|
|
 |
| Dakar Follow-up Bulletin > | |
|
|
| Country
Guidelines on the Preparation of National EFA Plans of Action | |
|
|
1.0
Introduction: the focus upon action
1.1 These general guidelines are intended to provide an orientation
to countries about how to create their own guidelines and how
to set their own courses towards their own goals. They do not
provide a perfect recipe or a magic formula that should be applied
mechanically in every country, with a guarantee of total success.
Thus, despite the language of recommendations and advice, the
message of these guidelines is quite clear: each country has
the responsibility for fulfilling the version of Education for
All it chooses for itself. Each country's guidelines should
reflect this sense of responsibility and become one means through
which national ownership and direction of EFA efforts are pursued.
1.2
The World Education Forum in Dakar, Senegal, 26-28 April 2000,
culminated in the adoption of the Dakar Framework for Action,
which embodies a revitalized collective commitment to achieve
Education for All by 2015. The emphasis of the Dakar Framework
is unmistakably upon the need for well-directed, determined
action to ensure the fulfilment in practice of the commitments
made not only in Dakar but also at a series of international
meetings in the 1990s as well as through the World Declaration
on Education for All (Jomtien, 1990), the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The time has come for promises to be kept and for commitments
to be fulfilled as far as the right to education is concerned.
The Dakar Framework is a call to action.
1.3
A recurrent theme running through the Framework is the recommendation
that the mechanisms for implementing the goals and strategies
of EFA should be participatory and, wherever possible, should
be built on what exists; this applies to the national level
as well as the regional and international levels. This recognition
of the existing basis for immediate action is grounded upon
common sense and an appreciation of the worth of past achievements,
the usefulness of existing mechanisms and strategies, and the
availability of considerable information and evidence, particularly
that generated through the EFA 2000 Assessment process. The
latter also provided an opportunity in a number of countries
to develop productive intra-governmental working relationships
that bridged ministerial and departmental boundaries and forged
links with partners outside government such as non-governmental
organizations (NGOs). In addition to those countries that have
sustained, since Jomtien, an active EFA-focused co-ordination
between government and civil society, the EFA 2000 Assessment
process has furnished extremely useful experience of how country-based
partnerships can be mobilized around EFA. This experience, in
fact, is invaluable and the lessons it can offer, both positive
and negative, should provide the starting-point for Dakar follow-up
at the country level.
1.4
Two important considerations, however, must be taken into account.
First, the content and character of partnerships developed through
the EFA 2000 Assessment process were shaped by the specific
focus of that exercise. Second, echoing the Jomtien conference
ten years earlier, the Dakar Framework for Action calls for
a broad national partnership between government and civil society
in order to secure the full realization of EFA goals and strategies.
Such a partnership may be a new experience for those inside
as well as outside government. It is partly for this reason
that the Dakar Framework for Action represents such a challenge:
it calls for massive efforts to achieve goals never attained
before through forms of collaboration and participation with
which many countries have little familiarity. Clearly, the message
of Dakar is not one of complacency; on the contrary, it is a
wake-up call and an invitation to act both urgently and in a
sustained way during the years ahead. It is hoped that these
guidelines will prove helpful to those who take up this invitation.
2.0
The purpose of these guidelines
2.1 The many efforts made by national societies over many
decades, the achievements of the post-Jomtien decade of EFA
activities, the EFA 2000 Assessment process and the meeting
of the World Education Forum in Dakar provide in their various
ways a strong momentum for change and, through the Dakar Framework,
an agenda for action. The main aim of these guidelines is
to help maintain that momentum and to stimulate countries
to increase their efforts in the light of the Dakar Framework
for Action and the Regional Action Plans agreed at regional
conferences related to the EFA 2000 Assessment exercise. It
is clearly recognized that the vitality of the EFA movement
after Dakar rests upon the energy, creativity and abilities
of the EFA partners at the country level; it is they who must
find viable and enterprising ways to incorporate the goals
and strategies of EFA into policies, programmes and actions
that address local realities and respond to local needs.
2.2 The foundation of these guidelines is a simple idea: namely,
the nature of the goal should decisively shape the character
of the process through which that goal is achieved. In this
particular case, the result or outcome addressed by these guidelines
is the generation of credible national EFA plans by 2002 at
the latest; this requires real effort, especially where nothing
currently exists. Such plans are vital within the perspective
of the Dakar Framework for Action because they constitute not
only each country's design for achieving the goals of EFA within
a generation but also the basis on which the international community
will support, in a co-ordinated, coherent and consistent way,
national EFA efforts.
