Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Social Assessment Report
Social Assessment on Access to Education: Field Study Report
Project Number: P144715
Date: 24th July 2013
Cambodia Global Partnership for Second Education Sector
Support Project
Prepared By The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports Kingdom of Cambodia
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government of Cambodia is currently preparing for the Cambodia Second Education Sector Support Project, hereafter referred to as the “Project”, to be financed by the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), which the World Bank administers and Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport (MoEYS) executes. The project consists of four components, namely, Component 1 Improving the Access and Educational Experience of Vulnerable and Disadvantaged Students; Component 2: Benchmarking Student Competencies; Component 3: Improving the Cambodia’s Teaching Force; and Component 4: System Management and Monitoring and Evaluation.
A Social Assessment (SA) is required under the World Bank’s Safeguard Policy (OP/BP 4.10). The objectives of the assessment are to : (i) evaluate the project potential positive and adverse effects on the Indigenous People (IP) and examine project alternatives where adverse effects may be significant; (ii) assess the stakeholders’ perspectives on current status of access to education, discrimination in access to education service, discrepancies in enrollment or any other indicators of education access between IPs and mainstream Khmer communities, measures to improve their access to education to maximize the benefits of the project activities to beneficiaries; and (iii) establish a basis for subsequent project monitoring and evaluation. The SA is also a means to engage in free, prior and informed consultation with indigenous communities and to assess whether these communities provide their broad support to the project or not. During SA process indigenous people were informed about the project and consulted about the project benefits and adverse effects. The SA has found that consulted the IP communities and key stakeholders support for the project.
The SA requires the collection of both primary and secondary data. Primary qualitative data were collected using qualitative research methodology such as focus group discussion (FGD) for the people from the communities and key informant interview (KII) for other key stakeholders. Secondary statistical data were also collected mainly from MoEYS, and Ministry of Planning’s commune database. Four provinces were selected for field study, namely Stung Treng, Mondul Kiri, Kampong Thom and Banteay Meanchey. In each province, a FGD and 5 KIIs were conducted.
Two selected communes, Sekong (Lun village) and Krang Teh, are dominated by Indigenous People (IP) where the other two communes, Popok and Ta Lam, are inhibited by Khmer ethnic. Sekong and Krang Teh are remote communes whereas Krasang and Ta Lam are rural communes. Primary sources of income in all four communes are mostly from rice and other crop production. Access to forest to collect non-timber forest products (NTFP) and hunting are very common for remote villagers of Lun and Krang Teh whereas migration to urban areas is a common option to generate alternative sources of income.
In general, in these communes, access to education is not much improved in recent years. Net enrollment rate in these communes remained almost at the same level or slightly decreased for the past four years, and dropout rate of all off the four visited schools increased compare to the previous academic year (see Annex 1). There are a number of factors affecting the access to education, including prevalence of poverty, out-migration, seasonality, poor infrastructure and distance from school, irregular teaching schedules, unattractive school environment, low awareness of educational benefits, etc. There is no gender discrimination or cultural barriers in the access to education. In fact, the number of girls at visited primary schools was higher than that of boys in all schools. However, there is a tradition that girls are usually married at a younger age (14-15) and, the number of female dropouts at grade 5 and 6 is almost the same as boys. The majority of boys dropout from school at grade 5 and 6 in order to look for employment.
Measures have been taken by the MoEYS, and its partnering NGOs in order to improve access to education. Those measures include provision of scholarship to poor students, provision of dormitory for poor students seeking higher education, provision of school meal, creation of decentralized curriculum, provision of bi-lingual programs, construction of new schools, and
3
promotion of child friendly schools. All measures can promote more enrollment, ensure regular school attendance and prevent dropout. However, more efforts are needed.
During field visit, communities and key stakeholders raised some recommendations in order to further improve access to education. Those recommendations are: (i) fostering local economic growth especially in rural and remote area; (ii) training local resource people, who can speak both Khmer and IP language, to become teacher; (iii) strengthening and promoting bi-lingual teaching program; (iv) providing incentive for remote-village teachers; (v) promoting child friendly school to all schools; (vi) constructing more schools to reach remote and un-served villages; (vii) providing regular education awareness campaign; (viii) continuing provision of scholarship to poor student sufficiently cover their basic needs (food); (ix) building more dormitory for teachers and students; (x) encouraging private sector to invest in education; and (xi) promoting informal education in working place where majority of workers are young with lower education.
In summary, the SA did not identify adverse effects on IPs as the result of implementing the project, and consultations and interviews confirmed that IP communes strongly support the proposed interventions and perceive its benefits. To ensure that the IPs present in the sub-project areas receive culturally appropriate social and economic benefits in an equitable manner, the SA recommends that the Project prepare an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF).
For the monitoring of safeguards implementation, the SA recommends that the proposed project use the system established under the previous education project, Education Sector Support Scale Up Action Program (ESSSUAP). However, the project shall improve monitoring system at the school level and at the District Office of Education in order to ensure reliability and accuracy of the data and record keeping.
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF ABBREVIATION ....................................................................................................................... 5
1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 6
1.1. Project Summary ................................................................................................................ 6
1.2. Objectives of Social Assessment (SA) ................................................................................. 6
1.3. Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 7
2. LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK .............................................................................. 9
2.1. Administrative Framework ................................................................................................. 9
2.2. Legal Framework ................................................................................................................ 9
2.3. World Bank Safeguard Policies ......................................................................................... 10
3. SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 10
3.1. Sekong Commune ............................................................................................................. 10
3.2. Krang Teh Commune ........................................................................................................ 11
3.3. Popok Commune .............................................................................................................. 11
3.4. Ta Lam Commune ............................................................................................................. 11
4. INFORMED CONSULTATION AND MAIN FINDINGS .................................................................. 12
5. OTHER FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................... 12
6. PAST AND EXISTING EFFORTS ................................................................................................... 14
7. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 15
7.1. Key considerations for IPP/IPPF ....................................................................................... 15
7.2. Key considerations for better access to education .......................................................... 15
7.3. Project monitoring............................................................................................................ 15
ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................................... 16
Annex 1A: Field Visit Report ......................................................................................................... 17
Annex 1B: Field Study Report ....................................................................................................... 21
Annex 1C: Field Case Study Report .............................................................................................. 25
Annex 1D: Field Case Study Report .............................................................................................. 30
Annex 2: List of Persons Met ........................................................................................................ 34
Annex 3: Data Collection Tools ..................................................................................................... 35
5
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
DoEYS = District of Education, Youth and Sports ECE = Early Childhood Education
EFA-FTI = Education For All Fast Track Initiatives EGMA = Early Grade Mathematics Assessment EGRA = Early Grade Reading Assessment
ESP = Education Strategic Plan EYS = Education, Youth and Sports
FGD = Focus Group Discussion GPE = Global Partnership for Education
Ha Hectare IP = Indigenous People
IPP = Indigenous People Plan KII = Key Informant Interview
Km = Kilometer MoEYS = Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports
NGO = Non-Governmental Organization NTFP = Non Timber Forest Products
OP = Operational Procedure RGC = Royal Government of Cambodia
SA = Social Assessment TOR = Terms of References
6
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Project Summary The Government of Cambodia is currently preparing for the Second Education Sector Support Project, hereafter referred to as the “Project”, to be financed by the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), which the World Bank administers and the Ministry of Youth, Education and Sport (MoEYS) implements. The objectives of this project are to assist the Government to expand access to Early Childhood Education (ECE) for 3-5 year olds and contribute to improved access to and quality of basic education, particularity for those from disadvantaged backgrounds. This will be achieved by increasing access to public and community preschool education, providing parental education, primary and lower secondary scholarships to disadvantaged students, expanding primary and secondary learning assessments, providing pre-service and in-service teacher training, improving teaching and learning environments, and undertaking monitoring and evaluation. The project consists of four components: Component 1: Improving the Access and Educational Experience of Vulnerable and Disadvantaged Students. Sub-component 1.1 Expanding Access to Early Childhood Care and Development will increase access to early childhood education, nutrition, and care for disadvantaged 3-5 years olds throughout the country by improving current services to meet service standards and expanding new services with standards. Sub-component 1.2 Increasing Access to Basic Education Services will increase access to basic education services in rural and remote areas, including for disadvantaged children and children with disabilities. Component 2: Benchmarking Student Competencies. Sub-component 2.1 Nationalizing Early Grade Reading and Mathematics Assessments (EGRA and EGMA) will finance the development and provision of textbooks for these assessments, as well as training to school administrators and teachers in preparation for the nationwide administration of the assessment tests. Sub-component 2.2 Supporting National Assessment will provide technical supports to National Assessment Office in conducting assessments, support for MoEYS to conduct annual review of EGRA and EGMA.. Component 3: Improving Cambodia’s Teaching Force. Sub-component 3.1 Improving Pedagogical Training will support Regional and Provincial Teacher Training Colleges throughout the country. Sub-component 3.2 Strengthening School Leadership will support the improvement of academic leadership of school principals. Component 4: Sector and Grant Management and Monitoring and Evaluation. This component includes Sub-component 4.1 Strengthening System Management and Sub-component 4.2 Project management and Monitoring and Evaluation.
