|
This article appeared in the Monitor
in May 2003. It was in reaction to an article in the Monitor that asserted the Universal Primary Education (UPE) scheme in Uganda is part of a conspiracy by developed countries
to keep us underdeveloped.
Why UPE is Good for Uganda
This is a reaction to the article by Mr. Ronald Kayanja in which
he asserts that the Universal Primary Education (UPE) scheme is
part of a wider conspiracy by donor countries to keep us backward
(see the Monitor 20th May 2003).
While not divulging in opposing his unsubstantiated claim that
the donor community would like us to remain underdeveloped, I
would like to categorically posit that UPE is not part of any
sinister conspiracy (whether real or imagined).
In a discussion with a colleague not so long ago, I expressed
my view that the ills afflicted onto Africa by callous leadership
can only be stopped and reversed by a powerful benevolent force
through armed struggle. She pointed out that although my views
against bad leadership are welcome, violent revolution is definitely
not the way to go since in an organization as complex as a nation,
the new power is also wont to succumb to destructive tyranny,
however benevolent it is initially. It is then that we agreed
that education-for-all is best way forward as it begets a gradual
and non-violent change. Education is the silent revolution.
The advantages of good education, which require no further explanation,
are: it imparts useful skills which increase productivity, promotes
healthy living, makes people easier to mobilize and nurtures democratic
values. These are all prerequisites for economic development.
UPE, that Mr. Kayanja so virulently attacks, is the first logical step in
the process of educating a nation. The problem is not UPE as such
but rather the quality of primary education at the moment. It is
quite feasible that UPE, if well targeted, can
be a good avenue for giving people skills. And for more complex
skills (such as those of information technology) it is obvious that
a basic primary education is indispensable as a way of preparation.
Mr. Kayanja’s assertion that parents can afford primary
education for their children is fallacious as the surge in numbers
of primary school-going pupils since the introduction of UPE shows.
For many Ugandans, the monetary and opportunity cost of educating
children was so high that they simply could not see their children
through primary school. Free UPE eliminates the cost and enables
more Ugandans to get an education.
True, there are certain skills which cannot be attained at primary
education level. But this is not to deny the crucial preparatory
role of primary education for all types of skills development.
For instance, just how can someone without primary education become
a skilled computer programmer?
What is needed therefore is a holistic approach where complex
skills-training is done in conjunction with but not instead of primary education. There
are various levels of education: primary, secondary and tertiary.
None of the levels should be ignored at the expense of the other.
Education is organised hierarchically in form of pyramid whereby
there are fewer people at each level as we go towards the apex.
There are upward and downward linkages between the levels. Thus
you cannot train a computer programmer unless he has primary arithmetic.
Just as primary education cannot be an end in itself, skills development
per se cannot be an end but must be done within the framework
of lower levels and higher education levels – the lower
being primary and the higher comprising of reflective practitioners.
Reflective practitioners are people who are not merely able to
do things according to set rules but are also capable of examining
the practice and suggesting viable alternative rules/methods if
need be. The task of producing reflective practitioners is the
responsibility of the university which can only accomplish this
by producing new knowledge through research especially at master’s
and PhD levels (a university should not content itself with merely
transmitting recycled knowledge). Hence, while skilled artisans
are needed for industrialisation to take-off, it is futile to
think of meaningful industrialisation in the absence of a school
of industrial design at the university (unlike the artisan who
makes the things, the designer understands the principles of the
made things and is capable of innovatively conceptualising new
products to react to prevailing opportunities and limitations).
Because of the pyramidal nature of education systems, the higher
levels of education are more exclusive and come with enormous
benefits in terms of job competitiveness and income generating
skills for which the beneficiaries must be made to pay. And so
it makes sense for government to invest more of the limited resources
in mass primary education but while taking measures to ensure
that upper education levels are not a preserve of those who can
afford (such that any person of the right intellectual capacity
has a fair chance of making it to the top of the system). Furthermore,
government ought to ensure that the higher education systems are
producing and imparting knowledge that is in tune with the country’s
needs.
The donors’ insistence on free UPE is therefore not the
problem. The problem is rather that of poor quality and lack of
a holistic education approach that takes care of all levels and
that is geared to Uganda’s problems. UPE needs to be augmented,
not abolished. Abolishing free UPE perpetuates existing dark-age
conditions whereby knowledge will remain the preserve of a select
few.
|
