Universal Primary Education
The controversial introduction of UPE in 1997 as a Presidential pledge deprived the program of gender mainstreaming opportunity. UPE remains a global initiative hatched by the UN stipulated in MDG objective 2; to improve access to equitable education for children in struggling regions of the world.
Today, there are concerns about the impact, quality, and the outcomes for those citizens processed through UPE. However, what should concern us the most is the obvious impact of UPE on rural economies, and the fact that it has become a reliable mode of enforcing socio-economic inequity between urban and rural communities.
The PLE results released in the last ten years show a consistent pattern of unequal achievements between rural and urban locations. Children studying in well-resourced urban settings have consistently outperformed their counter parts in resource scarce rural settings. The rural and impoverished districts have also performed worse consistently.
A recent report by Justice and Peace Center shows that the story in Northern Uganda is far damning than anywhere in the country. In 5 years, over 66% of the schools in Northern Uganda failed to produce first grades. This pattern may stretch back for the last two decades. This trend can explain the low quality of human resources in this region, and the region’s exclusion from the glorified economic resurgence of this country.
In this article, I explore how a failing UPE affects the health of rural economies and more specific, how UPE has affected the health of rural women/mothers.
The typical African woman in rural setting is the modern day beast of burden. The woman is the centerpiece of the livelihood of rural communities and households. She is constantly overloaded at all her body facets. On the head, they have firewood, water containers, sacks, or packages of food. In her arms, she holds a baby, handbag - a luggage. Either on the back or in the womb there is a baby.
The rural African woman needs liberation from the bondage of burden. In the process of this whole conundrum, she, as the person in that woman, is eternally lost. Her health considerations do not exist. And, no one seems to care enough about the precarious state of the rural African woman. Incidentally, you will discover that even husbands, parents, in-laws, or the managers of our social welfare do not care enough for gender mainstreaming in their policy processes.
It reminds me when, a couple of years ago, I was facilitating a cancer screening and prevention program for immigrant women from South Eastern Asia. When I provided them with nametags and asked them to write their real names on it. Some of the women were reluctant to comply. When I prompted them, some stated that they had forgotten their real names because the society defined them with what they do and to whom they belonged. This to me demonstrated how the person in our women still vanishes from the social and physical realms. She is only visible in her roles as a mother, wife, provider, worker, and to others, an object of means.
Despite the fact that the rural woman is lowly educated, she is socially well schooled in her subordinate gender roles, primarily as a gatekeeper of a place where she does not exert a physical presence. She is compelled to deliver many children out of inevitability. Naturally, she depends on assistance from her children – moreso, the females. The birth of every girl-child is a potential relief of her burden. She delights with eagerness to indoctrinate and socialize the female child into a caring role.
A UN gender and water resource report shows that on the average, the rural African woman spends 4 hours a day in search of water and fuel for her family. When she has girls of her own, some of her “natural” burdens are delegated to the daughters. The MDG report observed that over 60% of rural women in Sub-Sahara Africa are employed in unpaid agricultural work. Her children always help in clearing the shamba, planting, weeding and harvesting. In that sense, the rural African woman has the additional burden of producing laborers and caring for them as well. This is why a failing UPE hurts the rural woman the most.
It is here that UPE planners failed the rural woman despite all structural constraints against her. They took away her helpers, which added to her the burden of farming on top of caring for the family.
Knowing that 83% of Ugandans reside in rural communities, and that agriculture employs over 80% of Ugandans, the calendar of UPE could not be any worse – at least for the rural woman. Children are part-and-parcel of these communities and have supportive roles in the gardens, homes, and markets. By taking them away from these roles, their mothers must inherit these roles.
The school calendar needs adjusting such that school terms run during dry seasons when the need for labor is low. These children would still be in school, but help with cultivating, weeding, and harvesting during holidays. This would be a perfect time to apply the knowledge of agriculture in practice. Why make English a compulsory subject in schools and not agriculture, which employs instantly?
END.
No comments:
Post a Comment