1.2. Objectives of Social Assessment (SA) The recommendations from SA will be incorporated in the project design. The objectives of SA are three-fold:
1. Evaluate the preschool and primary school construction activities and scholarship programs proposed under component 1 and assess potential positive and adverse effects on the Indigenous People (IP). Project alternatives should be examined where adverse effects may be significant. The findings from this assessment will feed into the IP Planning Framework (IPPF). Link to Component 1.
7
2. Assess the stakeholders’1 perspectives on current access to education, discrimination in access to education services, discrepancies in enrollment or any other indicators of access to education between IPs and mainstream Khmer communities, measures to improve their access to education to maximize the benefits of the project activities to beneficiaries. Link to Component 1.
3. Establish a basis for subsequent project monitoring and evaluation arrangements. Link to Component 4.
The SA is also a mean to engage in free, prior and informed consultation with indigenous communities and to assess whether these communities provide their broad support to the project or not. During the SA process, Indigenous Peoples are informed about the project and consulted about the project’s potential benefits and adverse effects and provided opportunities to express their opinions.
1.3. Methodology The SA requires the collection of primary and secondary data. Qualitative primary data were collected using qualitative research methodologies such as focus group discussion (FGD) and key informant interview (KII) techniques. Secondary statistical data were also collected from different sources mainly from MoEYS and the Ministry of Planning. FGDs were conducted for the Indigenous Peoples (IP) communities and disadvantage groups (at village level) in the sampled province. KIIs were conducted with key stakeholders in each commune including Director of Provincial Department and District office of Education, Youth and Sports; School Principal; and chiefs of villages and/or communes where selected primary schools are located. FGD and KII discussion guides and questionnaires are attached to this report as Annex 3. Four provinces were selected for the field study. One FGD and 5 KIIs were conducted at each province. Each village’s profile information was also collected. Two FGDs were conducted in remote villages where IP community exists and the other two FGDs were conducted in rural villages. Table 1 below indicates the list of selected provinces and its selection criteria and Table 2 indicates sample size and coverage of the study. Table 1: Selected Province for the Field Study No. Province School Name Selection Criteria
1 Stung Treng
Lun Primary
School
North-Eastern region; school is located in IP community (Lun);
remote area with low enrollment rate and high dropout rate
during rice farming season; triggered by the Bank’ IP policy;
school is located in Lun village, Sekong commune, Siem Pang
district.
2 Mondul Kiri Bourapet
Primary
School
North-Eastern region; school is located in IP community
(Phnong); remote area with low enrollment rate and high
dropout rate due to in-migration, emerging job opportunity by
forest concessionaire and access to forest to collect NTFP;
triggered by the Bank’ IP policy; school is located in Bourapet
village, Krang Tes commune, Pichreada district.
3 Kampong Thom Krasaing Central or Tonle Sap region; one of the poorest provinces;
1 Key stakeholders include: (i) Director of Department of Primary Education, Director of Provincial
Department of Education, Youth and Sports, School Principles, IP communities and other disadvantaged groups
8
Primary
School
school is located in rural village with high dropout rate due to
domestic migration for works and land grabbing; school is
located in Krasaing village, Popork commune, Stong district.
4 Banteay
Meanchey
(Poipet)
Ta Lam
Primary
School
Border with Thailand; school is located in rural village but not
far away from urban center of Monkol Borey (5km away) with
high dropout rate due to out-migration to work in Thailand;
school is located in Ta Lam village, Ta Lam commune, Mongkol
Borey district.
Table 2: Sample Size and Coverage of Field Study Coverage Tool No. of Interviewee Collected data
Provincial KII-1 4 Provincial Directors of
Department of
Education, Youth and
Sports
Provincial educational statistics i.e. school
facilities enrollment and dropout rates
disaggregated by gender; discuss factors affecting
access to education at primary and lower
secondary level i.e. low enrollment and high
dropout rates; discuss possible measure to
improve access to education
District KII-2 4 District chiefs of office
of education, youth and
sports
District educational statistics i.e. school facilities
enrollment and dropout rates disaggregated by
gender; discuss factors affecting access to
education at primary and lower secondary level
i.e. low enrollment and high dropout rates;
discuss possible measure to improve access to
education
Commune KII-3 3 Commune Chiefs
(Could not meet chief of
Sekong commune in
Stung Treng)
Demographic and socio-economic information;
poverty level; and barriers for access to
education; school and other public facilities in the
level and village nearby
KII-4 3 School Principals
(Could not meet Lun
school principal in Stung
Treng)
School educational statistics i.e. no. of schooling
by gender, enrollment rate, admission rate, drop-
out rate, repetition rate, primary completion rate
etc.
Village KII-5:
Village
Profile
4 Chiefs of village Demographic and socio-economic information,
poverty level, educational statistics at village level
and barriers for access to education, school and
other public facilities in the level and village
nearby
FGD 6-10 villagers per FGD
Participants’ profile, socioeconomic information,
children schooling, social and cultural barriers for
access to education, school and other public
facilities in the level and village nearby
Prior to the fieldwork, the joint team consisting of the Department of Primary Education and the World Bank team met to discuss the plans for the social assessment and monitoring indicators and tools. All the necessary arrangements, such as appointments for meeting with provincial level MoEYS officers and directors, were made prior to the trip. Schools were selected by the provincial directors based on the selection criteria. The fieldwork was conducted from 19 to 29, March 2013.
9
Data collection and discussion in the field are limited to only two variables of access to education, enrollment and school dropout. Considering this limitation and sample size the results of this SA may not be necessarily represented the countrywide.
2. LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
2.1. Administrative Framework The Project will be financed by the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) and administered by the World Bank. The Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports (MoEYS) will execute the proposed project. The implementation arrangements build on the previous experience of the MoEYS in project implementation with the World Bank financed Cambodia Education Sector Support Project (CESSP) and the recently closed Education Sector Support Scale Up Action Program (ESSSUAP) financed by EFA-FTI Grant. The institutional structure will include staff members from the MoEYS, as well as national and international technical advisors financed by the project. For the enhancement of sector and sub-sector results-based management, resources (financial, physical and human) for this office would be assured as part of Component 4.
2.2. Legal Framework Cambodia Constitution (1993) supports the right to education, education for all and 9 years of basic education (Article 65, 66, 67 and 68). Article 48 states “[t]he State shall protect the rights of children as stipulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular, the right to life, education, protection during wartime, and from economic or sexual exploitation.” Article 46 stimulates “…The state and society shall provide opportunities to women, especially to those living in rural areas without adequate social support, so they can get employment, medical care, and send their children to school, and to have decent living conditions.” Law on Education was enacted by the National Assembly on the 19th of October 2007. The objective of this law is to develop human resources of the nation by providing lifelong education for the learners to acquire and develop knowledge, skills, capabilities, dignity, moral behavior and characters, in order to encourage learners to know, love and protect the national identity, cultures and language. Education Strategic Plan (ESP) 2009-2013 intends to continue to give highest priority to equitable access with high quality education, especially basic education, in order to realize the National Education For All (EFA) Plan by 2015. ESP 2009-13 also gives greater emphasis to expanding early childhood education, non-formal education, technical and vocational training and opportunities to access secondary and post-secondary education through the continued and improved partnership among Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC), development partners, private sector, non-governmental organizations, communities and parents. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 28 - Right to Education) states, in summary, that: every child has the right to education; primary education must be free; secondary education must be available to every child; discipline in schools must respect children’s dignity; and richer countries must help poorer countries achieve these. The Cambodian Constitution (1993) states that all citizens have the same rights, regardless of race, color, language or religious belief (Article 31). Indigenous peoples are regarded as citizens of Cambodia. Cambodia is a signatory to a number of international instruments that protect the
10
rights of indigenous peoples2, as well as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), which recognizes the role of indigenous people in protecting biodiversity. In 1992 the Government of Cambodia ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which ensures the rights to practice specific culture and the right to means of livelihoods, NGO Forum on Cambodia.
2.3. World Bank Safeguard Policies The World Bank safeguard policy OP/BP 4.10 is triggered because the pool of pre-identified potential school construction sites includes areas where Indigenous Peoples are present (given the nation-wide coverage of project). Moreover, the scholarship program of the project is intended to expand access to education services for poor and disadvantages students, including indigenous people. The scholarship program has been implemented under the previous Bank projects in the education sector. Throughout its implementation, the scholarship program has been guided by transparent selection and implementation criteria and has benefited from community-validated selection. It has also benefited from an open complaints handling mechanism, which has contributed to the fair and accountable implementation of the government scholarship program. It is a requirement of the OP/BP 4.10 to undertake a Social Assessment (SA) to evaluate the project’s potential positive and adverse effects on the Indigenous Peoples, and to examine project alternatives where adverse effects may be significant. The SA is a mean to engage in free, prior and informed consultation with IP communities and to assess whether these communities provide their broad support to the project..
3. SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION
3.1. Sekong Commune The joint MoEYS-WB team visited Lun primary school located in Lun village, Sekong commune, Siem Pang district of Stung Treng province. The size of Sekong commune is 2,859 hectares, of which 1,447 hectares are rice fields and 578 hectares are other croplands (chamkar). The croplands are located nearby or within the village whereas the rice fields are distant, about 5-6 km away. 93.63% of the total population relies on farming of rice and other crops (chamkar) as the primary income source while only about 9.84% of the population is employed by private companies or by the government, and about 5% is self-employed mostly selling groceries in front of their house or in local market. About 50% of households in this commune have farmlands (either for rice or other crops) on average each in the size of approximately 1.5 hectares per household. Due to such small size of the farmlands, the villagers cannot produce sufficient amount of food for their annual consumption, and therefore, they commonly go to the nearby forest to collect non-timber forest products (NTFP).This activity usually involves all family members including children. Based on the FGDs conducted with the villagers, farmers earn about $30 per month from NTFP, which is about 40% to total household income for a month. There is no more traditional slash-and-burn method of cultivation for rice and other crops. This is due to the fact that the villagers sold the land to concessionaires or other new comers. Seasonal migration during rice farming is very common for Lun village. The poverty rate in Sekong commune is estimated at 49% in 2012, which is higher than the provincial average at 46.11%, and even higher than the national poverty rate at 30.1%. Lun Primay School is one of the 10 schools where the
2 This includes the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and more generally the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
11
development and implementation of decentralized curriculum has been piloted. The villagers expressed their support this decentralized curriculum because the decentralized school calendar allows their children to accompany the family to move near rice fields during the rice farming period. Normally these farmers spend 5-6 months during the rice farming period, from December to May.
3.2. Krang Teh Commune The joint team visited Burapet Primary School located in Burapet village, Krang Teh commune, Mondulkiri province. Krang Teh commune covers in total 2,589 hectares of land, of which 407 hectares are rice fields and 1,083 hectares are other croplands (Chamkar). The croplands are located near the village where the rice fields are located far (about 4-5 km) from the village. 85% of total population relies on rice farming and chamkar for livelihood while about 10% is employed by private companies or by the government, and about 5% is self-employed selling groceries in front of their house. The majority of the households have croplands and the others have rice fields. About 50% of the households in this commune have either rice fields or croplands of less than one hectare per household. With such small farmlands, the food produced are not sufficient for their annual consumption. Going to the forest to collect NTFP is common. The FGDs conducted with the villagers showed that the farmers earn about $50 per month from NTFP, which is about 50% of the total household income. No traditional slash-and-burn practice was found for rice or crop farming because farmers have sold the lands to concessionaires or other new comers. At present, land registration is underway. With security of tenure, after issuing land title, the practice of slashes-and-burn was ended. According to the commune chief, the poverty rate is about 50% in 2012, higher than Mondullkiri’s poverty rate of 46.11% in 2009.
3.3. Popok Commune The joint team visited Krasang Primary School located in Krasang village, Popok commune in Kampong Thom province. Popok commune covers an area in the size of 2,038 hectares, of which 1,260 hectares are rice paddies (no Chamkar and no dry rice field). The primary income source for the majority of the households in the commune are rice farming (99.6%) while 8.4% of the population is also employed by companies or factories. About 4.3% of the total households owns rice fields less than a hectare, and about 2.2% has no rice fields at all. In addition, livestock raising is an important source of additional income and goods for household consumption. Chicken raising reported to be the most common at of 72%, followed by pig raising at 15%, and duck raising at about 8.7%. About 5% of the total population in this commune have migrated for job, 3.66% (2.7% female) are engaged with regular employment and about 1.4% (0.2% are female) are engaged with non-regular employment. According to the commune chief, the poverty rate for the entire commune is 45% in early 2013, which is is lower than the provincial rate at 52.4% in 2009.
3.4. Ta Lam Commune The joint team visited Ta Lam Primary School located in Ta Lam village, Ta Lam commune, Banteay Meanchey province. Ta Lam commune covers an area as large as 3,032 hectares, of which 2,406 hectares are wet rice fields and 100 hectares are dry rice fields (no other croplands). About 21.2% of the total households has rice fields less than one hectare, and approximately 14.6% has no rice fiends at all. The primary source of income is from rice cultivation for the 73% of the population while 26.4% is not clear where they gain income from. This figure is seems to be related to a large number of households which have small rice fields. It is reported that the out-migration rate is also high, resulting in a high percentage of the population with unclear jobs. Livestock raising is also important economic activity in this commune; chicken (64%), duck (6%) and pig (11%),
12
respectively. According to the commune chief the poverty rate for the entire commune is about 20% in 2012, which is much lower than provincial average at 37.15% in 2009.
4. INFORMED CONSULTATION AND MAIN FINDINGS Residents in the village where the visited primary schools were located were invited to free, prior and informed consultations for the proposed project in the form of focus group discussion (FGD). There were two IP communes and two non-IP communities. One FDG had approximately 6-10 participants. FGD questionnaire was used to guide the discussion. After asking for the participants’ profiles, they were informed about the possible Project interventions (mainly Component 1). During the discussion, below topics were covered:
- Their socioeconomic information
- Traditional and cultural practices
- Land and natural resource dependency
- Access to education
- Factors affecting access to education
- Measures to improve access to education The FGDs showed that all IP participants and their community rely heavily on the farming of rice and other crops for their livelihood. NTFPs can be an important source of income that can supplement farming. Gathering in the forests is a common activity for them including children. Because the life in these IP communities are the strongly linked to rice farming, seasonal movement during the rice farming periods seems to be one of the main barriers for children to continue to enroll in schools. FGD participants expressed strong support for the proposed project interventions, and did not see any potential adverse impact on their livelihood, cultural practices and lands. The question is how to ensure equitable benefit from the Project to these people from the IP communities.
5. OTHER FINDINGS FGD participants and KII interviewees shared their views on barriers for access to education. Below aspects were most commonly expressed as main causes preventing children from schooling. Poverty. There is strong correlation between the prevalence of poverty and access to education. Villages or communes with high poverty rate are more likely to show low enrollment rate and high dropout rate. Remote villages have higher poverty rate compared to rural and urban ones. Lun and Burapet Primary Schools show lower enrollment rates and higher dropout rates compared to Krasang and Ta Lam Primary Schools. Migration. Out-migration has adverse effects on access to education, both enrollment and dropout, especially during the past few years. Migration includes international and domestic movements and movement of people from one place to another. Krasang and Ta Lam village highly suffer from out-migration. Many Krasang villagers have migrated to Phnom Penh and other provinces for employment where Ta Lam villagers migrated to Thailand. Seasonality. Seasonal movement influences enrollment. Seasonal movement of villagers for farming has been a long time practice. Farmers who have rice fields that are located faraway from their villages and those who live around Tonle Sap lake and uphill land in northeastern provinces move with their family to live closer to their rice fields from May to November every year. Children, especially yon g ones, accompany their parents during this period. Some villagers who
13
are aware of the importance of education leave their older child with relative or neighbor for schooling. Lun and Burapet Primary School suffer the most followed by Ta Lam primary school. Lack of Awareness. In remote villages, awareness of the benefits/returns of education is very low. Villagers are unaware of the value education and feel no difference between educated and non-educated. Their children are likely to ends up working with the family in the Chamkar or rice field. High dropout rates are observed among children of the remote school of Lun and Burapet village. Community Participation. Communities play an important role in supporting school. Schools with strong supporting committees and those tied closely with the community are better likely to have higher capacity. Ta Lam primary school has established a community participation mechanism, in which school supporting committee and child advisory council are the main actors. Among the four visited schools, Ta Lam has higher enrollment rate and lesser dropout rate despite the strong trend in out-migration. School Environment. Physical appearance of schools should be attractive. For instance, schools should have trees to provide shade and cool environment; proper fence for security and keeping animals away; and school grounds and playgrounds for physical education. Lun and Burapet primary schools only have limited facilities that are unattractive to the children. Among the four schools Ta Lam is slightly better. Teaching. Lack of teaching staff and irregular (off and on) teaching schedules cause students to dropout. Burapet and Krasang Primary Schools face this issue. In the academic year 2011-2012, Krasang school only had one teacher who taught grade 1 through 6, 307 students in total, and acted as the school principal. Similarly, in Burapet Primary School, there is only one teacher who also serves as the principal. There are two more teachers deployed by the provincial department, but these two do not teach regularly especially during farming season. School Management. Good management includes developing clear organizational structure and assignment of roles and responsibilities and establishing support system such as school-supporting committees like parents committee and child advisory council. Among the visited school Ta Lam has better school management. Infrastructure and Distance. Distance is a barrier for access to education in some remote villages where road condition is poor. Poor road condition causes preventing children from attending schools during rainy season due to muddy and sticky soils and broken bridges. Security. The issue of security influences educational access in some remote villages with thick forest. Among the visited schools, this issue was not the major concerns of villagers. Gender and Cultural Practice. The issue of how gender and cultural practice affects educational access was discussed with all key stakeholders from the provincial to commune levels including discussions with villagers. The number of girls enrolled in visited primary schools is higher than that of boys. However, traditionally, girls from indigenous family are married at a young age (14 years old), and such practice leads to a large number of female dropouts at grade 5-6 and at lower secondary level.
