Basic Education in Cambodia:
The Impact of UNESCO on
Policies in the 1990s
Sideth S. Dy
Hiroshima University
Akira Ninomiya
Hiroshima University
Citation: Dy, S. S., and Ninomiya, A.
(2003, December 18). Basic Education in Cambodia: The impact of UNESCO on
policies in the 1990s, Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 11(48). Retrieved [Date] from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n48/.
|
Abstract
Efforts to enhance opportunities for Basic Education have been
growing within many developing nations after the1990 World
Conference on Education For All (WCEFA) in Jomtien, Thailand. In
the face of political turmoil, financial constraint and social
insecurity, Cambodia with the encouragement and assistance of the
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO), took measures to increase educational opportunities for
all her citizens through Basic Education strategic plans and
pledged to eradicate illiteracy by the year 2000. This article
examines the joint efforts during the 1990s of this organization
as a key assistance and support UN agency for educational policy
and strategy formulations, and the Cambodian government as a
national agency for educational initiatives and implementation.
UNESCO’s inputs for policy implementation are also detailed
to evaluate the overall impact of the organization during the last
decade. Analyses are based primarily on interviews with some key
government policymakers, fieldwork observation and interviews with
school-aged children, several speeches of top government
officials, and existing related official education statistics and
indicators in Cambodia. |
Introduction
UNESCO’s conceptual framework of Basic Education has been
receiving remarkable policy attention in many developing countries
over the last decade. Interest has been fueled by extensive
participation in the 1990 WCEFA and increasing ratifications of
the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in the early
1990s. Those developing nations, including Cambodia, have
recognized the rights of children to education on the basis of
equal educational opportunity and also taken measures to make
primary education compulsory, free and accessible to all (Article
28 of the CRC). Subscribing nations also pledged that all their
poor children would have gained access to quality primary
education by the turn of the century.
After the 1990 WCEFA, UN agencies, international organizations
(IOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) diversified their
support programs and activities to facilitate and assist least
developed nations to achieve the EFA goal by the year 2000. This
world community carries a key responsibility for alleviating the
constraints that prevent some countries from achieving the goal of
EFA (Windham, 1992).
However, at the 2000 World Education Forum (WEF) in Dakar, a
large majority of the 1990 WCEFA participants conceded failure,
despite the decline in the world illiteracy population from over
900 million in 1990 to less than 800 million, and despite the fact
that more children than ever gained access to primary schooling.
The 2000 WEF participants eventually vowed to redouble efforts to
achieve Basic Education for all by the year 2015.
Accordingly, this “simple yet profound goal” was
described by Sperling (2001, pp. 7) as adding to the existing
“crowded graveyard of overly ambitious developmental
goals.” Sperling (2001) warned that while the provision of
basic education can produce significant gains in income and
lifestyle, the achievement should really be seen as a starting
point rather than an end goal. Sperling (2001) suggested,
“The most likely way to achieve universal education by 2015
is through a clear framework for collective action that outlines
appropriate and realistic roles and responsibilities for donor
countries, recipient countries and multilateral
institutions” (p.9). Many Cambodian educational leaders
believe that they must spare no effort to give all Cambodians
education of acceptable quality.
Cambodia was still at war when it participated in the 1990
WCEFA. A Peace Accord was signed in Paris by all the warring
factions considering national reconciliation in 1991 with the
assistance of the international community to put war to an end.
Since then, Cambodia has opened itself to the world and called for
outside assistance. These ground breaking changes led to a general
election organized and supervised by the UN in 1993 to establish a
democratic government. Cambodia was seen as vulnerable in the
eyes of the international community. The World Red Cross, The
World Health Organization, the United Nations Children’s
Fund (UNICEF) and other organizations and donors came in to help
rebuild the broken socioeconomic system. UNESCO in particular was
exceptionally active and played a key role in providing
consultation and supporting reform of the education system in
Cambodia as early as 1990. Doing so has required working closely
with the central governments, both pre-election and post-election,
in formulating policies for educational development.
According to the socioeconomic circumstances of the early 1990s
and recalling that Cambodia was then in a stage of national
rehabilitation, Basic Education was focused on primary education
and adult education with the primary aim of enhancing the
achievement of literacy and numeracy (Hun Sen, 1991). Basic
Education subsequently was extended to nine years of formal
schooling composed of primary and expanded to lower secondary
education. The main goal of this new policy was to achieve
“functional literacy” and construct a foundation for
vocational and technical trainings, and for higher learning
(MoEYS, 1999, pp.14). In recognition of this fact, the Cambodian
government has been taking steps to alleviate widespread poverty
and has striven to eradicate illiteracy and improve access to
quality basic education (Tol Lah, 1997).
The principal aims of this article are (1) to review
educational policies and strategies formulated and implemented in
the 1990s; (2) to examine the main contributions of UNESCO and the
impact on Basic Education expansion; and (3) to identify and
explain the successes and failures of the Basic Education
developments during the 1990s. This study is, in order to
understand the educational policy and development in Cambodia,
derived from interviews with national EFA experts and keynote
speeches of top government officials. For further understanding
and to crosscheck what was heard or written, fieldwork
observations and interviews were conducted in five rural provinces
of Cambodia with over a hundred children, three local authorities
and parents in July-August 2001.
