Education is intensely a political matter. Under whatever historical and social circumstances, the task of educating future generations is deeply embodied in a society’s value systems and social fabric. The institutional arrangement for accomplishing this task depends on a wide and complex set of political conditions. It is, therefore, hardly possible to adequately understand and, hence, to plan education system outside the hot and cold winds of politics (Weiler, 1984: 467).
The political nature of education in any society has to do with at least the following major issues: The role of education on cultural development, recognition of identity and community survival. – The role of education in the allocation of political power, social status and privileges. – Education a sources of social beliefs and norms. – The relationship between education and social changes. – The claim of education on public resources.
In addition, the political nature of education and educational reform derives its political quality from being an integral part of the political decision-making process. The three successive regimes that ruled Ethiopia for over half a century the imperial government, the Marxist-Socialist Derg-regime, and the current EPRDF-led government) claimed that education was given high priority. Each of these regimes developed education policies and institutions and tried to build educational systems that could serve many of their respective political objectives and value systems.
Emperor Haile Selassie regime’s educational system was aimed at building a centralized state and society, and a generation loyal to the monarchy. Each of the last two regimes attempted to reform the education system of the preceding regime. The Marxist-Socialist Derg-regime attempted to develop a socialist oriented education system that could contribute to centralized socialist state and society, which finally proved to be disastrous. However, the most radical educational reform has been undertaken by the current regime which is the focus of this paper.
The education policies under the first two regimes were aimed at consolidating the national unity and territorial integrity of the country. The emphasis was the common historical heritage, culture and psychological makeup of the various linguistic groups and regions of the country. Contrary to the previous two regimes the current government’s education policy emphasis the difference between the various linguistic groups and the uniqueness of each and every one of them. Many Ethiopian nationalists see this policy direction suspiciously.
The Transitional Government of Ethiopia, which came to power in 1991, redrew the country’s internal boundaries on the basis of linguistic identity and ethnic settlement of groups in certain areas (and ‘areas of origin’). Ethnic regionalization did not stop at redefining regions but nded in complete federalization of the country’s political system and administration. The new regions are now responsible for the management and administration of basic social services, including education.
In 1994 a new ‘Education and Training Policy’ was declared to guide the education sector under the federal system. As a result, many far-reaching changes and reforms have been introduced, which include, among other things, decentralisation of the school system, curriculum reform, and the use of nationality languages. A number of questions should be raised here: How much of these reforms are otivated by political and/or pedagogical objectives?
What are the opposing views on and ideals for education among the various players in the field (among them the still independent Ethiopian Teachers Union)? What are the political objectives behind these educational reforms? What will be the short and long-term policy implications of the announced reforms on Ethiopia’s educational and training system? Will there be political effects of people’s identification with Ethiopia as a nation-state, or as members of one national political community? This paper will attempt to provide ome answers for these contested issues and questions.
To do so, first, the introduction of ethnic federalism in Ethiopia will briefly be discussed. Second, the major implication of Ethnic federalism on education in Ethiopia will be analyzed. Finally, some general recommendations will be forwarded by way of conclusion. 2. Ethnic Federalism in Ethiopia[1] Education and educational reform, as indicated above, is strongly political. In other words, education plays a significant role in politics and vice versa. It can contribute to the consolidation of a political system or to its failure.
It can also play a positive role in post-conflict development or trigger a new type conflict. On the other hand, politics influences education by defining the national political and educational goals. I can facilitate or hinder the expansion of education, correct the educational disparities and increase the absorbing capacity of the country’s economy. It is, therefore, crucial to understand the political system under which the education system is developed to comprehend the education system under consideration.
Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) which is currently in power was rganized based on a single ethnic group to liberate Tigray which is only one province of Ethiopia. Thus, it was regarded with genuine suspicion by the rest of the Ethiopia population, fearful that it would impose ethnic politics and the rule of a minority on the entire country. Conscious of the problem, TPLF created other ethnic organizations under its strict control and finally formed Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) to claim power in the country at large.
Thus, nominally it was EPRDF that controlled the country and took power in 1991. But in fact the EPRDF was simply an instrument of the TPLF. In addition, TPLF had its roots in the student movement of the late 1960s and 1970s, in which Marxism was the fashionable ideology. [2] It was only to secure the support of the West that TPLF made an ideological twist and embraced liberal democracy. Thus, it was clear from the beginning that a TPLF controlled government would not allow a multiparty system to take root in the country.
Thus, after TPLF/EPRDF took power in May 1991 it encouraged (even created) the formation of ethnic based political parties which may agree with its ethnic olicies (Mengisteab, 1997: 125-126), while preventing the major national parties from working legally in the country. To establish a transitional government a conference was held in Addis Ababa in July 1991, in which the major participants were TPLF/EPRDF, OLF and other newly organized ethnic based political organizations.
The conference dominated by ethnic based organizations: (1) adopted a charter and set up the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE) (87-member Council of Representatives of which EPRDF and OLF controlled 32 and 12 respectively); 2) agreed on the modalities of a transitional process to last two years, including election for local and regional government, the drafting of a constitution, general election for a constituent assembly to ratify the constitution and finally the election of the new assembly (Ottaway, 1995: 70).
Later on, however, OLF and some other members of the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE) left the government for various reasons, leaving EPRDF as the sole governing political organization. Thus, one-party ethnic dictatorship started to effectively take root. As it was expected, a constitutional commission was established, the constitution was drafted, a constituent assembly was elected in June 1994 under strict control of EPRDF. The draft constitution was ratified on 8 December 1994.
