Primary Education Development Plan II (PEDP II), which aims to provide all children, including those in difficult circumstances, with a complete cycle of primary education (Swai and Ndidde, 2006). The drive towards the decentralisation of the educational process has, in consequence, led to the localisation of leadership and management, as seen, for example, in the extended role of School Management Committees in the two countries. The recent trend towards decentralisation has raised questions about the roles and responsibilities of school leaders, who have traditionally adopted ‘functionary’ roles in many low-income states. Located as they are at the nodal point between central government policy imperatives, driven by the global agenda of social justice in educational provision and local concerns related to specific communities, families and children, head teachers must now play a

142  G.K.T. Oduro et al. central role in developing manageable strategies for implementing national policies, promoting social justice and improving pupils’ school experiences and learning outcomes. This chapter is informed by the findings of a large scale EdQual research project that examined the capacity that head teachers have for bringing about changes necessary for improving educational quality within schools that operate in disadvantaged circumstances. In this is chapter we discuss the ways in which some primary school head teachers in Ghana and Tanzania were able to promote social justice and improve the quality of teaching and learning in their schools. We argue that the decentralisation imperatives in these countries have impacted upon the role of school leaders, foregrounding the need for them to be supported in order to develop coherent, evidence-based approaches to the local implementation of government policy initiatives. The evidence from Ghana and Tanzania suggests that not only do ‘head teachers matter’ but that they also ‘matter’ through developing an enhanced role as agents of school improvement at the site level. This study illustrates that the development of an ‘action research’, evidence-based approach, with a particular focus on the role of head teachers as instructional leaders, can have significant impacts upon the quality of education experienced by pupils in their schools, even when these schools face significant challenges. The chapter concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for head teacher development and linkages between school, district and regional management structures.

Expansion, decentralisation and school leadership In sub-Saharan Africa, educational policies have been shaped by the manifestos of ruling political parties and international development agendas. Major initiatives introduced by sub-Saharan African governments towards achieving the 2015 EFA target include the implementation of fee-free primary education policy (Mingat, 2003, p.30) leading to dramatic expansion in enrolments. In Ghana, successive governments have recognised the indispensable role that education plays in the country’s socio-economic development. Accordingly, the country has reformed – and continues to reform – its educational system to ensure equity in the provision and delivery of quality education. The country’s 1992 Constitution mandates governments to provide free and compulsory education for all Ghanaians of school-going age. In pursuing changes introduced by the 2002 review of the country’s 1987 reforms, the Ministry of Education continues to explore ways of reaching out to marginalised children by expanding access to quality basic education. For example, the Ministry introduced a capitation grant in 2005 and mainstreamed kindergarten education as an integral part of the basic education system in 2007. In pursuit of Goal 5 of EFA, the Ministry has also decentralised its Girls’ Education Unit (GEU) across the country’s ten regions and 170 districts and appointed regional and district GEU officers to co-ordinate activities and support initiatives for improving girls’ access to quality education. This has resulted in improved gender parity at

Leading and managing change in schools  143 all levels of basic education in the country. The Gender Parity Index (GPI) at the primary level rose from 0.93 in 2003/2004 to 0.96 in 2008/2009 and 0.97 in 2010/2011 (Ministry of Education, 2009, 2011). In Tanzania, as part of its first Primary Education Development Programme (PEDP I)(URT [United Republic of Tanzania], 2001) the government abolished school fees and all other mandatory parental contributions in 2002 and shifted the cost burden relatively to communities, through encouraging their contribution to building classrooms. Compulsory enrolment in the first year of primary for children between the age of seven and ten was enforced and a complementary programme provided for children aged ten to 14 so that by 2005 universal enrolment was achieved and only seven and eight year olds needed to be enrolled in year one. Repetition was officially restricted to a maximum of one year over the primary school cycle. PEDP I also changed funding modalities by granting schools direct funding. So, as in Ghana, schools were provided with a capitation grant proportional to the number of pupils enrolled for operational expenses and purchasing of textbooks. It also instituted a development grant for increasing the quantity and improving the quality of school infrastructure. The institutional arrangements for PEDP show that whilst the Local Government Authorities articulate the overall policy directions of the Central Government, it is the school committee that determines the priorities. School committees are also required to develop detailed implementation schedules for the execution and supervision of the implementation of PEDP at school level. In a separate move, a competenciesbased primary curriculum (similar to the outcomes-based curricula discussed by Halai in chapter 12 of this book) was introduced in 2005. From 2007, these policies were continued and supplemented with others related to improving the quality of inputs and monitoring of outcomes in a second five-year programme, named PEDP II (URT, 2006a). The crucial issue here is how principles of decentralised accountability and community participation are ensured and how devolving financial management to school level supports the realisation of desired outcomes. In both countries, dramatic expansion in access has proved easier to achieve than delivery of good quality education, despite the restructuring of schools, construction of numerous classrooms, temporarily raising rates of recruitment into teaching in Tanzania and upgrading thousands of previously underqualified teachers in both countries. We argue that one of the reasons for this is that school leaders have not been supported to develop leadership capabilities commensurate with their expanded responsibilities (Oduro, 2007). Head teachers, especially in schools serving deprived communities, are key implementers of policies aimed at creating effective education environments, yet many of them are overwhelmed by the expectations placed on them (Oduro and MacBeath, 2003). Yet, the transitional processes from centralised to decentralised systems of management in both countries have changed the nature of challenges facing school level leadership. Head teachers have had to grapple with challenges relating to managing human, material and financial resources

144  G.K.T. Oduro et al. that are often inadequate and also have had to work with a greater number of external actors. These complex challenges coupled with increasing public demand for school accountability require a new type of head teacher who can effectively provide leadership for managing the increased enrolment resulting from the access expansion initiatives, facilitate the implementation of change initiatives, create conducive teaching and learning environments for all children and provide the necessary professional support for teachers and pupils. This new type of leader needs to gain an understanding of the processes of change and demonstrate a sense of agency in all he or she does as school leader. Without a clear understanding of change, a sense of agency and ways of managing change, those in leadership positions are more likely to sideline the task of managing change in schools. It is perhaps for this reason that Louis and Miles (1990) note that schools need knowledge, will and skill to bring about successful change efforts. It is essential therefore that school leaders in sub-Saharan Africa have a contextual understanding of the nature and strategies for initiating and managing change in the school.

The research process EdQual’s Leadership and Management of Change project involved collaborative action research with 21 Ghanaian (11 men, ten women) and 12 Tanzanian (six men and six women) head teachers of primary schools. All schools were coeducational public sector schools located within socio-economically disadvantaged communities in a range of urban, peri-urban and rural settings. There were roughly equal numbers of male and female action researchers (11 men and ten women in Ghana, six men and six women in Tanzania). A major question that guided the action research activities was: How can head teachers be empowered to lead school improvement that would benefit the most disadvantaged learners? The action research therefore aimed at empowering head teachers with the knowledge and skills of engaging in school-based needs analysis; identifying critical challenges confronting their school’s implementation of quality education initiatives; identifying which individuals and groups of children within their schools were most disadvantaged; and designing, implementing and monitoring interventions targeted at those pupils. As Rapoport articulates (1970), action research aims at contributing “both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to the goals of social science by joint collaboration within a mutually acceptable ethical framework” (p. 499). Rapoport’s focus on ‘problem-solving’, resonates well with the technique employed by the action researchers in the Ghanaian and Tanzanian schools. At the same time, the action research projects collectively allowed academic researchers to identify the ways in which head teachers could be empowered and supported to lead change and the conditions that supported or impeded them as school level innovators. As argued by Farah and Jaworski (2006), whose research influenced the action research approaches used in our

Leading and managing change in schools  145 study, an action research approach provides a systematic and evaluative stance towards the development process. The action research methodology was also viewed as a way of making empowerment and capacity development integral to the research process consistent with EdQual’s research approach, which sought to empower educators through the research process by “supporting their development as reflective practitioners and agents of change” at the same time as being “grounded in an analysis of local realities and the understandings and perspectives of learners, practitioners and the communities they belong to” (Barrett and Tikly, 2010: 193). The research, which was carried out between February 2008 and December 2009, generated data in the form of head teacher journals and facilitators’ reports. The study began with a workshop in Ghana and another in Tanzania involving head teachers and university lecturers who acted as action researchers and facilitators, respectively. A second workshop was conducted in each country in early 2009. The workshops aimed to develop understandings of the action research process and to provide an opportunity for sharing experiences and discussing emerging findings. Head teachers were encouraged to identify issues to research that would improve quality for the most disadvantaged learners in their schools. The head teachers’ projects tackled issues related to access, school/ community relationships, classroom pedagogy and pupil achievement. The facilitators visited action researchers in their schools between three and six times a year, where they discussed the research process, provided technical support with data analysis and recorded their impressions of the research process.

The impact of action research as a tool for leading and managing change in schools Evidence from the study strongly suggests that action research makes a difference in leading and managing change in school. It is therefore an approach that should be considered as an integral part of leadership and management development programmes for head teachers. Action research lays a foundation that encourages an ‘I can do it’ attitude or sense of self-efficacy in head teachers. Developing a positive attitude towards change and putting in structures to manage its implementation depends on professional selfconfidence and a sense of agency. This transformation in head teachers’ sense of self-efficacy as leaders of change at the school level is one of the most remarkable outcomes of the research. Prior to the commencement of the action research activity, 16 out of 21 head teachers in Ghana demonstrated lack of self-confidence in taking initiatives towards solving school-level challenges. They looked up to their circuit supervisor and the Ghana Education Service for directives as to how such challenges could be addressed. They were not confident about taking initiatives, defending these initiatives and convincing teachers, parents and pupils and other opinion leaders to buy into them. Moreover, only a few of them demonstrated awareness that their primary responsibility was to promote learning in the school. Instead, the

146  G.K.T. Oduro et al. majority of them saw themselves more as administrators whose primary task was to take custody of school property and account to the Ghana Education Service. For example, one Ghanaian head teacher observed: You see, I taught for fifteen years before I became a head but they say I should teach as well…I teach and I do administration going to district office, attending meetings, doing many things and teaching at the same time but I’m not paid double pay. It’s not fair…We head teachers are cheated…They should make teachers to help children to learn so we heads do the administration. (A rural head teacher) After they had participated in the training workshops, all twenty-one head teachers confidently undertook school level needs analysis to identify challenges inhibiting the implementation of quality education initiatives. They then drew up and initiated a change agenda. By the end of the action research cycle, they had stopped seeing themselves as merely administrators and custodians of school property and had developed such so much self-confidence that they were able to initiate interventions that improved pupil motivation and learning. In Tanzania, transformation was less dramatic, partly because around half of the action researchers were confident at the outset about leading organisational change and mobilising community members, although this confidence did not extend to classroom practice, where low teacher morale was seen as an insurmountable barrier to change. In Ghana, there was also evidence of attitudinal change in leadership styles from a ‘concentrated’ leadership style where the head teacher carried out every leadership task all alone to a more ‘distributed’ style where teachers were actively involved in leadership. Culturally, concentrated leadership styles may be attributed to the fact that leadership in the West African context has a spiritual connotation where the leader is believed to have been imbued with unquestionable power and authority by their ancestors. In this context, as Oduro (2004) explains, leadership is not a shared activity because the individual leader is singularly accountable to the ancestors. Moreover, the accountabilitydriven environment within which Ghanaian head teachers operate tends to discourage some head teachers from sharing leadership responsibilities with teachers. In Tanzania, head teachers tended to maintain the leadership styles they practiced before the project, with those who were more collegial in their approach tending to be more successful in leading sustained innovative change. In traditional Ghanaian cultural setting, the expectation is that children are seen but not heard. This cultural orientation had influenced the leadership practices of some head teachers prior to their involvement in the action research. After the research however, after the research however, this orientation changed and pupils were also involved in decision-making in the school. In 11 out of the 21 Ghanaian schools, head teachers encouraged active participation of pupils in school leadership by involving them in making and implementing decisions

Leading and managing change in schools  147 relating to issues such as speech and prize giving ceremonies, educational trips, cleaning of the compound, and lateness to school. By contrast, Tanzania already had a history of at least nominal pupil participation in school participation dating back to 1967 following the enunciation of the policy of Education for Self Reliance, which required pupils to be involved in decision making about school-based productive enterprises (Harber, 1997). This may be why pupil leadership did not emerge as an issue in Tanzania. These attitudinal changes in the head teachers had a positive impact on the implementation of school-level changes directed towards fighting poverty, ensuring gender equity and coping with the challenges associated with decentralisation. To illustrate the changes in leadership style resulting from the action research process, we will now discuss two case studies.

Leading and managing poverty-related challenges The majority of action researchers (16 out of 21 in Ghana and nine out of 12 in Tanzania) aimed to improve attendance and were already aware that attendance was a strong indicator of socio-economic or gender-related disadvantage. They demonstrated considerable resourcefulness in mobilising community leaders, parents and teachers, securing assistance for individual pupils from local NGOs and making use of school resources, such as a school farm. Mobilisation of community and parents was generally considered by head teachers to be easier to achieve than changes to teachers’ practice, most especially pedagogic practice. Twelve head teachers in Ghana reported remarkable success in persuading parents to ensure that pupils arrived in school ready to learn, through communicating the importance of providing children with breakfast in the morning and making sure they had pens and exercise books. Another Ghananaian action researcher, concerned about hygiene and sanitation at the school, persuaded community leaders to approach an international NGO, resulting in a borehole being drilled for the school. One head teacher in Tanzania was able to mobilise parents to contribute towards provision of a simple meal or a drink of milk during the school day. Two examples of initiatives tackling poverty related absenteeism and raising performance are described in projects A and B below. Project A illustrates the most common approach of mobilising community leaders and parents. However, this action researcher was also particularly successful in leading and managing changes to school practices, including, unusually, teaching and learning. This may well have been because of her own extensive expertise and sense of selfefficacy in promoting quality teaching and learning (see Halai, and Avalos and Barrett in this book). She introduced multiple changes during the process. Project A – Improving reading, writing and communication skills The head teacher was in charge of a special needs school for children with hearing impairments, in the northern region, a relatively underdeveloped region

148  G.K.T. Oduro et al. of Ghana. The school, with a population of 350 pupils, lacked adequate reading and writing books to support children’s learning. As a result, a number of pupils could not read basic texts. Prior to her participation in the action research activity, she pitied the parents of her pupils because of their socio-economic deprivation, and this inhibited her discussing pupils’ learning challenges with them. Indeed, she did not have any hope that the parents could buy reading books to support their children’s reading skill development. Teachers and head teachers were resigned to the existing state of affairs. During the action research process, the head teacher identified dialogue as a possible tool for changing parental attitude as well as the attitude of teachers. She created a platform for parents and teachers to discuss the performance of pupils through the Parent–Teacher Association meetings. Both parents and teachers expressed concern about the low level at which pupils performed in reading. Following the dialogue, parents prioritised purchase of reading books and teachers, following the head teacher’s leadership, experimented with new classroom strategies for improving children’s reading skills (this is discussed in more detail in Bosu, Dare, Dachi and Fertig, 2011). Post-intervention, the majority of pupils who had not been able to read fundamental words, could now, in the words of the head teacher, “identify and sign correctly words they used everyday to interact with teachers.” The head teacher also mobilized the parents to address issues of pupil attendance, punctuality and regularity in class. Through Parent–Teacher Association meetings, parents were urged to ensure that pupils went to school on time. The school was also responsive to parents’ requests to change the start of the school day from 8.00 am to 8.45 am for the sake of children, who had to walk long distances to school. The school also started calling a registration before the start of each lesson and hence reduced the incidence of pupil truanting midway through the school day. Project B – Supporting vulnerable pupils In project B, the action undertaken was typical of a cluster of four Tanzanian projects in which the researchers met regularly to share ideas and data collection tools. All four systematically analysed attendance data to identify pupils at risk of dropping out and then employed a combination of regular monitoring of individuals and personalised compassionate support that met with mixed success. However, the researcher in project B went further than others in establishing school systems for identifying and supporting vulnerable pupils. She had started with low expectations of the project but her highly collegial leadership style proved effective in mobilizing staff and facilitating vulnerable pupils to access support outside of school. The action researcher was head teacher of a school of 1500 pupils in Tanga in Tanzania, where most of the local residents were supporters of an opposition party. She gave this as a reason for the community’s reluctance to support the school and tolerance of pupil truancy. Although attendance rates at the school

Leading and managing change in schools  149 were above 80 per cent, she identified absenteeism as an issue to address in the research project. Various measures were introduced to improve this situation. Pupils who were frequently absent were identified through analysis of attendance registers. The head teacher herself started monitoring their attendance regularly, looking at their exercise books and encouraging them to talk about the reasons behind their absenteeism. She also persuaded their class teachers to do the same. Over the two-year period this was scaled up to the whole school level with systems in place for flagging up problems with attendance early on and a ‘truancy committee’ established to counsel pupils considered to be in danger of dropping out or under-performing. Teaching staff also discussed how they could make their lessons more engaging for pupils as a way to reduce truancy and some made efforts to modify their classroom practice. The project’s influence extended to a neighbouring school, which approached the action researcher for advice on how to improve pupil attendance. At the very beginning of the project, a small number of children were found to be missing school for poverty-related reasons. Most of these children were orphans, the most desperate of whom were two siblings, the elder of whom was head of household following the recent death of their mother. The head teacher approached a local NGO, which agreed to train the elder brother, who at 17 was overage for primary school, and set him up in business as a tailor. The school also kept a reserve of stationery which was issued to the neediest children at the head teacher’s discretion. Teachers also assisted individuals from their own pockets with money for medicine or a meal but felt they were unable to meet the need across the school.

Initiatives promoting gender equity In the case-study schools, stakeholders tended to understand gender equity as numerical parity in enrolment, performance and participation in official leadership roles. In a baseline study preceding the action research, head teachers in both Tanzania and Ghana said they were encouraging girls’ participation in school and learning. Gender related challenges identified by the action researchers included boys “domination in school leadership tasks”, early marriage of girls, absenteeism or poor performance due to girls’ extensive engagement in domestic activities and of boys due to engagement in economic activities or opting for leisure activities. In terms of girls’ participation in leadership roles, there was a clear difference between Ghana and Tanzania with several head teachers observing a tendency for boys to dominate in Ghana whilst in Tanzania equity in numbers of girls and boys in leadership was routinely observed, and indeed was required by the national policy. Six Ghanaian action researchers tackled gender inequality in leadership participation and consequently observed girls in their schools showing increased confidence in their interactions with boys (for a more detailed discussion, see Bosu et al., 2011). Project C (Box 7.3) below describes an action research project

150  G.K.T. Oduro et al. that sought to provide positive role models for girls. Box 7.3: Project C – Enabling girls and reducing sexual risk-taking. The head teacher, who was in charge of a disadvantaged school located within the interior part of the Central region of Ghana, was concerned by the incidence of drop-out due to teenage pregnancy amongst girls in her school. The school had an enrolment of 500 pupils comprising 300 girls and 200 boys. The head teacher raised the issue of teenage pregnancy with the Parent–Teacher Association, the School Management Committee and the wider community. Community leaders responded by passing a byelaw prohibiting primary school pupils from loitering on the street after 8.00 pm, effectively barring them from night-time drinking venues. The Chief and elders of the village also emphasised the celebration of puberty rites. In Ghana, puberty rites are a cultural set of rituals of social status transformation, which children undergo. Puberty rites mark the entry of young women into adulthood. Under the supervision of the queen mother of the village, young women who experience their first menstruation are secluded from the community for a period between two to three weeks during which they are taught the secrets of womanhood. It is only after the rituals that the young girl is pronounced marriageable and given the license to engage in sexual relations. As a result of heightened awareness in the community, stakeholders showed a greater willingness to take punitive measures against men found responsible for pregnancy of girl of primary school age. The head teacher explained: The chief and the community…invoked the practice of puberty rites in the village and parents were tasked to ensure that their young ladies obeyed the rules governing puberty rites. The result is that the incidence of girls dropping out because of pregnancy reduced. For example, in 2007/08 five girls dropped out due to pregnancy. In 2008/09, however, only one girl dropped out due to teenage pregnancy.

Additionally the head teacher identified school practices that implied girls were inferior to boys, contributing to a low sense of self-esteem amongst the former. Only girls were expected to perform particular menial chores such as sweeping classrooms and the compound and fetching water. Conversely, only boys tended to be allocated the leadership role of being school prefects. As well as changing these practices, the head teacher periodically invited women counsellors from the community and women in leadership positions into the school to talk to pupils, hoping they would act as positive role models for girls.

