Non-Formal Education and Quality Basic Education for All in Tanzania

A study of the Effectiveness of Non-Formal Education Programs for Children

of School-going Age in Korogwe District

Ellance Mathias Mbilu

A Thesis submitted as partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of a

degree of Master of Philosophy in Comparative and International Education

Department of Education

Faculty of Educational Sciences

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO

December 2019

ii

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate whether, amidst its well-known issues and concerns,

Non-Formal Education (NFE) can be regarded as an effective policy strategy for achieving

quality basic education for all in Tanzania. The purpose was to examine the effectiveness of

NFE programs and activities for children of school-going age in ensuring access to quality

basic education to out-of-school girls and boys in the country. The study was grounded in the

Social Reproduction Theory which can be summarized by the argument that, unless NFE is

of good quality, it has a high potential of reproducing inequality of opportunities in the

society. Furthermore, the study was also largely influenced by the idea that education of good

quality is a human right. It entails a range of important and interrelated elements which can

be classified into four main groups, namely inputs, process, context and outcomes.

The study employed a mixed method research strategy – meaning that both qualitative and

quantitative methods and tools for data collection and analysis were used. A total of 68

participants, including NFE learners, teachers, supervisors and local government officials

were engaged in the process of collecting empirical data which was done using document

review, questionnaires, interviews, focus group discussion and observations.

The findings indicate that NFE programs for children of school-going age in Tanzania are not

effective in ensuring quality basic education to out-of-school children and adolescents. Even

though the main goal for establishing the programs is to facilitate mainstreaming of their

learners to formal primary schools, only a small number of the registered learners get

mainstreamed. The majority of the learners either repeat the same course for many years or

end up dropping out of it before getting mainstreamed to formal primary schools.

Furthermore, there are issues and challenges which significantly affect quality of the teaching

and learning process including inadequate teaching and learning resources and dominance of

teacher-centred (as opposed to learner-centred) pedagogical approaches. In the same vein,

most of the learners involved in this study did not demonstrate good learning outcomes when

tested for basic literacy and numeracy skills.

In order to address most of the challenges, it is recommended that extra resources be

mobilized and specifically allocated for NFE programs and activities, instead of treating them

as ‘normal’ educational programs. It is also recommended that there needs to be an effective

system for monitoring and evaluating the quality of the NFE programs and activities in the

country.

iii

Acknowledgements

This thesis is the product of efforts of many individuals and institutions. Although I cannot

mention the name of everybody who had a hand in this product I would like to mention a few

of them to represent others.

My sincere and foremost thanks are to the Government and the people of Norway for

granting me a scholarship to pursue a Master degree at the prestigious University of Oslo,

through the Quota Scheme under the State Loan Fund (Lånekassen). I definitely would not

have made it there without a scholarship.

I am very grateful to my supervisor Dr Wim Hoppers for his guidance and efforts which have

made this piece of work come this far. Words cannot explain the invaluable and tireless

support and encouragement I received from one of my lead course instructors, Professor Lene

Buchert, especially in reading this work several times and making really helpful suggestions.

I am also thankful to all my course instructors including Dr Teklu Abate, Professor Fenshu

Liu, and Professor Jon Lauglo, for all their dedication and support in running the course.

Camilla Bakke, Senior Executive Officer, Department of Education was one of my heroes in

the efforts to finalize this thesis – thank you very much. I would also want to mention the IT

department staff for their tireless efforts in supporting finalization of this work. They did a

great job – much appreciation.

I would also want to thank the government of the United Republic of Tanzania through

Tanga Regional Administrative Secretary, Korogwe Town Council and Korogwe District

Council Administrative Secretaries for permitting me to conduct the research.

To my wife, Selina, and our lovely children – Grace, Dama, Mercy and Mathias – thank you

for your patience, love and support during the entire period of this work.

Finally, I would like to declare that, in spite of acknowledging the contribution from various

individuals in the production of this work, I remain exclusively responsible for errors and

mistakes which might be found in this work.

Ellance Mathias Mbilu

University of Oslo,

Norway – 2019

iv

Dedication

To my parents, Mathias Mbilu and Damaris Shemshina

v

Table of Contents

Abstract….. ................................................................................................................................ ii

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. iii

Dedication ................................................................................................................................. iv

List of Tables, Figures and Boxes.............................................................................................. x

List of Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Tanzania’s Experience ................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Statement of the problem ............................................................................................... 4

1.4 Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 6

1.4.1 The COBET Program ................................................................................................................ 6

1.4.2 The Global Learning XPRIZE Project ....................................................................................... 7

1.5 Objectives and Research Questions of the Study .......................................................... 7

1.6 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 8

1.7 Structure of the Thesis ................................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................... 10

2.1 What is NFE? ............................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Types of NFE ............................................................................................................... 14

2.2.1 Para-formal Education ............................................................................................................. 14

2.2.2 Popular Education .................................................................................................................... 15

2.2.3 Personal Development ............................................................................................................. 16

2.2.4 Professional and Vocational Training ...................................................................................... 16

2.3 The Rationale for NFE ................................................................................................. 16

2.3.1 NFE and Poverty Reduction .................................................................................................... 16

2.3.2 NFE as a Way to “Reaching the Unreachable” ........................................................................ 18

vi

2.3.3 Globalization and NFE ............................................................................................................ 19

2.3.4 NFE and Lifelong Learning ..................................................................................................... 19

2.4 Issues and Concerns in NFE ........................................................................................ 20

2.4.1 Quality Issues ........................................................................................................................... 20

2.4.2 Access and Equity Issues ......................................................................................................... 21

2.4.3 Issues Related to Management and Organization .................................................................... 21

2.4.4 NFE Financing ......................................................................................................................... 22

2.4.5 Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting of NFE Programs and Activities ................................ 22

2.5 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER THREE: THE CONTEXT FOR NFE POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN

TANZANIA ................................................................................................................ 24

3.1 General Profile of Tanzania ......................................................................................... 24

3.2 Education and Training System ................................................................................... 26

3.3 Number of Out-of-School Children and Adolescents in Tanzania .............................. 29

3.4 Macro-economic Policy Reforms and their Implications for Education ..................... 30

3.4.1 NFE Policy Thrust ................................................................................................................... 33

3.4.1.1 The Education and Training Policy ......................................................................................... 33

3.4.1.2 The Adult and NFE Development Strategy .............................................................................. 34

3.5 Diversity of NFE in Tanzania ...................................................................................... 35

3.5.1 COBET: Its Commencement and Objectives .......................................................................... 35

3.5.2 Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) .................................................................. 38

3.5.3 XPRIZE: Its Commencement and Objectives ......................................................................... 39

3.6 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 42

CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................ 44

4.1 The Social Reproduction Theory ................................................................................. 44

4.1.1 Relevance of the Theory to this Study ..................................................................................... 45

vii

4.2 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................ 46

4.2.1 Education as a Human Right .................................................................................................... 47

4.2.2 Factors that Determine the Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE ........................................ 49

4.2.2.1 Inputs ....................................................................................................................................... 50

4.2.2.2 Process ..................................................................................................................................... 51

4.2.2.3 Outcomes ................................................................................................................................. 52

4.2.2.4 Context ..................................................................................................................................... 52

4.3 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 53

CHAPTER FIVE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ............................... 54

5.1 Research Procedure ...................................................................................................... 54

5.2 Ontological and Epistemological Orientations ............................................................ 55

5.3 Research Strategy......................................................................................................... 55

5.4 Study Location ............................................................................................................. 56

5.4.1 Reasons for Choosing Korogwe .............................................................................................. 57

5.5 Sampling of COBET Schools, XPRIZE Centers and Participants .............................. 58

5.6 Data Collection Methods and Instruments ................................................................... 60

5.6.1 Assessment Test on Basic Literacy and Numeracy Skills ....................................................... 60

5.6.2 Questionnaires ......................................................................................................................... 64

5.6.3 Document Review .................................................................................................................... 64

5.6.4 Interviews ................................................................................................................................. 65

5.6.5 Focus Group Discussions ......................................................................................................... 66

5.6.6 Observations of Teaching-Leaning Process ............................................................................. 67

5.7 Validity and reliability ................................................................................................. 67

5.8 Ethical issues ................................................................................................................ 68

5.9 Delimitation of the study ........................................................................................... 69

5.10 Limitation of the study ................................................................................................. 70

viii

5.11 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 70

CHAPTER SIX: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ......................................... 71

6.1 Participants’ Characteristics......................................................................................... 71

6.1.1 Age and Gender/Sex of COBET and XPRIZE Learners ......................................................... 71

6.1.2 COBET and XPRIZE Learners Socio-Economic Background ................................................ 73

6.1.3 Teachers and Supervisors’ Educational Level and Work Experience ..................................... 74

6.2 Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE in Mainstreaming Learners into Formal Primary

Schools ......................................................................................................................... 75

6.2.1 COBET Learners’ Participation and Mainstreaming in Formal Primary Schools ................... 76

6.2.2 XPRIZE Learners’ Mainstreaming to Formal Primary Schools .............................................. 78

6.2.3 The Process of Finding and Registering COBET and XPRIZE Learners................................ 79

6.3 Quality of the Teaching and Learning Process in COBET and XPRIZE Centers ....... 81

6.3.1 Qualification and Availability of Teachers for COBET .......................................................... 82

6.3.2 Quality and Availability of Teaching and Learning Materials ................................................ 85

6.3.3 Pedagogical Approach ............................................................................................................. 88

6.3.4 Safety and Health in the Learning Environment ...................................................................... 90

6.4 Learning Outcomes ...................................................................................................... 93

6.5 Emerging Themes ........................................................................................................ 97

6.5.1 Lack of a Strong and Relevant System for NFE Quality Assurance ....................................... 97

6.5.2 Lack of a Specific Budget Line for COBET and Similar NFE Programs ............................... 98

6.6 Summary .................................................................................................................... 100

CHAPTER SEVEN: SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS

AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 101

7.1 Summary of the Findings ........................................................................................... 101

7.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 103

7.2.1 Need for Compensatory Measures ......................................................................................... 104

ix

7.2.2 Need for Availability and Utilization of Curriculum and Learning Materials Specific for NFE

Programs and Activities ......................................................................................................... 106

7.2.3 Need for an Effective System for Monitoring and Evaluating NFE Programs and

Activities ................................................................................................................................ 108

7.5 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 109

Appendix A Questionnaire for Head Teachers (English translation) .............................. 111

Appendix B Questionnaire for Ward Education Officers................................................. 114

Appendix C Interview Guide for COBET Teachers (English translation) ....................... 116

Appendix D Interview Guide for XPRIZE Supervisors (English Translation) ................ 118

Appendix E Interview Guide for DAEO .......................................................................... 120

Appendix F Focus Group Discussion (English Translation) ........................................... 121

Appendix G Observation Rubric ...................................................................................... 122

Appendix H Uwezo ALA Tests ........................................................................................ 123

Kiswahili ..................................................................................................................... 123

English ........................................................................................................................ 124

Numeracy 1 ................................................................................................................. 125

Numeracy 2 ................................................................................................................. 126

Appendix I Letter of Introduction and Research Support – University of Oslo ................. 127

Appendix J Research Permit – Tanga Regional Administrative Secretary ..................... 128

Appendix K Research Permit – Korogwe District Administrative Secretary................... 129

Appendix L Research Permit – Korogwe Town Administrative Secretary ..................... 130

Appendix M KTC Capitation Grants Expenditure Report for Primary Schools – March,

2019 131

Appendix N Number of Registered COBET Learners in Korogwe District - 2019 ......... 132

Appendix O List of XPRIZE Centres and Registered Learners – 2019 ........................... 133

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 134

x

List of Tables, Figures and Boxes

List of Tables

Table 2. 1: Differences between Formal and Non-Formal Education ..................................... 12

Table 3. 1: Basic Socio-Economic Indicators for Tanzania (2009-2016): Number, % and

Proportion by Year ....................................................................................................... 26

Table 3. 2: Net Enrolment Ratios in Tanzania, by Education Level and Year 2013-2016, % 28

Table 3. 3: Primary School Access, Participation, and Internal Efficiency Rates, 1975-2001(%)

...................................................................................................................................... 32

Table 4. 1: Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Rights-Based Approach to Education

...................................................................................................................................... 48

Table 5. 1: Projected and Actual Number of Participants in COBET and XPRIZE ............... 59

Table 5. 2: Coding System for Research Participants, Schools and Centres ........................... 60

Table 6. 1: Age and Gender of COBET and XPRIZE Learners .............................................. 72

Table 6. 2: Living Condition and Work Status of COBET Learners, Number and % ............ 73

Table 6. 3: Teachers and Supervisors Educational Level and Work Experience, Number and %

...................................................................................................................................... 75

Table 6. 4: COBET Learners Attendance and Transition to Formal Primary Schools, 2017-

2019.............................................................................................................................. 76

Table 6. 5: Number of COBET Learners Mainstreamed to Primary Schools in KTC, 2018 -

2019.............................................................................................................................. 77

Table 6. 6: XPRIZE Learners Attendance and Transition to Formal Primary Schools, 2017-

2019.............................................................................................................................. 79

Table 6. 7: COBET Learners’ Behaviour during Classroom Lessons, by School and Frequency

...................................................................................................................................... 89

Table 6. 8: Presence of Select Safe and Health Conditions in COBET Schools ..................... 91

Table 6. 9: Comparison of COBET and XPRIZE Learners Scores in Kiswahili, English and

Numeracy Tests ........................................................................................................... 95

Table 6. 10: Scores in Kiswahili, English and Numeracy Tests, by Gender ........................... 96

xi

List of Figures

Figure 3. 1: Map of Tanzania showing Administrative Regions and Districts ....................... 25

Figure 3. 2: Map of Tanga Region showing Districts with XPRIZE Program ........................ 41

Figure 4. 1: Factors that Determine the Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE ..................... 51

Figure 5. 1: Map of Korogwe showing Administrative Areas................................................. 57

List of Boxes

Box 5. 1: Description of Uwezo Annual Learning Assessment (ALA) Tests ......................... 61

xii

List of Acronyms

ACCESS Appropriate Cost Effective Centres for Education within School

System

ADEA Association for Development of Education in Africa

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

ANFEDP Adult and Non-formal Education Development Program

ANFES Adult and Non-formal Education Strategy

BEAP Basic Education in Africa Program

BEF Basic Education Fellowship

BRAC Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee

CBO Community-Based Organization

CCF Children for Children’s Future

COBET Complementary Basic Education in Tanzania

CREATE Consortium for Research on Education Access, Transitions and Equity

CSO Civil Society Organization

DAEO District Adult Education Officer

DAS District Administrative Secretary

EDC Education Development Centre, Inc.

EFA Education For All

EQUIP Education Quality Improvement Programme

ESRF Economic and Social Research Foundation

ETP Education and Training Policy

FTI Fast Track Initiative

GER Gross Enrolment Rate

GTZ German Technical Cooperation Agency

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

IAI Interactive Audio Instruction

IBE International Bureau of Education

ICBAE Integrated Community-Based Adult Education

IIEP International Institute for Educational Planning

IMF International Monetary Fund

JAICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

KDC Korogwe District Council

xiii

KTC Korogwe Town Council

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

MoEST Ministry of Education Science and Technology

MoHCDGEC Ministry of Health, Community Development, Gender, Elderly and

Children

MOVET Ministry of Education and Vocational Training

NBS National Bureau of Statistics

NECTA National Examinations Council of Tanzania

NER Net Enrolment Rate

NFE Non-formal Education

NIR Net Intake Rate

PEDP Primary Education Development Program

PO-RALG President’s Office – Rural Administration and Local Government

PSLE Primary School Living Examinations

RAS Regional Administrative Secretary

REFLECT Regenerated Freirean Literacy through Empowering Community

Techniques

RISE Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education

SAP Structural Adjustment Program

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

THMIS Tanzania HIV/AIDS and Malaria Indicator Survey

UIS UNESCO Institute for Statistics

UNDP United Nations Development Programs

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UPE Universal Primary Education

URT United Republic of Tanzania

USAID United States Agency for International Development

VET Vocational Education and Training

WCEFA World Conference on Education for All

WEO Ward Education Officer

WGNFE Working Group on Non-formal Education

ZTUR Zanzibar Teacher Upgrading through Radio

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Efforts to provide opportunities for basic education for all in most Sub-Saharan African

countries began in the early 1960s when the countries became independent. As most of them

inherited from their colonial governments economically poor and illiterate societies, the need

for provision of basic education as a means for eradicating illiteracy and abject poverty was

deemed imperative (Galabawa, 2001; Närman, 2004; Mushi, 2009). Most of the countries

since then started to adopt policies aimed at achieving Universal Primary Education (UPE)

and Education for All (EFA), along with allocating resources to facilitate the realization of

the UPE and EFA vision (Mushi et al., 2002). However, for a number of decades after

independence, most of the efforts and resources for basic education were largely directed to

strengthening mainstream formal education. Much less efforts and resources were directed to

Non-formal Education (NFE) programs which were mainly intended for adults in order to

reduce the backlog of adult illiteracy inherited from the colonial education systems (Hoppers,

2006; Mushi, 2009; ADEA, 2012).

In the mid-1980s, the nature and demand for basic education in most Sub-Saharan African

countries underwent significant changes following the adoption of the International Monetary

Fund (IMF) and World Bank’s Structural Adjustment Program (SAP). The adoption of SAP

resulted in major reforms in socio-economic policies of many countries and such reforms,

among other things, imposed cost-sharing in provision of social services including health and

basic education, as one of the conditionalities for financial loans (Galabawa, 2001; Mushi et

al., 2002; Mushi, 2009). The main consequence of cost-sharing in basic education provision

was that children and adolescent boys and girls from disadvantaged families and communities

could not enrol in mainstream formal schooling as they could not pay the fees (Carnoy, 1999;

Galabawa, 2001; Riddle, 2003; Rose, 2006). The increase in the number of out-of-school

children and adolescents prompted considerations for policies and practices which would

promote NFE programs and activities in general, and those for children of school-going age

specifically.

In addition to the impact of SAP, the nature and demand for basic education in Sub-Saharan

Africa has also been influenced by external pressure from a number of global development

agendas and obligations – including EFA, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),

2

Education as a Human Right, and the current Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In

Dakar in 2000, for example, participants in the World Forum on Education for All committed

to “ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls, children in difficult circumstances

and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to and complete free and compulsory

primary education of good quality” (UNESCO, 2000:3). The MDGs’ second goal was to

“ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a

full course of primary schooling (United Nations, 2015:24). Goal four of the SDGs requires

government and education stakeholders to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education

and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” by 2030 (United Nations, 2017:5). Such

global development agendas, coupled with internal socio-economic challenges, created

circumstances that pushed policy makers in the Sub-Saharan Africa region to consider and

promote alternative ways for providing basic education, beyond the pre-dominant formal

education system.

The need for NFE is reiterated by the fact that, in spite of the rigorous efforts to achieve EFA,

and with noticeably significant achievements, more than 33 million children of school-going

age in Sub-Saharan Africa were out-of-school by the Dakar EFA deadline of 2015 (United

Nations, 2015; UNESCO, 2015); and millions of children in this region who enrol in primary

and lower secondary schools, for a variety of reasons, end up dropping out (ADEA, 2008;

ADEA, 2012). Along with that, the region is facing other daunting challenges such as rapid

growth of the primary school-age population (which has increased by 86% between 1990 and

2015), high levels of poverty, lack of employment among youth, armed conflicts, HIV/AIDS

and other emergencies (United Nations, 2015).

While the problem of out-of-school children and youth in Sub-Saharan Africa is being

contributed by many different factors as alluded above, the same is also largely enhanced by

problems and challenges existing within the predominant formal education system -

especially those problems and challenges related to poor quality of the education provided, as

well as the system’s inability to reach marginalized and disadvantaged groups (Thompson,

2001; Mushi et al., 2002; Hoppers, 2006; Rose, 2007, Hartwell, 2006; ADEA, 2009,

Yasunaga, 2014). Other common problems facing formal schools in most African countries

include inadequate, under-qualified and unmotivated teachers, unhealthy and unsafe

teaching-learning environments as well as inadequate teaching-learning materials including

insufficient textbooks (Mushi, 2009). Because of these inherent challenges, it has

3

increasingly become evident among policy makers in the Sub-Saharan region, that the

mainstream formal education system alone cannot guarantee provision of quality basic

education for all, neither can it alone eradicate the emerging socio-economic challenges

(Hoppers, 2006). This has further contributed to proliferation of NFE programs and activities

offering basic education to youth, adults and children of school-going age.

NFE has for a long time been recognized as a possible alternative pathway to basic education

provision thanks to its outstanding characteristics in comparison to formal education,

especially its high degree of flexibility which accommodates diverse and content-specific

learning needs of children, young people and adults (Carr-Hill and Carron, 1991; Hoppers,

2006; Yasunaga, 2014). In various countries where NFE was introduced as an alternative way

to the goal of EFA, it demonstrated significant achievements – for example the cases of

BRAC in Bangladesh; the School for Life program in Ghana and the Complementary

Opportunities for Primary Education program in Uganda (Hartwell, 2006; DeStephano et al.,

2007). Other exemplary NFE programs include the Japanese terakoya, shijuku and kominkans, which

contributed to the country’s success in mass literacy, democratization and rural development between

the 1940s and the 1970s (Chiba, 2004).

1.2 Tanzania’s Experience

NFE in the United Republic of Tanzania (herein known as Tanzania) shares a similar history

as in many of the other Sub-Saharan African countries in that, for more than two decades

after independence, the county’s NFE programs and activities were largely intended for

illiterate adults and that most of the NFE programs and activities for children of school-going

age became a later product of the SAP and other international development agendas and

obligations (Galabawa, 2001; Mushi, 2009). Following independence in 1961, NFE was used

as an emergency but important strategy for stimulating wider national development goals.

With more than 85% of her adult citizens being illiterate, the government of Tanzania felt

that it would be unwise and less beneficial to concentrate all efforts on educating children and

leave the majority of the adults in a state of illiteracy, which would in turn delay the country’s

development for many more decades (Mushi, 2009). As a result, NFE programs and activities

were widely initiated to address not only the problem of adult illiteracy, but also to deal with

other development challenges such as poor nutrition, diseases, and inadequate agricultural

and industrial production. Beyond that, NFE was used as a tool for promoting socio-

4

economic and political changes happening in the society, especially Nyerere’s1 Socialism and

Self-Reliance (Mushi, 2009).

Between late-1980s and early-1990s, following the adoption of SAP policies, Tanzania’s

development policies changed from Socialism and Self-Reliance which focused on growth

and equity, to a capitalism which focused on growth and efficiency (Galabawa, 2001; Mosha,

2004: Mushi, 2009). Along with that, there was a strong emphasis for the government to

create an environment that would encourage collaboration with different partners – including

non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society organisations (CSOs), and

community-based organisations (CBOs) – in delivering social services including health and

basic education. This decision, among other things, resulted in the establishment of a wide

range of NFE programs and activities, including those that offer basic education to children

of school-going age, to complement the government’s efforts in ensuring EFA, and in dealing

with other development challenges the country was facing. Of particular interest to this work

are the NFE programs and activities being used as alternative schools for poor and

marginalized children of school-going age: Are they significantly equitable and accessible to

the hard-to-reach out-of-school children? Are their teaching-learning resources and processes

of good quality? Are they acceptable by the poor and disadvantaged communities? Are they

making significant contributions to achieving quality basic education for all in Tanzania?

1.3 Statement of the problem

While NFE in general is known to have made tremendous contribution to meeting learning

needs and in enhancing lifelong learning especially in Europe and North America (Bois-

Reymond, 2004; Hoppers, 2006), the same is highly marginalised in most African countries

(ADEA, 2012). In comparison with the mainstream formal education system, NFE programs

and activities in Africa and other developing countries are often less valued, treated as second

hand, and would be given insufficient or no financial support from governments (Hoppers,

2006; ADEA, 2012; Yasunaga, 2014). One of the reasons for NFE being unattractive among

policy makers and politicians in most African countries is the fact that these key decision

makers have been schooled in the tradition of the formal education system, which is largely

inherited from the colonial masters, and so they are charged with reproducing and

perpetuating the dominant mode of education (Thomson, 2001). Additionally, as discussed

1 Nyerere was the first President of Tanzania who served in the period 1961-1984.

5

above, the current NFE programs and activities in Tanzania and other African countries are

largely a product of neoliberal policies adopted from SAP. Neoliberal policies, as pointed out

by Carnoy (1999), are predominantly finance-driven and they tend to increase inequity in the

delivery of educational services, unless specific measures are taken to assist the poor and

marginalized groups. Furthermore, as Hoppers (2011) points out, such policies tend to

undermine non-formal approaches to basic education programs in favour of the mainstream

education opportunities, as they focus more on productivity than equity.

In the Jomtien Declaration of EFA in 1990, while NFE programs were recognized as a

possible way to meeting learning needs of out-of-school children and youth, it was indicated

that such programs would need to be adequately supported and that they need to share the

same learning standards as applied to formal schools (UNESCO, 1990). In the same vein,

given the strong belief in and dependence on the formal education system as the sole provider

of education in African societies including Tanzania, NFE ought to produce ‘graduates’ with

“accepted and socially-valued certificates and non-cognitive attributes necessary for

“promotability”, otherwise it (NFE) “might be even more inhibiting for the mobility and

prospects for the poor and marginalized” (Hoppers, 2006:41).

Specifically to Tanzania, as was mentioned by Mushi and his collaborators in 2002, most

NFE programs for children and young people, especially those offered by NGOs, are not

centrally coordinated by the ministry responsible for education; they do not have definite

guidelines for operationalization; no specific curriculum to guide the educational practices;

and no defined mechanisms to monitor and control the quality of the education offered.

Additionally, most of them are urban-based even though the majority of Tanzanians stay in

rural areas; they utilize untrained people as teachers or instructors; and because they solely

depend on funding from external international organizations, they are usually not sustainable

(Mushi et al., 2002).

Amidst all the mentioned issues and challenges associated with NFE in general, new NFE

programs and activities that offer basic education to out-of-school children and youth in

Tanzania are being established (URT, 2015), and the government appears to highly depend

on them as the main gateway for out-of-school children and other marginalized groups to

access basic education. Our main question is whether NFE can be regarded as an effective

policy strategy for ensuring equitable access to quality basic education for all males and

6

females in Tanzania. Being aware of the huge diversity of NFE, the focus of this work is on

Para-formal NFE programs and activities for children of school-going age, and our main

concerns are issues related to equity and quality of the education being offered. As discussed

further in Chapter Three, Para-formal NFE programs work as substitutes for regular full-time

schooling targeting out-of-school children and young people.

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of NFE programs and activities for

children of school-going age in providing basic education to out-of-school children in

Tanzania, in order to make suggestions on how such programs should work to maximize their

contribution to the efforts for achieving quality basic education for all in the country. Two

NFE programs namely The Complementary Basic Education in Tanzania (COBET) and the

Global Learning XPRIZE Project (XPRIZE) have been used as cases in this study. COBET

and XPRIZE are amongst many NFE activities which were conceived as part of the efforts by

the government of Tanzania, in collaboration with local and international NGOs and CBOs,

to demonstrate their commitment to achieving EFA as well as to demonstrate commitment to

other international agendas and obligations related to provision of basic education. In the two

sub-sections below, the COBET and XPRIZE programs have been explained briefly. They

will be fully described in Chapter Four of this work.

1.4.1 The COBET Program

COBET was initiated in 1997 by the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, in

collaboration with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), to offer out-of-school

children and adolescents a rare second chance to acquire basic education as well as life and

survival skills. In the mid-1990s the government realized that, while it was striving to have

all school-age children in school by 2005, there were already almost 3 million adolescents

and school-age children who were out of primary schools when they were supposed to be in

school – the majority of whom being girls and boys from hard-to-reach areas (Galabawa,

2001). The program was intended to facilitate mainstreaming into the formal schooling

system of such children and adolescents, after completing a three-year course and upon

passing a promotional examination accredited by the National Examinations Council of

Tanzania.

7

The COBET learners were categorized into Cohorts I and II corresponding to the ages of 11 -

13 years and 14 – 18 years respectively. Cohort I comprises of the learners who have never

been enrolled to school. They take the three-year course and finally sit for the National

Primary School Standard IV Examinations (which are also taken by the regular formal

primary school pupils). Learners who pass such examinations are mainstreamed into Standard

V of the formal primary schools and compete for selection to secondary school. On the other

hand, Cohort II learners comprises of those who used to be in the formal primary schools but

for various reasons dropped out before completing the cycle. These learners take the three-

year course and finally sit for the National Primary School Leaving Examinations. Those that

pass such examinations get the opportunity to join the formal secondary schools while those

who do not pass may join vocational education institutions.

1.4.2 The Global Learning XPRIZE Project

XPRIZE is an initiative funded by the XPRIZE Foundation and implemented in partnership

with the United Nations’ Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and

the World Food Program (WFP), in close collaboration with Tanzania’s Ministry of

Education Science and Technology (MoEST) and the President’s Office – Regional

Administration and Local Government (PO-RALG). This pilot project began in September

2017 and its overall aim is to improve literacy and numeracy skills for children aged 9-10

years in remote and underprivileged communities through innovative technologies. The

children are given tablets with software which enables them to learn literacy and numeracy

skills with minimal support from adults. In the end, the plan is to mainstream the beneficiary

children into the formal schooling system after the completion of the test period in 2019

(UNESCO Tanzania website, accessed on 9.06.2019).

1.5 Objectives and Research Questions of the Study

The overall objective of the study is to examine the effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE in

facilitating access to quality basic education to out-of-school children in Korogwe district. In

order to fulfil this objective, three specific objectives are pursued in the study:

To examine whether COBET and XPRIZE effectively facilitate mainstreaming of the

out-of-school children to formal primary schools

8

To examine whether COBET and XPRIZE centres enable a teaching and learning

process of good quality

To investigate whether COBE and XPRIZE learners achieve acceptable learning

outcomes in terms of basic literacy and numeracy skills

The corresponding research questions are:

i. Do COBET and XPRIZE programs effectively facilitate mainstreaming of their

learners to formal primary schools?

ii. Do COBET and XPRIZE centres enable a teaching and learning process of good

quality?

iii. Do COBET and XPRIZE learners achieve acceptable learning outcomes in terms of

basic literacy and numeracy skills?

1.6 Significance of the Study

In the context of existing knowledge on NFE programs in general and specifically in

Tanzania, as discussed previously in this introduction, this study is expected to make several

contributions including the following:

To provide up-to-date information about the functioning and effectiveness of NFE

programs and activities for children of school-going age in Tanzania, and their

contribution to achieving quality basic education for all in the country

To create awareness on specific issues, concerns and challenges faced by NFE

programs and activities in Tanzania so as to enable politicians, policy makers and

other education stakeholders make informed decision, especially on matters related to

resource distribution for educational programs

To suggest to policy makers and other educational stakeholders ways to plan and

implement NFE programs and activities for maximum contribution to the efforts of

reaching EFA goals

To make a contribution to already existing research and literature on the evolution of

NFE in Africa and its role in the wider society development

9

The thesis will be shared with the local government authorities where the study was

conducted so it can serve as an independent evaluation of their NFE programs and

activities

1.7 Structure of the Thesis

This study is organized into seven chapters. Chapter One provides the background

information, especially on the evolution of NFE for children of school-going age in Sub-

Sahara African countries. It also highlights Tanzania’s experience with NFE in order to set

the purpose and objectives of the study into context.