Table 3: Potential Social Impacts on Access to Basic Education by School
Factors Lun PS (IP Com.)
Burapet PS (IP Com.)
Krasaing PS (Non IP Com.)
Ta Lam PS (Non IP Com.)
Poverty Significant Significant Significant Significant
Migration Moderate Moderate Significant Significant
Seasonality Significant Significant Negligible Moderate
14
Teaching Moderate Significant Significant Negligible
Infrastructure and Distance
Significant Moderate Moderate Negligible
Security Moderate Moderate Negligible Negligible
Gender and Cultural Practice
Moderate Moderate Negligible Negligible
Awareness Significant Significant Moderate Moderate
Community Participation
Significant Moderate Moderate Negligible
School Environment
Significant Significant Moderate Negligible
School Management
Moderate Significant Moderate Negligible
Adverse effect to IP
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Support to the project
Strong Strong Strong Strong
6. PAST AND EXISTING EFFORTS The SA, through FGDs and KIIs identified past and existing efforts by MoEYS and its partnering organizations in increasing enrollment, decreasing dropout and ensuring regular school attendance of children, for those from disadvantaged communities, as well as from IP communities. Scholarship. Scholarship has been provided to poor students in cash or in-kind. The scholarship program has been an effective tool for children from low-income household to stay in school. Dormitory. Provision of dormitory gives students (at lower and upper secondary level) access to higher education in Phnom Penh and other large cities. Lower and upper Secondary schools are available only in populated commune, district and provincial centers, and students from remote villages usually cannot afford to travel daily to attend classes. Poor students usually also cannot afford to stay far away from home due to financial inability to afford the daily living expanses. Scholarship and dormitory should be a joint program. School Meal. World Food Program (WFP) introduced school meal program with the aim of reducing school dropouts and ensuring regular school attendance. This program has been successful and welcomed in the areas where there are low rates of out-migration for work and farming. Decentralized Timetable. MoEYS is piloting decentralized curriculum in 10 schools where there are seasonal movement associated with farming. Under the decentralized curriculum, the school semester starts in December and ends in May. Lun villagers in Stung Treng expressed strong support for this arrangement which enables their child to accompany the family during rice farming period, May to November. New School Building. Interviews with school principals highlighted that new school buildings attract children, and more enrollment and less dropout can be expected. New buildings, in general, are safer in keeping teaching and learning materials. Child Friendly School. MoEYS aims to make all schools child-friendly. Child Friendly School model encourages high enrollment and low dropout, ensure regular school attendant, and is very much supported by all of the four provincial directors of education.
15
Bi-lingual Programs. Twenty schools in Mondulkiri and Rattanak Kiri are offering bi-lingual education programs to IP children. This is to ensure that the success of children from IP community where the native language is not Khmer.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1. Key considerations for IPP/IPPF
As mentioned in Section 4, the SA found potential impact of the proposed Project on field-visited disadvantaged and IP communities will be positive, and there will be no potential adverse effect on IP communities. The SA suggests preparing an IP instrument, an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) in order to outline the framework for maximizing the Project’s benefit to the IP communities.
7.2. Key considerations for better access to education
In addition to the main findings and recommendations above, the SA suggests additional recommendation for improving the educational access of children from IP communities, as expressed by the key stakeholders in FGDs and KIIs.
Foster local economic growth especially in rural and remote area
Train local resource persons to become teacher
Strengthen and scale up bi-lingual education program
Provide incentive for teachers in remote-villages
Create more Child Friendly School
Expand school facilities to reach remote and un-serviced villages
Conduct regular education awareness campaign
Provide more scholarships to poor students
Provide dormitories to teachers and students from remote villages
Encourage the private sector to invest in education in rural areas
Provide completed basic education cycle
Promote informal education in working place where majority of workers are youngsters
7.3. Project social safeguards monitoring The proposed Project will build on the monitoring and evaluation system and experience used under the previous ESSSUAP which has worked well. M&E system under the proposed Project will help strength monitoring system at the district and school level. From the field visits, the SA generally recommends to:
Strengthen general monitoring system at the District Offices of Education level, in terms of data collection and record keeping; and
Strengthen monitoring system at school level, to monitor enrollment, dropout and school attendance.
The IPPF should outline specific social safeguards monitoring arrangements.
16
ANNEXES
17
Annex 1A: Field Study Report
Lun Primary School (Lun Village),
Sekong Commune, Siem Pang District, Stung Treng Province
(Date of Field Visit: 20-21 March 2013)
I. Provincial, District, and Commune Description 1. Demographic Information
Stung Treng is a northern province of Cambodia. The total population are 112,237 inhabitants (or 22,870 households) with annual growth rate of 3.2 and density of 10 people per Km2. Administratively, it consists of five districts, namely Sesan (16,947 inhabitants), Siem Bouk (17,282 inhabitants), Siem Pang (20,963 inhabitants), Krong Stung Treng (25,493 inhabitants), and Thala Barivat (31,652 inhabitants). The Mekong River crosses the province roughly through the center and its northern part borders with Laos. The province is known as homes of different indigenous groups. About 9% are representing indigenous population in which Kouy group represents 4% while Kavet represent 3%, CDB3 2010. The poverty rate in Stung Treng is 46.11% higher than the national level (30.1%), World Bank 20094 Siem Pang district is located in the northern of the province with total population of 20,863 inhabitants. It consists of five communes, including Praek Meas (3,492 inhabitants), Sekong (6,667 inhabitants), Santepheap (3,635 inhabitants), Srae Sambour (4,120), and Thma Kaev (2,949 inhabitants). Sekong Commune consists of eight villages, namely Siem Pang, Kaeng Nhey, Chartu, Ban Muong, Ban Huoy, Dan Luong, and Lun. Among 6,667 inhabitants 3,400 are female. The poverty rate in Sekong commune is estimated at 49% in 2012, which is higher than provincial level (46.11%). Majority of people in Sekogng commune speak Laos.
2. Economic Activities and Sources of Income Stung Treng has total land area of 11,109,200 hectares of which 31,980 hectares are rice land and 4,231 hectares are other cropland (or called Chamkar). The majority of 85.11% of households in Stung Treng relies on agricultural products followed by 4.65% considered having uncertain or multiple jobs and about 9.87% considered as service providers such as trading (5.61%), repairers (0.53%), transportation (0.57%), and other services (3.15). In agricultural activities, about 75.95% is rice farming and others 24.05% are cultivating short and long term crop in Chamkar. Illegal logging, collecting Non Timber Forest Product (NTFP), and hunting are observed as common activities in providing additional income to the majority of household especially indigenous families. Presently, the province is emerging large-scale investment in agro-industry especially cassava plantation. Siem Pang District has total land area of 455,900 hectares of which 5,883 hectares are rice land and 21 hectares5 are other cropland. Main economic activity is based on rice farming and Chamkar (96.65%). Beside these two activities villagers, especially those who have small farmland, go to forest to collection non-timber forest products (NTFP) such as firewood and construction materials, vegetables, fruit, roots, resins, veins, mushrooms, leaves and herbal plants and for hunting. Numbers of households who have rice land less than a hectare was not high (7.69%) followed by 5.75% considered no rice land at all. Similarly, only 2 households who have Chamkar land less than a hectare while only four reported no Chamkar land at all.
