Dependence of Urban Poor on Private Schools in Nairobi: An Institutional Analysis (Part I)

By Charity Limboro and V Santhakumar

Introduction

Like other developing countries, there are challenges to the provision of schooling for all children in Kenya. There are children living in the slums of Nairobi who are not in school. It is estimated that 1.13 million children of primary school age (6 to 13 years old) are out of school in Kenya (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2021). The share of out-of-school children could be higher in urban areas where monitoring by communities and local officials is difficult.¹  A section of children from poorer families in urban slums uses private schools, especially at the primary level. Even though these schools charge lower fees, they can be expensive considering the incomes of those people who live in slums.² Not many government schools function in urban slums apparently due to the illegal nature of these settlements.

There are studies on low-fee private schools which are used by the poor.  A few studies are on the conditions and learning achievements in these schools and these do not demonstrate a general trend. On the other hand, there is a discourse among the proponents of these schools regarding their superior performance in comparison with that of government schools. There is a discourse which highlights that (sections of) poorer parents are concerned about the quality of education in government schools, which is driving them to low-fee private schools. However, it is noted that the transition of children to secondary schools from these low-fee private primary schools is less compared to those who study in public primary schools, which may be partly due to the preference given to the latter in admissions in secondary schools run by the government.

There are diverse views on the role of these low-fee private schools in the education scene of Kenya. On the one hand, these are not considered a desirable option, and hence, the approach is to neglect them. On the other, there is an argument for recognition of, and for providing financial support to these schools. In taking steps to recognise these schools but not providing the expected financial support, the government of Kenya is also ambivalent in this regard.

The low-fee paying schools in urban Nairobi can be viewed in the context of the global debates on the role of such schools. There is an argument among economists that such schools are an efficient way to provide education for all (The Need to Strengthen Government Schools in India). The efficiency of private schools is behind the argument for using vouchers as a strategy to implement the government mandate in school education rather than expanding the public education system. Hence, the financing of such `cheap’ (with minimal infrastructure) private schools is projected and seen as a desirable reform in many parts of the world. This may be advocated as part of a `public-private partnership’ in education. The experience of low-fee private schools in urban Kenya may inform these debates too.

We have not seen an adequate analysis of the institutional context in which these low-fee private schools function in Kenya. Such an institutional analysis may be useful for policy-making. What could be the impact of the recognition of and financial support to these schools, or the complete neglect of these schools, may depend on the specific institutional context. This article demonstrates that policies which are pursued without understanding the socio-economic and institutional context of such `alternative’ schools may be ineffective or even counter-productive.

This article looks at low-fee paying private schools in urban Nairobi and is based on short-period fieldwork in a set of such schools and interaction with school directors (owners) and teachers. In addition, we have interacted with other stakeholders, including the association of these alternate schools. A public school was also visited and the possibilities and challenges of the education of children from urban slums in these public schools were discussed.

Observations on low-fee private schools in the slums of Nairobi

We visited three low-fee private schools in a major informal settlement or slum, namely, Kibera. Two of these schools are offering primary-level education and one is a secondary school. All schools are in temporary buildings made of steel sheets (walls and roofs) and have small classrooms. One of these was relatively better in terms of location and cleanliness. None of these schools has any space for play or recreation for children. There were not enough toilets. One school is situated in a flood-prone area, which affects the functioning of the school frequently according to the school director. These schools and their premises are by and large similar to the temporary buildings in the informal settlements and hence, students may see these as an extension of their homes.

All three schools reported that they have unqualified teachers or those who are seeking qualifications. There is a set of trained teachers, but their salaries are higher and they are constantly on the lookout for better opportunities and ready to grab such opportunities quickly. Some of these teachers are from the same slums where these schools are located but these also attract migrants from other parts of the country. There is a discourse which notes that untrained teachers are not `poor’ in terms of teaching. This may not be surprising since less qualified contract teachers are found to be as good as qualified teachers in improving the learning achievements of school children based on standard tests as noted in other parts of the world.³

Students have to pay fees to attend these schools, which vary from 1000 to 2000 Shilling per month. However, it is clear that there is some irregularity in the payment of fees by students and the management of these schools allows some degree of irregularity in the hope that students may pay at a later time. One school has attempted to diversify its source of income by running thrift and tailoring shops, a clinic and a drug store for the local people.  However, school fees seem to be the only source of income for the other two schools.

Though these schools run as informal private enterprises, they may not make much money. They employ teachers who are willing to work for less than say 80 to 150 USD per month.⁴  The unemployment of those who get teacher training (or the waiting time to get a job in government schools) encourages a set of trained teachers to work in these private schools temporarily. This is part of the employment in the informal sector – the pervasive trend in many developing economies. The school owners may be getting an income which may be equivalent to that of an informal sector worker in the area.

School directors (owners) in two schools highlighted that their organisation is community-driven and for the welfare of the community. One manager mentioned that his school was part of his self-employment.  However, the impression that we get is that there is not much participation of the community in the running of these schools and a realistic characterisation of these may be low-fee private schools (even though these may not make much profit). It may be more of a self-employment option for the owners of these schools.