Before and after 1994, elections were held at different levels. The major opposition political groups boycotted all those elections. Thus, EPRDF competed with itself and won all elections. This gave EPRDF a monopoly of power in the country at large. The political leaders of EPRDF strongly believe that ethnicity is has been the country’s fundamental problem. The solution to this problem, it is assumed, will be the introduction of ethnic federalism.
It was obvious, thus, that TPLF/EPRDF as a political organization based on ethnicity, will do everything possible to construct an ethnic based political system that can give the party a free hand to implement its policy and keep its power. As Young (1996: 538) correctly points out: … the best means for the TPLF to retain a leading position in Ethiopia, where Tigrayans constitute a small proportion of the country’s population, is to maintain an ethnic-based coalition with lements of the numerically superior Oromo and the historically dominant Amhara.
This is best achieved in a state where power is diffused to ethnic based administrations in the regions. That was and still is what EPRDF did and is doing. What this implies is, first, if the country is divided into different ethnic groups and the political parties are based on ethnicity, there will be no strong national opposition, which can challenge EPRDF. When the ethnic parties engage themselves in their respective local politics, EPRDF as the so-called ational (country wide) organization will be free to implement its policies.
Second, if ethnic based political parties dominate the central and regional governments, it will be easier for EPRDF to get support for the adoption and implementation of its ethnic policies. Third, if the state is reconstructed as a federal state, TPLF will have a legal base to develop Tigray (which it claims it represented and is under its absolute control) by transferring the country’s resources.
Fourth, EPRDF is well aware that it will not win in a free and fair election if the strong national parties nd the major ethnic organizations such as the All Amhara People’s Organization (AAPO), the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and The Southern Ethiopian People’s Democratic Coalition (SEPDC) are allowed to compete. Therefore, EPRDF prevented the national parties from participating in the country’s politics. It also imprisoned, tortured, and harassed leaders and members of the larger ethnic organizations and closed their offices except in the capital city and forced them to boycott all the major elections.
As a result, EPRDF successfully managed to have overall control of the ountry. From then on EPRDF became free to institutionalize its rule, implement its policies and restructure the country along ethnic lines. The 1994 constitution endorsed EPRDF’s policy of ethnic federalism and established the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE). [3] The country is divided into seven ethnic and one multiethnic states, and three ethnically mixed city-states. However, there is great variation among the different states.
This is mainly because in drawing their boundaries little attention was given to their respective geographical size, population ensity, resource bases, level of infrastructure, existing administrative capacity, or ability to generate tax revenue (Cohen, 1995: 164). The only major criterion used to draw the boundaries was ethnicity based only on language. In addition, despite the constitution’s statements on the state and federal powers, it is not clear how much power will be devolved to and exercised by the states, and which regions will benefit the most.
In the words of John Young (1996: 539): It remains to be seen whether devolution of power to the regions will present real decentralization of power, or simply deconcentration, with he national government still retaining dominant power, irrespective of constitutional provisions. The problem is further compounded by the fact that the EPRDF in its party guise has assumed control of assets and functions held by the state, notably in the economic sphere.
While the EPRDF in the state is busily shedding enterprises acquired or created by the Derg, its agents and associates are in turn purchasing and managing these same assets. Thus, Young (1996; 539) concludes, ‘… the success of regional administration, apart from Tigray, is uncertain. ‘ From what has been seen n the last eight years it is TPLF and Tigray which benefited the most at the expense of the rest of Ethiopia. This includes the rapid expansion of educational facilities (primary and secondary schools, Technical schools, Teacher training institutes, and higher learning institutes).
If the ethnic emphasis is combined with economic problem, as Abbink (1997: 174) suggests, it would ‘lead to ethnocentrism, regional economic disparity and a reproduction of inequality on the intermediate level of the new ethno- regional states, then one wonders what is new, and whether the Ethiopian eople have won anything yet by the constitutional recognition of their being ethnically separate. ‘ The regional (ethnic) disparity in economic development and the provision of public services, including education, has already become clear in the last twelve years.
A more serious problem in the constitution is the question of self- determination. According to Article 39. 1 of the Constitution ‘every nation, nationality and people in Ethiopia has an unconditional right to self- determination, including the right to secession’ (Young, 1996: 531). It hould be noted that the acknowledgment of the ‘right of secession’ is an extreme interpretation of ‘national self-determination’. As Abbink (1997: 172-173) points out, ‘no other constitution of a democratic country has a clause stating this right, … Ethiopia is special, but not so special that such a principle is needed. … the concept of secession has no validity as a feature of democratic governance. ‘ The danger attached is not only the extreme interpretation of the right of nations for self- determination but also the failure of implementation.
The central government still retains all real power at the central level. This ambivalent formula will in itself encourage a radicalization of demands for separatism of ethno-regions or ‘nationalities’, once they realize that the government is not serious about it (Ibid. . Identifying which social groups are nations, nationalities or peoples is also another problem. [4] Furthermore, the constitution guaranteed the right of self-determination to nations, nationalities and peoples. However, there is no overlap between member states and nations, nationalities and peoples. Thus, there arises confusion as to what the real sovereign units are and how many can claim their separate status. Already many groups have started claiming a separate status and demanding to use their own languages, which is complicating the administrative level of the country (Ibid: 167).