Chapter Two covers a summary of various themes in the literature about NFE. It includes the

meaning and types of NFE and its characteristics in relation to those of the formal education

system. The chapter also covers the importance of NFE in addressing various socio-economic

challenges. Finally the chapter explores some of the NFE issues and concerns leading to it

being marginalized and undermined in relation to the formal education system especially in

the Sub-Sahara African region.

Chapter Three provides a wider discussion on NFE policies, practices and trends in Tanzania,

including the country’s macro-economic policy reforms following the World Bank and IMFs

Structural Adjustment Program, and their implications for NFE. The chapter also provides a

full description of the two programs that are used as cases in this study.

In Chapter Four theoretical issues and the conceptual framework guiding this study are

elaborated. The Social Reproduction Theory has been adopted as the main guiding theory.

The chapter also covers the rights-based approach to education as a key concept to help in the

process of data presentation and analysis along with the framework for understanding

education quality in the UNESCO EFA Global Monitoring Report of 2005.

Chapter Five addresses the research strategy and methodology. It begins with a description of

the study location and sampling of the selection of participants. It then describes each of the

data collection methods used - questionnaires, interviews, observations, focus group

discussion and an assessment test of NFE learners’ basic numeracy and literacy skills.

Chapter Six presents and analyses the data collected and Chapter Seven summarizes the

findings and provides the conclusions and recommendations.

10

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter addresses the conceptualisation of the term NFE as discussed by various

researchers. -Various definitions of NFE as used in different contexts are highlighted, and the

one used for the purposes of this study identified. Citing examples from various countries and

regions, various types and forms of NFE are explored and concerns about their usage raised.

The chapter concludes with the rationale for NFE in Tanzania and other developing countries.

2.1 What is NFE?

Creating a universally acceptable definition of NFE has, for many decades, been a

challenging undertaking (Macpherson, 2007; Caron and Carr-Hill, 1999; Ward et al., 1974).

This challenge has intensified in recent years because of high levels of interaction between

formal, non-formal and informal modes of learning. Some learning approaches which have

traditionally been regarded as typical of the non-formal or informal education (approaches

like apprenticeship, fieldwork, reading newspapers, learning from peer groups, listening to

radio broadcasting, watching TV etc.) are now commonly applied within the formal

education setting (Hoppers, 2006).

It is even more challenging to clearly differentiate formal and non-formal education because

the two types of education, in contrast to the informal type of education, generally correspond

with some kind of organized and systematic view of education (Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991;

Dib, 1988). More importantly, there is a tendency of formal education to progressively absorb

innovations from non-formal education as part of the standard curricula (Carron and Carr-

Hill, 1991; Hoppers, 2006). The boundary between the two types of education becomes even

more blurred when non-formal educational activities lead to award of certificates (Robinson,

1999).

Attempts to discriminate NFE from formal education have usually been made based on a

wide range of dimensions including curricula/content, target group, administrative affiliation,

pedagogical styles, degree of flexibility, control or regulation mechanisms etc. (see, for

example, Antoniou & Lepouras, 2008; Mushi et al, 2002; Spronk, 1999; Aggarwal, 1981).

Yet, other authors point out that when one of these dimensions or a combination of them is

critically examined, one will still find a wide range of NFE activities with very little

11

difference with what is happening in the formal schooling system and, at the same time, they

are very close to informal learning practices (Rose, 2007; Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991).

However, Hoppers points out that the definitional debate appears to exist mainly amongst

educational scholars. At the country level, especially in the South, those directly involved in

education – including governments, CSOs, parents and young people – continue to use the

definition by Coombs, Prosser and Ahmed in the early 1970s (Hoppers, 2006). According to

Coombs and his colleagues, formal, non-formal and informal educations are defined as

follows:

Formal education is an institutionalized, chronologically graded and hierarchically

graded structured educational system, spanning from pre-primary, primary, secondary

to the university;

Non-formal education is any organized, systematic educational activity carried on

outside the framework of the formal education system to provide selected types of

learning to particular subgroups in the population including adults as well as children;

Informal education is defined as a long process by which every person acquires and

accumulates knowledge, skills and attitudes and insights from daily experiences and

exposure to the environments (Coombs, Prosser and Ahmed, 1973 cited in Kanukisya,

2010; Mushi et al., 2002; Hill, 2001; Dib, 1988).

Table 2.1, cited by Mushi and his collaborators, shows the major differences between formal

and non-formal education in terms of their goals, content, structure, evaluation, delivery and

control.

12

Table 2. 1: Differences between Formal and Non-Formal Education

Indicators Formal Education Non-Formal Education

Goal To prepare children for future life

To maintain status quo

Impersonal

To help people with living now

(immediate application in day to

day life)

To change society

Personal

Content Fixed concepts and content in its

curriculum

Compartmentalized

Pre-determined teaching and

learning materials

Diversified curriculum which is

responsive to learner and

environmental needs

Structure Fixed points of entry and exit

Terminal

Rigidly structured and organized

Defined target groups

Formal registration

Has flexible points of entry and

exit, re-entry and re-exit, and so

on throughout the life span of

the individual

Flexibly structured and

organized

Evaluation Validated by external standards set

by the teacher or other educator

Validated by learner’s

experience and success

Delivery Institution based

Isolated from social economic

environment and social action

Teacher-centred

Resource Intensive pre-determined

pedagogical organization and

methods

Environmental based

Community related

Learner centred

Resource serving

Control External

Hierarchical

Self-governing

Democratic

Source: Mushi et al. (2002)

One way of avoiding the scholastic debate on what NFE “really is”, as suggested by

Grandstaff (1974), is to have its definition derive from the context within which an NFE

activity is being planned and/or implemented. This means that the definition should be

13

‘contextual and functional’ instead of deriving from a global perspective. Grandstaff puts it as

follows;

…this means that we do not look at NFE activities in a global way, hoping to identify

defining characteristics, but ask, instead, on what grounds (in a given case) “formal” is being

discriminated from “non-formal.” In some contexts the grounds for discrimination might

result in an activity being labelled “formal”, while in another context, using different criteria

of discrimination, a similar activity might be labelled “non-formal (1974:6-7).

Similarly, UNESCO’s definition of NFE also puts emphasis on context:

Any organized and sustained educational activities that do not correspond exactly to the

definition of formal education. Non-formal education may therefore take place both within

and outside educational institutions, and cater to persons of all ages. Depending on country

contexts, it may cover educational programmes to impart adult literacy, basic education for

out-of-school children, life-skills, work-skills, and general culture. Non-formal education

programmes do not necessarily follow the ‘ladder’ system, and may have different duration,

and may or may not confer certification of the learning achieved (UNESCO, 2006:1).

However, Hoppers (2006) observes that in many Sub-Saharan African countries, the term

NFE has been used by education stakeholders to mean any systematic learning opportunities

organized outside the framework of the formal education system – for example, in Kenya

(Gathenya, 2004; MOEST, 2004); Botswana (Maruatona, 2007); and Tanzania (URT, 1995).

The Tanzanian Education and Training Policy (ETP) of 1995 describes non-formal education

as follows:

Non-formal Education can be generalized as Out-of-school Education as distinguished from

Formal Education which is In-School Education. However, either type may include at certain

stages some aspects of the other. The non-formal education and training caters for the

informal and adult education, to include literacy and post-literacy programs, continuing

education and Open University (URT, 1995:16).

In the context of this study, NFE will be referred to as education provided to out-of-school

children and adolescence who, because of their disadvantaged circumstances, either did not

get the opportunity to be enrolled in government or private schools, or they dropped out of

the schools before completing the national primary education cycle. Basic education is herein

referred to as the Tanzanian primary education or its equivalent, as per the Tanzanian

14

Education and Training Policy of 1995. The Tanzanian Education System is described in

details in Chapter Four.

2.2 Types of NFE

Just as challenging as it is to universally define what NFE is, it is equally challenging to

clearly classify NFE activities into distinct groups because of their high diversity, interactions

and similarities with regular formal education. UNESCO has provided guidelines for a NFE

conceptual framework from which a country may develop its own relevant NFE categories

(UNESCO, 2006). According to the UNESCO framework, NFE may be categorized based on

its activities, the agency that is providing the program, the program’s target group and the age

of the target group.

In this thesis, Carron and Carr-Hill’s classification of NFE is used. According to them, NFE

can be grouped into four types, which are para-formal education, popular education,

education for personal development, and professional and vocational training (Carron and

Carr-Hill, 1991). This classification is based on the intended educational needs (what is being

offered); the clienteles being served; the educational agencies organizing them, and their

relationship with the formal education system. The four types are briefly described in the

following sub-sections.

2.2.1 Para-formal Education

This form of NFE is composed of all kinds of educational programs which provide a

substitute for regular full-time schooling. Examples of Para-formal Education programs

include Uganda’s Complementary Opportunities for Primary Education (Hartwell, 2006); the

Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA) program in India (Mitra, 2007; Ward, 2011) and Ghana’s

School for Life (Hartwell, 2006). Such programs are mainly intended to offer a second

chance to those who for various reasons did not benefit from the regular school system at the

intended moment. While in some cases these programs are merely condensed forms of the

formal education system, they sometimes appear as alternative forms. They may include

programs, such as literacy programs, evening programs, and distance education programs.

The programs are intended to guarantee equivalent qualifications to those offered by the

corresponding levels in the formal education system (Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991).

15

2.2.2 Popular Education

According to Oscar (2010), ‘popular’ education refers to those political–pedagogical

processes that seek to overcome relationships of domination, oppression, discrimination,

exploitation, inequality and exclusion. Seen from a positive point of view, it refers to all

educational processes that seek to build egalitarian and fair relationships that respect

diversity and equal rights amongst people (p. 290).

Popular education is an educational trend characterized by being a social-cultural

phenomenon and an educational conception at the same time. As a socio-cultural

phenomenon, it refers to a multitude of diverse educational practices which share ‘a

transforming intentionality’, including all educational practices (both formal and informal)

aimed at raising peoples’ critical awareness of existing social, cultural and economic

inequalities (La Belle, 1987; Oscar, 2010). It is intended to help ‘the oppressed’ become

aware of their reality and of the social structures that keep them oppressed, and be capable of

acting for their interests in an organized and systematic manner (La Belle, 1987). As an

educational conception, “it points to the construction of a new educational paradigm which

challenges the dominating capitalist model of authoritarian education that is mainly

scholarized and dissociates theory from practice. It is based on critical and creative

pedagogy for the full development of cognitive, psychomotor, communication and emotional

skills” (Oscar, 2010:290). Unlike the conventional formal education, popular education

promotes participatory decision making mechanisms and forges relationships across and

within social classes (La Belle, 1987; Hammond, 1999).

Some of the characteristics of popular education activities include their concentration on the

poor; a learning-by-doing approach; and a constant preoccupation to adapt the learning

activities to the changing needs of the users (Carron and Carr-Hill, 1991). The activities are

normally conducted in groups or cooperatives that are organized and democratic; and feature

strong horizontal pedagogical relationship between learners and educators (Oscar, 2010).

According to Hoppers (2006) popular education forms differ from the para-formal forms of

education in that the former do not merely deliver the same formal curriculum but reconstruct

its principal foundations and associated pedagogical approaches.

16

2.2.3 Personal Development

This type of NFE includes all education programmes covering a wide range of learning

practices organized by cultural institutions that promote leisure-time activities such as

residential short courses, study visits, fitness centres, sports clubs and self-therapy

programmes (Hoppers, 2006). According to Carron and Carr-Hill (1991), what makes this

type of NFE differ from popular education is that it aims at satisfying individual needs while

the latter is concerned with collective development.

2.2.4 Professional and Vocational Training

This type of NFE covers all trainings outside the formal or non-formal forms of initial skills

training which may or may not lead to recognized national diplomas (Hoppers, 2006). They

include on-the-job learning, artisanal work, agricultural or industrial extension services,

entrepreneurship development programs, and commercial or artistic programs. They are

organized and offered by a wide range of providers including private firms and agencies,

trade unions as well as state and non-state formal schools and colleges. Such NFE programs

are mainly for skills development with the intention to help governments address socio-

economic challenges such as youth unemployment.

2.3 The Rationale for NFE

As pointed out earlier, the mainstream formal education systems in developing countries have

failed to meet demands for quality basic education. At the same time, the ongoing socio-

economic transformations resulting from globalization have intensified the demand for

competent workers in the labour market. For a country to be able to effectively compete with

others in the global market, its educational programs must produce young people with the

required social and technical skills. Some of the justifications for NFE are presented in the

following.

2.3.1 NFE and Poverty Reduction

The term poverty can better be understood when viewed in terms of both income poverty and

non-income poverty. According to URT (2002), income poverty is a status of having

inadequate income or having insufficient means of generating income. Non-income poverty

on the other hand has many elements, including physical or social isolation caused by

location, ignorance or illiteracy, inability to access goods and services etc. Other elements of

17

non-income poverty include physical or mental disability which might be hereditary or due to

such causes as poor nutrition and sickness. Mushi and his colleagues add to the list that non-

income poverty could also be measured in terms of being powerless within existing social,

economic, political and cultural conditions; as well as being vulnerable to crisis, shocks and

disasters (Mushi et al., 2004). Thus, poverty, according to Mushi et al. (2004) may be

referred to as the inability to attain minimum specified standards of goods and services

required for the satisfaction of basic needs.

Sen (1999) contends that, poverty is when someone has been deprived of his/her capabilities,

which are the ‘real opportunities’ to attain various life functionings – the constitutive

elements of being and doing - such as being healthy, being educated, having a decent job,

being part of a nurturing family and having friends, to mention but a few.

It is widely and historically accepted that education is one of the important means of

combating poverty globally, nationally and locally. Poverty is both a barrier to learning and a

consequence of insufficient and poor education (UNESCO, 2004). Countries which have

invested in education have benefited in terms of better economic growth and reduction of

poverty levels (Govinda, 2008). Poverty alleviation, a priority of current international

development strategies, is definitely linked to the general education of people, to which non-

formal education can make effective contributions (Chiba, 2004).

Tanzania is one of the countries in the world where poverty is widespread as illustrated by a

summary of some basic socio-economic indicators in Table 3.1 which shows that almost 22%

of the country’s adult population is illiterate and has a 4.7% HIV prevalence rate. The

National Development Vision 2025 recognizes the need for high quality education as a way

of creating a society that can positively respond to emerging development challenges and

whose people can effectively compete in the labour market regionally and internationally

(URT, 1999). The vision for Tanzania is to:

Be a nation with high level of education at all levels; a nation which produces the quantity

and quality of educated people sufficiently equipped with the requisite knowledge to solve the

society’s problems, meet the challenges of development and attain competitiveness at

regional and global levels (URT, 1999:8).

18

At the same time, the mainstream education provision, as highlighted earlier, is characterized

by glaring inequalities and poor quality. Effective non-formal education programs and

initiatives could contribute to poverty reduction by enabling poor people acquire knowledge,

skills and competencies which would help them eradicate illiteracy, get involved in income

generating activities, prevent themselves from diseases, promote gender parity and women’s

empowerment, as well as actively participate in political forums and other social activities.

Through effective non-formal education programs and activities, for instance, Tanzania was

able to reduce illiteracy rates from 85% in 1961 to less than 10% in 1984 (Mushi, 2009). This

achievement, however, could not be sustained. The current illiteracy rates have been recorded

to rise up to 38% in 2008 which is attributed to various challenges which are currently facing

adult and non-formal education programs in terms of relevance, management, funding,

shortage of instructional materials and a demotivated teaching force (Mushi, 2009).

2.3.2 NFE as a Way to “Reaching the Unreachable”

As discussed earlier, many children and youth in Tanzania cannot be reached by the formal

education system due to various in-school and out-of-school reasons, and thus they are denied

of their right to education. This problem is worse in rural areas where formal schools have so

few teachers that children simply decide to drop out; or they are so far away that parents feel

unsafe for their daughters to walk to school; or because illiterate teenagers feel too old to be

in the same class as small children (Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003). In cases like these, non-

formal basic education programs and activities could play a significant role to eradicate the

problem thanks to their enormous diversity and flexibility. A good example is the ACCESS

program centres under ActionAid in Tanzania which, apart from complementing some rural

primary schools, also served as satellites to the formal schools. Thus parents felt comfortable

as their daughters were safe in the village (ActionAid Tanzania, 2002). In Kenya as well as

Tanzania, some NFE educators have been reported to reach ‘street children’ in townships and

teach them basic academic and non-academic skills (McAlpine et al., 2007; Gathenya, 2004).

NFE programs and activities are also known to have been used as forums for strategic

communication in efforts for the governments to address contemporary development issues

and challenges. For instance, Bhalalusesa’s study to evaluate Community Level Basic

19

Education programs which applied the REFLECT2 methodology in some rural areas of the

country reveals that the REFLECT meetings served as focal points for community members

to discuss their problems on such issues as health and HIV/AIDS, water and agriculture. The

meetings were also used to initiate small-scale income-generating activities and development

of collective and effective implementation plans. Gender disparity was also noted to decrease

among the REFLECT members (Bhalalusesa, 2004).

2.3.3 Globalization and NFE

Globalization as a process has become a very influential phenomenon in many areas of

human life, including education. Technological advancement, which is one of the key

features of globalization, has made the whole world as small as a village in terms of

knowledge and information transfer. Education is undergoing remarkable changes both in

quality and in quantity because the world under which it is situated is itself changing (Kubow

and Fossum, 2007).

Carnoy (1999) observes that globalization means more competition and hence each nation

needs highly knowledgeable and skilled citizens for it to fit appropriately into the market

economy. National education systems, curricula or even individual subjects at all levels of

education need to be reviewed or completely changed to make them reflect the global market

needs. In this context, education is viewed as an important investment to develop human

resource necessary for economic and social transformation. Whereas globalization and the

resulting socio-economic transformations are making a huge impact in the field of education

especially in developing countries, rigid formal education systems have difficulty to quickly

adjust to such dynamic and rapid change (Chiba, 2004). Thus, effective NFE programs can

make a significant contribution to addressing the growing demand for knowledgeable, skilful

personnel.

2.3.4 NFE and Lifelong Learning

Lifelong learning is the linking of different types of education (formal, informal and non-

formal) in such a way that learners of different ages can interrupt or resume learning, or move

from one type to another at any time depending on changing needs and circumstances

2 REFLECT stands for Regenerated Freirean Literacy through Empowering Community Techniques. It is an adult

literacy program which draws from Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques to facilitate community-based

learning of basic literacy and numeracy skills for illiterate adults.

20

(ADEA, 2012). An assumption with the lifelong learning discourse is that individual learning

needs do change due to the changing nature of the world. Knowledge and skills a person had

acquired many years ago may be useless at present, thus forcing him/her to seek for

acquisition of new knowledge and skills.

This being the case, non-formal education is an important part of the lifelong learning process

as it provides flexible learning routes for those who need to acquire new knowledge, skills

and competences, yet they cannot adhere to the formalities of ‘in-school’ learning

arrangements. The challenge remains, therefore, to duly recognize ‘non-school’ learning

outcomes, not only in the South but also in the North. Colardyn and Bjornavold (2004)

contend that, lifelong learning requires validation of non-formal and informal education so as

to make visible the entire scope of knowledge, skills, competences and experiences held by

an individual, regardless of the location where, and the time when the learning took place. As

long as learning, skills and competences acquired outside formal education and training

remain invisible and poorly valued, the ambition of lifelong learning cannot be achieved

(ibid).

The flexibility of non-formal learning and an overarching framework for accrediting learning

outcomes would create a recognizable “non-school” variant of formal education thus freeing

the participants to learn what they want, when they want, where they want and for as long as

they want (Hoppers, 2006).

2.4 Issues and Concerns in NFE

As discussed in the introductory chapter, NFE in general, especially in Sub-Saharan African

countries is faced with marginalisation because of issues related to quality, equity as well as

management and organizational issues. These are further elaborated below.

2.4.1 Quality Issues

As discussed earlier, while there is evidence that NFE programs and activities are making

contributions to achieving basic education, there is a general perception that NFE means

education of poor quality (ADEA, 2012; Hoppers, 2006). Even the descriptor ‘non-formal’

literally means lack of formality which, in turn, connotes a negative concept because it is

equated to poor quality provision (Thomson, 2001; Etling, 1993). Putting the hyphen between

“non” and “formal” makes it even worse because the pre-fix “non” means without or reverse

21

of (Etling, 1993). But NFE is not the opposite of formal education – the two are in many

ways similar and overlap. However, many educators especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, think

that any education taking place outside the formal schooling system is somehow inferior,

usually dubious and certainly uncontrolled (ibid).

The quality of an educational activity is determined by many factors and there are different

ways to defining what quality actually is (UNESCO, 2004). As will be discussed in detail in

the next chapter, the quality of NFE programs can be analysed based on quality of its input,

processes and outputs – the curriculum, teaching-learning resources and processes, quality of

teachers/instructors, learners participation (UNESCO, 2004). The bottom line is that, while

NFE differs largely from formal education, the goal in either case must be to provide quality

of education (Mushi et al., 2002). If there are issues related to quality of the inputs, processes

and outputs – be they in the formal schooling or NFE programs and activities - such issues

need to be addressed accordingly.

2.4.2 Access and Equity Issues

While NFE programs and activities are often established to enhance social inclusion through

reaching specific groups of disadvantaged and marginalized children and adolescents who are

otherwise not reached by the formal schooling system, this goal may not always be met for a

variety of reasons. For example, in Tanzania some programs have very limited coverage due

to lack of finance and other resources, while many others, especially those offered by NGOs,

are largely urban-based and enrol more boys than girls (Mushi et al., 2002). Beyond that,

there are also other unintended actions and behaviour happening during the teaching-learning

process, such as unequal participation among boys and girls, which may perpetuate inequality

and exclusion (Hoppers, 2006).

2.4.3 Issues Related to Management and Organization

One of the key issues facing NFE in Sub-Saharan African countries has been lack of strong

institutions to coordinate and manage its operations (ADEA, 2012). And this is contributing

to the problem of its learning outcomes being unrecognized or less valued which, in turn,

limit the learners’ ability to transit into the formal schooling system and therefore affects their

career prospects in general (ADEA, 2012; Yasunaga, 2014). Even though there are

significant achievements in efforts to establish linkages between NFE programs and formal

22

schooling systems, most NFE programs in Tanzania, especially the ones offered by NGOs,

are being operationalized as parallel and in replacement of the formal schooling system. This

makes some community members undermine the contribution made by such programs

(Mushi et al, 2002) since they do not offer certificates which give learners eligibility to join

formal education.

2.4.4 NFE Financing

As discussed, in spite of the increasing efforts by government and non-government providers,

the current investment in NFE is not sufficient and equitable to accommodate all eligible

children. Allocation of public funds to NFE programs and activities in developing countries is

extremely limited, and it is even worse when this is treated as part of the budget for the whole

education sector – which is not sufficient – and calculated based on unit costs (ADEA, 2012;

Yasunaga, 2014). As argued by Yasunaga (2014), “If education sector budgets continue to

assume equal unit costs for all children, additional expenses required to offset the multiple

disadvantages of out-of-school children, including forms of social exclusion, can never be

sufficiently secured. Inequitable distribution of funds within a country is another persistent

challenge, often resulting in the disadvantaged out-of-school children and adolescents

receiving a lower-quality education” (p. 14).

2.4.5 Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting of NFE Programs

and Activities

In order to ensure quality control, accountability and transparency in the use of resources, as

well as to enable qualitative and quantitative measurements of the outcomes of any project,

there needs to be a well-established Monitoring and Evaluation system. In the context of NFE

programs, this requires a system that would help the government ensure that the providers

adhere to its policies and regulations for provision of basic education. Results from a reliable

Monitoring and Evaluation system would also be used to improve the intervention and

advocacy strategies in order to make NFE more credible at internal level in governments and

in the eyes of technical and financial partners (ADEA, 2012).

2.5 Summary

From the literature reviewed and presented in the two chapters above, it can be concluded

that the definition of NFE differs from one context to another, and that there is a huge

23

diversity of programs and activities which can offer a variety of educational opportunities

based on specific needs, in efforts to pursue lifelong learning. The literature further indicates

that, while NFE offers a promising route to achieving quality basic education for all, there are

glaring issues and concerns related to equity and quality of its programs and activities. Such

issues and concerns, coupled with the strong tradition of relying on the formal education

system as the sole provider for basic education, tend to lower the credibility of NFE amongst

policy makers and the society in general in Tanzania and other developing countries.

Therefore, there is need for in-depth investigations of the effectiveness of NFE in order to

make suggestions on how the existing challenges can be addressed.

The following chapter provides the context for NFE policies and practices in Tanzania,

including its trends during the early decades of the country’s independence and after the

introduction of the SAP in the 1980s.

24

CHAPTER THREE: THE CONTEXT FOR NFE

POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN TANZANIA

This chapter sets the context for NFE policies and practices in Tanzania. It includes an

overview of the country’s general profile followed by a brief description of its educational

system and a highlight of the number of children currently estimated to be out-of-school. Of

particular focus is the macro-economic reforms that happened following the adoption of SAP

and their implications for the education sector in general and NFE in particular. The chapter

also highlights the evolution of NFE programs and activities providing basic education to

children of school-going age, including the two projects being used as case studies for this

thesis – COBET and XPRIZE.

3.1 General Profile of Tanzania

Tanzania was formed in 1964 following the union of two former British colonies -

Tanganyika (Tanzania mainland) and Zanzibar which gained independence from the British

in 1961 and 1963 respectively. Tanzania is located in East Africa where it is bordered by

Kenya and Uganda to the North; Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo and

Zambia to the West; Malawi and Mozambique to the South; and the Indian Ocean to the East

(Figure 3.1).

25

Figure 3. 1: Map of Tanzania showing Administrative Regions and Districts

Source: www.google.com, retrieved on 16.10.2019

As can be seen in Table 3.1, selected basic socio-economic indicators in various years during

2009-2016 highlight that while the country’s population is increasing at a higher rate, its

26

formal education system is facing a number of challenges including insufficient human and

material resources which, in turn, affect the quality of teaching and learning process.

Table 3. 1: Basic Socio-Economic Indicators for Tanzania (2009-2016): Number, %

and Proportion by Year

Indicators Number, % and proportion by year

Total population 44,928,235 (2009) [f]

Population in rural areas 70% (2012) [c]

Young Population (0–17 years) 51.4% males and 48.6% females

(2012) [d]

Literacy among population of 7-13 years 62.8%; 59.5% male; 66.4% female

(2014/2015) [e]

Literacy rate of population aged 15+ 78.1% (2012) [c]

Pre-Primary School Net Enrolment Ratio (NER) 24.7% males; 27.3% females [e]

Primary school NER 73.6% (2014/2015) [e]

Secondary school NER 24.7% (2014/2015) [e]

Adolescent fertility rate (number of births per 1,000

women aged 15-19 years)

82.7 births per 1,000 (2012) [b]

HIV prevalence 4.7% (2019) [g]

Comprehensive knowledge of HIV/AIDS among

adolescents

41% males; 46% females

(2012)[f]

Teacher/Pupil ratio (in primary schools) 1:43 (2016) [d]

Textbook/Pupil ratio (in primary schools) 1:3 (2016) [d]

Classroom/Pupil Ratio (in primary schools) 1:78 (2014/2015) [e]

Sources: [a] URT (2018a); [b] UNDP3and URT (2018); [c] URT (2014); [d] UNICEF

Tanzania (2018); [e] URT (2017); [g] URT (2019)

3.2 Education and Training System

The Tanzania Education and Training System is composed of two main channels, namely

formal and non-formal education. The formal education and training system is comprised of 2

years of pre-primary school, 7 years of primary education, 4 years of ordinary level

3 United Nations Development Programme

27

secondary education, 2 years of advanced secondary education and at least 3 years of

university education (URT, 1995).

Pre-primary education targets children aged between 5 and 6 years. It has its own two-year

curriculum and, apart from being important for children’s cognitive development, it is also

intended to safeguard the national cultural values (URT, 1995; URT, 2011). In government

schools, the pre-primary units are, in most cases, within primary school buildings and operate

under the same school administration. Unlike the upper levels of education in Tanzania, the

pre-primary school cycle has no examinations for promotion purposes. While the government

acknowledges the importance of pre-schools for children between 0 and 5 years, the

education level is not formalized due to what the government calls economic infeasibility

(URT, 1995).

Primary education is a seven-year education cycle after pre-primary and is supposed to be

‘compulsory in enrolment and attendance for all children from the age of 7 to 13 years’

(URT, 1995). It begins with Standard (grade) one on entry and ends with Standard VII in the

final year (URT, 1995; URT, 2011). At this level, pupils are supposed to study compulsory

studies, namely Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, Work Skills and Languages (Kiswahili

and English). In almost all government primary schools the medium of instructions is

Kiswahili. A few government schools and the majority of the privately owned primary

schools give instructions in the English language (URT, 1995).

In the final year of the primary school cycle, pupils are supposed to sit for the National

Primary School Leaving Examinations (PSLE) whose results are used for promotion

purposes. The primary school leavers who manage to pass PSLE may join secondary school

level one (form one) in government secondary schools. According to the Tanzania Education

and Training Policy, primary education leavers who do not pass the PSLE may either join

Vocational Education and Training (VET) or enter ‘the world of work’ (URT, 1995). In

recent years, however, chances for primary school leavers to join VET are likely to be

minimal because, as shown in Table 3.2, there has been an increasing number of ordinary

level secondary school leavers who do not get opportunity to proceed to advanced level

secondary education and so they also are seeking chances to join VET.

28

Table 3. 2: Net Enrolment Ratios in Tanzania, by Education Level and Year 2013-2016, %

2013 2014 2015 2016

Pre-Primary education 39.5 30.7 25.9 46.7

Primary education 76.3 73.6 80.2 85.8

Secondary education (Form I-IV) 37.6 35.8 31.9 33.4

Secondary education (Form V-VI) 1.8 2.0 3.3 3.2

Source: URT (2016b)

Note: Net enrolment ratio (NER) is defined as “School age pupils/students enrolled in a given

level of education expressed as a percentage of corresponding school age population” (URT,

2011: XXV)

Secondary education in Tanzania is divided into two levels namely Ordinary and Advanced

levels, commonly known as ‘O’ and ‘A’ levels. The ordinary level is comprised of four levels

namely form 1 through form 4, while the advanced level is comprised on forms 5 and 6.