Understanding Cambodia: Its Regimes and Their Policies on
Education
Cambodia (sometimes known as Khmer or Kampuchea) may not be
known worldwide and is sometimes forgotten by or isolated from the
international community. Its present condition is deeply rooted in
its past magnificence and sufferings. Those who fail to understand
the history of Cambodia may find its current situation confusing
or incomprehensible. This section traces the pivotal periods from
pre-French colonialism (before 1863), French colonial era
(1863-1953), post-French colonialism or the first Kingdom of
Cambodia known as Sihanouk regime (1953-1970), political turmoil
of Lon Nol regime or the Khmer Republic (1970-1975), genocidal
regime of the Khmer Rouge or Pol Pol regime (1975-1979), to the
Vietnamese occupation period or Heng Samrin regime (1979-1989). It
concludes with a discussion of the regime of the State of
Cambodia as a transitional period from the collapse of Soviet
Union to the UN organized general election (1989-1993) and the
post general election period or as the second Kingdom of Cambodia
(1993-present).
The history of Cambodia dates back thousands of years
(Chandler, 1988). Cambodian (Khmer) people were among the first
in Asia to adopt religious ideas and political institutions,
presumably from India, and to create a centralized kingdom
occupying large territories with comparatively sophisticated
culture (Chandler, 1998; Encyclopedia Britannica, 2001). Since the
Khmer people immersed themselves in Buddhism around the twelfth
century, the teaching of Buddhist principles was institutionalized
and "basic literacy" was needed for religious leaders to circulate
religious concepts and to help lead civil society. Buddhist temple
schools were established and open for boys and young men, where
they could learn moral ethics, literacy and some Buddhist advice
about life. The schools have competently provided only
“primary education” (Bit, 1991, pp. 50) to boys since
they had to stay in the temple or serve as monks.
The teachers were volunteer Buddhist men (monks—sangha
or achaj). This practice was seen as early as the seventh
century (Chandler, 1988). This Buddhist or traditional education
system reached the highest level known as banddhit or highest
learning as noted by Chou, a Chinese envoy to Angkor (former
Cambodian capital) during 1296-1297 when Cambodia was known as the
Khmer Empire from the ninth to the fourteenth centuries (Chou,
1953). The decline of Angkor supremacy in around the mid-fifteenth
century caused a collapse of this nationwide traditional schooling
system and a good deal of knowledge was nowhere to be found
(Chandler, 1998; Prasertsri, 1996). It is hard to see the Khmer
regime’s strong commitment to any policy of education in the
pre-colonial period from the sixteenth to the nineteenth
centuries.
Cambodia became a French protectorate in 1863. Bit (1991)
noted that under the French protectorate a limited public school
system and only few private schools prepared the elite and higher
education was possible only through study abroad. On the other
hand, it was noted that tertiary education was first introduced in
Cambodia in the late 1940s, namely a Faculty of Law (Sloper,
1999).
For the first twenty years of their protectorate, Chandler
(1991) found that the French did little to interfere with
traditional politics even neglecting educational development in
Cambodia. In the early twentieth century, the colonial
administration began to “modernize” the traditional
school system by integrating it with the French schooling system,
seeing Cambodia’s progress in improved agricultural
production as serving France’s colonial power. However,
Chandler (1998) commented, “before the 1930s the French
spent almost nothing on education in Cambodia” (p.156). The
French were reluctant to enhance education because education
would empower Cambodians and loosen France’s hold on the
colony (Clayton, 1995). Clayton (1995, p.2) with other scholars
even argued that “the French purposefully withheld education
from Cambodians in order first to consolidate and then to maintain
power – French schools did indeed fail to enroll significant
numbers of Cambodians until late in the colonial
period.”
Many scholars see the modernization of the traditional
education system and the integration of the French-oriented
curriculum into the traditional Khmer curriculum as a French
socioeconomic exploitation (Kierman, 1985, p. xiii as quoted by
Clayton, 1995):
There were 160 modern [that is controlled by the French]
primary schools with 10,000 pupils by 1925…but even by 1944,
when 80,000 [Cambodians] were attending [some sort of] modern
primary schools, only about 500 pupils per year completed their
primary education …by 1944 there were only 1,000 secondary
students…even by 1953 there were still only 2,700 secondary
students enrolled in eight high schools in Cambodia. (p. 6)
Such a low investment in modernizing Cambodian education
probably resulted in part as well from the traditional Cambodian
intellectuals’, especially the Buddhist monks, resistance to
the French attempts to romanticize Khmer scripts in the 1940s as
they had successfully done to the Vietnamese (Chandler, 1998;
Osborne, 1969). Seeing that their traditional culture of education
was on in the verge of collapse caused by the French reform, the
Cambodians opposed and even enhanced traditional cultural forms in
rural areas far from the eyes of the French (for discussion see
Clayton, 1995).
After ninety years under the French colonization from 1863 to
1953, the post-independence Cambodia of Sihanouk’s regime
from 1953 to 1970 promoted increasing schooling opportunities
following the French model of a schooling system. This effort
continued what the French had started but accelerated the pace of
development. The number of primary and secondary schools increased
rapidly, especially by the end of Sihanouk regime (Bit, 1991).
Education extended to the university level. There were nine
universities in the capital and some provincial cities. By the
late 1960s, Deighton (1971) reported that there were more than one
million children enrolled in primary education as compared with
about 0.6 million in 1960 and 0.13 million in 1950. From 1950 to
1964, secondary the education enrolment ratio increased from 0.04
percent to 17 percent. As further evidence of this increased
interest and investment in formal education for building a modern
and peaceful state, the regime even increased the national budget
for education to over twenty percent of the national expenditure
by the late 1960s (Deighton, 1971).
However, some other scholars such as Chandler (1998), Chandler
(1991), Ayres (2000), Ayres (1999) and the present senior
education officials commented that the regime had failed to
universalize basic education and had failed to enhance employment
for high school and university graduates. Moreover, Duggan (1996)
also criticized the regime as follows:
The education system provided by Sihanouk was biased towards
the nation’s largest cities. Rural Cambodia did not benefit
from the selective expansion strategies employed by the Prince
(Sihanouk) and handsomely built universities did not assist rural
children and their family’s poverty. (p. 364)
Criticisms were directed toward the regime for not widely
enhancing nationwide literacy-oriented education or increasing
schooling opportunities for all. The Sihanouk regime marked the
greatest advancement of Cambodia in the past few hundred years.