2.3 Probably the most resounding declaration expressed by the
participants in the World Education Forum in Dakar is the following:
'We affirm that no countries seriously committed to education
for all will be thwarted in their achievement of this goal by
a lack of resources'. One indispensable element and sign of
that serious commitment is the production of a realistic national
EFA plan, but it is clear that the participants in Dakar wanted
more than a mere document. After all, countries all over the
world have an abundant experience of paper plans that were never
implemented and, in some cases, were never intended for implementation.
The challenge presented by the Dakar Framework for Action is
two-fold: first, the process through which the national EFA
plan is generated should fulfil in a convincing way what the
Framework requires; and second, the plan and its implementation
should receive the clearest possible support of the country's
highest political leaders. Evidence of a lack of high-level
political will towards enacting the plan would serve to undermine
confidence in the seriousness or credibility of the commitment
to EFA.
3.0
National EFA forums
3.1 While the EFA movement is truly global in its scope and
significance, the Dakar Framework for Action is unambiguous
in its identification of where the main focus of action is and
must be: 'The heart of EFA activity lies at the country level'.
At this level, moreover, it is the government which is to take
the lead and assume the greatest responsibility when it comes
to orchestrating efforts towards achieving EFA: 'Governments
have an obligation to ensure that EFA goals and targets are
reached and sustained'. However, the responsibility for pursuing
the goal of EFA is not the government's alone but in fact it
is a task for the whole of society and from which the whole
of society should benefit. Support and assistance, furthermore,
will come from a range of international sources.
3.2 A key recommendation of the Dakar Forum is that a broad-based
national partnership should be cultivated which brings together
both government and civil society as well as other partners,
national and international, in a common endeavour: to achieve
and sustain good quality basic education for all as soon as
possible, and by 2015 at the latest. In some countries, such
a partnership already exists; in others, it has lost momentum
or is only just emerging; in yet others, it has not really started.
However, given the scale of the EFA challenge in the years ahead,
such a partnership needs to be encouraged, supported, organized
and strengthened; the best results will not happen just by chance.
Therefore, it is recommended that a designated mechanism, a
'national EFA forum', is entrusted with the task of cultivating
this national partnership.
3.3 Some countries may have a kind of National EFA Forum already
but it will go under another name or may perform some functions
but not others. The EFA 2000 Assessment process, for example,
generated a co-ordination group that, with some adaptations,
could be transformed into a national EFA forum. Alternatively,
without necessarily having any specific reference to EFA, several
mechanisms of dialogue, interaction and collaboration may exist
that bring together different or sometimes overlapping groups
of government officials, NGOs and international agencies to
address national educational issues. The immediate choice facing
each country is whether to use an existing structure or to create
a new one.
Q: What exactly is a national EFA forum?
A: A
national EFA forum is a consultative and co-ordination body
that brings together around one table the representatives
of all those with a vital stake in basic education. It is
both a vehicle of partnership and dialogue and a coordinating
mechanism focused on the planning, analysis and monitoring
of progress towards set goals.
Q: Will the national EFA forum be a policy body or simply
another talking-shop?
A: Everything
ultimately depends upon the members: their ability and determination
to make this partnership work and their efforts to mobilize
interest, commitment and support. Success will require sustained
and conscientious participation in all aspects of the planning
process and careful attention to emerging problems, neglected
groups and gaps in provision. Not to be forgotten are the
interest, support, help and guidance that will come from the
regional level and from the global EFA movement led by UNESCO.
Q: What are the essential aims of the national EFA forum?
A: In
pursuit of the overall goal of achieving more rapid progress
towards good quality basic education for all by 2015 at the
latest, the aims of the national EFA forum are:
To promote
and develop effective relations of partnership by means
of dialogue, collaboration and co-ordination;
To
harness the forces of partnership to ensure that all EFA-related
planning, through its entire process, is as effective and
efficient as possible;
To
monitor and report on national EFA activities and to prepare
strategies to improve performance where progress towards
EFA is slow or to address new or deepening problems of access,
equity or quality;
To
foster increased and sustained commitment among all partners
and stakeholders, and in the society at large.
[Other
purposes compatible with the above will certainly be added in
particular countries]
Q: What are the main functions or tasks to be undertaken by
national EFA forums?