3 Commune Data Base 2010
4 Poverty Profile and Tends in Cambodia
5 In the past many farmer practice slash and burn farming and land was considered forest. Therefore, it was
not counted as cropland
18
Sekong commune has total land area of 2,859 ha of which 1,447 ha are rice land and 578 ha are other cropland (Chamkar). Cropland is located nearby the village while rice land is located faraway, about 5-6 km. 93.63% of total population’s livelihood is based on rice farming and Chamkar as primary income while about 9.84% employed by private company or government and about 5% is self-employed by selling grocery in front of their house or in local market. About 50% of households in this commune have either rice land or cropland of 1.5 hectare per household. The small area of farmland cannot produce sufficient food for their annual consumption. Therefore, going to forest to collect NTFP is common and this activity usually involves all family member including children. Based on FGD conducted with villagers, farmers earn about $30 per month from NTFP, shared about 40% to total household income. There is no more traditional slash and burn practice for rice or crop farming. This is due to the fact that they all sold the land to concessionaire or other new comers. Presently, land registration by student team is underway. With security of tenure after issue land title there is a signal of the end of slash and burn practice. Seasonal migration during rice farming is very common for Lun community. II. Education Situation
In Stung Treng province, there 23 pre-school (equal to 96 classrooms), 131 primary schools (equal to 646 classrooms), 20 lower-secondary schools (equal to 107 classroom), and 6 secondary schools (equal to 30 classrooms). In Siem Pang district there are one pre-school, 28 primary schools (equal to 81 classrooms), one lower-secondary school (equal to 5 classrooms), and one higher-secondary school (equal to 5 classroom). In Sekong Commune, there are one pre-school (equal to 1 classroom), 8 primary schools (equal to 28 classrooms), and one lower secondary school (equal to 5 classroom). At provincial level regarding the primary school, there is decreasing in net enrollment rate and increasing in dropout rate in recent years. The net enrolment rate at provincial level is estimated at 93.1% in year 2008-2009, decreased about 3.8% compared to year 2009-2010 (89.3%), or 4.6% decreased compared to year 2010-2011. However, it is increased up to 91.7% in year 2011-2012. In Siem Pang district, the net enrollment rate is significantly decreased. It was declined from 97.8% in 2008-2009 to 85.3% in 2009-2010 and continued to fall down to 82.5% in 2010-2011. However, it was slightly increased to 86.6% in 2011-2012. For school dropout, the rate at provincial level is steady for two academic years, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 (12.5%). This rate is 3.8% higher than year 2008-2009 and 1.6% higher than 2011-2012. In Siem Pang district, the dropout rate is generally higher than provincial level. In the last four academic years the highest dropout rate was seen in year 2010-2011 (21.9%) followed by year 2009-2010. The lowest dropout rate is in year 2008-2009 (13.1%) followed by last year 2011-2012 (16%). Figure 1 indicates four-year enrollment and dropout rates disaggregated by Province and district of Siem Pang and Figure 2 data is disaggregated by female.
19
Source: Statistic Data from DoEYS, Stung Treng Province
In Sekong commune, net enrolment rate at primary school was slightly decreased, 76.98% in year 2009-2010, 76.94% in year 2010-2011, and highly decreased 68% in year 2011-2012, according to CDB 2010 and the interview with the Office of Education of Siem Pang District. However, there is no exact data on dropout rate available at commune level but Lun primary school principal reported the same figure that the trends of dropout rate have been increased in the last few years and for about 10% for this year.
Source: Statistic Data from DoEYS, Stung Treng Province
In average there is about 50 students per classroom within provincial town follow by 35 students per classroom outside provincial areas and about 20 students per classroom in the remote areas. There are three specific locations called Veal Pring (new settlement area in the provincial town), Spong (Thala Borivat District), and Pchul (Siem Bok District) where no school existence. Average number of student per classroom at primary level is quite high in Siem Pang district and it can be part of problem in causing lower enrolment and higher dropout rate (50 person per classroom in
93.10% 97.80%
8.70% 13.10%
89.30% 85.30%
12.50% 20.10%
88.50%
82.50%
12.50% 21.90%
91.70%
86.60%
10.90% 16%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Entire Province Siem Pang Entire Province Siem Pang
Enrolment Rate Dropout Rate
Figure 1: Four Years Enrolment & Drop-out Rate Disagregated by Province and Siem Pang District
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
91.70%
87.50%
86.60%
85.00%
10.90%
9.90%
16%
15.60%
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00%
Total
Female
Total
Female
Total
Female
Total
Female
En
tire
Pro
vin
ce
Sie
m P
ang
En
tire
Pro
vin
ce
Sie
m P
ang
En
rolm
ent R
ate
Dro
pout R
ate
Figure 2: Four Years Enrolment & Drop-out Rate Disagregated by Province and Siem Pang District and Gender
2011-2012
2010-2011
2009-2010
2008-2009
20
average), according to vice chief of office of EYS. In addition, there are certain numbers of old buildings that need to rebuild or replace to concrete building since its structure look very weak and some part were fell down or leaking. And the study materials such as whiteboard, chair, and table are still limited. In Sekong Commune, there are only 30 students per classroom, which is far lower than the report from district level.
III. Discussed access to education
1. The barriers
During the field interview, we found several common barriers that block access to education at primary level. Poverty is reported as the main problems in causing lower enrolment rate and higher dropout rate. The poverty has led significantly to higher dropout rate because students needs to look for employment opportunity or engage in income earning activities (mostly collecting NTFP) especially start from grade 5 (once they get 11 or 12 years old). Usually, they go to the forest for farming and collecting NTFP for at leas a week and bring the whole families to live in a small cottage built on their farmland. With this reason, most of parent is hesitate to let their children live with neighbor and let them go to school. However, parent’s awareness on the important of children education is considered high, according to FGD conducted with parent. Lack of teacher (one teacher for three classes) from local areas or irregular teaching seems to be a factor that pushing high drop out rate as well, it is reported from Province, district, and school principle. In addition, follow the standard of study curriculum can be a possible barrier. For example, children could not pass the mathematic standard so that it leads them to drop out. Study calendar was discussed as one barrier in blocking access to primary level as well and the decentralized curriculum (December to May) seems to be successful for this first year piloting (2013) in Siem Pang District. Most of indigenous families are using their own language for daily communication. It is also one key obstacle that leads children difficult to follow Khmer language since the school rarely having teacher who can speak bi-lingual. Road condition during rainy season is very muddy and it cause lower attendant for both student and teacher.
2. Measures to improve access to education
However, during field visit, there are some common suggestion comes from key informant interviews as well as from Focus Group Discussion with parent.
- Create more school in the areas where no school available yet - School shall have all levels (all grades) - Train more local people to become teacher - Creating more dormitories to accommodate more training teacher come from other
provinces - Apply decentralize curriculum to the areas where needed - Flexible study curriculum base on actual geographical areas - Improve local road network to avoid frequently absence of both teacher and student - Strengthening data management and statistic (reporting system) from school up to
district levels
21
Annex 1B: Field Study Report Purapet Primary School (Purapet village)
Krang Teh Commune, Pech Chreada District, Mondul Kiri Province (Date of Field Visit: 22-23 March 2013)
I. Provincial, District, and Commune Description
1. Demographic Information
Mondulkiri is a Northeastern province of Cambodia. It is full of natural beauty, thickly forested mountains, powerful waterfalls, the lush green rolling hills at the western part, and homes of wildlife. The total populations are 62,218 inhabitants (or 13,257 households) with annual growth rate of 6.34% and density of 4 persons per Km2. Administratively, it consists of five districts, including Kaev Seima (19,226 inhabitants), Kaoh Nhaek (16,976 inhabitants), Pech Chreada (11,816 inhabitants), Saen Monorom (9,940 inhabitants), and Ou Reang (4,260 inhabitants). The Province is known as homes of different indigenous groups, the so-called hill tribes. More than half of the country’s approximately 62,218 indigenous people are residing in Mondulkiri (39,619 persons). The largest indigenous community out of 10 groups residing in the province is Phnong with total of 36,992 inhabitants or representing 93% of the province total indigenous people, CDB6 2010. The poverty rate in Mondulkiri is 46.11% higher than the national level (30.1%), World Bank 20097. Pech Chreada district is centrally located in the province. It consists of four communes, namely Krang Teh, Pu Chrey, Srae Ampum and Bou Sra. Total populations in the district are 11,816 inhabitants, CDB 2010, unwell distributed among the 4 communes. Krang Teh have 1,662 inhabitants, Pu Chrey have 4,376 inhabitants, Srae Ampum have 1,316 inhabitants, and Bou Sra have 4,462 inhabitant. Krang Teh commune consists of four villages, namely Krang Teh, Lao Romeat, Tram Kach and Burapet. Among 1,662 inhabitants 847 are female. According to Commune chief poverty rate is about 50% in 2012.
2. Economic Activities and Sources of Income Mondul Kiri has total land area of 142,8800 ha of which 59,522 ha are rice lands and 10,191 ha are other cropland (or called Chamkar). The majority of 77.47% of households in Mondul Kiri relies on agricultural products followed by 16.2% considered of having uncertainty or multiple jobs and about 6.13% considered as service providers such as trading (4.1%), repairers (1.12%), and transportation (0.55%). In agricultural activities, about 59.5% is rice farming and others 17.97% are cultivating short and long term crop in Chamkar. Illegal logging and collecting Non Timber Forest Product (NTFP) is observed as common activities in providing additional income to the majority of household especially indigenous families. Presently, the province is emerging large-scale investment in agro-industry such as rubber and cassava plantation. Pech Chreada District has total land area of 390,000 ha of which 2,895 are rice land and 2,085 ha are other cropland. Main economic activity is based on rice farming and Chamka (95%). Beside these two activities villagers, especially those who have small farmland, go to forest to collection non-timber forest products (NTFP) such as firewood and construction materials, vegetables, fruit, roots, resins, veins, mushrooms, leaves and herbal plants and for hunting. Numbers of households who have rice land less than a hectare was high (17.5%) followed by 7.7% considered no rice land at all. Similarly, households who have Chamkar land less than a hectare was 17.6% while 15.0% reported no Chamkar land at all.