Dunnett (1993) celebrated the 1960s in Cambodia pointing out that
it had the highest literacy rates and most progressive education
systems in Southeast Asia.
The French influence in the educational system and overall
administrative systems was still strong in the recent history of
Cambodia. The French shadow falls across Cambodian schooling even
to the present day. It has been noted by senior education
officials that one of the causes of high rates of repeating grades
and high dropout rates in Cambodian primary education is the use
of the old French-styled classroom management and evaluation
methods.
Following the over fifteen years of peace and prosperity
Cambodia under the Sihanouk regime, General Lon Nol backed by the
United States seized control in a diplomatic coup d'état in
1970 and declared Cambodia the Khmer Republic (Chandler, 1991). It
was the first time in Cambodian history that the monarchy was
abolished. Almost no reforms ensued, but instead the country was
plunged into civil conflict. The Communist uprising reached its
peak from the East and spread fighting in rural areas in early
1970s. As a result, educational opportunities were shut off. The
regime was in turmoil and collapsed in 1975 (for a discussion see
Chandler, 1991). The socioeconomic achievements gained in the
previous regime soon vanished.
Cambodia went down and finally sank to “year zero”
in the regime of Democratic Kampuchea known as the Khmer Rouge or
Pol Pot regime from 1975 to 1979. The regime changed Cambodia into
a revolutionary Maoist communist state. This “great
leap” revolutionary regime of Pol Pot visited mass
devastation on this pitiful nation—devastation of individual
property, the formal school system, the social culture--and forced
the entire population either into the army or onto collective
farms (Chandler, 1998; Dunnett, 1993). The damage to the
infrastructure of education was monumental; Cambodia lost almost
three-quarters of its educated population under the regime;
teachers, students, professionals and intellectuals were killed
or managed to escape into exile (ADB, 1996; Prasertsri, 1996). It
has been estimated that about two million of the pre-war Cambodian
population of around seven million were killed or died in that
genocidal regime.
The People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK) or Heng Samrin
regime from 1979 to 1989 started to rebuild the country from the
utter devastation of “year zero.” The regime, which
was supported by Vietnam and other socialist bloc nations, ruled
Cambodia after the fall of the Khmer Rouge. The regime’s top
priority between 1979 and 1981 was to rebuild educational
institutions. Generous support from UNICEF and International Red
Cross together with the determination to restructure Cambodia by
the PRK, saw about 6,000 educational institutions rebuilt and
thousands of teachers quickly trained (Dunnett, 1993). The
regime’s policy on enhancing education was seen thus in an
interview with a senior education official who had been involved
in basic education and teacher training since 1979:
From 1979-1981 was a period of restructuring and rehabilitating
of both infrastructure and human resources. The restructuring and
rehabilitation I refer was collecting school-aged children and
putting them in school despite the poor condition of the school
and even conducting classes in the open air or under the trees. We
appealed to all those teachers and literate people who survived to
teach the illiterates. We used various slogans such as
“going to teach and going to school is
nation-loving”and so on. There were no licenses or any high
requirements for holding a teaching job. We just tried to open
school and literacy classes – we didn’t care about
quality.
In the early 1980s, all levels of schools (from kindergarten to
higher education) were reopened and total enrolment reached almost
one million. Teachers were better trained and quality was
gradually emphasized. However, it is worth noting that in any
primary school about 30 percent of the children had no father, 10
percent had no mother, and between 5 and 10 percent were orphans
(Postlethwaite, 1988). The political and economic disturbance
haunted Cambodia until the second term of the Royal Government and
the complete eradication of the Khmer Rouge’s machinery and
organization in 1998. Nevertheless, the people of Cambodia still
have pride in their prosperous, powerful and glorious precedents
and this pride encourages them to dream of another golden age.
Current Basic Education Development in Cambodia
A transition period from the planned economy of the 1980s to a
free market economy in the 1990s has reshaped the aim of the
Cambodian education system in light of socioeconomic realities.
The educational trends can be roughly traced through two
leadership periods. Pen Navuth, Minister of Education of the then
PRK, with multi-lateral support from the socialist bloc, affirmed
in 1985 that the “objective of Cambodia’s education
was to serve the then revolutionary socialism of Kampuchea
(Cambodia) and to form new and good, hard-working citizens with
good health, technical awareness and support for the revolutionary
Kampuchea. Schools were to be organized as cultural centers open
to all and as a system of defense against enemy propaganda”
(Pen Navuth as cited in Ayres, 2000, p. 452).
The PRK education system was composed of four years of primary
education, three years of lower secondary and three years of upper
secondary education. The 4+3+3 system – according to a
current senior education official of the Ministry of Education,
Youth and Sport (MoEYS) who has been involved in restructuring the
education system since 1979 – was implemented in response to
emergent needs for human resources for national rehabilitation.
Under the leadership of Tol Lah, current Minister of MoEYS of the
new constitutional Royal Government of Cambodia established after
the UN supervised general election in May 1993, the objective of
the present education system is to “develop the pedagogic,
cognitive, mental and physical abilities of learners. It aims at
developing among its citizens a sense of self-confidence,
self-reliance, responsibility, solidarity, national unity,
patriotism and culture of peace” (MoEYS, 1999, p.9).
