Where is Uganda’s education headed as a result of the government’s directive?
BY MICHAEL TUMWESGIGYE
Pre-primary education is a component of early childhood care and education (ECCE), which is widely acknowledged as a critical period in children’s physical, mental and psychosocial development. Children (aged 0 to 8 years) require nurturing in a safe and caring environment to grow up healthy, alert, secure and capable of learning. In the long run, any country that invests in early childhood saves money and time. As a result, ECCE is the most important and cost effective investment in improving learning. Access to high quality early childhood education is essential for healthy intellectual, psychological, emotional, linguistic, social and physical development, as well as lifelong learning. It also has a large influence on a person’s later abilities, attitudes, values, skills and behaviour. This, however, is contingent on the quality of ECCE services.
For a long time, ECCE was not adequately regulated to fit into Uganda’s official educational system. As a result, parents considered ECCE to be optional. For a long time, Uganda’s ECCE was defined by a lack of a strong policy framework, limited access and poor quality. The Ugandan government, on the other hand, has recently begun to prioritise ECCE in the country. Following the implementation of the Early Childhood Care and Education Policy-2018. The Ministry of Education and Sports (MOE&S) recently directed operators of all joint pre-primary and primary schools to operate the two levels as separate educational institutions, each with its own licence and management team.
Every public primary school must also have a nursery school. It should be noted that the vast majority of ECCE centres are owned by private investors who charge exorbitant fees, preventing poor children from accessing ECCE services. This implies that when the new directive is implemented in government primary schools, ECCE will be more accessible to poor children. Education is a universal human right, the implementation of this directive will adhere to human rights principles.
According to the new government directive, two head teachers are required, one for the Nursery and another for the Primary. Other equirements include: two registrations (one for nursery school and another for primary school), separate kitchens and dining rooms, separate toilets and washing facilities, separate teachers and separate EMIS numbers. A visitor’s book, safe drinking water, a first-aid kit, and proper garbage disposal; financial and administrative records; technical drawings for building plans; bank statements; and a land title. In short, the two levels will operate in parallel with distinct processes, procedures and systems. This is a good move by the government because pre-primary education has its specialisation that should be highlighted.
Separating pre-schools from primary schools appears to be a good practice in theory; however, the obvious question is whether the government and other education stakeholders have the capacity to put the directive into action. The separation of nursery and primary schools allows for a more specialised focus on the unique needs and developmental stages of each age group. This personalised approach has the potential to improve the quality of education provided to children at different stages of their early learning journey.
Different licences and management teams contribute to the establishment of clear lines of accountability. Each level can have its own set of regulations, standards and monitoring mechanisms in place to ensure that educational goals are met and maintained at both the nursery and primary levels.
Separation enables more efficient resource allocation. Each institution’s resources, such as: personnel, infrastructure, and teaching materials, can be tailored to meet the needs of either nursery or primary education. This focused approach has the potential to improve resource management.
If nursery and primary schools are managed by separate management teams, administrative processes can be streamlined. Decision-making becomes more focused, allowing for faster responses to the unique challenges and opportunities presented by each educational level. Teachers can choose to specialise in either nursery or primary education. Educators gain a deeper understanding of the developmental stages, learning styles, and educational approaches relevant to their age group, this specialisation leads to more effective teaching practices.
Some education stakeholders, however, have criticized the directive. This is because the transition necessitates not only financial resources but also professional human resources, proper government regulation and buy-in from private education players. The operation of distinct institutions with distinct licences and management teams may result in an increased administrative burden. Schools will be required to manage additional paperwork, compliance requirements, and administrative processes, potentially diverting resources away from educational activities.
The requirement for separate licences, infrastructure, and management teams may have financial implications. This could put a strain on operators’ financial resources, particularly those with limited budgets, potentially affecting the overall quality of education provided.
It takes time for a system to change. Building infrastructure and establishing a boundary within the same school are all challenging tasks, especially in this economic climate. As a result, the government may need to consider options to assist private schools in implementing this new directive in addition to government primary schools.
