Education Knowledge

July 2002

Primary school agriculture: What can it realistically achieve?

by Sibylle Riedmiller

Published in "Entwicklung und Laendlicher Raum" (28) 3/94:9-13

Hardly any other school subject or programme evokes as many expectations of beneficial effects, as well as passionate objections, as does Primary School Agriculture (PSA). Widely promoted for African pupils during colonial times, the subject fell into disgrace after Independence, but was soon revived by the newly independent states, affected by the first "school leaver crisis" in the sixties. Donor funded reform attempts promoted "ruralisation" curricular reforms in the seventies and "work experience" or "education with production" programs in the eighties, many of which are considered a failure today. Nevertheless, at least some elements of PSA have survived in many school systems in sub Saharan Africa. An overview is given in the attached table, based on a comprehensive survey conducted by the German aid agency GTZ in 1990.

Though donor support to basic education received an unprecedented impetus after the much publicised Jomtien "Education for All" Conference in 1990, policy advice for education reforms spearheaded by the World Bank today commonly discourages such curricular components. Is this justified?

The objectives most commonly quoted in the literature, policy papers and curricula, regarding the introduction of agriculture in primary schools can be broadly classified according to three areas: educational, economic and socio political objectives, with some overlapping. This article summarises the justifications and the available evidence and experiences on the subject in sub Saharan Africa, based on a literature review, the regional survey mentioned above, an analysis of field reports and curriculum material from 30 countries of the region, and last but not least, the author's own experiences in managing a PSA reform project in Tanzania from 1982 88.1

1. Educational objectives

1.1. Giving pupils knowledge and skills for better agricultural productivity

This objective goes beyond the scope of traditional primary schooling by giving it a basic vocational or at least pre vocational orientation. As such it is among the most controversial objectives of PSA. The rationale behind the objective starts from the fact that schools, as generalised educational institutions, have originated from industrialised countries with highly diversified, formal labour markets, where basic literacy and numeracy, as provided in schools, are normally followed by more specialised vocational training in a variety of institutions.

Most of sub Saharan Africa, in contrast, is characterized by predominantly rural economies, often with more than 80% of the population depending on mainly small scale agriculture for their living or even survival, while the formal labour markets are extremely restricted with little prospect of expansion. The majority of primary school leavers do not have any chance of further formal education and vocational training, but will have to depend on farming.

Therefore, purely "academic" schooling is seen as endangering the traditional education and training of the peasant labour force, where children learned from their parents and elders how to farm under the local conditions. Taking them away from home to school for most of the day, not only weakens the family labour force, where children play an important role in agriculture and animal keeping, but also minimises their chances of learning from their parents. Common sense demanded, therefore, that schooling should compensate for this by teaching agricultural knowledge and skills.

This argument has been challenged from different angles. One group of critics does not object to the logic of the argument, but points out the long list of failures in respective reform attempts since colonial times. It is stated that many of these reforms failed not only because of poor implementation (which is often acknowledged), but mainly because of generally strong resistance by the target groups, parents, teachers and pupils alike. Sinclair, for example, conducted a review of past experience in the seventies and observed that "it was hard to avoid the conclusion that work experience programmes lacked empirical justification... For most Third World governments the best policy would seemingly be to leave work experience programmes severely alone !" 2

Another group of critics, many of them related to the World Bank, would stress that the basic function of primary schooling is to provide literacy and numeracy. Any vocational or even pre vocational training would compete with this function. Their view is based on case studies summarised by Lockhead, Jamison and Lau (1980), where the correlation between farmers' educational level and the productivity of their agricultural practices appeared to provide evidence for the assertion that a minimum of four years of schooling by itself contributed to higher productivity, even without agriculture in the curriculum. 3 Consequently, Psacharopoulos (1987) assumes that, "in one way, a general education curriculum at the primary school level, emphasising the 3 Rs and basic science, may be the most vocational and relevant type of education one may provide to assist farming in a particular area." 4

However, the methodology of these studies has been criticised by Eisemon and Nyamete (1990). After field research in Kenya, which involved classroom observations as well as the observation of school leavers in agricultural activities, they concluded that "school acquired literacy may be necessary but it is certainly not a sufficient condition for increasing productive capacities. Literacy is often not a functional skill because the schooling farmers have received, has not equipped them to carry out knowledge based practical tasks involving modern production technologies. The social and economic changes with which literacy and schooling have been associated and that have provided the impetus for educational expansion are unlikely to occur in the absence of qualitative improvements in instruction in science and agriculture."5