A: According
to the Dakar Framework for Action, the main functions are:
Advocacy:
each forum should become a champion of EFA and should make
the case for quality basic education whenever and wherever
it can, particularly for the benefit of those who are ill-served
or unreached by existing provision of formal and non-formal
education;
Resource
mobilization: all types of resources (financial, material,
human) and all sources of support (government, the private
sector, communities, international donors and agencies)
should figure in the forum's resource mobilization strategy;
Monitoring:
each forum should keep a watchful eye on the EFA situation
and should focus especially on whether learning achievement
is at the centre of EFA-related actions; appropriate reporting
mechanisms should be put in place so that the results of
monitoring are incorporated into processes of policy review
and strategy revision;
Generation
and sharing of EFA knowledge: under the auspices of
the forum, studies and analyses of EFA-related activities
should be undertaken and distributed; in addition, the forum
will be a conduit for sharing information about EFA inside
the country as well as for exchanging information with regional
and international bodies.
As experience and the sharing of good practice accumulate, these
functions will evolve quite naturally. Suffusing several, if
not all, of the above-mentioned functions are various dimensions
of communication: dialogue, exchange, persuasion, promotion,
observation, information, etc. Communication, in fact, will
become the life-blood of the forum; in view of this, attention
should be paid to developing skills and capacity in this area,
not least in the field of media relations.
Q: At the country level, who are the main EFA partners
and stakeholders?
A:
The national EFA forum should include key representatives
from relevant government ministries and departments and from
relevant parts of 'civil society', that is, those associations
and social institutions that organize citizens' interests
and express their views. It is important that, from the government,
it is not just the Ministry of Education that participates
in the forum; the Ministry of Finance should participate as
should those ministries that undertake youth and adult training,
literacy programmes and non-formal education such as the Ministry
of Youth, the Ministry for Women and Family Affairs, the Ministry
of Social Affairs and the Ministry of Employment (names and
the allocation of functions vary from one country to another).
In addition, representation of sub-national levels of educational
authority (e.g. from the provincial and municipal levels)
should be considered. The membership of the forum from civil
society should be drawn from educational stakeholders such
as community leaders, parents, learners, teachers' associations,
higher education institutions such as universities, NGOs,
employers' groups, research institutes, women's groups, churches,
associations representing indigenous groups or minorities,
and so forth. As a clear signal that the forum's vision is
genuinely inclusive, serious efforts should be made to secure
the representation of social groups that traditionally are
poorly served by the education system.
Q: What other types of partners and stakeholders
should participate in the forum?
A:
It is recommended that the forum should include representatives
from the economic sector (both public and private) and from
the international community: for example, United Nations agencies
(UNESCO, UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, and others), multilateral donors
(such as the World Bank, the European Union, regional banks),
bilateral donors (the development assistance branches of foreign
governments) and international NGOs.
Q: Should representatives of the international community
be included as members of the forum?
A:
This is a matter to be decided by the national members.
Opinions and situations will vary from one country to another.
However, even if they are not included as full members, it
is recommended that representatives of the international community
should participate as technical advisors, observers, or facilitators;
in other words, as interested partners. The important thing
is that leadership of the EFA process is always in the hands
of national authorities.
Q: Does the name 'National EFA Forum' have to be
used?
A:
Calling the partnership and coordination mechanism the 'National
EFA Forum' is desirable and should be encouraged; however,
if this creates more problems than benefits there is no reason
to insist. The important thing is that, whatever its name,
some recognized body should pursue the aims, fulfil the functions
and perform the tasks associated with this role. There may
be an existing mechanism that is selected by the government
and agrees to undertake this role but, for the sake of identity
and continuity, the original name of the body may be retained.
On the other hand, where there is no such mechanism or where
no existing body is willing to assume the role or where none
is found entirely suitable, a new body should be created.
In the latter case, the name of 'National EFA Forum' normally
should be adopted. Naturally, there should be only one mechanism
that is recognized by the government as fulfilling the role
of the national EFA forum; once so designated, this mechanism
should be seen as the national focal point for EFA by regional
and international bodies.
Q: What should be the size of the forum?
A:
The size of the forum is a matter for the original members
to decide upon but then to keep under review. If there are
too few members, the Forum could well be accused of being
unrepresentative. If there are too many members, its work
could become unwieldy. Perhaps a maximum of twenty active,
regular members should be aimed for. Some form of rotation
or substitution might be adopted in order to secure the advantages
of both manageable size and wide representation. Another form
of participation that should be considered is affiliation
whereby groups, institutions and individuals join the Forum
as affiliated members as a sign of their interest in improving
basic education in the country and their commitment to the
national and international goals of EFA.
Q: How should the forum be organized?
A:
The leadership and structure of the Forum should be agreed
upon at an early stage by the members and then reviewed periodically
as to whether it is satisfactory or not. One option that might
be considered is that the chair should come from the Ministry
of Education while the deputy chair should be drawn from the
civil society representation. One advantage of this option
is that there would be one individual clearly authorized to
act as the official spokesperson of the national EFA forum
and as the contact person for communications to and from regional
and international EFA bodies. Alternatives include the idea
of such roles being filled on a rotational basis from amongst
the membership of the forum or the adoption of a team approach.
