Several notable civil society groups have spoken out against the World Bank’s support for privatization of education in Africa, specifically Kenya and Uganda. The privatization movement gains in strength to the extent that governments fail to provide adequate funding for public education.
Private, for-profit schools in Africa funded by the World Bank and U.S. venture capitalists have been criticized by more than 100 organizations who’ve signed a petition opposing the controversial educational venture.
A May statement addressed to Jim Kim, president of the World Bank, expressed deep concern over the global financial institution’s investment in a chain of private primary schools targeting poor families in Kenya and Uganda and called on the institution to support free universal education instead.
The schools project is called Bridge International Academies and 100,000 pupils have enrolled in 412 schools across the two nations. BIA is supported by the World Bank, which has given $10 million to the project, and a number of investors, including U.S. venture capitalists NEA and Learn Capital. Other notable investors include Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Pierre Omidyar and Pearson, a multinational publishing company.
In a speech delivered in April, Kim praised BIA as a means to alleviate poverty in Kenya and Uganda. Critics responded that many Kenyans and Ugandans cannot afford private education, further arguing that this type of investment merely supports Western businesses at the expense of local public services.
A section of the letter addressed to Kim asserts:
“We, civil society organisations and citizens of Kenya and Uganda, are appalled that an organisation whose mandate is supposed to be to lift people out of poverty shows such a profound misunderstanding and disconnect from the lives and rights of poor people in Kenya and Uganda. If the World Bank is serious about improving education in Kenya and Uganda, it should support our governments to expand and improve our public education systems, provide quality education to all children free of charge, and address other financial barriers to access.”
Opposition to educational neocolonialism
The statement reflects a growing global movement questioning Western policies pushing private education in developing countries. It was written and signed by 30 organizations in Uganda and Kenya and supported by 116 organizations around the world, including Global Justice Now and ActionAid. They claim BIA uses highly standardized teaching methods, untrained low-paid teachers, and aggressive marketing strategies targeted at poor households.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Have you read my mind lately Diane? As a passionate supporter of your work to end the privatization of education and deprofessionisation of teaching in the US, I have been recently worried by the trends in Asia and Africa. I actually volunteered for this organization and interviewed for a position there a few years ago. During the interview process I found myself drawing parallels with TFA and other reform groups. The CEO told me that he does not allow his teachers to unionize because that would jeopardize the efficiency of his operation. The teachers are high school graduates and not just any high school graduates buut those who could not make the cut to get into university. The operation stunk of racial and class inequality and discrimination. The white and ivy educated technocrats were being paid tremendously more than the locals. I got the idea that locals were highly micromanaged and mistreated. I sincerely hope that they are not able to bribe themselves into being allowed to continue to deprofessionalize teaching, but it’s a distinct possibility in Kenya. Of course they have the buy in of Gates and Zuckerberg. Wasn’t the failure in Newark enough?
LikeLike
The “Bright International Academy” franchise uses TFA alums with a master’s degree to design the step-by step curriculum. The teaching methodology is a version of no-nonsense-nurture. follow my directions EXACTLY, or else.
The marketing pitch on the website for Bright International Academy is:
“This (technology and system) allows us to bring best-in-class instruction, international and local research, and curriculum specialists into every one of our classrooms” …”standardize our high-quality instruction across all of our academies.” …Because of our highly efficient delivery mechanism (marrying talented individuals from each community with technology, scripted instruction, rigorous training, and data-driven oversight), Bridge is able to bring some of the world’s greatest instruction and pedagogical thinking into every classroom in every village and slum in the world.”
A group called “Global Justice Now” claimed that the real total cost of sending one child to a Bridge school is not the advertised $5 to $6 a month. It is $9 to $13 a month, and up to $20 a month with school meals. In Kenya, sending three children to BIA would represent 68% of the monthly income of half the population. In Uganda, sending three children to BIA would represent 75% of the monthly income of half the population.”
The markets for schooling in Africa, india, and elsewhere are being tapped in the manner of colonial powers of another era, in this case with US investors who are techno-enthusiasts, have funded their preferred “curriculum specialists,” and are clearly enthusiastic about no-nonsense-nurture teaching scripts loaded onto tablets.
I will not be surprised to see the backers of the Bright International Academy franchise system, including U.S. venture capitalists— Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Pierre Omidyar (founder of EBay) and Pearson–figure out how to market the franchise right here is the the USA.
After all, the “Bright International Academy ” curriculum experts are based in the USA and they are TFA alums. TFAers are darlings of investors.
The NNN methodology is easy to put into a tablet format and best of all it does not require teachers to have any qualifications…. or at most a certificate of orientation from the BIA franchise
It will not be hard to market this USA version as a “highly efficient delivery system” that has also been internationally field-tested. Moreover, it can claim to a program based on “the world’s greatest instruction and pedagogical thinking” for poor children trapped in failing government-run schools.
I jest, but only sort-of.
LikeLike
The World Bank is behind privatization of all schools in all countries, the USA included.
LikeLike
Are governments of other countries actually going to turn over the so-called education of their students to the curriculum designed by and funded by a western power?
LikeLike
Paul Krugman is concerned about Puerto Rico’s schools. He writes,
” … It would, in particular, be a terrible idea to give the hedge funds that have scooped up much of Puerto Rico’s debt what they want — basically to destroy the island’seducation system in the name of fiscal responsibility.”
LikeLike
Africa, definitely one of Pearson’s “growth” markets. Brought to you by Sir Michael Barber of course.
LikeLike
Based on the letter written by 100 international organizations, I wrote to my U.S. senator about the privatization of schools in Kenya and Uganda. His reply indicated his office, or he, was unaware of the issue. With hope, he will remember the travesty, if the topic of corporatization of education, at a macro level, ever reaches discussion in D.C.
LikeLike
Comments
I have read all these comments and, at the risk of upsetting people, none of you know what the reality on ground is. I live and work as an educator in Africa and would rather blame our governments, who, due to corruption, ineptitude and lack of concern, have totally neglected the education sector. I have been to the Bridge Schools and I agree that they are not perfect. I even agree with most of your criticisms. But what is the alternative? What would you have parents do? Sacrifice so their children can at least get a fair chance in the world, or subject their children to a failed public education system? Bridge is not the government and realistically cannot provide education for all. That is the government’s job. What they are doing is providing a decent alternative for poor parents.
As for their use of unqualified teachers. What does being qualified mean? I cannot recruit teachers from our colleges of education. They are ill prepared for the work place. I prefer a fresh, eager mind and will provide appropriate training. And why would people think Bridge teachers are rejects from the university system? Getting into tertiary institutions in Africa can be likened to a funnel. The children of the poor have very little chance. Not because they are not intelligent, but because they are so badly taught that they are barely able to pass the high stakes tests to universities. The teachers in Bridge come from these poor communities, grew up there and live there.
Like I said, I do not like the commercialization of education, but there is no vacuum and someone has to step in and do what our governments continue to neglect to do.
LikeLike
This is the mentality that will keep the rich rich and the poor poor. Why advocate for a system that requires untrained, ununionized robotic teachers. Why assume that the best alternative for the poor is a substandard education? You ask what the alternative is, I say since they have all these millions, work on training real teachers, work on fixing public schools, not undermining them. This is not a good alternative, I’ve been to the schools too, I know the challenges, but from experience with the negative effects of charters in the US, I can tell you that this is going nowhere fast. It will not end well.
LikeLike