Conclusion The research reported here set out to support head teachers in improving quality education in their schools. It particularly sought to enable head teachers to be innovative in improving education quality for disadvantaged learners in a

Leading and managing change in schools  151 context where decentralisation is extending and intensifying their administrative responsibilities in the school. We highlight four implications that can be drawn from the research and comment on the conditions which limited innovation. First, particularly in Ghana where most head teachers did not directly link leadership roles to improving pupil learning, head teachers should be reconstructed as leaders for improving the quality of learning rather than bureaucratic implementers of centrally determined policies. This has profound implications for how they are managed, how their work is supervised and for leadership training. Reconstructing school leaders as autonomous professionals could be regarded as a first step towards “nurturing the local roots of innovation” (Samoff et al. in Chapter 9). Incorporating action research into professional development is a promising way of enhancing the leadership capabilities of head teachers as it develops their skills for evaluating school quality, increases their capacity to monitor the impact of change initiatives, and develops habits of reflexivity while at the same time nurturing a transforming sense of self-efficacy. Secondly, the research shows that head teachers are capable of mobilising communities, from household level upwards, to support quality education delivery. This is a particularly significant finding as EdQual’s secondary data analysis from the second phase of the Southern and East African Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality (SACMEQ) has shown that community support has a positive impact on learning outcomes (Smith, 2011). Research has also shown that variables such as improved diet and access to pens and paper are associated with improved performance in reading (Smith and Barrett, 2011). Head teachers demonstrated considerable potential to address the inclusion challenges of EFA within their own schools and local communities. However, only a small minority of action researchers demonstrated efficacy in leading pedagogical change. Most felt they were not adequately prepared to lead pedagogical change in the context, in Tanzania, of radical curriculum reform similar to that Halai describes in Pakistan in chapter 12 of this book. Thirdly, changes in the role of head teachers within the decentralisation processes in Ghana and Tanzania have implications for linkages between school, and district and regional management structures. School Management Committees and School Committees in Ghana and Tanzania, respectively, play a pivotal role in the implementation of decentralised initiatives. Yet, in both countries, these committees do not function effectively because of their inadequate capacity in school management (URT, 2006b; IEPA [Institute for Educational Planning & Administration], 2010). As a result head teachers do not get the requisite support for their leadership practice. This partly explains why, in both countries, head teachers complained that they were overwhelmed by their leadership and managerial responsibilities. Governments in both countries therefore need to ensure that decentralised responsibilities devolved to head teachers are accompanied by requisite professional support. Finally, whilst our research suggests that in most schools and contexts, skilled empowered leaders can make a difference in terms of quality improvement and

152  G.K.T. Oduro et al. social justice, this is not always enough. There are contexts where local communities are unable to support the school or individual children within the school, whether because of a socio-economic poverty, a shortage of social capital, or both. In these contexts, quality improvement will only be stimulated through some form of external intervention such as expert facilitation of schoolcommunity dialogue to overcome school level challenges. It was precisely in these contexts that some schools were chronically understaffed so there was no time or capacity to initiate change within the school. It should however be noted that even in those schools where action researchers were successful in mobilising community support, the extent to which communities will be able to sustain this into the future, especially if global recession or unfavourable weather threaten local livelihoods, is not known.

References Barrett, A.M. & Tikly, L. (2010) ‘Education quality: research priorities and approaches in the global era’ in Mattheou, D. (Ed.) Changing Educational Landscapes: Educational policies, schooling systems and Higher Education – a comparative perspective. Dordrecht, Springer. Pp. 185–206. Bosu, R., Dare, A., Dachi, H. and Fertig, M. (2011) ‘School leadership and social justice: evidence from Ghana and South Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 67–77. Crawford, G. (2008) ‘Decentralization and the limits to poverty reduction: findings from Ghana’. Oxford Development Studies, 36(2): 235–258. Crook, R.C. (2003) ‘Decentralisation and poverty reduction in Africa: the politics of local-central relations’. Public Administration & Development, 23: 77–88. Farah, I. and Jaworski, B. (2006) Partnerships in Educational Development. Oxford, Symposium. Harber, C. (1997) Education, Democracy and Political Development in Africa. Brighton, Sussex Academic Press. Institute for Educational Planning & Administration (IEPA) (2010) ‘A report on perspectives of school management committees on the SMC Handbook prepared for the Ghana Education Service’. Cape Coast, University of Cape Coast. Louis, K.S. and Miles, M.B. (1990) Improving the Urban High School: What Works and Why. New York, Teachers College Press. Mingat, A. ‘Analytical and factual elements for a quality policy for primary education in Sub-Saharan Africa in the context of Education for All’, paper presented at Association for the Development of Education in Africa, Biennial Meeting, Mauritius, December 2003. Ministry of Education (2009) ‘Education sector performance report’. Accra: Republic of Ghana. Ministry of Education (2011) ‘Preliminary education sector performance report’. Accra: Republic of Ghana. Nkrumah, S.A. (2000) ‘Decentralisation for good governance and development: the Ghanaian experience’. Regional Development Dialogue, 21: 53–67. Oduro, G.K.T. ‘Distributed leadership in schools: what English headtachers say about the ‘pull’ and ‘push’ factors’, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Manchester, September 2004.

Leading and managing change in schools  153 Oduro, G.K.T (2007) ‘Çoping with the challenge of quality basic education: the missing ingredient’, in D.E.K. Amenumey (ed.) Challenges of Education in Ghana in the 21st Century. Accra, Woeli Publishers. Oduro, G.K.T. andMacBeath, J. (2003) ‘Traditions and tensions in leadership: the Ghanaian experience’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3): 441–457. Rapoport R.N. (1970) ‘Three dilemmas of action research’. Human Relations. 23 pp 499–513. Smith, M.C. (2011) ‘Which in- and out-of school factors explain variations in learning across different socio-economic groups? Findings from South Africa’, Comparative Education, 47(1): 79–102. Smith, M. and Barrett, A.M.(2011) ‘Capabilities for learning to read: an investigation of social and economic effects for Grade 6 learners in Southern and East Africa’, International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 23–36. Smoke, P. (2003) ‘Decentralisation in Africa: goals, dimensions, myths and challenges’, Public Administration & Development, 23: 7–16. Stenhouse, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. Heinemann, London. Swai, F. and Ndidde, A. (2006) ‘Local research on the characteristics of effective primary schools in Singida, Tanzania’, paper produced for the Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Biennial Meeting, Libreville, Gabon, March 2006. United Republic of Tanzania (2001)‘Education sector development programme (ESDP): primary education development plan (PEDPI) (2002–2006)’, Dar es Salaam: Basic Education Development Committee. United Republic of Tanzania (2006a) ‘Education sector development programme (ESDP): primary education development plan (PEDP II) (2007–2011)’, Dar es Salaam: Basic Education Development Committee. United Republic of Tanzania (2006b) ‘Education sector development programme: education sector review (aide memoire)’, Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Education and Culture.

11 Dilemmas of language choice in education in Tanzania and Ghana Oksana Afitska, Yaw Ankomah, John Clegg, Patrick Kiliku, Lydia Osei-Amankwah and Casmir Rubagumya Introduction This chapter addresses the language issue in classrooms in Ghana and Tanzania. It is premised on the belief that language and the issue of a good quality education are inseparable. It is not possible for learners to learn if they do not understand lessons; and they cannot understand lessons if they do not understand the language in which the lessons are taught. This is also the case with teachers. They cannot teach effectively if they have problems in expressing themselves in the language of instruction (LoI) (Clegg, 2005). To use Qorro’s analogy (2003), it is not possible to have electricity supply without copper wires, which act as a conduit of electricity. So, to say that you are interested in quality education without paying attention to the language in which that education is transmitted is like saying you are interested in electricity but you don’t care about the wiring system! For this reason, the issue of the language(s) used in classrooms takes centre stage in discussing the quality of education in African countries, many of which still use former colonial languages as LoI. This is not to imply that a language that is accessible to both learners and teachers is the only prerequisite of a good quality education. As contributions to this volume clearly show, there are other factors that contribute to quality in education. It would be proper to say language is a necessary but not sufficient condition for achieving quality education. Wolff (2006, p.50) has put it succinctly: “language is not everything in education, but without language, everything is nothing in education”. Within the general framework of this volume, we look at the language of classroom interaction in Ghana and Tanzania in as far as it relates to inclusion, democracy and relevance. Firstly with regard to inclusion, we argue that in order to enable children to have access to an inclusive education, we need to pay attention to the languages used for instruction in African classrooms. Using a language that is not accessible to the majority of the learners will marginalise them. The question to ask ourselves is: to what extent does education in English or African languages facilitate or limit successful teaching and learning? Whereas it is generally agreed that learners can learn better in a language they understand,

Dilemmas of language choice in education  155 we also need to be careful not to be seen to exclude some learners from learning a language of wider communication like English. This raises the question of which languages should be used as media of instruction and which should be taught as subjects. It also raises the question of whether in order to learn a language you need to use it as LoI. Language policies in many African countries seem to be premised on this assumption: that if you want to learn English properly you have to use it as a medium of instruction. However, ample research evidence shows that learning through a mother tongue as LoI actually facilitates the learning of a second language later (Cummins, 1979; Baker and Hornberger, 2001). Also, experience from around the world shows that people can learn a foreign language effectively without necessarily using it as LoI. Many people from Scandinavian countries learn English successfully, but they don’t use it on a regular basis as a LoI in their educational system. Conversely, many ‘Anglophone’ African counties use English as a language of instruction, but the level of English proficiency in these countries, even at university , leaves much to be desired. Language is also relevant to democracy because different stakeholders (learners, teachers, education authorities, civil society organisations) have views on which languages should be used for what purpose in the educational system of a given country. For example, as our research in Tanzania confirms, some believe that English should be a LoI despite the fact that learners do not understand it well, whereas others take the view that a high level of learner understanding is crucial. In addition, the language question in many African countries has often been polarised in terms of either a European language or an African language: whereas there is, in fact, a range of views on this issue. We argue that in order for these debates to be meaningful and productive, there is need for as many stakeholders as possible to be heard. Moreover, language is relevant to democracy in the sense that education should enable all citizens to participate fully in the democratic governance of their country. As Bamgbose (2000, p.28) puts it: “Political empowerment…means the involvement of the largest section of the population in the political process. Language is crucial to this involvement”. If people cannot access education because the LoI is a barrier, they have been denied the right to participate in the governance of their country. Finally, language also raises the question of relevance: to what extent should speakers of African languages use those languages for learning, and what are the competing advantages of African languages and European languages as languages of instruction? What language(s) is/are more relevant to the prevailing environment in a given African country? Is a relevant education best provided in an African or a European language, or a combination of both? To what extent are European languages in Africa relevant to globalisation? Some stakeholders – for example, some respondents to our attitude surveys – refer to English as the language of globalisation when they argue for using it as LoI. The appeal to ‘globalisation’ can mean many things to different people and these things may not necessarily be achieved by using European languages as LoI. In addition, it has been argued that in order to be part of the ‘global village’ what Africa needs

156  O. Afitska et al. is not to teach through European languages, but the capacity to compete in the global market by producing quality goods and providing quality services. These are only possible if education is provided in a language that learners can understand. In this view, it is the use of an African LoI, which increases educational standards, and thus economic achievement, and gives access to the globalised world. Learning English, or any other foreign language, would thus be a result of globalisation, not an initial route to it (Rubagumya, 2004). These far-reaching concerns drove our interest in researching the question of LoI in Tanzania and Ghana.

The research design In 2007/08 we studied classroom interaction in schools in Tanzania and Ghana just before and after the switch of medium – in Tanzania, in primary year six and secondary form one and in Ghana, in primary years three and four (Clegg, 2010; Rubagumya et al., 2011). We collected three sets of data: video-recordings of classroom interaction, stakeholder attitudes as expressed in oral responses to a survey and school textbooks for analysis. We worked with a small sample of urban and rural schools, observing lessons in mathematics and science in lessons conducted in African languages (Kiswahili and Fanti) and English as well as in lessons in English and African languages as subjects. After baseline data were collected, an intervention was provided in both countries in the form of a twoday workshop for teachers on classroom strategies to increase the effectiveness of language use within subjects. Further case-study data were then collected in a smaller number of the baseline schools to establish the effect of the intervention: in Tanzania four primary and four secondary schools – two urban (Morogroro) and two rural (Kilimanjaro) were involved; and in Ghana, three primary schools in the Cape Coast Metropolitan area, two urban schools – one state and one private – and one rural state school. In all, 24 case study lessons were videorecorded in Ghana and 32 in Tanzania. The videotapes were analysed during a workshop for researchers from Ghana and Tanzania carried out at Bristol University in spring 2009, using a video observation schedule with lesson transcripts for more fine-grained analysis. The observation schedule was developed to capture evidence of classroom processes which the research questions focus on, namely: teacher speaking time, language choice and language competence; teacher strategies (including quality of instructions and explanations, use of visual aids, questioning and prompting: range and frequency of responses); opportunities for individual work, pair work, group work, reading, writing; variation in responses of boys and girls with reference to LoI. The outcomes of the analysis using the observation schedules were then subjected to a basic SPSS analysis. Small surveys of the opinions of a range of stakeholders on the roles of English and African languages as LoI were also conducted in both countries in case study schools. In Tanzania 34 interviewees were involved: two head teachers – one from each school; ten parents – five from primary schools and five from secondary

Dilemmas of language choice in education  157 schools; 11 teachers – six from primary schools and five from secondary schools; 11 pupils – five from primary schools and six from secondary schools. In Ghana 87 stakeholders were involved: 36 pupils (six pupils from each class in all three schools) a parent of each of the 36 pupils, nine teachers (all the teachers of the classes) and the heads of the schools, as well as six teacher training college tutors.

Language and classroom interaction A major concern for the project team was the relationship between language of instruction and quality of teaching. The ability of both learners and teachers in the LoI has an impact on the effectiveness of classroom practice. If learners cannot use the LoI well enough to understand teachers, talk readily in the classroom, read textbooks and write about subjects, their learning can be slow and ineffective. Evidence shows that levels of ability in European languages on the part of learners are sometimes too low for them to use the language effectively for learning (Criper and Dodd, 1984; Macdonald, 1993; Alidou et al., 2006). Fleisch (2008) and Smith (2011) link low school achievement in South Africa partly with ability in the LoI and internationally other studies (Smits et al., 2008; Fehrler and Michaelowa, 2009) do the same. Macdonald (1990), also in the case of South Africa, showed that the language demands of the curriculum in the second language (L2) may be much higher than the language ability which learners bring to education when they switch medium to the European language. In Tanzania, where only secondary education is conducted through English, there are persistent reports of low levels of achievement, which are related to learner language ability (Criper and Dodd, 1984; Roy-Campbell, 2001; Qorro, 2009). Most recently, the Uwezo project points to low levels of reading ability in English in Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya (Uwezo, 2010). Teachers’ use of code-switching, a widespread and potentially useful practice when used strategically in bilingual contexts (Clegg and Afitska, 2011), is related partly to low-learner ability in the LoI. Teacher ability in the LoI also affects classroom practice. Research suggests that African teachers teaching in a European language may often be not fluent enough in the language to use it to achieve acceptable levels of learner subject knowledge. This can limit the range of teaching strategies that they employ (Qorro, 2004, 2009) and render their teaching less than effective (Brock-Utne, 2004). Insufficient competence on the part of both teachers and learners may lead teachers to teach ‘defensively’, using what Chick (1996) has called ‘Safetalk’: they avoid topics which they themselves may feel linguistically unable to deal with and reduce to a minimum the linguistic and cognitive demands of what learners need to say (Cleghorn, 1992; Rubagumya, 2003). Unconfident teacher language ability (Clegg and Afitska, 2011) also triggers excessive and unstrategic code-switching. We wanted to find out whether in our sample we could see differences in the quality of pedagogy that teachers used in an African language (L1) and English (L2) and whether indeed teacher language ability in L2 reduced the learning value of classroom processes.

158  O. Afitska et al. Our Tanzanian study found that teachers used a richer pedagogy when working in an African language. Teachers in the baseline study used several pedagogical strategies more frequently in L1-medium than in L2-medium lessons. They signalled lessons and explained concepts more clearly; they used more questions and prompts and provided a wide range of feedback to learners; they used a wider range of assessment strategies; they provided more opportunities for group-, pair- and individual work and writing; they elicited responses from a wider range of learners, with more extended and spontaneous responses; and finally, they spoke less. After the intervention (see below), teachers working in both languages increased the degree to which they used many pedagogical strategies, but by and large, Kiswahili-medium teachers still used them more than English-medium teachers. Tanzanian teachers in our survey (see below) also suggested that their own L2 ability constrained their L2medium teaching and led them to code-switch. As far as learners are concerned, the Tanzanian study found that a wider range of learners used more extended and spontaneous responses to teachers in L1-medium lessons, though the intervention did not increase this either in L1- or L2-medium teaching. The Ghana study yielded more equivocal results, with L1-medium teachers using some strategies more often than L2-medium teachers, but not others. This is probably due to the fact that one of the three schools in the study was a private school with an intake with high socio-economic status (SES) and with better English language ability on the part of both teachers and learners. Notably, in both countries, data revealed that teachers in both L1-and L2-medium lessons medium did not offer many reading opportunities, confirming evidence from elsewhere in Africa that little reading takes place in many African schools (Fleisch, 2008; Taylor and Vinjevold, 1999). Our study thus provides evidence that teachers’ classroom practice can be more limited in L2 than in L1. It also suggests that learners say more in lessons in their L1. Does this affect school achievement in the longer term? Tanzanian teachers in our sample had by and large an adequate level of English and some Ghanaian teachers – especially those in the private school – had good English. Research in schools elsewhere (Cleghorn, 1992; Ndayipfukamiye, 1994; BrockUtne and Alidou, 2006), in particular in Tanzania (Brock-Utne, 2004), shows teachers and learners struggling to use English to teach effectively with much more obviously damaging consequences for the quality of their pedagogy and presumably for levels of school achievement. It is probable that many teachers in African education – with the best will in the world – cannot employ the range of strategies in the L2 which effective teaching requires, and that likewise their learners cannot use the L2 to talk, listen, read and write to anything like the extent which academic study demands. However, the study also shows that some teachers and learners do function reasonably well in English in the classroom, as the example of the Ghanaian private school shows. It is likely that learners in this school came from higherSES backgrounds. The fact that higher school achievement is associated with ability in the LoI and SES (Fleisch, 2008; Smits et al., 2008; Smith, 2011)

Dilemmas of language choice in education  159 means that competence in the LoI – of either learners or teachers – is a crucial issue of inclusion. If the use of a European language as LoI is shown to reduce the quality of education, then it excludes learners who do not speak this language well enough and these are likely to be lower-SES learners. European L2s in Africa thus become a gatekeeper to educational success (Tollefson, 1991) and the LoI tends to reduce access to the curriculum for learners – perhaps the majority – from poor backgrounds.

Teacher education for teaching in L2 A second question which arises out of our study is the type of pedagogy which teachers use and the extent to which they have been trained to teach their subject to learners with low ability in the LoI. The crucial principle here is that teaching learners with low levels of ability in the LoI normally depresses learning effectiveness. Teachers find teaching difficult; learners find learning difficult. Learners find it hard to understand teachers, don’t talk in classrooms in L2 (Arthur, 1994; Brock-Utne and Alidou, 2006), find it hard to write about cognitively complex contents and to read about them in textbooks (Taylor and Vinjevold, 1999; Probyn, 2006) and cannot easily demonstrate knowledge in examinations (SPINE [Student Performance in National Examinations], 2009). Their access to the curriculum is thus curtailed. Forms of bilingual and language-supportive education, for example in minority education in the USA, UK or Australia and immersion education in North America (Clegg 2005; Gibbons 2006; Garcia, 2009), are able to avoid this reduction in educational effectiveness by using a distinct specialist pedagogy which compensates for learners’ lack of comprehension and ability to express themselves. This pedagogy uses an enhanced range of classroom strategies for increasing access to the contents of the curriculum by amplifying the comprehensibility of teacher-talk and reading texts and the capacity of learners to listen and read; it also supports learners in talking and writing about academically complex contents with limited language resources. It enables teachers to explain concepts and give instructions clearly, to signal the course of lessons, to use visuals, to check learner’s comprehension, to question and prompt, to encourage responses from a wide range of learners, to offer opportunities for group and individual work and for cognitively demanding reading and writing (Gibbons, 2006). Where education takes place in a language in which learners are not fluent, teachers need to employ this pedagogy and teacher-educators need to train them to do so. If this does not happen, learning effectiveness is likely to be compromised and educational standards may fall. There is evidence that subject teachers are not trained to use this pedagogy in initial teacher education in Africa (Probyn, 2006). Alidou (2009) suggests that teachers are rarely guided by pedagogy for bilingual education which initial teacher-education has taught them. Teachers and researchers (Ndayipfukamiye 1994; Probyn 2005, 2006) comment that teachers have not been trained to work bilingually. In contrast, evidence has accumulated that much teaching is

160  O. Afitska et al. teacher-centred (Qorro 2009), relies on code-switching to convey meaning (Clegg and Afitska, 2011) and may fall back on Safetalk. There is some evidence that without specialist support, learners in African L2-medium classrooms tend to speak little (Brock-Utne and Alidou, 2006) and may have difficulty understanding teachers’ expositions of complex concepts. They may also get few writing opportunities (Taylor and Vinjevold, 1999; Fleisch, 2008) and the quality of what they write tends to be cognitively undemanding. Similarly they may get few reading opportunities (Taylor and Vinjevold, op. cit.); our own Tanzanian baseline studies showed teachers offering few reading opportunities. For us this is an issue of relevance: in education systems which employ as LoI a language in which both teachers and learners have difficulty, a relevant initial teacher education is one in which all subject-specific training provides trainees with L2-medium pedagogy and thus enables learners to learn subjects to a high standard despite language barriers. We wanted to find out whether the range of pedagogical strategies used in English-medium lessons displayed any of the features of L2-medium pedagogy. We also wanted to see to what extent teacher-education – in our context a short professional development workshop on classroom strategies – was able to influence the range of strategies used in both languages. The workshop highlighted the strategies which teachers need to use in order to help learners do what their limited ability in the LoI normally prevents them from doing. The teachers were shown ways of helping learners to speak in response to teachers in the plenary classroom as well as in groups. They learned simple ways of scaffolding learners in the writing of academic texts about complex subject contents. They were shown tasks for helping learners to read complex textbook texts and to follow teacher-presentations. They also learned how to make their own talk clearer and the structure and content of their lessons more transparent. Two things emerge from the study. Firstly, teachers use a richer pedagogy, with a wider range of pedagogical strategies, when teaching in L1, than in L2. What is actually required – and what initial training should provide – is a richer pedagogy in L2, in order to compensate for the lower effectiveness of L2medium learning. Secondly, teachers working in L2 showed changes in their practice after the intervention. In both Tanzania and Ghana, teachers signalled lesson stages and gave instructions more clearly; they asked more question and used more prompts, they checked learner comprehension more frequently and provided a wider range of feedback. In addition, in Tanzania they also explained concepts more clearly, provided more language support, used a wider range of visual aids and resources, adjusted their language to suit their learners, elicited responses from a wider range of learners, used a wider range of assessment strategies, offered more opportunities for group- pair- and individual work, writing and reading. Similar changes in teachers’ practice were also observed in L1-medium lessons in both Tanzania and Ghana. We felt that the study showed that even short in-service teacher intervention could bring improvements in the quality of English-medium teaching. It also showed that a language-supportive approach to training could be useful

Dilemmas of language choice in education  161 regardless of LoI. However, it also supports the assumption that initial teacher education in Africa does not focus explicitly on enabling teachers to teach subjects in English to learners whose ability in that language is low. It is difficult to grasp why this should be so in a continent where learners are struggling to learn in European languages that they do not speak well. It is evident that change here is urgently needed.