1.2. Making Science teaching more relevant and more effective

While the vocationalisation of primary education has been under attack as long as PSA has been a policy issue in the Region, the place of basic science in the primary curriculum has rarely been challenged. It is the way in which science is actually taught in many schools that has been often criticised. For example, classroom observations of science and agriculture lessons, Eisemon (1990a) conducted in Kenya and Burundi, have revealed that, typically, "classroom discourse in academic subjects is characterized by vocabulary building, by introduction of new and unfamiliar terms in a language that is neither the student's nor the teacher's mother tongue. For this reason, teachers favour listing and fill in the missing word exercises in regular classes, and drilling the correct answers when coaching students."6

One reform strategy to overcome the common lecturing and rote learning of science "facts" unrelated to the pupils' environment, and to make teaching more relevant, has aimed at integrating science with agriculture. In some francophone countries in the region, science syllabi are called "Sciences d'Observation", which include a series of observational lessons on agricultural topics related to plant, animal or soil science. The "Nature Studies" syllabi of British colonies also considered school gardens as "outdoor laboratories" for systematic observation and experimentation.

This science based approach to Agriculture would make Agriculture the focal center of science teaching, instead of using Agriculture for illustrating science topics. It would mean "teaching scientific skills through Agriculture", rather than "teaching Agricultural knowledge through science topics".7 This, however, puts high demands on curriculum development and teacher training. An analysis of several integrated science syllabi showed that they commonly contain few agricultural topics of a rather general nature only and are, as a whole, too rigidly sequenced. This would make localised teaching of Agriculture difficult even for the experienced and committed teacher.8

Where examination papers contain some agricultural questions, these also contribute to a rather cursory treatment of the subject, as they ask for the "listing" of the more general aspects of Agriculture (e.g. pupils should name, in French, the agents of soil erosion, list organic fertilizers and farming operations, in Benin, among others). Several evaluation reports and field studies from the same countries observe a dissociation of manual work from classroom teaching as a major problem.9

1.3. Giving Environmental Education a sustainable and practical dimension

In view of the environmental crisis affecting many countries in the Region, there has been a growing awareness of the necessity of including elements of Environmental Education in school curricula, either as a multi disciplinary additional subject, or as topics to be dealt with within other subjects. A wealth of material for curriculum planners and teacher trainers has been developed by the UNESCO UNEP International Environmental Education Programme.10

In practice, however, the "problem solving skills" required for Environmental Education are often difficult to reconcile with the traditional rote learning of facts practised in the subject matter teaching in many schools. Commonly, environmental concern is only expressed through short lived campaigns, e.g. for tree planting, with politicians observing hundreds of schoolchildren carrying and planting tree seedlings, which later wither away unwatered. It can be said that in curriculum development generally, sufficient attention has not yet been paid to the potential of PSA for Environmental Education. This would have two basic implications:

First, the syllabus should be flexible enough to allow for selection and adjustment of teaching content according to the school's environment, e.g. in providing for agricultural class projects which might have promising results under local conditions. In this case, the teachers' scheme of work would be based on the crop calendar of the chosen crops according to the local farming seasons. Local traditional farming practices could also become an object of analysis, in order to avoid their uncritical replacement with so called "modern agricultural methods" (such as monoculture or the indiscriminate use of agrochemicals), which do not always prove superior to traditional farming. Secondly, the proposed farming techniques should emphasise the preservation of the natural resources, e.g. by promoting Agroforestry and mixed cropping, organic fertility control and "cultural" (non chemical) methods of pest and disease control, whenever applicable.11

1.4. Influencing pupils' attitudes, giving positive motivation towards agriculture and rural life

This rationale has been behind much of the strong political pressure for the introduction of PSA since colonial times. Based on the view that education is a leading factor in development, it assumes that school curricula play a dominant role in the formation of attitudes among pupils. It is argued that too many primary school leavers are deserting the rural areas and migrating to towns, because schooling has alienated them from rural life, created negative attitudes towards agriculture and given them unrealistic expectations of white collar jobs available in towns. The urban elite groups, from the colonial administrators to the post Independence government bureaucracy, who designed PSA education reforms, felt concern about the effects, such as the depletion of the rural labour force of able bodied (mostly male) youth and the creation of urban mass unemployment with the feared consequences, such as criminality and political unrest.

