1

On enrolment and gender parity, pro-poor private schools

in Nairobi’s poor urban neighborhoods have a point to

make Contributors: Epari Ejakait

Reuben OgollahEva Nderu

Moses Ngware

7th INDEPTH Network Annual General and Scientific Meeting3-7 September 2007. Safari Park Hotel, Nairobi, Kenya

Theme: The Role of DSS in monitoring progress on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

2

Presentation outline

• Background• Research questions• Methodology• Results• Key message• Policy proposals

3

Background

4

Private schools in Kenya

• These have roots in Kenya’s independent schools.– Nomiya Luo Mission-Nyanza (1910)– Kikuyu Independent Schools Movement-

Central (1920s), then broke in 1937 into• Kikuyu Independent Schools Association• Kikuyu Karinga Education Association (more

opposed to any cooperation with colonial Govt.)

• Provision of primary education in Kenya=public (GoK) and private.

5

Number of schools by type

Year Public

Private

Total

National 2006 17804

1839 19643

Nairobi Province

2006 195 331* 526

Korogocho 2007 2 29* 31Viwandani 2007 2 17* 19

Source: CBS (2007), APHRC*=includes both private and NFE

6

Research questions

• What is the enrolment in pro-poor private primary schools in Nairobi’s informal settlements compared to public schools?

• What is the Gender Parity Index (GPI) in schools within the informal settlements?

7

Methodology• Longitudinal• Retrospective data 2000-2005

Site Site descriptio

n

Children aged 5-19

yrs

Number & % of girls

Korogocho Slum 7698 4016 (52.2%)

Viwandani Slum 3892 1974 (50.7%)

Jericho Non Slum 1564 788 (50.4%)

Harambee Non slum 728 362 (49.7%)

Total 13882 Slum=5990 (51.7%)

8

Preliminary results

9

% of enrolled pupils irrespective of school location

68.165.0

61.3 58.953.6

48.151.9

46.441.138.7

35.031.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Year

Pe

rce

nt

Public Private

10

% of enrolled pupils within schools in the informal

settlements

61.1 58.554.9 52.3

47.541.438.9 41.5

45.1 47.752.5

58.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Year

Nu

mb

er o

f p

up

ils

Public Private

11

Situation in select public schools in the informal

settlements, 2007School Name

Str

c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 c8 Total

Daniel Comboni

4 210

235

251

273 274

257

243 173

1920

Ngunyumu 3 80 136

132

181 229

222

190 91 1264

Star of Hope

1 78 70 90 84 54 50 42 46 515

St. Elizabeth

3 157

154

168

169 90 144

134 122

1141

12

Gender Parity Index (GPI)

• GPI assesses gender differences • Based on GER to standardise the

effects of the pop structure of the appropriate age groups.

• A GPI of 1 represents 100 girls for every 100 boys in school.

boysfor indicator of Value

girls.for indicator of ValueGPI

13

Gender Parity Index (GPI)2

• If this GPI=0-1, (disparity in favour of boys)

• If this GPI=1+, (disparity in favour of girls)

• It is sometimes considered that a GPI of between 0.97 and 1.03 indicates that gender parity has been attained (The EFA Global Monitoring Report Team, 2003; United Nations, 2003)

14

Gender Parity Index (GPI) by type of school

1.09

1.06 1.06 1.061.07

1.09

1.031.04

1.06

1.031.04

1.02

0.970.980.99

11.011.021.031.041.051.061.071.081.091.1

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Year

GP

I

Public Private

15

Why call them pro-poor?

• They are not in the class of conventional private schools in Kenya

• Their fees are low, on average about (USD 5 or Ksh 300 per month) and payment is staggered

• Not strict on school uniform• Operate within the informal

settlements where most of the urban poor live.

16

Key challenges facing pro-poor private schools

• Substantial % of untrained teachers• Poor infrastructure and sanitation• Lack of adequate and appropriate

teaching and learning materials• Most are not registered with the

Ministry of Education so cannot get its support

• Individualised or poor management systems

17

Key message

• Despite many challenges, these pro-poor private schools in the informal settlements

– Have enrolled a substantial % of children from the informal settlements

– Their GPI is much better compared to that in the public schools

18

Policy proposals• Bring these private schools on board

in terms of – Registration with MoE (perhaps as

private formal)– quality assurance (regular visits)

• Trained teachers and teaching and learning materials( can a minimum # in each school be a pre-requisite?)

• Attempt vouchers for the delivery of FPE in the urban poor neighbourhoods

19

Thank You