Similarly, it is estipulate in Article 5. 2 that ‘All Ethiopian languages shall enjoy equal state recognition’ and in Article 5. 3 ‘The member state of the federation shall determine their respective official languages’. [5] These articles have their own problems. Who is going to decide which anguages should be designated the regional government or each ethnic group? What will happen if every ethnic group likes to use its own languages? What will be the reaction if some ethnic groups are denied to use their respective languages?
All this has been done in the name of democracy and the right of self- determination of the people. In reality, however, Ethiopia is fragmented into many ethnic states and it may go on to further fragmentation. Thus, as Ottaway (1995: 79) perfectly argues: The fragmentation of the Ethiopia polity should not be confused with ecentralization. It is, of course, possible for a political system to be decentralized as well as democratic. Democracy can thrive in a federal system or one with strong local and regional governments.
But these are systems where a common national arena exists in addition to the local and regional ones, and the same parties compete in all. Furthermore, in a decentralized, democratic system, there is agreement on the unity of the state and a determination to maintain it intact. In Ethiopia, major political players were uncertain whether to stay in one country or cause it to divide. Ottaway (Ibid. : 81) further points out that ‘there can be no democracy in Ethiopia as long as ethnic fragmentation continues. …
It seems likely that the level of ethnic conflict will increase in Ethiopia in the foreseeable future, making democracy a distant prospect. ‘ In other words, ‘separation of ethnic groups is unlikely to prevent conflicts as long as the factors that lead to conflict such as unequal access to resources, and uneven distribution of power, are not carefully addressed and mechanisms for economic, political and social integration of the different social ntities are not developed’ (Mengisteab, 1997: 117).
For many Ethiopian the introduction of so many languages as medium instruction, specially the use of different scripts, hastily without due consideration of the costs and consequences, and less emphasis given to Amharic as common national language, will endanger the national unity and survival of the country. In general, the reconstruction of the Ethiopian state exclusively on ethnic lines has been unprecedented. It is a very risky and expensive experiment. It is hardly possible to see which way the country is going. Even the Prime
Minister, the main architect of ethnic federalism, openly admitted that ‘he did not really know where Ethiopia was going’ (Cited in Abbink, 1997: 172). The fundamental question here is what is and will be the major impact of such controversial ethnic federalism on education in Ethiopia. It is to this question I now turn. 3. The Impact of Ethnic Federalism on Education in Ethiopia The reconstitution of Ethiopia along ethnic federalism, as indicated above, brought about various fundamental changes on the country’s educational system.
The major changes include: the controversial language policy (in rimary school and Teacher training institutes), the management of schools and educational materials, curriculum development, the structure of the school system, and the increasing involvement of the government in higher learning institutions and the lack of academic freedom. Let us briefly consider some of this changes. Language policy, especially language as medium of instruction has been an important issue in Ethiopian politics.
For instance, according to article 31 of the Eritrean constitution, during the federation period (1952-1962), Tigrigna and Arabic had been official languages in Eritrea (Wagaw, 1979, 97- 8). This was taken as a post-war solution. However, later on the federation was dissolved and the two languages were replaced by Amharic language. This measure became one of the root causes of the long costly war in northern Ethiopia.
The right to use one’s own mother tongue together with other political issues has also been behind the emergence of many ethnic liberation fronts in other parts of the country. However, only Amharic[6] and English[7] had been used a medium of instruction. It was only since the last years of 1970’s when the National Literacy Campaign was aunched fifteen different languages were used as medium of instruction in the Campaign. This multi-lingual language policy, which was appreciated by many linguistic groups, was not implemented in the formal education system of the country.
One of the first decisions made by the Council of People’s Representatives (composed of members representing the political groups which participated in the May 1991 Conference) was to issue a directive to introduce four ethnic languages (Tigrigna, Oromgna, Somali, Wolayetigna) as medium of instruction in the country’s school system. It should be mentioned that oth TPLF and OLF used Tigrigna and Oromgna respectively as medium of instruction in the limited areas which were under their control before 1991.
To implement the Council’s directive teachers who are native speakers of the four languages were recruited from the different parts of the country to translate the existing educational texts into the four languages. Because of the strong pressure to do it as soon as possible there was not time to evaluate the quality of the textbook to be translated and there was no meaningful attempted to introduce the teachers (translators) the art science of translation).
The more serious problem was the absence of literatures and dictionaries for all four languages that could be used as a reference for the translation. It is crucial to point our that, as Daswani (1997: 9) asserts, ‘For language to qualify for written status, it is essential that there should exist in that language a reasonable body of printed literature by native speakers of the language… ‘. There were very few books, if any, written in many of the languages that are designated as language of instruction.
Thus, for instance the same word was spelt ifferently due to the absence of standard spelling. In general, there was no meaningful research (study) to determine whether these languages were ready to be used as medium of instruction. It was purely a political decision with no regard to pedagogy. As Teferra (1999: 95) correctly put it: The task of translating and transcribing vernacular languages that have as yet developed practically no reference materials, dictionaries, or significant body of literature is an arduous one.
It requires, among others, a critical mass of experts executing their duties competently, arefully, and responsibly from a wide array of disciplines. In a situation in which major decision are dictated by less competent politicians of limited political scope, the consequences may be detrimental to the same people the government strives to promote. The hastily and chaotic implementation of the current policy may not only frustrate present and undermine the future efforts, it may have grave consequences as well.