Critics of this logic focus basically on three lines of arguments. The first is that the role of education in general and the school curricula in particular, in shaping attitudes, is being over estimated by those who believe that "ruralisation" of school education could stem migration. As Sinclair (1980) states, "attitudes to rural life are predominantly influenced by the huge differentials in level and security of earnings between the modern and traditional sectors of employment, and even the most charismatic teachers could hardly overcome this factor."12

A still much quoted classic is Foster's "Vocational School Fallacy". After field work in Ghana in the late fifties, he concluded that, "those who criticise the 'irrational' nature of African demand for 'academic' as opposed to 'vocational' education fail to recognise that the strength of academic education lies precisely in the fact that it is pre eminently a vocational education providing access to those occupations with the most prestige and, most important, the highest pay within the Ghanaian economy."13 The very essence of Foster's thesis, however, has been quoted much less in the mainstream literature. His findings revealed a "remarkable level of realism" among pupils. Little attention has been given to what this may mean for pupils' attitudes in the nineties, towards agriculture which has, under the drastically changed conditions of the African economies since the fifties, become the only realistic occupation for the majority of them.14

Another group of critics would insist that schools do play a role in attitude formation, but rather because of the way in which PSA is actually implemented in many African countries. They would focus on the stark contrast between the "written" and the "hidden" syllabus, the latter probably having a stronger impact on attitudes than the former. As Gardner (1985) argues: "the idea that experiencing lengthy periods of compulsory work on a school farm will somehow reduce the pupils' contempt for those who spend their lives in such hard, back breaking toil is at least naive and at the most ludicruous. Enforced labour of this nature can only serve to increase the young people's ambitions to escape from this type of work and to live where other employment possibilities might exist. The migration from the land and from the rural areas can only be encouraged in this way. In addition, where pupils are not involved in the planning and management of projects and where they do not share directly in either the produce or the profits of the project, their rejection of the work will be the quicker."15 Another component of the "hidden syllabus" would be the widespread practice of using PSA for disciplinary measures, as has been reported, as one example among many others, by Wenzel (1986), after surveying 91 schools in Zimbabwe.16

A third argument to explain negative attitudes towards PSA and "practical" subjects in general, has been suggested by Lillis (1984), who argues that the understanding of "education" held by rural parents may be limited by their own experiences in acquiring practical skills. "African evidence seems to suggest, for example, that 'education' is seen as wholly restricted to reading and writing activities or academic education. Technological development in most rural areas is still at too low a level of non differentiation to suggest that there may be a useful body of theory supporting practice and, therefore, it is assumed that skills development and vocation occurs 'naturally', on the job not in school. Thus, vocational education runs the risk, at all times, of being seen as an illegitimate extension of the concept of 'education' and vocational schools are similarly viewed."17 Lillis does not elaborate this interesting thesis further, especially the underlying 'evidence' he is referring to. Possibly, parents may just react to the way in which PSA is actually taught at school, by unqualified and unmotivated teachers, and they may be right in feeling that they themselves could do better in teaching their children how to farm.

2. Economic objectives

2.1. Lowering the costs of schooling

During colonial times most mission schools (especially boarding schools) had to rely on agricultural projects to maintain teachers and pupils. In those days, when primary education was a privilege for a few, it seemed appropriate that pupils contributed to the costs of schooling with their labour on the school farm, as an indirect school fee. As most rural African children participate in family food production by helping in farming and animal keeping anyway, it seemed logical, that pupils should do the same in school. Even after introducing Universal Primary Schooling as a right in many countries, the heavy burden this has caused for the government budget, has placed strong expectations on the "economic" potential of PSA. In some cases, targets were set for the self financing of schools.