The latter leadership began with educational structure
rehabilitation and a series of reforms to meet the global standard
as a direction of sustainable social and economic development. It
was strongly espoused that universalizing basic education could
help alleviate poverty (Tol Lah, 1999). Accordingly, the education
system shifted periodically from ten years of schooling (4+3+3) to
eleven years as (5+3+3) and lastly in 1996 reached the common
worldwide system of twelve years (6+3+3).
As Buchert (1995) observed, the reform of the education system
shifted to a predominant concern among international agencies with
global poverty reduction, in the context of the implementation of
EFA. Essentially, Cambodia found itself lost in the middle of
nowhere while seeking socioeconomic development in the late 1980s.
The UNESCO’s framework in universalizing Basic Education
(with its emphasis on achieving poverty alleviation in the near
future) has become a topic of concern at the highest levels since
the late 1990s.
The ill-designed education system, incapable management staff,
social and political instability and economic depression have all
worked a negative effect on educational achievement. There has
been much evidence that there is no greater guarantee of a
country’s future than to invest in education for national
development and that Basic Education is key to freeing people from
poverty (Tol Lah, 1997). The 1993 Cambodian constitution makes a
strong commitment of the country to the EFA approach as
acknowledged in Chapter VI, Articles 65 & 68 which stated:
The State shall provide free primary and secondary education to
all citizens in public schools. Citizens shall receive education
for at least nine years. The State shall protect and upgrade
citizens’ rights to quality education at all levels and
shall take necessary steps for quality education to reach all
citizens.
Cambodia faces numerous challenges in developing its Basic
Education system to keep abreast with its neighboring countries.
The 1991 National Conference on EFA indicateed that in the 1990-91
academic year, the number of children enrolled in primary schools
was 94 percent in urban areas, 75 percent in rural areas, and 50
percent in remote areas. Growing enrolment and participation are
revealed in National Education Statistics and Indicators: In
1998-99, (a) 59 percent of urban children, 82 percent of the rural
children and 97 percent of the remote children failed to attain
lower secondary education; (b) 14.5 percent were unable to survive
a full six-year primary education; and (c) the gross enrolment
ratio in primary school was 89.7 percent, but downed to 23 percent
in lower secondary, and further down to 8.7 percent in upper
secondary education (MoEYS, 1996-9).
A sequence of political conflicts and civil wars over the past
two decades crippled the developmental process in education of
this poor nation, which mostly affected education in rural and
remote areas. In the 1998-99 school year, the country had a total
of 5,156 primary schools, 355 lower secondary and 132
upper-secondary schools. Fifty per-cent of the total number of
primary schools mostly found in rural and remote areas did not
have a complete range of grades (grades1-6) for the primary cycle.
Children who live far away from a school with the complete range
of grades find it difficult to continue learning and many
inevitably become dropouts. A senior MoEYS official expressed a
concern in an interview that “We don’t have enough
schools for Basic Education; that is why we did not have a 100
percent enrolment rate…many school-age children failed to
enroll even though school is free”.
According to the parents, local authorities, the pupils and the
dropouts interviewed in rural areas of Cambodia, they complained
that the school did not comply with the central policy and the
school allowed teachers to charge money for private tutoring and
to collect contributions from the pupils. Those who could not
afford inevitably dropped out. Most children, though given the
opportunity, were placed in large classes of around eighty in
primary schools. Almost one-third of the teachers are still
untrained. Their salaries are still around twenty American dollars
per month, which necessitates their holding a second job.
With annual population growth rate of 2.4 percent, the
people’s demands for formal basic schooling are also
increasing. The population growth of an estimated 4 million in
1980 to almost 12 million in 1998 requires a formidable effort
from the government, which must reform the education system
quickly. In 1998-99, the enrollment rate in primary education for
the whole country wasonly 78 percent. In other words, 22 percent
of the population aged 6-11 remains outside schools. The
increasing number of dropouts in lower grades is the cause of the
high rate of illiteracy. The situation is worse in remote
provinces as the net enrolment rate is even lower than 50% (MoEYS,
1996-9).
Contributions of UNESCO to Educational Development in
Cambodia
Cambodia became a member of UNESCO in 1951 and the United
Nations in 1955. As a consequence of political instability and a
series of civil wars between the 1970s and 1980s, UNESCO suspended
its activities and cooperation – and lastly closed its
office in Phnom Penh. Vietnam continued to hold its troops in
Cambodian after it intervened in 1979 to install PRK. Though it
had helped to rebuild Cambodia from ashes after it won a war with
the Khmer Rouge – the international community and many
Cambodians saw this as an act of subjugation of Cambodia (for
further discussion see Clayton, 2000).
Consequently, the liberal bloc placed economic and political
sanctions on the PRK as well as Vietnam. Cambodia could only
receive assistance from the socialist bloc. The Cambodian armed
resistance forces fought with the Vietnamese army resulting in
social unrest in many rural areas. A complete Vietnamese troop
withdrawal from Cambodia in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet
Union a few years later necessitated reforms in Cambodia in almost
all sectors to shift from the socialism to a grudging acceptance
of liberal democracy. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the
pillar of the socialist bloc, Cambodia found itself without aid
from its socialist donors of the late1980s. Opportunities were
very limited since the country was still under sanctions. The
international community prepared to help Cambodia. Shortly after
the 1990 WCEFA, UNESCO reopened its office in Phnom Penh in
1991.
As promised at the 1990 EFA Conference, UNESCO, UNICEF, United
Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the World Bank have played
an important role in assisting Cambodia in national reconstruction
and rehabilitation. A senior education official pointed out that
putting every thing systematically in order would have been a
difficult task without international assistance and support. The
country could not have come to where it is today on its own
without external assistance. He further explained:
After returning from the 1990 WCEFA we organized a national
conference on EFA in 1991 with remarkable support by UNESCO,
UNICEF and UNDP. The running process and support we obtained
urgently in 1991 was from UNESCO. UNESCO has been assisting us
technically and financially.