It is important to note that it was before the new education policy was developed and adopted that the translation of educational texts into four anguages was under way. It was in 1994 that a new ‘Education and Training Policy’ to guide the education sector under the federal system was declared. One of the most important elements, as indicated above, in the process of decentralization of decision-making and the division of power between the central and the regional administration was the provision which guaranteed each region the right to use its own language as medium of instruction.
Each region was also given responsibility for the provision of primary education (grades one through eight) its constituency. Section 5. 3. of the proclamation states that ‘primary education will be given in nationality (local) languages because of the pedagogical advantage of learning in one’s mother tongue and the rights of nationalities to promote the use of their language’ (Teferra, 1999: 83). Section 5. 3. stipulates that ‘after making the necessary preparation, nation and nationalities (in the country) can either learn in their own languages or choose from among those selected on the basis of national and country-wide distribution’ (Ibid. ). There had already been problems with the implementation of section 5. 3. 2 in ig cities in the central and southern parts of the country where significant proportion of the population speaks languages (usually Amharic) other than the language designated as a medium of instruction in the regions.
The directive from the Ministry of Education was to arrange the school(s) for both local languages and the other language to be used in the school(s) so that students can make their own choice with which language to learn. However, the local authorities were not willing to implement the directives or later changed their mind and forced the students to learn ith only the local language by closing the other. Such measures created tension between the regional (local) authorities and the families who prefer to educate their children in the language of their choice.
Some families even decided to send their children to other areas where their language of choice is being used a medium of instruction. Every ethnic state, according to the new education policy, was encouraged to choose not only its medium of instruction (the language used in schools), but also the type of alphabet to be used. As a result, currently Ethiopia uses 17 languages as medium of instruction and three different alphabets: the Ethiopian (Ge’ez), the Latin and the Arabic.
In addition, the government tried even to create a new language based on shared elements of four related Omotic language-speaking groups in southern Ethiopia (the Wolayta, Gamo, Gofa, and Dauro) called ‘WOGAGODA’ as a medium of instruction, which locally resulted in strong public protest in 1999 and 2000. The programme was later dropped making the educational materials produced for the schools useless. In implementing this policy some regions were forced to use the Geez and he Latin and/or Arabic scripts.
Even in some schools that cater to different ethnic groups more than one script are being used. One of the major setback, as Teferra (1999: 89) asserts, is that: The Latin script that replaced Geez appears to have suffered from one major problem. Due to overzealous effort, the transcribed Latin words have become excessively long. Moreover, as of yet, there is a lack of conventional orthography for most of the new instructional languages. This may have an impact on the achievement of primary school-children who have to deal with two scripts – Latin first and Geez later.
It is orrisome that this same problem affects not only the schoolchildren, but also their TTI-graduate teachers. Many critics point out that ‘the decision to designate a script has been politically motivated’ (Teferra, 1999: 89) and it became an important political issue. Opposition political groups, nationalists and scholars condemned the use of more than one script. They saw the changes in the education system as one of the political tactics of the minority government to stay in power. Some even argue that the current language policy is a replica of the same strategy used in apartheid South Africa, which not only romoted Afrikaans as the language of the ruling minority but encouraged the use of so-called tribal languages, such as Setswana, Sesotho, Khosa, and Zulu, in pursuit of a divide-and-rule policy (Ibid. : 90). Other critics point out that the ruling elite has been driven by its divisive intent. According to these critics, if the educational reform was not fuelled by division intent, the transition would have been less chaotic and gradual based on sound research.
For these critics, especially the replacement of Geez by the other two scripts is a conscious plot by the minority elite to ndermine the sphere of dominance of its historical rivals and endanger the national unity and territorial integrity of the country at large. For instance, Professor Alem Eshete (2003: 1), one of the strong critics of ethnic politics in Ethiopia, wrote: In power since May 1991, EPLF-TPLF bandas have put that agenda into practice and Ethiopia is bleeding since divided into tribal Kelels and sub-kelel fighting each other.
Our ancient languages and script, our ancient religious, etc. that made up our identity as Ethiopians, have either disappeared or are in the process of disappearing being replaced y tribal languages, dialects, new alphabets, and new tribal religious’. Generally, as Teferra (1999: 90) put it: The accusation of critics and opponents of the current policy may not be totally groundless. The ruling party was in pursuit of vernacularization long before the infrastructure was in place.
Instructional materials were poorly prepared; competent teachers familiar with vernacular languages were not available; and the infrastructure was not receptive when the new scheme was launched. Regardless of the views of proponents and opponents, the overall nitiative was poorly and hastily implemented. It is important to point out here that the replacement of Geez with Latin and Arabic scripts has also a very serious impact in the non-formal education. It undoubtedly annulled much of the achievement of the 17-year national literacy campaign based on Geez script.
It may genuinely be argued that a very high percentage of the adult population who became literate may relapse to illiteracy largely because of the change from the Geez to Latin or Arabic. The division of the country into regions and zones along ethno linguistic ines has also some other shortcomings. While some regions, such as Amhara, Tigray and Oromo, have to deal with only one language, others such as Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region (SNNPR) have to deal with more than a dozen. SNNPR accounts for about half of the total ethnic groups of the country.
Currently, five working languages have been used in the nine zones. This number may increase significantly. The problem is more complicated due to shortage of trained personnel to deal with so many languages, except probably in a few languages such as Guragigna, Sidamigna nd Kembatgna. In addition to the shortage of trained manpower, especially teachers and educators, the high cost for the preparation of instructional materials in so many languages undoubtedly drains much of the educational budget of these regions.
