|
1.2 Background to the study
1.2.1 An overview to the education system in Tanzania
Tanzania’s education system takes the pattern of 2-7-4-2-3+. That is, two years of pre-primary education, seven years of primary education, four years of certificate of secondary education( ordinary level), two years of advanced certificate of secondary education and a minimum of three years of university education (United Republic of Tanzania, 1995).
The pre-primary education is provided for children aged five to six years. Usually, there is no formal examination which promotes pre-primary children to primary schools. Instead, pre-primary education is formalised and integrated into the formal primary school system. Primary schooling in Tanzania is universal and compulsory for all children from the age of seven. The primary school cycle begins with standard one (STD I) on entry, and ends with standard seven (STD VII) in the final year. At the end of standard seven, pupils sit for the National Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). This examination acts as a selection examination for entry to secondary education (Form One). A Primary School Leaving Certificate (PSLC) is awarded to all children who complete standard seven (United Republic of Tanzania, 2006).
At the end of Form four, students sit for the Certificate of Secondary Education Examination (CSEE) which upon successful completion, a national certificate is awarded. Candidates who satisfy set performance criteria are selected for the Advanced Certificate of Secondary Education (ACSE). It starts at Form Five and culminates at Form Six where students sit for the Advanced Certificate of Secondary Education Examination (ACSEE). Upon successful completion, they are awarded an advanced national certificate of secondary education. Students who meet set University admission criteria are admitted for a university education that lasts for three or more years depending on the field of study.
1.2.2 Management of primary education in Tanzania
The management of primary education in Tanzania had for a long time been centrally done through the ministry of education. With this top-down control approach, things were centrally managed through the district and regional education officers. The procurement of school supplies for example, was mostly planned and implemented at the ministerial level. The centrally procured school supplies were then distributed to individual schools countrywide by the District Education Officers (DEOs). The mode of distribution to individual schools was through ‘door-delivery’ if funds were available to cover transport costs (Mushi, 2006). It was usual to see pupils carrying school supplies such as exercise books, text books, boxes of chalk and other items from the district offices to their respective schools because the district education office had no funds to cover transportation costs. With this bureaucratic system, there were lot of delays in distribution of the school supplies to their respective destinations, pupils missing classes to ferry school materials from the district headquarters and so on. In addition, the exclusion of people at the grassroots made them feel that they were not part of the development programmes. In other words, it resulted in lack of ‘ownership’ and commitment because the plans were imposed to the people rather than being developed from them through participatory planning. The government was seen as the only actor responsible to ‘bring’ education, health care services, water and other essential services to the citizens as ‘recipients’ and not as ‘participants’/ actors in the process. This consequently led to excessive workload and financial burden to the government. Yet, the availability and quality of the essential social services to the public persistently deteriorated as the time went by due to the amplified burden that the government had to shoulder. It is due to the deterioration of service provision sectors that drove the governments of the developing countries in the 1980s to embark on efforts to transform their governance processes into more participatory and inclusive forms as an attempt to increase resource availability and promote ownership among citizens at the grassroots level. |