In addition, it should be anticipated that the work of the
national EFA forum will need to be supported by a small secretariat
whose members should be drawn from both government and civil
society. Apart from helping to organize meetings of the forum,
maintain the flow of correspondence, and respond to requests
for information, the secretariat will support the functioning
of any working groups established by the forum and the preparation
of conferences or workshops.
Q: Should EFA forums be established at the sub-national
level?
A:
This is certainly an option to be considered and for some
countries, particularly those that are geographically large
or are organized federally, it may provide one way through
which the vision and practice of EFA can spread within the
society. For most countries, however, the most important task
is to ensure that the national EFA forum establishes close
links with government authorities, networks, institutions
and communities that are active in basic education at the
province/prefecture/county levels and municipal or district
levels. The forum should be a catalyst of improvement in basic
education by becoming an intermediary between those with unmet
educational needs and those with knowledge, skills and resources.
Q: Will the national EFA forum receive help from
the regional level?
A:
There already exist a number of regional and sub-regional
organizations, associations and networks devoted to improving
education in individual countries. These bodies, many of which
are concerned with basic education, will continue to provide
advice and assistance. The regional level also figured prominently
in the post-Jomtien decade through mid-decade conferences
and the EFA 2000 Assessment, which generated cross-national
analyses and strategies that should prove useful in the period
ahead. In addition, regional EFA forums will soon be established
that will support national EFA efforts through network co-ordination,
the promotion of partnerships and technical co-operation,
advice and guidance on how to organize EFA activities, target-setting
and monitoring at regional and sub-regional levels, the sharing
of good practices and lessons learned from successful innovations,
policy dialogue, advocacy and resource mobilization. Each
national EFA forum will be a member of a regional EFA forum,
which in turn will be accountable to the national forums.
Q: What should happen in those war-torn or crisis-ridden
countries where normal patterns of social, economic and political
life have broken down?
A:
The creation of a national EFA forum, let alone the generation
of a national EFA plan, will prove very difficult in some
countries where the structure and sovereignty of the state
itself may be in ruins. In such situations, the United Nations
may temporarily be in the best position to organize the integration
of EFA-related concerns into stabilization, rehabilitation
and reconstruction processes. However, efforts should be made
to secure the participation of national society and community
representatives in any co-ordination and consultative mechanisms
that are established; the seeds of future partnership arrangements
may be sown in this way. What is most important is that organized
learning activities are resumed whenever and wherever possible,
and that the destruction of education systems, both physically
and organizationally, should be reduced to a minimum.
3.3 Emerging from the Dakar Forum and in view of the firm commitments
made there, a number of immediate actions should be taken in
order to establish and/or strengthen national EFA forums. The
detailed specification of these actions can only be done by
the responsible governmental authorities at the country level
(typically the Ministry of Education) in consultation with their
partners. However, the following questions should help to clarify
what are the next steps to be taken:
(i)
Does any group or body resembling a national EFA forum currently
exist?
(ii)
Is this body involved in processes of policy formulation
and implementation? If so, in what ways?
(iii)
Is this body willing and able to take on the role of national
EFA forum?
(iv)
If no such body exists, who should be invited to help design
and set up the national EFA forum?
(v)
Who should be informed and consulted about this process?
(vi)
What are the criteria for selecting the full membership
of the forum?
(vii)
How broad should the membership be?
(viii)
How might conflicts of opinion about membership be resolved?
(ix)
How might conflicts of opinion about the aims, functions
and tasks of the Forum be resolved?
(x)
What measures need to be taken to ensure that the forum
is transparent, accountable and democratic?
(xi)
How soon should the first meeting of the forum take place?
(xii)
What should be the priority items on the agenda of this
first meeting?
(xiii)
What kinds of assistance from the international community
might the forum need in order to undertake its immediate
tasks effectively?
(xiv)
What kinds of information does the forum need in order to
embark upon the task of devising a national EFA plan?
Each
national EFA plan will:
(i) be developed by government leadership in direct
and systematic consultation with national civil society;
(ii)
attract co-ordinated support of all development partners;
(iii)
specify reforms addressing the six EFA goals;
(iv)
establish a sustainable financial framework;
(v)
be time-bound and action-oriented;
(vi)
include mid-term performance indicators; and
(vii)
achieve a synergy of all human development efforts,
through its inclusion within the national development
planning framework and process.