The importance given to this "economic" objective is such that assessment of the success of introducing PSA, if attempted at all by Ministries of Education, is commonly done by measuring the harvested produce reported by the schools, while at the same time, Agriculture does not appear in the examinations. However, official figures on the output of school farming, though often given prominence in budget speeches, are of a limited value, as they are normally not set against inputs, in terms of tools, seeds and other material, not to mention pupils' labour. Widespread lack of farm records and shortcomings in the management of the farm produce, as reported in Cameroon (Bude, 1985), Tanzania (Riedmiller, 1983), Botswana (Chengeta, 1988), Zimbabwe (Heberden, 1983, Wenzel, 1986), Zambia (Kaluba, 1986) and many other countries, have made it difficult to assess the schools' potential in self financing.18

Most authors would agree with Sinclair (1979) that, "true, some programmes can be self financing but this requires special circumstances, expertise and a sufficient enrolment of older children to cover the expenses incurred in respect of younger children. True, also, that innovative principals can develop excellent programmes on a shoe string using local resources, but such innovators are themselves a scarce resource and also, because of their dynamic quality, they are never short of at least the funds to buy a shoe string."19

It is not only because of the shortage of innovative personnel, however, that the objective of the self financing of schools through PSA should be regarded with reservation. In the reality of most rural schools, this economic concern often counteracts the basic pedagogical objectives, as the poorly paid and unmotivated teachers are tempted to use the proceeds of the school farm as an additional income for themselves. This situation, coupled with an authoritarian school climate where pupils have no participation in the management of their produce, easily generates a teacher pupil relationship of mutual mistrust and resentment, where pupils feel exploited as cheap labour for the teachers' benefit. There is ample evidence to support this, summarised by Riedmiller & Mades (1991).20

2.2. Spreading agricultural development at village level

Expectations of how PSA could contribute to increasing agricultural productivity in the village, mainly focus on the demonstration effects of a well run school plot, the skills acquired by the school leavers who will be the future farmers, even pupils advising their parents on new farming techniques they have learned at school, and the teacher assuming the role of an agricultural extensionist.

Concerning the actual performance of school farms, most authors in this field would agree that too many are rather poor examples of improved farming methods. In Cameroon, in the mid seventies the IPAR Buea conducted surveys in 79 schools and concluded, that the spread effect of school farms was, on the whole, very limited, not only for their poor outlook, but also because of the choice of unpopular crops and the use of unfamiliar "modern" farming techniques, such as single cropping and crop rotation, without proving the superiority of such innovations.21

The expectation that school pupils should advise their parents on improved farming methods which they have learned at school, is unanimously rejected not only by African authors, as contrary to strong cultural obligations, in most African societies, of respect for and obedience from children and youth towards their elders. In fact, this relationship of respect and obedience between children and elders is continuously reinforced by the teacher student relationship observed in most classrooms. Children are taught to accept, not to ask questions.

There remains the hope that pupils would apply their agricultural knowledge and skills learned at school on their own farms after leaving school. Not much evidence is available in this area. Tracer studies are rare, often outdated and inconclusive. Findings would be meaningful only in cases where a PSA curriculum reform had been implemented successfully. It should be obvious that the impact of school agriculture teaching on school leavers' farming operations can only be measured, if they had actually been taught improved farming methods at school, a condition unfulfilled in most reforms.22

The expectation that teachers should assume the additional role of an agricultural extension worker, generally proved futile, not only because in most countries few teachers receive professional (if any) training in agriculture, but also because of the teachers' low motivation to do more work in addition to what they are paid for.23

3. Socio political objectives

3.1. Giving girls access to basic agricultural education, as the future food producers

To the author's knowledge, this objective has not been mentioned in the literature so far. However, there may be strong reasons for it in the particular situation prevailing in the Region. It has now been generally acknowledged that women are responsible for most of the food production in sub Saharan Africa, to an extent that a publication on the subject is entitled, "The African farmer and her husband"24

With the rapid expansion of primary schooling in most of sub Saharan Africa, average female enrolment is now 67 per cent, as opposed to 85 per cent male enrolment.25 In spite of the still considerable gap in the schooling of girls, primary schools are today the most equitable of all educational institutions in the Region. Primary school education is the only formal education, the vast majority of women are likely to get for some time to come, as their access to agricultural vocational training is negligible. Agricultural extension services are also still overwhelmingly staffed by men and reach mostly, if not exclusively, male farmers.26