In order for Cambodia to keep abreast of the healthier
developing world, modernization of the overall systems requires
skilled manpower to lead the development process (Ayres, 2000).
This underscores the role of education for national
rehabilitation. The Cambodian government made an effort to
participate in the 1990 WCEFA, and then held its own EFA
conference the following year. The conference marked the second
consideration of schooling opportunity and literacy after the
first attempt to eliminate illiteracy among the adult population
in the early 1980s, an attempt devoid of support from UNESCO.
Owing to the roles of UNESCO and the educational problems in
Cambodia in the 1990s, this world education body has assisted and
supported the national initiatives to achieve the EFA goal
(UNESCO, 1993). The organization’s mission in Cambodia has
moved forward under the banner “fighting poverty by
promoting the development of EFA.”.UNESCO began with
building human resources for the ministry of education and
providing a new conceptual framework for educational development.
It trained 1,200 administrative education officials in educational
planning and management, and has also supported the establishment
of the Educational Management Information System Center (UNESCO,
2001).
Noting the deficiency in educational statistical data and
information for the design of educational policies and
decision-making, UNESCO has also focused on strengthening the
management system. Additionally, in order to enhance quality basic
education, it has guided and supported the reform of curriculum
for science education and the production of learning/teaching
materials. These contributions, such as providing consultation and
support for local initiatives in terms of improving access and
quality of basic education, are acknowledged in several senior
government officials’ speeches (Sar Kheng, 2000; Tol Lah,
1999).
Even with the many actions that UNESCO has undertaken, the
progress of reform in educational management in Cambodia is still
slow. Still the number of trained staff is limited in the
educational system. However, UNESCO’s contributions were
indispensable. Despite the fact that education personnel are
equipped with knowledge and skills, substandard operational
resources and their low wages (of less than 30 US dollars per
month) appear to have adverse effects on motivation. The former
EFA coordinator raised the issue that the poor living standard of
the staff and lack of resources had reduced their efforts from
full commitment in implementing the policies. This mind-set not
only reduces the positive impact of UNESCO but also interferes
with the achievement of the goal of EFA in Cambodia. It is
unquestionable that the undernourished and unmotivated workforce
is sorely challenged to create good results.
Characteristics of Cambodian Basic Education
In Cambodia following the UNESCO’s framework, Basic
Education is constitutionally defined as nine years of formal
schooling, comprising primary and lower secondary education. It
aims to contribute to improvements in the socioeconomic sphere as
a whole. According to UNESCO (1998b), “Basic
Education” must meet the basic learning needs of all human
beings. These needs comprise literacy, oral expression, numeracy,
problem solving and knowledge, as well as the skills, values and
attitudes required by an individual to develop and participate in
society. Although education is “officially” free of
charge in public institutions, practically in the 1990s all
schools required students to pay some maintenance fees. This
served to run off thousands of children of the poorest of the
poor from enrolment because almost 40 percent of the population in
1997 lived below the poverty line (UNESCO, 1998b). In the Basic
Education Social Sector Plan 1996-2000, the government anticipates
that nine years of schooling will become compulsory in the
future.
The official school age at the primary level is from 6 to 11
years. Pupils are advanced through grades 1 to 6 after passing
tests at the end of each year. Pupils who fail a grade can repeat
only twice during the primary cycle. The official school age of
lower secondary level is from 12 to 14 years. Pupils can only
repeat once at this level. The official number of school days in a
year is 228 and there are 1,254 sessions. Several studies by
UNESCO note that the grade-to-grade promotion regulation is
difficult, and sometimes the criteria are not clearly defined,
which results in high repetition rates in grade 1 of around 40
percent during the1990s (UNESCO, 1998b). The national examination
from primary level to lower secondary level was abolished in the
late 1990s in order to encourage more participation in secondary
education. However, the limited number of secondary schools in
rural areas and opportunity costs obstruct opportunities for
further schooling (Dy, 2001).
Basic Education Attainment
Policy statements provide a framework for strategic planning.
They are subject to change periodically when socioeconomic and
political conditions change (UNESCO & UNDP, 1999). Since the
nation-wide educational statistics and planning mechanism was
established in 1996, MoEYS has systematically formulated education
policies and goals in attempts to satisfy the international
community, donor countries, the CRC and the 1993 Constitution. Its
emphasis was put on universalizing nine years of basic education
and developing opportunities for functional literacy, and
modernizing and improving the quality of education through
effective reforms.
Policymaking and strategic planning in the early 1990s have
been influenced by several significant and interrelated events
such as sequential National Conferences on EFA and the signing of
Peace Accords in Paris by Cambodia’s warring factions, the
formation of the International Committee on the Reconstruction of
Cambodia, the newly adopted Constitution and a series of National
Education Seminars (Ayres, 1999). Although the policies are well
designed, the lack of high-quality socioeconomic and operating
cost assessments led some education experts to pronounce the
1990s’ policies “excessively ambitious.”
Strategic plans require sufficient budget and excellent staffing
management. The current National EFA Coordinator identifies three
main factors that make the basic education targets for the year
2000 unattainable: the absence of mechanisms to carry out reforms,
insufficient funding to put plans into action, and on-going civil
war causing social unrest especially in remote areas.
A great deal of effort has been made to achieve basic education
for all. Cambodia’s ambitious goals included helping a
hundred percent of school-aged children in urban and some rural
areas of geographically plain provinces to achieve access to
primary education, and eradicating illiteracy of all adults by
1995. Without carefully weighing its resources, it set another
ambitious goal –that all school-aged children in remote and
mountainous areas should gain access to primary education by the
year 2000. An education ministry official recently noted in an
interview that “if it was worth giving education to our
children we had better make it good quality.” Hence, the
1991 national conference on EFA did not neglect quality
improvement. (State of Cambodia, 1991).