Source:
Dakar Framework for Action, para. 16
4.0
Preparing the national EFA plan
4.1 The point of departure for the preparation of a national
EFA plan that should be ready by 2002 is the information, strategies
and plans that currently exist in regard to each country. Useful
sources will include the following:
The
evidence amassed during the national, regional and thematic
EFA 2000 Assessment process; in addition to basic data,
the assessment reports contain up-to-date analyses of the
strengths and weaknesses of country-level performance vis-à-vis
basic education over the past decade as well as recommendations
for future action and an outline of suitable strategies.
The regional 'framing' of national plans and performance
is particularly useful, not least for the perspective provided
by the experiences of neighbouring countries.
Other
national and/or regional surveys and studies in the fields
of education, demography, employment, etc., through which
education-related and contextual knowledge has been accumulated.
Present
national sector strategies and plans for the education sector
and for other sectors: the latter are important not only
because, directly or indirectly, they influence what can
be achieved in the education sector but also because there
are basic education programmes and activities occurring
in these sectors too.
In countries where existing information is unreliable, outdated
or incomplete or where there are competing or incompatible sets
of data and strategies within the same sector, the preparation
of a national EFA plan provides an excellent opportunity to
bring interested parties together to improve the situation.
4.2 This thorough mapping of what currently exists should be
accompanied by an awareness that the creation of national EFA
plans does not imply the complete abandonment of what is already
in place or the generation of a separate, 'stand-alone' plan
for basic education. Such a requirement is neither realistic
nor desirable. The main significance of Dakar is that it signals
a collective commitment to press ahead more strongly and more
effectively towards reaching certain goals and targets for basic
education within a specified period of time. This boost for
basic education will definitely take place, in which case there
will be implications for what currently exists and what has
been projected and planned. Clearly, if more rapid progress
in basic education is pursued with renewed vigour and extra
resources, if new or strengthened partnerships are formed at
the country level, if closer integration with efforts to reduce
poverty and accelerate socio-economic development is accomplished,
and if better ways of improving and monitoring learning achievement
are implemented, this will have far-reaching effects. This is
precisely the point of the categorical statement within the
Dakar Framework for Action that identifies education as 'the
key to sustainable development and peace and stability within
and among countries'.
4.3 The above-mentioned effects will include certain immediate
types of changes. The projection of a sustained boost to basic
education during the next fifteen years will need to be accommodated
within existing plans and strategies but, relatively soon, this
process of accommodation will require modifications and adaptations,
perhaps of significant dimensions. It is vital, therefore, for
existing plans and strategic designs to be re-visited and their
adequacy for the post-Dakar scenario to be reviewed. In turn,
ideas for the reform and expansion of basic education will need
to be adapted to structured frameworks and ongoing processes
that have time-frames of up to ten years. Clearly, such changes
will require negotiation and re-negotiation among all interested
parties. In view of the complexities and sensitivities involved
in the changes, accommodations and negotiations required, the
deadline of '2002 at the latest' for the elaboration of national
EFA plans is a sobering one.
4.4 Thus, the generation of a national EFA plan, building and
improving upon existing sources of information and strategy,
will necessitate decisive actions in the immediate period ahead
as well as a sustained commitment to a multi-faceted process
of change. While each country must elaborate its own plan to
suit its own distinctive conditions and within specific frameworks
of strategy, planning and policy, it is possible to identify
several broad areas of improvement relevant to this task, namely:
a) the
participatory character of the process through which the
plan is to be generated;
b) the
way in which the plan should give 'substance and form' to
the Dakar goals and strategies, and to the commitments made
in a series of international conferences in the 1990s;
c) the
budgetary prioritization that should be given to basic education
until EFA is achieved and then sustained;
d)
the role to be played by international agencies and the
international community more broadly;
e)
the way the plan must be integrated within a wider poverty
reduction and development framework;
f)
the elaboration of clear strategies within the plan for
addressing the special problems of those excluded from educational
opportunities; and g) the clear support the plan must have
from political leaders and the country at large.
4.5 Each of these areas of improvement will now be examined
in turn with a view to clarifying what should be done at the
country level in order to produce a national EFA plan that is
credible and thereby merits the coordinated and enhanced support
of international agencies and institutions.
a) Planning
as a participatory process
Whatever may be the technical expertise and skills that will
be required in order to generate and implement a national educational
plan, the message from Dakar is clear: such a plan will be more
effective if it is grounded upon broad-based partnerships, the
participation of stakeholders, transparent and democratic processes,
and mechanisms that guarantee greater accountability. The participants
in the World Education Forum in Dakar gave a pledge to support
the following strategies:
To ensure
the engagement and participation of civil society in the
formulation, implementation and monitoring of strategies
for educational development; and
To develop
responsive, participatory and accountable systems of educational
governance and management.