The primary school will, therefore, for some time to come remain the only channel to give a large number of future, female farmers some basic agricultural education. There is also evidence that girls make better use of primary education than boys. A study of 96 developing countries showed that increased primary education affected the long term economic prosperity of girls more than it did that of boys, especially in the poorest countries.27 In addition, PSA does not have a gender bias, like other "practical" subjects in some countries, where crafts are taught to boys, while girls receive domestic education. In most countries in the region, boys and girls participate equally in agriculture, when it is either taught as a subject (or as part of a subject) or done as manual labour.28

3.2. Improving pupils' nutritional status by providing school meals

In contrast to the expectation that pupils should contribute to the school budget with the produce of their work on the school plot, the idea that they could benefit more directly, e.g. by getting a school meal, is rarely mentioned.

While educational policy makers and planners have, in the past, often overlooked nutrition and health as determinants of learning, numerous research findings suggest a relationship between pupils' malnutrition and poor school performance.29 Child nutrition is now increasingly acknowledged as a factor in education, rather than a charitable concern, and school feeding is given high priority in the World Bank's education policy paper for sub Saharan Africa (1988) and the Jomtien Education For All declaration (1990).30

Several donor agencies are funding "nutritional intervention" programmes in schools in the Region. The World Food Programme (WFP) supports large school feeding programmes in Botswana, Cape Verde, the Gambia, Chad, Niger, Ivory Coast and Lesotho, among others. UNICEF provides, under the "Child Survival and Development Programme", tools and inputs for school gardens, as well as funds for writers' workshops on teaching material for agriculture, health and nutrition, as a rather indirect, but supposedly more sustainable support to school feeding.

However, experience shows that externally supported school feeding programmes tend to create high dependency on foreign donors and pose extraordinary demands on the management and distribution of supplies, especially if targeted to the most needy sections of the school population.31 They may also change food habits in favour of imported food, at the expense of locally grown crops.

The potential contribution of PSA to an alternative or at least supplementary school feeding may have been underestimated. PSA as a supply source for school meals would not only allow for local management and control, but also let pupils produce what they consume, thus establishing a clear linkage between agricultural production and consumption, a desirable educational outcome indeed. And, above all, PSA would present a more sustainable long term alternative to externally funded school feeding programmes, which often tend to be seen as an "acquired right" by the target groups, though their duration is necessarily limited.32 To overcome this dependency, food aid donors have increasingly attempted to link school feeding to the curriculum, by making provisions for school orchards and vegetable gardens and the introduction of agricultural and nutrition education. However, these project components have often not been designed with the necessary details and were not monitored, with the result that they remained unimplemented.33

Certainly, there are limitations to PSA as a supply source for food, as, normally, PSA cannot sustain a school feeding programme throughout the year. In most cases, only the pupils of upper grades are producing crops, while lunch is given to the entire school population. In addition, the emphasis must be on small plots rather than on extended school farms, often found in areas where abundant land is available. The very common pressure for high production severely obstructs the educational objectives of PSA, and tends to overwork pupils with routine tasks of little educational relevance, such as land clearing and weeding.

Therefore, the school farm will normally supply requirements only for a number of months or even weeks. But even this limited seasonal school lunch (or take home ration) may, if properly managed, have an impact on pupils' nutrition, and, maybe more importantly, on their motivation for PSA. Monitoring findings over five years in about 300 schools in Tanga Region, Tanzania, where Primary School Agriculture was introduced, have given evidence that, whenever pupils were allowed to decide on the use of crops harvested from the school farm, they nearly always opted for direct consumption through school lunch. Where the school management arranged for school lunch, this decision was highly popular with pupils and parents and contributed to higher school attendance.34

3.3. Attracting pupils to school with greater local relevance of subject matter and better teaching methods

While there is ample evidence that school feeding can increase pupils' attendance35, greater local relevance has rarely been an explicit demand by parents from schools. This often disappointed educational policy makers, who had hoped for more public support for education reforms. In the history of PSA reform attempts, parents often rejected any "ruralized" curriculum which seemed to lead to a dual system and to reduce their children's chances of further education. In many rural areas (and not only there), parents see the schooling of their children as an investment for their future, not for the intrinsic value of what is being taught, but for the value of the school leaving certificate, especially if this then qualifies them for further education.