Quality primary education did not result from the modest
investment of effort and resources. Notwithstanding these
government efforts and even with the help of with significant
donor support, several policy issues, such as institutional
strengthening and quality improvement, remained unresolved (ADB,
1996). Furthermore, after experiencing a more stable
socio-political environment and full international support, the
Cambodian government attempted again to mobilize and combine
resources, and numerous reforms had been undertaken recently in
its educational system. The efforts were focused on enhancing
quality of learning and teaching, increasing access to basic
education, ensuring equity in education services, and increasing
effectiveness in planning and management. These efforts have
resulted in primary education enrolment increases all over the
country (see Table 1), and successful reforms of the educational
system, curriculum, data management facilities and school
management networks.
Another critical goal in the second term of the Royal
Government of Cambodia was to achieve an effective balance between
quality improvement measures and selective expansion of
educational services. Thus, the government reestablished targets
for the year 2000 as follows: 1) increase net primary education
enrolment to 90 percent ; 2) improve net lower-secondary education
enrolment to 85 percent; 3) reduce repetition rates in grades 1 to
6 to below 10 percent; and 4) help 85 percent of first grade
students in primary education to complete grade 6. This second
period saw an improvement in educational opportunities given by
the state through additional school buildings, more training for
teachers and increased educational awareness of parents. Further
progress is witnessed in growing participation and funding from
communities and households amounting to almost 80 percent of total
expenditure for education (Bray, 1996). However, the low salary of
teachers still exists and increases in government funding are
slow to occur (see Table 1).
In view of its tragic past civil strife, Cambodia has made
progress in expanding schooling opportunities especially at
universalizing primary education and slightly increasing the
transition rate from primary to lower secondary education.
Mehrotra (1998) argued that successful “Basic
Education” policies and implementations in high EFA
achieving countries depend on state-support basic social services.
Cambodia, with a poor social service system particularly in rural
areas, is in a situation in which socioeconomic disparities
determine the educational opportunity for quality learning. In
terms of transition rates to lower secondary education, gender
equity, and school facilities, the wealthier households enjoy
greater access to quality schooling than do disadvantaged
families. Consequently, this disproportional provision of basic
education reveals insufficient state investment in universalizing
educational opportunity.
Quantity vs. Quality
Recent changes in the school system and curriculum reform in
Cambodia have contributed to both quantitative expansion and
qualitative improvement. Keynote political speeches of Cambodian
educational and government leaders stressed the need for nine
years of quality basic education for all Cambodians (Tol Lah,
1999; Tol Lah, 2000; Sar Kheng, 1999 & Sar Kheng, 2000). How
they define quality is still uncertain since much of what they
have accomplished has been mainly in the area of improving
accessibility, such as building more schools and recruiting more
teachers and paying less attention to increased funding for the
improvement of teaching and learning. Through dialogues with some
MoEYS senior officials, the concept of “Basic
Education” was found to be imprecise and “basic
learning needs” too broad and confusing for most educational
leaders to act on until they were clarified in the 2000 WEF.
In the early 1990s, major efforts were made to consolidate
teacher improvement systems, continue restoration of school
buildings and develop systems to supply effective textbooks and
teaching aids (ADB, 1996). There are limited education indicators
available from the early 1990s. Most of the goals and strategies
set at the 1991 National Conference on EFA were carried out until
1994 with limited success. Then the educational initiatives were
reformulated in 1994 in consultation with donors and technical
agencies for the 1995-2000 strategic plan and also the
socioeconomic plan for 1996-2000. Victor Ordonez, Director of the
UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (PROAP),
stated in his commentary at the Asia Pacific Conference on EFA
Assessment 2000 that:
Policy makers are slowly getting over – the sometimes
false – dichotomy of quantity versus quality. Under this
dichotomy, when budgets are limited, one must often choose between
more textbooks and facilities for those already in school
(quality), or additional buildings and teachers for those not yet
in the system (quantity). The drive towards universal primary
education in Asia has tended to favor quantity or expanded access.
(Ordonez, 2000, pp. 2)
This sentiment was echoed by the former and current officials
in charge of EFA in Cambodia. They believed that awareness of the
value of education and nationwide diffusion could lend support to
strengthening the quality of schooling. Reaching all and inviting
all to cooperate were the main goals of the 1990s. Another
pressing concern is the low level of success in producing
qualified or adequately skilled candidates for gainful employment.
This underscores the need to find a workable balance between
striving to educate as many as possible, and providing a quality
education to those who reach graduation. One approach is to take
important steps to curb dropout and enhance transition rates.
Expanding quantity should be coupled with strengthening the
quality of the schooling provided. Otherwise, without carefully
planned programs, quantitative gains could result in qualitative
losses (ADB, 1996). Through meetings in the late 1990s,
“quality improvement” was stressed and prioritized.
However, Dunggan (1996) reported that unqualified teachers
constituted around 80 percent of the active teaching force. One
must wonder about the quality of teaching. In comparison with
other Southeast Asian nations, the gross secondary education
enrolment rate in Cambodia was the lowest (Dy, 2001). It may be
concluded that basic education development programs, especially
those of the late 1990s, affected quality and enrolment in
secondary education.