Students in the ordinary level (form 1-4) must learn Maths, English, Kiswahili, Civics,

Biology, Geography, and History. While all ordinary level students learn Physics and

Chemistry in forms 1 and 2, they may opt to drop such subjects as they enter form 3. Some

secondary schools are designated to specialize in agriculture, commerce, home economics

and textile. Students in the advanced level (forms 5 and 6) must specialise either in

commerce, arts and social sciences or in natural sciences. All of them must also take general

studies. The ordinary secondary school level is intended for the 14-17 years age group, while

the advanced secondary school level is intended for the 18-20 years age group. As at the

primary school level, students must pass the national examination to become eligible for

joining the higher education level.

Education in Tanzania is mainly governed by two ministries, namely the MoEST and the PO-

RALG. The MoEST is responsible for policy formulation, teacher-training and quality

assurance while the PO-RALG is mainly responsible for hiring teachers and monitoring their

day to day performance at school level. Amongst other aspects, both ministries are also

charged with research as well as monitoring, evaluation and reporting of primary and

secondary education.

29

3.3 Number of Out-of-School Children and Adolescents in

Tanzania

While the exact number of out-of-school children and adolescents is not known, at least 1.3

million children of the official primary school-age population (7-13 years) were out of school

in 2016 (URT, 2016b). Furthermore, as highlighted in Table 3.2, the country’s formal

education system has poor internal efficiency as indicated by large proportions of learners

dropping out before completing a full cycle of basic education. At the same time, since early

2016 the government has been rolling out a Fee Free Basic Education strategy, which is

already reported to be causing some new ‘strains’ on the formal education system which may,

in turn, result in more school dropouts and thus increase the number of out-of-school children

and adolescents. As UNICEF Tanzania clearly says:

The most important change in the (education) sector in recent years has been the introduction

of free lower secondary and pre-primary education. It is a continuation of the policy which

implemented free primary education in 2001 and which, within five years, led to an almost

full enrolment (Net Enrolment Ratio (NER) in 2001: 65.5 per cent, NER in 2006: 96.1 per

cent). The expanded policy came into force at the beginning of 2016 and led to an immediate

increase of 38 per cent in pre-primary enrolment. Enrolment for Form1 (first year of

secondary education) increased by 44.6 percent as fees were dropped (UNICEF Tanzania,

2018: 2).

The government of Tanzania realizes the importance of ensuring equitable access to basic

education as a way of addressing its community development challenges and in meeting

international development agendas, including the SDGs. It is determined to mobilize

resources which will help address the current challenges. According to the government:

While Sustainable Development Goals-4 calls for not leaving any one behind regarding

education provision, there is 14.2% or 1,313,204 pupils of school age population (7-13) who

are not at school. More sensitization to community to enroll pupils to schools is needed. Apart

from providing free and compulsory basic education, some interventions such as providing

school meals need to be introduced so as to attract more pupils to schools especially from

poor families (URT, 2016b:57).

30

3.4 Macro-economic Policy Reforms and their Implications

for Education

At independence in 1961, Tanzania inherited an economically poor and illiterate society

characterised by widespread of poverty, disease and ignorance. The situation was caused by

inequitable distribution by the colonial masters of resources and the necessary social services

including education. The purpose of colonial education was to serve the interest of the

colonial masters and thus it was characterised by inequalities based on religious, regional,

racial and gender dimensions (Mushi, 2009). At independence, 85% of Tanganyika’s

population did not know how to read and write (Nationalist Newspaper, 24 August 1967 cited

in Mushi, 2009).

Provision of education was regarded as an important means of achieving better life for all

citizens because it would help eliminate poverty, disease and ignorance. Particular emphasis

was given to adult education in order to minimize the high illiteracy rates among adults so as

to make them actively participate in national development. It was believed that, given the

existing socio-economic conditions, it would take too long to wait for children to acquire the

knowledge and skills necessary for them to effectively participate in the change process. A

wide range of adult education activities were initiated and conducted under the rubric of

‘community schools’ and they were integrated with socio-economic development programs

so as to make them functional (Mushi, 2009). According to King (1965:22), the enrolment in

literacy classes rose from 132,000 in 1961 to about 570,000 in 1965; but there was no

significant decrease in illiteracy by 1965.

Since independence, under the leadership of Nyerere Tanzania envisioned a socialist nation.

However, it was not until 1967 that Socialism and Self-Reliance was officially declared as

the country’s development strategy, together with its subsequent policy of Education for Self-

Reliance (ESR). Under Socialism and Self-Reliance, the country’s development policies were

characterized by strong reliance on government control of the economy and the major means

of production. Other characteristics include emphasis on democracy in order to reinforce

cooperation among citizens; and work was made obligatory for each individual except small

children, old people and the sick (Mushi, 2009; URT, 1995). ESR was meant to address the

inherent problems of the colonial education system. It was aimed at making the education

provided more relevant to Tanzanians by integrating the educational needs and aspirations of

individuals with those of the community, thus linking education and society.

31

Till this period adult education was still given high priority not only for the purpose of

overcoming the inherent socio-economic hurdles, but also to inculcate in peoples’ mind the

ideology of socialism and self-reliance. Several initiatives were made to achieve these goals,

including introduction of workers’ education, distance education, mass education campaigns,

post-literacy programs as well as establishment of rural libraries for the rural communities to

read newspapers and other relevant materials (Närman, 2004; Mushi, 2009). Furthermore, in

the year 1973, the government announced UPE to enable free and compulsory primary

schooling for all children aged 7 years. At the same time, the government had to meet all

costs for other essential social services including health (Mushi, 2009)

Thus, between early 1970 and early 1980 the socio-economic policy reforms in Tanzania

were characterized by the following features: use of education as an instrument for social

change; strong state intervention in education and other socio-economic development

activities; robust community mobilization; free and compulsory primary education for all;

and low civil society group participation (Galabawa, 2001). These reforms and combined

efforts between the government and communities resulted in significant educational

achievements in the country, including increased participation and access to primary

schooling, high internal efficiency of the primary education system (Galabawa, 2001), and

the reduction of illiteracy rates from 85% inherited at independence to less than 10% in 1986

(Mushi, 2009; Brock-Utne et al., 2006).

However, while government spending on education and other social services increased under

the socialist economic policies, the country experienced serious economic problems which

led to deterioration of the economy in the mid-1980s (URT, 1995). The economic hardship

was part of the international economic depression which affected the whole of Africa during

this period (Mushi, 2009). In addressing these economic challenges, the government had to

change its socio-economic development plans and policies from being state-controlled to

market-oriented (URT, 1995).

Given the country’s limited domestic resource base, the imperative changes in socio-

economic development policies were also influenced by the global financial institutions – the

World Bank and the IMF – through loan prescriptions. It was during this period that SAP was

introduced into Tanzania. SAP was introduced with direct advice from the World Bank,

including the concept of cost sharing in the provision of the necessary social services

32

including education (Galabawa, 2001; Brock-Utne et al., 2006; Närman, 2004).

Consequently, the government spending on education and other social services was reduced,

private ownership of schools was permitted, school fees were re-introduced and the

government supervisory role was reduced. Due to cost-sharing, and because many parents

were so poor that they could not afford paying for their children’s education, primary school

enrolment rates started to decline and schools were characterized by irregular pupil

attendance and high dropout rates as can be seen in Table 3.3 which shows primary school

pupils’ access and participation rates for selected years for the period 1970-2001. It indicates

that primary schools dropout and repetition rates were increasing since early 1990s following

the country’s macro-economic policy reforms influenced by SAP.

Table 3. 3: Primary School Access, Participation, and Internal Efficiency Rates, 1975-

2001(%)

Access (Intake

Rates)

Participation (Enrolment

Rates)

Internal Efficiency

(Dropout/Repetition Rates)

Year GER NER GIR NIR DR RR

1970 83 37.0 39.1 27.0 0.9 0.7

1975 84 34.0 54.1 47.1 1.1 1.1

1980 78.2 34.1 98.0 68.0 2.0 1.5

1985 70.3 32.0 85.5 67.8 2.7 2.8

1990 77.0 21.0 73.5 54.3 4.8 3.9

1995 72.0 18.0 77.6 55.5 4.8 4.0

2000 77.0 15.0 77.7 57.7 6.6 4.8

2001 85.0 27.0 89.0 61.4 6.6 3.3

Source: Galabawa (2001)

Note: “GER (Gross Enrolment Rate) is the total number of pupils/students enrolled in a

given level of education expressed as a percentage of the corresponding school-age

population. GIR (Gross Intake Rate) is the total number of new entrants in the first grade of

pre-primary or primary education expressed as a percentage of the school-entrance age

population. Net Intake Rate (NIR) in the number of new entrants in the first grade of pre-

primary or primary education who are of official school-entrance age expressed as a

percentage of the official school-entrance age population. Dropout Rate (DR) is the

proportion of pupils enrolled in a given grade in given school year who are no longer

33

enrolled in the following school year. Repetition Rate (RR) is the “proportion of pupils

enrolled in a given grade in a given school year who study in the same grade in the following

school year” (URT, 2011: xxiv).

Between the mid-1980s and early 1990s, the country also went through important political

changes – from the single-party democracy of the 1960s under President Julius K. Nyerere to

the current multiparty democracy with a different leadership. These political changes

weakened Nyerere’s Socialism and Self-Reliance policies due to rapid introduction of the

market-oriented economic policies (Galabawa, 2001). Furthermore, it was during this same

period when the EFA and MDGs agenda were declared.

3.4.1 NFE Policy Thrust

Several socio-economic policies were developed to reflect the macro-economic policy

reforms. These included the Education and Training Policy (ETP) of 1995; the Tanzania

Development Vision 2025 (1997); the Education Sector Development Plan (2001); the

Primary Education Development Plan (PEDP) (2001); the Adult and Non-formal Education

Development Strategy (ANFES) of 2003; and the Secondary Education Development Plan

(2004). These policies significantly changed the government’s practices in the provision of

basic education in Tanzania. Two of the most important policy documents are explained

briefly in the following.

3.4.1.1 The Education and Training Policy

For more than thirty years after independence, Tanzania existed without a comprehensive

education and training policy. Education and training programs and practices were carried out

under the guidance of the short and long-term development plans, regulated by the Education

Act of 1962 (URT, 1995). It was realized that, while demands for better education have

increased, the existing educational plans and programs were narrow in scope and means –

they only emphasized formal education and vocational training, with little or no regard of the

need to integrate these plans with those for non-formal education and training (URT, 1995).

Thus;

Government now sees the importance of an education and training policy to guide,

synchronize and harmonize structures, plans and practices; to ensure access, equity and

quality at all levels; as well as proper and efficient mechanisms for management,

administration and financing of education and training (URT, 1995).

34

The establishment of the ETP therefore gave a new impetus for the development of non-

formal education in Tanzania. As discussed earlier, while a wide range of non-formal basic

education programs and activities were being conducted even before the ETP was developed,

they were not considered to be essential components of the education system. In the

education and training policy, non-formal education is conceived to encompass adult and

informal education (URT, 1995). Likewise, the policy calls for better linkages between the

formal and non-formal education sectors thus laying a better foundation for lifelong learning.

Furthermore, the policy encourages public-private partnership in the provision of education

which resulted in a wide range of non-formal basic education being established by local,

national and international NGOs.

3.4.1.2 The Adult and NFE Development Strategy

With the ETP as the overall policy document for education and training in the country, the

government decided to develop the ANFES in order to accelerate the effort towards

realization of UPE. This was partly a response to the Non-formal Education Status Report of

2002 which revealed that, with more than 10 years since EFA was declared, there were still

about 3 million students with special learning needs who could not be met through the formal

education system, and the illiteracy rate was increasing (Mushi et al., 2002). The report

further revealed the potentials of NFE which could help in addressing these problems and

other challenges facing educational development in the country. The overall objective of

ANFES was to ensure:

..in partnership with the civil society, that out-of-school children, youth and adults have access

to quality basic learning opportunities, especially girls, women, disadvantaged groups and

nomads, with a view to improve the literacy level by 20%, and reducing the backlog of out-of-

school children by mainstreaming at least the 11-13 year olds of the targeted groups; thus

contributing to the creation of a lifelong learning society, improvement in people’s livelihood,

and to an increased awareness and prevention of HIV/AIDS (URT, 2003:2).

The strategy called for adequate funding in order to expand and strengthen the existing

complementary basic education programs - COBET, Integrated Community-Based Adult

Education (ICBAE) and Appropriate Cost-Effective Centres of Education within School

System (ACCESS). These programs were already operating in some rural areas and

demonstrated good experiences (Mushi et al., 2002).

35

3.5 Diversity of NFE in Tanzania

Provision of non-formal basic education is currently implemented by the government in

collaboration with a wide range of local, national and international NGOs. According to

Mushi et al. (2002), NFE programs are not meant to be a parallel system of the formal

primary school. The two systems are meant to complement each other and be linked to other

social development programs in the community in order to ensure sustainability. In practice,

however, it appears that the programs, especially those operated by NGOs, usually lack

synergy with the formal system and operate in an uncoordinated manner, with little or no

guidance from the government (Mushi et al., 2002; McPherson, 2007). The local, national

and international NGOs run and support a large number of non-formal basic education

programs, but most of them relay on external financial resources which makes them

vulnerable in terms of sustainability (Mushi et al., 2002). As one would expect, due to the

lack of sustainable funding, a number of NFE programs and activities which were established

and run by NGOs earlier on have been phased out even though there is evidence that their

contribution to ensuring access to basic education to out-of-school children and youth is still

needed.

The government supports a number of non-formal basic education programs, including

COBET and ICBAE, which are currently provided throughout the country. The XPRIZE

project on the other hand, as will be discussed below, is largely funded by international

NGOs and, being a pilot project, it is targeted to specific rural areas in Tanga and Arusha

regions.

3.5.1 COBET: Its Commencement and Objectives

COBET was conceived as part of the Tanzanian Government effort to translate into reality its

commitment to the EFA agenda and other human rights-related conventions that it had

ratified. In the mid-1990s the government realized that, while striving to have all school age

children in school by 2005, there were already almost 3 million children and adolescents who

were out of primary schools when they were supposed to be in school – the majority of whom

being girls and boys from hard-to-reach areas. COBET was therefore initiated to offer these

out-of-school and older-for-grade children and adolescents a rare second chance to acquire an

education (Musaroche, and Mdachi, 2005).

36

The program was initiated in 1997 by the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, in

collaboration with UNICEF, in order to provide quality basic education as well as life and

survival skills to the children and adolescents who had either never enrolled in formal

schools or had dropped out of the schools for various reasons. It was intended to facilitate

mainstreaming into the formal schooling system of such children and adolescents, after

completing a three-year course and upon passing a promotional examination accredited by

the National Examinations Council of Tanzania. The Tanzania Institute of Education (TIE)

was mandated to develop a responsive three-year curriculum and instructional materials

which would suit the needs of the target group. Using the formal primary school curriculum

as a starting point, TIE was required to develop a COBET curriculum characterized by

participatory teaching and learning approaches.

Between 1997 and 2001, COBET was run as a pilot phase in 50 centres in five selected

districts namely Kisarawe, Songea Rural, Ngara, Musoma Rural and Masasi (see Figure 3.1).

The centres were characterized by close proximity from the children’s homes; safe and secure

learning environments (including absence of corporal punishment); a child-centred pedagogy;

a learner-decided daily schedule; no school fees; no uniforms; and free provision of

teaching/learning materials. In most of these districts, COBET learners were identified

through community sensitization meetings and school mapping exercises. Many of the

learners were brought to register with the centres by their parents, guardians, religious leaders

or came on their own (Massawe et al., 2000; Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003)

Each of the pilot COBET centres was provided with three facilitators, one trained teacher

from a nearby school and two paraprofessional facilitators. The paraprofessionals were

interviewed and selected by a panel of educational officials from the district education office.

The former were required to possess at least ordinary level secondary education and be ready

to work in accordance with the COBET philosophy. The facilitators received pre-service and

regular in-service trainings to help them effectively deliver the intended curriculum. The

paraprofessionals were receiving monthly honoraria from the district councils while the

trained teachers were on the government pay roll (Massawe et al., 2000; Galabawa and

Lwaitama, 2003)

Resources for implementation of the pilot program were sourced from the government of

Tanzania, supported by several development partners led by UNICEF. Other development

37

partners include the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, the Canadian

International Development Agency, and the Japanese Government. Apart from paying

honoraria and salaries to the facilitators through the district councils, the Ministry of

Education and Vocational Training was responsible for providing ongoing technical support

to the facilitators and the district officials. The village communities were responsible for

contributing resources for construction of the centre room/building or at least to make sure

that there was a decent building available for COBET activities within their locality

(Massawe et al., 2000; Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003).

The overall management of the pilot program was assigned to the office of the Chief

Education Officer at the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training. COBET classes and

centres were administered through the District Education Office and the COBET committees

at the village level. The committees had authority to make autonomous decisions on such

issues as holding responsible the parents whose children did not attend school; community

sensitization; resource mobilization and utilization; as well as monitoring and evaluation of

the centre functioning. They were also involved in hiring and firing of the facilitators and in

other areas in which they could mobilize the community to generate extra payment for

facilitators perceived to perform outstandingly (Massawe et al., 2000; Galabawa and

Lwaitama, 2003).

Based on an evaluation report by Galabawa (2003), the pilot program made an impressive

contribution to the provision of quality basic education in Tanzania. The data show that, at

the end of the pilot phase, a total of 1,530 children and adolescents (54% boys and 46% girls)

had been reached by the program including 449 orphans (173 girls and 276 boys). More

importantly, the program was also reported to perform well in qualitative terms. For example,

some of the COBET learners who sat for the PSLE after studying at COBET centres for three

years achieved results similar to those who studied for seven years in the formal schooling

system (Galabawa, 2003). Similarly, in some districts, such as Masasi and Kisarawe, the

majority of the Cohort I COBET learners were reported to pass the National Standard IV

Examination and so were mainstreamed into the formal primary school Standard V (Massawe

et al., 2000).

On the other hand, the pilot phase reported very high unit costs per student educated through

the program. These were estimated to be around US$166 a year as compared to US$70 a year

38

for primary education in the formal schools and US$ 267 for formal secondary education

(Galabawa, 2003). Such high unit costs could be explained by the teacher-pupil ratios in

COBET centres which were around 1:20 compared with 1:45 in the formal primary schools.

The costs were also associated with the facilitators’ pre-service training and regular in-service

training; their honoraria; development and testing of the learning materials; as well as

revising and distribution of the materials.

Following the success of the COBET pilot phase, the Ministry of Education and Vocational

Training within the framework of PEDP, decided to scale up the program to all districts of

Tanzania. Because of the high unit cost of the pilot program, its expansion had to feature a

number of significant changes. First, COBET classes and centres began to be established

either within existing formal primary schools or by non-governmental, community-based or

faith-based organizations. Second, the management of a COBET classes now became the

responsibility of the school committee of the school in which there was a COBET class or

which was nearest to a COBET centre. Third, the funding and overall technical support

became the responsibility of the district governments which were directed to finance the

COBET program through the general budget (Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003).

Some of the implications of these changes were that there were insufficient teaching and

learning materials. Also, because COBET is now supported through the general government

budget, funding became uncertain and payment of facilitators’ honoraria unreliable.

Furthermore, the district education officials could not effectively monitor and evaluate the

program.

3.5.2 Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE)

The Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) was a pilot NFE project which was

initiated in Zanzibar in 2006 and implemented through 2011, along with a sister project

called Zanzibar Teacher Upgrading through Radio (ZTUR), by the Education Development

Centre, Inc. (EDC) in collaboration with Zanzibar’s Ministry of Education and Vocational

Training (MoEVT), and sponsored by the United States Agency for International

Development (USAID) (EDC and USAID, 2009; EDC Inc., 2014).

According to EDC Inc. (2014), the two projects were intended to reach the following goals:

39

Improving access to quality math, literacy and life skills instruction and materials for

underserved young children (preschool to grade two)

Developing a quality distance and open learning program through which in-service

early childhood teachers can upgrade their skills and work towards preschool

accreditation; and

Building the capacity of Zanzibar’s MoEVT staff in the area of early childhood

development (ECD) and education (pp. 1-2)

Educational activities specific to the RISE project included developing and piloting three

series of Tucheze Tujifunze4 (Tu Tu) Interactive Audio Instruction5 (IAI) programs for

preschool, Standard I and Standard II students, including those in formal and non-formal

settings, with accompanying instructional and learning materials; establishing TuTu centres

in areas with limited access to formal primary schools; training pre-school and early grade

educators (fromboth formal and non-formal settings) to teach numeracy, literacy and life

skills; producing interactive videos for guiding teacher professional development in teaching

English as a second language; and building the capacity of a MoEVT team to lead distance

and open learning for all of Zanzibar (EDC Inc., 2014:1-2).

By its closure in 2011, the RISE and ZTUR projects had recorded a number of achievements,

including good learning outcomes in basic numeracy and literacy skills amongst RISE

graduates, establishment of new RISE centres by the government, and more than 1,000

teachers/educators had received training on how to effectively teach literacy, numeracy and

life skills through radio instruction (EDC Inc., 2014).

3.5.3 XPRIZE: Its Commencement and Objectives

XPRIZE project is a test project implemented in Tanzania by UNESCO and WFP in

collaboration with MoEST and PO-RALG to promote early learning through innovative

technologies in the country. The project began in September 2017 and its “overall aim is to

4 Tucheze Tujifunze literally means Let’s play Let’s learn. It is a local name used to for Interactive Audio

Instruction (IAI). 5 IAI is an interactive teaching and learning pedagogy that promotes quality learning in diverse environments,

including those with shortages of qualified teachers, school infrastructure, and learning materials.

40

improve literacy and numeracy skills for children in remote and underprivileged communities

through innovative technologies” (UNESCO Tanzania website, accessed on 9.06.2019).

In 2014, the XPRIZE Foundation initiated the Global Learning XPRIXE which is a US$

15million five-year competition that challenged teams of Information Technology experts

from around the world to develop open-source software that will enable children aged 7-13

with limited access to schooling to teach themselves basic reading, writing and arithmetic. In

September 2017, the top five applications were announced and in December 2018 more than

2,500 children in 141 remote villages in Tanga and Arusha regions in Tanzania were

involved in testing each team’s application. In the end, the team that brings their cohort of

roughly 500 children to the highest levels of literacy will win the XPRIZE (XPRIZE

Foundation website, accessed on 9.23.2019).

In Tanga region, about 2,700 out-of-school children aged 7-13 from Lushoto, Muheza,

Pangani, Handeni, Korogwe, Mkinga and Kilindi districts (Figure 3.1) were given tablets

with the same type of application in order to teach themselves reading, writing and arithmetic

through games. The children come from 172 hamlets6 and in each hamlet a house was

selected where a solar power charging station and a computer saver were installed. The saver

is for capturing data about the children’s learning progress which happens automatically

when the tablets are being re-charged. To secure the charging system and the saver, the

houses where the system was installed would belong to the hamlet leader or other houses

chosen by the community members.

A respected man or woman from the community would be selected and trained on how to

help children re-charge their tablets and to follow-up with children who did not come to re-

charge their tablets for some days. He/she was also to contact a designated district

government official for assistance related to malfunctioning of tablets or the charging and

saver system. The person would be paid about Tanzania Shillings 150, 000/- (equivalent to

US$ 65) per month covered by UNESCO (KDC, 2019).

6 A hamlet is a sub-village with about 100 households. In the Tanzanian government structure, a hamlet is the

second lowest level of local government authority. A village is made up of at least two hamlets.

41

Figure 3. 2: Map of Tanga Region showing Districts with XPRIZE Program

In order to make sure that these ‘tablet children’ finally got mainstreamed to the formal

education system, the following plan was proposed:

Children aged 7-9 years who stay nearby formal primary schools will be enrolled to

primary level one (Standard I) in January 2020.

Children aged 7-9 years who stay far away from formal primary schools will be

enrolled in ‘attachment schools’ in January 2020. The community members are

responsible for constructing or offering a building where the children will continue

their studies. The ‘attachment schools’ will be under supervision by the nearest formal

primary schools which, among other things, will provide textbooks. The district

42

governments are responsible for employing teachers to teach in the ‘attachment

schools’ and the Ward Education Officers are charged to provide overall monitoring

of such schools.

Children aged 10-13 who stay nearby formal primary schools will take a test and

enrol in different levels of primary school depending on their performance in the test.

Children aged 10-13 who stay far away from formal primary schools will be going to

the ‘attachment schools’.

Children aged 14-18 who stay nearby formal primary schools will be going to

COBET classes (as COBET classes are often located in the primary school premises).

In case there are no COBET classes, the district government will be expected to find

ways to make sure such children continue learning.

Children aged 14-18 who stay far away from formal primary schools will be enrolled

in ‘attachment schools’ as COBET learners (KDC, 2019).

As indicated earlier, the main partners in this project are XPRIZE Foundation, UNESCO,

WFP, MoEST and PO-RALG. UNESCO leads the educational aspects of the field test in

collaboration with MoEST and PO-RALG. Part of what UNESCO does is to oversee ‘End

Line Assessments’ which include ‘cognitive assessment and Socio-Emotional Development’

of the participants. WFP, on the other hand, is managing logistics and ICT aspects of the field

test, including installation of solar power charging stations for the tablets (UNESCO Dar,

2019). The government of Tanzania through MoEST and PO-RALG monitors the project

progress and provides technical support through Ward Education Officers (WEO7) and

Information Communication and Technology officers related to the tablets and the solar

power charging stations. The government has also committed to make sure that the children

used in the test project are mainstreamed to formal primary education schools and/or COBET

learning centers (KDC, 2019).

3.6 Summary

The chapter has presented a brief description of Tanzania’s educational system and its

associated challenges to achieving quality education for all, including an estimated number of

out-of-school children in recent years. Furthermore, the chapter posits that NFE programs and

7 A Ward Education Officer (WEO) is the government official who is in charge of schools and educational activities in that area

43

activities targeting children of school-going age in Tanzania started to emerge from the early

1990s after the country’s macro socio-economic policy reforms following adoption of the

IMF and World Bank SAP and other international development agendas such as EFA and the

MDGs. Prior to the macro socio-economic policy reforms and the international development

agendas which gave rise to some specific policies for NFE, such type of education was

almost synonymous with adult education and was guided by the overall ETP.

The chapter has further indicated that, while there is a variety of NFE programs and activities

providing basic education to out-of-school children and adolescents in Tanzania, COBET is

the main one supported by the government. The majority of others are run by NGOs with

heavy dependency on funding from local, national and international organizations, posing a

big challenge to the issue of sustainability.

In the following chapter, some theoretical issues and concepts will be discussed to provide an

analytical frame for collecting and analyzing data pertaining to the effectiveness of NFE in

Tanzania, including their success and challenges in order to provide suggestions for

improvement.

44

CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

In this chapter, some theoretical issues and concepts that guide this work will be discussed.

The chapter begins with a presentation of the Social Reproduction Theory as the main theory

guiding the study, followed by discussion of its relevance to the study. As Bryman puts it:

Theory is important to the social research because it provides a backcloth and rationale

for the research that is being conducted. It also provides a framework within which social

phenomena can be understood and the research findings can be interpreted (Bryman,

2008:6).

Following the theory is the conceptual framework, which is a set of key concepts that have

been frequently used in the study, especially in the course of collecting, analysing and

interpreting the data.

4.1 The Social Reproduction Theory

According to reproduction theorists, schools are not institutions of equal opportunity but

mechanisms for perpetuating social inequalities through reproduction of dominant ideologies,

forms of knowledge, and the skills needed to maintain the social division of labour (Collins,

2009; Fergus, 2016). Fergus elaborates that:

A reproduction framework implies that in order to understand the intent of schools, it

is necessary to analyse the ways schools operate as agents of social and cultural

reproduction. This theoretical lens seeks to illustrate schools’ role in reproducing class

division, gender binaries, and racial/ethnical stratification. It also illuminates the

ideological conviction of class and power and how they shape educational

experiences especially through the hidden curriculum. Schools can thus be seen as

active agents in the reproduction of social inequality (Fergus, 2016:121).

In defining the concept ‘social reproduction’, the term ‘social’ may be interpreted variably

based on systems or context within which it is being discussed, but what is being reproduced

is usually related to hierarchies of classes and occupational status (Demaine, 2003). While

there are various social institutions which contribute to the process of social reproduction, the

significance of school and education programs as active agents for reproduction rests on their

ability to impact individual’s learning outcomes including ‘educational qualifications and

45

appropriate attitudes and values’ which, eventually, determines individuals’ occupations

which are competitive and hierarchical in terms of desirability, social status, pay and so forth

(Demaine, 2003; Bourdieu, 2006; Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2006).

Social reproduction in schools and educational programs occurs through legitimation of

ideologies such as nationalism, educational opportunity, meritocracy and achievement

ideology (Bowles and Gintis, 1976 cited in Fergus, 2016:121). Educational practices based

on these ideologies include special education classification, segregated classes, gifted

program placement, and alternative schools for students with problem behaviour (ibid). As

such ideologies get absorbed into educational practices in schools and education programs,

the education stakeholders including teachers, learners and parents tend to continuously

frame issues such as poor quality learning outcomes as a problem of individual students and

not of the system; and such ideologies normalize existing educational practices and routines –

such as ineffective pedagogical approaches - as rationalized structures (ibid).

4.1.1 Relevance of the Theory to this Study

The social reproduction theory implies that there is a hierarchy of educational provisions and

that the poor and marginalized groups do not get access to the best schools but use poor

quality schools (Collins, 2009; Fergus, 2016). Poor quality NFE programs and activities

which are targeted to the poor out-of-school children and adolescents, such as COBET and

XPRIZE learners, do not help to uplift them from their deprivation, instead they basically

keep them at the same level of poverty (Hoppers, 2006).

As presented in Chapter One, the effectiveness of NFE as a strategy for providing quality

basic education to out-of-school children and other marginalized groups in Tanzania, like in

many other Sub-Saharan African countries, is highly questionable because this type of

education, in comparison with the mainstream formal education, is socially less valued and

would often receive far less or no funding and other resources needed to ensure a teaching

and learning process of good quality (Hoppers, 2006; ADEA, 2012; Yasunaga, 2014). In that

sense, unless NFE programs and activities, such as COBET and XPRIZE, manage to produce

graduates with high quality knowledge, skills and attitudes to enable them to compete

effectively in the labour market, such programs are essentially contributing to reproduction of

inequalities of opportunity in Tanzania.

46

The contribution of NFE to reproduction of inequalities in Tanzania can also be examined in

relation to the changing nature of NFE programs and activities, and the intents of

international organizations as the main funders of NFE in the country. As alluded to in

Chapter One, since the early 1990s and following significant socio-economic policy reforms

which prompted the establishment of NFE programs in the country, while a number of such

programs and activities were reported to have demonstrated effectiveness in providing quality

basic education to out-of-school children and adolescents especially at initial stages – for

instance ACCESS8, BEF9 and CCF10 (Bhalalusesa, 2003; Mushi et al., 2002), it is striking

that most of them merely operated for some years as a pilot project with new ones being

established by the same funders, instead of mobilizing and investing adequate resources in

scaling up the ones that proved to be effective. Just as Hoppers (2006:41) asks whether NFE

is “designed to maintain an unjust socio-economic order within countries and sustain

conditions of external dependency”, it is worthwhile investigating whether the current NFE

programs and activities like COBET and XPRIZE make effective contributions to achieving

quality basic education for all in Tanzania or whether they actually perpetuate inequalities

amongst the poor and marginalized groups who cannot access the best educational

opportunities in the country.