This public pressure for examination oriented schooling, at the expense of more "relevant" education, has been observed in many developing countries and was termed "Diploma disease" by Dore (1976) in his classic analysis.36 Consequently, the relevance of the subject matter taught and the quality of teaching methods used by the teachers, is often not assessed by parents, other than by looking into their children's examination performance and the school's overall examination results in comparison with other schools.

In spite of the widespread consent in the literature, that the "Diploma disease" affects the majority of parents who send their children to school, a suspicion remains, that those, who keep them out of school, let them in fact "vote with their feet". A case study on truancy and dropout, carried out by Nkoma (1979) in the Pangani District in Tanzania, revealed that "truants come from poor homes and, on the days they were not going to school, they were occupied in productive activities. They were not just idle. Moreover, more than half of the truants suggested a change in the school curriculum, mostly in favour of vocational subjects."37 In some areas, schools may be still "regarded as a 'foreign body' which turns the children's thoughts away from working in the fields", as Guezodje (1977) reported from Benin.38

Conclusion

Experience and research evidence give a more differentiated picture of the prospects Primary School Agriculture may have, than is suggested by the prevailing scepticism of the major donors. There is reason to believe that the subject can provide agricultural knowledge and skills, and make the teaching of Science and Environmental Education more relevant and effective. It also may benefit girls as the future food producers and provide some nutritional support to pupils.

However, the potential impact of PSA on pupils' attitudes towards farming as an occupation and rural life, as well as the contribution of PSA to cost reduction of schooling, and to agricultural development in general, has probably been over estimated in policy papers and justifications for curriculum reforms, as these aspects are influenced by powerful factors outside educational intervention. It may be sustained that PSA has great potential, as long as objectives are reconsidered, and the requirements of implementation are taken more seriously than in the past.

What can be learned from failed reforms? Probably there may be fewer reforms that have been implemented and failed than is normally assumed. Aid practitioners will agree with Vulliamy (1984) that "many educational innovations, which have been dubbed 'failures', were in fact never implemented at all, but remained instead as written policy statements that bore little or no relation to educational practices."39 While in the literature, the danger of "client rejection" of reforms introducing PSA has been given much attention, the lack of continuity and stability in the decision making processes in many countries has gone largely unnoted, with the concomitant, often sweeping (sometimes donor induced) changes of political programmes and priorities.

The feasibility or non feasibility of the introduction and/or improvement of PSA on a sustainable basis will, in a particular country, not depend on technical problems (which can be solved) or financial constraints (which would rather favour PSA), but ultimately be determined by support from the political decision makers and government bureaucracy. To be effective, this support will require, in addition to the curriculum reform, changes in the examination and selection system as well as in the salary schemes of the civil service (including teachers), that is, changes in areas which are open to government intervention. Where agricultural producer prices are controlled by the government, these would also act in support of, or as a disincentive to, PSA and to farming more generally as a career.