Table 1. Basic Education Indicators in
Cambodia
| Academic Year |
1996-97 |
1997-98 |
1998-99 |
1999-00 |
| Expanded Access and
Coverage: |
| Gross admission rate |
113 |
97.9 |
103.3 |
123.6 |
| Gross primary education enrolment ratio |
94.5% |
88.3% |
89.7% |
100.3% |
| Net primary education enrolment ratio |
84.7 |
77.8 |
78.3 |
85.5 |
| Gross lower secondary education enrolment ratio |
30.5 |
23.7 |
23.0 |
22.9 |
| Net lower secondary education enrolment ratio |
23.2 |
16.3 |
14.2 |
14.4 |
| Girls gross enrollment ratio in primary education |
86.4 |
81.2 |
83.9 |
93.3 |
| Girls gross enrollment ratio in lower secondary education |
22.7 |
16.8 |
16.1 |
16.4 |
| Quality Improvement: |
| Literacy rate (15 years old and over) |
65.9* |
67.3 |
68.7* |
|
| Repetition rate in primary education |
27 |
26.3 |
24.6 |
22.3 |
| Transition rate from primary to lower secondary education |
56.3 |
71.9 |
74.3 |
76.7 |
| Transition rate from lower to upper secondary education |
33.3 |
38.8 |
39.4 |
56.3 |
| Funding: |
| Percentage of national budget for education |
8.1 |
10.3 |
8.3 |
10 |
Sources: EMIS Center, Department of Planning,
Ministry of Education Youth and Sport, Cambodia. *Ministry of
Planning: 1996 Socioeconomic Survey & 1998 National Census
Discussion
No country can afford to neglect education since it is the
foundation for development and modernization of the state. In
recognition of this truth, Cambodia has made various attempts to
strive for success in basic schooling accessibility and quality.
Even in the course of social and political instability, Cambodia
made significant progress, such as in increasing number of schools
(from 4,665 primary schools in 1990 to 5,274 in 2000; from 66
upper-secondary schools in 1990 to 140 in 2000) and pupil
enrolments (1.3 million enrolled in primary in 1990, increased to
2.2 million in 2000, and upper-secondary enrolments of 47,562 in
1990 mounting to 108,213 in 2000). These accomplishments can be
credited to the government’s development partners (such as
UN agencies, multi and bilateral donors), improved management
within the government, and household communities for their
assistance and participation. With reference to Ordonez
(1997-2001), if the spirit of the EFA programs was to get as
close to the targets as possible, Cambodia almost achieved
universal primary education at this end of the decade. Thus, this
cooperation with UNESCO along with the existing resources and
aspirations have brought about quantum leaps in educational
achievement.
Future challenges in realizing the UNESCO’s EFA
principles demand additional inputs and willpower. Many of the
problems entail inequality of access to quality education,
regional disparities, and the vast poverty of the people of
Cambodia. The quality of basic education is deficient, especially
in rural and remote areas that cover nearly 80 percent of the
children to be served.
UNESCO’s framework and assistance for Cambodian basic
education policy and strategy formulations had a great impact on
the educational. The primary accomplishments of UNESCO assistance
in Cambodia involved strengthening the statistical management of
schooling, strengthening working networks and building capability
of the staff, establishment of educational data systems, and
introduction of a nine-year basic schooling system in the mid
1990s.
Accordingly, the weight of UNESCO may be underscored in
long-term efforts of the government of Cambodia to universalize
basic education through enhancement of funding. In other words,
the efforts of UNESCO and other organizations in providing
consultation and recommendations to policymaking and goal shaping
have led to building human resources and stimulating international
aid donors. This effort has established a foundation for policy
formulation and fundamental approaches to schooling improvement in
the era of change.
Conclusion
There remain formidable challenges for Cambodian policymakers
in realizing the 1990 WCEFA’s goals. On the other hand, as
demonstrated by the above analyses, progress towards these goals
with the essential presence of UNESCO has been considerable and
overall encouraging. The greater developmental goals are neither
too lofty nor too easily accomplished nor already written in
stone. Rather, as the case of UNESCO in Cambodia, the goals must
exhibit both idealism and malleability, changing periodically in
light of observable progress and existing realities.
The major success of UNESCO in Cambodia since the 1990 WCEFA
was in advocating basic education for all. The illiteracy rate
declined, and more young people were able to go to school than
ever before. Though the national budget for education in Cambodia
of the 1960s (approximately 20 percent) is higher than in the
1990s’(approximately 9 percent), school enrolment is lower.
This illustrates that the UNESCO’s EFA conceptual framework
is effective regardless of limited education expenditures.
However, political will and international support along with a
growing sense of the value of education among Cambodians have
raised participation in schooling.
References
ADB. (1996). Cambodia: Education sector
strategy study. Asia Development Bank: Manila.
Ayres, D. (1999). Policymaking and policies of
education in Cambodia. In D. Sloper (Eds. ), Higher education
in Cambodia: The social and educational context for
reconstruction (pp. 51-65). UNESCO Principal Regional Office
for Asia and the Pacific: Bangkok.
Ayres, D. (2000). Tradition, modernity and the
development of education in Cambodia. Comparative Education
Review, 44, 440-463.
Bit, Seanglim. (1991). The warrior heritage:
A psychological perspective of Cambodian trauma.
California.
Bray, M. (1996). Counting the full cost:
Parental and community financing of education in East Asia.
The World Bank: Washington, DC.
Buchert, L. (1995). The concept of education for
all: What has happened after Jomtien? International Review of
Education, 41 (6): 537-549.
Chandler, D. (1988). Cambodia. In The
encyclopedia of Asian history (Vol. 1, pp. 219-221). The Asia
Society.
Chandler, D. P. (1991). The land and people
of Cambodia. USA, HaperCollinsPublishers.
Chandler, D. P. (1998). A history of
Cambodia (Rev. ed.). Silkworms book: Chiang Mai.
Chou, Ta-kuan. (1953). The custom of
Cambodia. (3rd ed. ). The Siamese Society System: Bangkok.