Stakeholder views on the language of instruction Democracy enters into the study in relation to the views of stakeholders about LoI. It is important to take them into account: the views of parents in particular carry a lot of weight. What evidence there is shows these views to be fairly conflicted, as one would expect with such a complex subject, and it is useful to disentangle them. When African languages are used as the LoI in the early years they have certain obvious and visible values. They can reinforce home-school links, strengthen local cultures (World Bank, 2005), teach traditional skills (Middelborg, 2005) and increase community cohesion outside the school (Stroud, 2001; Middelborg, 2005). They can also, of course, help learners to gain initial literacy more easily than they could if learning through a European language to which they may have little exposure (Williams, 1998; Ouane and Glanz, 2010) and increase general academic achievement (World Bank, 2005; Pinnock, 2009). Learners’ motivation is raised and parental involvement in school is increased (Middelborg, 2005; World Bank, 2005). When they consider the use of local languages as LoIs from this point of view, parents tend to be well disposed towards them (Benson, 2004). There is plenty of evidence, in other parts of the world as well as Africa, of communities welcoming the introduction of early years initial literacy in a local language (UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization], 2008; Kosonen and Young, 2009), especially where it did not previously exist, for these reasons. As a rule, however, parents in Africa are also particularly concerned that their children should learn European languages (Qorro, 2005). This is especially the case if a European language is the LoI at some fairly early point in a child’s school career – which in most countries it inevitably is. They are aware of the great cultural capital of a language such as English and they are conscious of the economic rewards it may bring in terms of access to relatively well-paid jobs. They may also be keen to gain access to an accepted means of communicating within their own country – often viewed, perhaps mistakenly, as a neutral language amongst competing African languages – and a language through which they can communicate regionally. They are also anxious to reap the rewards of ‘globalisation’ (Pinnock, 2009; Rubagumya et al., 2011). By and large, parents who see the benefits of initial education in a local language tend to want both this and the advantages of learning later through a high-status LoI. However, parents often make several assumptions, which conflict with research evidence (e.g. Heugh, 2006), about how best to acquire fluency in a

162  O. Afitska et al. high-status language. One is that you learn a language by using it as LoI, not necessarily by learning it as a foreign language (Brock-Utne, 2010). Another is ‘the earlier the better’: they feel that children will learn better if they start learning the prestige language, preferably by using it as LoI, from the first day of schooling. A third is that if you use curriculum time for learning in a local language for a period, you take that time away from – and thus reduce the opportunity for – learning in the prestige LoI. This has led parents, in South Africa for example (De Klerk, 2002; Heugh, 2009) to opt for English-medium schooling as early as possible; in Tanzania it is one reason for choosing Englishmedium private schools (Rubagumya, 2003; Rubagumya et al., 2011). In our own survey, stakeholder groups valued the fact that learners understood lessons. In the Tanzanian survey, teachers thought that Kiswahili was appropriate as LoI because most learners spoke it well. Primary learners were comfortable learning in Kiswahili and secondary learners felt that they would learn more if it were the LoI, rather than English. English, by contrast, was not felt by teachers to be an effective LoI because learners did not understand it well. Parents and learners also thought that learner English language levels were too low. Secondary learners said that low levels of English meant that they rarely participated in class and understood little of lessons unless teachers code-switched. Primary learners also said that code-switching by teachers in English lessons was essential for understanding. In addition, for both teachers and parents, the status of Kiswahili as the national language also made it appropriate as LoI. On the other hand, Tanzanian stakeholders were worried about Kiswahili as LoI. Head teachers and teachers thought that it was not sufficiently developed to function as LoI throughout schooling. In addition they felt, as did parents, that Kiswahili did not have international standing and did not prepare learners adequately for the job market. Teachers, parents and learners thought that English was an international language and a supra-national language in Africa, which learners need for jobs and for access to the globalised world. This view tended to override the contrasting view that high levels of understanding are important. It led some Tanzanian head teachers and teachers to advocate using English as LoI from the beginning of primary school, while parents and learners felt that the teaching of English in the primary school should be strengthened so that English could function better as LoI in secondary school. All interviewees valued English-medium primary schools for their enhanced resourcing and because of their use of English as LoI. Findings from the Ghana survey also revealed that stakeholders were drawn both by arguments for understanding and for the value of a high-status language. They perceived that the use of the local language as LoI in years one to three was good because it helped young pupils to understand lessons better. However, a majority of them including head teachers, teachers, teachereducators and urban parents advocated the use of both L1 and L2 as LoI in the lower primary school. They felt that while the pupils would learn well in the L1 they needed early exposure to English for greater effectiveness in later years. Parents in rural areas were less concerned to have English as LoI so early. Pupils

Dilemmas of language choice in education  163 were similarly aware of both sides of the question. They felt more comfortable using the local language and claimed they understood lessons better in L1 but also wished to be taught in L2 so that they would be fluent in it and thus enjoy the perceived prestige attached to its use. One implication is that urban stakeholders at least, in more English-fluent contexts, recognised both L1 and L2 as playing a crucial role in enhancing teaching and learning. They noted that L1, used alongside L2, enables teachers to better express certain concepts for the comprehension of learners while it also enables learners to participate more fully in the lesson. There may be a relaxed view here, amongst more fluent users of English, about using two languages in the classroom, which confirms experience in bilingual education elsewhere (Garcia, 2009) and points the way towards a more effective bilingual pedagogy for African schools. It should be noted that in contrast to Tanzanian stakeholders, for whom Kiswahili is well-established in primary education, Ghanaians complained about conditions relating to the use of L1 in education, which are peculiar to their context: there was a general lack of resources for teaching and learning in the L1; almost all primary school textbooks were written in English and teachers had to struggle to translate them orally for use in L1-medium lessons. Teachereducators also expressed concern about inadequate resources to prepare teachers to provide L1-medium instruction. The survey of stakeholder attitudes to the use of LoIs reinforces the view that stakeholders in Africa hold conflicted and sometimes contradictory feelings towards English and African languages as LoIs. They saw the value of African languages as LoI in the primary school, because learners understand lessons more easily in them. Tanzanians (and perhaps some rural Ghanaians) were also concerned that learners’ English language ability is often not sufficient for them to use it as LoI – the views of the Tanzanian learners are compelling in this regard. Tanzanian teachers also implied – confirming research from elsewhere (e.g. Brock-Utne, 2004) – that they did not feel confident enough in English to use it as LoI as effectively as they wished. On the other hand, stakeholders in both countries attribute a socio-economic value to English, in terms of what they see as its international status and role as gatekeeper to social advancement. This allows Tanzanian teachers and head teachers to override their concerns about low learner ability in English and their support for African languages in the primary phase and to propose instead – in the face of what research (Heugh, 2006) tells us – that English should operate as LoI earlier than at present or even throughout schooling. Thus the common-sense view of these respondents – that learners learn best in a language they understand – is trumped by the perceived benefits attached to fluency in a European language. In addition, in Ghana we may be seeing the possibility of a split between urban and rural areas reflected elsewhere in Africa – Smith (2011), for example, describes it in South Africa. In urban Ghana, where more English is spoken, better-educated parents in our high-SES school value English as LoI both alongside L1 in years one to three and thereafter. Rural respondents, however, are more aware that learners in the lower primary school at least, do better in L1.

164  O. Afitska et al.

Conclusion The three defining EdQual themes are reflected in our conclusions, sometimes contradictorily. With regard to inclusion, we found, as many such studies in Africa do, that LoI can exclude learners. Governments choose to educate learners in a European language, but teachers and learners work more effectively in an African language: stakeholder groups in Tanzania were candid about how difficult it is to teach and learn in a language which learners do not understand well enough. However, this situation can place us at odds with the requirements of democracy: we must pay heed to the wish of Tanzanian parents for much of education to take place in English, but we cannot overlook the damage that this can do to their children’s capacity to learn. The answer is that communities should not have to choose between languages: formal bilingual education preserves the L1 as a conduit for learning, while adding fluency in L2. Familiar in many parts of the world, bilingual education is rarely mooted as a solution for Africa. We need to put it at the top of the educational agenda. The theme of relevance is highlighted when we focus on teacher-education. We observed that teachers teaching subjects in L2 were not using a pedagogy tailored to these conditions. The lack of relevance here is stark. Training teachers to teach subjects in L2 to learners with low levels of ability in the language should be at the heart of initial teacher education and CPD in Africa. Finally, we return to the issue of inclusion when we discuss the relation between SES and LoI. We noted the possibility that not all schools may find it hard to teach in a European language. Our Ghanaian evidence suggests that in some schools, probably with intakes which are socio-economically better off and who speak the LoI more frequently and perhaps at home, both teachers and learners may be able to work reasonably effectively in English. Studies elsewhere in Africa show that school achievement correlates with home language use of the LoI (Smits et al., 2008), with SES (Fleisch, 2008; Smith, 2011) and to some extent with the rural–urban dimension (Smith, 2011). However, in any country in Africa this group of schools working effectively in L2 is likely to be relatively small in relation to the population as a whole. For the majority, it is likely that SES as a familiar barrier to education is overlaid in Africa with ability to learn through a European LoI. It is becoming increasingly difficult for governments to ignore the accumulating evidence that in sub-Saharan Africa language of instruction prevents schools from doing their job properly. If it is shown to be yet another barrier between the advantaged few and the disadvantaged majority, this adds to the urgency with which we should all address this issue.

References Alidou, H. (2009) ‘Promoting multilingual and multicultural education in francophone Africa: challenges and perspectives’, in B. Brock-Utne and I. Skattum (eds) Languages and Education in Africa: a Comparative and Transdisciplinary Analysis. Didcot, Symposium Books. Pp.105–131.

Dilemmas of language choice in education  165 Alidou, H., Boly, A., Brock-Utne, B., Diallo, Y.S., Heugh, K. and Wolff, H.E. (2006) Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa – the Language Factor: A Stock-taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Paris, ADEA. Arthur, J. (1994) ‘English in Botswana primary classrooms: functions and constraints’, in C. Rubagumya (ed.) Teaching and Researching Language in African Classrooms. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters. Pp.63–78. Baker, C. and Hornberger, N. (2001) (eds) An Introductory Reader to the Writings of Jim Cummins. UK, Multilingual Matters. Bamgbose, A. (2000) Language and Exclusion. Hamburg, LIT. Benson, C. (2004) ‘The importance of mother tongue-based schooling for educational quality’, Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005, The Quality Imperative. Paris, UNESCO. Brock-Utne, B. (2004) ‘English as the language of instruction or destruction – how do teachers and students in Tanzania cope?’, in B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai and M. Qorro (eds) Researching the Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA). Cape Town, African Minds. Pp.57–84. Brock-Utne, B. (2010) ‘Research and policy on the language of instruction issue in Africa’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(6): 636–45. Brock-Utne, B. and Alidou, H. (2006) ‘Experience II – active students – learning through a language they master’, in H. Alidou, A. Boly, B. Brock-Utne, Y. S. Diallo, K. Heugh and H.E. Wolff, Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa – the Language Factor: A Stock-taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Paris, ADEA. Pp.101–117. Chick, K. (1996) ‘Safe-talk: Collusion in apartheid education’, in H. Coleman (ed.) Society and the Language Classroom. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Clegg, J. (2007) ‘Moving towards Bilingual Education in Africa’, in H. Coleman (ed.) Language and Development: Africa and Beyond, edited proceedings from the 7th International Language and Development Conference, Addis Ababa, 26–28 October 2005. Addis Ababa: British Council. Clegg, J. (2010) ‘Language of instruction and quality of learning in Tanzania: EdQual policy brief no. 7’. Bristol: EdQual. Clegg, J. and Afitska, O. (2011) ‘Teaching and Learning in two languages in African classrooms’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 61–77. Cleghorn, A. (1992) ‘Primary level science in Kenya: constructing meaning through English and indigenous languages’. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(4): 311–23. Criper, C. and Dodd, W.A. (1984) ‘Report on the Teaching of English Language and its Use as Medium of Instruction in Tanzania’. Dar es Salaam: The British Council. Cummins, J. (1979) ‘Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children’. Review of Educational Research, 49(2): 222–51. De Klerk, V. (2002) ‘Language issues in our schools: whose voice counts? Part 1: the parents speak’. Perspectives in Education, 20(1): 1–14. Fehrler, S. and Michaelowa, K. (2009) ‘Education marginalization in Sub-Saharan Africa’, paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010. Paris, UNESCO. Fleisch, B. (2008) Primary Education in Crisis: Why South African Children Underachieve. Cape Town, Juta. Garcia, O. (2009) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell.

166  O. Afitska et al. Gibbons, P. (2006) Bridging Discourses in the ESL Classroom. London, Continuum. Heugh, K. (2006) ‘Theory and practice – language education models in Africa: research, design, decision making, and outcomes’, in H. Alidou (et al.) Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa – the Language Factor: A Stock-taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Paris, ADEA. Pp.56–84. Heugh, K. (2009) ‘Contesting the monolingual practices of a bilingual to multilingual policy’. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(2): 96–113. Kosonen, K and C. Young (eds) (2009) Mother-tongue as Bridge Language of Instruction: Policies and Experiences in South-East Asia. Bangkok, Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization Secretariat. Macdonald, C. (1993) Towards a New Primary Curriculum in South Africa. Pretoria, Human Sciences Research Council. Middelborg, J. (2005) Highland Children’s Education Project: A Pilot Project on Bilingual Education in Cambodia. Bangkok, UNESCO Bangkok. Ndayipfukamiye, L. (1994) ‘Code-switching in Burundi primary classrooms’, in C. R. Rubagumya (ed.) Teaching and Researching Language in African Classrooms. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters. Pp.79–95. Ouane, A. and Glanz, C. (2010) Why and How Africa should Invest in African Languages and Multilingual Education. Hamburg, UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Pinnock, H. (2009) Language and Education: The Missing Link. London, CfBT and Save The Children Alliance. Probyn, M. (2005) ‘Language and the struggle to learn: the intersection of classroom realities, language policy and neo-colonial and globalisation discourses in South African schools’, in A. Lin and P. Martin (eds) Decolonisation, Globalisation: Language-in-Education Policy and Practice. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters. Pp.153–172. Probyn, M. (2006) ‘Language and Learning Science in South Africa’. Language and Education 20(5): 391–414. Qorro, M. (2003) ‘Unlocking language forts: the language of instruction in post primary education in Africa with special reference to Tanzania’, in B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai, and M. Qorro (eds) Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa. Dar-esSalaam, E&D Limited. Pp.187–196. Qorro, M. (2004) ‘Popularising Kiswahili as the language of instruction through the media in Tanzania’, in B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai and M. Qorro (eds) Researching the Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa. Cape Town: African Minds. Pp.93–116. Qorro, M. (2005) ‘Parents’ views on the language of instruction in secondary schools’, in B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai and M. Qorro (eds) LOITASA Research in Progress. Dares-Salaam, K AD Associates. Pp.96–125. Qorro, M., (2009) ‘Parents’ and policymakers’ insistence on foreign languages as media of education in Africa: restricting access to quality – for whose benefit?’, in B. BrockUtne and I. Skattum (eds) Languages and Education in Africa: a Comparative and Transdisciplinary Analysis. Oxford, Symposium. Pp.57–82. Roy-Campbell, Z.M. (2001) Empowerment through Language: The African Experience: Tanzania and Beyond. Trenton, NJ, Africa World Press. Rubagumya, C. (2003) ‘English medium primary schools in Tanzania: a new ‘linguistic market’ in education?’, in B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai and M. Qorro (eds) Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA). Dar es Salaam: E&D Limited. Pp.149–169.

Dilemmas of language choice in education  167 Rubagumya, C. (2004) ‘English in Africa and the emergence of AfroSaxons: globalization or marginalization?’, in M. Baynham, A. Deignan and G. White (eds) Applied Linguistics at the Interface. London, Equinox and the British Association for Applied Linguistics. Pp.133–144. Rubagumya, C. with Afitska, O., Clegg, J. and Kiliku, P. (2011) ‘A three-tier citizenship: can the state in Tanzania guarantee linguistic human rights?’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 78–85. Smith, M. (2011) ‘Which in- and out-of-school factors explain variations in learning across different socio-economic groups? Findings from South Africa’. Comparative Education, 47(1): 79–102. Smits, J., Huisman, J. and Kruijff, K. (2008) ‘Home language and education in the developing world’, paper commissioned for EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009. Paris: UNESCO. SPINE, (2009) ‘Investigating the language factor in school examinations: exploratory studies’, report for Study 5.1 of SPINE research programme, University of Bristol. Available at (accessed 8 June 2011). Stroud, C. (2001) ‘African mother-tongue programmes and the politics of language: Linguistic citizenship versus linguistic human rights’. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 22(4): 339–355. Taylor, N. and Vinjevold, P. (1999) Getting Learning Right: Report of the President’s Education Initiative Research Project. Johannesburg. Joint Education Trust. Tollefson, J. (1991) Planning Language, Planning Inequality. New York, Longman. UNESCO (2008) Improving the Quality of Mother Tongue-based Literacy and Learning: Case Studies from Asia, Africa and South America, (Bangkok, UNESCO Bangkok). Uwezo (2010). Available at (accessed 8 June 2011). Williams, E. (1998) Investigating Bilingual Literacy: Evidence from Malawi and Zambia. Serial No. 24. London, Department for International Development. Wolff, E. (2006) ‘Background and history – language politics and planning in Africa’, in H. Alidou (et al.) Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa – the Language Factor: A Stock-taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in SubSaharan Africa. Paris, ADEA. Pp.26–55. World Bank (2005) In Their Own Language: Education for All. Washington DC, World Bank.

12 Implementing curriculum change Small steps towards a big change? Anjum Halai

Introduction Curriculum change as a step towards improving education quality is usually driven by high-level decision-makers such as ministries of education or central bureaus of curriculum. However, curriculum implementation is a complex process, which takes place in the real world of schools and classrooms, and it is implementation that determines whether or not educational goals are achieved. While education quality is a nebulous concept, with different interpretations of quality depending on the context and purpose of education, certain trends emerge. One such significant trend is towards curriculum change based on Outcomes-Based Education (OBE), an approach to education focused on what students should know and should be able to do. OBE shifts the emphasis from teaching content to enabling students to achieve stipulated outcomes at their own pace, according to Spady, a key proponent of OBE in the United States (Spady, 1994, 1997). There is agreement that OBE has its roots in behaviourism and is linked to educational initiatives such as behavioural objectives (Mager, 1984), and competency-based approaches to curriculum and assessment (Argüelles and Gonczi, 2000). OBE is closely associated with student centric pedagogical practices, so much so that the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably (Chisholm, 2005). Outcomes based curricula are underpinned by non-authoritarian and democratic social values and promote active student participation. They emphasise a wide sets of outcomes, including not only basic literacy and numeracy, but also citizenship, social skills and knowledge about key local and global issues (Barrett etal 2007). Moreover, outcomes-based curricula are seen as equitable as they can be adapted to a range of different contexts so that the curricular process is student centred, and differentiated in response to the needs of individual learners (Tabulawa, 2003). This chapter examines the introduction of outcomes-based curricula in lowincome countries. The next section discusses issues of implementation of outcomes-based curricula in low-income countries. This is followed by discussion of an Action Research Project that studied the process of implementation of nationally-driven curriculum in classrooms in Pakistan.

Implementing curriculum change  169 Finally, in the concluding section, we discuss insights into and issues of implementation at the local level and we draw recommendations for policy and practice. A case is made for looking at education quality in the context of a complex multidimensional framework.