It also appears that these regions do not enjoy substantial support from the central government for dealing with their problems. For example, according to Teferra (Ibid. ), ‘the budget allocated to region 3 – with one vernacular language – is equivalent to SNNPR’s – a region that has to deal with nine such languages and, very interestingly, lso caters to twice as many students’. This may undoubtedly create a regional disparity or worsen the already existing one.
If regional disparity is associated with ethnicity, it may create serious political repercussions. The political loaded nature of the new educational reform is not only the adoption of the provisions and the hastily implementation. The process of translating and transcribing curricular materials has also not been isolated from politics. According to Teferra (1999: 92), one education bureau chief admitted that ‘his team would not coin or adopt any word from ther vernacular languages, even when these words do not exist in his language.
He firmly underscored that ‘he would rather create a new word than legitimize the already adopted words from other local language’. This attitude, as Teferra (Ibid. : 93) corrected put it, ‘… appears pathetic, if not ignorant, to contemplate the creation of a “pure” language with no elements from other language groups. Lack of broad knowledge in language development fused with misguided political interest and shallow argument may consequently affect the interests of millions of people’.
This is very much pathetic and misguided politics to the extreme when seen from the fact that developed international languages such as English and French have many words borrowed from other languages. It is also worrisome to let incompetent, poorly qualified and politically biased personnel to decide the fate of millions of people on the pretext of self-determination, autonomy and multi-lingual education. Another issue in the new education policy is the publication and distribution of textbooks.
Textbooks and other instructional materials were ublished and distributed centrally by the Ministry of Education up until 1991. According to the new education policy, however, regional education bureaus are responsible for producing, publishing and distributing textbooks and other instructional materials. Up until September 1996, more than 900 diferent educational materials were produced in 17 languages including, Afar, Agnwak, Amharic, Benshangul-Gumuz, Dawrogna, Gedeogna, Hadiygna, Harari, Keftcho, Kembatgna, Oromigna, Sidamgna, Somaligna, Tigrigna, and Wollaytgna (Teferra, 1999: 98).
More languages will be added o this list in due time. One of the most serious problems facing the implementation of the new education policy on educational materials provision is the complexity of the process of book production and distribution. Formerly the production and distribution of educational materials was done on the basis of a set of students-books ratio by the central government. Currently, educational bureaus order books and other instructional materials based on their budget earmarked by their respective regional governments.
This may undermine the effort of ensuring the provision of books to students and schools in egions which are using numerous languages. This may seriously affect academic performance in some regions. The other problem is the increasing cost of the production and distribution of educational materials, especially for regions using different languages and scripts. It is true that the higher the number and variety of textbooks produced in different languages and scripts, the more expensive, as well as more error-prone, and more complex the distribution and management could be.
The new policy did not only affect primary education but also the teacher training programme and higher education. The medium of instruction in teacher training institution (TTI) was originally in English. This was changed by the provision of the proclamation Section 3. 5. 2. which stipulates that ‘The languages of teacher training for kindergarten and primary education will be the nationality language used in the area’ (Quoted in Teferra, 1999: 88). Implementation of this provision created a number of problems. 1). Teachers previously trained in English and do not speak local languages were displaced which created shortage of teachers in some regions while there are excess in others. 2) Some regions have to train teachers in more that one languages, in some cases in more than one scripts which dramatically increases the cost and complicates the educational programmes. (3). Teachers trained in one region in one vernacular language would become the responsibility of that particular region and must be absorbed by it.
This not only curtailed the movement of teachers across regions, in some cases within a region where different languages are in use, but also impinges on their marketability. Higher education and university staff training was supported by the EU and y Norway. The assumption usually was that a fundamental structural reforms coupled with a technocratic approach would go a long way in solving Ethiopia’s education sector problems.
What is often neglected, however, is the interference of the politicians. In some important aspects, reforming Ethiopian education has been affected by the politics of the current regime (as it was during previous regime, especially the Derg). A few years back (1993) Addis Ababa University, on order of the Ministry of Education, had to dismiss 42 senior and qualified faculty members, not on professional rounds but for vague political reasons.
Most of the dismissed university professors were singled out for their critical remarks on the policy of the government and significant number of them belong to the Amhara linguistic (ethnic) group. This was a serious blow to the quality of higher education in the country. Furthermore, as the Ethiopian Human Rights Councils (EHRCO) reported it: The dismissed professors of Addis Ababa University are not allowed to enter the University campus let alone assemble there. Consequently, they paid for a hall in the Chamber of Commerce Building to have a eeting on May 24, 1993.
This was banned by the government on May 21, 1993. Such practices which flagrantly violate the laws that the Transitional Government itself promulgated is contrary to the rule of law and will only negatively influence the expected democratic process (EHRCO, 1993). While dismissing professors from the universities, the government seems to stimulate a proliferation of new institutions in the various Regional States in the name of decentralizing/regionalizing higher education.
This was done without adequately equipping them in terms of facilities and staff nd strengthening and upgrading the existing institutions of higher learning, The government has also been following very harsh policy in violently suppressing the student movement. In April 2001, students of the Addis Ababa University who attempted to present their demands to publish their newspaper and form a student union were systematically beaten. According to the 42nd Special Report of EHRCO (EHRCIO, 2001) no less than four students sustained both heavy and light injuries.