These approaches, of course, were not invented in Dakar but
correspond to experience acquired and lessons learned from many
contexts over many years. Similarly, the creation of a national
EFA forum as a vehicle for systematic consultation with and
representation of national civil society institutions is not
entirely new. The importance of the Dakar Framework and, indeed,
the whole post-Jomtien process is the widespread recognition
that these considerations are not incidental or peripheral but
go to the heart of the failure to achieve the goals of EFA.
With this recognition comes increased pressure to enact practical
measures through which, in due course, visible improvements
will emerge. The establishment and effective operation of a
national EFA forum, on the lines indicated earlier, will represent
a clear sign of improvement at the country level.
The six EFA goals
We hereby collectively commit ourselves to the attainment
of the following goals:
(i) expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood
care and education, especially for the most vulnerable
and disadvantaged children;
(ii) 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;
(iii) ensuring that the learning needs of all young
people and adults are met through equitable access
to appropriate learning and life skills programmes;
(iv) achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels
of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and
equitable access to basic and continuing education
for all adults;
(v)
eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary
education by 2005, and achieving gender equality in
education by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls'
full and equal access to and achievement in basic
education of good quality;
(vi)
improving all aspects of the quality of education
and ensuring excellence of all so that recognized
and measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all,
especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life
skills.
Source:
Dakar Framework for Action, para. 7
b) Substance
and form
The commitments freely given by governments at international
conferences and in a range of multilateral and bilateral agreements
do not directly or automatically impact upon the lives of ordinary
people. To have such an impact, they have to be expressed in
a country's specific strategies, policies, and programmes and
then be translated into concrete, consequential actions. The
Dakar Framework for Action could not be clearer on this point:
while each national EFA plan should 'specify reforms addressing
the six EFA goals', each plan should also give 'substance and
form to the goals and strategies' laid out in the Dakar Framework
and in 'the commitments made during a succession of international
conferences in the 1990s'. How, then, should 'substance and
form' be given to these commitments?
In practice, most countries have many of the necessary elements
already available in the shape of school construction programmes,
textbook production and distribution, adult literacy schemes
in rural areas, vocational skills training for youth and other
activities on the ground. The majority of these activities owe
their origins not to the enunciation of goals in distant conference
halls but to unresolved difficulties arising in the society
and its education system. It is these problems, pressures and
needs, given a specific form by the character of a particular
country, that should lie at the heart of a national EFA plan.
The vitality and relevance of the plan will reside in whether
it addresses real problems and issues, not whether it formally
mentions the main goals of EFA.
This does not mean, however, that the specific inclusion of
the six EFA goals in the national EFA plan is unimportant. After
all, the goals will play a useful role in structuring activities
in a meaningful way and will provide clear benchmarks for judging
the trend of achievement and performance. Consequently, the
plan of action should indicate how activities such as lengthening
the school day, re-writing a series of history textbooks or
building separate toilets for girls will bring the fulfilment
of a particular goal closer. In addition, with a view to achieving
a particular goal more comprehensively or more rapidly, the
plan should specify the increases in inputs and levels of activity
required over a specified period of time in order to have the
intended effect. It is here that broad-based consultation, technical
advice and an integrated approach are so important in order
to ascertain whether a specific increase in inputs (e.g. funding
of an increased number of places for primary teacher education)
will be adequate or appropriate (recruitment incentives and
prospective salaries may be too low; a high proportion of graduates
may die of AIDS or desert the teaching profession within a year
or two of qualification; the real teacher education priority
may be at the lower secondary level). The selection of priority
actions, therefore, should be undertaken carefully and those
actions should be monitored through measurable indicators of
performance or achievement; if evidence can be found to show
that implementation is inadequate, timely adjustments may be
undertaken. However, it is vital that, in the process of formulating,
implementing and monitoring the national EFA plan, sight is
not lost of the actual problems and unmet needs that it should
be addressing. The key test of a plan is not the elegance of
its design but whether the plan is implemented effectively so
that real improvements occur.
Q: Are the six EFA goals equally important for all
countries?
