Collective Responsibility to Capacity Development: Kenya

1
Collective Responsibility to Capacity
Development Kenyas Experience in the Education
Sector in the Recent Past

• A Presentation By
• Prof. Karega Mutahi Permanent Secretary,
  Ministry of Education
• During
• 2006 LenCD Forum at AICAD, Kenya

2
Historical Background

• GoKs recognition of the importance of human
  capital demonstrated by
• Heavy investment in the necessary human and
  institutional capacity development for the
  achievement of quality education.
• sustained and progressive effort to put in place
  structures towards this end since early 1960s

3
Historical Background

• In the Education Sector, the rate of development
  of needed capacity has not been commensurate with
  the demand for effective management in education
  the implementation of programmes
• Comprehensive Education Sector Analysis (CESA) of
  1994
• Master Plan for Education and Training
  (1997-2010)
• GoK/UNDP Report on capacity and training, needs
  assessment in MOE, etc.

4
Historical Background

• Ineffective policy support, lack of succession
  management, inadequate capacity and capacity
  development programmes made effective/efficient
  use of available resources in delivery of quality
  education and training difficult

5
Historical Background

• Well coordinated approach to capacity development
  for efficient and effective delivery of quality
  services has been made absolutely necessary due
  to the
• Development of
• Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
• Economic Recovery Strategy,
• Declaration of FPE in 2003

6
Historical Background

• Successful implementation of FPE required
• Working out modalities for raising and
  amalgamating necessary resources
• Bringing together all education stakeholders,
  including Development Partners (DP)
• Successful formulation and application of
  implementation guidelines was thus realised

7
Historical Background

• Participatory and consultative process throughout
  the country lead to
• National Conference on Education and Training in
  November 2003
• Gazettement of Sessional Paper No.1 of 2005
• Formulation of Kenya Education Sector Support
  Programme in July, 2005 for realizing the policy
  objectives.

8
Historical Background

• The Donors to Education Coordination Group
  (1999/2000)
• Established its TOR in relation to MOE vision and
  mission
• DP involvement in formulation of KESSP and
  implementation of FPE
• MOE/DP joint ME of the implementation of FPE
  encouraged DP to endorse Kenya to receive FTI
  funds, bringing in collective responsibility and
  mutual accountability

9
Historical Background

• Lesson learnt and experience gained from the
  on-going donor supported Programmes /and pilot
  projects on capacity development has helped MOE
  develop own capacity in
• Instructional material delivery
• In-service training of teachers/head teachers and
  school management committees (SMC)

10
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• INSET of teachers to build capacity for improved
  quality of education, particularly in the
  poorly-performed areas of mathematics and science
  subjects and, in response to such emerging
  issues as HIV/AIDS and Gender-responsive teaching
  has been incorporated in KESSP

11
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• MOE/JICA launched the Strengthening of
  Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education
  (SMASSE) INSET for secondary school teachers in
  1998
• Piloted in 9 districts.
• Successful implementation and impact lead to a
  Phase II, with national coverage in 2003.
• Extended to take on board mathematics teachers in
  Diploma TTC, PTTC and TIVET institutions.

12
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• The MOE/DFID school-based teacher development
  (SbTD),
• MOE/AKF/CIDA
• MOE/UNICEF
• MOE/USAID
• Other smaller pilot programmes by NGOs and faith
  based organizations (FBO)

13
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• MOE/Donor supported workshops and seminars since
  early 2004 for education managers/ administrators
  on
• General SWAPs
• Results-oriented management
• Performance Appraisal System (PAS)

14
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• Formulation of KESSP by MOE and Development
  Partners
• SWAP for Kenya that flexibly incorporated the
  on-going individual programmes like SbTD, SMASSE,
  AFK/CIDA, UNICEF
• Complement capacity building in the education
  sectors
• Effectively improve delivery of educational
  services and education quality

15
In-Service Education Training (INSET)

• Some KESSP IP strategies, such as teacher
  education, secondary education, ICT, TIVET,
  gender and higher education are still being
  developed.
• On-going discussions and consultations by MOE/DP
  and other stakeholders on strategies for
  harmonization of capacity development based on
  the on-going and stipulated KESSP investment
  programmes

16
Capacity Development under SWAP-KESSP

• Implementation of any programme requires
  development of relevant policies and
  implementation capacity on a continuous basis.

17
Capacity Development under SWAP-KESSP

• Policy and Implementation Capacity
• Need technical assistance and support.
• Pose major challenges in addressing the Paris
  Declaration
• Promising piloted and best practices need to be
  isolated, shared, adapted and strengthened as
  they are spread for application in implementing
  education programmes.