All school owners have mentioned that there are children in these slums who do not use public or private schools. There are children who are out of school. This is mentioned by the Chairman of the Association of Alternative Schools too. However, government officials may not recognise the presence of these out of school children. There are mechanisms to identify out-of-school children in the rural areas of Kenya, but these may not be that effective in the urban slums.

These private schools may be attracting a set of children who would not have otherwise gone to any school. It may not be that these schools attract those students who plan to study in a public school. One school director told us about his efforts to contact those students who pass the Kenya Certificate of Primary Education but are unable to pursue secondary education. Through his intervention, they have enrolled in his private secondary school. Consequently, the presence of these private schools may be making education accessible to some more children (but not all children as evident from the presence of out-of-school children in these localities). Hence, it is correct to judge that these schools serve a complementary role to public education.

These schools may be flexible in their services, which may be attractive to those parents who live in slums and are engaged in informal or casual jobs. The ability to pay fees as and when they have extra money is the one thing that was mentioned by the school managers. Since these schools are located within the slums, even younger children can just walk to the school without their parents worrying about them going outside the slum. A single mother may be able to keep her child in school until she gets back after her work outside the slum.  Since a few teachers live in or very close to the schools, these schools serve as daycare facilities too. All these factors may be encouraging a set of parents to use these low-fee private schools.

Even in those low-fee private schools which have 400-500 children, one may not see more than 25 children writing the final examination (at the end of the primary level). The average grade of this small set of children is not poor. Nevertheless, the lower number of children attempting the final examination may indicate some problems. It could be due to the outflow of students to public schools as they progress in terms of grades. There could be a dropping out of some children or irregular attendance and grade repetition for others.

Alternative Provision of Basic Education and Training (APBET), Complementary Schools Association of Kenya, is an association for these low-fee schools mainly to lobby with the government to provide recognition and support to such schools. Though the association estimates that there could be more than 1,700 such schools in the slums of Nairobi, more than half of these are not registered as members of the association. There is a desire among sections of these schools to not be part of government regulation. Even when the government initiates a procedure to register these schools, there is a reluctance on the part of such schools to do so. The informality may provide certain (perverse) incentives to such schools. The way these function in terms of accounting or management also seem to be like other informal enterprises wherein parents may send money through mobile transfer to owners without adequate book-keeping and so on.

In summary, these schools are clearly an inferior option. They have sub-standard infrastructure and unqualified teachers, and the quality of instruction seems poor. Conversely, some students from these schools may be doing well in competitive examinations. This could be due to the personal attention and tutoring that are available in such schools.

Observations on public schools

We visited a public school where a few children from the slum of Kibera study. (Charity, who has previously taught in a public school understands these spaces well). Based on our interactions with this school and other experiences, we make the following observations:

1. There is a formal or legal commitment on the part of government schools to admit all children seeking admission to these schools. It is not easy or common to deny admissions. Hence, children from informal settlements can get admission to public primary schools if they want and if their parents make the effort.
2. The public schools are far better in terms of infrastructure and facilities compared to the low-fee private schools. These have spacious campuses with playgrounds, bigger classrooms, permanent buildings, libraries, and so on.
3. Needless to mention that the teachers (including head teachers) seem to have better qualifications and education and are in a position to articulate the purposes of education well. They seem to have higher self-esteem and enjoy their occupation.
4. Though children from informal settlements can get admission (theoretically) in these public schools, there are practical difficulties. From the school that we visited, the slum is about 4-5 kilometres away. Consequently, children from the slums may walk to the school or use public transport. Some of them may be dropped by parents. However, all parents may not be in a position to drop their children. Younger children may not be able to walk or use public transport. These constraints may deter some children from slums from using public schools.
5. Public schools do not provide mid-day meals. From our discussions, it seems that the schools are not able to provide enough textbooks. There is a cost on the part of parents for this. Then there is overcrowding in most of these schools (indicating the absence of enough schools). Hence, there are not enough desks, etc. Schools ask parents to contribute money to address some of these challenges. There are provisions to accommodate the needs of those students who may not be able to pay. Nonetheless, all these indicate that the indirect cost of using public schools is not insignificant even if students do not have to pay tuition fees in these schools.
6. Our interactions with the school teachers in government schools do not give an impression that they are adequately aware of the challenges of those children who come from slums. Teachers seem to think that a school located 3-4 kilometres away from the residence of children provides adequate access. They attribute the fact that some children do not enrol in school or use low-fee private schools to the lack of interest on the part of parents in the education of their children. Public schools in countries like India are expected to make efforts to enrol children who are out of school. It is not clear if such efforts are made in Kenya.
7. It is generally known that the secondary schools which are run by the government are of better quality. However, there is a priority given in admission to these secondary schools to those children who study in public primary schools. Hence, there is a trend by which a section of children who study in low-fee private schools move to public primary schools as they progress to higher grades. It seems that it is only those who are economically weaker, who stay back in private schools till grade VIII or may seek admission in a low-fee private secondary school.

Read Part II here. 

AUTHORS
Charity Limboro, Lecturer, School of Education, Kenyatta University, Nairobi
V Santhakumar, Professor, Azim Premji University, Bangalore, India

Featured photo by Oscar Omondi on Unsplash