4.2 Conceptual Framework

The following subsections present the key concepts that guided this study, especially in

presenting and analysing the research findings. The central ideas behind this framework are

that education of a good quality is a human right (UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007), and that an

educational program (such as COBET and XPRIZE) should be regarded as a system which

can only operate effectively and produce high quality results if all its building blocks – the

inputs, process, context and outcomes – function in an interrelated manner and are regarded

as equally important (UNESCO, 2004). Such ideas and concepts are discussed further in the

8 ACCESS (Appropriate Cost-effective Centers for Education within the School System) was a pilot NFE project

initiated by the Action Aid Tanzania, funded by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development

(DFID). It was implemented in some districts of the country between 1996 and 2002 to help increase learning

opportunities for children in areas where there are no schools. 9 BEF (Basic Education Fellowship) was another pilot NFE project funded by Care Tanzania, which aimed at

improving access to quality basic education for children and adults through building organizational and

institutional capacity of local NGOs. 10 CCF (Children for Children’s Future) is an NGO founded in 1994 in Arusha region to help street children gain

education, training and skills to make themselves self-reliant

47

next subsections, beginning with Education as a Human Right followed by the Factors that

Determine the Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE programs.

4.2.1 Education as a Human Right

Education has been recognized as a human right since the adoption of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. This Declaration was followed by a series of related

international conventions and treaties – including the International Convention on the Rights

of the Child, adopted in 1989 - which finally established an entitlement to free and

compulsory primary education for all children (UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007).

The right to education was further emphasized during the WCEFA in 1990 in Jomtien and in

the Dakar Framework of Action resulting from the follow-up international forum held in

Dakar in 2000. The conference participants – the government officials responsible for

education from almost all nations of the world; representatives of such international

organizations as UNICEF, UNESCO, the World Bank, UNDP and United Nations Fund for

Population Activities (UNFPA); bilateral donor agencies and many international NGOs –

unanimously declared that access to quality basic education is a basic human right for all

young people and adults. The emphasis was put on learning and not merely schooling

(WCEFA, 1990; WCEFA, 2000).

In order to facilitate a better understanding of the rights approach to education, individuals

and organizations who advocate for this perspective have been proposing conceptual

frameworks which would help policymakers and other stakeholders comprehend the elements

that need to be observed in planning for and provision of education. Table 4.1 summarizes

the dimensions for the rights-based approach to education as developed by UNICEF

/UNESCO (2007:28). As can be seen from this table, the term right to education include

access to education of good quality in an environment that guarantees learners’ safety, health

and respect.

48

Table 4. 1: Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Rights-Based Approach to

Education

1. The right of access to education • Education throughout all stages of

childhood and beyond

• Availability and accessibility of education

• Equality of opportunity

2. The right to quality education • A broad, relevant and inclusive curriculum

• Rights-based learning and assessment

• Child-friendly, safe and healthy

environments

3. The right to respect in the learning

environment

• Respect for identity

• Respect for participation rights

• Respect for integrity

Source: UNICEF/UNESCO (2007)

Katarina Tomasevski recommended key dimensions for understanding the rights-based

approach to education in terms of what she calls “governmental obligations” (Tomasevski,

2001). According to her, there can be no right to education without corresponding obligations

to governments and other important stakeholders including teachers and parents. The

governments have the obligation to make education available, accessible, acceptable and

adaptable (Tomasevski, 2001). In summary these dimensions imply that governments have

the responsibility to establish (or allow free establishment of) schools, fund them and ensure

availability of competent educators; make education compulsory for all; ensure that the

education provided is of acceptable relevance and quality; and make sure that it is flexible

enough to a accommodate the diverse learning needs of learners.

The government of Tanzania also has an obligation to ensure availability, accessibility,

acceptability and adaptability of basic education for all. The right to education was enshrined

in its Constitution of 1977 as amended in 1998, which states that:

49

Every citizen has the right to self-education, and every citizen shall be free to pursue

education in a field of his choice up to the highest level according to his merit and ability

(URT, 1998:16)

Equally, as a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948

and a participant in the WCEFA of 1990 in Jomtien and in the Dakar World Forum on

Education in 2000, the Tanzanian government has signed up to the international obligation to

ensure execution of such international conventions and agreements. This includes ensuring

equitable provision of quality basic education as a human right through removal of any kind

of disparities regarding access to quality education amongst different social groups such as

the hard-to-reach communities, orphans, disabled and nomads.

As discussed further in Chapter Four, the government of Tanzania has indeed demonstrated

significant efforts in ensuring access to quality basic education, as demonstrated through

major socio-economic policy reforms in late 1990s, followed by allocation of significant

portions of the national budget being directed to the education sector (URT, 2012). The two

programs being studied in this work (COBET and XPRIZE) are a product of the government

socio-economic policy reforms, and were established in the context of the human right to

education. They were aimed at reaching the marginalized children and youth and give them

their right to quality basic education of which they would otherwise be denied. Together with

other objectives, this study is intended to investigate the extent to which the human rights

principles are observed in the course of implementing the programs.

4.2.2 Factors that Determine the Effectiveness of COBET and

XPRIZE

Figure 4.1 shows the conceptual framework which has been developed to provide overall

guidance regarding data collections, data analysis and discussion of findings in this study.

The framework has mainly resulted from the “Framework for understanding education

quality” developed by the EFA Global Monitoring Team and published by UNESCO (2004).

Other elements have been adopted from a study on “Impact Assessment of COBET” by

Galabawa and Lwaitama (2003).

The framework has been developed based on the idea behind the establishment of the two

NFE programs being studied (COBET and XPRIZE), taking into consideration their

objectives, the target groups and their general learning organization. The general assumption

50

is that the effectiveness of an education program is determined by the quality of its inputs, the

quality of the teaching and learning process, the context within which the program operates,

as well as the quality of its outcomes. These factors operate in an interrelated manner.

The framework is also in line with the rights-based approach to education UNICEF/UNESCO

(2007: 28) suggest a “holistic approach to education” in order to realize the goal for the right

to education. According to UNICEF/UNESCO, a holistic approach to education means to

ensure the right of access to education, the right to quality education, and respect for human

rights in the teaching/learning environment and during the teaching and learning process

(UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007). The latter aspect includes ensuring that learners’ rights are

observed, taking into account such elements as clean and safe learning environments as well

as avoiding actions that humiliate human dignity such as the use of corporal punishment.

The framework for the study provides a simplified version of the holistic approach to

education. The elements of the four building blocks (the inputs, processes, context and

outcomes) of the framework will guide the analysis of the extent to which, for example,

learners rights are observed in the teaching and learning process; how the government

exercises its legal duties for education; what role communities play to ensure realization of

the goal for human rights in education, to education and through education. Each main

component of the framework is further discussed in the following:

4.2.2.1 Inputs

These are the human and material resources needed to support the teaching and learning

process - including the learners, teachers, administrators, classrooms/learning centres,

textbooks and libraries, to mention but a few. Other inputs may not be tangible, yet are

equally important. Such inputs include, for instance, school/learning centre governance and

administration. For the COBET and XPRIZE programs, learner characteristics were used to

decide textbook selection, quality and quantity of facilitators, daily classroom schedule and

the entire learning organization at learning centres. Other important inputs for the two

programs included support from the community around (Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003;

URT, 2001; Helgesson, 2001).

51

Figure 4. 1: Factors that Determine the Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE

Source: Galabawa and Lwaitama (2003); UNESCO (2004).

4.2.2.2 Process

When quality human and material resources are made available, another category of factors

that determine the realization of the expected outcomes is the quality of the teaching and

learning processes. As discussed in UNESCO (2004), it is during the teaching and learning

process that ‘the impact of curricula is felt, the teacher methods work well or not, and the

Inputs

Learner

Characteristics: age,

socio-economic

background,

childhood care

Human and Material

resources:

Teaching/Learning

materials, quality

and quantity of

facilitators…

Central and Local

government support

Support from NGOs

organizations

Factors for Effective Process

at the School/Learning Centre

School/Centre Climate

o Learners’ rights

o Learners’ safety

o Learners’ health

Enabling Conditions

o Quality of facilitators

o Appropriate

compensatory measures

Teaching/Learning process

o Interactive

o Equity in participation

o Learner centeredness

Outputs/Outcome

Learners’

retention

Mastery of

basic

numeracy

and literacy

skills

Cohort

completion

rates

Transition to

formal

primary

schools

Context

Public expectations and recognition of the outcomes of NFE

Level of attention given to NFE

Existing education policies (relationship between the formal and non-formal education

sectors)

Public resources available

National governance and management strategies

Teachers’ views on NFE status

52

learners are motivated to participate and learn how to learn’ (p.37). The actual teaching and

learning processes - as they occur in a classroom/learning centre - include student time spent

learning, assessment methods, teaching styles, the language of instruction and classroom

organization strategies. Furthermore, it is at this stage that the extent to which human rights

in and through education are adhered to, can be assessed.

4.2.2.3 Outcomes

The outcomes of education should be assessed in the context of its agreed objectives

(UNESCO, 2004). COBET and XPRIZE programs were established in the context of the

EFA agenda – to ensure access to quality basic education for all in Tanzania (URT, 2003).

The outcomes of these programs should therefore be assessed in relation to two major issues

being addressed by the EFA agenda - equity and quality in basic education provision. There

is a broad range of education outcomes including actual learning achievement (such as

examination performance); creativity and emotional development; changes in attitudes,

values and behaviour (UNESCO, 2004) to mention but a few. Hoppers (2006) suggests that

for NFE programs like COBET and XPRIZE, it would be important to assess ‘self-esteem

and the social competences’ (emotional and personal development, creativity etc.). It would

also be important to point out the advantages of different pedagogical settings, methodologies

and styles as compared with those of regular schools. However, because of the resources

available for this study, only some actual learning outcomes (learners’ retention, cohort

completion rate, transition to formal primary schooling) will be assessed.

4.2.2.4 Context

This has to do with how social, cultural, economic, political and philosophical dynamics

within a society interact with educational provision in that society and how the outcomes of

education influence these dynamics. Links between education and society are strong and

influence one another (UNESCO, 2004; Kubow and Fossum, 2006). While education can

open up the minds of people to help them recognize different life options and opportunities,

resources for education are likely to be constrained in societies where poverty is widespread

(Robeyns, 2006; UNESCO, 2004). The COBET and XPRIZE programs were established for

the purpose of reaching marginalized groups and help them access quality basic education.

The realization of this purpose, however, depends on the social, cultural, economic and

philosophical context within which they are implemented. This includes issues, such as

53

public recognition of the programs, the kind of support the government and the entire

community offer to the programs, and other prevailing socio-economic circumstances.

4.3 Summary

One of the key concepts highlighted in this chapter is the role of schools and educational

programs in perpetuating various forms of inequalities in the society. Social reproduction

theorists posit that schools and educational programs are not always institutions of equal

opportunity, but can also be active agents for reproducing inequalities. The reproduction

occurs in different ways including legitimation of certain ideologies, restricting educational

opportunities of good quality and intended or unintended practices happening in schools or

classrooms which may, in turn, affect the learners in one way or another. Thus, NFE

programs and activities for out-of-school children and other disadvantaged groups can lead to

reproduction of poverty and inequalities especially if the education offered is of poor quality.

In comparison to formal education, NFE of poor quality has a higher potential of reproducing

inequalities because of the issues and concerns attached to it by the society.

Another key concept covered in this chapter is education as a human right. Out-of-school

children and adolescents deserve an education of good quality as their basic human right.

Quality of an educational program can be difficult to define, but it is universally accepted to

measure it through the quality of its inputs, processes, outcomes and the context where the

program is being implemented.

This framework has been essential for the collection of the data for the study. The details of

the research design and the methodology used appear in the following chapter.

54

CHAPTER FIVE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND

METHODOLOGY

This chapter explains the research design and methodology for the study. It begins with

highlighting the research procedures, followed by the study’s epistemological and ontological

orientations. The chapter continues with discussing how the study was designed to explore

the three research questions formulated in the introduction. It focuses particularly on reasons

for choosing the study location, the process of sampling research participants, and the data

collection tools. Furthermore, issues of validity and reliability of the data are discussed

together with ethical considerations and the limitations and delimitations of the study.

5.1 Research Procedure

The researcher started by scanning literature on NFE in general and particularly in Africa and

Tanzania. This was done in order to identify areas of interest and identify the need for further

research. After the formulation of the research purpose and its location, the research

questions were formulated and the data collection tools were developed which are explained

in details in section 5.6.

As part of preparations for field research, a letter was provided by the University of Oslo to

introduce the researcher as a student in the Master of Philosophy in Comparative and

International Education program, and to request relevant authorities to grant permission to

conduct the fieldwork. This introductory letter was attached to another request to the Tanga

Regional Administrative Secretary (RAS) for permission to conduct field work in Korogwe

district. RAS, again, contacted the Korogwe District Administrative Secretaries (DAS) for

permission for the fieldwork in their district and to offer support in the research process as

needed. The DAS granted the research permission as well as a letter of introduction to the

teachers, head teachers and other participants to the research. Copies of all the mentioned

letters have been attached as Appendices I-L.

Field data were collected between September 9 and September 30, 2019 using data collection

methods described in section 5.6. The actual amount of time used and the processes involved

in collecting the data have been highlighted as part of the description of the specific data

collection methods.

55

5.2 Ontological and Epistemological Orientations

All researches are guided by have underlying philosophical assumptions, commonly known

as paradigms, which are “a cluster of beliefs and dictates which for scientists in a particular

discipline influence what should be studied, how research should be done, and how results

should be interpreted” (Bryman, 2008:605). Paradigms are intrinsically associated with the

concepts ontology, which is the way the researcher defines the truth and reality;

epistemology, which is the process through which the researcher comes to know the truth and

reality, and methodology, which is the method used in conducting the research (Guba and

Lincoln, 1994; Abdulkareem et al., 2018).

Some widely used research paradigms include positivism, interpretivism and pragmatism.

Interpretivism, which relates to qualitative research, posits that there are differences between

people and objects of the natural sciences, and that meanings of social actions can be

subjective, multiple and socially constructed by social actors (Bryman, 2008; Feilzer, 2010).

Positivism, on the other hand, advocates that meanings are singular and objective and can

only be discovered through the application of the methods of the natural sciences (ibid). The

pragmatic paradigm, which is associated with mixed method research, sidesteps issues of

reality and truth and, instead, focuses on methodological quality recognizing that different

methods are appropriate for different situations (Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Patton, 2002).

The choice of the research design and methodology for this study are based on a pragmatic

stance. Given the key problem being investigated in this study – the effectiveness of NFE

programs as a policy strategy for delivering quality basic education to disadvantaged children

– there was need for a research design that would create opportunities to gather data from a

variety of groups of participants, while at the same time find ways to keep the data valid and

reliable. In that sense, as will be seen below, mixed method and tools were used in the

collection, analysis, and interpretation of the empirical data as well as the presentation the

research findings.

5.3 Research Strategy

The study employs a mixed method research strategy – meaning that both qualitative and

quantitative methods for data collection and analysis were used. While it has long been

known that a review of quantitative studies about a particular phenomenon combined with a

56

review of qualitative studies about the same phenomenon can provide richer insights and

raise more interesting questions for future research than if only one set of studies is

considered, researchers are increasingly combining both quantitative and qualitative methods

in the design of a single study (Patton, 2002; Gall et al., 2007; Bryman, 2008).

According to Bryman (2008), the decision on whether a study employs a qualitative or

quantitative strategy depends, among other things, on the role of theory in relation to the

research. According to him, a study under which theory leads to research observations and

findings is a quantitative study, whereas a study whose findings or observations lead to

creation of theory is a qualitative study.

In this study, the research was guided by theoretical and conceptual issues related to the

functioning and contribution of the two programs used as a case study (COBET and

XPRIZE). Qualitative methods were employed, namely semi-structured interviews, focus

group discussion and classroom observation, in order to capture opinions, views and feelings

of the informants in regards to the quality of the teaching and learning process as well as

opinions about what could be done to maximize the contribution of the said programs to

achieving quality basic education for all in Tanzania.

5.4 Study Location

The study was conducted in Korogwe which is one of eight district of the Tanga region in

North-East Tanzania. As seen in figure 5.1, Korogwe district is bordered by Lushoto,

Muheza, Handeni, Same and Simanjiro districts. It covers an area of 3,576 square kilometres

which is about 13% of the total land area of the region; located about 290 km from Dar es

Salaam. As per the last national census of 2012, Korogwe District has a total population of

242,038 people including 118,544 males and 123,494 females with the annual national

population growth rate being 2.7 (NBS, 2012). Administratively, the district is divided into

two sub-districts which are Korogwe District Council (KDC) and Korogwe Town Council

(KTC) with about 122 villages.

Based on annual statistics obtained from Korogwe government authorities during this study,

as of June 2019, the entire district has about 167 primary schools, 29 of them being under

directorship of the KTC and 139 being under KDC. There is a total of 72, 428 pupils in

Standard I-VII and there are 24 primary schools which have been designated as COBET

57

centers with a total of about 454 registered COBET learners (KDC, 2019). There are about 43

XPRIZE centers with a total of about 653 registered learners for COBET and XPRIZE

programs respectively (see Appendix N and Appendix O).

Figure 5. 1: Map of Korogwe showing Administrative Areas

Source: www.google.com, retrieved on 16.10.2019

5.4.1 Reasons for Choosing Korogwe

The main reason for choosing Korogwe district is that it is one of the districts with a good

number of COBET centres and one of the pilot districts for the new XPRIZE programs.

Furthermore, Korogwe is a relatively easily reachable district from Dar es Salaam (290km)

and from Tanga city (100km), with relatively better roads and other infrastructure than most

other districts of Tanzania. It even has better access to resources and facilities from Dar es

Salaam and Tanga than many other districts and is often regarded as an urban rather than a

58

rural district. However, there is evidence that Korogwe’s performance in the education sector

is not satisfactory. Based on PSLE Results for the years 2017 and 2018, administered by

NECTA, KDC is one of the poorly performing districts in Tanga region and country-wide.

According to URT (2018b), KDC was ranked 97th out of 158 districts in 2017 in Tanzania,

and 133rd out of 158 districts in 2018, with an average pass rate of 72.89%. This shows not

only the necessity of the selected NFE programs to help ameliorate the situation, but also the

relevance of the study.

5.5 Sampling of COBET Schools, XPRIZE Centers and

Participants

This study was conducted in six COBET classes located in six primary schools and six

XPRIZE learning centres located in six hamlets, in the Korogwe district. It was initially

planned to do random sampling of schools and learning centres based on the lists of

registered COBET and XPRIZE schools and centres operating in Korogwe (see Appendix N).

However, upon visiting some of the schools and centres, it turned out that few learners were

in attendance and those present were only males. Therefore, selection was instead done

through purposeful sampling of schools and centres with a sufficient number of attendees

including girls and boys.

For COBET, data were collected from five schools using questionnaires administered to head

teachers. Three of the six schools were purposefully selected for further collection of data

using interviews with teachers, as well as classroom observation, and focus group discussion

with learners. In addition, learners’ basic numeracy and literacy skills were assessed through

administering Uwezo11’s ALA tests (see further below). The three schools were purposefully

selected as they had the largest number of leaners, including girls and boys.

For the XPRIZE program, as described in section 3.6.3, there are no head teachers. Instead,

WEOs is the government official in charge for providing overall supervision of the program.

Even though the area selected for this research had more than six XPRIZE centres, it had

only two WEOs because it falls under only two administrative wards. In that sense, data for

11 Uwezo, meaning ‘capability’ in Kiswahili, is ‘a five year initiative’ that aims to improve competencies in

literacy and numeracy among children aged 6-16 years old in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Uwezo establishes

evidence (on whether children of school-going age are learning or not) by assessing literacy and numeracy levels

for children aged 6-16 years using a large, country-wide household based sample. Several annual rounds of the

Uwezo assessment have been successfully undertaken in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. In Tanzania, six rounds

of this assessment have been conducted between 2011 and 2015. (Accessed from www.uwezo.net on September

15, 2019)

59

this research was gathered through a questionnaire to the two WEOs; interviews with three

XPRIZE centres supervisors, observation and a focus group discussion with the learners in

one centre; and from assessing the learners’ basic numeracy and literacy skills through

administering Uwezo’s ALA tests to 14 boys and 10 girls.

Other participants included the District Adult Education Officers (DAEO12s) who were

selected in virtue of their administrative positions. Table 5.1 shows the projected and actual

number of participants in the two selected programmes. As can be seen, the majority of the

participants projected for this study were able to take part in the research process.

Table 5. 1: Projected and Actual Number of Participants in COBET and XPRIZE

COBET XPRIZE

Other Participants Projected Actua

l

% Projected

Actua

l

%

30 Learners 24 80 30 Learners 30 100 Projected Actual %

3 Teachers 3 100 03

Supervisors

3 100 2 DAEOs 2 100

6 Head teachers 5 83 2 WEOs 1 50 Total: 2 Total:

2

100

Total: 39 Total:

32

82 Total: 35 Total:

34

97

In efforts to protect the participants’ anonymity during the research process, special codes

were assigned to all participants, schools and centres used (Table 5.2). In order to

differentiate between COBET and XPRIZE learners, their codes have two letters with the

first one corresponding with the initial letter of their program name followed by the letter ‘L’

and serial numbers. The codes for the rest of the participants are the upper case letters of their

job titles followed by serial numbers. The codes for primary schools and XPRIZE centres are

respectively PS and XC, followed by serial numbers.

12 A district has several wards and hundreds of villages. DAEOs are in charge of Adult and Non-formal Education

in their Districts. Korogwe district has two DAEOs as it has two sub-districts as described in Section 5.4.

60

Table 5. 2: Coding System for Research Participants, Schools and Centres

Participants Codes

COBET Learners CL1, CL2, CL3…CL24

XPRIZE Learners XL1, XL2, XL3…XL30

Teachers T1, T2, T3

Supervisors S1, S2, S3

Head Teachers H1, H2, H3…H5

WEOs W1

DAEOs D1, D2

Primary Schools PS1,PS2, PS3…PS6

XPRIZE Centres XP1, XP2, XP3…XP6

5.6 Data Collection Methods and Instruments

A combination of methods was used to gather primary and secondary data for this study.

These included document review, observations, focus group discussion with COBET and

XPRIZE learners, semi-structured interviews with the children, teachers, supervisors and

district government officials, and questionnaires with teachers/head teachers and supervisors.

Furthermore, a test of all learners was administered to assess their abilities in literacy and

numeracy. The basic literacy and numeracy test and the other data collection methods are

described below.

5.6.1 Assessment Test on Basic Literacy and Numeracy Skills

The COBET and XPRIZE programs, as indicated earlier, are implementing educational

curricula which are recognized by the government of Tanzania, and their learners are required

to meet nationally accepted minimum learning outcomes before they get mainstreamed into

formal primary schools. Therefore, this study has used government-recognized tests to assess

the learning outcomes of COBET and XPRIZE learners on basic literacy and numeracy skills.

These tests were adapted from Uwezo’s country-wide study which was conducted in 2015 in

Tanzania to assess, among other things, the learning outcomes on basic literacy and

numeracy skills amongst children aged 7-16 years. The tests, which are collectively known as

61

“Uwezo Annual Learning Assessment (ALA) test”, were administered to 112,455 children

aged 7-16 years from 68,588 households in all districts of Tanzania (Uwezo, 2017).

Box 5. 1: Description of Uwezo Annual Learning Assessment (ALA) Tests

Source: Uwezo (2017).

The Uwezo tests are designed to assess basic literacy in Kiswahili and English and

numeracy skills of children aged 7-16 years. Specifically, the tests are set according

to the Standard 2 level curriculum in Tanzania, i.e., the level of competency that is

expected to be attained after completing two years of full-time primary education.

Thus, assuming education quality standards are maintained, one would expect that

most pupils enrolled in Standard 3 or above should be able to correctly answer all the

test questions.

All tests were developed in collaboration with primary school teachers, subject-

specific curriculum experts from the Tanzania Institute of Education (TIE ) and the

University of Dar es Salaam (language and mathematics departments), and assessment

experts from the National Examinations Council of Tanzania (NECTA). Three teams

of three people each were formed to prepare tests in Kiswahili, English and

numeracy.Both literacy tests (Kiswahili and English ones) have five competency

levels: i) non-reader; ii) able to read letters/sounds; iii) able to read words; iv) able to

read paragraphs; and v) able to read a short story. In addition, the Uwezo tests verify

whether the child comprehended the story by asking two comprehension questions.

The literacy tests were subjected to Type Token Ratio (TTR) calculations to balance

the number of words and the difficulty level between different test sets. The English

test sets were further subjected to the Flesch-Kincaid Readability test scale, which

determines the complexity or simplicity of paragraphs and stories according to a

selected level of testing. This helps to standardize the difficulty level of all test sets

within a given assessment year as well as across survey years.

The numeracy test has six competency levels: i) non-numerate; ii) number recognition;

iii) place value/greater than; iv) addition; v) subtraction; and vi) multiplication. The

numeracy test also evaluated skills in ethno-mathematics.

As in previous years, a bonus question was included in the assessment in Tanzania to

assess children’s general knowledge. All assessed children were given three pictures

of people with different occupations and asked to recognize their occupation based on

their clothing and the work they were doing in the pictures. The tests were subjected

to three pre-tests in three different socioeconomic contexts.

62

The tests were developed by teams of assessment experts from well-respected government

educational institutions in the country. They were piloted in a few areas before being used in

the country-wide assessment. Uwezo’s own description of the process involved in the ALA

tests development; the competency levels assessed in each case; the target group and the

expected performance bench mark, is provided in Box 1.

For the purpose of this study the very same tests were used (see Appendix H.1-H.4). The tests

were administered to a total of 48 participants including 24 COBET learners (19 boys and 5

girls) and 24 XPRIZE learners (14 boys and 10 girls). All learners in both programs met the

requirements used in the Uwezo country-wide ALA tests conducted in 2015. All except one

learner are within the required age range (between 7-16 years) and have been in the two NFE

programs for at least two years. Additional characteristics of the participants will be

presented in Chapter Six.

Two government officials from Korogwe District Council, one from the Information

Technology department and the other from the Community Development department, were

asked to serve as research assistants in administering the Uwezo ALA tests to the COBET

and XPRIZE learners. Both were former teachers who currently have administrative roles at

the district level. These individuals were selected by virtue of their role as the points of

contact for the XPRIZE program in this district. One day before the first assessment day, a

meeting was held with the two assistants to describe the assessment goals and process and to

clarify roles for each of them. However, the assistants were not given access to the tests until

the testing time. On the assessment day, one of them assisted the researcher in administering

the literacy assessment, while the other assisted with logistical organizations of the process

including handling supplies to the learners, making sure that learners did not copy answers

from each other, assisting the learners when needed, and collecting the completed assessment

papers.

As described earlier, XPRIZE is a pilot project being implemented by international NGOs,

The role of the district officials has mainly been to assist in logistics and communication

between the NGOs and the XPRIZE learning centres. In that sense, the officials have no

interest in whether XPRIZE learners pass the Uwezo ALA tests or not. Similarly, because

COBET classes are located in formal primary schools under supervision of the school head

teachers, the two government officials have no direct role. Their engagement in this part of

63

the study, therefore, did not affect the independence of the study or the quality of the data

collected.

Before administering the tests, their purpose was explained to the learners and a safe and

friendly environment was created for one-on-one assessments of the learners. The children

(participants) were assured that there would be no consequences if they gave incorrect

answers to some of the questions and that everyone should feel free to indicate if s/he did not

understand the questions. They were also promised a small gift upon completion of the tests –

a pen and a sweet.

The numeracy and literacy tests were printed separately. The literacy (Kiswahili and English)

tests were administered first, followed by the numeracy ones. Learners were called

individually to first be assessed on abilities to read letters, words, and paragraphs of

Kiswahili and English languages respectively. The researcher and one of the research

assistants gave individual scores on each learner’s ability to read letters, words and

paragraphs. The scores were later used to compute the average score for each learner on this

assessment category. After that assessment level, a learner was given a pen and shown a page

with short stories (one in English and another one in Kiswahili). The learner was to read the

story and answer two questions as a way of assessing their ability to comprehend stories. The

learners were also given an option to fill-in their age and gender in a space provided at the top

of the test paper. The same process was done for the numeracy tests. Each learner was

expected to take up to 2 hours for both tests i.e. 1 hour for the literacy tests and 1 other hour

for the numeracy tests. This amount of time is the same as that used to take tests in formal

primary schools in Tanzania.

The COBET learners were tested either in their own classroom (asking other learners to stay

outside and far away from the classroom during the one-on-one reading assessment phase so

that they could not overhear each other). For the XPRIZE learners who do not have

classrooms as they learn on their own (with tablets), the assessment was conducted under a

tree or in corridors of neighbouring houses depending on availability. These places were

prepared ahead of time to make sure that each learner had something to sit on – local stools,

benches or chairs – borrowed from the communities. They were asked to switch off tablets

and put them on their laps to help in writing responses to the test questions. The process of

64

marking and recording scores for the written tests was done by the researcher. This was

followed by the data analysis process as presented in section 6.5.

5.6.2 Questionnaires

Questionnaires are much used in research because of their ability to collect large amount of

standardized data (Kothari, 2004; Gall et al., 2007). In this study, given their potential

advantage mentioned, questionnaires were used to collect data on COBET and XPRIZE

programs from head teachers and WEOs respectively. As indicated in earlier chapters, most

COBET classes are located within primary school premises, with the head teachers given the

responsibility to supervise all operations taking place in the school, including COBET

classes. Given their crucial role in COBET, it was important to collect their opinions on how

the program functions especially in regards to the key issues being investigated as described

in the conceptual framework in Chapter Four. Such issues and concepts include the health

and safety of the learning environment, availability and quality of teaching-learning resources

as well as the program’s strength and weaknesses.

For the XPRIZE program, as highlighted in section 5.6.1, questionnaires were used to collect

data from the WEOs as in charge of supervising all educational activities in his area. In both

cases, the questionnaires were largely self-administered but, in some cases, phone calls were

also used to either re-administer the questionnaire in case a respondent failed to return the

first one or to follow-up on certain questions or issues that needed clarification from the

respondents.

5.6.3 Document Review

This method involved review of relevant documents and existing policies for provision of

basic education in general, and those related to the NFE programs for children of school-

going age in Tanzania and beyond. As Patton (2002) suggests, documents are used not only

as valuable sources of secondary data but also as stimulus for inquiry that can be followed up

through observations, interviews and other methods of data collection. In this study, the key

Tanzanian policy documents reviewed include the Tanzania ETP of 1995, The Tanzania

Mainland Non-Formal Education Status Report of 2002, Education Sector Development

Program and the ANFEDP. Included are also various studies and reports on COBET and

65

XPRIZE programs, as well as data from the Tanzania Basic Education Statistics reports

especially those related to basic education enrolment trends.