Because of this, a riot exploded in Addis Ababa on 18th of April 2001, resulting in the loss of many lives 31killed, 253 wounded and thousands arrested according to the police report) and public and private properties worth millions of birr were destroyed and looted (Ibid). Human Rights Watch, at the time reported that, “The attacks on academic freedom have now degenerated into a wholesale assault on civil society in Ethiopia. ” (May 10, 2001).
In a letter dated June 25, 2001, the African Studies (2001) Association wrote: We were dismayed to learn that government police had entered the university campus, disrupted a peaceful and lawful student assembly, and were ubsequently responsible for the deaths of dozens of students. We were equally dismayed to learn that decades of struggle by the university to achieve a charter of autonomy were frustrated by your government’s refusal to recognize that charter.
Finally, we were dismayed to learn of the arrests of Professor Mesfin Woldemariam, a founding member of the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, and Dr. Berhanu Nega, a prominent economist at Addis Ababa University. A more recent government policy (of late 2002) is that of developing and implementing a highly unpopular staff evaluation system within the national igher education institutions and the appointment of government supporters as academic president and vice-presidents of Addis Ababa University.
According to a commentary entitled ‘Addis Ababa University Under Attack Again’ the government tried to dictate that ‘the university ought to enter the serious business of self evaluation (‘gimgema’: which is a cultural revolution style criticism-and-self-criticism exercise originally developed by the EPRDF during its armed struggle, but later replicated by the bureaucracy), before thinking about any future action plan’. 8] The then resident and vice presidents of the university resigned insisting that this contravened the university’s own rules for evaluating teaching performance, and also expose teaching staff to undue embarrassment and criticism. It also does not accord to the, earlier promised, autonomy charter for the universities.
This shows how the government is seemingly trying to bring higher education under its absolute control. All of these developments seem to be more based on political expediency than on concern for the earlier stated aims (see AAU 1999) of qualitative and qualitative expansion of higher education. In general, the EPRDF’s government is muzzling educators and students with a policy of harsh repression.
As Human Rights Watch (HRW, 2003) clearly pointed out, ‘Ethiopia’s security forces have targeted students and teachers because they are among the most politically active elements of Ethiopian society. Ethiopia is on the brink of another famine, and it needs educated people to lead the country out of this disaster’. Furthermore, HRW in its special report ‘Lessons in Repression: Violation of Academic Freedom in Ethiopia’, wrote: Being educated can be a risky business in Ethiopia.
Students and teachers, often among the most politically active elements of society, are frequent victims of human rights violations including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrest, and denial of freedom of association and expression. Ethiopian leaders since Haile Selassie have targeted the academic community; the current government’s continuation of such abusive practices emphasizes the serious obstacles facing Ethiopia before basic rights are respected and enforced not only on university campuses but across the country.
This report focuses on three major abuses: repeated, unjustified use of ethal force by security forces to put down political protests by students; continued repression of the independent Ethiopian Teachers’ Association, whose members include many of Ethiopia’s most distinguished professors; and the stifling of independent thought through denial of university autonomy and government control of activities on university campuses. The government of Ethiopia, the ruling party of which has its roots in a student movement. Ibib) This has been going on since EPRDF took power in 1991. The Timeline of key events and assaults on academic freedom in the country is an excellent vidence (See Appendix No. 1). It is worth mentioning a number of general additional points with regard to the new language and educational policy and the implementation process. First, there was no meaningful attempt to study which languages are ready to be used as a medium of instruction and what kind of programme is devised to help the development of other languages.
It seems that the choice of languages was made for pure political reasons. [9] Second, there was no effective plan for the training of teachers and other supporting personnel in the different languages. This problem is serious in ome regions and linguistic communities. Third, students who had one or more years of education were forced to continue their education with another language and a different alphabet. It seems that before the provision of any guidelines regulating the transition from Amharic to other national languages the transition was started.
There appears to be no study available on how those students who were in grade four and above in 1993-94 would cope with the transition and with the national school leaving examination (Negash, 1996: 82). Fourth, the existing content of education was translated into many anguages in spite of the fact that it had been criticized, among other things, for producing school leavers who had very little chance getting employed in the modern sector. The chance of the school leavers going back to the villages were even smaller, since most of them were from urban areas and since their training was mainly theoretical.
Fifth, the new education policy was issued in July 1994. However, a de facto policy had been in operation since February 1993 (Negash, 1996. 80). As Negash (Ibid. ) put it: ‘For all purposes Proclamation 45/1993, which ealt with the separation of powers between the regions and the central authority, functioned as the cornerstone for the education policy which at this period was in the process of being drafted. Both the central government and the regions appeared to have known the contents of the education policy nearly one year before it was officially promulgated’.
This was not because the population was involved in the process of drafting the policy. The society has never been involved in any of the process. It was only because the governing party started implementing its policy before t became a country wide policy believing that its policy would be an official policy. It was only a matter of time. As it was expected EPRDF’s policy became the country’s education policy. EPRDF was successful in adopting its ethnic policy as the country’s policy because it controls the parliament, other ethnic political parties, the country’s economic and security forces.
The other crucial point to be mention here is that ethnicity is not only used for the political restructuring of the country and the educational system but also of civil organizations. The two major examples are the Ethiopian Trade Union and the Ethiopian Teachers Association, which were forced to reorganize themselves on ethnic lines. The objective, according to the unions and opposition political groups, is to minimize the power of these organizations in challenging the policies of the government by fragmenting them into smaller and weaker ethnic organizations.