6 Commune Database 2010 7 Poverty Profile and Tends in Cambodia, World Bank 2009
22
Krang Teh commune has total land area of 2,589 ha of which 407 ha are rice land and 1,083 ha are other cropland (Chamkar). Cropland is located nearby the village while rice land is located faraway, about 4-5 km. 85% of total population’s livelihood is based on rice farming and Chamkar while about 10% employed by private company or government and about 5% is self-employed by selling grocery in front of their house. Majority of households have cropland and less majority have rice land. About 50% of households in this commune have either rice land or cropland of less than a hectare per household. The small area of farmland cannot produce sufficient food for their annual consumption. Therefore, going to forest to collect NTFP is common and this activity usually involves all family member including children. Based on FGD conducted with villagers, farmers earn about $50 per month from NTFP, shared about 50% to total household income. There is no more traditional slash and burn practice for rice or crop farming. This is due to the fact that they all sold the land to concessionaire or other new comers. Presently, land registration by student team is underway. With security of tenure after issue land title there is a signal of the end of slash and burn practice.
II. Education Situation
In Mondul Kiri, there are 2,575 pre-school (with 4,006 classrooms), 6,849 primary schools (with 58,594 classrooms), 1,196 lower-secondary schools (with 12,251 classrooms), and 426 secondary schools (with 6,750 classrooms). In Pich Chreada district there are 4 pre-schools (with 4 classrooms), 12 primary schools (with 42 classrooms), and 3 lower-secondary schools (with 13 classrooms), and no high school. In Krang Teh commune, there are 2 pre-school (with 2 classrooms) and 3 primary schools (with 6 classrooms). At primary school level, in Mondul Kiri, there is decreasing in net enrollment rate and increasing in dropout rate in recent years. The net enrollment rate at provincial level is estimated as 91.9% in year 2011-2012, 1% decreased from year 2010-2011. Moreover, the net enrollment rate at Pich Chreada district is significantly decreased, declining from 92.2% in 2010-2011 to 75% in 2011-2012. School dropout rate at provincial level is 13.7% in 2011-2012, 1.5% higher than last year (12.2% in 2010-2011). At Pich Chreada district the drop out rate even higher for last academic year (15% in 2011-2012) but more or less similar year for academy year 2010-2011 (12%).
Source: Statistic Data from DoEYS, Mondul Kiri Province
Consistently, in Krang Teh commune, net enrolment rate at primary school have been decreased in the last few years, 85.25% in year 2008-2009, 61.13% in year 2009-2010, 73.77% in year 2010-2011, and about 65% in year 2011-2012, according to CDB 2011 and the interview with Krang Teh
91.90%
75%
13.70% 15% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Province Pech Chreada Dis Province Pech Chreada Dis
Enrolement Rate Drop-out Rate
Figure 1: Four Years Net Enrolment & Drop-out Rate Disagregated by
Province and Pech Chreada District
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
23
Commune chief. However, there is no data on dropout rate available at commune and school levels but according to commune chief and Purapet primary principal dropout rate have slightly increased in the last few years. For this academy year 2012-2013 the dropout rate is about 10%. The school capacity at primary level is not a significant problem affecting enrolment and dropout rate within Pich Chreada District and Krang Teh commune. In average, there are about 20 to 25 students per classroom. However, the density per classroom is not equally distributed among the schools, according to the Director of DoEYS and primary school principal. Additionally, there are numbers of old wood buildings needed to demolish and replaced by new building. Study and teaching materials such as whiteboard, chair, and table are very limited. The visited Burapet primary school consists of a old wood building with 3 classrooms, no proper surrounding fence and a descent child playground.
III. Discussed access to education
1. The barriers
Below seems to be common barriers to access to education as it has been raised by majority of the interviewees and villagers during field visit.
Poverty: The village where we visited have higher poverty rate (over 50%) compare to provincial and national level. Poor households are those who have smaller farmland (less than a hectare per household). Products from farm, either or both rice and crop, are not sufficient for year-round consumption. Therefore, they must find supplementary i.e. go to nearby forest to collect NFTP or get employed in Concessionaire Company in order to get more income. This factor causes both low enrollment and high dropout rate.
Materialization: Many villagers in the remote area visibly use Mobile phones. It becomes a modern lifestyle of youngsters. Most of parents who attended the FGD said when their child asked for money to buy something and was rejected they went to forest to collect resin and other valuable products and sold it in the market. When they absence from class for many days they don’t want to go back to school or afraid of school. This factor causes high dropout among grade 4 and 5 students. This factor causes more dropout rate.
Migration: In the village about 50% have rice land approx. 4-5km away from home. During rice farming from May to December they move entire family including animal, pets and poultry to the rice farmland for the entire farming period then they return home after harvesting. This factor causes lower enrollment rate but fewer dropouts because there are some parents who leave their elder child with neighbor for schooling. Another case is that people sold their land and move out to new place. This factor causes both enrollment and dropout.
Low awareness of education: It was raised by commune chief that villagers have low awareness of the importance of having educated. What they think and see “no different or change whether or not their child get educated”. They live in poverty and illiteracy for many generations and they have never seen someone from their village got educated and got promoted or become higher-ranking person. This factor causes both low enrollment and high dropout.
Poor road condition: During rainy season road become muddy and sticky. It is difficult for walk and rice. When there is rain parents don’t like to send their child to school. This factor causes more dropouts.
Irregular teaching: Some teachers did not come to teach regularly. When students come many time and did not see teacher then they stop coming. This factor causes high dropout.
Poor school environment: It was raised by commune chief and some villagers that school environment less attract the children to come to school i.e. old and broken building, no proper
24
fence, no playground, unhygienic class and campus etc. This factor causes more dropout then enrollment.
Lessé-faire (no-force) culture: It was reported by a schoolteacher that Phnong people have a tradition that any decision must be made based on consensus among the members of household. When child did not want to go home parents did not force or lobby their child. We also observed this behavior during the FGD when we asked why you allow your child to drop school. They answered, “I don’t know what to do”.
Lack of local teacher or bi-lingual requirement: All teachers were sent from somewhere else to teach in the school. After completion of his/her assignment they leave the school. This causes lack of teacher. Another case is that all children and villagers speak their local language “Phnong” on daily basis. They less understand Khmer language. Teacher who cannot speak Phnong may cause higher dropout. Presently, MoEYS is offering bi-lingual teaching program in selected schools in Mondul Kiri. It proved a successful model.
2. Measures to improve access to education
Below are measures raised by key informants and villagers, especially advise from provincial director of EYS, during the field visit.
Construct more school: Still some remote areas and new emerged villages have no proper school. We need more construct more school in those areas. This is to ensure high enrollment rate
Completed school level: each primary and lower secondary school shall have completed level i.e. level 1 to 6 and level 7 to 9. This is to prevent dropout
Train local resource to become teacher: Shall have incentive to promote local resource to become teacher. This is to ensure the availability of teacher at remote area.
Strengthen the bi-lingual program: Area where dominated by indigenous people shall provide bi-lingual teaching program.
Encourage private sector to invest in education: The provincial director of EYS saw the important role of private sector in education. The involvement of private sector can help the government in achieving education for all.
Provision of dormitory: Students from remote area who seek higher education or training in the provincial town need accommodation. Without accommodation they cannot continue their higher education.
Scholarship to poor student: This is very important to ensure that poor students are able to continue for higher education and to ensure equitable education program. However, scholarship should be sufficient to cover basic need, mainly for food.
Awareness raising: It was suggested by commune chief that there should be a regular awareness campaign with villagers. If campaign is conducted through meeting there shall be some small incentive for them otherwise it is difficult to gather them for the next meeting.
Establish monitoring system: At school level there shall be a system to monitor student attend. There should be focal person to meet student parents if student absence from school many times.