5.6.4 Interviews

This method was chosen in order to facilitate interactive discussion with individual

respondents. It was also chosen as a tool for in-depth investigation of data collected by using

questionnaires and document review. Various researchers advocate that qualitative

interviews, if properly administered, enable researchers to interpret the social world from

respondents’ point of view – which is an important characteristic of qualitative research

(Patton, 2002; Kothari, 2004; Bryman, 2008). In this study, a list of probing questions were

prepared (interview guides – see Appendices C-E) which covered all the key concepts being

investigated, as highlighted in the conceptual framework described in section 4.3.2. Such

concepts include quality of the inputs (such as learner characteristics, teaching and learning

materials, and qualification of teachers/facilitators); quality of the outputs and outcomes

(especially on learners’ access to the programs, their completion rates, as well as transition to

formal primary schools) and the context – which includes the role of the government, the role

of the community, existing policies, and relationship with the formal education system.

The respondents were three COBET teachers, three XPRIZE supervisors and two DAEOs. As

shown in Table 5.2 their corresponding codes were respectively T1-3, X1-3 and D1-2 which

were used in data analysis and presentation. As regards gender, five of the respondents were

females with two of them being COBET teachers and three being XPRIZE supervisors. Three

respondents were males including 1 COBET teacher and 2 DAEOs. COBET and XPRIZE

respondents were interviewed using different interview guides as they play different roles in

supporting the programs. The DAEOs were interviewed using the same interview guide

because they have the same role.

In each case, the same questions were asked of all respondents in order to ensure continuity.

Follow-up questions were asked when there was a need for clarifications from the

respondents or when new information emerged. The interviews were done in a flexible

manner that permitted questions to be asked when relevant for the natural flow of the

discussion instead of consecutively according to the interview guide. This led to a lively

interaction during which the knowledge, experiences and feelings of the respondents could be

66

captured. Each interview lasted for about 35 minutes. Six of the interviews were voice-

recorded while two of them rejected to be voice-recorded and notes were taken instead.

The interviews were conducted in Kiswahili language and the texts were transcribed in the

same language and then translated into English. This was done by the researcher who is

fluent in both languages. In the presentation of the data (Chapter Six), English has been kept

in the main text while the Swahili quotes are presented as footnotes.

5.6.5 Focus Group Discussions

Focus Group Discussions work in the same way as structured or semi-structured interviews

except that the participants are interviewed in a group (as opposed to one-on-one).This

method was used to hear the voices of COBET and XPRIZE learners in regards to how the

programs function, their strengths and weaknesses and what needs to be done to maximize

the contribution of the two programs to the efforts of ensuring access to quality basic

education for all in Tanzania.

One focus group discussion was held per program. For COBET, eight children including six

boys and two girls in one of the primary schools participated in the discussion, while seven

children including five boys and two girls participated the discussion in one of the XPRIZE

centres. Their codes were CL1-8 and XL1-7 for COBET and XPRIZE programs respectively

and appear in the data analysis and presentation in Chapter Six.

In order to maximally engage and make the children feel comfortable, they were first briefly

introduced to the researcher’s own educational journey, including school start at the age of 10

years old like some of them. He also highlighted the common Tanzanian saying – Elimu

Haina Mwisho (Education Has No End - translation by the researcher) as a way of keeping

their inspiration to education. Having introduced the purpose of the conversation and asking

for their full participation, candies were shared and they were prompted to suggest rules

which would help keep the conversation meaningful and respectful to all. Some of the rules

were the need to listen to each other, to be free to ask questions, and to not laugh when

someone made a comment. To better guide the conversation and keep track of the issues

under discussion, a list of prepared questions was freely followed (see Appendix F). As in

interviews, the focus group discussion questions were also asked in Kiswahili language.

67

5.6.6 Observations of Teaching-Leaning Process

Guided non-participant observation technique was also used in order to gather information on

what actually happens during the teaching-learning process. The overall intention was to

verify the teaching methods used and their suitability to the target group. During the

observation process, a checklist was used (see appendix G) to help guide the researchers.

Much attention was paid to the issues and concepts described in the conceptual framework in

Chapter Four which affect the overall quality of the teaching and learning process. Such

issues include overall learner centeredness, observance of human rights and recognition of

the learners’ diversity as demonstrated through equity in participation and interaction in the

learning process as well as efforts by the teachers to promote inclusion. Additionally, the

observation process also involved taking notes of behaviour of interest to the research as it

emerged during the teaching and learning process.

5.7 Validity and reliability

As applied in quantitative research, the term validity refers to whether the research measures

what it was intended to measure, whereas the term reliability has to do with the extent to

which the research results are consistent over time and an accurate representation of the total

population under study (Golafshani, 2003). In qualitative research, however, the two terms

can take different forms and are difficult to ascertain - they are often conceptualized as

trustworthiness, rigor and quality (p. 604).

In order to maximize validity of a qualitative study, Creswell and Miller (2000) recommend

the use of the triangulation approach. According to them, the term triangulation is defined as

“a validity procedure where researchers search for convergence among multiple and

different sources of information to form themes or categories in a study” (p. 126). Patton

(2002) argues that triangulation strengthens a study by combining methods. According to him

triangulation is of four types namely the use of different data sources in a study; the use of

several researchers or evaluators; the use of multiple theories or perspectives to interpret a

single set of data or study; and the use of multiple methods to study a single problem or

program (p. 247).

As indicated in section 5.4, this study employed the mixed method research strategy,

including using multiple data collection methods and tools, as way of maximizing its validity

and reliability. The data collection tools were reviewed to ascertain their relevance to the

68

study, coverage, and consistency before they were applied to the actual research field.

Furthermore, the questionnaires and interview guides were piloted on three individuals with a

background in education to help check the clarity, relevance and coherence of the questions

being asked.

5.8 Ethical issues

All requirements for an ethical piece of research were fully and properly adhered to before

and during the research process. The University of Oslo provided a letter of introduction

which was used when approaching the Tanzanian government and non-governmental

organizations as well as other stakeholders in the research process. Permission to conduct

research was requested from the RAS who is the government official in charge of all matters

related to governance, management and administration in the region. After accepting the

request, RAS provided two letters of introduction; one to the KTC Administrative Secretary

(DAS1), and another one to the Korogwe District Administrative Secretary (DAS2). Both

letters directed the respective district government officials to allow the conduct of the

research in their districts and as introduction to the departments, schools and other institutions

and stakeholders in their districts who would be involved in the study. The two district

government officials, in turn, wrote letters of introduction which were used in primary

schools and other areas involved in the data collection process. For copies of all research

permits, see Appendices I-L.

Another ethical aspect which was carefully observed and followed during the study was the

participants’ consent and anonymity. A coding system was developed (see Table 5.2) to make

sure that the actual names of participants, schools and centres used in the research process are

not revealed during analysis and reporting of the data. Additionally, pseudo names such as

‘interviewee’, ‘participant’ and ‘respondent’ were used wherever necessary. Furthermore,

before any data collection method or tool was administered, the purpose of the research was

carefully explained and assurance was given to the respondents that their comments would be

anonymous. Consent was requested for them to take part in the research work and they were

informed that they could withdraw at any time. Oral consent was given in all cases. In the

interviews, the request for consent was repeated before voice recording as part of the

background information and before the actual interview questions were asked.

69

Because of the age group of the children (6-17 years), the permission to conduct research

with in-school and out-of-school children and youth attending COBET and XPRIZE

programs in the selected schools and centres was granted as part of the research permits from

Tanga and Korogowe local government authorities as described above (see Appendices I-L).

In collaboration with teachers and centre supervisors, oral consent was given by parents

and/or guardians to allow for the children to take part in the research. Before conducting the

discussions, safe and friendly environments were created that allowed the children to engage

comfortably and to not participate if they so decided.

Additionally, throughout the research process, efforts were made to protect data so that they

remain only in the safe hands of the researcher. Electronic research records including

interviews and other files were saved in encrypted flash drives. Hard copy records such as

questionnaire responses, notes and the learners’ written responses for ALA tests are safely

kept in the researcher’s home. All the records and files will be destroyed after completion of

the study.

A copy of the final version of the thesis will be shared with the Korogwe district government

as feedback on the research process and because they requested to be given a report for their

office use. Feedback may also be provided to other research participants provided this is

approved by the Korogwe district government.

5.9 Delimitation of the study

The study was conducted in Korogwe district which is only a small section of the whole

country where NFE programs and activities are being implemented. In line with that, while

there is a huge diversity of NFE programs and activities operating in Tanzania, this study and

its findings are only based on the programs and activities targeting children of school-going

age. Additionally, one of the NFE programs in the study is a very new pilot project, which

has been implemented in Korogwe for only slightly more than two years. After a longer

period of time, this program may produce different outputs and outcomes than were observed

during this study.

Therefore, the findings of this study may not be replicable in other regions of Tanzania and

may not be used for making generalizations on the role of NFE in Tanzania’s development at

large. Nevertheless, the findings do underline the need for in-depth investigation on NFE and

70

its role in development of the society, specifically on its effectiveness as a policy strategy for

achieving quality basic education for all.

5.10 Limitation of the study

One of the limitations of the study was the insufficient number of female representation as

research participants. In spite of efforts to ensure that as many girls as possible were engaged

in the research process only a few or no girls were reached. As a result of this challenge, only

a few conclusions were made by comparing girls and boys and such conclusions may be

weak due to insufficient data.

Furthermore, there were some challenges in accessing government documents especially

those related to the local government education budget. Even though all necessary research

permits had been provided by the higher authorities, including the permission to access all the

documents needed for the study, some government officials at the local level were hesitant to

make them available. However, with consistent follow-up, the documents were finally

secured and used for the study.

5.11 Summary

This research employed a mixed method research strategy, which included application of

qualitative and quantitative data collection methods and tools – including interviews,

questionnaires, document review, focus group discussion and observations – to investigate

the issues being studied as stated in the research questions. The choice and design of the

research strategy was influenced by pragmatic thinking as it focused on methodological

quality and appropriateness, and the recognition that different research methods can be

appropriated to different situations. It was hoped that the application of both qualitative and

quantitative data collection tools would maximize the validity of the study. The data collected

are presented and analysed in the following chapter.

71

CHAPTER SIX: DATA PRESENTATION AND

ANALYSIS

In this chapter the data collected in Korogwe district are presented. The overall purpose of the

research was to investigate whether, amidst evident success and challenges associated with its

functioning, NFE can be regarded as an effective policy strategy to help achieve quality basic

education for all in Tanzania; and to suggest possible ways for NFE to maximise its

contribution to the provision of quality basic education. Given the huge diversity of NFE

programs, this study focuses on programs offering basic education to children of school-

going age, with COBET and XPRIZE programs used as case studies. Three research

questions were pursued, namely:

Do COBET and XPRIZE programs effectively facilitate mainstreaming of their

learners to formal primary schools?

Do COBET and XPRIZE centres enable a teaching and learning process of good

quality?

Do COBET and XPRIZE learners achieve acceptable learning outcomes in terms of

basic literacy and numeracy skills?

As indicated earlier, study involved sixty eight participants distributed across learners,

teachers, head teachers, centre supervisors and government officials responsible for

supervision of educational activities in Korogwe district. Data were collected using

qualitative methods and an assessment test on basic literacy and numeracy skills amongst the

learners. The characteristics of the research participants are first presented, followed by the

findings according to the themes or categories investigated under each research question.

6.1 Participants’ Characteristics

The learners were the most important group of interviewees for this study. Below we present

and analyse our findings about their characteristics first, followed by those of other participants.

6.1.1 Age and Gender/Sex of COBET and XPRIZE Learners

The data on age and gender/sex of the COBET and XPRIZE learners involved in this study

are presented in Table 6.1. As can be seen, the majority of the learners in both programs are

72

between 10 and 13 years of age, which means they would have been in Standard V, VI or VII

in the formal primary education system.

Table 6. 1: Age and Gender of COBET and XPRIZE Learners

COBET XPRIZE

Age (Years) Boys (%) Girls (%) Total (%) Boys (%) Girls (%) Total (%)

6-9 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 1(3.3) 3(10) 4(13.3)

10-13 11(45.8) 5(20.8) 16(66.7) 12 10(33.3) 22(73.3)

14-17 5(20.8) 2(8.4) 7(29.2) 3(10) 1(3.3) 4(13.3)

17+ 1(4.2) 0(0) 1(4.2) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0)

Total 17(70.8) 7(29.2) (24)100.1 16(53.3) 14(46.7) 30(99.9)

The age groups were classified to match the government classification of age cohorts for

children attending formal primary and lower level secondary schools in Tanzania. As

described in section X.X, the official entry age to Standard I of formal primary school in the

country is 7 years, even though some children are enrolled at age 6. Standard IV pupils (at

around 9 years) are required to pass a national test in order to continue with Standard V (at

around 10 years) and proceed to reach Standard VII (at around 13 years) when they take a

national test. If they pass, they join the formal ordinary level secondary schools (at around 14

years) and finish that level of schooling at around age 17. Children who do not pass the

national test at Standard IV are required to repeat the same grade the following year. Those

who fail the ordinary level (O-level) secondary education national test cannot proceed to the

advanced level (A-level) of secondary education.

As shown in Table 6.1 most of the COBET learners involved in this study, e.g. 16 (66.7%),

would have been between Standard V and Standard VII of the formal primary education

system, while 8 (33.3%) of them would have been in O-level secondary schools. A similar

conclusion can be made with reference to the XPRIZE project with 22 (73.3%) of its learners

matching Standard V to VII cohort, while 4 (13.3%) were matching the group of Standard I

to IV, and 4 (13.3%) the O-level secondary group of the formal secondary education system.

As regards gender, there seems to be far fewer girls (29.2%) than boys (70.2%) attending

COBET, while for the XPRIZE project the difference between the number of boys (53.3%)

and girls (46.7) is relatively small.

73

6.1.2 COBET and XPRIZE Learners Socio-Economic

Background

According to UNESCO-IS/UNICEF (2015), children who are out of school (such as COBET

and XPRIZE learners) are amongst the most vulnerable and hard to reach members of society

and those from rural and poor households are by far more likely to be out-of-school than their

age-mates from urban and wealthy households (p.68).

As part of their evaluative study of the COBET pilot project funded by UNICEF, Galabawa

and Lwaitama (2003) made an investigation on living conditions and work status of COBET

learners in selected districts of Tanzania. They concluded that the majority of the leaners, as

seen in Table 6.2, lived with either one parent (mother or father) or with a guardian who is

not a biological father or mother, and that therefore the majority of the learners did not live

with both parents. It was also found that almost all of the learners engaged in some form of

work, especially household chores, farming and some petty income generating activities, such

as selling groundnuts and helping parents or guardians to carry agricultural products to the

market place for sale. About 20% of the COBET learners reported to be ‘working for wage’

as house girls or house boys.

Table 6. 2: Living Condition and Work Status of COBET Learners, Number and %

Status N/223 %

Living with both parents 79 35.5

Living with mother only 79 35.6

Living with father only 16 7.2

Living with guardian 47 21.1

Living alone 1 0.4

Parents Missing 1 0.4

Working for wage 25 11.2

Working in household (e.g. farming) 153 68.6

Not working at all 45 20.2

Source: Galabawa and Lwaitama (2003).

In this study it was similarly found that at least some COBET and XPRIZE learners live with

their guardians and engage in some kind of child work. One interviewee reported that “most

of them (COBET learners) live with guardians, especially grandparents. They have to work

74

to get food and other basic needs. You cannot force them to come to school”13 (T2).

Likewise, when attempting to schedule a meeting with the XPRIZE learners in one of the

centres, the centre supervisor suggested to reschedule the meeting for a different day because

it was a market day and so most of the learners would not be available for the meeting. As

she put it:

Sir, tomorrow is a market day. Plan to come the next day or any other day in this

week … as you will not be able to meet the children. They will be at the market14

(S1).

Leaners socio-economic background is one of the factors for determining the effectiveness of

an education program (UNESCO, 2004) as described in the conceptual framework in Chapter

Four. The child work status highly influences attendance in ‘school’ and overall participation

in the teaching and/or learning process organized in the two programs. The same issue has

been reported as one of the major reasons for absenteeism amongst COBET learners ever

since the program started about two decades ago (Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003).

The findings in this study show that the living and working conditions of COBET and

XPRIZE learners are important factors affecting their day to day activities including their

ability to attend and participate in organized learning opportunities. For the COBET program,

as will be further discussed later in this chapter, the living and working conditions strongly

affect decisions regarding classroom schedules, including time to start and finish daily activities,

and thus the number of hours that can be spent in classroom learning.

6.1.3 Teachers and Supervisors’ Educational Level and Work

Experience

The teachers and supervisors are important for executing day to day implementation of

COBET and XPRIZE. Table 6.3 shows their characteristics based on data collected through

questionnaires administered to five head teachers and 1 WEO and interviews with three

teachers, three XPRIZE centre supervisors and two DAEOs. The findings indicate that most

COBET teachers who were involved in this study (66.7%) had a ‘Certificate in Teaching’ as

13 Kiswahili quote: Kwa sababu wengi wao wanaishi na walezi, hasa babu na bibi, mara nying wanalazimika

kufanya kazi ili wapate chackula na mahitaji mengine. Huwezi kuwalazimisha waje shule. 14 Kiswahili quote: Mheshimiwa, kesho ni siku ya soko. Pangeni kuja kesho kutwa au siku nyingine wiki hii…

maana hamtawapata watoto. Watakuwa sokoni

75

their highest level of education. For the XPRIZE project, the centre supervisors are standard

(STD VII) seven leavers.

Table 6. 3: Teachers and Supervisors Educational Level and Work Experience, Number and %

Gender/Sex Highest Level of Education Work Exp. (yrs)

Respon

dent

F (%) M (%) STD

VII (%)

Cert.

(%)

Diploma

(%)

Degre

e (%)

0-4(%) 5-9(%) 10+

(%)

TR* 2

(66.7)

1(33.3) - 2(66.7) 1(33.3) - 2(66.7) 1(33.3

)

H/T 3 (60) 2(40) - - 4 (80) 1(20) 2(40) 3(60) -

DA - 2 (100) - - - 2(100) 2(100)

WE 1(100) - - - 1(100) - - 1(100) -

SU 3

(100)

- 3 (100) - - - - - -

*TR = Teachers; HT = Head teachers; DA = DAEOs; WE = WEOs; SU = Supervisors

In both programs, women are mostly given the responsibility to directly engage with the

learners through teaching and supporting them. There is only one male COBET teacher and

all the supervisors for XPRIZE centres are women. As will further be discussed later, this is

likely related to women’s willingness to work as volunteers (without pay). As discussed in

the introductory chapter, NFE programs are often less valued and receive limited or no

funding from the government (Hoppers, 2006; ADEA, 2012; Yasunaga, 2014).

6.2 Effectiveness of COBET and XPRIZE in

Mainstreaming Learners into Formal Primary Schools

One of the main goals for COBET, XPRIZE and similar para-formal NFE programs is to

facilitate mainstreaming of out-of-school children and young people of school-going age to

the formal schooling system and thus give them another chance to continue learning in the

system that is socially more valued and recognized. However, it is well known that there are

many factors leading to the problem of out-of-school children in Tanzania and in other Sub-

Saharan African countries - including formal schools being too far away from home, parents

being unable to buy school uniforms and other supplies for their children, absence of lunch at

school, unfavourable circumstances surrounding girls during their menstrual periods as well

as child-unfriendly teaching and learning environments associated with corporal and other

forms of punishment, to mention but a few. The findings on the socio-economic background

of the COBET and XPRIZE learners involved in this study, as presented in section 6.2.3,

76

provide additional evidence of the hardship faced by out-of-school children, and how this

impedes their efforts to attend and participate in organized educational opportunities.

In that context, one of the research questions in this study is whether COBET and XPRIZE

programs effectively help out-of-school children to return or get enrolled in formal primary

schools and successfully learn with their mainstream counterparts. In investigating this

question, data on the process of finding and registering COBET and XPRIZE learners were

collected, i.e. how many of them have been registered over the past few years; how many of

them have been mainstreamed to formal primary schools, and their participation rates. The

data were gathered through documentary review, questionnaires, interviews and observations.

6.2.1 COBET Learners’ Participation and Mainstreaming in

Formal Primary Schools

Table 6.4 below presents the findings on COBET learners participation and mainstreaming in

formal primary schools. As it can be seen, only a small fraction of the registered learners

manage to make it to Standard V of the formal primary school. While more than 168 COBET

learners have been registered in selected centres between 2017 and 2019, only 69 (41.1%) of

them have been reported to attend classes regularly in 2019. Out of the total number of

learners registered during the said period, only 24 (14.3%) succeeded in being mainstreamed

to Standard V of the formal primary school.

Table 6. 4: COBET Learners Attendance and Transition to Formal Primary Schools, 2017-

2019

Learners Registered Learners Attending Classes

Regularly in 2019

Learners

Mainstreamed to

Standard V in 2018

School F M Total F M T F M T

PS1 9 16 25 1 4 5 0 3 3

PS2 13 25 38 1 11 12 1 3 4

PS3 11 18 29 7 8 15 3 4 7

PS4 4 12 16 2 6 8 0 3 3

PS5 7 25 32 1 12 13 0 2 2

PS6 9 19 28 4 12 16 2 3 5

Total 53 115 168 16 53 69 6 18 24

As further indicated in Table 6.5, for the entire Korogwe Town Council, which has a total

number of 209 registered COBET learners, the number of learners who succeeded in making

77

it to Standard VII (the final grade of primary education) in 2018 and 2019 were 15 and 12

respectively (KTC, 2019).

Table 6. 5: Number of COBET Learners Mainstreamed to Primary Schools in KTC, 2018 -

2019

Year 2018 Year 2019

STD V STD VI STD VII STD V STD VI STD VII

M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T M F T

39 12 51 39 12 51 08 07 15 25 03 28 25 03 28 07 05 12

Source: KTC, 2019

In order to be mainstreamed to Standard V, primary school pupils in Tanzania (including

COBET learners) must pass the Standard IV national test, and those who fail are required to

repeat the same grade and take the test again the following year. According to NECTA15

(2019), about 6.84% of Standard IV pupils who took the national test in the year 2018 did not

pass the test16. In 2010, the latest data available, a total of 8,214 COBET learners sat for the

Standard IV national text national-wide. The national average pass rate was 87.6% with the

Mtwara regions pass rate of 56.0% being the lowest (URT, 2011).

The data presented above also indicate that the number of out-of-school boys registered in the

selected COBET centres during the period 2017-2019 are more than twice the number of girls

and that the two genders constitute 68.5% and 31.5% of the total population, respectively. A

similar trend can be observed in regards to female attendance in classes in 2019, and in

regards to them succeeding to be mainstreamed to formal primary school classes. The NER

amongst children aged 7-13 years, in the financial year 2014/15, was 76.7% for girls and

70.8% for boys; and the literacy rates of the same age group, recorded in the same financial

year, were 66.4% and 59.5% respectively (URT, 2017). This shows that more girls get

enrolled to formal primary schools than boys, which could be one of the reasons why there

are more boys in COBET centres than girls. Additionally, since out of 168 COBET learners

registered in 2017-2019 only 24 (14.3%) were t mainstreamed into formal primary school,

15 Accessed via YouTube through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3fHc8gfJ2U on September 25, 2019. 16 It’s important to mention that pupils who fail to pass this national test cannot be registered for the national PSLE

at the end of Standard VII even if s/he would want to do that as a private candidate and hence will not be eligible

for the lower secondary school education and so on.

78

there are very high rates of dropout and repetition amongst COBET learners. This means the

internal efficiency of the program is very poor.

6.2.2 XPRIZE Learners’ Mainstreaming to Formal Primary

Schools

The XPRIZE project, as discussed earlier, is a pilot project which employs modern

technology. The out-of-school children of school-going age have been given tablets and

allowed to learn on their own with minimal supervision from an adult. They are then given a

grade-equivalent test on literacy and numeracy, and if they pass the test they get

mainstreamed to the appropriate grade in nearby formal primary schools. The adult

supervisor assists the children with re-charging their tablets (at a solar-powered centre) and

seeks technical assistance from the district government officials in case a tablet has been

damaged, stolen or unable to function as expected. The tablet software contains instructional

content approved by the Ministry of Education Science and Technology. In regards to

pedagogy, teachers have been fully replaced by tablets. Also, there are no routines as in

formal schools, such as morning assemblies, singing national anthems, inspection of school

uniforms, cleanliness of the school environment or taking learners’ attendance list. The

learners take full control of their own learning including what they want to learn and when

they want to do so.

Unlike COBET, the XPRIZE learners have not yet taken the national Standard IV test which

would give us data regarding their pass rates in entering Standard V. Instead the process to

mainstream them is based on informal quizzes given by primary school teachers under

supervision of the WEO. This test can be administered at any point. Like in COBET, a

number of data collection methods including document review, interviews and questionnaire

were used to collect data for this study. The data collected appear below.

Table 6.6 shows that more boys (72) enrol in the XPRIZE program than girls (48).

Proportionally, however, more girls (68.8%) have succeeded in being mainstreamed to formal

primary schools than boys (52.1%). The program has also enrolled about 119 out-of-school

children during the period 2017-2019. Out of these, 70 (58.9%) have been mainstreamed to

formal primary schools during the same period. However, unlike COBET learners, the

XPRIZE learners who succeeded in being mainstreamed are still awaiting the national

79

Standard IV test to determine whether or not they qualify to join Standard V and hence

continue to higher education through the formal schooling channel.

Table 6. 6: XPRIZE Learners Attendance and Transition to Formal Primary Schools, 2017-

2019

Learners Registered Learners Mainstreamed Mainstreaming Rate (%)

Centre F M Total F M Total F M Total

XC1 7 14 21 6 9 15 85.7 64.4 57.7

XC2 10 10 20 8 4 12 80.0 40.0 60.0

XC3 7 12 19 1 12 13 14.3 100 68.4

XC4 4 15 19 0 5 5 0.0 47.4 47.4

XC5 11 8 19 10 5 15 90.1 62.5 89.9

XC6 9 12 21 8 2 10 88.9 16.7 47.6

Total 48 71 119 33 37 70 68.8 52.1 58.9

6.2.3 The Process of Finding and Registering COBET and

XPRIZE Learners

The effectiveness of COBET and the XPRIZE programs in enabling out-of-school children to

enrol or return to formal primary schooling also depends on whether there are effective and

sustainable systems to ensure that all out-of-school children are consistently identified and

supported to enrol in the NFE programs. One of the factors that contributed to the success of

COBET during its pilot phase (1997-2001), with financial assistance from UNICEF, was the

fact that school committees were trained and empowered to take full responsibility for day to

day running of COBET centres and to ensure that out-of-school children are reported and

enrolled in the program (Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003).

During interviews with COBET teachers, all interviewees mentioned that nowadays COBET

learners are largely brought to the centres by their parents or guardians when they feel the

need to do so. They indicated that, while one of their roles as COBET teachers is to work

with the school committees to identify out-of-school children and enrol them, the reality is

that most of the school committees do not do that at all and the teachers are required to teach

the regular pupils just like other teachers. As one of the interviewees said:

You know brother, the so-called school committee does not do anything on getting out-of-

school children here. In 2015 we worked with the school committee to conduct a census for

children living in difficult circumstances, but since then there hasn’t been a systematic way to

find and enrol them. Sometimes we make announcements in community meetings and

80

religious gatherings. But, to a larger extent, children are just brought by their own parents or

guardians. Some house girls are brought by their bosses. In this centre I have six children all

coming from one family. Their parents migrated from Handeni district to engage in rice

farming here. The parents went to our head teacher to seek chances for their children to enrol

in school. They wanted their children to not miss studies. The head teacher directed them to

me so I could tell them what to do and we finally got the children registered 17(T2).

Just as COBET was successfully initiated as a pilot project in the late 1990s with funding

from UNICEF, the process of initiating the XPRIZE pilot project involved massive

community mobilization and sensitization, training of school committees, and identifying

specific district government officials to provide technical assistance whenever needed. The

process of finding and registering learners has been highly successful. The project target was

to distribute not more than 21 tablets per centre (KDC, 2019) and, as indicated in Table 6.5,

this target was met by 94.4% with a total of 119 out-of-school children being registered and

given tablets, out of an expected 126 children.

The success of XPRIZE in finding and registering out-of-school children to the program is

associated with availability of resources, especially the funding from the XPRIZE foundation

through UNESCO and WFP, as described earlier. The local and district officials and the

community members who were directly involved in the process of finding, registering and

supporting the children were all paid allowances. Additionally, there were three motor cycles

specifically rented to provide day to day support to the XPRIZE centres in Korogwe District

Council.

Another factor that has contributed to the success of the XPRIZE project in finding and

registering out-of-school children is the fact that most of the children, and even the adults

living in the areas covered by this study, had never seen a tablet before. As such, the very

presence of tablets within the community became big news on its own, let alone the

opportunity for some children to touch and finally own them. Indeed, just being in possession

17 Kiswahili quote: Unajua kaka, kiukweli kamati yetu haifanyi chochote kuhusu upatikanaji wa watoto. Tulifanya

kazi pamoja mwaka 2015 tulipofanya sensa kutambua watoto wa mitaani, baada ya hapo hakujawa na utaratibu

wa kueleweka wa kuwapata na kuwaandikisha. Wakati mwingine tunajitolea tunatangaza kwenye nyumba za

ibada, au kwenye mikutano. Kwa kiasi kikubwa siku hizi watoto wanaletwa na wazazi au walezi wao wenyewe,

na baadhi ya wasichana wanaofanya kazi za ndani wanaletwe na mabosi wao. Hapa kwangu nina watoto sita wote

wa familia moja. Wazazi wao wamehamia hapa kutoka Handeni kwa ajili ya kilimo cha mpunga. Walikuja

wenyewe shuleni kuulinzia kama wangepata nafasi za watoto wao kusoma kwa sababu walitaka watoto wao wasikose masomo. Hapo ndio mwalimu mkuu akawaelekeza waje kwangu inwaelekeze cha kufanaya,

tukawaandikisha watoto

81

of a tablet has helped some out-of-school children return to school. Some children who

dropped out of formal primary schools in the past have decided to return because they either

do not want to have their tablets taken away or they hope to receive one someday. As one of

interviewee stated:

At some point children were told that if they don’t go to school, their tablets will be taken,

and those who don’t have tablet and don’t go to school will not be given one when new

tablets are brought. Nowadays most of children who dropped out of school in the past, and

those who used not to go to school they do go. And the children who are in possession of

tablets return here to take their tablets as soon as the school day ends because they are not

allowed to take the tablets with them when they go to school. In this street, they are known as

‘tablet children’ and the children who don’t have tablets envy their peers18 (S3).

The findings above indicate that there are neither efficient nor sustainable ways to find and

enrol out-of-school children to the COBET and XPRIZE programs. The success that XPRIZE

has recorded as a pilot project appears to be short-term as it will all depend on whether or not

there are sufficient funds to cover the costs needed to support logistics and other activities

enabling the process of identifying and enrolling all out-of-school children to the NFE

program.