Outcomes-based curricula and child centred pedagogy In the 1980s and early 1990s developed in Western countries such as the US, Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Canada were attracted by OBE’s democratic underpinnings and a clear focus on student outcomes, leading to centrally driven curriculum change (Spady, 1994, p.2). However, over the course of time due to practical, political and ideological reasons the outcomes-based curricula in these countries have given way or been modified greatly. A key concern raised by critics was that aiming for a broader set of outcomes might water down the academic rigour of the curriculum (Spady, 1997). More recently, the uptake of outcomes-based curricula is also seen in diverse low-income countries. This move raises questions about the introduction of a type of curriculum reform that has been contested in the countries of origin. These questions notwithstanding, OBE is seen by ministries of education and development agencies to promote democratic social relations in the classrooms through encouraging learner autonomy, open-mindedness towards alternative viewpoints and tolerance (Bantwini, 2009; Tabulawa, 2003; Vavrus, 2009). This is because it aims for a broad set of outcomes beyond cognitive development and supports pedagogy broadly known as child centred. There are multiple understandings of child-centred pedagogy. These include providing students with opportunities to work in small groups on activities involving learning materials such as ‘learning cards’, which allow the teacher to pace the teaching according to individual needs (Sriprakash, 2010); group work on open-ended problem solving tasks especially in mathematics classrooms (Baig and Halai, 2006; NCTM, 2000) and inquiry based learning (Dean, 2005; Halai, N., 2006), to name a few. While ideologically-loaded curriculum reform and concomitant pedagogy is usually centrally ordained, it has to be negotiated through and with the teacher who is the key agent of change in the classroom (Fullan, 2004). Hence without a focus on the process of implementation, especially on issues related to teacher support and acceptance of proposed change, the desired outcomes may not be achieved. There are several cases from low-income countries with very different social and political contexts, where attempts to introduce curriculum reform have been frustrated at the implementation stage, a few of which are discussed below. In post-apartheid South Africa the democratic government introduced education reform in 1994 through a phased process of introducing an Outcomes-Based Education known as the Curriculum 2005. Commenting on the rationale for Curriculum 2005, Chisholm, points out that through its: emphasis on results and success, on outcomes and their possibility of achievement by all at different paces and times rather than on a subject-

170  A. Halai bound, content-laden curriculum…C2005 provided a broad framework for the development of an alternative to apartheid education that was open, non-prescriptive and reliant on teachers creating their own learning programmes and learning support materials. (Chisholm, 2005, p.80) Studies have shown that despite the intention to promote equity in basic education, this curriculum faced extraordinary challenges in the context of under-resourced schools with inadequately trained teachers. It has been established that teachers required a greater degree of support in understanding the essence of Curriculum 2005 and to change their practice accordingly. Hence, national reform programmes cannot be assumed to lead to transformation without adequate attention to implementation and capacity (e.g. Nakabugo and Sieborger, 2001; Chisholm and Leyendecker, 2008). However, Todd and Mason (2005) suggest with reference to the programme in South Africa that an outcomes-based curriculum need not be abandoned completely in the face of such challenges. Rather, they argue that other locally rooted or ‘proximal’ variables – notably teaching quality, including teaching strategies – need to be taken into account when implementing nationally-driven outcomesbased curriculum reform (Todd and Mason 2005, p.221). Likewise, issues related to outcomes-based curriculum arise in a different socio-political context such as the case of the Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (SSA) a national initiative in India intended to achieve universal access to elementary education. This is a programme of gigantic proportions and provides a broad framework for flexible programme development linked with the National Education Policy and its Programme of Action 1992. In order to achieve the quality the Programme of Action 1992 recommended laying down ‘Minimum Levels of Learning’ (MLL) at primary and secondary levels of schooling, alongside initial and recurrent orientation of teachers to competency-based teaching (National Informatics Centre, 2010). The SSA has made progress in achieving its targets of improving access to basic education for all children by 2015, as indicated by enrolment figures (Govinda and Bandyopadhyay, 2008). However, there is recognition that a focus on competency based curricula and MLL has not translated into improved quality of learning in the classroom, mainly because teachers have not been supported to interpret and translate central statements on MLL into relevant and appropriate teaching plans (Anandalakshmy, 1999). More recently, in a comprehensive overview of the progress of school education in India, Kingdon (Kingdon, 2007, p.192) acknowledges that the SSA has helped the current state of school facilities but she holds that initiatives like SSA need to be critically evaluated as “learning achievements in both primary and secondary schooling are very low signalling poor-quality schooling”. Elsewhere Aslam and Kingdon (2008, p.22–23) go on to explain that the usually “unmeasured process variables impact student achievement”, identifying lesson planning and involvement of students as important process variables.

Implementing curriculum change  171 Sriprakash (2010) confirms the importance of recognising local variables, which modify the form and essence of nationally-driven curriculum reform in India. In a detailed analysis of the implementation of curriculum change that promotes child-centred pedagogy, she raises several concerns. First, she points out that student-centric pedagogy is not value neutral but is strongly driven by non-authoritarian values of inclusion of students’ voice in learning. She goes on to say that there is need for a more nuanced analysis of teaching practice in the context of curricular reform, an analysis, which identifies the specific ways in which teachers accept student-centred pedagogy. She stresses that it is important to recognise that these innovations have come from the school contexts of economically wealthier countries in the north where the teachers are highly qualified professionals and the classroom environment is not impoverished. As a consequence, the assumptions that underpin a reform initiative should be made explicit and problematised. Similar concerns about the use of student-centric pedagogy taken from other contexts have been raised elsewhere. Vavrus (2009, p.303) argues on the basis of an ethnographic study of teacher education practice in Tanzania that “the cultural, economic, and political dimension of teachers’ practice need to be considered alongside efforts to reform the country’s education system”. Likewise, Barrett (2007, p.290) points out the futility of dualisms such as “child centred” versus “teacher centred” pedagogy, saying that teachers incorporate notions of “progressive practice” into traditional notions of good pedagogic practice. In the next section, attempts to facilitate the introduction of the mathematic strands of this curriculum in under-resourced, rural schools in Pakistan are discussed.

Implementing curriculum change: an action research project In Pakistan in the post-‘9/11’ scenario, the first decade of this century has seen a wave of education reform initiatives undertaken by the government agencies in conjunction with international development agencies (MoE [Ministry of Education], 2011). These reforms have been multidimensional, ambitious, and at times innovative, and have reflected the generally held view that education is an important vehicle to propel Pakistan out of its current social political and economic crises (Barber, 2010; Safyan, 2009). However, in spite of these initiatives, the education system in Pakistan remains generally ineffective. For instance, classroom processes are mainly characterised by rote learning and didactic teaching delivered very often by inadequately qualified or prepared teachers. In short, government schools do not appear to have benefited from initiatives (Barber, 2010; Halai, 2007). Of particular relevance to this chapter is the recent curriculum reform process in Pakistan. In 2006, the Ministry of Education started a major review to modernise the national curriculum (MoE, 2006). As a result, a new curriculum was written, called National Curriculum 2006, with the primary goal of

172  A. Halai promoting student learning outcomes through systematic benchmarking and standard setting at each level of schooling. This represented a shift from the knowledge delivery approach of Curriculum 2000, Curriculum 2006’s predecessor. For example, the new mathematics curriculum explicitly recognises the importance of logical and mathematical thinking in Standard V and provides benchmarks for investigation, problem-solving and co-operative learning (ibid, 2006, p.2–3). ‘Implementing Curriculum Change’ was an action research project supported by the Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries – otherwise known as the EdQual Project. The project studied the process of implementation in disadvantaged rural classrooms in Pakistan of the problem-solving strand in Standard V of the national curriculum in mathematics. An action research approach was adopted because it was believed that the systematic process of action and reflection would lead to development of actions aimed at improving the classroom reality. It was also thought the approach would bring together development of knowledge and change in the community through the empowerment of teachers and other key decision-makers in the schools. The aim was to generate insights into the grassroots reality of schools and classrooms, to better understand the factors that facilitate or hinder change at the local level when centrally-driven curriculum change is introduced. Both university researchers and teacher researchers participated in the project. The former worked with teachers to interpret the national curriculum, explain and demonstrate teaching and learning processes to the teachers, to develop teaching plans and to encourage reflection on issues emerging from the research process. The latter focused on analysing their teaching and further developing their pedagogic practice. Workshops and meetings provided ample opportunity for both sets of participants to interact and share emerging findings and build collective understanding. In these workshops, teachers were also introduced to the learning processes that they were supposed to encourage in their classrooms. This involved them working in groups on open-ended mathematics problems through the “understand the problem-plan-act-review” framework developed by Polya (1957, p.1–32) and then collectively reflecting on their experiences. It was considered that the framework of problem-solving as noted by Polya (ibid) was especially suited to the goals of the outcomes based curriculum because it encourages learners to work on open-ended mathematics tasks, where the onus is on the learners to devise a plan and take mathematical decisions on the basis of their knowledge and competency in mathematics (Halai et al., 2011; NCTM, 2000, p.52). Schools for participation in this action research project were selected from one taluka (sub-district unit), where poverty is prevalent, from a rural, disadvantaged and geographically large district named Thatta in the province of Sindh in Pakistan. There were 14 government high schools (secondary schools) in the taluka, nine for boys and five for girls. Of these, four were selected for

Implementing curriculum change  173 participation through a consultative process with the Executive District Officer for Education (EDO-E). However, due to resource constraints, work was undertaken in only three schools, two for girls and one for boys. All twelve mathematics teachers, four men and eight women, in these three schools participated in the action research. The head teachers in all three schools were men (for details see Halai et al., 2011). The fieldwork was conducted over the period May 2007 to December 2009. Data were obtained in various ways from various sources. For instance, the university researchers made 45 school visits and observed 30 lessons in these schools, carrying out as many pre- and post-observation interviews with teachers. School-based workshops were conducted (12 workshops per school) for the mathematics teachers in the participating schools, and three talukabased workshops to which mathematics teachers from all the 14 schools in the taluka were invited. At the beginning and end of the fieldwork we also interviewed the head teachers of these schools and other key stakeholders such as the EDO-E. A semi-structured observation instrument was developed to focus on the process of problem solving as it unfolded in the classroom. Analysis was inductive and ongoing in order to capture the ways in which teachers progressively incorporated new pedagogical approaches within their practice. Various strategies were adopted to encourage collaboration within the research process. Schools were selected within one administrative unit to facilitate inter-school collaboration and efforts were also made to create clusters and networks for action within schools. To further encourage intra-school collaboration, head teachers were encouraged to create space in the school timetables so that the mathematics teachers could meet and work collaboratively to interpret and implement the new curriculum.

Results Participating schools possessed a basic infrastructure in terms of a boundary wall, classrooms and toilets. However, conditions in and around the schools were dismal as the classrooms were dark and walls were bare. Blackboards and chalk were the only available teaching resources and many of the blackboards were broken or pitted with holes. There were no libraries in the school, and the prescribed textbook was the only academic resource available to the students and the teacher. To enter the school one had to cross over rubbish heaps or negotiate pools of stagnant water with swarms of flies. On average the teacher to student ratio stood at 1:30, lower than the national average, which is close to 1:40 in primary schools (MoE, 2009). Typically the textbook provided the syllabus of mathematics and was mainly theoretical with sets of exercises of context-free mathematics and tasks for drill and practice. Word problems were relatively few and, where provided, required the application of a specific rule or procedure. The teachers in the action research project had both Masters and Bachelors degrees; they fulfilled the eligibility criteria for secondary school teachers drawn

174  A. Halai up by the Ministry of Education. However, a detailed examination of their qualifications showed that most of them had not selected mathematics as their major in either their undergraduate or graduate studies and had only studied mathematics up to higher secondary or lower level. Consequently teachers’ competency in and knowledge of mathematics varied from very knowledgeable to weak. Initially, teaching and learning followed the same forms in all the lessons observed. The teachers explained mathematics rules and procedures on the blackboard (see Nuzhat below) and students then followed these rules and procedures to solve problems taken from the exercises in the prescribed textbooks. The topics to be covered in these lessons had been earlier identified in schemes of work provided by the district education office. It was therefore evident that the teachers’ practice was rooted in performance oriented didactic practice. However, teachers themselves maintained that all mathematics teaching and learning was ‘problem-solving’ because it entailed teachers working through a mathematics problem on the blackboard and then the students emulating the process to complete exercises in the textbooks. Nonetheless, over the course of the project, the teachers demonstrated an increasingly sophisticated understanding of problem-solving in mathematics classrooms. Close to 60 per cent of the total lessons observed incorporated developing competencies and skills for students to engage in the problem-solving process. This took the form of providing space and opportunities for the learners to express their thinking and rationalise their mathematics decisions. Teachers did not provide one standard procedure for solution of problem but encouraged multiple routes to the solution. Two teachers’, Nuzhat and Rozina, engagement with the child-centred pedagogic practice in the context of implementing an outcomes based curriculum are described below, drawing from Halai et al. (2011). Nuzhat Nuzhat was a young woman mid-career who had a B.Sc. and studied mathematics up to higher secondary level. A typical lesson in her class was characterised by her explaining the concepts and rules of mathematics and working out on the blackboard the solutions to mathematic tasks set in the textbook. Students were expected to work through similar exercises in their textbooks. While the students worked silently Nuzhat would mark students’ work from the day before. Nuzhat viewed the teacher as a “guide”, who “do [es] the mathematics and show[s] the method to the students”. In our postobservation discussions she was often sceptical about providing space for students to rationalise their mathematics thinking. She believed in keeping students disciplined so that they would complete their work in their exercise books, which she would “check” from time to time. However, despite her initial scepticism, time and again she invited the university researchers to demonstrate the problem-solving process in her

Implementing curriculum change  175 classroom. From observing demonstration lessons she progressed to co-teaching with the university researcher. Ultimately, she started to open up spaces in her teaching for students to devise their own ways to find solutions. For example, in a lesson on factorisation in class VI, Nuzhat did not tell her students which procedure they should follow in order to factorise a given statement (25+50), a major deviation from her usual practice. Instead, her students were allowed to select their own methods. She then monitored the students as they engaged with this task and took questions from them, another change from her usual routine. When two students approached the factorisation in different ways. Nuzhat invited the students to present their work on the blackboard for the rest of the class to see. She then pointed out that a mathematical problem could be solved through multiple methods. Rozina Rozina was an early career teacher who had not studied mathematics beyond high school. During the introductory meeting, she picked up the textbook and pointed out several word problems, which could be solved by applying the formulae introduced in the book and said, “Miss, we ourselves do not know how to solve these problems involving volumes of cylindrical shapes. How can we teach problem solving to our students” (field notes translated from Urdu). She often provided a member of the university team with a list of topics from the prescribed textbook, which she said she had difficulty in teaching and stated that her motivation in joining the action research was to learn more mathematics and also learn to teach it better. A typical lesson in Rozina’s class started with a presentation of the concept and procedures on the blackboard and students copying from the board and later working through exercises set in the textbook. However, during the course of the action research a change was seen in her practice. She would also invite students to present their work on the blackboard for the class to see. More significantly she worked with the students, who were stuck, in solving the assigned problems.

Supporting teachers’ implementation of student centric pedagogy within an outcomes-based curriculum Several key lessons can be learnt from the case of the ICC Project. Teachers’ interpretation of student-centric pedagogy involved creating space for students’ participation within the structure of a traditional lesson and within seriously under-resourced classrooms. For example, teachers set students to work on tasks without insisting on one fixed procedure or invited students to the front of the class to justify their mathematics decisions to their peers. Teachers were creating spaces for student engagement within the constraints of their own beliefs regarding the role of the teacher and working with content in the prescribed textbook. To do this, they required support and development responsive to their existing classroom realities.

176  A. Halai Change was incremental, through what we came to recognise as ‘controlled opening of space’, which provided students the opportunity to participate but under the role of the teacher as a ‘guide’. This was a very different from the more student-centric approach initially recommended by the university researchers in the workshops. One difference was the nature of the tasks teachers set for students were narrowly defined so that there was limited scope for the development of students’ mathematical thinking. Another difference was the classroom organisation of space, as students were expected to work in isolation from one another rather than in small, collaborative groups. This finding on incremental change is consonant with studies on teacher development in other low-income countries that emphasise the “small adjustments that teachers make when working within the systems that they find themselves in” (Johnson et al., 2000). One reason for this was that teachers were drawing the content of their teaching from the sole resource available to them, the centrally prescribed textbook, which mainly comprised of narrow routine mathematics tasks. This practice is incompatible with outcomes-based approaches which require that students work at their own pace with learning materials are suited to their to their particular levels of competence. This finding has an important implication for the implementation of child-centred outcomes-based mathematics curricula in underresourced education systems in low-income countries: pedagogical practices will not be differentiated according to the needs of the learner unless teachers have access to well developed textbooks which are aligned with curriculum outcomes. Teachers also needed to develop their subject content knowledge so that they could take the risk of deviating from the narrow confines of the textbook. However, this need varied immensely and was more pronounced in the case of teachers who had not studied mathematics beyond secondary level and were being asked to teach in secondary classrooms. In the workshops this need was partly addressed through work on mathematics tasks. However, local expertise was available in the form of other secondary mathematics teachers, usually posted to boys’ schools, with the requisite subject knowledge. However, this support was of limited use, as the pedagogical approaches of the latter teachers were rooted in the knowledge delivery mode of teaching. Hence, there would be value in supporting the national reform by training and education to subject teachers to collaborate in supporting each others’ professional development. In summary, the Implementing Curriculum Change Project demonstrated that under-qualified mathematics teachers in remote rural schools required significant levels of support in order to implement the more student-centric pedagogical practices, required by the new outcomes-based curriculum in Pakistan. However, even when they were provided with this support, they were still constrained by various factors rooted in the reality of the classroom.

Conclusion This action research project indicates a way forward for the implementation at local level of a national reform initiative in developing world situations with

Implementing curriculum change  177 paucity of resources. However certain features would need to be taken into account for such a project to be considered as a way forward. Firstly, professional development should be responsive to the needs of the teachers so that teachers see the value in participating in it. Secondly, teachers need to be provided with the various forms of assistance that will enable them to change their practice. This assistance includes the provision of in-service training, the creation of opportunities for teachers to collaboratively reflect on their practices, and the provision of appropriate textbooks. Even then, it should be recognised that teachers may be unable to fully implement outcomes-based curricula due to the continued existence of certain obstacles to pedagogical transformation, such as large class sizes. Administratively, it is recommended that centrally-driven curriculum reform is supported by the creation of horizontal networks of schools within each taluka, networks which are in turn vertically connected to district education offices and local private universities. The ‘network model’ provides a potential framework for systemic change as it gives schools access to necessary resources. Clustering or creating a network of schools within a taluka (or some other manageable administrative unit) also potentially optimises resource usage within the public sector. This is a significant consideration in low-income countries such as Pakistan with a large education infrastructure and a shortage of resources. In addition, there is considerable evidence that change in teacher practice is more sustainable and meaningful for the teachers when undertaken in collaborative structures (Hussain and Ali, 2010; Leu, 2004). To conclude, outcomes-based curricula have been introduced in low-income countries because it is believed that they will prepare students for the challenge of living in an increasingly globalised world. Traditional transmission pedagogies are deemed inadequate for enabling students to be lifelong learners with transferable skills, who can take charge of their learning and adapt to the rapidly changing economic opportunities created by globalization. For example, Tabulawa (2003, p.9) elaborates in some detail that the epistemological foundation of learner-centred pedagogy, (a key element of outcome-based curricula) is social constructivism i.e. learners construct knowledge through active participation in the process of learning. This epistemological position rejects the traditional view that learners receive knowledge transmitted to them. However, key local variables such as teacher preparedness and teaching practices mediate the implementation of outcomes based curricula at local levels. By complementing the national initiatives with locally-driven, bottom-up processes, a framework could be created to enable teachers to more closely align their practice with the demands of these curricula, particularly the adoption of student centric teaching practices. Most significantly the bottom-up processes of inquiry employed in the research enabled the researchers to identify the small steps that teachers in low-income countries must take in order to implement outcomes-based curricula within the social, political and cultural constraints of their education systems. It is just this process that ensures the quality of

178  A. Halai curriculum change by making it relevant to and sustainable in the contexts where it is being introduced.1

Note 1 I wish to thank Tauseef Akhlaq, Munira Amir Ali, Sahreen Chauhan, fellow members of the ICC team. I also wish to thank the school teachers for their contribution to the development of knowledge and insights in the course of this inquiry.

