School decentralisation in Nepal: a disjuncture between macro-level advocacy and micro-level reality?

Khanal, Peshal

doi:10.1007/s10671-010-9088-z

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nepal made certain policy amendments in 2001 and 2002 embracing decentralisation and community participation, and devolved school management authority, including the authority to hire teachers, to school committees (Carney et al 2007;Carney and Bista 2009;Khanal 2010aKhanal , 2010b. These amendments did not entirely replace the central mechanism for teacher appointment, promotion and transfer, however.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher management in a decentralised school context in Nepal: Fuelling tension and dissent?

Khanal

2011

Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the issues and concerns of Nepalese teachers in relation to Gaynor's (1998) three models of teacher management (administrative, grassroots and alternative), constructed in the context of decentralisation reform around the world. The article suggests that the existing teacher management policies in Nepal are problematic and controversial, embracing both the administrative and grassroots models of teacher management and maintaining both the centralised and decentralised policies of teacher selection, promotion and financing. With problems similar to those of many developing nations in Africa, decentralisation of teacher management results in growing division and hierarchy among teaching staff, and favouritism, cronyism and corruption at the local level. The lack of equitable distribution of qualified teachers across regions and schools is another concern. The article concludes that the decentralisation of teacher management is problematic particularly in the countries where a dual approach to teacher management has been adopted and where the political, economic, institutional, technical and educational systems need to respond to the specific characteristics and needs of schools and communities as a whole.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher management in a decentralised school context in Nepal: Fuelling tension and dissent?

Khanal

2011

Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As I discussed above, schooling in Nepal had begun as an external project backed up by external ideology of modernization and development. This explains why schooling in Nepal always remained an exclusionary and centralized function controlled and run by people who are accountable to the government bureaucrats and not to the people of the community (Onta, 2000;Caddell, 2005;Shields & Rappleye, 2008;Khanal, 2010). Schooling in Nepal was actually developed and implemented as a project designed to legitimize a particular culture of few -traditional and new elites that includes politicians, bureaucrats, businesspeople, and the civic leaders and to maintain their control.…”

Section: Nepali Practices Of Linking Education and Rural Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Realizing the Existence of Multiple Forms of Knowledge: A Strategy Towards Seeing Education for Rural Transformation

Parajuli¹

2015

J Educ & Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A b stractEducation in Nepal is very structured and focused towards enhancing cognitive knowledge of students. Though Nepali policy documents often emphasize education as a means for development and social transformation, this paper argues that Nepali education has not given any direct consideration to this aspect. Some attempts are of course made towards seeing education as a means for rural transformation but it is a surprising reality that despite success of those pioneer and model building efforts, they could not be placed in government policy and practice. Deriving from those and other research and field experiences, the paper tries to explain this reality. Further, based on such Nepali experience, the paper argues on the need for identifying local practices of knowing and educating as accepted modes of knowing and educating. Such recognition would contribute to see the knowing beyond the formal and non-formal schooling process. This would help us realize that forms of knowledge are not one but multiple. In today's globalized context, it is of course important that people have knowledge that could link them with the world beyond their everyday living. At the same time, it is also equally important that we value their knowing and educating practices and recognize all forms of knowledge as important and end the binary and derogatory practice of labeling people as illiterate as we have given to the large mass of people.

show abstract

“…Going back to 2002, when the government introduced the Community School Support Project (CSSP), a pilot project of school decentralization, with the total financial and technical support of the World Bank, it amended the education policies in line with the broader policy guidelines of the Bank and other donors (see Khanal, 2010a). The VEC is among the various policy concepts brought about by these amendments.…”

Section: Participation In Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As many other developing nations, Nepal embarked on a policy reform in school education embracing decentralization and local ownership particularly after the establishment of democracy in 1990 (see Khanal, 2010a;Carney, Bista, & Agergaard, 2007). This article looks at how the policy creates spaces for community participation in school and to what extent a gap exists between policy intention and policy implementation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community participation in schooling in Nepal: a disjunction between policy intention and policy implementation?

Khanal

2013

Asia Pacific Journal of Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community participation in the governance of school systems is a recurrent theme of educational reform in developed and developing countries alike. This article analyses the effort of one developing country -Nepal -to promote broader participation in educational decision-making through local school governance structure. It looks at how the current policy creates spaces for community participation in school and the extent to which a gap exists between policy intention and policy implementation. Drawing on the case study data, this article suggests that while the policy has created legitimate spaces for community participation in school, participation in such spaces is taking a form of tokenism, and the community represented in school governance is restricted to a small number of political elites. Given that ethnic, cultural, linguistic and socioeconomic characteristics of the local populace, problems exist within the school system to embrace differences and diversities that prevent a majority of parents from effective participation in school. This article concludes that along with the structural reform, participation can be reinforced by developing a long-term strategy to build community capacity for the provision and management of education, as well as by preparing educators to work effectively with parents of different socio-cultural backgrounds.

show abstract

School decentralisation in Nepal: a disjuncture between macro-level advocacy and micro-level reality?

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

Teacher management in a decentralised school context in Nepal: Fuelling tension and dissent?

Teacher management in a decentralised school context in Nepal: Fuelling tension and dissent?

Realizing the Existence of Multiple Forms of Knowledge: A Strategy Towards Seeing Education for Rural Transformation

Community participation in schooling in Nepal: a disjunction between policy intention and policy implementation?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About