Clayton, T. (1995). Restriction or resistance?
Educational development in French colonial Cambodia.
Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 3 (19), 1-13.
Clayton, T. (2000). Education and politics of
language: Hegemony and pragmatism in Cambodia (1979-1989).
Comparative Education Research Center: Hong Kong.
Duggan, S. J. (1996). Education, teacher
training and prospects for economic recovery in Cambodia.
Comparative Education, 32 (3): 361-375
Dunnett, S. C. (1993). Cambodia, overcoming
hardship, rebuilding its education system. WENR: World
Education News & Reviews. Spring: vol.6, no.2. pp.
20-23.
Deighton, L. C. (1971). Cambodia. In The
encyclopedia of education (vol.1 pp. 578-584).
Creswell-Collier Educational Corporation.
Dy, Sideth. S. (2001, July). Basic education
for all in Cambodia: Opportunities for access. Paper presented
at 11th World Congress of Comparative Education: Chungbuk, South
Korea.
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2001).Cambodia.
www.britannica.com/bcom/eb 01/01/29
Hun Sen. (1991, September). Closing
speech, National Conference on Education For All: Phnom
Penh.
Mehrotra, S. (1998). Education for all: Policy
lessons from high-achieving countries, International
Review of Education, 44 (5/6): 461-484.
MoEYS. (1996-9). Education statistics and
indicators: Ministry of Education Youth and Sport: Department
of Planning, EMIS Center: Phnom Penh.
MoEYS. (1999). Education in Cambodia.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport: Phnom Penh.
Ordonez, V. (1997-2001). Education policy:
Education in a region of change. United Nations ESCAP. http://www.e
scap-hrd.org/education/ordonez.htm access 01/09/24
Ordonez, V. (2000). Complementary remarks of the
director, UNESCO-PROAP Conference on EFA Assessment, 17-20
January, 2000, Bangkok
http://www2.unesco.org/wef/en-news/VOrdonez.shtm access 01/01/30
Osborne, M. E. (1969). The French presence in
Cochinchina and Cambodia: Rule and response (1859-1905).
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Postlethwaite, T. N. (1988). Kampuchea. In
The encyclopedia of Comparative education and national systems
of education. (pp. 412-413). Pergamon Press.
Prasertsri, S. (1996). Rebirth of the
learning tradition: A case study on the achievements of education
for all in Cambodia. UNESCO: Phnom Penh.
Sar Kheng. (1999, September). Closing
remark, sum-up meeting on education, youth and sports
achievement and activities for the 1998-99 school year and
objectives for the new academic year of 1999-2000: Phnom Penh.
Sar Kheng. (2000, November). Speech,
sum-up meeting on education, youth, and sport for 1999-2000 and
new action for 2000-2001: Phnom Penh.
Sloper, D. (1999). Higher education in
Cambodia: The social and education context for reconstruction.
UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific:
Bangkok. pp 6
Sperling, G. B. (2001). Toward universal
education: Making a promise, and keeping it. Foreign
Affairs, 80/5, pp 7-13.
State of Cambodia. (1991). Final report:
National Conference on Education For All. 2-6 September: Phnom
Penh.
Tol Lah. (1997). Success in education: A tool
for development: Minister of Education, Youth, and Sport:
www.iac.co.jp/~kpnarin/minister.htm
Tol Lah. (1999, September). Speech,
sum-up meeting on education, youth and sports for 1998-1999 and
indicators for the 1999-2000 academic years: Phnom Penh.
Tol Lah. (2000, November). Opening
speech, sum-up meeting on education, youth and sport for
1999-2000: Phnom Penh.
UNESCO. (1993). UNESCO: Worldwide action in
education: France, pp. 14
UNESCO & UNDP. (1999). Basic education
for all in Cambodia: A strategic approach for human
development, and poverty alleviation: Phnom Penh.
UNESCO. (1998a). Basic education for
empowerment of the poor. APPEAL: Bangkok
UNESCO. (1998b). “Towards the 21st
century” national strategy: Education for All in
Cambodia. UN working group on poverty and education:
UNESCO-Cambodia: Phnom Penh.
Windham, D. M. (1992). Education for all: The
requirements. (Monograph III). UNESCO: Paris.
About the Authors
Sam Sideth Dy
Institute of Comparative and International Education
Graduate School of Education
Hiroshima University
Kagamiyama, Higashi Hiroshima Shi
739-8524, Hiroshima, Japan
Sam Sideth Dy, a Cambodian survivor of the past two decades of
civil war (1970s-1980s) in Cambodia, is currently enrolled in a
PhD Program at the Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima
University. His field of specialization is Education and Human
Sciences. Before coming to Japan in 1998, he was a senior lecturer
of English language teaching methodology at the Royal University
of Phnom Penh where he earned his first university degree. He
holds membership in Comparative and International Education
Society (CIES) and Japan Comparative Education Society. His area
of research is basic education policy in Cambodia. He may be
reached by email at sideth@hiroshima-u.ac.jp or sideth.dy@eudoramail.com
or by phone at (082) 422-1921.
Akira Ninomiya
Professor
Department of Education
Graduate School of Education
Hiroshima University
Kagamiyama, Higashi Hiroshima Shi
739-8524, Hiroshima, Japan
Akira Ninomiya is a Professor of Comparative and International
Education and Assistant Dean of the Graduate School of Education,
Hiroshima University. He has published several books and articles
such as Cross-Cultural Perspectives (1995); Societies
and Schools in the 21st Century (2000); and “World
Citizenship” (American Educational Research Journal, vol.41,
no. 1999 – co-authored with Walter Parker, and John Cogan).
He may be reached by email at animiya@hiroshima-u.ac.jp,
or postal mail at the above address.
|
