Educational Decentralisation and the Management of Public Primary Schools by Local Councils in Cameroon
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47672/ajlg.2270Keywords:
Decentralisation, Instruction, ManagementAbstract
Purpose: The main focus of this paper was to examine the influence of educational decentralisation on the management of Public Primary schools in the North West, South west, Littoral, West and North Regions of Cameroon. The Study was guided by two objectives: To examine the influence of organization of instructions on the management of public primary schools in Cameroon: Determine the influence of resources generation on the management of public primary schools in Cameroon.
Materials and Methods: The ex-post-facto design employing both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection was used in this study. Data were collected from 156 Councillors, 295 Primary school Teachers. Questionnaire and semi-structured interview guide were the instruments used for the study. The instruments consisted of both close and open-ended questions. The reliability coefficient for Councillors was 0.938 while the reliability coefficient for Teachers was 0.891 which was above the recommended threshold of 0.7 thus, implying that the instrument was also valid and reliable for the study as the teachers to a greater extent were objective in their responses. Data from close ended questions were analysed using SPSS 23.0, with the aid of descriptive and inferential statistical tools while opened ended questions were analysed thematically.
Findings: Findings show that Councillors’/teachers’ quality (R = 0.628**, P = 0.000), Resources Generation (R = 0.576**, P = 0.000), strongly, positively and significantly affect the management of Primary Schools with all P-values <0.001, far < 0.05 with results from the Anova statistics predicting an effect of 54.1%. Despite this relationship, a significant proportion of respondents indicated that lack of a strong political will for the implementation of decentralisation law, limited resources and administrative bottle neck were the challenges identified hindering the effective implementation of the decentralisation laws in Cameroon. Findings showed that teachers and Municipal Councillors do not significantly differ in their opinion as a majority of the teachers 80.3% and Municipal councillors 77.9% disagreed that Municipal councils organize instruction for primary schools within their jurisdiction. Findings showed that teachers and Municipal Councillors do not significantly differ in their opinion as a majority of the teachers 80.3% and Municipal Councillors 71.4% disagreed that Municipal Councillors generate resources for effective management of primary schools within their jurisdiction. Findings showed that teachers and Municipal councillors do not significantly differ in their opinion as a majority of the teachers 87.5% and Municipal Councillors 80.4% disagreed that Municipal councils managed personnel for primary schools in their jurisdiction.
Implications to Theory, Practice and Policy: To remedy this challenges that have led to new Decentralisation laws, the text of application on the management of schools by local authorities and the regional assembly should be put in place, ensure accountability, new school Boards be introduced for Primary schools, curriculum planning should be more inclusive to enable effectiveness in the management of Primary Schools.
Downloads
References
McGinn, N., & Welsh, T. (1999). Decentralisation of education: why, when, what and how? Paris: UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning.
McCubbins, Mathew, Roger Noll, and Barry Weingast (1987).Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3: 243-277. 25
Miller, Gary (1993). Managerial Dilemmas: The Political Economy of Hierarchy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Miller, Gary (2005). The Political Evolution of Principal-Agent Models. Annual Review of Political Science 8: 203-225.
Miller-Grandvaux, Yolande and Karla Yoder (2002).A Literature Review of Community Schools in Africa, Washington DC: USAID, Bureau for Africa, office of Sustainable Development, SARA Project.
Mingat, Alain, Ramahatra Rakotomalala, and Jee-Peng Tan, (2002).Financing Education for All by 2015: Simulations for 33 African Countries, Africa Region Human Development Working Paper Series. The World Bank, Washington D.C.
Momoniat, Ismail (2001). Fiscal Decent in South Africa: A Practicioner's Perspective. Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations & Local Financial Management Program. Washington D.C: World Bank.
Moulton, Jeanne, et.al. (2001).Paradigm Lost? The Implementation of Basic Education Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington DC: USAID. Sustainable Development Publication Series, Office of Sustainable Development Bureau of Africa Technical Paper No. 109
Parker, Andrew N. (1995). Decentralisation: The Way Forward for Rural Development? Policy Research Working Paper 1475. Washington, D. C.: The World Bank.
Popkewitz, T. and Brennan, M. (eds) (1998). Foucault’s challenge: discourse, knowledge and power in education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Prendergast, Canice (2003). The Limits of Bureaucratic Efficiency. Journal of Political Economy 111: 929-958. Prendergast, Canice (2007). The Motivation and Bias of Bureaucrats. American Economic Review 97: 180-196.
Ridker, Ronald G. (1997). Determinants of Educational Achievement and Attainment in Africa: Findings from Nine Case Studies. Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Reform.
Romer, Thomas and Howard Rosenthal (1978).Political Resource Allocation, Controlled Agendas, and the Status Quo. Public Choice, 33: 27-43.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1981). Government decentralization in comparative theory and practice in developing countries. International Review of Administrative Science, 47 (2), 133-147.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. and John R. Nellis.(1986). Assessing decentralization policies in developing countries: The case for cautious optimism. Development Policy
Uemura, Mitsue (1999). Community Participation in Education: What do we Know? Washington, DC: World Bank, HDNED.
UNDP (1999). Decentralisation: a sampling of definitions, October. Wunsch, J. S. & Olowu, D., eds., 1990, The failure of the Decentralised State and Self Governance in Africa, Goulder Westview Press.
USAID (2001). DHS EdData - Education Profiles for Africa First Edition (Data for Benin, Ghana, Guinea Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Nigeria, Uganda, and Zambia). Washington, DC: USAID Office of Sustainable Development, Africa Bureau, and Center for Human Capacity Development.
Volden, Craig (2002). A Formal Model of the Politics of Delegation in a Separation of Powers System. American Journal of Political Science 46: 111-133.
Welsh, Thomas and Noel McGinn (1998). Decentralization of Education: What and How? Paris: IIEP.
Whitacre, Paula. (1997). Education Decentralization in Africa as Viewed Through the Literature and USAID Projects. Washington DC: Academy for Educational Development, Inc, USAID/AFR/SD PN-ACA-366.
Whitford, Andrew (2006). The Pursuit of Political Control by Multiple Principals. Journal of Politics 67: 28-49.
Winkler, Donald. (1989). Decentralization in Education: An Economic Perspective. Population and Human Resources Department Paper. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank (2001).A Chance to learn: knowledge and finance for education in Sub-Saharan Africa, Washington DC: The World Bank.
Miller-Grandvaux, Yolande and Yoder, Karla. March 2002. PN-ACP-215 Overview of USAID Basic Education Programs in Sub-Saharan Africa III.SD Technical Paper No. 106. February 2001. PN-ACK-735.
Memon, M. (2003, August 5-8). Policy reforms for decentralizing education system in Pakistan: prospects and challenges. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI), Sydney, Australia.
Law N° 2019/024 of 24 December 2019, Bill to Institute the general code of Regional and Local Authorities.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Massa Ernest Massa, PhD
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