The Ethiopian trade union has been strongly challenging the policy of the government on structural adjustment programmes while the Ethiopian Teachers Association opposed the ethnically based educational policy which was not ased on relevant research and did not involve any popular participation (Degu, 2002: 223). For the reasons I have indicated above there has been and still is strong opposition against the ethnic federal system, the new language and education policies.
More importantly there is a growing feeling among many Ethiopians that ethnic based political and educational policy may destroy the national unity and territorial integrity of the country. There is also a growing suspicion that the ruling party initially organized to liberate one specific region – Tigray (the Tigregna speaking people of Ethiopia) – an not be the legitimate political force which will develop genuine education policy for the country at large. It is strongly believed that the ruling party is playing the ethnic card to maintain its power and favour its specific ethnic group.
To give one example, Professor Andargachew Tesfaye of the Addis Ababa University pointed out: What is more disheartening is the fact that education is used as a political tool to favour or disfavour regions under the pretext that education at the first and second level is a regional affair. One only wishes that those responsible will realise, soon enough, that this is a angerous game and speedy amends are needed. It is also high time for the people, particularly who can see the unfair game being played and understand the long run consequences, to start speaking up and speak loud. Support Group to the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, 2000: 18)
As the result of the introduction of ethnic federalism the country’s political groups are divided between supporters (mainly ethnic political groups allied with the ruling party) and opponents of ethnic politics (mainly non-ethnic and ethnic groups which rejects ethnic federalism). The ntroduction of three different alphabets in the school system also created strong public opposition, especially from the teacher’s and other trade union members.
There has also been conflict (at times violent) between linguistic groups who’s languages are used as medium of instruction and linguistic groups who’s languages are not used as medium of instruction (who are forced to learn in other languages). Furthermore, there has been a growing demand from linguistic groups who’s languages are not used as medium of instruction for their right to use their own languages in the school system. If these demands are not met they may develop into a wider political movements.
Therefore, the language and educational policies, which are supposed to be part of the post-conflict development, may most likely push the country into another cycle of conflict. 4. What can be done? Some General Remarks As discussed above one of the root causes of violent conflict in multi- ethnic countries has been the language policy of a country. The demand for mother tongue education and the use of one’s own native language has been a growing problem in many countries. Such demands grew for a number of easons: pedagogical, political and socio-cultural.
Mother tongue education has been advocated for years due to the fact that it is pedagogically more effective especially in the first years of teaching-learning process. Socio- culturally the use of one’s own native language is strictly connected with the development of the respective culture and identity. It is believed that there can be no other language which can reflect the culture, values, way of life, etc. of a society more that its own language. Politically, the right to use one’s own language in the public arena has also been taken as n element of one’s democratic right that should be respected.
As the world witnessed in many circumstances, when such demands were not satisfied the result had been conflict and in worst cases violent conflict. It is, therefore, imperative to undertake educational reform as part of post-conflict development process. The reform should consider, among other things: _ The rights of every citizen to use their native languages in education and other public arenas. _ The socio-economic and political impacts that are attached with the uses of one’s own language. _ The economic capacity and trained manpower needs of the country.
The new education policy should in principle be mutli-lingual. However, the policy should be based on the results of a thorough research on which languages are capable to be used as medium of education, at what level of education and when to be used. Different measures should also be taken to help some languages to develop to be used as medium of instruction. It is very important that research in codification, orthography, and standardization be promoted in all the languages, especially those languages designated as a medium instruction.
It is clear that if such work n the different languages does not reach an adequate level of development, the effort to foster the utilization of the country’s mother tongues and national languages, and the preservation of and promotion of cultures and traditions will remain elusive. There should also be strong emphasis to create an opportunity and means for the country to speak one common language while diversifying the others. A country needs one common, widely used – a national lingua franca.
This entails, while other languages could be promoted, developed and used, the role of one (most probably Amharic) language that binds the country ogether should not be underestimated. The new educational policy should also give special attention to improving the professional and moral qualities of teachers, who are the central actors in education sector. Special attention should be paid to the recruitment, quality of training, professional (job) satisfaction, social prestige, and to the spiritual and material incentives of teachers.
For teachers to devote their knowledge, energy and time in producing young productive citizens with confidence and purpose, teachers must to motivated. A genuine, open, and critical, and all-encompassing forum for debate that could disentangle emotional and political vagaries from realities is crucial to the success of efforts to vernacularize education. The debate should focus not only on the benefit and potentials that may accrue from vernacularizing education, but also the costs, consequences, and sacrifices that may have to be made.
Regional disparities of educational opportunities and the disparity between educational expansion and economic development should also be addressed as part of a new education policy. In order to rectify the regional disparity, nequal measures or differential steps will be required to be taken to move towards equality. Such steps should be taken as a crucial strategic aspect of securing equitable distribution of resources that will result in equal opportunity of education services at all levels.
Unequal measures or differential steps mean directing or allocating significant proportion of financial, material and human resources to areas which are identified to be disadvantaged in the old system. In short, more attention should be given to areas or social groups where there are few or no schools and other educational facilities. It should be well noted here that building educational facilities by itself might not solve the problem. Other steps to improve the political, economic, social and cultural development of the disadvantaged areas should also be considered.