A:
In principle, the answer is 'yes': the fulfilment of each
goal is vital for all countries and for the fulfilment of
the other goals in the perspective of EFA as a whole. In practice,
however, the education systems of different countries have
evolved differently; as a result, some countries are much
further ahead than others in regard to, say, female literacy
rates or the quality of learning achievement in mathematics
in Grade 4 of primary school. Within a context of scarce resources,
each country has to decide where its own priorities lie and
which strategies and associated actions will achieve the greatest
benefit. Within such a prioritization, however, there should
be a place for all six EFA goals. Moreover, the national EFA
plan should indicate clearly when and how a goal at present
receiving a reduced priority will be accorded greater importance.
c) Budgetary
prioritization
The EFA 2000 Assessment process threw into sharp relief the
long-standing and dramatic shortages of funding that exist in
many countries. As a practical measure designed to overcome
problems of 'chronic under-financing' and as a sign of the seriousness
of the government's intent over a sustained period of time,
the Dakar Framework for Action calls for national EFA plans
that establish 'budget priorities reflecting a commitment to
achieve EFA goals and targets at the earliest possible date,
and no later than 2015'. Such a prioritization in favour of
basic education should be linked to the requirement that each
plan should establish a sustainable financial framework, a requirement
that enjoins the government to hold good to its financial commitments
to basic education by protecting this area of expenditure from
temporary cuts in funding or reductions in the rate of expenditure
increase needed to meet future EFA targets.
However, since national resources will be unable to meet all
needs, including those that have been prioritized, the plan
should be clear about exactly where the gaps are located and
how, i.e. through what strategy and actions, those gaps may
be filled. An active search for new and alternative sources
of funding should be conducted.
d) The
role of the international community
Statements made before, during and after the Dakar Forum confirm
that, in general, the international commitment to support basic
education remains strong. Bilateral and multilateral donors
have promised to make additional international funding available
through grants, loans and material support. On the other hand,
the international community has been disappointed by the slowness
of improvement and the ineffective use of resources in many
countries. This mixture of commitment and concern may be expected
to flavour the international response to the immediate task
in hand, the preparation of national EFA plans. Governments,
meanwhile, have their own concerns about the reliability and
sustainability of aid flows, the need for more effective donor
co-ordination, the form that new financial resources will take,
and whether donors can really work with the country rather than
promoting their own agendas. For their part, governments are
likely to want clear indications that increased resources will
indeed be forthcoming and will not be blocked by unreasonable
conditionalities.
With regard to the preparation of national EFA plans, expressions
of international support and types of international assistance
may come in several forms, ranging from the concrete and practical
to the symbolic and motivational. Examples include:
a) clear
messages from headquarters and capitals to country representatives,
and then shared with the government and its domestic partners,
that there is highest-level support for EFA goals and actions;
b)
collaboration with government and the fledgling national
EFA forum to help the development of partnerships at the
country level;
c)
advocating and facilitating the inclusion of the EFA agenda
in wider frameworks of strategy and planning;
d) renewed
efforts to ensure that there is genuine co-ordination, consistency
and coherence in the international response to Dakar, particularly
among donors; and
e)
a range of practical measures, such as the following:
the designation of a contact person/liaison officer for
the national EFA forum and the national-level planning
process
financial support for the establishment and operation
of the forum, including the holding of meetings, the running
of working groups, the work of the secretariat
expert advice and/or training on policy development and
planning approaches and methodologies
financial support for the participation of national representatives
in workshops (e.g. on planning) at the regional level
expert advice and/or financial support regarding the
conduct of special studies, the preparation of position
papers, analyses, etc.
technical and financial support for publicizing the outcome
of the Dakar Forum or other EFA-related activities
e) An
integrated plan
If basic education is to enjoy financial prioritization over
a considerable period of time, this should not be achieved at
the cost of other areas of government action that are integrally
related to EFA enhancement, such as other types of poverty alleviation
programmes or health and sanitation measures. Hence the emphasis
within the Dakar Framework of Action upon the integration of
the national EFA plan into the overall national education plan
which, in turn, is embedded within the framework of the country's
development strategies and poverty reduction programmes. Through
the incorporation of the EFA plan within ongoing processes of
reforming the national education system, an extra impetus may
be given to the pace of change and improvement. In these ways,
the 'synergy of all human development efforts' within a country
can be enhanced.
At the country level, there exist several frameworks into which
the national EFA plan will need to be incorporated, such as:
the national education sector plan, in which projections for
secondary and higher education, for example, will need to be
adjusted in view of EFA expansion; overall development strategy;
and poverty reduction programmes. In this regard, it is vital
for governments to ensure that the goals, strategies, targets
and activities expressed in national EFA plans are reflected
consistently throughout their own operations and in their dealings
with United Nations-led frameworks and strategies. Of particular
importance is the consistency between the provisions of the
national EFA plan and those contained in the education-related
sections of other plans and strategic instruments such as UNDAF,
PRSP, Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF), Country Assistance
Strategy (CAS), etc. Since the national EFA plan is not meant
to have a separate operational existence alongside other plans
but should be infused into them and thereby shape their formulation,
revision and implementation, it is vital for EFA to be well
understood and if possible 'owned' by other mechanisms of strategic
design and planning; for example, the agenda of EFA should be
integrated with the agenda of poverty reduction, to the advantage
of both.
