review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in NigeriaWithin SMoEs, two <strong>review</strong>s <strong>of</strong> staff capacity found ‘poor job definitions and inappropriate work methodsand procedures’ (Orbach 2004), as well as:… a lack <strong>of</strong> clear <strong>of</strong> roles and responsibilities and overlapping functions between departments; a highproportion <strong>of</strong> ex-teachers with no management training working in senior positions; no functioningappraisal or performance management system and few pr<strong>of</strong>essional development opportunities forindividuals (Johnson et al. 2007).The need to improve teacher recruitment, management, and training has been highlighted in severalgovernment <strong>review</strong>s (e.g. FME 2005; FME 2011a). Thomas (2011) notes that <strong>the</strong>re is no process foreffective planning for <strong>the</strong> placement <strong>of</strong> teachers, which is centrally driven, leading to an unequaldistribution between LGEAs. Appointments are <strong>of</strong>ten politicised or based on personal influence.Assessment processes need streng<strong>the</strong>ning, as do promotion procedures and opportunities forpr<strong>of</strong>essional development (see Section 10. 2).Citing a World Bank study on <strong>the</strong> staffing situation in 26 local governments in 13 states in Nigeria, <strong>the</strong>2004 ESA concluded that, ‘<strong>the</strong>re is hardly any discernible norm for recruitment and deployment <strong>of</strong> staffacross <strong>the</strong> states’ (FME 2005: 234).6.5.3 Monitoring and evaluationAs already highlighted several times in this <strong>review</strong>, <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> accurate data for <strong>the</strong> education sector –nationally and at state levels – is widely acknowledged in Nigeria and regarded as a major problem byboth federal and state governments in carrying out M&E (FME 2005; FME 2011a; UBEC 2012a).Santcross et al. (2010) argue, however, that <strong>the</strong>re is a slowly growing demand for better data, as somestate governments realise <strong>the</strong>y need an evidence base for decision-making and informed planning.Abalu et al. (2013) make <strong>the</strong> case that <strong>the</strong>re is latent capability in M&E that is not utilised. They arguethat M&E could be politically successful if framed in terms <strong>of</strong> enhancing politicians’ credibility and as ameans <strong>of</strong> improving learning about policy ra<strong>the</strong>r than enforcing accountability. Despite <strong>the</strong>se optimisticassessments about future possibilities, however, <strong>the</strong>y do note that at present <strong>the</strong>re is very littlemonitoring <strong>of</strong> spending and outputs, or evaluation <strong>of</strong> public policy.Findlay (2013) <strong>review</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> ASC, which informs <strong>the</strong> EMIS and provides information on schoolenrolment. The ASC/EMIS was judged to be poorly implemented in many states. The EMIS wasdecentralised to states in 2007 with little support or additional funding from FGN. However, Findlayreported some improvement in states supported through ESSPIN, although it is worth reiterating <strong>the</strong>point that any improvement at LGEA and state level in <strong>the</strong> EMIS <strong>of</strong>fices will be undermined if individualhead teachers do not produce reliable, school-level data; data on teacher and head teacher recordkeepingsuggests that this is a concern (see Section 11.2).Information on <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> teachers and <strong>the</strong>ir qualifications is more accurate and is collected through<strong>the</strong> teacher payroll managed by <strong>the</strong> SUBEBs, although this will not include teachers who are hiredlocally, paid for by PTAs, for example, or who work in private schools.Mezger (2013) <strong>review</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> several household surveys that also estimate enrolment levels, noting thatmany provide inconsistent numbers.There is no regular data collection on learning achievement, but some ad hoc surveys (e.g. MLA, NAUBE,EGRA, etc.) do provide some information. Results from <strong>the</strong>se surveys were summarised in Section 5.3.The poor state <strong>of</strong> expenditure data has been discussed above.EDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 65
Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in Nigeria6.6 Political economy analysisSeveral donor-funded programmes in education and o<strong>the</strong>r social sectors have invested in PEA in orderto understand <strong>the</strong> key drivers <strong>of</strong> change and to inform <strong>the</strong>ir engagement with government. For example,DFID’s State Partnership for Accountability, Responsiveness and Capability (SPARC) has used PEA tomake decisions to cut spending where it has been determined that <strong>the</strong>re is a political blockage; SPARChas also used PEA to inform <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> its activities as it has expanded into new states.A report on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> PEA across DFID’s state-level programmes (DFID 2011) found that PEA has beenuseful for understanding <strong>the</strong> context and informing <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> programmes, specifically involvingidentifying and understanding <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> politically influential individuals (and to some extent groupsand organisations) in each state. It <strong>the</strong>refore facilitated <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> approaches to advocacy andrelationship building.6.6.1 The role <strong>of</strong> state governorsAs highlighted above, several papers identify <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> state governors as critical in determining policyand spending priorities (e.g. Santcross et al. 2010; SPARC 2012; DFID 2013 a, b, and c; Schiffer et al.2013).OPM (2011) looked at <strong>the</strong> political context for healthcare reform in <strong>the</strong> states <strong>of</strong> Adamawa, Nasarawaand Ondo. They found that common features across <strong>the</strong> three states were <strong>the</strong> dominant politicalposition <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> governor (in terms <strong>of</strong> control <strong>of</strong> policy, finance and patronage) and <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> effectiveautonomy <strong>of</strong> local government. Schiffer et al.’s (2013) analysis <strong>of</strong> non-salary funding in Kano State als<strong>of</strong>ound that education spending was determined primarily by <strong>the</strong> political interests <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state governor,although whe<strong>the</strong>r states access UBEC funding was also found to be pivotal (see also UBEC 2012a).6.6.2 Local networks and fundingSchiffer et al.’s (2013) mapping <strong>of</strong> networks (netmapping) and power relations in <strong>the</strong> Kano study alsoshowed how, in <strong>the</strong> absence <strong>of</strong> appropriate state funding, schools rely on informal ‘local resiliencenetworks’ to manage volatile resource flows, meaning that <strong>the</strong> financial and material support a schoolreceives can vary widely between schools depending on <strong>the</strong>ir success in building relationships withcommunity groups, NGOs, and international donors and using informal connections to governmentagencies to increase <strong>the</strong>ir resources. This can widen disparities in funding between better-connectedschools that can access funds and those with weaker networks (ibid.).6.6.3 Streng<strong>the</strong>ning capacity and improving accountabilityDFID’s PEA to inform <strong>the</strong> Mobilising for <strong>the</strong> Millennium Development Goals (M4M) project (DFID 2013b,c and d) focused on case studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> drivers <strong>of</strong> change in two LGAs in Jigawa and Kano states. Thesestudies supported <strong>the</strong> view that state government and particularly <strong>the</strong> governor play a central role,noting that local governments are almost entirely upwardly accountable to state governments fromwhom <strong>the</strong>y receive <strong>the</strong> bulk <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir funding, via <strong>the</strong> LGA. This, combined with <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>re islimited involvement <strong>of</strong> civil society in policy and planning, means that <strong>the</strong>re is very little downwardaccountability between service providers and service users (Santcross et al. 2010; DFID 2013 b, c and d).Politically driven decision-making is compounded by low capacity within state governments (inparticular planning departments); that is to say that, even where political interest in reform exists, <strong>the</strong>capacity for effective prioritisation, planning and budgeting is low (Santcross et al. 2010).EDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 66
Page 1 and 2:
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON BASICED
Page 3 and 4:
Review of
Page 5 and 6:
Review of
Page 7 and 8:
Review of
Page 9 and 10:
Review of
Page 11 and 12:
Review of
Page 13 and 14:
Review of
Page 15 and 16:
Review of
Page 17 and 18:
Review of
Page 19 and 20:
Review of
Page 21 and 22:
Review of
Page 23 and 24:
Review of
Page 25 and 26:
Review of
Page 27 and 28:
Review of
Page 29 and 30:
Review of
Page 31 and 32:
Review of
Page 33 and 34:
Review of
Page 35 and 36:
Review of
Page 37 and 38:
Review of
Page 39 and 40:
Review of
Page 41 and 42: Review of
Page 91: Review of
Page 143 and 144:
Review of
Page 145 and 146:
Review of
Page 147 and 148:
Review of
Page 149 and 150:
Review of
Page 151 and 152:
Review of
Page 153 and 154:
Review of
Page 155 and 156:
Review of
Page 157 and 158:
Review of
Page 159 and 160:
Review of
Page 161 and 162:
Review of
Page 163 and 164:
Review of
Page 165 and 166:
Review of
Page 167 and 168:
Review of
Page 169 and 170:
Review of
Page 171 and 172:
Review of
Page 173 and 174:
Review of
Page 175 and 176:
Review of
Page 177 and 178:
Review of
Page 179 and 180:
Review of
Page 181 and 182:
Review of
Page 183 and 184:
Review of
Page 185 and 186:
Review of
Page 187 and 188:
Review of
Page 189 and 190:
Review of
Page 191 and 192:
Review of
Page 193 and 194:
Review of
Page 195 and 196:
Review of
Page 197 and 198:
Review of
Page 199 and 200:
Review of
Page 201 and 202:
Review of
Page 203 and 204:
Review of
Page 205 and 206:
Review of
Page 207 and 208:
Review of
Page 209 and 210:
Review of
show all

review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?