25
Annex 1C: Field Field Study Report Krasang Primary School, Srae Krasang Village,
Popok Commune, Stoung District, Kampong Thom Province (Date of Field Visit: 25-26 March 2013)
I. Provincial, District, and Commune Description
1. Location and Demographic Information
Kampong Thom is one of the provinces that border with Tonle Sap Lake. The total population of this province is 697,350 persons equivalence to 134,546 households with annual growth rate of 1.08 and density of 46 people per Km2. This province consists of eight districts, namely Baray (188,551 inhabitants), Kampong Svay (98,034 inhabitants), Krong Stueng Saen (55,518 inhabitants), Prasat Ballangk (52,693 inhabitants), Prasat Sambour (45,710 inhabitants), Sandan (51,024 inhabitants), Santuk (83,777 inhabitants), and Stoung (122,053 inhabitants). This Province is known as the existing pre-Angkorian site, where the two famous temple Prasat Sambo Prei Kuk, and Prasat Andet temples exist. There is an indigenous group called Kouy with total population of 12,825 (or 2,603 households) living in Kampon Thom8. The poverty rate in this province is far higher (52.40%) than the estimated rate of the national level (30.1%), World Bank 20099. Stoung district is located northwest of Kampong Thom province and it borders with Siem Reap province. It consists of 13 communes including Banteay Stoung (10,866 inhabitants), Chamnar Kraom (11,860 inhabitants), Chamnar Leu (11,354 inhabitants), Kampong Ceh Cheung (6,995 inhabitants), Kampong Chen Tboung (9,831 inhabitants), Msar Krang (9,797 inhabitants), Peam Bang (3,040 inhabitants), Popok (8,971 inhabitants), Pralay (13,188 inhabitans), Preah Damrei (5,974 inhabitants), Rung Roeang (5,510 inhabitants), Samprouch (12,493 inhabitants), and Trea (12,174 inhabitants). Popok commune consists of eight villages namely Samour, Anlong Kranh, Kaoh Samraong, Srae Krasang, Khtom Mon, Popok, Phteah Daeum, and Trapeang Russei. There are 243 female-headed households among 1,494 households in total. And among 8,971 inhabitants 4,664 are female. According to commune chief the poverty rate for the entire commune is 45% in early year 2013 which is lower than in year 2010.
2. Economic Activities and Sources of Income Kampong Thom has total land areas of 1,381,400 hectares of which 219,907 hectares are rice field (28,819 hectares are dry-rice land and 191,088 hectares are wet-rice land) and 12,272 hectares are other cropland (Chamkar). The majority of 91.38% households have primary income based on agricultural products followed by 5.27% considered as service providers such as trading (2.9%), repairer (0.59%), transportation (0.64%), and other service providers (1.1%). On agriculture activities, rice-farmer constitutes of 85.37% and the rest are based on other cropping activities. For other cropping activities, people usually grow corn, soya bean, long bean, peanut, cassava, sweet potato, and sesame. However, the migration in this province is high. There were about 11% migrants in 2010, of which 6.68% (or 23,564 persons) reportedly migrated to work with company or factory within or outside the province while 3.45% (or 12,175 persons) reportedly migrated to work with uncertain jobs. Stoung district has the total land areas of 45,800 hectares of which 43,025 hectares are rice field (12,545 hectares are dry-rice land and 30,480 are wet-rice land) and small areas of 124 hectares are cropland. The primary incomes for the majority of the households are rice farming which is covered up to 89.5% of total households for the entire district while 80.5% of them are raising livestock shared additional incomes and household consumption. In addition, 4.31% are
8 Commune Data Base 2010
9 Poverty Profile and Trends in Cambodia, World Bank 2009
26
fishermen while less than 1% are relying on short and long term crops. However, the total families who have rice land less than on hectare are very high, 39.15% of total households, which is significantly a correlated factor to the higher rate of migration for work. Migration figure for the entire district are 12.64% of which 7.01% reportedly migrated to work in the company or factory within and outside the province while 5.63% reportedly migrated to work with unclear jobs. Popok commune has total land areas of 2,038 hectares of which 1,260 hectares are wet-rice land areas (no Chamka and dry-rice land). The primary income for the majority is rice farming (99.6%) while company or factory employs about 8.4%. However, there are about 4.3% of total households have rice land less then 1 hectares and about 2.2% has no rice land at all. In addition, livestock raising are very important activities in providing additional incomes to household as well as for family consumption, which is chicken raising reportedly the highest rate of 72% followed by 15% are pig raising, and about 8.7% are duck raising. In total, there are about 5% of total population in this commune migrated for job, which is 3.66% (2.7% female) are migrated to work for certain job and about 1.4% (0.2% are female) are migrated to work for uncertain job.
II. Education Situation
Within Kampong Thom province, there are 152 pre-school (equal to 240 classrooms), 467 primary schools (equal to 2,942 classrooms), 69 lower-secondary schools (equal to 152 classroom), and 22 higher-secondary schools (equal to 73 classrooms). In district level, within Stoung district, there are 18 pre-schools, 80 primary schools (equal to 520 classrooms), 10 lower-secondary schools (equal to 61 classrooms), and there is no high school. In commune level, there are one pre-school, 3 primary schools (equal to 22 classrooms) and one lower-secondary school (equal to 3 classrooms). At primary school, the enrollment rate at provincial level is calculated at 91.7% in year 2011-2012, which is about 3% lower than year 2010-2011 (92.10%), and about 2% lower than year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. However, the enrollment rate at Stoung district is quite significantly decreased, it’s about 2% declined each year for the period of three years (93.2% in 2008-2009, 91.4% in 2009-2010, and 89.6% in 2010-2011) and fall to 84.1% in year 2011-2012. For school dropout, rate at provincial is about 9% more or less the same for the last four years while it’s much higher at Stoung district (13% in 2011-2012 and 10% in 2010-2011). In Popok commune, enrolment rate at primary school have been decreasing in the last few years, 73.7% in year 2008-2009, 47.0%% in year 2009-2010, 71.9% in year 2010-2011, and about 64% in year 2011-2012. However, there is no exact data on dropout rate available at commune level but the dropout rate at Krasang primary school was highly increased from 5.9% in 2011-2012 to 9.23% in this early academy year (2012-2013).
27
Source: Statistic Data from DoEYS, Kampong Thom Province
In provincial level, the average student is estimated at around 50 students per classroom within the Kampong Thom town and urban areas while the remote areas are more then 60 per classroom. And this figure is consistent with Stoung district as well. Within Stoung District, primary schools are available in every commune as well as lower secondary school. In this regards, vice chief of office of EYS motioned of lacking classroom at primary level as well as lower secondary. During the field visit we found that, Trapeang Krasang primary school was also reported of having limited rooms to accommodate more student if the enrolment rate is increased up to 100%.
III. Discussed access to education 1. The barriers
During the field interview, we found several barriers in accessing to education, which was raised by relevant stakeholders such as provincial director of EYS, District chief of EYS, Commune Chief, school principals, and parents.
Poverty: The village and district visited have a very high rate of poverty if compared to the national level and the people who have agricultural land less than one hectare is also high. This factor cause poor families to looking for other additional income by hiring labor force in agriculture sector for Concessionaire Company (rubber plantation) and the rich people in town. Usually, by hiring labor force, parent bring all family member including children in school age to live in their work place for longer period (at leas 1 week). Furthermore, some household during the FGD reported they still go to forest to collect timber and NTFP for specific period and mostly accompanied by their children. This factor causes lower enrolment rate.
Migration: Within Popok Commune, during dry season they are seem to be free at all. There is no dry rice land to cultivate during dry season and even thought no labor force demand within the commune and district, which causes people to migrate to find other temporary job outside the district and the province. And some of them preferred to hire labor force in Thailand since the salary rate is much higher than in domestic. “There was high seasonal dropout rate from March
92.10% 93.40%
84.10% 81.96%
9.10% 8.70% 13% 11.40% 0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Total Female Total Female Total Female Total Female
Entire Province Stoung Entire Province Stoung
Enrolment Rate Dropout Rate
Figure 1: Four Years Net Enrolment & Drop-out Rate Disagregated by Province and Stoung District and Gender
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
28
because children preferred to go to work with Rubber Plantation Company outside district to earn additional income to support family”, reported by Popok commune chief. This factor causes both lower enrolment rate and higher dropout rate.
Lack of teacher: At Krasang primary school, there is only one school principle that is the only teacher who teach from grade one to grade six. This is giving the fact that, the trained teacher are not willing to go to teach at remote areas due to far travel distance and no accommodation provided. This problem caused both lower enrolment rate and higher rate dropout.
Irregular teaching: Some teachers did not come to teach regularly. When students come many times and did not see teacher then they stop coming. This factor causes high dropout.
Low awareness of education: According to Krasang School principle, the awareness of having children educated is still low. Immediate needs for daily living is much more importance than anything especially generating the income. This views usually well shared and transferred from parent to their children. “You see, that family look much more better since their son get employed as construction worker in Thailand”, according to school principal. This factor, bring lower enrolment rate as well as higher dropout rate.
Married: In rural areas, girl is allowed to get marriage in early age of 15 years old. In Khmer culture, parent quite interested to see their children getting married as soon as possible so that children will soon have a very good future. This causes high dropout rate.
2. Measures to improve access to education
Below are measures raised by key informants and villagers, especially advise from provincial director of EYS, during the field visit.