References Argüelles, A. and Gonczi, A. (2000) (eds) Competency Based Education and Training: A World Perspective, Mexico City, Grupo Noriega Editors. Aslam, M. and Kingdon, G. (2008) ‘What can teachers do to raise pupil achievement? Recoup Working Paper No. 19’, report for Research Consortium on Educational Outcomes and Poverty, Cambridge, RECOUP. Available at (accessed 16 December 2010). Anandalakshmy, S. (1999) ‘Inside the classroom’, in PROBE Team,Public Report on Basic Education in India, (New Delhi, Oxford University Press). Pp.68–82. Baig S. and Halai A. (2006) ‘Learning mathematics rules with reasons’, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 2(2): 15–39. Bantwini, B. D. (2010) ‘How teachers perceive the new curriculum reform: lessons from a school district in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa’, International Journal of Educational Development, 30(1): 83–90 Barber, M. (2010) ‘Education reform in Pakistan: this time it is going to be different’, paper presented by the Co-Chair, Pakistan Task Force. Washington DC, Brookings Institution. Available at

(accessed 25 February 2011). Barrett, A.M. (2007) ‘Beyond the polarization of pedagogy: models of classroom practice in Tanzanian primary schools’. Comparative Education, 43(2): 273–294. Barrett,A. M., Ali, S., Clegg, J., Hinostroza, E., Lowe, J., Nike, J., Novelli, M., Oduro, G., Pillay, M., Tikly, L., & Guoxing, Y. (2007) ‘Initiatives to improve the quality of teaching and learning: a review of recent literature’. EdQual Working Paper 11. Available at . Chisholm, L. and Leyendecker, R. (2008) ‘Curriculum reform in post-1990s subSaharan Africa’. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(2): 195–205. Chisholm, L. (2005) ‘The politics of curriculum review and revision in South Africa in regional context’. Compare: a Journal of Comparative Education, 35(1): 79–100. Dean, B. (2005) ‘Citizenship education in Pakistani schools: problems and possibilities’. International Journal of Citizenship and Teacher Education, 1(2): 36–55 Fullan, M. (2004) The Challenge of Change, Start School Improvement Now, New York, Corwin Press. Govinda, R. and Bandyopadhyay, M. (2008) ‘Access to elementary education in India: country analytic review’, report for Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity, Brighton, CREATE. Govinda, R. (2008) ‘Education for all in India: assessing progress towards Dakar goals’, Prospects, 38: 431–444.

Implementing curriculum change  179 Halai, A., Akhlaq, T., Amirali, M. and Chauhan, S. (2011) ‘Implementing problem solving in mathematics classrooms: an action research. Final report,’ report for Research Programme Consortium on Implementing Education Quality in Low Income Countries, Bristol, EdQual. Available at . Halai A. (2007) (ed.) Teacher Status in Pakistan: A Symposium. Karachi, Aga Khan University. Halai, N. (2006) ‘Learning to use innovative pedagogy: the experience of a primary science teacher’, Science Education International, 17(2): 123–32. Hussain, R. and Ali, S. (2010) ‘Improving public school teachers in Pakistan: challenges and opportunities’. Improving Schools, 13(1): 70–80. Johnson, S., Monk, M. and Hodges, M. (2000) ‘Teacher development and change in South Africa: a critique of the appropriateness of transfer of northern/western practice’, Compare, 30(2): 179–92 Kingdon, G. G. (2007) ‘The progress of school education in India’. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(2): 168–195. Leu, E. (2004) ‘The patterns and purposes of school-based and cluster teacher professional development programmes. Working paper No. 2’, report for EQUIP1, USAID. Available at http://www.equip123.net/docs/Working-p2.pdf> (accessed 18 May 2011). Mager, R.F. (1984). Preparing instructional objectives, 2nd edn, Belmont, CA, David S. Lake. Ministry of Education (2006) National Curriculum for Mathematics: Grades I–XII, 2006. Islamabad: Ministry of Education. Available (accessed 8 August 2011). Ministry of Education (2009) Year Book 2008–09. Islamabad: Ministry of Education. Available at

(accessed 25 February 2011). Ministry of Education (2011) Achievements of the Ministry of Education. Islamabad: Ministry of Education. Available at (accessed 7 September, 2011). Nakabugo, M. G. and Sieborger, R. (2001) ‘Curriculum reform and teaching in South Africa: making a ‘paradigm shift’?’ International Journal of Educational Development, 21(1): 53–60. National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (2000) Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Online. Available at (accessed 8 August 2011). National Informatics Centre (2010) Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Andhra Pradesh: quality issues in elementary education. Available at (accessed 4 August 2011). Polya, G. (1957) How to Solve It, 2nd edn, (Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press). Safran, B (2009). Pakistan Education Reform Programs: Ambitions and Innovations. Online. Available at (accessed Feb 26 2011). Spady, W. (1997) Paradigm Lost: Reclaiming America’s Educational Future, Arlington, TX, American Association of School Administrators. Spady, W. (1994) ‘Choosing outcomes of significance’. Educational Leadership, 51(6): 18–22. Sriprakash, A. (2010) ‘Child-centred education and the promise of democratic learning: pedagogic messages in rural Indian primary schools’. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(3): 297–304.

180  A. Halai Tabulawa, R. (2003) ‘International aid agencies, learner-centred pedagogy and political democratization. A critique’. Comparative Education 39(1): 7–26. Tikly, L. and Barrett, A.M. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’. International Journal of Educational Development 31(1): 3–14. Todd, A. and Mason (2005) ‘Enhancing learning in South African schools: strategies beyond outcomes-based education’. International Journal of Educational Development, 2(3): 221–234. Vavrus, F. (2009). ‘The cultural politics of constructivist pedagogies: teacher education in the united republic of Tanzania’. International Journal of Educational Development, 29(3): 303–311.

13 Participatory professional development ICT and mathematics education in Rwanda Alphonse Uworwabayeho, Jolly Rubagiza, Federica Olivero and Rosamund Sutherland Introduction This chapter is concerned with the ways in which Information and Communications Technology (ICT) can be used in low-income countries to support young people to develop knowledge and skills that enable them to participate fully in society. It centres around the results of the EdQual ICT project, which aimed to develop and evaluate strategies for effective use of ICT to support teaching and learning in basic education in Rwanda, with a particular focus on mathematics. The EdQual ICT project was grounded within the Rwandan national development vision that the country will achieve middleincome status by 2020. The Vision 2020 plan centres around creating “a prosperous knowledge-based economy” based on information and communication technologies, thus hoping to make Rwanda the ICT hub of Africa. ICT in education has emerged as one of the pillars of the country’s National Information and Communications Infrastructure (NICI) Policy and Plan (NICI, 2010). Moreover, cultivating the interest of students in mathematics, science and technology is also emphasised (MINEDUC [Ministry of Education], 2003; 2006). The vision that ICT will both transform learning in schools and educate young people to contribute to building the economy has been echoed in highand low-income countries around the world. In this chapter we argue that investment in ICT in schools will only have the desired outcome if young people are allowed access to hands-on activities with ICT, and this requires a more student-centred approach to teaching and learning. In this respect providing schools with ICT equipment and resources, including access to the Internet, is only a starting point in a process of empowering young people to use ICTs to transform their learning and their lives. Drawing on the results of the InterActive Education Project (Sutherland et al., 2009), we suggest that teachers are only likely to develop a more studentcentred approach to ICT use in the classroom if they re-think their normal teaching practices through a programme of professional development. We

182  A. Uworwabayeho et al. discuss a model of participatory action research, developed within the Rwandan context for the specific case of mathematics teaching. This involves mathematics teachers in developing innovative classroom scenarios through active ‘hands-on’ experimentation with ICTs and reflection and discussion with other teachers. We argue that through such professional development mathematics teachers can begin to shift towards a more student-centred approach, devolving the responsibility for solving mathematical problems to students themselves. In this approach ICT becomes a tool for solving mathematical problems through investigating and conjecturing, empowering students with skills that may transform their learning and their lives. This chapter starts by describing the context in which ICTs are being introduced into society and schools in Rwanda. We discuss the ICT policy framework and then move on to discuss the particular context of mathematics education, which provides the case study for this chapter. The chapter continues by discussing the EdQual ICT project and the approach to professional development that emerged throughout the project. Finally, we argue that Sen’s capability approach (1999) can provide a framework for rethinking ICT use in schools and for conceptualizing professional development as participatory action research.

Teaching, learning and ICT in Rwanda Vision 2020 Socio-economic development in Rwanda is largely guided by the Vision 2020 development plan adopted in the year 2000. The major aspiration of this vision is to transform the country from a subsistence agriculture economy into a middle-income country. Investing in the country’s human resources through provision of education is therefore seen as “critical for enabling the country to achieve its goal of becoming a knowledge-based and technology-driven society” (MINECOFIN [Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning], 2007, p.22). The Vision 2020 development plan reiterates the need to generate, disseminate and acquire scientific skills as well as promote technological innovation in the country. And for Rwanda to achieve this, it is observed that there is a need to: …develop the teaching of science and technology at secondary and university levels. It will facilitate the creation of high and intermediate technology enterprises and develop access to ICT down to the administrative sector level, in accordance with the national ICT plan. (MINECOFIN, 2000, p.20) The national ICT plan is the National Information and Communications Infrastructure Policy and Plan (NICI), which was adopted in 2001. This is to be implemented in four phases of five years each until 2020. The NICI plan

Participatory professional development  183 recognises the role of ICT in education as a driving force for development. As a result there are four education policy actions associated with NICI and these include: (i) the use of ICTs for formal and informal education; (ii) raising public awareness of ICTs; (iii) helping educational institutions improve their business processes and (iv) promoting research and development. The MINEDUC has seen the expansion of ICT infrastructure through a number of initiatives in primary and secondary schools and also introduced ICT as a compulsory subject at secondary school level. Despite the criticism that the rush towards incorporating ICTs in education and society may lead to an increasing digital divide between rural and urban areas in low-income countries (Hepp et al., 2004), research has shown the key role of teachers in addressing this issue. Teachers function as gatekeepers, generating the conditions for students to learn how to use ICT in school and for promoting schools as “triggering centres for the diffusion of technology into rural communities” (Salinas and Sanchez, 2009). As such, teachers’ skills, expectations and usage of ICT are essential and need to be developed through appropriate professional development. The next section will examine the predominant teaching model in Rwandan schools in the specific field of mathematics. We will then argue that even when investment in ICT in schools is sufficient and secured, its impact will only make a difference if students have hands-on access to digital technologies through a student-centred approach to teaching and learning. Teaching and learning mathematics In Rwanda mathematics as a subject in schools is given priority in line with the Vision 2020, which aimed to build a knowledge-based economy (MINEDUC, 2003), as previously discussed. However, statistics show that there is a high failure rate of students in national mathematics examinations at all levels (Rwanda National Examinations Council, 2008). This failure in mathematics is generally attributed to a lack of qualified teachers and inadequate facilities such as learning resources in schools (Earnest & Treagust, 2002). Only just over half of mathematics teachers are qualified (51.9 per cent in 2001/2, MINEDUC, 2003), and there is evidence that even qualified teachers continue to promote rote learning of mathematics (Uworwabayeho, 2009). This is exemplified by the traditional lesson format followed by Rwandan teachers described below, which is not dissimilar from what happens in Pakistani mathematics classrooms (see Halai, chapter 12 in this book) and is in line with the model of ‘structured pedagogy’ that is sometimes recommended in the education and development literature (see Sayed and Ahmed, chapter 8 in this book). The teacher starts the lesson by reviewing the mathematical concepts introduced in the previous lesson, usually through asking one or two oral questions to the students, who answer by repeating what they have previously learnt. The teacher then explains new topics whilst at the same time writing notes on the chalkboard; students listen and copy the notes down in their notebooks. Afterwards, students work individually on various mathematical

184  A. Uworwabayeho et al. exercises. Then the teacher asks one student to write her/his work on the chalkboard for the whole class to see. At this stage, ways of providing feedback to students vary from teacher to teacher and depend on the time available before the end of the lesson. Some teachers might provide the ‘right answer’ if the student who is at the board does not produce what they expect, while others will call another student to correct his/her colleague. Finally, the teacher may ask students to solve a set of mathematical problems as homework. There is an awareness in Rwanda that what the country needs is young people who can take initiative and investigate mathematical problems for themselves and that the dominant teacher-led approach is not supporting young people in this respect. However, there are many challenges in terms of changing the teaching of mathematics to a more student-centred model. Firstly, the proportion of non-qualified mathematics teachers would imply an emphasis on both pedagogical and mathematics content knowledge when planning for professional development. Secondly, even when mathematics teachers engage in continuous professional development programmes, there is still evidence of a gap between what they learn about teaching and learning and what they then do in the classroom (Sifuna and Kaime, 2007). Whereas teachers may say that they support the idea of student-centred approaches, evidence from observations in the classroom suggests that they have not yet made the shift from more teachercentred approaches to devolving activities to students (ibid, 2007). This could be because of large classes, teachers’ and students’ unfamiliarity with the language of instruction, and pressure to cover the syllabuses in preparation for national examinations. Whereas development agencies (e.g. Volunteer Service Overseas [VSO], Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education [SMASSE], and Forum for African Women Educationalists [FAWE]) have supported a range of in-service teacher education projects in Rwanda, few have included research about teaching and learning processes. As a consequence the evidence base for what really happens at the classroom level is limited and much of the policy on teacher professional development has not been grounded in local realities. This problem seems to be prevalent in the majority of lowincome countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa (Sifuna and Kaime, 2007). In the next section we will look at approaches to teacher professional training, developed in the context of the Interactive Education project, which the EdQual ICT project drew on, in order to understand how the process of transformation of ICT availability into its use by teachers and young people could happen.

Professional development, ICT and learning mathematics We suggest that from an educational perspective what is important is not what access young people have to ICT resources but what access they have to using ICT, that is, access to hands-on activity with ICT. The importance of children’s hands-on activity with computers underpinned early research by one of the authors (Hoyles and Sutherland, 1992) which was inspired by the work of Seymour Papert (1980), which also inspired the development of the One Laptop

Participatory professional development  185 Per Child (OLPC) initiative at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (OLPC, 2011) and underpins the OLPC initiative in Rwanda. The main idea threading through all of these initiatives is that the ‘technology’ needs to be in the hands of the ‘child’. Interestingly, many of these initiatives have also been concerned with children and young people using ICT as a tool to transform the learning of mathematics. Similar initiatives in low-income countries include the Enlaces project in Chile (Moënne, Verdi, and Sepulveda, 2004) and the Enseñanza de las Matemáticas con Tecnología (EMAT) project in Mexico (Rojano, 2006; Sacristán and Rojano, 2009). We know that when computers and ICT are injected into the school system teachers tend to maintain a teacher-centred approach to teaching and learning with the “emphasis on the use of digital technology within school mathematics has been on teacher-led use, using mainly presentational software such as PowerPoint and interactive whiteboard software” (Sutherland, 2011). However, we also know that without a teacher orchestrating learning, young people are very unlikely to spontaneously learn such subjects as mathematics (Sutherland, 2006). In particular those students who are already disadvantaged by the system are even more likely to be disadvantaged if they do not have access to people who are knowledgeable about subjects such as mathematics and science. We suggest that there is an inherent tension here. On the one hand, without teachers young people are not likely to use available technology to learn mathematics. On the other hand, with teachers young people are not likely to be given access to the technology to solve mathematical problems for themselves. This tension can only be resolved through professional development, as discussed in the next section. The research reported in this chapter was influenced by the InterActive Education project (Sutherland et al., 2009), which was developed in the context of a rapid expansion in all kinds of information and communications technology (ICT) and in response to the massive drive to incorporate these new technologies into every aspect of school life and learning in the UK. The overall aim of the project was to examine the ways in which ICT could be used in educational settings to enhance teaching and learning. The project took a holistic approach, examining learning with ICT at both the level of learner and classroom, and the learner in outside school settings, also taking into account the institutional and societal factors which structure learning. The Interactive Education project drew heavily on socio-cultural theories of learning (Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 1998). A key aspect of such theory is the claim that all human action is mediated by tools. In the project the idea of ‘tool’ was interpreted as incorporating a wide range of technologies and artefacts (for example, pen, paper, book, computer), semiotic systems (for example, language, graphs, diagrams), social interaction (for example, group work) and institutional structures (for example, national educational policy). Within this framework ICT is considered as a tool that potentially expands what a person can do. For example, when using a spreadsheet it is possible to develop a complex budget, experimenting with variables and unknown values, and creating hypothetical situations which would be very difficult to do with paper and pencil.

186  A. Uworwabayeho et al. The next section will discuss how the EdQual ICT project in Rwanda, drawing on the Interactive Education project, developed its own participatory professional development model, using ICT as a catalyst for changing mathematics teachers’ practices.

A participatory professional development model: the EdQual ICT project in Rwanda The EdQual ICT project (Karangwa et al., forthcoming) set out to investigate the ways in which ICT can be used in Rwanda to enhance teaching and learning, with a particular focus on science and mathematics. It centred around the implementation and evaluation of a collaborative professional development programme, working with more than 65 teachers for four years. The research design was based on a participatory model of professional development. This process built on the work of the InterActive Education Project as discussed in the previous section and also drew on insights from the Enlaces initiative in Chile (Moënne et al., 2004), through collaboration with UK and Chilean partners. The EdQual project was carried out in 12 schools; of these three were primary schools and nine secondary schools. In each school three to four teachers of science and mathematics participated during the four years. The schools were selected on the basis of open access to all students, possession of computers and electricity, a mixture of primary and secondary and rural and urban schools, supportive and motivated school administration. Through a series of teacher workshops which were organised at the end of each academic year (four major workshops in total, from 2006–2009) teacher participants worked together to develop their own skills and to plan activities to be carried out in their own schools. The role of the project team from the Kigali Institute of Education (KIE), Chile and the UK was to support these processes at the workshops themselves and to monitor the implementation of planned activities through visits to schools in the periods between workshops. For example, during the November 2006 workshop teachers engaged in hands-on activities on the use of spreadsheets to plot and explore graphs of straight-line functions and basics statistics. During the academic year 2007, teachers started integrating ICT in their teaching using spreadsheets and free educational software, available on a range of websites, to teach lessons linked to the national mathematics curriculum. As a follow up, researchers visited teachers in their respective settings. During the period of teaching, sessions held before and after classes provided an opportunity for sharing interpretations of what had occurred in the classroom. Discussions in the meetings focused on the teaching and learning practices, and the planning of instructional activities. Lessons were video-recorded and in addition hand-written notes were taken by one of the researchers in the classroom. The video-recorded lessons were used in subsequent workshops for reflection and evaluation on teachers’ practices of using ICTs. Discussions led to plans on how best to use these tools for effective learning within the subsequent academic year.

Participatory professional development  187 Phase 1: Incorporating ICT into a teacher-centred approach Within the first three years of the project it was observed that teacher partners started to use ICT in their mathematics lessons. However they tended to incorporate ICT into the dominant teacher-led lesson format described in Section 2.3. For example, one of the mathematics teachers decided to teach students how to use a spreadsheet to plot a straight-line graph. The teacher started the lesson with a PowerPoint presentation and introduced the students to the concept of a straight-line function (y = ax + b) within the context of a problem about playing cards.1 The 38 students (all girls) in the class sat around 15 computers, paying attention to the presentation of the teacher. The teacher showed the students how to set up a spreadsheet to solve the problem and explained the problem. After spending 80 of the 100 minutes of the lesson with teacher-talk and demonstration the students were then asked to use formulae in Excel to find out the amount y to pay after x minutes of playing. The teacher explained how to construct the formulae by reading elements in the spreadsheet (column, letter and row, number, e.g. if the number a is in column B and row 3, we write B3). While the students were looking for values of y, the teacher kept asking them to say aloud the corresponding number of minutes of playing (x). Whereas students in the class eventually spent about 20 minutes (20 per cent) of hands-on time with the computers, the majority of the lesson was dominated by teacher-talk and teacher-action. The approach being used by the teacher fitted with his normal classroom practice. In this respect the teacher was drawing on a strong teacher-centred model of teaching, which keeps students dependent on the teacher, and works against the independence that is needed to fully exploit the potential of ICTs. This example shows, as we previously argued, that the introduction of ICT by itself does not transform learning, unless teachers rethink their teaching practices and devolve the use of ICT to the students themselves. The subsequent phase of the EdQual project further developed the collaborative professional development model in a way that we suggest empowered teachers to try a new way of working in the classroom, which left more space for students to experiment with the ICTs for learning mathematics. Phase 2: Shifting towards a student-centred approach to teaching and learning mathematics with ICT During the last two years of the EdQual project an opportunity arose for mathematics teachers to work more intensively with one of the authors of this chapter (Uworwabayeho, 2011). This work centred around the use of dynamic geometry software (Laborde, 2001) for teaching geometry, with Alphonse working with two mathematics teachers from a Kigali school that was well equipped with computers and was connected to the Internet. Both researcher and teachers were qualified to teach mathematics but had never used any ICT tools

188  A. Uworwabayeho et al. before the EdQual project. The classes taught during this period (July 2008 to January 2010) were year 2 (grade 8) and year 3 (grade 9), 12–15 year olds. The topics covered the teaching of elementary geometry as it appears in the Rwandan 2006 mathematics curriculum (syllabus). Altogether 18 lessons were co-taught. The participatory action research model (Elliot, 1991) involved the researcher working together with the teachers in the design and development of mathematics lessons. When preparing a lesson, the topic from the mathematics curriculum was organised into a series of questions focusing on the mathematical knowledge specified in the curriculum. For example, when introducing third-year secondary school students to the mathematical concepts of commutativity and associativity of addition in a set of vectors,2 the following activity was planned: (1) let u and v be vectors. Construct the vectors u plus v and v plus u. Compare u plus v and v plus u. Provide your conclusion. (2) Consider vectors u, v and w. Construct (a) (u+v)+w and (b) u+(v+w). Compare (a) and (b). Give your conclusion. (Lesson on 17/2/2010) Previously, the students had been introduced to how to construct the sum of two vectors in the dynamic geometry environment. In addition, the students were supposed to be familiar with the concepts of commutativity and associativity of addition in number sets (integers and real numbers) from their previous academic years. They had also learnt vectors and constructed their sum by using geometrical instruments in their second year of secondary school. So this activity was not unfamiliar to the students, who however were now supposed to refer to known mathematical axioms when validating their conclusion after visual observations in the dynamic geometry environment. The teachers and the researcher were present in the ICT enhanced mathematics lessons, with the researcher taking on the role of collaborator in the teaching. The lessons, including this one, generally followed the following format. Firstly the teacher started the lesson by presenting the mathematical activities to the whole class: either the activities were distributed to students on a worksheet or the teacher dictated the questions and students wrote them down on paper. Students then worked in small groups (generally two or three students per computer), investigating the mathematical questions set by the teacher. During group work, the teachers moved around the class to ensure students were on task, and also interacted with them. The interactions with students were characterised by a focus on the students’ mathematical activities as illustrated by the following excerpt. Teacher: Amani: Teacher: Amani: Teacher:

What did you conclude? They [vectors u+v and v+u] are equal. Are they equal? What allows you to say this? They have same norm. Only the same norm?