References

1 This article is a revised version of chapter 3 of the State of Knowledge report produced by RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G. G. (1991) Primary School Agriculture in sub Saharan Africa: Policies and Practices. GTZ, Eschborn
2 SINCLAIR M.E. (1977) Introducing work experience programmes in Third World schools: A review. Prospects, Vol.III No.3 UNESCO, Paris, p.364
3 LOCKHEED M.E., JAMISON D.T., LAU L. (1980) Farmer education and farm efficiency: A survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 29 (1) 37 76
4 PSACHAROPOULOS G. (1987) To vocationalize or not to vocationalize? That is the curriculum question. International Review of Education XXXIII(2): 187 211, UNESCO Institute of Education, Hamburg, p.192
5 EISEMON T.O. & NYAMETE A. (1990b) School literacy and agricultural modernization in Kenya. Comparative Education Review, Vol.34, No.2, p.176
6 EISEMON T.O. (1990a) Examination policies to strengthen primary schooling in African countries. International Journal of Educational Development, Vol.10, No.1, p.78
7 This approach has been elaborated in a teacher's manual by BERGMANN H. (1985a) Primary School Agriculture. Vol.I: Pedagogy, Vol.II: Background Information. Braunschweig/Wiesbaden
8 RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991), p.51
9 RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991), p.55
10 UNESCO UNEP (1985/86), International Environmental Education Programme, Environmental Education Series, Modules No.5 and 6 on Pre service Training and In service Training of Teachers and Supervisors for Primary Schools, Paris
11 RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991), p.51
12 SINCLAIR M.E. & LILLIS K.M. (1980). School and Community in the Third World, IDS Sussex, p.55
13 FOSTER P.J. (1965b) The vocational school fallacy in development planning. In: C.A. Anderson & M.S. Bowman (eds.) Education and economic development, Aldine Publishing Co.,Chicago
14 One exception is GARDNER R. (1985) Work orientations in non technical schools curricula: A review of experience with particular reference to Ghana and Papua New Guinea, London (man.)
15 GARDNER (1985), p.118
16 WENZEL H.J.(1986) How can schools contribute to agricultural and rural development. The CARD programme's contribution to education with production in schools. Coordinated Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD), Masvingo, Zimbabwe
17 LILLIS K.M. (1984) The growing importance of the vocational school ? Problems associated with vocational education in developing countries. In: Atle Hetland & Abel G.M. Ishumi, Educational planning in developing countries. Stockholm, p.176
18 BUDE U. (1985) Primary schools, local community and development in Africa. Baden Baden. RIEDMILLER S. (1983) Polytechnical Education Support Programme (PESP), Monitoring Report 1983. Tanga/Tanzania. CHENGETA J.G. (1988) Report on Regional Agriculture Syllabus Review Workshops, Gaborone/ Botswana. HEBERDEN R. (1983) Report on regional visits and an evaluation of the application of the Agricultural Science Wedge of the syllabus and of agricultural projects. Harare/Zimbabwe. WENZEL ibid., KALUBA H. (1986) Education with Production in Zambia. Lessons from the experiences of the first decade 1975 1985. In: Education with Production, Vol.5 No.1. Gaborone/Botswana
19 SINCLAIR (1977)
20 summarized by RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991)
21 Institute for the Reform of Primary Education (IPAR Buea) (1977) Report on the reform of primary education, Buea/Cameroon
22 RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991), p.74
23 BUDE U. (1982) Towards a realistic definition of the teacher's role in primary schooling: experiences and research evidence from Cameroon. Compare Vol.12 No.2
24 HAHN N.D. (1986) The African farmer and her husband. Women and farming systems The IITA experience, Manhattan, Kansas State University
25 CAILLODS F. (1989) Women's literacy for development: A brief overview of the situation today. UNESCO, Paris
26 WOODS B. (1984) The role of people: A paradigm for achieving sustainable development in the rural sector. World Bank Staff Working paper, Washington, D.C.
27 BENAVOT A.(1989) Education, gender and economic development A cross national study. In: Sociol.of Education, vol.62, pp.14 32
28 RIEDMILLER S. & MADES G.G. (1991), p.22
29 LEVINGER B. (1989) Malnutrition, school feeding and educational performance. UNESCO, Unit for Cooperation with UNICEF and WFP, Paris, POLLITT E. (1990) Malnutrition and infection in the classroom, UNESCO, Paris
30 WORLD BANK (1988), Education in sub Saharan Africa. Policies for adjustment, revitalization and expansion, Washington D.C., WORLD CONFERENCE ON EDUCATION FOR ALL (1990), Meeting basic learning needs: A new vision for the 1990s, Background document, New York, January 1990
31 WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME (1990), Food aid for education. Past experience and future directions. Rome
32 WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME (1990), p.15
33 WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME (1990), p.8
34 RIEDMILLER S. (1989b) Die Primarschule als Grundlage fuer laendliche Entwicklung: Erfahrungen mit Schullandwirtschaft. In: Entwicklung und Laendlicher Raum, 23(1), pp.3 7, Frankfurt
35 LEVINGER B. (1989)
36 DORE R. (1976) The Diploma Disease. Education, qualification and development, London
37 CARR HILL R. (1984) Primary education in Tanzania, A review of the research. SIDA, Stockholm
38 GUEZODJE V. (1977) Education reform in Benin. In: Prospects VII(4), UNESCO, Paris, pp.455 471
39 VULLIAMY G. (1984) Relevance education, strategies for curriculum change and pilot projects: A rejoinder. International Journal of Educational Development. Vol.4 No.2, p.252



SD Homepage Back to Top FAO Homepage