6.3 Quality of the Teaching and Learning Process in

COBET and XPRIZE Centers

While it is difficult to have a single definition of quality of education as it largely depends on

the context in which it is being analysed, there seems to be a general agreement that

“education should allow children to reach their fullest potential in terms of cognitive,

emotional and creative capacities” (UNESCO, 2004:30).

As indicated above, out-of-school children – the target group for the COBET and XPRIZE

programs – are generally coming from historically deprived backgrounds. Therefore, the

efforts to uplift them from deprivation through education must involve a high quality

teaching and learning process as this is necessary for them to reach their fullest potential.

That is to say, their educational programs and activities should involve a teaching and

18 Kiswahili quote: Watoto waliambiwa kwamba wasiporudi shule tablet zao zitachukuliwa. Na wale ambao

hawana tablet na hawaendi shule wameambiwa wasipoenda shule hawatapewa tablet zitakapoletwa tena. Kwa

sasa watoto wengi wa hapa mtaani ambao awali walikuwa hawapendi kwenda shule wanaenda. Na wale ambao

wana tablet tayari wakitoka shule tu wanakimbilia hapa kuchukua tablet zao kwa sababu hawaruhusiwi kwenda

nazo shuleni. Hapa mtaani wanaitwa watoto wa tablet, na watoto ambao hawana tablet wanawaonea wivu wenzao.

82

learning process which will enable them not only to become competent in reading, writing

and arithmetic but also to develop critical thinking, collaboration and team work skills as well

as other learning outcomes necessary for their future prosperity. This requires enough and

qualified teachers and that the learning environments are safe and free from bullying,

corporal punishment or other forms of intimidation, and that there are adequate teaching and

learning resources of good quality, including adequate and relevant text and reference books.

In reference to the input-process-context-output model which was introduced as a framework

to understand, analyse, monitor, and improve quality of education (UNESCO, 2004), which

was as well discussed in Chapter Four, data were collected regarding quality and availability

of teachers for COBET; quality and availability of teaching and learning materials;

pedagogical approach; and safety and health of the teaching and learning environment. The

data were collected through classroom observation, interviews, and review of relevant

documents.

6.3.1 Qualification and Availability of Teachers for COBET

In an educational program, COBET included, having enough and qualified teachers is an

important input to the process of preparing and producing competent graduates whose

potentials can maximally be harnessed for the development of their society.

It is important to note that, after being scaled-up as a country-wide program, most COBET

classes were located in formal primary schools and their facilitators were replaced by the

formal primary school teachers. To qualify as a primary school teacher in Tanzania, as of the

financial year 2014/15, one must have completed four years of ordinary level secondary

education and possess an academic certificate for that level, and also possess a ‘Certificate in

Education” from a collage or educational institutions which are recognized by the

government (URT, 2016a).

As appears in Table 6.3, COBET teachers for all centres covered in this study do meet the

minimum qualifications for teachers of primary education in the country. However, given the

unique nature of the program in terms of the target group being children and adolescents from

difficult socio-economic backgrounds; and given the overall goal of this program being to

provide quality basic education as well as life and survival skills to the children and

adolescents, the teachers implementing the program need to have additional pedagogical

83

skills to enable them to facilitate a productive teaching and learning process (Galabawa and

Lwaitama, 2003).

Regarding the Teacher to Pupils Ratio (TPR), based on data collected and data presented in

Tables 6.3 and 6.4, the average TPR for the six COBET centres involved (considering

registered learners who regularly attended classes in 2019) was found to be 1:11.5. This is far

better than the national TPR for formal primary schools, namely 1:43 in the year 2016

(UNICEF Tanzania, 2018).

In addition to the number and qualifications of COBET teachers, it was important to explore

the views of the teachers on their job experiences, especially with regard to whether or not

they feel professionally prepared to teach the young adults; whether they receive adequate in-

service training related to COBET; and whether they are available and willing to do the job.

When COBET was initiated as a pilot project, it was treated as a unique educational activity

totally different from regular formal primary schools – the curriculum being different, books

and other resources relevant to the out-of-school children and adolescents, and the facilitators

receiving regular in-service training geared to making their pedagogical skills match the

needs of the target group (Bhalalusesa, 2003; Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003). Now that

COBET centres have been premised within the formal primary school context, it was of

interest to explore how are the teachers mandated to teach and manage the centres operate.

The findings show that all the COBET teachers interviewed expressed willingness to teach

and felt ready for the job. On the other hand, they all mentioned that they had not received

any in-service training related to COBET for more than a year now. But the lack of in-service

training did not appear to be much of a challenge for them because, as will be further

discussed, they also teach the regular primary school children, and so they just use the same

skills and techniques to teach COBET learners as well. Indeed, from the observations

conducted, there were no differences in appearance between COBET classrooms and those of

regular primary school pupils.

Two main challenges were mentioned loudly and clearly during the interviews. First, COBET

teachers are also required to teach the regular pupils and to perform all other normal duties of

teachers. This is because, in the past, they used to be given additional pay as honoraria for

taking the extra duty of teaching and supporting COBET learners. However, and this is the

84

second major challenge mentioned by all COBET teachers, the honorarium has not been paid

since 2015, and this keeps demotivating them. As one of the teachers said:

I am required to teach English Language to Standard III through Standard VII pupils and, at

the same time, I get scheduled as Teacher on Duty. And, as a teacher, I have to make sure that

I do plan for my daily lessons. Imagine, you also have to prepare lessons for the COBET

children who start learning late in the afternoon. It’s very tiresome. And with all these, we

have not been paid our honoraria since 2015, and I don’t think we will ever get paid19 (T2).

While COBET teachers meet the government minimum qualifications for primary school

teachers in Tanzania, they seem not to possess pedagogical skills needed to facilitate

meaningful implementation of the program in a way that can have maximum positive impact

on the learners. As indicated in Tables 6.4 and 6.5, a large proportion of COBET learners are

young adults. Most of them are likely to have only this one chance for schooling because

only a small proportion of them manage to get mainstreamed to the formal education system.

The main challenge for COBET teachers appears to be having too much responsibility which

affects their availability to support COBET learners effectively. Furthermore, they have not

been paid their honoraria for some years now.

In an interview with one of the DAEOs it was mentioned that, since 2015 the responsibility to

pay COBET teachers’ honoraria was taken on by the Global Partnership for Education (GPE)

under its Literacy and Numeracy Education Support (LANES) project, and that the payments

would normally be made in instalments – and so the teachers will be paid. However, in the

GEP’s Mid-Year LANES Implementation Report of 2016, it appears that the LANES project

was to phase out in the financial year 2016/2017, and its ‘revised end date’ was in December

2018 (GPE, 2016) – which means there may be no more payment for the COBET teachers.

In regards to the XPRIZE project, as described earlier, teachers were not needed as the

learners learn on their own using tablets. The supervisors for the solar power charging centres

were democratically selected by community members during the community sensitization

process based on the community’s respect and faith in the individual. Apart from helping the

19 Kiswahili quote: Ninatakiwa kufundisha English Darasa la tatu hadi la Saba., wakati huohuo napewa zamu

kama kawaida. Kama mwalimu, natakiwa kuandaa maandalio ya somo kwa kila siku. Na ujiandae kufundisha

watoto wa MEMKWA wakija shule mchana. Inachosha sana. Lakini pamoja na yote hayo hatujalipwa posho zetu

tangu mwaka 2015 na sidhani kwamba tutalipwa.

85

children re-charge their tablets, they are also responsible for follow-up in case children take

too many days to come to re-charge their tablets and in case there are challenges report these

to the district government officials. Based on comments from the district government

officials supporting this project, the centre supervisors are doing their job well. But just as for

COBET teachers, one of the major challenges is that they have not received their honoraria

for at least some months now.

6.3.2 Quality and Availability of Teaching and Learning

Materials

Teaching and learning materials constitute another important set of inputs to an effective

process of preparing competent graduates of any educational undertaking, as explained in

Chapter Four. Other things being equal, the success of teaching and learning is likely to be

strongly influenced by the quality and availability of resources available to support the

process. It is obvious that schools without teachers, textbooks and learning materials will not

do an effective job (UNESCO, 2004). In order to examine whether there are enough teaching

and learning materials of good quality for COBET and XPRIZE learners, data were collected

through observations of the actual classroom teaching-learning process and interviews with

the COBET teachers; and through observation of the leaners as they used tablets and

interviews with supervisors for the XPRIZE project.

For COBET, the purpose was to explore the relevance of the books being used in relation to

the target group; and the amount of books in terms of pupils-books ratio (PBR). Three

COBET centres were visited for the observations and interviews. For XPRIZE, given the fact

that each of the learners possesses a tablet, the observation concerned how quickly learners

could interact with the technology and which subject appeared to be of most interest to them.

In all three COBET centres visited, teachers used books for regular formal primary school

pupils to teach COBET learners, and there was only one copy per class which was being used

by the teacher in giving instructions. None of the learners had a book. Arguably, it was

striking to see that they did not have even the books which were designated for regular formal

primary school children. With the current PBR being one book for three students in most

Tanzanian schools (UNICEF Tanzania, 2018), it should be possible to set aside a few copies

for the COBET learners. Most of the learners instead focused on copying text written by their

86

teachers on chalkboards. Some of them did not have notebooks either and so they ended up

not even being able to copy the notes written by the teachers.

During the interviews, all teachers confirmed that there are books and teachers’ guides

specifically for COBET learners – albeit a few. When asked why they were not using the

books designated for the target group, two of the reasons stood out. While one of the teachers

simply said that it is easier to plan and teach using the regular primary school books, another

interviewee stated:

I was given these books back in 2015 during a seminar on COBET, which was conducted in

Dodoma. Since then, however, every time I try to use these books it seems that the content is

far higher than the learners’ ability. For instance this book here (s/he raises one of the books),

has got some difficult arithmetic which may be difficult for the learners to grasp. Also, we

sometime receive learners with diverse educational history and so it’s difficult to use this one

book20 (T1).

While it was clear that the books for COBET learners were not sufficient and relevant, it was

striking that even the available few ones were not used. This can be related to a number of

factors: firstly, it might be related to the issue that teachers responsible for COBET are given

other responsibilities and hence focus on those as opposed to taking time to focus on planning

for COBET lessons. To make things easier they may just teach the very same content covered

with the regular primary school pupils. Secondly, it might be that the teachers, even though

they are officially qualified and have the credentials recognized by the government, may be

unable to sufficiently master the content designated for COBET learners. Indeed, two of the

three COBET teachers interviewed were official teachers of Standard I pupils in the formal

primary school. This may explain why they are not comfortable to teach according to the

official COBET curriculum, especially as they are not given adequate training related to that.

Similarly, there are teachers in the formal system who do not fully master the content for the

grade they are supposed to be teaching. As UNICEF Tanzania reports:

Quality of education in Tanzania remains lower than in its peer countries. According to

Service Delivery Indicators, only 21 per cent of teachers in Tanzania have sufficient

20 Kiswahili quote: Nilipewa hivi vitabu mwaka 2015 wakati wa semina ya MEMKWA iliyofanyika Dodoma.

Lakini, tangia mwaka huo, kila nikijaribu kuvitumia inaonekana kwamba maudhui yake ni makubwa kuliko

uwezo wa wanafunzi wenyewe. Kwa mfano hiki hapa, mahesabu yake ni makubwa, hayaeleweki kwa urahisi.

Pia, unapokea watoto wenye historia na uwezo tofauti kielimu hivyo ni vigumu kutumia hiki kitabu kimoja.

87

knowledge to teach their subject, with 69 per cent scoring well below the pass mark. Results

for Uganda are only marginally better but in Kenya, 39 per cent of teachers pass the

assessment and only 34 per cent of teachers are vastly unprepared to teach their subjects.

Given the already existing scarcity of adequately prepared teachers, especially in the field of

science, the extra enrolment will likely decrease the average level of teaching quality

(UNICEF Tanzania, 2018).

In addition to lack of sufficient and relevant books, different kinds of resources such as

manila cards, scissors, pencils, highlighters, erasers and others – which would normally help

teachers in preparing teaching aids – were also lacking. Apart from having some desks,

chalks, notebooks, pens and an attendance register, all the classes visited were clearly empty.

This obviously impacts a range of pedagogical issues as will be discussed later.

It is evident that COBET does not have sufficient teaching and learning materials, let alone

the fact that even the few materials that exist are not of good quality, especially in terms of

their relevance to the out-of-school children and adolescents in terms of the overall goal of

using education to uplift them from deprivation. As one would imagine, lack of teaching and

learning resources of good quality is a huge impediment even to their own personal efforts in

searching for quality education to help them get out of the poverty cycle.

As far as XPRIZE is concerned, each of the learners had a tablet and they clearly seemed to

be enjoying their interactions with these. As soon as they arrived at the tablet re-charging

centre, all the learners quickly and freely went to grab his/her own, and it took just a few

minutes to see that everyone had switched on the tablet and the ‘learning’ started. The

learners picked a variety of things to learn, all based on individual interest and choice – there

was no guidance from adults, and the centre supervisor seemed to do almost nothing unless a

learner asked for assistance of some kind. The tablets were of very high quality and, as

described earlier, the content was all in Kiswahili and approved by the Ministry of Education,

Science and Technology before the applications were made. There are many different games

and songs attached to the lessons, and the instructions on what to do were given by the apps

loudly and clearly.

An apparent challenge with XPRIZE was that some tablets were damaged. On the day of the

visits to the three centres together with a district government official, 13 tablets were

collected with damages of different kinds and taken to the district office for maintenance.

88

According to the XPRIZE pilot project, each learning centre was to receive a maximum of 21

tablets (equivalent to 21children) and thus the 13 damaged tablets means that 13 children are

not able to learn until the tablets are fixed. More so, the project is in the process of phasing

out and it is unlikely that the district government will secure funds to continue supporting the

children.

6.3.3 Pedagogical Approach

The term pedagogy can simply be defined as learning oriented towards social goals

(Hinchliffe, 2001). The original design of COBET was that the program was to assume a

pedagogical approach which was learner-centred, participatory and interactive in order to

create opportunities for the learners to feel in charge of their learning situation (Galabawa and

Lwaitama, 2003). The goal for this approach was to enable the learners get most benefits out

of the teaching and learning process, beyond just learning basic numeracy and literacy skills.

These would include effective communication skills, good interpersonal skills, freedom of

speech, creativity, patriotism and many more. This would in the end help maximize their

potential. This approach is in line with the rights-based approach to education, as discussed in

Chapter Three, which emphasises a learner-cantered approach to teaching and learning

(UNESCO, 2004). The COBET and XPRIZE learners have the full right to enjoy this right

just as other children.

The observations in three COBET classes and one XPRIZE centre aimed at investigating the

extent to which learners enjoy their right to being at the centre of the teaching and learning

process. The areas of interest to this investigation were: the level of interaction between

teachers and learners; the level of interaction between and amongst learners; and efforts to

promote equity in participation through deliberate engagement of girls and other ‘special

groups’. The observation was done in a 40-minutes numeracy lesson per class and an

observation rubric for desired behaviour was used to guide the researcher. Table 6.7 presents

some of the data gathered from the observation of COBET by primary school where the

classes are located. The first column indicates the learning behaviour observed by the

researcher and the other columns indicate the number of times a behaviour was observed per

class, based on the observation guide which can be seen in Appendix G. The school names

are here presented based on the codes in Table 5.2.

89

Table 6. 7: COBET Learners’ Behaviour during Classroom Lessons, by School and Frequency

Frequency

Observed Behaviour PS3 PS4 PS6 Total

Learners volunteer to answer

questions

3 1 4 8

Teachers pick learners to

answer questions

6 7 10 23

Learners ask questions of

teachers

2 4 1 7

Learners make comments 1 2 1 4

Learners have group

discussion

0 0 0 0

Teachers encourage girls to

make comments

0 0 0 0

Teachers use games, songs,

activities etc.

0 0 1 1

From the observations conducted in all three COBET classes, and as appears in Table 6.7

while there was some level of learners’ engagement, the teachers were largely the ones giving

instructions to learners most of the time. Once learners were engaged, the interaction was

verbal as the learner answered questions from teachers. Except for one class where the

teacher sang a numeracy song with the learners, games were not used to energize and engage

the learner. There were no group work assignments, even when there were obvious

opportunities to do so, such as giving the learners a few problems to solve as a group and

make presentations to the teachers. Furthermore, there were only a few instances when the

teachers had individual consultations with the learners during the lesson, in spite of the small

class size. In regards to gender, only one girl was observed in one of the COBET centres as

others did not come to school this day. She was generally treated in the same way as boys.

The XPRIZE learners, on the other hand, interacted with their tablets - there are no teachers

and the learners learned at their own pace and choice of when to do so. The learners seemed

to be engaging with their technology, picking different topics or sections to learn. However, it

could not be established whether any learning took place. The learners were later assessed for

their basic and numeracy skills through the Uwezo’s ALA test as will be discussed later.

90

Interactive and learner-centred pedagogical approaches, as indicated in the conceptual

framework in section 4.4, are amongst the key elements that determine quality and

effectiveness of the teaching-learning process in a school or educational program as they

would foster learners’ critical thinking, enhance equity in participation, help the learners to

develop collaboration and team work spirit and promote democratic values in and through

education (UNESCO, 2004). The rights-based approach to education, as described by

UNICEF/UNESCO (2007), calls for learners’ inclusion, participation and equality in the

teaching and learning process as a strategy for maximizing quality which is an important

dimension of the human right to education. Quality education to out-of-school children and

adolescents will eventually equip them with knowledge, skills and attitudes which will enable

them to exercise their full potentials in pursuing personal and national development gaols.

6.3.4 Safety and Health in the Learning Environment

A safe and healthy school environment refers to a learning environment that fosters a safe and

supportive environment for learning as well physical and mental health. It includes a wide range of

entities, such as availability of good nutrition, clean and safe water, sanitation facilities and

availability of safe areas for physical exercises, to mention but a few. But it also includes absence of

actions which humiliate human dignity – such as gender-based violence, sexual assaults, bullying,

corporal punishment and the like. As pointed out in Chapter Four in regards to education as a human

right, learning in an environment where everyone feels safe and respected is an aspect of children’s

right to education of good quality (UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007). Children's health and nutrition also

impact their school attendance, ability to learn, and overall development (World Bank Group, 2015).

The out-of-school children under COBET and XPRZE, likes other children, deserve the right to learn

in safe and healthy environments. It is understandable that, being a developing country with a number

of socio-economic challenges as alluded to earlier, Tanzania has not yet been able to effectively

address most challenges related to safe and healthy learning environments in primary and secondary

schools. However, for out-of-school children and youth who are constantly being subjected to

different forms of social exclusion because of their poor socio-economic background (Sen, 2000), the

government, local communities as well as local and international organizations, as education

stakeholders ought to pull together and allocate extra resources in supporting them as a way of

uplifting them from deprivation through giving them an education of good quality. Indeed, some of

the elements of a safe, friendly and healthy learning environment do not need many resources to be

guaranteed.

91

It is in this context that some aspects of safety and health of the learning environment for COBET and

XPRIZE learners were investigated. Specifically, whether there are actions which humiliate human

dignity such as child-abuse, gender-based violence and corporal punishment. Other aspects included

whether there are school feeding programs; presence or absence of toilet facilities as well as access to

clean and safe water. Data were collected from five head teachers supported by further investigation

through observation and two focus group discussions with fifteen learners; and interviews with three

COBET teachers and three XPRZE centre supervisors.

Table 6. 8: Presence of Select Safe and Health Conditions in COBET Schools

Question Category Yes No Total

Does your school have access to clean/safe water? 5 0 5

Does your school have adequate toilet facilities? 5 0 5

Does your school schedule have a sports and games day? 5 0 5

Are COBET learners involved in sports and games? 2 3 5

Does your school provide lunch/meal to pupils? 4 1 5

Do COBET learners get lunch/meal? 4 1 5

Do teachers administer corporal punishment to pupils? 5 0 5

Do COBET learners get corporal punishment? 0 5 5

Are there any reported gender-based violence in your

school?

0 5 5

Table 6.8 shows that in schools attended by COBET learners, the learning environment is to a

large extent safe and healthy, including for the regular formal school pupils. There are sports

grounds, latrines and water taps in all the schools visited. However, in a focus group

discussion with the learners, and in interviews with the teachers, comments indicated some

level of unsafe and unhealthy actions on certain occasions. For example, while all head

teachers said that there is no corporal punishment of COBET learners, the learners

themselves said they sometimes get caned by the teacher, but they think it is ok for their

teacher to do so if they make mistakes. While corporal punishment is legal in Tanzania if

administered according to the law, it is known to be one of the causes of primary school

children dropout (URT, 2011). When COBET was introduced as a pilot project, one of the

rules for running a class was that there should be no corporal punishment of the learners,

partly as a way of creating a friendly and respectful learning environment, but also because

92

some of the learners dropped out of the formal schools in the past due to many issues

including corporal punishment (Bhalalusesa, 2003; Galabawa and Lwaitama, 2003).

In the interviews with teachers, all the respondents said that they do not use corporal

punishment of COBET learners, but two of them said they do administer corporal punishment

of the regular formal primary school children – which indicates some possibility that this

could also be done of COBET learners. During an interview with one of the DAEOs, it was

mentioned that one COBET teacher is not allowed to cane the learners ‘because they are

adults’. It is therefore likely that the COBET teachers did not want to say that they use

corporal punishment of COBET learners because they know that it is not allowed.

In regards to school feeding programs, 4 out of 5 schools with COBET learners do provide

lunch or porridge. The head teachers of all the schools where meals are provided said that the

meals are for all, including COBET learners. However, in the focus group discussion some of

the learners said that they do not get meals at school because their school day begins when

meals have already been taken. As described in Chapter Four, COBET learning schedules are

not fixed – it is the teacher and learners who decide when they need to start and finish their

classes. However, most of the centres involved in this study start lessons at 1:30pm – which

is after lunch in some of schools. The lack of meals were not, however, a major issue for

most of the learners during the group discussion. For the teachers, on the other hand, it was

mentioned as one of the possible reasons why some learners do not attend classes regularly. It

also makes some of the learners lose focus and even sleep during lessons. There is evidence

that school feeding programs have helped to reduce primary school dropout and increase

pupil participation in some areas of Tanzania (World Bank Group, 2015)

As far as the XPRIZE learners are concerned, because their program does not bring them

together for teaching as each one learns on his/her own using tablets, it was not possible to

objectively find out how a safe and healthy learning environment affected individual learners

in the learning process. The findings presented are based on observation, a focus group with

the learner and interviews with 3 XPRIZE centre supervisors. The focus group discussion

involved 5 boys and 2 girls. All, except for 2 boys, reported that they were going to a nearby

formal primary school. They had previously dropped out of the same school, but after being

registered as XPRIZE learners and been given tablets they were re-enrolled in the school.

93

Among other things, it was observed that most XPRIZE centres are located in communities

where there is no tap water. Three centres are located along a big river, which is used as the

main source of water for different human activities and for animals. During the focus group

discussion, some participants mentioned that they initially dropped out of the formal school

because they were still young and the school is far from home. One had to cross a river to get

there. One of the supervisors, on the other hand, added that there were many reasons leading

to school dropout, one of them being the lack of meals at school. As she said:

Our school does not provide lunch. In the past, the government wanted parents to contribute

food stuff for their children’s lunch, but they don’t cooperate, and this hunger has been a

reason for truancy amongst many pupils here. Also, our hamlet is isolated from the rest of the

village by a river, and during the rainy season the young children cannot cross it to access

school, and even their parent cannot allow them to do so21 (S1).

Overall, just as for COBET, it was found that there are indications of health and safety

challenges existing within the learning environment for XPRIZE learners as exemplified by

the observed lack of tap water and children not being guaranteed lunch or other meals.

These and other factors are barriers to learning.

6.4 Learning Outcomes

In line with the need for NFE to ‘share the same learning standards as applied to formal

schools’ as declared at Jomtien in 1990, one of the purposes was to investigate whether or not

COBET and XPRIZE learners achieve acceptable grades in a nationally recognized test for

basic literacy and numeracy skills. ‘Acceptable grades’ mean the average grade-equivalent

pass rates according to the national curriculum expectations. Regardless of their historical

background and unique learning circumstances, COBET and XPRIZE learners will in the end

be exposed to the same competitive work environment as their formal primary school

counterparts. At a minimum, COBET and XPRIXE learners therefore need to be at the same

level of academic achievements as their grade-equivalent formal primary school counterparts

- which will then translate into ‘socially-valued certificates needed for promotability’

(Hoppers, 2006).

21 Kiswahili quote: Shule yetu haitoi chakula cha mchana. Zamani serikali ilitaka wazazi wachangie kwa njia ya

kutoa chakula lakini wazazi hawakutoa ushirikiano, kwa hiyo watoto wengi wanatoroka shule wakiumwa njaa

kwakuwa chakula hakitolewi. Lakini pia kitongoji chetu kimetengwa na mto, wakati wa masika ukijaa watoto

wadogo hawawezi kuvuka kwenda shule, hata wazazi pia huzuia watoto wao kupita pale.

94

In the Tanzanian context, assessment of learning outcomes through reading and written tests

is the most commonly used and highly valued way of assessing quality of education. This is

commonly conducted through reading and written tests and examinations which are regularly

done at school, district, regional and national levels. As described in Chapter Three, the

national level examination results in Tanzania are used to selectpupils for successive levels of

formal schooling.

For this purpose, the Uwezo 2015 country-wide ALA tests for Kiswahili, English and

arithmetic were used to assess the learning outcomes of COBET and XPRIZE learners. The

Uwezo 2015 country-wide ALA tests were administered to 112,455 children aged 7-16 years

from 68,588 households in all districts of Tanzania regardless of socio-economic status. The

tests were set according to the Standard II level curriculum in Tanzania. COBET has been

implemented in the country for almost two decades now and the XPRIZE pilot project has

been under implementation for at least two years now, both offering basic education to out-

of-school children of school-going age, using a curriculum approved by the government of

Tanzania. Therefore, assuming that the two education programs have been implementing

their curricula while maintaining high quality education standards, all COBET and XPRIZE

learners, having been in their programs for more than two years, would be expected to

correctly answer all questions – which means 100% score in each test.

The findings, as shown in Tables 6.9 and 6.10, indicate that, with the pass mark being 100%

in each of the three tests (Kiswahili, English and Numeracy), only 12 (50%) of COBET

learners passed Kiswahili, none of them passed English, while only 8 (33.3%) passed the

numeracy test. For XPRIZE learners, on the other hand, only 5 (20.8%) passed Kiswahili, no

one passed the English test and only 3 (13.5%) passed the numeracy test. The mean scores in

the three tests respectively were 85.1, 29.5 and 88.0 for COBET; and for the XPRIZE project

the mean scores were respectively 59.6, 5.2 and 76.7. In general, these findings indicate that

COBET learners performed better than XPRIZE learners.

95

Table 6. 9: Comparison of COBET and XPRIZE Learners Scores in Kiswahili, English and Numeracy

Tests

# of

Learners

COBET Scores (%) XPRIZE Scores (%) # of

Learners

Kiswahili English Numeracy Kiswahili English Numeracy

1 100 90 100 100 25 100 1

2 100 78 100 100 20 100 2

3 100 70 100 100 20 100 3

4 100 60 100 100 20 98 4

5 100 55 100 100 15 95 5

6 100 50 100 95 15 93 6

7 100 50 100 95 10 90 7

8 100 50 100 95 0 90 8

9 100 40 97 90 0 90 9

10 100 30 95 75 0 90 10

11 100 30 95 75 0 86 11

12 100 30 95 55 0 85 12

13 97 20 95 50 0 85 13

14 95 20 90 50 0 80 14

15 95 15 90 50 0 80 15

16 95 10 90 40 0 80 16

17 90 10 90 35 0 75 17

18 80 0 85 35 0 75 18

19 70 0 80 25 0 70 19

20 60 0 80 15 0 65 20

21 60 0 75 15 0 40 21

22 50 0 75 15 0 25 22

23 40 0 65 10 0 25 23

24 10 0 15 10 0 24 24

Mean

Score 85.08333 29.5 88 59.58333 5.208333 76.7083333

96

Table 6. 10: Scores in Kiswahili, English and Numeracy Tests, by Gender

# of

Learn

ers

Girls Scores (%) Boys Scores (%) # of

Learn

ers Kiswahili English Numeracy Kiswahili

Englis

h Numeracy

1 100 30 100 100 90 100 1

2 100 30 100 100 78 100 2

3 100 25 100 100 70 100 3

4 100 20 98 100 60 100 4

5 100 15 95 100 55 100 5

6 100 10 90 100 50 100 6

7 95 10 90 100 50 100 7

8 90 0 85 100 50 100 8

9 75 0 85 100 40 97 9

10 75 0 80 100 30 95 10

11 55 0 80 100 20 95 11

12 50 0 80 97 20 95 12

13 50 0 70 95 20 95 13

14 40 0 65 95 20 93 14

15 15 0 65 95 15 90 15

Mean

Score 76.33333333 9.333333333

85.533333

33 95 15 90 16

95 10 90 17

90 0 90 18

80 0 90 19

70 0 90 20

60 0 86 21

60 0 85 22

50 0 80 23

50 0 80 24

40 0 75 25

35 0 75 26

35 0 75 27

25 0 75 28

15 0 40 29

15 0 25 30

10 0 25 31

10 0 15 32

10 0 15 33

Mean Score 70.51515 21 80.636364

Combining girls from both programs and comparing their performance with that of the boys,

as shown in Table 6.9, it can be seen that 6 (40%) of them passed Kiswahili, none of them

97

passed English, and 3 (20%) of them passed numeracy, with the performance of the boys

being 11 (33.3%), 0 (0%), and 8 (24.2%) in the three tests respectively. The mean scores

show that girls performed better in Kiswahili and numeracy with mean scores of 76.3% and

85.8%, compared with boys who had mean scores of 70.5% and 80.6% in Kiswahili and

numeracy tests respectively.

According to Uwezo (2017), based on their country-wide ALA test in Kiswahil, English and

numeracy conducted in 2015, literacy and numeracy skills among primary school children in

Tanzania are low, with the average pass rate in the three tests being 35% among Standard III

pupils and 72% for Standard VII pupils. Additionally, as observed in this study, most

children tested by Uwezo performed better in Kiswahili than in English and numeracy, with

English taking the lowest scores. The findings of this study reflect the findings of Uwezo.

6.5 Emerging Themes

During the research process, two themes related to the main research question emerged even

though they were initially not part of the main issues being investigated. The first one was

lack of a strong and relevant system for quality control of NFE programs in general,

including COBET and XPRIZE. This was brought up during interviews with the DAEOs, but

it also emerged during interviews with COBET teachers. The second one, also brought up by

the DAEOs, was lack of a budget line from the district budget specifically targeted to

COBET, XPRIZE and other similar NFE programs for out-of-school children and

adolescents. This was also mentioned by some of the head teachers as one of key challenges

in supporting COBET learners.