This is due to the fact that effective utilization of educational facilities has been proved unthinkable in socio-economically and culturally backward societies. In other words, to solve the problem of regional disparities of educational opportunities and reverse its socio- political and economic impact effective and efficient comprehensive evelopment programme, which takes the overall development of a country or a specific region into consideration, must be launched.
The other related issues that need to be tackled are the disparity between educational expansion and economic development, the lack of integrity between education and a country’s trained manpower needs and the ever- increasing number of educated unemployment. These are interrelated problems that need serious considerations. To tackle these problems and reverse their adverse effect comprehensive and integrated educational and training olicy should be developed based on the manpower needs of a country.
The education sector must fundamentally be reorganized and re-directed towards a country’s socio-economic and political development, especially towards the dominant economic sector. It should be, above all, oriented towards facilitating a country’s economic development by enhancing labour productivity. Some serious measures should also be taken to increase the absorptive capacity not only of the modern economic sectors but also the tradition/ rural sector.
This can be done by developing a socio-economic rogramme taking into account the needs of the people and the country in the one hand, and a country’s national resources, experience, culture, local knowledge and international development, on the other hand. The very process of rectifying the weaknesses, reorienting and reorganizing the existing curriculum content of a country’s educational system should depend on the precise and clear redefinition of a country’s national goals: political, economic, social and cultural policies, accepted by the different socio-political groups.
It is important that, especially in a eterogeneous society, a country’s national goals should be the result of a negotiated consensus between the various socio-political groups. It will be in reference to and help to attain such national goals that the country’s educational goals should be articulated which will then guide the overall educational activities. Appropriate emphasis must be made in developing a state of mind that will accept that the country’s diversity is the source of future strength and development.
Education should be reorganized to help cultivate deep and lasting national belongingness in the minds of the outh. In general the new education system and its content must be designed in such a way that will be capable to produce a generation that deeply think and act as equal citizen of a country. In a situation where the attitude of preferring violence and war as a means of solving problems and differences has been strong, education can play a crucial role to change such attitude of the society, especially the attitude of the youth.
In such a situation a country’s education system needs to be redesigned and developed so that it can contribute to this end. As Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam (1991: 5) pointed out education should contribute to the development of an attitude in which: Peace must not be and must not mean the defeat and humiliation of one group and the victory and jubilation of another… peace can only mean the substitution of violent and destructive conflict by a positive and a constructive one, the substitution of fighting with the bullet by fighting with words and ideas…
Voilence as a means of resolving differences or as a means of acquiring power over any section or the whole society is both morally and ntellectually unacceptable. The resort to violence is not only a concrete demonstration of rejecting the sovereignty of the people, it is also a violation of one’s own stand against oppression and arbitrary rule by force… such a position is morally and intellectually untenable. The development of such an attitude in the minds of the society and especially in the youth must be taken as the responsibility of the structured education system.
The development of such very positive attitude in the society will undoubtedly help to break the cycle of violence and reate a sense of common purpose in the society. All of the points discussed above to be effective in developing a new educational policy there should be attitudinal changes within the political leaders and educators on the one hand, and within the society at large on the other hand. A system should be devised which makes it possible to have effective popular participation in the major educational activities, decision-making, implementing, evaluating and controlling.
Political leaders and educators must develop the will to consider the views and opinions in society. They should have the will to have effective dialogue with different groups in society. As Paulo Freire (1973:77-79) pointed out dialogue requires an intense faith in the human being, ‘faith in his power to make and remake, to create or recreate, faith in his vocation to be more man, which is not the privilege of an elite, but the birth right of all men’. Political leaders and educators should change their attitude on what education is all about by revising past experiences, mistakes and successes.
Furthermore, educators should take into account that ‘authentic ducation is not carried on by “A” for “B” or by “A” about “B”, rather by “A” with “B” mediated by the world. A world which impresses and challenges both peoples…. ‘ (Ibid. : 82-83). As Freire (Ibid. ) correctly put it, ‘we simply can not go to the laborer-urban or peasant in the banking style, to give them “knowledge” or to impose upon them the model of the “good man” contained in a program whose content we have ourselves organized’.
The society should have a say in organizing the educational system. ‘Many political and educational plans have failed because their authors designed hem according to their personal views of reality, never once taking into account – except as mere objects of their action – the men in a solution to whom their program was ostensibly directed’ (Ibid. ). As Freire further pointed out often the speeches of politicians and educators are not understood because their language is not attuned to the concrete situation of the citizens they address. Their talk is just alienated and alienating rhetoric…
In order to communicate effectively, educators and politicians must understand the structural conditions in which the thought and language f their people are dialectically framed… ‘ (Ibid. : 85-86). If politicians and educators are determined to launch genuine educational reform which can contribute in avoiding conflict and/or in breaking the cycle of conflict there could be no reason to fear the people, their expressions, their effective participation, etc.
Initiators to genuine mass based educational reform must also be accountable to the people, they must speak frankly to the society of their achievement, shortcomings, miscalculations and their difficulties, and of course invite the people for their views and opinions. In short, they must make continuous effort to enhance the role of the society and develop the will to seriously consider public opinion.
On the other hand, the members of the society must be aware that they are and should be the real sources of the articulation of and the decisive actors in the practicality of the educational reform, for such reform to be meaningful and lasting. They must be prepared to consciously contribute to the decision-making, implementing and evaluating processes of the educational reform and the effectiveness of the educational system in general.