Consequently, the meetings of the national EFA forum should
welcome the participation of key figures involved in these other
frameworks of strategy and planning. By the same measure, members
of the forum should participate in these frameworks and ensure
that the agenda of basic education is promoted. Through regular
dialogue, the sharing of information, the design of common solutions,
and the co-ordination of actions, not only the forum but also
other educational groups inside and outside government should
encourage an integrated approach to educational development.
Among the important questions that will almost certainly arise
from such processes of interaction are the following:
What
resources for EFA are actually available from different
sources (national, multilateral, bilateral, private)?
What
gaps in resources exist or are anticipated?
What
are the most important areas of identified need?
What
are the time-frames of action within which these needs will
be met?
What
capacity building measures are essential for EFA progress?
What
are the forms and timing of the international technical
assistance that is required?
By
what mechanisms can double-counting of assistance be avoided?
f) Strategies
for the excluded
Each National EFA Plan is expected to elaborate clear strategies
about how the special problems of those excluded from educational
opportunities can best be addressed. While particular emphasis
has been placed on girls' education and gender equity, all categories
of the excluded or marginalized should receive attention, notably:
ethnic
minorities;
children
in difficult circumstances (e.g. street children, working
children, child soldiers, children orphaned by HIV/AIDS);
inguistic
minorities;
children
with special needs (e.g. with disabilities);
refugee
children and youth;
children
of the internally displaced (IDPs).
The clear interest of the international community in girls'
education, as evident in the United Nations Girls' Education
Initiative announced by the United Nations Secretary-General
in Dakar, will certainly help to focus national attention on
this question. However, it is important that other significant
sources of disadvantage and disparity in education are identified
and that appropriate actions are not only taken but also are
integrated into well-defined strategies of intervention. For
example, where external assistance is directed towards problems
of hunger or malnutrition, school feeding programmes and early
childhood/family nutrition schemes should be designed in relation
to other interventions, particularly those that target the most
vulnerable.
In the years ahead, the full impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic
in many countries will be nothing short of calamitous. Its easiest
victims will be those who are already vulnerable due to poverty,
ignorance and traditional cultural practices. Among the victims
will also be entire educational systems and the prospects for
achieving EFA targets in coming years. Anticipatory measures
need to be identified, selected and implemented urgently in
the case of some countries where the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS
can be accurately predicted. Over and above these concerns,
however, is the increasing realisation that the weakening or
collapse of educational systems will tend to deepen and extend
the educational disadvantages of the unreached, the marginalized
and the excluded. It is vital for national EFA plans to address
these matters realistically and for international agencies and
donors to devise suitable forms of assistance in close consultation
with national authorities.
g) Political
and social support
The inherent or perceived importance of education is no guarantee
that it will be accorded the level of high-level political support
or broad-based social support that would make a difference to
the realization of EFA. The Dakar Framework for Action is quite
forthright on this matter: 'Political will and stronger national
leadership are needed for the effective and successful implementation
of national plans in each of the countries concerned'. This
concern should be taken seriously by those orchestrating the
national EFA effort; more will be needed than just the support
of ministers and leaders of civil society. What form of support
from the national political leadership should be sought?
Support will also be needed from every level of society; to
achieve this, every step possible must be taken to make education
for all a major issue for debate and thought. This will require
engaging the interest of parents, communities, employers, educational
professionals and learners themselves. It will also mean mobilizing
those who form, shape and disseminate public opinion: the media,
intellectuals and leading public personalities from all areas
of activity.
5.0
Concluding Remarks
Within the perspective that the ultimate goal of the EFA movement
is to create a learning society in which all can participate,
it is clear that most countries in the world today are experiencing
another reality. Nevertheless, the coming years will bring opportunities
for many countries to make substantial improvements in basic
education that will affect the lives of millions of people.
Some of these improvements will be traceable to international
support and assistance but most will derive from the efforts
of the countries themselves. The following factors will predictably
play a key role in this process:
the
development of a shared vision or consensus within a country
around the agenda of EFA;
the
cultivation of partnership between government, civil society,
the private sector and international agencies;
country
ownership and direction of the EFA project;
the
'customization' of EFA processes so that they correspond
and are adapted to the specific situations and problems
of specific countries;
the
allocation of increased resources to the task of achieving
EFA goals; and
the organization of efforts so that those
most in need are reached.
Dated
on 4th August 2000
|
|
|