6.5.1 Lack of a Strong and Relevant System for NFE Quality

Assurance

In Tanzania, education quality assurance is one of the responsibilities of the Ministry of

Education, Science and Technology through its Quality Assurance Unit which has

departments at regional and district levels throughout the country. “Quality assurance (QA)

is the systematic monitoring and evaluation of the various aspects of systems, projects or

programmes in order to maximise the probability of standards being achieved for specified

performance indicators” (Latchem, 2012:14). According to the DAEOs, the current quality

assurance system mainly focuses on formal schools and rarely inspects COBET and other

NFE programs. It would therefore be necessary to strengthen the district adult education

98

departments to enable them to fully oversee the functioning of NFE programs including QA.

The main concern was that NFE and adult learning programs have different goals and

different delivery strategies from the formal schools and therefore they need different systems

for quality assurance. In this respect, one of the interviewees stated:

COBET’s quality control is a responsibility of the district education quality control

department. But these people have been trained to mainly assess and control the quality of the

formal education system and teachers. Most of them do not have knowledge and skills to

control the quality of NFE. In fact, apart from inspecting COBET classes which are within

formal primary schools, I don’t think they normally go out there to inspect other NFE

programs which are not located in schools. And even for the COBET classes, I don’t think

they do inspection based on the program goals. Most of them have no background or

experience in adult education22 (D1).

In a one-on-one interview with COBET teachers, it also appeared that the teachers are usually

not visited by ‘school inspectors’ when they go to visit formal primary schools. However, this

experience has been explained by conflicting schedules of the inspectors and of COBET

learners. While the inspector would be at the school in the morning, most COBET classes

begin in late afternoon when the inspectors are already gone. Education quality control,

including school inspection, in Tanzania has generally been reported to be facing a number of

challenges including insufficient regular inspection due to lack of resources (Kambuga, 2015)

and absence of effective mechanisms to monitor effectiveness of the inspection process

(Twaweza, 2010).

6.5.2 Lack of a Specific Budget Line for COBET and Similar

NFE Programs

Respondent D2 brought up the issue of lack of a specific budget line in the overall district

budget as a key to many challenges facing COBET and similar NFE programs in Korogwe

district. When the government of Tanzania decided to scale up COBET making it a country-

22 Kiswahili quiote: Kwa sasa jukumu la kukagua MEMKWA ni la kitengo cha udhibiti ubora wa elimu hapa

katika halmashauri. Laking hawa wenzetu wa udhibiti ubora wamefundishwa na kuandaliwa kukagua shule na

walimu katika mfumo rasmi. Wengi wao hawana uelewa na stadi za kusimamia ubora wa elimu nje ya mfumo

rasmi. Na ukiachilia mbali kukagua madarasa ya MEMKWA ambayo yapo ndani ya shule za msingi, hata si dhani

kama hua wanaenda kukagua miradi mingine ya elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi. Na hata kwa MEMKWA si dhani

kama wanakagua kulingana na malengo ya mradi wenyewe. Wengi wao hawana uzoefu juu ya elimu ya watu

wazima.

99

wide program in 2001, the district councils were given the responsibility to mobilise funds to

ensure sustainability of the program operations (Galabawa and Laitama, 2003). About 17

years later, one would expect that COBET and similar NFE programs and activities had been

systematically included in the wider budgeting process, including having their own specific

budget line. But this is not the case in Korogwe. The respondent mentioned this as a major

reason for their inability to support the programs, including ‘lack of power’ to make decision

regarding what to change or improve. The respondent put it this way:

You know young brother, money is everything. No matter how big is the position you hold in

these departments, if you don’t have a budget you cannot make any successful decision. In the

district budget, there’s no specific budget line for the COBET and other similar NFE

programs. Our unit, the Adult and Non-formal Education unit, is under the department of

primary education. Funding is normally allocated for the whole department and directed to

primary schools, hoping that COBET learners will also benefit because their classes are

located in such schools. Even when we plan to follow-up on these kinds of projects it’s a

problem, we cannot get our own vehicles, we have to wait for a vehicle going to where the

programs are for other purposes23 (D2).

Since 2016, the government has been implementing a Fee Free Basic Education (primary and

lower secondary education) strategy, disbursing about 20.8 billion Tanzanian Shillings [US$

9.03 million] every month to finance it, and the money is paid directly to primary and

secondary schools’ bank accounts, but verified and monitored by the district governments

(URT, 2019). According to some of the head teachers, the money they receive from the

government is based on the number of registered primary school pupils, and the COBET

learners are not counted. As one of the head teachers reported:

We receive five hundred Tanzanian Shillings per day [US$ 0.22] for every registered pupil.

Our school has 571 pupils, including 284 girls and 287 boys. The COBET students are not

officially registered and so they are not included to the budget. However, when we buy school

23 Kiswahili quote: Unajua bwana mdogo pesa ndio kila kitu. Kama huna bajeti hata kama ukipewa madaraka

kiasi gani katika hizi idara huwezi kubuni au kuamua lolote likafanikiwa. Katika budget ya halmashauri hakuna

bageti maalum ya elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi. MEMKWA iko chini ya idara ya elimu ya msingi, kitengo cha elimu

ya watu wazima. Pesa zikija zinapelekwa mashuleni kwa kudhani kwamba MEMKWA nao watapatia humohumo.

Hakuna fungu maalum la MEMKWA na elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi. Hata tukitaka kufuatilia miradi kama hii ni

shida, labda usubiri lift ya gari au pikipiki ya idara nyingine inayoelekea huko unakotaka kwenda.

100

supplies like chalks and other teaching resource, the COBET teacher uses the same supplies24

(H1).

In reviewing the Korogwe Town council’s education budget expenditure reports for financial

years 20017/18 and 2018/19, there is no money reported to have been used for NFE activities

(see Appendix M). This shows, as reported by the respondents above, that NFE programs in

this district do not have a specific budget line.

6.6 Summary

In this chapter, the data for COBET and XPRIZE programs collected in Korogwe district

using qualitative and quantitative methods and tools have been analysed and presented. The

findings show that, NFE programs and activities are in Korogwe district are facing a number

of challenges which, in turn, negatively impact their effectiveness in providing quality basic

education to out-of-school children and adolescents.

In the next chapter, the findings are discussed in details in relation to each of the research

questions upon which recommendations for improvements are made.

24 Kiswahili quote: Tunapokea shilling 500 kwa kila mwanafunzi aliyesajiliwa. Shule yetu ina wanafunzi 571,

wanawake 284 na wanaume 287. Hawa wa MEMKWA hawajasajiliwa, hawapo kwenye idadi hiyo, kwa hiyo

bajeti haiwahusu. Hata hivyo, tukinunua chaki na vifaa vingine vya kufundishia mwalimu wao anatumia hivyo

hivyo.

101

CHAPTER SEVEN: SUMMARY OF THE MAIN

FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND

CONCLUSION

The main question explored in this research was whether Non-formal Education can be used

as an effective policy strategy to help achieve equitable quality basic education in Tanzania.

The focus was on Non-formal Education for children of school-going age, and two programs

providing basic education to out-of-school children of the said age group, COBET and

XPRIZE, were used as case studies. The questions guiding the study were: whether COBET

and XPRIZE are effective in mainstreaming their learners to formal primary schools; whether

their teaching and learning processes are of good quality; and whether the two programs

produce good learning outcomes in terms of basic literacy and numeracy skills. A number of

data collection methods were used, including questionnaires, interviews, observations, focus

group discussion, review of documents and assessment tests on learners’ ability in Kiswahili,

English and Numeracy. The first section below summarizes the major findings upon which

recommendations for improvement are made.

7.1 Summary of the Findings

In this study, it was found that the two programs are not effective in mainstreaming their

learners to formal primary schools. The empirical findings presented in Chapter Six indicate

that for both programs, the majority of the registered learners do not finally make it to joining

a neighbouring formal primary school – as they either end up dropping out of their programs

sooner or later, as seen in Table 6.4 and Table 6.5. It was also found that, while COBET and

XPRIZE learners are evidently from poor socio-economic backgrounds as alluded in section

6.1.2, the system of finding and helping them join NFE programs is largely inefficient and

unsustainable. In this case, while it is evident that there is a big number of out-of-school

children in Korogwe district as see in appendices N and O, it is mainly willing parents and

voluntary guardians who take the initiative to register some of the children to the NFE

programs while the rest remain unreached by basic education.

One of the main goals for COBET, XPRIZE and similar para-formal NFE programs is to

facilitate mainstreaming of out-of-school children and adolescents to the formal education

system in order to enable them pursue their desire for further education (Galabawa and

Lwaitama, 2003), and as part of efforts to remove them out of the poverty cycle. Thus, the

102

programs’ inability to effectively mainstream their learners to the formal education system

means that such learners will not possess socially-valued certificates and other educational

qualifications which are necessary criteria in the job market. Based on the social reproduction

theory, this forces them to remain at the same level of poverty and hence reproduction of

inequalities of opportunity. Additionally, the rights-based approach to education requires that

quality of education is made accessible throughout all stages of the childhood and beyond

(UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007). The findings indicate that the majority of COBET and XPRIZE

learners do not finally make it into the formal education system which means that a big

number of out-of-school children and adolescents are systematically denied of their right to

education of a good quality.

The study also found that, the overall quality of the teaching and learning process for the two

programs is poor. The aspect of quality was investigated in terms of qualification and

availability of teachers; quality and availability of teaching and learning resources;

pedagogical approach as well as safety and health of the learning environment in COBET

schools and XPRIZE learning centres.

While there are enough teachers for COBET learners based on the TPR in comparison with

the TPR for formal primary schools in the country, and that all COBET teachers possess the

minimum qualifications for primary school teachers as required by the government, the main

challenge is that all of them were mainly trained to teach formal primary school pupils. They

have not received adequate in-service training on how to teach COBET learners as a special

group. There is also an issue of lack of payment of honoraria to COBET teachers and

XPRIZE supervisors which keeps the teachers unmotivated. The failure to pay teachers’

honoraria has been related to lack of financial support from the local government, which

further indicates that there is an unfavourable context for effective implementation of NFE

programs and activities.

In regards to the quality of teaching and learning materials, the findings indicated that most

COBET teachers do not use the curriculum and textbooks which were developed specifically

for COBET learners. Instead, they use the curriculum and textbooks designed for regular

primary school pupils. The government’s purpose for developing a specific curriculum and

textbooks for COBET was in line with considerations for the learners’ characteristics –

including their age, history, prior experience and socio-economic background – which are

103

some of the important factors for a good quality teaching and learning process (UNESCO,

2004), as explained further in section 4.4. For the XPRIZE program, the learners use tablets

as their only learning resource. The tablets are of high quality and the learning applications

contain curriculum and other learning resources which are approved by the TIE which is the

government body in charge of curriculum development.

The classroom teaching and learning process for COBET learners was found to be largely

dominated by teacher-centered as opposed to learner-centred approaches. The teachers spent

most of the instructional time to present information to the learners, with chances for the

learners to make comments being very rare. Also, there were some levels of violation of the

learners’ rights especially through administering corporal punishment.

On whether COBET and XPRIXE programs produce good learning outcomes in terms of

basic numeracy and literacy skills, it was found that such programs do not do so. As can be

seen in section 6.4, even though all COBET and XPRIZE learners have been in the programs

for more than two years, most of them (more than 60%) could not pass Uwezo’s ALA tests

which are equivalent to Standard II of the curriculum for formal primary schools. This

indicates that the education offered in COBET and XPRIZE programs is of very poor quality.

In the context of Tanzania’s education system where test and examination scores are used as

the main determinant for learners succession to the next level of the formal education system,

the findings further indicate that most COBET and XPRIZE learners would very unlikely

complete the primary education cycle unless they repeat the same class for some years until

they pass the tests. This is against the rights-based approach to education which requires that

children have access to quality education throughout all stages of childhood and beyond

(UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007). Furthermore, the lack of basic numeracy and literacy skills

means that such learners are highly limited in terms of their abilities to engage in productive

work in the society and they have limited access to opportunities for personal prosperity and,

as argued in the social reproduction theory, such individuals will perpetuate their own

disadvantages.

7.2 Recommendations

Tanzania has made significant progress towards achieving quality basic education for all.

However, based on the findings of this study, there are major challenges in reaching out-of-

school children and ensure that they too have access to quality basic education as their right.

104

While NFE programs and activities are generally regarded as a possible alternative to

achieving the EFA goal, they currently seem not to be effective enough to the extent of being

relied upon as a sole provider for quality basic education to out-of-school children in

Tanzania unless a number of measures are taken. Some of the necessary measures that need

to be taken are recommended in the following sub-sections.

7.2.1 Need for Compensatory Measures

Based on the findings of this study, it can be argued that most of the challenges faced by

COBET and XPRIZE, and very likely all other NFE programs and activities for children of

school-going age in Tanzania, are related to the fact that the programs are by far treated as

less important in comparison to the formal education system when it comes to mobilization

and allocation of resources, such as qualified teachers, classrooms, textbooks and other

teaching and learning resources needed for their implementation. This argument can be

justified by the fact that while the government is currently financing a Fee Free Basic

Education strategy and with the awareness that at least 1.3 million children of school-going

age are out-of-school (URT, 2016b), there is no designated budget line for COBET or other

NFE programs and activities in Korogwe district as appears in the national budget for

financial year 2019/2020 (URT, 2019). The same is the case in the Korogwe Town Council’s

capitation grants expenditure report for primary schools (Appendix M) which indicates that

COBET learners are regarded as being part of the regular primary school pupils and that there

are no ‘Compensatory Measures’ taken to aid their program.

Compensatory measures, as described by Lupton (2006), imply extra resources provided

(beyond what would normally be provided to regular schools) to assist educational programs

for children from disadvantaged backgrounds so that they can receive an education of good

quality which can in turn remove them from their disadvantage. For the COBET learners,

compensatory measures can take different forms, such as free meals, better pay and regular

in-service training for the teachers or facilitators, adequate books and other teaching

materials, as well as additional educational provisions such as free extra tuition, homework

clubs and reading recovery programs (ibid). They would also include adjusted curricula and

pedagogical approaches to enable effective teaching and learning to take place, as well as

suitable resources to help teachers adapt to the diverse needs of the learners (Hoppers, 2006).

105

For the XPRIZE learners, the compensatory measure would also include availability of

additional learning materials and supplies such as notebooks, pencils, crayons and textbooks

which would supplement the learning process through enabling learners to practice

handwriting, drawing, colouring and other skills which cannot be easily learned by use of

tables. It would also be even more productive to improve the tablet charging stations to make

them favourable environment for the children to gather and learn in different ways. The

station improvements would include widening and renovating the rooms, suppling chairs and

table or benches, simple sports and games facilities and ensuring availability of water and

sanitation services.

The recommendation for compensatory measures as a necessity for effective NFE programs

and activities in Tanzania stems from the concept of ‘Social Exclusion’ as thoroughly

narrated by Sen (2000) and Kabeer (2000). According to Kabeer (2000) disadvantaged

people – such as the poor out-of-school boys and girls – are a result of social exclusion

caused by existing institutional mechanisms which determine how resources are distributed

and values are assigned (pp. 84-87). Such people have a limited ability to compete and

ultimately get out of their deprived situations unless they are given some extra support – the

‘remedies’ (ibid). This implies that the policies and practices to improve the socio-economic

status of such people should take into account the necessity for compensatory measures

which would help them overcome their structural, social and economic deprivations.

In relation to the theory of social reproduction, in the absence of compensatory measures

which would enhance the quality of education provided in NFE programs and activities, the

learners will basically remain in the same level of poverty and that they will perpetuate this

status in the next generation with the latter likely to face even harsher consequences of

poverty. As Kabeer (2000) notes:

The absence of at least (quality) basic education would put the children of the poor at a much

greater disadvantage when they grow up than it did to their parents, and would perpetuate the

inter-generational transmission of disadvantage (p. 94)

In a developing country like Tanzania with many competing priorities in all aspects of basic

social services provision including health and education, the central challenge appears to be

the government’s ability to ensure sustainable funding for the compensatory measures.

106

However, in efforts to ensure quality basic education for all in the country, the government

needs to take the issue of providing quality basic education to out-of-school children and

other marginalized groups as an urgent and special one in terms of measures to mobilize and

allocate the resources needed. Additionally, in the context of Tanzania, there is evidence that

with a strong political will, as happened during massive campaigns against adult illiteracy in

the first decade after independence, it is possible to secure additional development funding

even from the perceived materially poor parents and communities (Galabawa and Lwaitama,

2003; Mushi, 2009). To that end, it is recommended that the government strongly works with

communities, parents and local national and international organizations (development

partners) to mobilize funds specifically intended for ensuring equity and quality in NFE

provisions for children of school-going age.

7.2.2 Need for Availability and Utilization of Curriculum and

Learning Materials Specific for NFE Programs and

Activities

NFE programs and activities are targeted to the out-of-school children and adolescents who

have socio-economic backgrounds and experiences which are quite diverse and different

from those of formal primary school pupils. Therefore, there needs to be guaranteed

availability and utilization of designated curricula and learning materials which can

effectively respond to the nature of the learners’ educational needs – as opposed to utilizing

the curriculum and textbooks designed for the regular primary school pupils as was the case

for the COBET learners in this study.

When COBET was initiated as a pilot project about two decades ago, a special curriculum

was developed to cater for the specific educational needs of the learners which would broadly

include academic, life and survival skills (Massawe et al., 2000; Galabwa and Lwaitama,

2003). The curriculum development process involved various education stakeholders

including communities, parents, children, and DEOs. The process was followed by

development of relevant curriculum materials including syllabi, modules, manuals and other

materials for the learners and facilitators; and the overall goal was to create a conducive

environment for learner friendly and life relevant teaching and learning processes (ibid).

The curriculum and its associated teaching and learning materials for the COBET program

during the pilot stage were mentioned in various evaluation reports as one the program’s

107

success stories – see for example Katunzi (1999), Massawe et al. (2000), and Mushi et al.

(2002). Indeed, the curriculum was suggested to be used as a standard one for NGOs running

NFE programs for out-of-school children and adolescents (Massawe et al., 2000) and its

subsequent reviews have led to a standardized curriculum for all NFE programs and activities

for out-of-school children and adolescents in the country (URT, 2016c). In this study

however, as discussed in section 6.3.2, while some copies of the standardized NFE

curriculum and textbooks were seen in a number of COBET schools, they were not utilized

by the teachers. Instead, it is the textbooks designated for the formal primary school pupils

that were utilized for classroom instructions intended for the COBET learners. In the same

vein, it was observed that the COBET learners had neither the designated COBET textbooks

nor formal primary school books which made most of them rely on coping notes written by

their teachers on chalkboards.

While the necessity for and importance of a designated curriculum for any educational

program cannot be overemphasized, the mere presence of the curriculum documents without

creating an environment which is suitable for its proper utilization is meaningless. As

Tedesco and his collaborators assert:

The intended curriculum requires an educational institution able to implement it and the

organization of learning opportunities and processes adapted to the diversity of students.

However, the institution itself risks being too prescriptive if it is not able to convince and

commit its actors. Hence, there is a need for teachers that can implement the curriculum,

translate into practice the intended objectives, prioritize learning and content areas, and adopt

teaching strategies and evaluation criteria that respond to each student’s uniqueness. In

addition, the teacher alone cannot personalize education if the curriculum and educational

institutions are not friendly (Tedesco et al., 2013: 8-9).

The government needs to collaborate with teachers, parents and other education stakeholders

to make sure that the curriculum designed for COBET and other NFE programs and activities

is effectively implemented and its impact on the learners periodically reviewed and adjusted

as necessary. For the XPRIZE program, the effectiveness of the tablet learning applications

need to be further investigated to ascertain their suitability facilitating broader learning

outcomes of good quality beyond basic numeracy and literacy skills.

108

7.2.3 Need for an Effective System for Monitoring and

Evaluating NFE Programs and Activities

As highlighted in section 6.5.1, NFE development in Tanzania is faced by a major challenge

of lack of an effective system for monitoring and evaluation of its programs and activities.

Evidence from this study was the lack of systematic ways to monitor and evaluate COBET

and XPRIZE activities, especially those related to quality of the teaching and learning

process. Using the case of COBET as an example, while teachers had ways to record the

learners’ registration, attendance to classrooms and their transition to formal primary schools,

most of them are not observed by school inspectors when the latter inspect schools. Most of

the decisions regarding what to teach, when and how have been left in the hands of the

teacher who, on the other hand, is neither well prepared nor possesses adequate resources to

do the job.

While Tanzania is one of the first countries to benefit from UNESCO’s Non-Formal

Education – Management Information System (NFE-MIS25) in early 2000 (Connal and

Sauvageot, 2005), the government acknowledges that there is still a need for an effective

system for monitoring and evaluation of adult and NFE programs and activities in the country

as it clarifies below:

Monitoring and evaluation are essential components to ensure effective implementation of

ANFEDP. However, there is an ineffective monitoring and evaluating system for adult, non-

formal and continuing education. Also, availability of reliable data for making rational plans

and effective implementation is a challenge to be addressed. Research is key for ensuring that

educational decisions and practices are evidence-based, but it is not well developed in the

field of adult, non-formal and continuing education (URT, 2012b:38).

The challenge of lacking an effective system for monitoring and evaluation of NFE stems

from the complexity of its nature and characteristics, in regards to being universally held in

low regards; its heterogeneous nature; its highly diverse modes of delivery; its wide-range of

stakeholders involved; and limited funding (Yasunaga, 2014:8). Effective development and

25 NFE-MIS is a system that has been specifically conceived for the information management of Non-Formal

Education and which collects, stores, processes, analyses and disseminates data and information on NFE for the

planning and management of NFE. It consists of the following components: a conceptual framework and

methodologies for mapping and monitoring NFE, prototype data collection tools; a computerized database, and a

dissemination strategy which ensures a two-way information flow between NFE stakeholders (Connal &

Sauvageot (2005).

109

usage of systems for monitoring and evaluation of any project requires participation of the

key stakeholders for that project (Latchem, 2012; Sulemana et al., 2018). In the same sense,

given the multifaceted challenges of NFE, the development and usage of an effective system

to monitor and evaluate its programs and activities need to involve at least the learners,

teachers, parents and the communities where those activities take place.

7.5 Conclusion

Using COBET and XPRIZE programs operating in Korogwe district as a case study, this

research sought investigate the effectiveness of NFE programs and activities for children of

school-going as a policy strategy for achieving quality basic education for all in Tanzania,

and hence to make recommendations which may enable such programs to maximize their

contribution to the intended goal.

Based on the most significant findings of this study, it is concluded that while NFE programs

and activities appear to be the main way relied upon by the government in providing quality

basic education to out-of-school children and other marginalized groups, they are not

effective enough in achieving the said goal.

Even though one of the main goals for COBET and XPRIZE is to facilitate mainstreaming of

learners to the formal education system, very few amongst many registered learners

successfully make the transition from the NFE programs to the neighbouring formal primary

schools. The programs have very poor internal efficiency as most of the learners either repeat

the same course for many years or end up getting mainstreamed to formal primary schools.

Furthermore, there are significant concerns related to the quality of the teaching and learning

process as characterized by insufficient teaching and learning materials, utilization of an

irrelevant curriculum and its materials, lack of proper training for the teachers or facilitators,

dominance of teacher-centred pedagogical approaches (as opposed to learner-centred ones) as

well as some concerns related to the learning environment being unsafe and unhealthy for the

learners. Related to the issues of quality of the teaching and learning process, most of the

learners do not achieve good learning outcomes in tests for basic literacy and numeracy

skills.

The challenges faced by NFE programs and activities for children of school-going age in

Tanzania are mainly due to the universal perception that this type of education is inferior to

traditional formal education, and thus giving it lower priority when it comes to mobilizing

110

and allocating resources needed for execution of its programs and activities (Hoppers, 2006;

ADEA, 2012; Latchem, 2012; Yasunaga, 2014). On the contrary, as argued by Brown (1995),

Kabeer (2000), Sen (2000) and other scholars of the social exclusion discourse, since the

disadvantaged and marginalized people (like out-of-school children and adolescents) are a

result of existing institutional mechanisms, the distribution of resources should be done in

such a way that these people are given extra resources in order to remove or uplift them from

their disadvantage. In that sense, it has been has been recommended that the government of

Tanzania needs to do more in terms of mobilizing and allocating resources for NFE programs

and activities as the main gateway to basic education for out-of-school children and other

marginalized groups in the country. It has also been recommended that there is need for an

effective system for monitoring and evaluating NFE programs and activities, in efforts to

ensure that the education being provided through this means is of the best quality possible.

Quality education is a human right (UNICEF/UNESCO, 2007) and, in the context of NFE for

out-of-school children and adolescents, it covers a broad range of elements including

availability of school meals for the learners; adequate teaching and learning resources of

good quality; interactive learner-centred teaching and learning process; relevant curriculum;

regular in-service training for the teachers or facilitators and favourable education policies, to

mention but a few (UNESCO, 2004). As asserted by Kabeer (2000) and Hoppers (2006),

inability to receive quality basic education amongst the poor and disadvantaged makes them

at an even greater disadvantage which they will perpetuate in their future generations.

111

Appendix A Questionnaire for Head Teachers (English translation)

Utangulizi (Introduction – explains the purpose of the research and appreciating the

willingness and acceptance to participate).

Katika miaka ya hivi karibuini, elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi imetumika kama njia kuu ya kufisha

elimu ya msingi kwa watoto walioko nje ya mfumo rasmi wa elimu pamoja. Lengo kuu la

utafiti huu ni kutafuta taarifa kuhusu ufanisi wa elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi katika kufanikisha

malengo ya elimu bora kwa wote Tanzania. Ili kufanikisha lengo hili tunaomba ujaze dodoso

hapa chini kutupa taarifa mbalimbali kuhusu Mpango wa Elimu ya Msingi kwa Waliokosa

(MEMKWA) katika shule yako. Tunatanguliza shukurani zetu.

1. Jinsia: (Weka alama ya (v) panapohitajika) – (mark (v) in the appropriate box for you)

Mwanamke

(Male)

Mwanamume

(Female)

2. Kiwango cha Elimu: (Weka alama ya (v) panapoendana na elimu yako) – (level of

education)

Sekondari (Ordinary level)

Sekondari (Advanced level)

Diploma (Diploma)

Digrii (Degree)

Nyinginezo (toa maelezo kwa

ufupi)/others (please explain briefly)

3. Umri miaka (Age)…………………..

4. Uzoefu wako kazini (Miaka uliyofanya kazi kama mwalimu)………………. (Miaka

uliyofanya kazi kama Mwalimu Mkuu)………………….(Years of working as a

teacher ……… Years of working as a head teacher……………….)

5. Shule yako ina wanafunzi wangapi? How many pupils does your school have?

Wasichana (Girls)……………………

Wavulana (Boys)……………………..

6. Shule yako ina walimu wangapi? How many teachers does your school have?

Wanawake (Females)……………………

Wanaume (Males)…………………….

112

7. Shule yako ina wanafunzi wa MEMKWA wangapi? How many COBET learners does

your school has?

Wasichana (Girls)…………………...

Wavulana (Boys)……………………

8. Shule yako ina walimu wangapi wa MEMKWA? How many COBET teachers does

your school has?

Wanawake (Females)………………….

Wanaume (Males)…………………..

9. Shule yako ina huduma ya maji safi na salama? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama

(v) panapostahili). Does your school have clean and safe wáter service? (put a tick

where appropriate)

Ndiyo (Yes)…………..

Hapana (No)………....

10. Shule yako ina huduma ya vyoo ya kutosheleza wanafunzi wote? (tafadhali toa jibu

kwa kuweka alama (v) panapostahili). Does your school has adequate toilets?

Ndiyo (Yes)…………..

Hapana (No)………....

11. Shule yako ina viwanja vya michezo? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama (v)

panapostahili) Does your school have sports fields/grounds?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

12. Wanafunzi wa MEMKWA wanashiriki michezo? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama

(v) panapostahili). Do COBET learners participates in school sports and games?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

13. Wanafunzi wanapata chakula shuleni? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama (v)

panapostahili). Does your school provide free meal to pupils?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

14. Wanafunzi wa MEMKWA wanapata chakula shuleni? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka

alama (v) panapostahili). Do COBET learners get the meal?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

113

15. Je, adhabu ya viboko hutolewa shuleni kwako? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama

(v) panapostahili). Do teachers administer corporal punishment to pupils?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

16. Je, wanafunzi wa MEMKWA hupewa adhabu ya viboko? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa

kuweka alama (v) panapostahili). Do COBET learners receive corporal punishment?

Ndiyo…………..

Hapana………....

17. Je, kuna matukio ya unyanyasaji wa kijinsia yameripotiwa hapa shuleni kwako mwaka

huu? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama (v) panapostahili). Have there been reported

cases of gender-based violence in your school this year?

Ndiyo………….

Hapana………..

18. Mambo gani yafanyike kuboresha MEMKWA? What should be done to improve

COBET program?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

19. Kama una maoni mengine yoyote tafadhali yaandike hapa chini? Any other comments?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

Asante Sana

114

Appendix B Questionnaire for Ward Education Officers

Utangulizi (Introduction – explains the purpose of the research and appreciating the

willingness and acceptance to participate).

Katika miaka ya hivi karibuini, elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi imetumika kama njia kuu ya kufisha

elimu ya msingi kwa watoto walioko nje ya mfumo rasmi wa elimu pamoja. Lengo kuu la

utafiti huu ni kutafuta taarifa kuhusu ufanisi wa elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi katika kufanikisha

malengo ya elimu bora kwa wote Tanzania. Ili kufanikisha lengo hili tunaomba ujaze dodoso

hapa chini kutupa taarifa mbalimbali kuhusu mradi wa XPRIZE katika kata yako.

Tunatanguliza shukurani zetu.

1. Jinsia: (Weka alama ya (v) panapohitajika)

Mwanamke

(Male)

Mwanamume

(Female)

2. Kiwango cha Elimu: (Weka alama ya (v) panapoendana na elimu yako)

Sekondari (Ordinary level)

Sekondari (Advanced level)

Diploma (Diploma)

Digrii (Degree)

Nyinginezo (toa maelezo kwa

ufupi)/Others (please explain briefly)

3. Umri miaka (Age)…………………..

4. Uzoefu wako kazini (Miaka uliyofanya kazi kama mwalimu)………………. (Miaka

uliyofanya kazi kama Mratibu Elimu Kata)………………….Work Experience in Yeas:

As a teacher:……………………..As WEO:………………………………

5. Kata yako ina watoto wangapi ambao hawaendi shule? What is the estimated number

of out-of-school children and adolescents in your ward?

Wasichana (Girls)……………………

Wavulana (Boys)……………………..

6. Kata yako ina wanafunzi wa XPRIZE wangapi? (How many out-of-school children

attend XPRIZE program?)

Wasichana (Girls)…………………...

115

Wavulana (Boys)……………………

7. Kata yako ina wasimamizi wangapi wa vituo vya XPRIZE? (How many XPRIZE

supervisors does your Wark have?)