Participatory professional development  189

u

j

u+v v

v+u

Figure 13.1  Students’ construction in the dynamic geometry software

Amani: Teacher: Amani: Teacher: Amani: Teacher: Louis: Teacher:

Same co-ordinate. Co-ordinate? Do we have co-ordinate? They are parallel. Same norm and parallel and what else? Same length. Norm is length. Same norm, parallel and same sense. The same sense, same length and same direction. You should write this before the conclusion. (Excerpt from the 17/2/2010 lesson)

In this lesson, the students spent about 80 minutes out of a 100 (80 per cent) on active hands-on work with the dynamic geometry software. After the group work, the students came back as a whole class and one representative per group read their responses to the set questions and a discussion followed. Finally, the teacher highlighted the targeted mathematical knowledge. Whereas superficially the structure of such a lesson may appear similar to the lesson described in the previous section, there were significant differences between the two types of lessons, which highlight a progressive shift to devolving the use of ICT to the students. Firstly, the mathematical activity was presented in different ways. At the start of the teacher-led ICT lesson, the teacher provided students with the mathematical knowledge, generally in an axiomatic form, which the students then needed to apply to a similar situation. In contrast, in the student-centred ICT lesson, the teacher asked the students to discover the mathematical axioms through investigation within the dynamic geometry software. Secondly, in the teacher-led ICT lesson, each student was invited to work individually on prescribed exercise after the teacher’s presentation. By contrast, in the studentcentred ICT lesson, the mathematical activities were devolved to the students, who then spent a large proportion of the lesson working in pairs on the mathematical questions, investigating the problems and formulating mathematical axioms for themselves, using ICT as a tool for exploring and conjecturing. When the teacher interacted with students during group work these interactions were characterised by the teacher inviting students to validate their formulations. Observations of mathematics lessons in Rwanda in phase 1 of the EdQual ICT project suggest that this type of group work is rare in

190  A. Uworwabayeho et al. Rwandan classrooms. Here, by group work we mean where students work in pairs or small groups on mathematical activities that lead to the construction of new knowledge. Thirdly, at the end of the student-centred ICT lesson, the students shared their problem solutions with the whole class through one group representative reading their findings to the rest of the class. The teacher might intervene to ask other group members to complement their colleagues’ answers where necessary. By contrast, in the teacher-led ICT lesson, the students’ presentation to the whole class was characterised by one student writing her/his answer on the chalkboard and the teacher validating that answer as ‘right or wrong’. Finally, when the teacher provided a summary at the end of the student-led ICT lesson, this was characterised by highlighting new mathematical knowledge drawing on what students had produced, whereas the teacher-led ICT lesson was characterised by the teacher stating the new mathematical knowledge. A teacher-perspective on shifting towards a student-centred approach and the role of ICT Interviews with both teachers at the end of the research highlighted what aspects of the participatory design were key for them in making a shift towards a more student-centred approach to teaching mathematics and to a more integrated use of ICT in which students were given access to hands on mathematical activities. Talking about her classroom practice during the project, one teacher confirmed that her views on teaching and learning had changed: I realised that getting the learners working more than the teacher is very good and this is not the way I used to teach before. Since we started using ICT I’ve tried to enable student interactions in normal classrooms too, I avoid just talking from the front all the time. (Interview, 25/2/2010) Over the course of the EdQual project, ICT acted as a catalyst for change towards a more student-centred approach to teaching. This confirms what other research, specifically using dynamic geometry software, has found. For example, Laborde (2001), analysing the types of tasks developed by teachers over three years and their evolution, argues that integrating technology into teaching is a long process in which teachers moved from designing observation and validation tasks, to more open-ended explorations that devolve the construction of knowledge to the students. Laborde identifies a number of variables that also connect to the EdQual’s findings one of which is teachers’ experience with teaching and with the software. The research also describes how teachers progressively overcame their initial resistance to losing control of the students as a result of devolving the activities to them and the ICT. This is in fact what seems to have happened between phase 1 and phase 2 of the EdQual project, enabled by the participatory professional action research model.

Participatory professional development  191

Social justice, capabilities and the use of ICTs in mathematics education If we take as a starting point that ICTs are available resources, then from a social justice perspective what is important is how people convert these resources into what Sen (1999) calls capabilities, where capabilities are potential functionings, or opportunities to achieve. A person’s capabilities can be thought of as a capability set, which provides freedom of choice to be an active participant in society. How a person converts resources into capabilities relates both to the social and cultural context of use of these resources and to individual difference, agency and choice. From a socio-cultural perspective it also relates to the personal history of an individual as well as to what an individual perceives to be possible with the designed technology. All of this emphasises the importance of the choice of technologies that are made available in schools and the choices about how teachers and students use these technologies in school and the role these tools play in the curriculum. Within this chapter we are concerned with how ICTs can be used to transform learning in mathematics classrooms and also to educate and empower young people. The literature on capabilities helps us to understand the process of transforming ICT availability into use. We first have to ask the question about what capabilities (potential functionings) we want young people in Rwanda to have in order to be able to have the choice to participate fully in society (whether or not they decide to exercise this choice). We argued in a previous paper (Rubagiza et al., 2011) that what Jenkins calls “new media literacies” (Jenkins, 2009, p.xiii) could constitute such a capability set. This includes the capability to experiment with the surroundings as a way of problem-solving, the capability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real world processes, the capability to scan the environment and shift focus onto salient details, the capability to interact meaningfully with tools that expand mental capacities, the capability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others towards a common goal, the capability to search for, synthesise and disseminate information, and the capability to negotiate. Jenkins argues that such literacies should be seen as “social skills as ways of interacting within a larger community and not simply as individualised skills to be used for personal experience” (Jenkins, 2009, p.32). Interestingly, this capability set, influenced by the idea of media literacies, fits well with capabilities that are potentially available through the use of ICT in mathematics. For example, the first of these capabilities, “the capability to experiment with the surroundings as a way of problem solving”, is central to problem-based learning in mathematics and in particular to problem-based learning with ICT. The second of the capabilities listed above, the capability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real world processes, is also important in mathematics, and in particular can be accessed through the use of dynamic software environments, such as dynamic geometry and dynamic graph plotting packages. The capability to interact meaningfully with tools that

192  A. Uworwabayeho et al. expand mental capacities is similar to the socio-cultural idea of tools as meditational means that transform what an individual can do. As Walker (2006) argues, capability refers to what people are able to do and not just how many resources are available. It focuses on the freedom to be able to choose a life that one values. From this perspective, development is a process of “expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy” (Sen, 1999, p.1). The idea of agency is central to the capability approach, as it is to socio-cultural theories of learning and development, where agency is viewed as the ability to pursue goals that one values. Diversity is foregrounded in the capability approach, in that every diverse person is valued by society. Here the focus on individual diversity must not be confused with the neo-liberal approach to individualism, with its focus on individual self-interest.

Concluding remarks Throughout this chapter we have suggested that what is needed for ICT to be integrated in education in a way that empowers young people’s experiences and life is a participatory approach to professional development, in which teachers are involved in formulating the research questions and participating in the design and development of teaching scenarios. Walker (2006, p.109) also argues that a “participatory action research process would enable us to involve all those affected by the practice in developing and evaluating the development of valued capabilities in and through education.” In this respect we are beginning to use the capability approach as a lens to conceptualise professional development as participatory action research. We are also using the capability approach to rethink ICT use in the mathematics classroom as providing access to a capability set that will allow young people freedom of choice about how they participate in society as active citizens. Such freedom includes both ICT-related and mathematical-related capabilities. We are also beginning to understand how dynamic mathematical ICT tools can be used as catalysts for provoking Rwandan mathematics teachers to change their practice. However as we have argued throughout this chapter and elsewhere (Sutherland et al., 2009) there is nothing inherent in the ICT tool itself that ‘causes’ change, it is how the ICT tool is used that is important. How teachers use the ICT too is related to professional development practices. From a detailed case study (Uworwabayeho, 2011) we have shown that it is possible to encourage the emergence of a student-centred model of mathematics teaching in Rwanda through employing a participatory collaborative and action research based approach to teacher development. And within this approach, the use of ICT appears to be inextricably bound up with the process of change. We hope that such an action research approach “would help us to do fairness and to do capability development better” (Walker, p.109). However we still have to ask the question about how such a participatory model could be scaled up in Rwanda. We suggest that the Kigali Institute of Education (KIE), which is responsible for pre-/in-service teacher training in

Participatory professional development  193 Rwanda could take a lead in organising such a programme, building on the team of lecturers at KIE with experience of running these workshops and with experience of leading such continuing professional development programme that the EdQual project has left behind. Within the pre-service programme student teachers could be equipped with new teaching approaches and could be trained to work as a team. Within the in-service distance training programmes, KIE has in total ten regional centres where in-service teachers meet tutors for subject coaching, which includes teaching methods as well as mathematics. Teachers should be encouraged to work as a team firstly, as they work in the same schools and at regional level secondly, supported by their tutors. This would be in line with the Ministry of Education statement that: Teachers must be prepared to work as part of a team, combining their efforts with their colleagues, supervisors and parents to create the best possible learning environment for their students. In addition, teachers must continually educate themselves learning about new advances in education, new technologies and new ways to encourage their students to reach their full potential. (MINEDUC 2007) This recommendation takes into account existing challenges, mentioned earlier, such as the large numbers of unqualified mathematics teachers, limited teacher capacity to work with technologies, as well as competition for ICT resources between teachers of ICT as a subject and other subject areas. The findings from this study could, therefore, assist policy makers to develop student-centred approaches for teaching ICT through making best use of existing projects such as the OLPC.

Notes 1 The problem statement: 5 francs are required as an initial deposit before starting to play a game. How much will it cost a player after 10 min if each subsequent min costs 1 franc? (Lesson on 22/6/2007) 2 This is a topic of the 2006 Rwandan national mathematics curriculum.

References Earnest, J., and Treagust, D.F. (2002) ‘Science education and the impact on the school environment in transitional societies’, paper presented at the The Australian Association for Research in Education, 2002. Elliot, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Milton Keynes-Philadelphia, Open University Press. Hepp, P., Hinostroza, J. E., Laval, E. and Rehbein, L. (2004) Technology in Schools: Education, ICT and the Knowledge Society, Washington, DC: The World Bank. Hoyles, C. and Sutherland, R. (1989) Logo Mathematics in the Classroom. London, Routledge.

194  A. Uworwabayeho et al. Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media education of the 21st century. USA, MIT Press. Karangwa, E., Rubagiza, J., Kaleeba, A., Uworwabayeho, A., Muhangere, C., Kampire, E., Kampogo, M., Iyamuremye, D., Sengarama, R., Denley, P. and Sutherland R. (forthcoming) ‘Use of ICTs in Rwandan Basic Education’, EdQual Research Report. Bristol, EdQual. Laborde, C (2001) ‘Integration of technology in the design of geometry tasks with cabri-geometry’. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 6: 283–317. MINECOFIN (2003) Vision 2020. Kigali: Republic of Rwanda. MINECOFIN (2007) Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy 2008–2012, K igali, Republic of Rwanda. MINEDUC (2003) Education Sector Policy. Kigali, Republic of Rwanda. MINEDUC (2007) Teacher Development and Management Policy in Rwanda. Kigali, Republic of Rwanda. MINEDUC (2006) Education Sector Strategy Plan. Kigali, Republic of Rwanda. MINEDUC (2009) ICT in Education Policy (draft). Kigali, Republic of Rwanda. Moënne, Verdi, and Sepulveda (2004) ‘Ensen˜anza de las ciencias con uso de TIC en escuelas urbano marginales de bajo rendimiento escolar’, paper presented at the Proceedings of Taller Internacional de Software Educativo TISE 2004, Santiago. NICI (2010) ‘Rwanda NiCI policy’. Available at (accessed 23 June 2011). OLPC [One Laptop Per Child] (2011) Available at (accessed 11 August 2011). Papert, S. (1980) Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. Brighton, Harvester Press. Rojano, T. (2006) ‘Puesta a prueba del Modelo EMAT’, in T. Rojano (ed.) Enseñanza de la Física y las Matemáticas con Tecnología: Modelos de Transformación de las Prácticas y la Interacción en el Aula, México: SEP-OEI. Rubagiza, J., Were, E. and Sutherland, R. (2011) ‘Introducing ICT into schools in Rwanda: educational challenges and opportunities’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31: 37–43. Rwanda National Examination Council (2008). Available at (accessed 20 March 2009). Sacristán, A. and Rojano, T. (2009) ‘The Mexican national programs on teaching mathematics and science with technology: the legacy of a decade of experiences of transformation of school practices and interactions’, in A. Tatnall and A. Jones (eds) IFIP Advances in Education and Technology for a Better World, Boston, Springer. Pp.207–215. Salinas, A. and Sanchez, J. (2009) ‘Digital inclusion in Chile: internet in rural schools’, International Journal of Educational Development, 29(6): 573–582. Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Sifuna, N. D., and Kaime, G. J. (2007) ‘The effect of in-service education and training (INSET) programmes in mathematics and science on classroom interaction: a case study of primary and secondary schools in Kenya’. Africa Education Review, 4(1): 104–126. Sutherland, R. (2006) Teaching for Learning Mathematics. Milton Keynes, Open University Press. Sutherland, R., Robertson, S. and John, P. (2009) Improving Classroom Learning with ICT, London, Routledge.

Participatory professional development  195 Sutherland, R. et al. (2011) ‘Digital technologies and mathematics education’, a report from a working group of the Joint Mathematical Council of the United Kingdom, chaired by Professor Rosamund Sutherland. Tikly, L., and Barrett, A.M. (2011) ‘Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in low income countries’. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 3–14. Uworwabayeho, A. (2009) ‘Teachers’ innovative change within countrywide reform: a case study in Rwanda’,. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(5): 315–324. Uworwabayeho, A. (2011) ‘Using Collaborative Action Research to Support Mathematics Teachers to Shift towards Learner-centred Classrooms: ICT as a Catalyst for Change’, unpublished PhD thesis, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Walker, M. (2006). Higher Education Pedagogies. Maidenhead, Open University Press. Were, E., Rubagiza, J., Sutherland, R., Hinostroza, J.E. and Motimele, M. (2006) ‘The use of ICT to support basic education in disadvantaged schools and communities in low income countries: research project proposal’. Bristol, EdQual. Wertsch, J. (1998) Mind as Action. New York, Oxford University Press. Wertsch, J. (1991) Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. London, Harvester.

Part IV

Conclusion

14 Education quality and social justice in the South Priorities for policy, practice and research Leon Tikly Introduction This final chapter will summarise some of the key insights and ideas from the preceding chapters and draw out the implications for policy, practice and for further research into education quality in the global South. The chapters of this book illustrate how, far from being a neutral issue amenable to technical solutions, issues relating to the quality of education are both complex and contested within specific contexts. They need to be understood not only in relation to the different approaches to understanding education quality, such as those presented in Part 1, but against an analysis of how debates about quality are linked to different interests locally and globally (as we argued in Chapter 2).

Revisiting social justice and education quality It is worth returning to the central theme of the book in the concluding chapter, namely the relationship between education quality and social justice in the global South. In Chapter 2 we described in detail three principles that we suggest can provide a starting point for discussion of education quality from a social justice perspective, namely the principles of inclusion, relevance and democracy. These are outlined below. • •

•

Inclusive: All learners have the opportunity to achieve specified learning outcomes. Relevant: Learning outcomes are meaningful for all learners, valued by their communities and consistent with national development priorities in a changing global context. Democratic: Learning outcomes are determined through public debate and ensured through processes of accountability.

In the following sections we make some suggestions about how each of these principles may be realized in practice. Before proceeding however, it is important to clarify one or two of the assumptions underlying the principles, partly by way

200  L. Tikly of a response to some of the concerns raised by Aikman and Unterhalter in Chapter 3. Aikman and Unterhalter raise two inter-related issues. Each is potentially important for understanding the relationship between social justice and education quality. Firstly, Aikman and Unterhalter are concerned to know how we have arrived at the above principles. As we have pointed out elsewhere (Tikly and Barrett, 2011), the principles are our attempt to relate Nancy Fraser’s three principles of global social justice to the main themes that have emerged from international debate on education quality over the last two decades. We do not intend the three dimensions to be definitive but instead, a contribution towards that debate. In this sense, rather than assuming a common set of underlying values we agree with Sen that the moral and ethical basis informing policy needs to be worked out through processes of informed public debate. Nonetheless, we do consider these values to be important in that they seem to provide a useful framework for evaluating quality and inequality in education and underpin much policy and advocacy aimed at creating a more just educational dispensation. This leads to Aikman and Unterhalter’s second concern, which is our earlier critique of the top-down approaches evident in some human rights discourses, including those undertaken by many states and international actors and what they perceive as our favouring of more locally-based processes of decisionmaking. They argue cogently, from a gender equity perspective that by appearing to favour local definitions of ‘relevance’ and processes of decisionmaking we are eliding the reality that “can lead to powerful voices for tradition sanctioning practices which undermine women’s wellbeing or sustainable livelihoods”(Aikman and Unterhalter, p.14). They rightly point out that feminist and other scholars interested in social justice have emphasised the ethical obligation on the state to clearly articulate a framework for rights that can protect the interest of less powerful groups and constituencies. However, this critique misrepresents our position in its assumption that privileging the democratic principle over inclusion and relevance implies a privileging of local decision-making over other levels. On the contrary, in our view, debates about what constitute rights and capabilities in education need to happen at a number of scales and levels within the state and civil society. We suggest below, for example, the importance of a national debate on education quality as a basis for establishing a legal and policy framework for implementing a good quality education. This national debate needs to be open and democratic and whilst, as Aikman and Unterhalter point out, top-down regulation can create conditions for local democratic decision-making, grass roots pressure and activism within civil society to work towards creating conditions for democratic national debate and transparent processes of educational policy-making. In this sense we see the emergence of a vibrant civil society as a precondition for a good quality education and one that compliments and gives legitimacy to the elaboration of a legal and policy framework to underpin the rights of girls and other marginalised

Education quality and social justice in the South  201 groups of learners. In other words, like both Sen and Fraser we see the principle of democratic participation as a necessary pre-condition for inclusion and relevance.

Creating enabling environments key priorities In Chapter 2 Tikly and Barrett set out a framework for analysing education quality based on social justice principles and the capabilities approach. It will be recalled that according to our context led model, the quality of education results from the interaction between three environments, namely those of policymaking, the school and the community. In this chapter the framework is developed in light of the evidence presented in the book to consider how the right mix of priorities including different kinds of inputs and processes can lead to enabling environments from which a good quality education can emerge. Whereas traditional understandings of education quality are often based on a linear input–output model our framework is more akin to a recipe in which the outcomes (a good quality education) depend on the particular mix of ingredients (inputs and processes) and the interaction between environments. The success of the ‘recipe’ is only determined by measuring the desired outcomes over time (see below). In the language of capability theory, the capability set of individuals depends on the ability of an individual to convert exposure to the various resource inputs and processes associated with a good quality education into valued capabilities and functionings. The factors that may impact on this ability to convert inputs and processes into capabilities and functionings may be personal (e.g. related to personal health and physical condition), social (e.g. to do with social norms, public policies) or environmental (the impact of local geography, climate) (Robeyns, 2005). The institutional environment of school, educational policy, home and community all influence the social conversion factors of the individual. For education to be of a good quality, each of the three environments must be responsive to the conditions, needs and valued goals expressed within the other two. The chapters of this book powerfully highlight the importance of different articulations between these contexts and in this chapter some ensuing priorities for policy to improve education quality are outlined. The priorities are purposefully discussed in broad terms. In keeping with our approach, it is argued that they need to be interpreted and refined against an understanding of local contexts and realities. Neither are they intended to provide a comprehensive set of ‘magic bullets’ but rather the starting points for debate and suggestions for ongoing research around education quality and social justice.

