The privatization of education has become an increasingly common phenomenon in developing countries where the quality of public education is questioned by the general population. Throughout the Indian subcontinent, parents are eager to send their children to private English medium schools (Srivastava, 2010). As primary school enrollment rates have reached near universalization in Nepal, India, and Sri Lanka, there has been a mass migration of students from public to private institutions, some high cost but others low (Srivastava, 2010). Proponents of privatization argue that private schools increase educational quality by providing ‘choice’ to parents. Meanwhile, critics argue that the phenomenon is a neo-liberal project that turns schooling into a business valuing market competition over equity and quality. In either instance, the cost of private schooling can lead to a widening of class divisions, marginalizing those who cannot afford a choice.
Recognizing the challenge of negative perceptions towards public schools, the provision of “quality education” is at the core of the Nepalese Ministry of Education’s (MoE) School Sector Development Plan (SSDP), which outlines the educational goals, initiatives, and reforms to take place between 2016 and 2023. The mission of the SSDP is to “to produce the needed human resources to elevate Nepal’s status from a Least Developed Country by 2022 and to reach the status of a middle-income country by 2030” (MoE, 2016 p. 17). The SSDP seeks to strengthen the quality of education in the public sector by “increasing students’ learning through enhancing the relevance and quality of the learning environment, the curriculum, teaching and learning materials (including textbooks), teaching methods, assessment and examinations” (MoE, 2016 p. 17).
If education is to foster sustainable economic development, a key distinction must be made between access to education and the value and relevance of what students learn and how the skills and knowledge acquired in school can be leveraged within the local context. While policy documents are rich with the term “quality education,” reforms are initiated in Nepal through a top-down approach, leaving little input from teachers, headmasters, and parents. Like the first step of a ladder, before quality education can be implemented it must first be understood at the school-level, within the local context.
I am currently in Gorkha, Nepal conducting interviews with teachers, headmasters, and parents at three public schools seeking to better understand how quality education is locally understood. Supported by the Sigur Center for Asian Studies, this project is part of my master’s thesis in the George Washington University’s International Education Program. So far, I have learned that there are select public schools whose quality are perceived as being no different than private schools. Student performance on district level exams, the physical school infrastructure and English as the medium of classroom instruction are described as key indicators of quality education by parents. Meanwhile, there are other public schools which are perceived as providing less rigorous education. As one parent explained, “this school gives my young daughter a place to go while I work.” The parent also stated that the quality of education of the school was compromised by a lack of parental involvement. He explained that, “Many of the parents at this school are uneducated and are not involved with the school…without parent involvement there is no accountability.”
While education reforms in Nepal aim to strengthen equity and access to quality public education, factors related to poverty, lack of parental involvement, and lack of accountability may cause a disconnect between policy and practice. While I am still in the process of collecting and analyzing data, it is clear in the pilot stages of research that parents, teachers, and headmasters in Gorkha, Nepal believe that lack of parental involvement degrades educational quality and accountability in public schools. Additionally, teachers voiced that if a student’s basic needs such as food, shelter, and health are not met, the student will not be able to learn at his or her fullest capability. Since education is a sub-system of a larger political-economic system, perceptions of quality education are inadvertently connected to perceptions of the quality of life. Interviews indicate that at the most fundamental level, a quality education must support the basic needs of children by creating a safe learning environment. If the basic needs of students are not met, it is difficult for headmasters, parents, and teachers to have the space and time to reflect upon what a quality education should teach students and how such content should be delivered. With forthcoming educational reforms focused on improving access to quality education within the public sector, time will reveal if provisions will support the narrowing of class divisions and the socioeconomic development of Nepal.
References:
MoE (2016). School sector development plan, Nepal, 2016–2023. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education, Government of Nepal. Retrieved from http://www.globalpartnership.org/content/nepal-school-sector-development-plan-2016-2023
Srivastava, P. (2010). Privatization and Education for All: Unravelling the mobilizing frames. Development, 53(4), 522-528. https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2010.88
By Emily Hall, Sigur Center Field Research Grant Recipient. Emily is a master’s student in the International Education Program at the George Washington University. Emily’s areas of interest include understanding and supporting teacher quality and teaching quality in developing country contexts through the lens of cultural anthropology. Her master’s thesis examines local perceptions of quality education in Nepal and analyzes government funded educational reform initiatives seeking to improve equitable access to quality education.