Wanawake (Females)………………….

Wanaume (Males)…………………..

8. Wanafunzi wa XPRIZE wanapata changamoto gani katika kujifunza? Which

challenges do XPRIZE learner face in the teacning and learinf process?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

9. Je, kuna matukio ya unyanyasaji wa kijinsia kwa wanafunzi wa XPRIZE yameripotiwa

kwako mwaka huu? (tafadhali toa jibu kwa kuweka alama (v) panapostahili) Have there

been reported cases of gender-based violence in your school this year?

Ndiyo………….

Hapana………...

10. Mambo gani yafanyike kuboresha XPRIZE? What should be done to improve XPRIZE?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Kama una maoni mengine yoyote tafadhali yaandike hapa chini? Any other comment?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

Asante Sana

116

Appendix C Interview Guide for COBET Teachers (English translation)

Utangulizi (Introduction – explanation of the purpose of the research and appreciation for

accepting to participate in the research)

Katika miaka ya hivi karibuini, elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi imetumika kama njia kuu ya kufisha

elimu ya msingi kwa watoto walioko nje ya mfumo rasmi wa elimu pamoja. Lengo kuu la

utafiti huu ni kutafuta taarifa kuhusu ufanisi wa elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi katika kufanikisha

malengo ya elimu bora kwa wote Tanzania. Lengo la mahojiano haya ni kupata taarifa

mbalimbali kuhusu maendeleo ya Mpango wa Elimu ya Msingi kwa Waliokosa (MEMKWA)

katika shule yako. Kama unaridhia, mahojiano haya yatarikodiwa kwa ajili ya kurahisisha

uchakataji wa taarifa hii hapo baadae, na kwamba taarifa unazotoa zitakuwa siri na

hazitatumika kwa malengo mengine yoyote zaidi kufanikisha utafiti huu. Natanguliza

shukurani za dhati.

1. Kiwango Cha Elimu (Level of Education)

Darasa la Saba (Primary Level 7)

Sekondari (Ordinary level)

Sekondari (Advanced level)

Cheti (Certificate)

Diploma (Diploma)

Digrii (Degree)

Nyinginezo (Zitaje)/Others (mention)

2. Umefanya kazi ya uwalimu kwa muda gani sasa? How long have you been a teacher?

3. Ni lini ulipewa majukumu ya kufundisha MEMKWA? When were you assigned to

teacher COBET?

117

4. Kabla ya Hapo Ulifundisha darasa la ngapi? Which class were you teaching before

being a COBET teacher?

5. Zaidi ya kufundisha MEMKWA, nini Majukumu yako mengine? Apart from being a

COBET teacher, what other tasks/responsibilities do you do?

6. Je, ulipewa mafunzo yoyote kabla ya kufundisha MEMKWA? Did you receive training

before being assigned as COBET teacher?

7. Je, Unapata mafunzo zaidi kazini kuhusu MEMKWA?

8. Nini Maoni yako kuhusu vifaa vya kufundishia MEMKWA?

9. Wanafunzi wa MEMKWA wanapatikanaje? What is the process of finding and

registering COBET learners?

10. Niambie kuhusu ratiba ya masomo ya MEMKWA? Tell me about COBET learners’

daily schedule/timetable?

11. Wanafunzi wa MEMKWA wakikosea wanapata adhabu gani? How do you discipline

COBET learners in case of behavior problems? Viboko? Do you cane them?

12. Wadhibiti Ubora wanakagua MEMKWA? Wanafanya nini wakija kukagua? Do school

inspectors inspect your COBET program? What do they do when they come?

13. Je, MEMKWA ina changamoto gani kwa ujumla? What are the main challenges you

face in running COBET?

14. Mambo gani yafanyike kuboresha? What should be done to improve the COBET?

15. Una maoni mengine? Any other comments/suggestions?

Asante Sana! Thank you very much

118

Appendix D Interview Guide for XPRIZE Supervisors (English Translation)

Utangulizi

Katika miaka ya hivi karibuini, elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi imetumika kama njia kuu ya kufisha elimu

ya msingi kwa watoto walioko nje ya mfumo rasmi wa elimu pamoja. Lengo kuu la utafiti huu ni

kutafuta taarifa kuhusu ufanisi wa elimu nje ya mfumo rasmi katika kufanikisha malengo ya elimu bora

kwa wote Tanzania. Lengo la mahojiano haya ni kupata taarifa mbalimbali kuhusu maendeleo ya maradi

wa XPRIZE katika kitongoji chako. Kama unaridhia, mahojiano haya yatarikodiwa kwa ajili ya

kurahisisha uchakataji wa taarifa hii hapo baadae, na kwamba taarifa unazotoa zitakuwa siri na

hazitatumika kwa malengo mengine yoyote zaidi kufanikisha utafiti huu. Natanguliza shukurani za

dhati.

1. Kiwango Cha Elimu

Darasa la Saba (Primary Level 7)

Sekondari (Ordinary level)

Sekondari (Advanced level)

Cheti

Diploma

Digrii

Nyinginezo (Zitaje)

2. Umefanya kazi ya hii kwa muda gani sasa?

3. Ni lini ulipewa majukumu ya kusimamia kituo cha XPRIZE?

4. Kabla ya Hapo Ulifundisha darasa la ngapi?

5. Zaidi ya kufundisha XPRIZE, nini Majukumu yako mengine?

6. Wanafunzi wa XPRIZE wanapatikanaje?

7. Je, ulipewa mafunzo yoyote kabla ya kufundisha XPRIZE?

8. Je, Unapata mafunzo zaidi kazini kuhusu XPRIZE?

9. Nini Maoni yako tablets kufundishia watoto wa XPRIZE?

119

10. Wanafunzi wa XPRIZE wakikosea wanapata adhabu gani? Viboko?

11. Wadhibiti Ubora wanakagua XPRIZE?

12. Je, XPRIZE ina changamoto gani kwa ujumla?

13. Mambo gani yafanyike kuboresha mradi wa XPRIZE?

120

Appendix E Interview Guide for DAEO

1. Gender……………………

2. Age…………………………

3. Education level…………………………………

4. Work Experience………………………………

5. How long have you been District Adult Education Officer?

6. What’s the role of your office in COBET/XPRIZE/NFE?

7. What are the key success of COBET/XPRIZE and other NFE programs in your

districts?

8. What challenged do COBE/XPRIZE and other NFE programs face in your district?

9. Who are the main funders for COBET/XPRIZE activities?

10. What percentage of total budget for Primary Education is set for COBET/XPRIZE?

11. In what ways is quality of COBET/NFE activities monitored in your district?

12. Is COBET inspected? If yes, by who? How many times a year?

13. Do you receive COBET inspection reports? If yes, can I get a copy of the latest report?

14. In your view, what should be done to maximize the contribution of COBET in achieving

quality basic education for all in Tanzania?

15. Any other comments?

121

Appendix F Focus Group Discussion (English Translation)

1. Nini maoni yenu kuhusu masomo? (What are your opinions on this learning program?)

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Mambo gani yaboreshwe ili masomo yenu yawe na mafanikio zaidi? (What should be

done to make you succeed in your studies?)

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

3. Maoni mengineyo? (Any other suggestions?)

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

Asanteni Sana! (Thank you very much!)

122

Appendix G Observation Rubric

Name of School/Centre:

Observed Behaviour Frequency

Learners volunteer to answer questions

Teachers pick learners to answer questions

Learners ask questions of teachers

Learners make comments

Learners have group discussion

Teachers encourage girls to make comments

Teachers use games, songs, activities etc.

123

Appendix H Uwezo ALA Tests

Kiswahili

nya te mu

do pi ku kwe

ba no li

Watoto wadogo wana mahitaji mengi

muhimu. Inapaswa wapewe chakula

bora. Pia wapatiwe maji safi na

salama. Wapewe na muda mwingi

wa kulala.

Silabi Aya1

Kiswahili

kuku pete maji

daka paka nyama

ndoa bata zeze

saa

Mwalimu alisema tutunze vizuri vitabu

vyetu. Mikono yetu iwe safi wakati

tunasoma. Mikono michafu huchafua

vitabu. Tuoshe mikono kwa sabuni na

maji.

Maneno Aya2

Mwaka una miezi kumi na miwili. Machi ni mwezi wa tatu katika mwaka.

Mwezi huu hupendwa sana kuliko miezi mingine. Maua huwa na harufu na

rangi nzuri. Rangi za maua ni za kupendeza sana. Vipepeo wazuri

wanaruka angani na kwenye maua. Mama huniruhusu kwenda nje kucheza.

Ninakimbizana na wenzangu. Mama anachuma maua mazuri kwenye

bustani. Tunamwekea katika nywele zake nzuri. Tunakaa kwenye maua na

kuimba. Mama hucheka na kufurahi sana.

Maswali

1. Katika hadithi uliyosoma wadudu gani wanaruka angani?

2.Tunamwekea nini mama katika nywele zake nzuri?

Mwezi Machi Hadithi

124

English

c p a w

h r f d

m e

Joseph and John are brothers.

They are in grade two. They go to

school every morning. They stay

at home on weekends.

English Letters Pragraph1

hut eat moon

sheep take bat

dig hair men

dress

My sister is called Hilda. She lives

near a market place. She sells

clothes in the market. Many

people buy clothes from her.

Words Paragraph2

w2

I live in Majengo village. There is one big mango tree. It is the tallest tree

here. Small birds love to eat mangoes from this tree. We like playing

around it. The tree gives us shade.

People say this mango tree is very old. They think that the tree keeps

water under it. It gives us a lot of rain. It grows many sweet mangoes

from April. Other trees also grow many leaves. We feed our goats on tree

leaves.

Questions:

1. What do small birds love to do?

2. What do people think about the mango tree?

Story

125

Numeracy 1

126

Numeracy 2

Taja kazi ya mtu huyu (What is this person’s occupation?)

127

Appendix I Letter of Introduction and Research Support – University of Oslo

128

Appendix J Research Permit – Tanga Regional Administrative Secretary

129

Appendix K Research Permit – Korogwe District Administrative Secretary

130

Appendix L Research Permit – Korogwe Town Administrative Secretary

131

Appendix M KTC Capitation Grants Expenditure Report for Primary Schools –

March, 2019

132

Appendix N Number of Registered COBET Learners in Korogwe District - 2019

S/N School Boys Girls Total

1 PS1 5 7 12

2 PS2 4 1 5

3 PS3 7 3 10

4 PS4 11 13 24

5 PS5 4 5 9

6 PS6 18 11 29

7 PS7 9 2 11

8 PS8 9 11 20

9 PS9 16 13 29

10 PS10 10 9 19

11 PS11 5 7 12

12 PS12 6 1 7

13 PS13 30 16 46

14 PS14 6 5 11

15 PS15 8 4 12

16 PS16 10 1 11

17 PS17 25 7 32

18 PS18 16 9 25

19 PS19 24 10 34

20 PS20 9 2 11

21 PS21 25 13 38

22 PS22 12 3 15

23 PS23 10 5 15

24 PS24 16 1 17

Total 454

133

Appendix O List of XPRIZE Centres and Registered Learners – 2019

CENTER CODE Registered Learners

XP1 20

XP2 21

XP3 9

XP4 16

XP5 17

XP6 7

XP7 16

XP8 13

XP9 18

XP10 21

XP11 5

XP12 16

XP13 11

XP14 18

XP15 13

XP16 16

XP17 13

XP18 18

XP19 14

XP20 21

XP21 20

XP22 19

XP23 19

XP24 19

XP25 15

XP26 19

XP27 14

XP28 19

XP29 14

XP30 11

XP31 21

XP32 20

XP33 19

XP34 9

XP35 6

XP36 19

XP37 20

XP38 15

XP39 15

XP40 4

XP41 19

Total 660

134

REFERENCES

Abdulkareem, A., Ismaila, A., & Jumare, M. A. (2018). Understanding the Use of Research

Paradigm and Theory in the Discipline of Library and Information Science Research:

Reflection on Qualitative and Quantitative Approach. Journal of Research in

Librarianship, 4(2), pp. 24-32

ActionAid Tanzania. (2002). Providing Opportunities to Access Basic Education to Children

in Difficult Circumstances. Dar es Salaam: ActionAid

ADEA. (2008). Beyond Primary Education: Challenges and Approaches to Expanding

Learning Opportunities in Africa. ADEA Biennale on Education in Africa Maputo,

Mozambique

ADEA. (2009). The Basic Education in Africa Program (BEAP). A policy Paper – Responding

to Demands for Access, Quality, Relevance and Equity. Eschborn. BREDA/IBE-

UNESCO/GTZ

ADEA. (2012). Strategic Orientation Framework for Non-Formal Education in Holistic,

Integrated and Diversified Version of Life Long Learning. Working Group in Non-

Formal Education. Ouagadougou. Burkina Faso

Aggarwal, J.C. (1981). Theory and Principles of Education: Philosophical and Sociological

base of Education. New Delhi: Vikas.

Antoniou, A & Lepouras, G. (2009). Reflections on Mobile and Life Long Learning: Museums

as Application Fields. Proceedings of the AIDIS International Conference on Mobile

Learning 2008. Qwara, Malta pp 249-252

Beck, U & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2006). Beyond Status and Class. In Lauder, H., Brown, P.,

Dillabough, J. & Halsey, A. H (Eds), Education, Globalization & Social Change.

London: Oxford University Press

135

Bhalalusesa, E. (2003). Presentation of COBET, Tanzania. Symposium on the Management of

Diversity within the Context of Quality Education for All, organized by the

ADEA/WGNFE, Ouagadougou.

Bhalalusesa, E. (2004). Towards Sustainable Development through the REFLECT model in

Tanzania: major trends and lessons. In: Adult Education and Development, Vol. 61.

Bonn: IIZ/DVV

Bois-Reymond, M. 2003. Study on the links between Formal and Non-formal Education.

Leiden University. Netherlands

Bourdieu, P. (2006). The Forms of Capital. In Lauder, H., Brown, P., Dillabough, J. & Halsey,

A. H (Eds), Education, Globalization & Social Change. London: Oxford University

Press

Brock-Utne, B., Desai, Z., & Qorro, M., (Eds.). (2006). Focus on Fresh Data on the Language

of Instruction Debate in Tanzania and South Africa. Cape Town: African Minds.

Brown, P. (1995). Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion: Some Observations on Recent Trends

in Education, Employment and Labour Market. Work, Employment & Society, 9(1), pp.

29-51

Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods. New York: Oxford University Press

Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and Educational Reform: What Planners Need to Know.

Paris: UNESCO-IIEP

Carr-Hill, R.A and Carron, G. (1991). Non-formal Education: Information and Planning

Issues. IIEP Research Report 90. Paris: UNESSCO-IIEP

Chiba, A. (2004). Non-formal Education: Unfulfilled Tasks and Challenges for the Future. A

keynote presentation to a UNESCO-JAICA International Symposium on Non-formal

Education to promote EFA and Lifelong Learning. October, 2004. Tokyo, Japan.

136

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education. London and

New York: Routledge Falmer

Colardyn, D & Bjornavold, J. (2004). Validation of Formal, Non-formal and Informal

Learning: policy and practices in EU member states. European Journal of Education.

39 (1), pp. 70-88

Collins, J. (2009). Social Reproduction in Classrooms and Schools. The Annual Review of

Anthropology, 38(03) pp.33–48

Connal, C. & Sauvegoet, S. (2013). NFE-MES Handbook: Developing a Sub-National Non-

Formal Education Management Information System. Paris: UNESCO

Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into

Practice, 39(3), pp.124-131

Dawson, C. (2002). Practical Research Methods: A User-friendly Guide to Mastering

Research Techniques and Projects. Oxford: How To Books

Demaine, J. (2003). Social Reproduction and Education Policy. International Studies in

Sociology of Education, 12(2), pp.125-140

DeStephano, J., Moore, A. S., Balwanz, D., & Hartwell, A. (2007). Reaching the Underserved:

Complementary Models of Effective Schooling. Washington: USAID – EQUIP2

Dib, Z. (1988). Formal, Non-formal and Informal Education: concepts and applicability. In:

Cooperative Networks in Physics Education. Conference Proceedings 173. New York:

American Institute of Physics

EDC, Inc. (2014). Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) and Zanzibar Teacher

Upgrading by Radio (ZTUR): Post-Project Evaluation in Zanzibar. Final Report –

January 2015

Etling, A. (1993). What is Nonformal Education? Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(4),

pp. 72-76

137

Farrell, J & Hartwell, A. (2008). Planning for Successful Alternative schooling: a possible

route to Education for all. Paris: UNESCO- IIE

Feilzer, M. (2010). Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically: Implications for the

Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods

Research, XX(X), pp. 1–11

Fergus, E. (2016). Social Reproduction Ideologies: Teacher Beliefs about Race and Culture.

In DisCrit - Disiability Studies and Critical Race Theory in Education, by Connor D.

J., B. A. Ferri., & Annamma, S. A (Eds), Teachers College Press. Columbia

University

Galabawa J.C.J. (2003). Complementary Basic Education in Tanzania (COBET): Some

Revalations from a Strategy for Access and Quality Improvement at Primary School

Level. A paper presented at a research dissemination UNICEF workshop held at

UNICEF, Dar es Salaam on 20th June 2003

Galabawa, J. (2001). Developments and Issues Regarding Universal Primary Education (UPE)

in Tanzania. A paper presented at ADEA Biennial Meeting held in Arusha, Tanzania

on October 7-11, 2001.

Galabawa, J.C.J & Lwaitama, A.F. (2003). Civil and development ethics education as

innovative strategy for mobilizing development finance: the case of the Complementary

Basic Education in Tanzania (COBET) pilot project. Paper presented at UNU/WIDER

Conference on Sharing Global Prospective, September 23, Helsinki, Finland.

Gall, D. M., Gall, J. P & Borg, W. (2007). Educational Research: an introduction. Boston:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Gathenya, W. (2004). National Strategies for Mainstreaming Non-formal Education

Innovations in Kenya. A keynote presentation during an ICSEI Conference on Braking

Boundaries to Achieve Quality Education for All. January, 2004. Barcelona, Spain

138

Global Education Partnership. (2016). Literacy and Numeracy Education Support (LANES).

Mid-Year Implementation Status Report. Dar es Salaam: GPE

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The

Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606

Govinda, R. (2008). Non-formal Education for Poverty Alleviation: Analysis of Field

Experiences from Asia. Paris. UNESCO-IIEP

Grandstaff, M. (1974). Alternatives in Education: A Summary View of Research and Analysis

on the Concepts of Non-formal Education. A study team Report. Washington, D.C:

USAID

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K.

Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Hammond, J. L. (1999). Popular Education as Community Organizing in El Salvador. Latin

American Perspective, 26(4), pp. 69-94

Hartwel, A. (2006). Meeting EFA: Ghana School for Life. Washington: USAID – EQUIP2

Helgesson, L. (2001). (E)quality: Girls’ and Boys’ Education in Masasi and Kisarawe Districts.

Dar es Salaam. UNICEF

Hill, H. (2001). Non-formal Education as an Important Strategy for Youth Empowerment.

Unpublished

Hinchliffe, G. (2001). Education or Pedagogy? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(1), pp.

31-45

Hoppers, W. (2006). Non-formal Education: a conceptual review. Paris. UNESCO-IIEP

Hoppers, W. (2011). The Politics of Diversifying Basic Education Delivery: a comparative

analysis from East Africa. Journal of Education Policy, 26(4), pp. 529-542

139

Kambuga, Y. (2015). School Inspection in Tanzania as a Motor for Education Quality:

Challenges and Possible Way Forward. Review of Knowledge Economy 2015, 2(1),

pp.1-13

Kanukisya, B. (2012). Globalization Impacts on Adult Education. A Comparative Study of

Adult Education Policies and Practices in Tanzania and Uganda. Oslo: University of

Oslo

Katunzi, N. (1999). Complementary Basic Education for Tanzania (COBET). Papers in

Education and Development, University of Dar es Salaam.

KDC. (2019). XPRIZE Program to Provide Basic Education to Out-of-school Children

through Innovative Technologies. A presentation to local government officials.

Korogwe

King, Jane. (1967). Planning Non-formal Education in Tanzania. Paris: UNESCO-IIEP

Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. Delhi: Dharmesh

Printers

KTC. (2019). Adult and Non-Formal Education Department Report - 2019. Internal report

shared for the research purposes on September 20th, 2019.

Kubow, P.K & Fossum, P. R. (2006). Comparative Education: Exploring Issues in

International Context. New Jersey: Pearson Merrill, Prentice Hall

LaBelle, T. J. (1987). From Consciousness Raising to Popular Education in Latin America and

the Caribbean. In Comparative Education Review, 31(2), pp. 201-217

Latchem, C. (2012). Quality Assurance Tool Kit for Open and Distance Non-Formal

Education. Vancouver: Common Wealth of Learning

Lupton, R. (2006). Schools in Disadvantaged Areas: contextualized policy response. In Lauder,

H., Brown, P., Dillabough, J. & Halsey, A. H (Eds), Education, Globalization & Social

Change. London: Oxford University Press

140

Macpherson, I. (2007). Tanzania Non-formal Education. Country Profile Prepared for EFA

Global Monitoring Report 2008, Education for All by 2015: will we make it? Paris:

UNESCO

Maruatona, T. (2007). Botswana Non-formal Education. Country Profile Prepared for EFA

Global Monitoring Report 2008, Education for All by 2015: will we make it? Paris:

UNESCO

Massawe, J., Seka, B., Baynit, C., & Mtitu, J. (2000). Report on the Evaluation of COBET

Material and Learners Achievement in Masasi and Kisarawe COBET Centres.

Tanzania Institute of Education in Collaboration with Ministry of Education and

Culture and UNICEF – June, 2000.

McAlpine, K., W. Raj., Lucas, A., Mariki, T., Kweka, M; & Nyembe, S. (Eds.). (2007).

Practice Handbook: Methodology for delivering and practicing Non-formal Education

in Tanzania. Kilimanjaro: Mkombozi Centre for Street Children

Mitra, A. (2007). India Non-formal education: Country profile prepared for the Education for

All Global Monitoring Report 2008 Education for All by 2015: will we make it? Paris:

UNESCO

Mosha, H.J. (2004). New Directions in Teacher Education for Quality Improvement in Africa.

University of Dar es Salaam. Papers in Education and Development, 24(?), pp 55-78

Musaroche, L & Mdachi, M. (2005). Complementary Basic Education in Tanzania: a basic

education model for children in rural areas. A presentation at the Education for Rural

people seminar. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Mushi, P.A.K, Bhalalusesa, E., & NFE Sub-Technical Working Group. (2002). Non-formal

Education Status Report (Tanzania Mainland). Final Report. Dar es Salaam: Ecoprint

141

Mushi, P.A.K, Mlekwa V. M, & Bhalalusesa, E.P. (2004). Poverty Reduction in Tanzania:

Searching for Basic Education Intervention Model. In: Galabawa, J. & Närman, A

(Eds.), Education, Poverty and Inequality. Dar es Salaam: KAD Associates

Mushi, P.A.K. (2009). History and Development of Education in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Dar

es Salaam University Press

Närman, A. (2004). We have heard it all before: The Millennium Goals and Education in

Africa. In Galabawa, J. & Närman, A (Eds.), Education, Poverty and Inequality. Dar es

Salaam: KAD Associates

Ngodu, A. (2010). Dropout Rate: an alarming threat to the internal efficiency of Tanzanian

Education. Dar es Salaam: MOEVT

Oscar, J. H. (2010). Popular Education and Social Change in Latin America. Community

Development Journal, 45(3), pp. 287-290

Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods - 3rd Ed. California: SAGE

Riddle, A. (2003). The Introduction of Free Primary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Paper

commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2003/4, The Leap to Equality

Robeyns, I. (2006). Three models of education: Rights, Capabilities and Human Capital.

Theory and Research in Education. SAGE Publications

Robinson, B. (1999). Open and Distance Learning in the Gobi Desert: Non-formal Education

for Nomadic Women. Distance Learning: An International Journal, University of

Queensland, Australia.

Rose, P. (2006). From the Washington to the Post-Washington Consensus: The Influence of

International Agendas on Education Policy and Practice in Malawi. In Lauder, H.,

Brown, P., Dillabough, J. & Halsey, A. H (Eds), Education, Globalization & Social

Change. London: Oxford University Press

142

Rose, P. (2007). NGO Provision of Basic Education: Alternative or Complementary Service

Delivery to Support Access to the Excluded? CREATE: Research Monograph No. 3

Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf

Sen, A. (2000). Social Exclusion: Concept, Application and Scrutiny. Social Development

Papers No. 1. Manila: Asian Development Bank

Spronk, B. 1999. Non-formal Education at a distance: a framework for discussion. Paper

prepared for the Pan Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning. March 1999: Brunei

Darusalam

Sulemana, M., Musah, A., & Simon, K. (2018). An Assessment of Stakeholder Participation

in Monitoring and Evaluation of District Assembly Projects and Programmes in the

Savelugu - Nanton Municipality Assembly, Ghana. Ghana Journal of Development

Studies, 15(1), pp. 16-40

Sunyoung, H. & Kim, J. (2015). United Nations and Sustainable Development Goals: A

Handbook for Youth. UN-ESCAP. ENEA-Office

Tedesco, J.C., Opertti., R, & Amido, M. (2013). The curriculum debate: why it is important

today. IBE Working Papers on Curriculum Issues No. 10. Geneva: UNESCO-IBE,

2011

Thompson, E.J.D. (2001). Successful Experiences in Non-Formal Education and Alternative

Approaches to Basic Education in Africa. Paper for Discussion presented at ADEA

Biennial Conference in Arusha, Tanzania.

Tomasevski, K. (2001). Human Rights Obligations: making education available, accessible,

acceptable and adaptable. Comparative Education Review, 51(4), pp. 497-510

Twaweza. (2010). When School Inspection Doesn’t Deliver: Highlights from the CAG audit of

the Secondary Schools Inspection Programme in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Twaweza

143

UNDP&URT. (2018). Tanzania Human Development Report 2017: Social Policy in the

Context of Economic Transformation. Dar es Salaam: ESRF

UNEESCO Dar. (2019). Permission to Conduct Endline Cognitive and Socio-Emotional

Assessment within the Scope of XPRIZE Project for the Promotion of Early Learning

through Innovative Technologies in Tanzania, 4-14 March, 2019. Letter to Korogwe

District Executive Director

UNESCO&UNICEF. (2011). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children. Paris: UNESCO-

IIE

UNESCO&UNICEF. (2015). Fixing the Broken Promise of Education for All: Findings from

the Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children. Montreal: UNESCO-UIS

UNESCO. (2000). The Dakar Framework for Action: Education for All - Meeting our

Collective Commitments. World Education Forum, Dakar, UNESCO

UNESCO. (2004). Education for All: the Quality Imperative. EFA Global Monitoring Report,

2005. Paris: UNESCO

UNESCO. (2006). Guidebook for Planning Education in Emergencies. Paris: IIEP

UNESCO. (2007). EFA Global Monitoring Report 2006-Statistical Annex. Paris: UNESCO

UNESCO. (2015). Education for All 2000-2015: Achievements and Challenges. EFA Global

Monitoring Report 2015. Paris: UNESCO

UNICEF Tanzania. (2018). Education Budget Brief 2018. Dar es Salaam: UNICEF

UNICEF&UNESCO. (2007). A Human Rights-Based Approach to Education for All: a

framework for the realization of the children’s right to education and rights within

education. New York. UNICEF

United Nations. (2015). The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. New York.

United Nations. (2017). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2017. New York: United

Nations

144

URT&UNESCO. (2015). Tanzania Human Development Report 2014. Dar es Salaam: ESRF

URT. (1995). Education and Training Policy. Dar es Salaam. MOEVT

URT. (1998). The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977. Dar es Salaam

URT. (1999). The Tanzania Development Vision 2025. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Finance and

Planning

URT. (2001). Basic Education Master Plan. Dar es Salaam. MOEVT

URT. (2002). Poverty and Human Development Report. Dar es Salaam: Mkuki na Nyota

Publishers.

URT. (2003). Adult and Non-Formal Education Sub-Sector Medium Term Strategy 2003/04-

2007/08. Dar es Salaam: MOEVT

URT. (2003). Adult and Non-Formal Education Sub-Sector Medium Term Strategy 2003/04-

2007/08. Dar es Salaam. Ministry of Education and Vocational Training

URT. (2011). Basic Education Statistics in Tanzania 2007-2011. Dare es Salaam: MOEVT

URT. (2012). Adult and Non-Formal Education Sector Development Plan 2012/13-2016/17:

Dar es Salaam: MoEST

URT. (2014). Basic Demographic and Social Economic Profile Wave 4, 2014-2015. Dar es

Salaam: NBS

URT. (2015). The 2015 Tanzania Report on Contribution of NGOs in Development. Dar es

Salaam: MoHCDGEC

URT. (2016a). Announcement of Vacancies for Primary School Teachers for the Financial

Year 2016/17. Dodoma: Ministry of Education Science and Technology

URT. (2016b). Pre-Primary, Primary and Secondary Education Statistics in Brief. Dodoma:

PO-RALG

URT. (2016c). Muongozo wa Utekelezaji wa Mtaala wa Elimu ya Msingi kwa Watoto Walio

Nje ya Mfumo Rasmi. Darasa la I-IV. Dar es Salaam. TIE

145

URT. (2018a). Tanzania HIV Impact Survey (2016-2017). Dar es Salaam: MoHCDGEC

URT. (2018b). Districts and Municipal Rankings in Primary School Leaving Examination

Results in 2018. Dar es Salaam: NECTA

URT. (2019a). National Budget for Financial Year 2019/2020. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of

Finance and Planning

URT. (2019b). National Comprehensive Guidelines on HIV Testing and Councelling. Dar es

Salaam: MoHCDGEC

USAID & EDC. (2009). Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) in Zanzibar.

Learning Gains Assessment: More than Child’s Play. New York: EDC, Inc.

Uwezo. (2017). Are Our Children Learning? Uwezo Tanzania Sixth Learning Assessment

Report. Dar es Salaam: Twaweza East Africa

Ward, M. (2011). Aid to Education: the case of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in India and the Role

of Development Partners. Journal of Education Policy 26(4), pp. 543-556

Ward, T. W., Sawyer, D.F., McKinney, L & Dettoni, J. (1974). Effective Learning: Lessons to

be Learned from Schooling. In Ward, T and Herzog Jr, W. A (Eds). Effective Learning

in Non-formal Education. A study team report. Washington, D.C: USAID

WCEFA. (1990). Meeting Basic Learning Needs: A vision for the 1990s. New York. UNICEF

House

WCEFA. (2000). Education for All: Meeting our Collective Commitments. Paris. UNESCO

World Bank Group. (2015). Zanzibar School Feeding Policies. Systems Approach for Better

Education Results, Report 2015.

Yasunaga, M. (2014). Non-formal Education as a Means to Meet Learning Needs for Out-of-

School Children and Young Adolescents. UNESCO&UNICEF background paper to the

Out-of-School Children Initiative