Creating enabling environments: key resource inputs and processes National debates on education quality In Chapter 2 we argued that education quality is both contested and complex and needs to be understood as a political issue. Consistent with the social justice

202  L. Tikly

Enabling policy environment Enabling inputs

Good Quality Education

Enabling processes Enabling school environment

Enabling home & community environment

Figure 14.1 Enabling inputs and processes for a good quality education

approach is the view that the capabilities that education sets out to develop must be determined through processes of public debate and dialogue. In relation to the discussion of the post-colonial state, it is only through opening up democratic space within the state that it becomes possible to articulate alternative accumulation strategies and hegemonic projects. In our view, and following Fraser (2008), democratic participation needs to underlie struggles for inclusion and relevance. It is only through processes of political struggle, advocacy and informed public dialogue that it becomes possible to recognise and to address the concerns of the most marginalised and to make the case for a more inclusive and relevant approach to policy. However, in many African countries, as elsewhere, policy-making has remained the preserve of economic, social and cultural elites. It has also been dominated by global discourses and agendas. Opening up a public space for discussing education policy therefore poses specific challenges. The first is to ensure that local rather than global voices predominate in the debate. This requires developing local leadership and ownership of educational agendas to ensure that they reflect local realities and priorities. This in turn involves breaking the cycle of dependency on donors including the reliance on overseas technical expertise in writing policy (Tikly & Dachi, 2009). This ability to autonomously determine policy and to link it to a view of the national interest has characterised emerging economies that have successfully globalised (Green et al., 2007). This also requires a re-conceptualisation by donors of the development partner role. Rather than viewing aid as leverage for policy influence they should seek to disburse aid through modalities that facilitate democratically determined sovereign goals for education. Increasingly the regional level has also been an important space in which educational priorities and agendas have been debated and contested in Africa, most especially at the level of higher education (Tikly & Dachi, 2009).

Education quality and social justice in the South  203 A second challenge arises from the recognition that not all those with an interest in implementing a good quality education share what Chisholm (2004) has described as an equal ‘social voice’. Avalos and Barrett point out that in some countries teachers, most especially contract or para-teachers, have ineffectual political representation and limited recourse to legal representation. Le Fanu underlines the importance of designing inclusive national curricula that are grounded in the classroom realities and build on existing professional capabilities of teachers to respond to the particular learning needs of their pupils, as opposed to imposing an idealistic international model of inclusion. This requires policy-making that engages with the perspectives and experiences of educational professionals. As discussed above, in some countries organisations within civil society have played a proactive role in demanding that the concerns of different interest groups (women, the poor, indigenous peoples etc.) be addressed. As Unterhalter and Aikman remind us, struggles around the right to a good quality education have often provided an important focus for elaborating the wider ethical and political case that needs to be made for a good quality education for all. Their concerns can be extended to encompass not only issues of gender justice but other structural inequalities including those based on social class, inequality linked to rurality, the struggles of indigenous groups and of ethnic minorities for recognition and of people with disabilities. Mobilising marginalised groups around educational issues requires an educative effort on the part of the state and civil society including the media and this effort needs to take place using a variety of modalities and at a number of scales. The role of the media and, in particular, the importance of a free media in promoting education quality, is an area where future research could valuably be directed. School, home and community links As suggested above, a starting point for analysis of home/community links is the recognition of the home and the community as sites within which wider economic, political and cultural inequalities are produced and reproduced in relation to local cultural norms and practices. Oduro et al. point to two very different ways in which schools can move from reproducing inequality to challenging or counteracting inequality in the community. They demonstrate how, with training and support head teachers can become agents for positive change. They refer to an example of a head teacher, who transformed school practices and lobbied local leaders to tackle threats to pupil safety and educational careers arising from gendered violence against girls. Head teachers in Ghana were also able to mobilise communities to tackle some of the factors that analysis of SACMEQ II data has indicated are associated with low reading achievement (Smith et al., 2012) by persuading parents to ensure children were sent to schools with exercise books and pens and were given breakfast before leaving home. Other research (Uduku, 2011) focuses on school design and how schools can be sites that facilitate community development, for example,

204  L. Tikly through providing space and facilities for adult basic education or allocating school farm plots to disadvantaged families. Ngcobo and Tikly (2010) have shown that adult basic education opportunities can enable parents to create a home environment that supports their children’s own learning. Improved accountability and parent/community voice Related to the above are issues of creating greater accountability in the education system. Whereas exponents of human capital theory associate greater accountability with increasing parental choice within a market led system, from a social justice perspective accountability is linked to increased parental and community voice. Uwezo in East Africa and the Annual State of Education Report in India make the results of independently collected assessment data available to parents and in this way seek to make schools and governments more accountable for the quality of education. Similarly, the South African government has committed itself to making its own assessment data relating to the performance of individual schools available to parents as part of its drive to raise quality for disadvantaged learners (DOBE, 2010). The success of such initiatives, however, depends on parents and communities being empowered to interpret the information that they receive in meaningful ways and to act on it. Training for school committee members and facilitating dialogue has been reported to be an effective way to improve school accountability and, hence, quality (Oduro et al., 2011). In some instances community based organisations have taken a lead in this, although there is also a role for school governing boards in empowering parents through forms of training. Education systems have internal networks of accountability cutting vertically across levels of governance, and the proper functioning of these is vital for education quality. For example, Phumbwe’s (2011) study of school fundraising in Tanzania linked a failure across levels of government to audit self-help funds with widespread mismanagement leading to mistrustful relations between schools and parents. Effective assessment, monitoring and evaluation of quality A social justice and capabilities approach poses specific challenges for the monitoring and evaluation of education quality and for educational assessment. Developing policy relating to education quality involves consideration of the quality gap in education both between and within countries and of the nature and extent of educational disadvantage. Unterhalter (2007), for example, has drawn attention to the difficulties associated with existing Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) related to the unreliability of data and to the potential of more participative approaches to collecting relevant data such as those used by NGOs, where the process as well as the data itself can be used to evaluate a range of potential capabilities in education. Participation in international assessment exercises such as the Trends in International Maths and Science Study (TIMMS) and Progress in International Reading and Literacy

Education quality and social justice in the South  205 Study (PIRLS) can provide information about existing levels of quality in national systems, although caution is needed in interpreting data (Goldstein, 2004). The advantage of regional initiatives such as SACMEQ is that comparisons can be made with countries sharing similar socio-economic, historical, political and cultural characteristics. However, high profile international assessments attract political attention and whilst this can stimulate valuable national debate on education quality it can also be used to legitimise uncritical policy transfer (Ross & Genevois, 2006). High stakes assessment, where pupil test performance is linked to rewards or punitive measures against schools and teachers, encourages ‘teaching to the test’ and curriculum impoverishment (Barrett, 2011, Goldstein, 2004). A key priority is to strengthen national systems of assessment, monitoring and evaluation, including making available longitudinal data relating to schools and individual pupils. Rea-Dickins et al. (2009) have shown how constructing examination questions in a way that is supportive of secondlanguage learners improves the accuracy of examinations as measures of learners’ subject knowledge. Longitudinal studies can assist in identifying trends in achievement over time and can play an important diagnostic role in identifying strengths and weaknesses in the system, highlighting groups at risk of underachieving and areas for possible intervention as Thomas, Salim and Peng argue in their chapter. At the level of the school, EdQual research has highlighted the importance of making use of data as part of school selfevaluation and the importance of local support for schools in interpreting data and implementing change (Bosu et al., 2011). An inclusive and relevant curriculum and pedagogy Pedagogy has increasingly been seen to lie at the heart of the debate about quality as Sayed and Ahmed’s contribution to this volume makes clear. Two chapters describe initiatives to make mathematics teaching more interactive. Halai argues for a series of small-scale school-based initiatives that bring researchers in higher education and teachers together to design and develop skills for more learner-centred practices. Uworwabayeho et al. show how targeted collaborative professional development can assist teachers to use available ICTs to create opportunities for inquiry-based learning. Both of these chapters start from a position of commitment to interactive learning that is problematised by Sayed and Ahmed, and Le Fanu. Sayed and Ahmed argue for structured pedagogy that involves careful planning of lessons, with a clear introduction that links to the previous lesson and sets out learning objectives, as well as the use of formative assessment. Structured pedagogy may use a range of strategies including talking to the whole class from the front of the room, question and answer with the whole class, individual exercises or reading, group discussion and practical activities depending on their context, learners’ needs and subject matter. Le Fanu, on the other hand, argues for grounded inclusionism – that draws on the expertise of local professional educators, who

206  L. Tikly have worked out inclusive approaches that work within the contexts of their own classrooms with the materials that they have available. To be relevant, curriculum and pedagogy need to be matched to educational and development goals. It was mentioned above that Rwanda aims to grow its service sector and become a communications hub for East and central Africa. However, Uworwabayeho et al. point out that as yet teaching practices do not encourage pupils to experiment with computers and hence develop ICT skills that would support this vision. Pupils in rural areas, particularly girls, who have little if any access to computers outside schools, are thus being less well prepared for the new economic direction than their urban peers. Developing professional capabilities Whilst we have defined a good quality of education in terms of the capabilities of learners, the capabilities of educators has been a recurring theme throughout the book. The opportunities provided to learners are inextricably inter-related with the capabilities of professionals. Analysis of the SACMEQ II data shows that, particularly for the most socio-economically disadvantaged learners, teacher qualifications and experience has a positive impact on literacy and numeracy (Smith et al., 2012). School leadership too can have a positive effect on attainment through providing a safe learning environment for boys and girls. Effective head teachers in disadvantaged settings ensure teacher and learner attendance and punctuality, maximise time on task, engage in teacher supervision, mobilise resources for learning and engage with parents and wider community (Ngcobo & Tikly, 2010). The chapters in Part 3, based on EdQual research, demonstrate the power of even quite short focused professional development to enable teachers to make their teaching more interactive; to use newly introduced ICT tools to enhance teaching and learning; to use talk, reading and writing in ways that support second language learners; to introduce head teachers to basic analytical methods for evaluating school quality and identify poorly performing pupils; and to support them to become agents of quality improvement within their schools. Avalos and Barrett apply a professional identity perspective to consider how teachers in low-income contexts may be enabled to teach for social justice. Providing teachers with an extended initial education with practicums that introduce them to the social and educational realities of disadvantaged and oppressed groups is identified as key to teacher professionalism but also costly. Issues related to teacher motivation and morale are also highlighted, including pay and remuneration, political and legal representation and teachers’ relationship with the local community, the latter being particularly important for teachers posted to remote areas, far from their personal family and friendship networks. Drawing on an extensive review of educational reform in sub-Saharan Africa, Samoff et al. argue that policy should seek to reproduce the conditions that nurture and sustain innovation, including dynamic local leadership, rather than seeking to reproduce the content of initiatives that were successful in a

Education quality and social justice in the South  207 specific context. This highlights again the importance of leadership capabilities and viewing these not just as the acquisition of transferable skills and knowledge but also as supporting professional agency. Rather than searching for teacherproof policies and materials, policy needs to be aimed at enabling professionals to initiate and take responsibility for quality improvement. Appropriate textbooks and learning materials including ICTs Textbooks and other learning materials play an important role in raising learner achievement (Barrett et al., 2007). They are critical for supporting the teaching and learning process, particularly in disadvantaged contexts and where teacher subject knowledge is limited. Textbooks and other materials do however need to be compatible with curriculum and pedagogy. They also need to be appropriate to the environment and to the cognitive level and the language of the learner, as Afitska et al. point out. A key challenge, however, is the avoidance of corruption and mismanagement that can prevent resources reaching schools, particularly those remote from administrative centres (UNESCO, 2008). School effectiveness research shows that having access to ICTs including audio-visual aids, TVs and computers in schools can boost achievement. Uworwabayeho et al., in their contribution, demonstrate that technologies with the right support can extend possibilities for curriculum and pedagogy but that if technologies are to be used effectively then they must be accompanied by adequate training. Investing in basic infrastructure and resources Investing in infrastructure and resources including basic writing materials and stationary can boost the achievement of disadvantaged learners (Smith & Barrett, 2011). Many learners have to endure learning in dilapidated buildings and there is evidence that performance is improved when learning takes place in buildings that are in at least a basic state of repair. A challenge for ICTs, is to ensure that schools have electricity supply and the technological expertise to make use of the ICTs they are given (Rubagiza et al., 2011). A key challenge for policy makers is to ensure that funding is sufficient to meet need and is efficiently distributed to schools. Ghana and Tanzania make use of a capitation grant to fund non-salary expenditure. However, whilst the grant in Ghana has impacted positively on enrolments it has not significantly impacted on achievement (Osei et al., 2009). A key issue, according to head teachers surveyed by EdQual, is the overall size of the grant and inefficiencies in its administration (Bosu et al., 2011). A related issue is to ensure that funding is targeted at disadvantaged learners (Smith & Barrett, 2011). In this regard, South Africa makes use of an infrastructure grant linked to a school index of need, although results have been mixed (see Sayed and Ahmed, chapter 8 in this volume; Tikly, 2011). A further challenge, highlighted by Uduku (2011), is designing school buildings to be sustainable within their environments and to accommodate large class-sizes. They also need to be flexible enough to adapt to functions

208  L. Tikly beyond classroom teaching and learning, for example, providing hot meals for children or safe recreational space outside of school hours. School feeding, child health and early childhood development Evidence from the analysis of the SACMEQ data reveals that for the most disadvantaged learners, addressing issues of nutrition and health can have a relatively greater impact on achievement than in-school factors (Smith, 2011). Unsurprisingly, poor nutrition is most prevalent in countries with large arid or semi-arid areas even when, like Botswana and Namibia, these are middle-income countries (Smith & Barrett, 2011). A recent report by the World Health Organisation (WHO) has highlighted the hugely detrimental and irreversible effect of stunting caused by malnutrition on learning (WHO, 2011). Provision of breakfast and of school feeding and nutrition programmes can lead to improved scores in academic tests, especially for socio-economically disadvantaged learners (Abadzi, 2006), as can de-worming (see Kremer et al., 2007). However, largescale programmes are not the only way to improve nutrition. In research reported by Oduro et al. in chapter 10 of this volume, head teachers in Ghana persuaded parents to prioritise providing children with breakfast or paying for milk during the school day. Similarly, improved access to pre-school programmes can enhance both education outcomes and equity. Pre-school interventions show most significant effects relative to later interventions on children born into families below the poverty line (see Chapter 7 by Chawla-Duggan et al). Chawla-Duggan et al. highlight the importance of joined-up policies at this level that cover primary healthcare and nutrition as well education and that engage with parents, both through listening to them and enabling them as carers.

Conclusion In presenting our model it is important to be clear about the limits of educational reform in relation to achieving broader human development goals. It is sometimes easy to read off from human capital theory that simply through investing in education quality it is possible to promote growth. These kinds of simplistic messages are often given by The World Bank and other multilateral organisations. As Hanushek and Wößman (2007) themselves point out, the extent to which education quality can contribute to growth in fact depends on a range of other macro-economic policies including policies relating to trade and to labour markets. From the perspective of the analysis presented above, the nature of the crisis faced by many African countries is deeply rooted in the nature of the global political economy and cannot be addressed through education alone. Many of the problems that we identify as having the most profound effect on learner achievement in fact have their genesis in the reality of poverty outside of the school system. Whilst remaining realistic about the potential of the school system to alter this reality, it is also important to resist falling into a fatalistic pessimism and to recognise the role that education

Education quality and social justice in the South  209 potentially can play as part of a wider programme of economic and social reform in facilitating economic development in the global era (see, for example, Green et al., 2007). This requires engaging with the political economy of the education quality debate as has been attempted in this chapter. We hope that the context-led framework is a starting point for examining the many ways in which education quality is entangled with economic, political, social and cultural issues that operate at different scales and with roots entangled in ambiguous histories. We are deeply cognisant of the evolving nature of our framework and hope that it will stimulate further debate. We are necessarily limited in the range of contexts that we have been able to explore in this book. Further research needs to extend to other geographical areas within and outside of Africa. It also needs to engage with some pressing issues that we have only begun to touch upon in this volume. In particular, the threat of environmental catastrophe and the quest for sustainable development calls for analysis that places value on natural environments and biodiversity and highlights human dependence on these. At the same time, changing patterns of international and civil conflict call for a sustained analysis of the inter-relationships between education quality, socio-cultural identity and conflict.

References Abadzi, H. (2006) Efficient learning for the poor: insights from the frontier of cognitive neuroscience, Washington DC, World Bank. Barrett, A. M. (2011) A Millennium Learning Goal for education post-2015: a question of outcomes or processes. Comparative Education, 47(1): 119–133. Barrett, A. M., Ali, S., Clegg, J., Hinostroza, J. E., Lowe, J., Nikel, J., Novelli, M., Oduro, G., Pillay, M., Tikly, L. & Yu, G. (2007) Initiatives to improve the quality of teaching and learning: a review of recent literature, Background paper for the Global Monitoring Report 2008. Paris, UNESCO. Bosu, R., Dare, A., Dachi, H. A. & Fertig, M. (2011) School leadership and social justice: evidence from Ghana and Tanzania. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 67–77. Chisholm, L. (Ed.) (2004) Changing Class: Education and Social Change in Postapartheid South Africa, Pretoria, HSRC. Dobe (2010) Call for comments on Action Plan to 2014: Towards the Realisation of Schooling 2025. IN D. O. B. Education (Ed.), Staatskoerant, 2 August 2010. Fraser, N. (2008) Scales of justice: Reimagining political apace in a globalizing world, Cambridge, Polity Press. Goldstein, H. (2004) Education for all: the globalization of learning targets. Comparative Education, 40(1): 7–14. Green, A., Little, A. W., Kamat, S., Oketch, M. & Vickers, E. (2007) Education and development in a global era: Strategies for ‘successful globalisation’, London, Df ID. Hanushek, E. A. & Wößmann, L. (2007) Education quality and economic growth, Washington DC, The World Bank. Kremer, M., Miguel, E. & Thornton, R. (2007) Incentives to Learn, Cambridge MA, J-Pal. Ngcobo, T. & Tikly, L. P. (2010) Key Dimensions of Effective Leadership for Change: A Focus on Township and Rural Schools in South Africa. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(2): 202–228.

210  L. Tikly Oduro, G. K. T., Arko-Boham, K., Atakpa, S. K., Owuso, S., Kahangwa, G. L., Dachi, H. A., Barrett, A. M., Rarieya, J., Safdar, Q. & Babur, M. (2011) Country context review and meta-analysis of quality basic school leadership and management initiatives: Ghana, Tanzania and Pakistan, Bristol, EdQual. Osei, R. D., Owusu, G., Asem, F. & Afutu-Kotey, R. (2009) Effects of Capitaiton Grant on Education Outcomes in Ghana, Accra, Institute of Social and Economic Research. Palmer, R., Wedgwood, R. & Hayman, R. with Kenneth, K. & thin, N. (2007) Educating out of Poverty? A synthesis report on Ghana, India, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and South Africa. London, DFID. Phumbwe, D. (2011) Improving provision of education through school self-help initiatives: lessons from Tanzania, paper presented at the 11th UKFIET Conference, University of Oxford, 13–15 September 2011. Rea-Dickins, P., Yu, G. & Afitska, O. (2009) The consequences of examining through an unfamiliar language of instruction and its impact for school-age learners in subSaharan African school systems, in: L. Taylor & C. Weir (eds) Language Testing Matters: The Social and Educational Impact of Language Assessment, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Pp.190–214. Robeyns, I. (2005) The capability approach: a theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 6(1): 93–117. Ross, K. N. & Genevois, I. J. (Eds.) (2006) Cross-national studies of the quality of education: planning their design and managing their impact, Paris, UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning. Rubagiza, J., Were, E. & Sutherland, R. (2011) Introducing ICT into schools in Rwanda: educational challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 37–43. Smith, M. & Barrett, A. M. (2011) Capabilities for learning to read: an investigation of social and economic effects for Grade 6 learners in Southern and East Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 23–36. Smith, M., Barrett, A. M. & Tikly, L. (2012) ‘School effectiveness and education quality in Southern and East Africa’. Final report, Bristol, EdQual. Smith, M. C. (2011) Which in- and out-of-school factors explain variations in learning across different socio-economic groups? Findings from South Africa. Comparative Education, 47(1): 79–102. Tikly, L. (2011) A roadblock to social justice? An analysis and critique of the South African education Roadmap. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 86–94. Tikly, L. & Dachi, H. (2009) The new regionalism in African education: possibilities and limitations for developing South–South collaboration, in: L. Chisholm & G. SteinerKhamsi (eds) South–South co-operation and transfer in education and development, New York, Teachers College Press. Pp.103–122. Uduku, O. (2011) School building design for feeding programmes and community outreach: Insights from Ghana and South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1): 59–66. UNESCO (2008) EAF Global Monitoring Report 2009: Overcoming inequality: why governance matters, Paris/Oxford, UNESCO/Oxford University Press. Unterhalter, E. (2007) Gender, Schooling and Global Social Justice, London, Routledge. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2011) World health statistics 2011. Available online at (accessed 29 July 2011).