18
Capacity Development under SWAP-KESSP

• The development and implementation of FPE and
  SMASSE in Kenya have provided valuable lessons
  worth discussing further with respect to capacity
  building in as appertains to addressing Paris
  Declaration.
• Tremendous capacity in management of school
  programmes, financial management in respect to
  instructional material and infrastructure
  development has been built.

19
Capacity Development under SWAP-KESSP

• Significant contribution by out-sourced,
  consultancy working under MOE leadership.
  However,
• unable to fully institutionalize and regularize
  capacity development mechanisms for current and
  future programmes.
• Capacity built only suitable for the task at hand
  but not perpetual for long-term benefit.
• The approach not quite effective in sustainable
  capacity development.

20
Capacity Development under SWAP-KESSP

• Tangible results discernable where specially
  selected/ identified officers on fulltime basis
  understudy expatriates or consultants and train
  locals in view of institutionalizing and
  regularizing capacity building.
• Exemplification of this in MoEs KESSP investment
  programmes in capacity building such as PRISM and
  SMASSE.

21
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• The role of Mathematics and Science in national
  development needs no emphasis
• SMASSE initiative as jointly formulated and
  undertaken by MOE and JICA

22
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• SMASSE programme
• Building necessary capacity for strengthening
  secondary mathematics and science education
  through INSET for teachers
• An approach worth adapting for sustainable
  capacity development
• Under the Chairmanship of PS, the programmes
  organizational and administrative structure
  includes all the key stakeholders.

23
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Funding
• 60 JICA
• Kenya, 18 MOE headquarters and 22 DEB through
  Schools (beneficiaries) for ownership and
  sustainability and
• Activities and outcomes formulated and
  implemented through an agreed PDM

24
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• In the pilot phase, core staff of 8 Kenyan
  teachers working on full time basis with 6
  Japanese experts.
• The Kenyan academic staff has grown to 61 and
  Japanese academic staff has reduced from the
  initial 4 to the current 2
• An indication of sufficient capacity development
  of Kenyan personnel to effectively continue the
  programmes.

25
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Training of Kenyan Personnel by JICA
• Started in July 1998 in Japan
• More opportunities for capacity development of
  teachers, teacher trainers, and education
  managers opened
• In the Philippines 2002
• In 2006 Malaysia
• National Trainers
• Short Courses on INSET 59
• M. Ed (Mathematics/Science) 07
• Education Administrators/INSET Managers58
• District Trainers 145

26
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Third Country Counterpart Training funded by JICA
  and GoK for SMASSE-WECSA member countries
• Trained 275
• Capacity of the National Academic Staff developed
  to a level where they are deployed to other
  countries as JICAs Third Country Experts (TCE)
  for INSET formulation and implementation

27
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Numbers of trainers, teachers and education
  managers have been trained in Kenya at the
  National and District levels through a two-tier
  cascade system by September, 2006.
• District Trainers 1,677
• Mathematics and Science Teachers 16,251
• Kenyan school Principals 762
• District Education Officers 71
• Quality Assurance Standards Officers 474
• Diploma Science TTC Tutors 300
• TIVET Tutors 177

28
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Within a period of 6 years under the same project
• Many teachers have been in-serviced to benefit
  students in
• secondary schools,
• 2 diploma teacher training colleges and
• Education staff from other African countries have
  been trained
• Institutional capacity of 106 selected secondary
  schools has been strengthened to district
  resource centre status

29
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Joint MOE/JICA mid-term and final evaluation of
  the SMASSE Project met the 5 Development
  Assistance Committee evaluation criteria of
• Relevance
• Effectiveness
• Efficiency
• Impact and
• Sustainability

30
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• SMASSE clearly demonstrates collective
  responsibility of stakeholders with mutual
  accountability
• It is envisaged that at the end of the
  cooperation period, the capacity development
  programme, systems initiated and implemented
  by/through SMASSE will be sustained

31
Capacity Development The SMASSE Example

• Since SMASSE has not only complemented capacity
  building in the education sector but also has the
  potential for improving education quality on
  continuous basis, MOE is considering the
  harmonisation of other KESSP Programmes for
  capacity building and professional development
  along the SMASSE model

32
Conclusion

• Technical assistance provided by the DP needs to
  be patterned in a manner that enables partner
  countries to effectively and efficiently sustain
  capacity development programmes/ mechanisms
  beyond DP funding and participation
• The role of local universities and other training
  institutions in capacity development needs to be
  enhanced.