For over fifty years, our education systems
has been embedded in the political economy of a hegemonic state. Today access
to quality education, outcomes of human, cultural, social and economic capital
mirror the patterns of political patronage and the ethnic zero sum game of
competition for and distribution of the so-called national cake.
Access to educational resources explains
more than ninety percent of difference in economic and wellbeing outcomes among
Kenya’s ethnic groups. Take a moment and think about the geographic
distribution of the so-called national schools? My definition of national
schools does not include the under-resourced former district and provincial
schools that were recently assigned national school status.
The Kenyan state, through successive regimes
since independence, has failed to allocate in an inclusive manner the critical
educational resources that would enable equitable social mobility. Just like
roads, water, electricity and health services, vested political interest by
powerful Nairobi elites has always determined who enrolls, whether they
complete and how much our children learn in school.
We must now re-think the role of the national
government in education. The role of the distant state authority needs to be
re-examined in the context of devolution. Moreover, we must be especially
mindful of the track record of the national government with respect to
equitable distribution and social inclusion in provision of vital social
services over the last 51 years.
What we have seen in the past 50 years in
the education sector is an inordinate burden of bureaucracy, politicisation and capture by special interest, inefficiency, and the hubris of one size-fit-all, which
has led to unconscionable inequality in educational outcomes. Counties like
Turkana, Marsabit, Tana River, Kwale and Mombasa have the scars to prove that
this model does not work.
Devolution education is a plausible remedy. Fundamentally,
education is about building relevant human capital, which is then deployed to
drive cultural and economic capital for development. Counties are in the best
position to articulate the fit between education and urgent local needs. By re-defining
accountability we can prevent capture of the delivery of education by vested
political interests. Moreover, decentralising education could make it difficult
for schools to “game” the system when performance and accountability standards
are not set at the national level and include critical parameters like social
inclusion and local human capital formation.
Decentralising education does not take away
the role of the national government. In fact, it makes the role of government
much clearer. The national government would be responsible for defining the
national curriculum framework. This would include core curriculum themes, which
focus on values, ethics and civic responsibility. The national government would
be responsible for defining exit competencies at all levels of the education
system. This is consistent with the role of the national government in
education, as stipulated in the fourth schedule of the constitution.
Essentially, devolving education is about
increasing the role of local stakeholders and moving away from the hierarchical
input-oriented governance to an outcome-oriented approach where the central
government steers from a distance. Devolving education is not undermining the
power of the state. It is about strengthening local accountability in the
provision of national public goods. It is about making social inclusion and
local capital formation critical to accountability in educational outcomes.
In a decentralised education regime, the
government would the responsible for determining standards for teacher
education, including a national certification program for both primary and
secondary school teachers. This would also include setting very high academic
standards for getting into the teaching profession. Teaching can no longer be
the profession of the not so bright amongst us.
In a decentralised education regime, the
government would be obligated to set up an education equalisation fund to improve school infrastructure. This allocation would be based on long-term
weighted average mean scores (from 1963) in all national standardised tests.
Counties with the lowest scores would be assigned the highest budget. Local
stakeholders, including parents and students would have to determine how the
resources are allocated.
Perhaps our greatest achievement in 50 years
is the 2010 constitution, which vests sovereign power in the people of Kenya.
It is we the people, who delegate authority to the legislature, the executive
at national and county levels, and to the judiciary. What level of government
should carry the greatest responsibility for preparing our youth for the future?
Time for debate is now.
No comments:
Post a Comment