Index

Page numbers in italics denotes a table/diagram Abbott, A.D. 75 access 13, 18, 27 see also inclusion accountability 12, 20; and parent/ community voice 204 action research 144–5, 151; impact of as a tool for leading and managing change in schools 145–7 ADEA (Association for the Development of Education in Africa) 121, 126 Africa: creating space and capacity to extend education reform in 121–36; scaling up see scaling up; see also individual countries African language 6, 18, 154, 155, 156–8, 161, 163 aid 202 Akyeampong, K. 79, 80 Alexander, R. 109, 113, 118 Altinyelken, H.K. 45 Annual National Assessment (ANA) 112–13 Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 72 Aslam, M. 170 assessment 42, 116, 204–5; and Education Action Plan (South Africa) 112–13, 116; see also evaluation Association for the Development of Education in Africa see ADEA Baker, J. 29

Balarin, M. 29 Ball, S. 16 Bamgbose, A. 155 Benavides, M. 29 benchmarking 116 Bennell, P. 79, 80 Blair, Tony 3 Bosu, R. 50 Botswana 208 bullying 18 capabilities/capabilities approach 5, 13–15, 19, 20, 32, 34–5, 201, 204; developing professional 206–7; enhancing of teachers’ 83; and gender 26; and grounded inclusionism 51; and use of ICT in mathematics education 191–2 capacity critique: and global inclusionism 45–6, 48, 50–1 career structures 83 Carolina Abecedarian Project 92 cascade models of training 43–4 Castells, M. 76 Chad 83 change: leading and managing of in schools 141–52 Chicago Child-Parent Centres 92 Chick, K. 157 child-centred pedagogy 110, 169–71 see also student-centred approach child rights 91 Chile 81, 85, 185

212  Index China 5, 72; evidence from value added research in 62–8, 63–5, 66, 67 Chisholm, L. 169–70, 203 civil society participation: South Africa 113–14 code-switching 157, 158, 160 cognitive learning 26 coherence 93, 94 collegial support opportunities 84–5 colonialism 15, 16, 18, 47 Columbia 81 Commission for Africa (2005) 3 community 15, 15, 17–18, 201, 203; promotion of inclusive education through activism of 43; relationship between school and 79–80 community activism, concentrated leadership style 146 Connell, R. 31 context led model 15–18 contract teachers 82, 83, 203 Convention on the Rights of the Child 12, 94 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol 49 corporal punishment 18 cosmopolitanism 20 critical thinking 14, 20, 110, 111 Cuba 86 curriculum/curriculum change 20, 80–1, 110, 168–78; and childcentred pedagogy 169–71; and Education Action Plan (South Africa) 114, 116; features to be taken into account in implementing outcomes-based 177; and gender 28, 29, 31; and global inclusionism 42–3; implementation of change in Pakistan 171–7; inclusive and relevant 205–6; learner-centred 42, 45, 47; network model 177;

outcomes-based 81, 143, 168, 169–71, 175–6, 177 Dakar Declaration 91 Dakar Framework for Action 41 DBSA (Development Bank of Southern Africa) 118 decentralisation 61, 141, 142, 151; and scaling up 130–1 decision-making 13, 16, 17, 20, 25, 72, 81, 95, 128, 130, 133, 146 Delors, J. 20 democracy/democratic 32, 33, 82, 94, 199, 202; and language 155, 161, 164 Denuelin, S. 14–15 Department for International Development (DFID) 2, 3, 62, 68 DeStefano, J. 127, 128, 135 developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) 101 Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) 118 disabilities 45, 50, 85; and global inclusionism 48–9 distance education programmes 86 distributed leadership style 146 diversity 19, 31, 49, 111; and capability approach 192; and Education Action Plan (South Africa) 115, 118; and EFA 83; Embracing Diversity manual 41–3; tension between coherence and 94 dynamic geometry software 187–9, 189 Early Childhood Care and Development (ECD) 113 Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) 5, 91–104; agencies of governance and the division between care and education 99–100; EdQual framework

Index  213 94–5; existing theoretical approaches to quality of 92–5; expansion, quality standards and a recognition of children’s entitlement to 96–7; Ghana case study 95, 98–102; human capital approach 92–3; human rights approach 94; Maharashtra case study 95–8; political recognition of the importance of through governance 96, 98–9; postmodern approach 93–4; recognition and relevance to socio-cultural contexts within the curriculum of 101; redistribution through expansion and universalisation 100–1; redistribution through targeted provision 97; schoolcommunity/parent relations and quality 101–2; women and community 97–8 economic growth:, and education quality 11–12 Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC) 62 EdQual ICT project (Rwanda) 181, 186–90; incorporating ICT into a teacher-centred approach 187, 189; research design 186; shifting towards a student-centred approach and teacher perspective on 187–90 EdQual research programme 2–4, 14, 44–5, 172; early childhood care and education (ECCE) 94–5; Leadership and Management of Change project 144 Education Action Plan (South Africa) (2014) 108–18; and assessment 112–13, 116; challenges addressing 112; and curriculum 114, 116; focus on literacy and numeracy 112, 115–16; ‘getting back to basics’ approach 112, 116; omissions 113, 115; output goals

112, 113; participation as management discourse 113–14; and teacher/learner ratios 117 Education for All see EFA Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) 204 education quality: contested terrain of 11–15; definition 14; national debates on 201–3; and social justice 199–201 education roadmap 118 Educational International 82 Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa see ERNWACA EFA (Education for All) 1, 2, 19, 83, 141; Global Monitoring Report (2005) 109, 113; Global Monitoring Report (2007) 91; Global Monitoring Report (2009) 12, 79 Elliott, J. 48 Embracing Diversity 41, 42–3 EMIS (Education Management Information Systems) 204 English language 6, 47, 154–7, 155, 158, 161, 162, 163 epistemological critique: and global inclusionism 47–8, 51 ERNWACA (Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa) 124, 129 ESRC (Economic and Social Science Research Council) 62 ethnicity 59, 103; and gender 30 evaluation, educational 59–72, 126–7, 204–5; functions 60–1; limitations of SACMEQ datasets 59, 72; reasons for 60–2; strengths and limitations of value added measures 70–1; and value added measures 59–60, 61; value added research in China 62–8, 63–5, 66, 67; value added research in Zanzibar 68–70

214  Index FAWE (Forum for African Women Educationalists) 78, 121, 126 FCUBE (Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education) programme (Ghana) 99, 100, 102, 141 fee-free kindergarten (KG) schooling: in Ghana 98–9 fee-free primary education policy 142 Ferguson, J. 16 Fleisch, B. 157 Forum for African Women Educationalists see FAWE) Foucault, M. 13, 17 Foundation for Learning Document 116 Fox, C. 30 Fraser, Nancy 5, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 32, 94, 200, 202 Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education see FCUBE funding 16, 207; and scaling up 121, 123, 125, 128, 133 Gambia, The 84 GDP (gross domestic product) 11 gender 25–35, 126; association with inequality and exclusion 26; and capability approach 26; and curriculum 28, 29, 31; definitions 27; and ethnicity 30; focus on girls’ or boys’ achievement 27–8; initiatives promoting equity of 149–50; and language 29; and power 28–9; and recruitment 85; relational meanings of 29; and textbooks 28; and violence 28–9 gender justice 1, 5, 33–5, 203 Gender Parity Index (GPO) 143 GES (Ghana Parity Index) 99 Ghana 5, 6, 50, 95, 98–102, 103, 141, 151, 203, 207, 208; agencies of governance and the division between care and education 99–100; Constitution (1992)

142; decentralisation of Girls’ Education Unit (GEU) 142–3; ECCE provision and policy 95, 98–102; educational reform 142; Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (FCUBE) program 99, 100, 102, 141; impact of action research as tool for leading and managing change in schools 145–7; improving reading, writing and communication skills by head teachers 147–8; initiatives promoting gender equity 149–50; language and classroom interaction 157–9; language issues in classroom 156–64; redistribution through expansion and universalisation 100–1; research process 144–5; schoolcommunity/parent relations and quality 101–2; stakeholder views on language of instruction 162–3; teacher education for teaching in L2 160–1 Ghana Education Service (GES) 99 Girls’ Education Unit (GEU) (Ghana) 142–3 global inclusionism 5, 40–52; as an educational vision 41–3; capacity critique 45–6, 48, 50–1; critique of 44–50, 50–1; and curriculum 42–3; defining the ‘global’ in 41; disability critique 48–9, 51; epistemological critique 47–8, 51; grounded inclusionism as alternative model 49–50, 51; as social and political transformation 43–4; underlying assumptions of 44 Global Monitoring Report see EFA globalisation 15, 16; and language 155–6 Goetz, A.M. 33–4 ‘going to scale’ 121–2; definitions 123; and participatory local

Index  215 development 134; perspectives on 122–3; see also scaling up government: role of in scaling up 132–3 Greene, Maxine 77–8 grounded inclusionism 49–50, 51 Hanushek, E.A. 11–12, 208 Harrington, L. 123 head teachers 6, 141–2, 141–52, 203, 206; action research as tool for leading and managing change 145–7, 151; challenges for 143–4; improving reading, writing and communication skills project (Ghana) 147–8; initiatives promoting gender equity 149–50; and managing change 144; mobilisation of communities 151; povertyrelated challenges 147–9; research process 144–5; supporting vulnerable pupils project (Tanzania) 148–9 Healey, F.H. 127, 128, 135 health issues 208 Hickling-Hudson, A. 84 hidden curriculum 5, 84, 86 High/Scope Perry Pre-school programme 92 home environment 15, 15, 17, 202 human capital approach 2, 11–12, 16, 17, 18–19, 26, 110, 115, 117, 204, 208; criticism of 115; early childhood care and education (ECCE) 92–3; impact on ’best practices’ in education 117 human rights approach 11, 12–13, 19, 32–3, 200; early childhood care and education (ECCE) 94 ICDS (Integrated Child Development Service) 95–8, 103 ICT (information and communication technology) 2, 181–93, 206, 207;

capabilities and use of in mathematics education 191–2; challenge for 207; hands-on activity with 184–5; and InterActive Education Project 181, 185, 186; and mathematics education in Rwanda 181–93; and pupil achievement 207; studentcentred approach to 181–2; teacher-centred approach to 185, 187 identity: and teacher professionalism 76–7, 77 Improving Educational Evaluation and Quality in China (IEEQC) Project 62, 65 inclusion/inclusionism 5, 18–19, 25, 32, 94, 103, 199, 202; grounded 49–50; and language 154–5, 164; and resource distribution 19; rights-based approach to 5 inclusive education: definition 40; in international development see global inclusionism India 5, 83; Annual State of Education Report 205; introduction of low fee private schools 12; Maharashtra case study 95–8; Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (SSA) 170 information and communications technology see ICT INGOs (international nongovernmental organisations) 12, 16 institutionalized obstacles to social justice 13 Integrated Child Development Service see ICDS InterActive Education Project 181, 185, 186 International Monetary Fund (IMF) 141 international non-governmental organisations see INGOs

216  Index International Rescue Committee (IRC) 79 investment in infrastructure and resources 207 Jackson, J. 130 Jansen, J.D. 82 Jenkins, H. 191 Kanjee, A. 111, 113 Kigali Institute of Education (KIE) 192–3 Kingdon, G. 170 Kirk, J. 29 Kiswahili 162, 163 Korten, D. 123 Laborde, C. 190 language 6, 154–64; African 6, 18, 154, 155, 156–8, 161, 163; and code-switching 157, 158, 160; and classroom interaction 157–9; and democracy 155, 161, 164; English 6, 47, 154–7, 155, 158, 161, 162, 163; and gender 29; and globalisation 155–6; and inclusion 154–5, 164; parents views of LoI 161–3; and pedagogy 160, 164; and relevance 155–6, 160, 164; research design 156–7; stakeholder views of language of instruction 161–3; teacher ability in LoI 157; teacher education for teaching in L2 159–61, 164 Latin America 84 Lauglo, J. 115 leadership: and scaling up 128, 131 see also head teachers learner-centred teaching/education 6, 13, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49–50, 81, 205 learning materials 207 learning process research 123 Lesotho 48

Lewin, K.M. 84 Liberian teachers 79 literacy 4, 14; focus on in South Africa 112, 115–16 local communities: accountability to 133; school engagement with 6, 130, 206 local participation: and scaling up 134 longitudinal data 205, 59–72 see also value added measures Longlands, H. 28 Louis, K.S. 144 Lowe, J. 20 Lynch, K. 29 Macdonald, C. 157 McKinsey Report (2010) 75, 78 Maclure, R. 124, 128–9 Maharashtra (India) 95–8, 103; and ECCE 95–8; expansions, quality standards and a recognition of children’s entitlement to ECCE 96–7; Integrated Child Development Service 95–8; political recognition of the importance of ECCE through governance 96; redistribution through targeted provision 97; women and community 97–8 Malawi 45–6 Malvicini, P. 130 market-led approach 11–12 Mason 170 mathematics: capabilities and use of ICT in 191–2, and ICT in Rwanda 181-93, see also EdQual ICT project; and implementation of curriculum change in Pakistan 172–5; teaching and learning of in Rwanda 183–4 mentoring partnerships 83 MESW (Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare) (Ghana) 99 Mexico 185 Miles, M.B. 144

Index  217 Miles, S. 50 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 1, 91, 141 Miller, D. 122, 123 Minimum Levels of Learning (MLL) 170 Ministry of Education (Ghana) 142 Ministry of Education (Pakistan) 171–2 Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare (MESW) (Ghana) 99 Ministry of Women and Children’s Affairs (MOWAC) (Ghana) 99 Mohanty, C. 30 monitoring 204-5, see also assessment; evaluation Moss, P. 93 motivation, teacher 79–80; and collegial relationships 80; influence of community on 79–80; and poor salaries 79 Moulton, J. 46 MOWAC (Ministry of Women and Children’s Affairs) (Ghana) 99 Mpokosa, C. 81, 85 Mtahabwa, L. 45 Mulkeen, A. 83 multi-level modelling 62, 63, 63, 68–9 Mundy, K. 46 Myers, R. 121, 123 Namibia 208 National Information and Communications Infrastructure Policy and Plan (NICI) (Rwanda) 182–3 National Policy for Children 95 Ndaruhutse, S. 81, 85 negative rights 12 new media literacies 191 Ngcobo, T. 204 Niger 83 Nikel, J. 20 Novelli, M. 81

numeracy 14; focus on in South Africa 112, 115–16 Nussbaum, M.C. 13–14, 20 nutrition issues 208 Nuzhat (teacher) 174–5 One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative 184–5 Open File on Inclusive Education 43–4 outcomes-based curricula 81, 143, 168, 169–71, 176, 177 Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) 168 Pakistan 28, 177; education reform 171; implementation of curriculum change 171–7; school conditions 173 Papert, Seymour 184 Papua New Guinea: critique of global inclusionism 45–50 parents: and accountability 204; relations with school 101–2; views on language of instruction 161–3 participation 5, 13, 20–1, 25, 95, 109; as management in Education Action Plan (South Africa) 113–14 participatory professional development model: ICT and mathematics education in Rwanda 186–90, 192–3 pedagogy 110, 111; inclusive and relevant 205–6; and language issues 160; structured 205 PEDP (Primary Education Development Plan) 141, 143 performance-related pay 81 Peru 29, 30 Phumbwe, D. 204 pilots 121, see also scaling up PIRLS (Progress in International Reading and Literacy Study) 204–5

218  Index policy/policy-making 7, 15, 15, 16–17, 200, 202; and ECCE 96, 104; economic level 16; forms of misrepresentation 16; ideological/discursive level 16–17; influence of on teacher professionalism 80–2; in low income countries 16; participation of local stakeholders 44, 51; political level 16 positive rights 12 postmodern approach: and early childhood care and education (ECCE) 93–4 power: and gender 28–9 primary education: universalisation of 80 Primary Education Development Plan (PEDP) (Tanzania) 141, 143 professional development 5, 84–5, 86 Progress in International Reading and Literacy Study (PIRLS) 204–5 pupil achievement: longitudinal data on 5 Qorro, M. 154 quality: key processes associated with 109 Quality Imperative, The (report) (2005) 1 Ramchandran, V. 80 Rao, N. 45 Rapoport, R.N. 144 rational choice theory 11 rational planning: promotion of inclusive education through 43 Rea-Dickens, P. 205 recognition 13, 20, 95, 109 recruitment 85 redistribution 13, 94–5, 109 reductionist input-output models 6 reflexivity 20, 151

relevance 5, 19–20, 25, 32, 33, 94, 199, 202; and language 155–6, 160, 164 resource distribution: and inclusion 19 reward and remuneration structures 78–9, 86 rights-based discourse 12–13, 17 Robeyns, Ingrid 34 Rozina (teacher) 175 Rwanda 6, 206; EdQual ICT project see EdQual ICT project; ICT and mathematics education in 181–93; and Kigali Institute of Education (KIE) 192–3; National Information and Communications Infrastructure Policy and Plan (NICI) 182–3; teaching and learning mathematics 183–4; Vision 2020 plan 181, 182–3 SABER (System Assessment and Benchmarking for Education Results) project 20 SACMEQ (Southern and East African Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality) 59, 72, 151, 205, 208 SACMEQ II 203, 206 SADTU (South African Democratic Teachers Union) 82 Safetalk 157, 160 Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education 41 salaries, teacher 79, 86 Sarva Shiksa Abhiyan (SSA) 170 scaling up (in Africa) 121–36; challenge of evaluating outcomes in education 126–7; and decentralised management 130–1; empirical research on 125–6; factors associated with successful 127–8, 130, 135;

Index  219 knowledge base 124–5; and leadership 128, 131; locus of authority and responsibility 133–4; and participatory local development 134; perspectives on 122–3; reasons for failure 128–30; role of the external funding and technical assistance agencies 133; role of the national government 132–3; situations where inappropriate 131–2 Scheerens, J. 60 school autonomy 11–12 school committees 82, 151, 204; Tanzania 143 school design 203–4 School Effectiveness and Education Quality (SEEQ) project 3 School Effectiveness and School Self Evaluation in Zanzibar (SESEZ) 68 school environment 15, 15, 18 school feeding 208 School Management Committees 141, 151 School Performance Review 21 Schweisfurth, M. 84 self-efficacy 76, 77, 78, 80, 85; teacher perceptions of 82–4 Sen, A. 13–14, 15, 32, 34, 191, 200 Smith, M. 157, 163 social constructivism 177 social justice: dimensions of 13, 75; and education quality 199–201; institutionalized obstacles to 13; structural barriers to 5; and teacher professionalism 75–86 socio-cultural theory of learning 185 South Africa 5, 17, 207; approaches to educational failure 111; civil society participation 113–14; Curriculum (2005) 169–70; Education Action Plan see Education Action Plan (South Africa); education reform

169–70; educational policy overview 111–12; educational spending 117; language issues in classroom 157, 162; no-fees school policy 117; problems affecting educational outcomes 112; racism in schools 114; teacher strikes 113; two-tier education system 115 South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU) 82 South Korea 86 Southern and East African Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality see SACMEQ Spady, W. 168 special education 43 Sriprakash, A. 171 stakeholder participation 93 Stewart, F. 14–15 Stuart, J.S. 84 student-centred approach 6; and early childhood care and education (ECCE) 187–90 sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) 2; critique of global inclusionism 45–50, 142 sustainability 19–20 System Assessment and Benchmarking for Education Results (SABER) project 20 Tabulawa, R. 177 Tanzania 6, 45, 46, 49, 141, 143, 151, 207; Education for Self Reliance policy 147; impact of action research as tool for leading and managing change in schools 146, 147; initiatives promoting gender equity 149; language issues in classroom 155–64; Primary Education Development Plan I/II (PEDP I/II) 141, 143; research process 144–5; school committees 143; stakeholder views on language of instruction 162–3;

220  Index supporting vulnerable pupils project 148–9; teacher education for teaching in L2 160–1; teaching as ‘learning-centred’ 49 Tatto, M.T. 116 teacher-centred approach: and ICT 185, 187 teacher competencies 110; factors influencing 110 teacher education 5, 84–5, 206; and teaching in L2 159–61, 164 teacher/learner ratios: and Education Action Plan (South Africa) 117 teacher professionalism 75–86, 110, 116, 206; conceptual framework 76–8; and identity 76–7, 77; influence of policy and teaching contexts 80–2; remuneration and reward structures 6, 78–9; self-efficacy 76, 77, 78, 80, 82–4, 85; and social justice 77–8; teacher initial preparation and professional development 84–5, 86; working conditions 78–80 textbooks 207; and gender 28 TIMMS (Trends in International Maths and Science Study) 204 Todd, A. 170 Tomaševski, Katarina 81–2 top-down approach 12, 20, 32, 47, 62, 109, 200 Torgerson, C.J. 48 Torres, R. 110–11, 117 trade unions 81–2 transcendent theoreticism 51 transparency 20 Transparency International 46 Trends in International Maths and Science Study (TIMMS) 204 Tuseme (‘Speak Out’) clubs 78 Uduku, O. 207 Uganda 45

UNESCO 1, 91; Co-operative Action Strategies in Basic Education in Africa project 125–6; and global inclusionism 41–4 Urwick, J. 48 user-fees 117 Uvin, P. 122, 123 value added measures 59–60, 61–72; and China 62–8, 63–5, 66, 67; in low-income countries 72; strengths and limitations of 70–1; types of variables to create 62; and Zanzibar 68–70 van den Berg 82–3 Vaughan, R. 14 Vavrus, F. 171 Vietnam 30 violence: and gender 28–9 Vision 2020 plan (Rwanda) 181, 182–3 Vizard, P. 14 Walker, M. 192 well-being 79 White, J. 123 Wößmann, L. 11–12, 208 Wolff, E. 154 women: and ICDS programme in Maharashtra 97–8, see also gender working conditions 83 World Bank 61, 72, 110, 118, 125, 141 World Declaration on Education for All 41 World Health Organisation 208 Zambia: and students with disability 50 Zanzibar 5, 72; evidence from value added research in 68–70 Zeichner, K. 85