Construct more school and school renovation: Still some urban and remote areas and new emerged villages have no proper school. We need to construct more school in those areas. In other hand, some school looks very old and not attracts children to stay in. There are a lot of suggestion raised by commune chief as well as school principal to renovate the school in better way such as having garden, specific plot for sporting, and playground etc. This is to ensure high enrollment rate
Completed school level: each primary and lower secondary school shall have completed level i.e. level 1 to 6 and level 7 to 9. This is to prevent dropout.
Train local resource to become teacher: Shall have incentive to promote local resource to become teacher. This is to ensure the availability of teacher at remote area.
Provision of accommodation to teacher: For teachers who are coming from other province to teach in remote areas should have proper accommodation near by that school. This solution can help teacher come to teach regularly and well prepared for lesson as well to follow up student at home. This can help to lower drop out rate.
Scholarship to poor student: This is very important to ensure that poor students are able to continue for higher education and to ensure equitable education program. However, scholarship should be sufficient to cover basic need, mainly for food.
Awareness raising: It was suggested by commune chief and office of education that there should be a regular awareness campaign with villagers. If campaign is conducted through meeting there shall be some small incentive for them otherwise it is difficult to gather them for the next meeting.
29
Decentralization of school calendar: This seems to be a good solution to specific areas which children and parent getting employed seasonally especially the village nearby the forest. This is to prevent the dropout.
30
Annex 1D: Field Field Study Report Ta Lam Primary School, Ta Lam Village,
Ta Lam Commune, Monkul Borei District, Banteay Meanchey Province (Date of Field Visit: 27-28 March 2013)
I. Provincial, District, and Commune Description
1. Location and Demographic Information
Banteay Meanchey is western province of Cambodia that it’s bordering to Thailand. The total population of this province is 707,623 inhabitants (or 152,545 families) with annual growth rate of 1.56, which is slightly higher than the national growth rate (1.54%) and having density of 101 people per Km2 while the national level is only 75 persons per Km2. This province consists of 9 districts including Paoy Paet (95,155 inhabitants), Mongkol Borei (15,751 inhabitants), Phnum Srok (55,048 inhabitants), Preah Netr Preah (92,972 inhabitants), Ou Chrov (54,993 inhabitants), Serei Saophoan (83,524 inhabitans), Thma Puok (64,001 inhabitants), Svay Chek (62,255 inhabitants), and Malai (42,161 inhabitants)10. The poverty rate in this province is slightly higher (37.15%) than the estimated rate of the national level (30.1%), World Bank 200911. Mongkul Borei district is located north of Kampong Thom province and its bordering Siem Reap and Battambang province. It is known as the biggest population district of the provinces. It consists of 13 communes including Banteay Neang (19,714 inhabitants), Bat Trang (7,319 inhabitants), Chamnaom (17,562 inhabitants), Kouk Ballangk (7,938 inhabitants), Koy Maeng (6,634 inhabitants), Ou Prasat (14,567 inhabitants), Phnum Touch (10,865 inhabitants), Rohat Tuek (12,604 inhabitants), Russei Kraok (23,755 inhabitants), Sambour (7,368 inhabitants), Soea (14,252 inhabitants), Srah Reang (6,606 inhabitants), and Ta Lam (8,278 inhabitants).
Ta Lam commune consists of eight villages namely Preah Srae, Ta Lam Kandal, Ta Lam Chong, Boeng Khleang Lech, Chang Koul, Boeng Khleang Kaeut, Khla Kham Chhkae, and Boeng Veaeng. There are 184 female-headed households among 1,811 total households for the entire commune. And among 8,278 inhabitants 4,221 are female. According to commune chief the poverty rate for the entire commune is 20% in year 2012.
2. Economic Activities and Sources of Income Banteay Meanchey has total land areas of 667,900 hectares of which 301,353 hectares are rice field (11,233 hectares dry-rice land and 290,120 hectares are-wet rice land) and 122,670 hectares are other cropland (Chamkar). There are about 72.76% of total households whose primary income is based on agriculture followed by 11.22% are service providers, and another 15% are main income comes from uncertain jobs. The main agricultural activities are rice cultivation (66.18%) and the rest are doing other crop farming on big land areas such as corn (5,071 ha), soya bean (1,239 ha), cassava (104,362 ha), mungbean (1,131 ha), and sesame (10,742 ha). However, people holding agricultural land with less than one hectare is up to 18.69% while 13.91% reported has no any cultivated land at all. In addition, migration rate is estimated at 12,084 persons or about 2% of total population in 2010 (6,936 people in-migrated and 5,148 people out-migrated). Mongkul Borei District has total land areas of 98,879 hectares of which 77,986 hectares are rice field (1,741 hectares are dry-rice field and 76,245 hectares are wet-rice field) and 432 hectares are other cropland (Chamkar). Other crop cultivation is not significant activity in sharing to family incomes while rising chicken or duck for household consumption is estimated at 66% for the entire district. The primary occupation of the majority are rice cultivation farmer (73.12%)
10
Commune Data Base 2010 11
Poverty Profile and Trends in Cambodia, World Bank 2009
31
followed by 5% working as service providers such as trading, repairer, transport, and other services. However, there are 17.17% reported of having unclear jobs. Interestingly, there are 43% having cultivated land areas less than one hectare and another 8% no cultivation land at all. In addition, the figure on migration is also high, it’s estimated at about 10% which is 1.1% are migrated to work with company or factory and 8.9% are migrated to work with uncertain jobs. Ta Lam commune has total land areas of 3,032 hectares of which 2,406 hectares are wet-rice land and 100 hectares are-dry rice land, no other cropland. There are 21.2% of total households has rice land less than 1 hectares and other 14.6% has no rice land at all. The primary incomes of 73% households are rice cultivation while 26.4% household has unclear jobs. This figure is correlated to the high number of households who has small rice land. In another angle, it is reported that the migration rate is also high. This indicates rather clearly that why the figure of having unclear job is high. Again, the figure on raising livestock such as chicken (64%), duck (6%), and pig (11%) for the entire commune is high the same as district level. This indicates that livestock raising is main supplementary to household consumption.
II. Education Situation
For the entire Banteay Meanchey Province, there are 155 (equal to 228 classrooms), 397 primary schools (equal to 2,076 classrooms), 54 lower-secondary schools (equal to 276 classrooms), and 26 higher-secondary schools (equal to 556 classrooms). In Monkul Borei district, there are 10 pre-school (equal to 11 classroom), 102 primary schools (equal to 552 classrooms), 13 lower-secondary schools (equal to 103 classrooms), and 4 higher secondary schools (equal to 138 classrooms). In Ta Lam commune, there are one pre-school (1 classroom), 11 primary schools (equal to 24 classrooms) and one lower-secondary school (equal to 5 classrooms). At primary school, the enrollment rate at provincial level have been decreased in the last four years, 95.8% in 2008-2009 to 92.35 in 2009-2010 and slightly rise up to 94.5% in 2010-2011 but again fall down to 90.0% in 2011-2012. However, the enrollment rate at Monkul Borei district is not significantly decreased but slightly higher rate (97% in average for the last four years) if compare to provincial level. By the way, school dropout rate at provincial is quite high (10.3%) in 2011-2012 which is 3% increased from 2010-2011. In contrast, the dropout rate in Mongkul Borei district is very low at about only 4% from 2010 to 2012. The primary school enrolment rate for the entire Ta Lam commune is slightly increased in the last few years. It’s increased from 87% in 2008-2009 to 89.8% in 2009-2010 and 94.7% in 2010-2011. However, several villages within the commune has significantly decreased for the enrolment at primary level especially Ta Lam primary school, according to Ta Lam primary school principal. It has been decreased from 90% in 2008-2009 up to 83% in 2011-2012. Unfortunately, there is no data available for dropout rate at commune level. However, the drop out rate at Ta Lam primary school was very highly increased up to 18% in year 2011-2012.
32
Source: Statistic Data from DoEYS, Kampong Thom Province
In average, there are about 51 students per classroom in Banteay Meanchey province. However, it is estimated at 60 to 70 students per classroom for rural areas while about 50 students per classroom for the majority of urban areas. In district and commune, in general, one classroom accommodated more than 50 students, due to the limited number of school building. Lack of school facility such as table, chair, and white board were also mentioned by DoEYS as well as school principal. In addition, the school environment at Ta Lam commune as well as other majority of school in rural area is not yet up to the standard of the school exist in town or urban areas, according to DoEYs.
III. Discussed access to education
1. The barriers
During the field interview, we found several barriers in accessing to education, which was raised by relevant stakeholders such as provincial director of EYS, District chief of EYS, Commune Chief, school principals, and parents.
Poverty: This province has faced three years flooding and causing in higher poverty rate. Rice production has less yield from year to year and bring people fall in to debt. This factor cause some family decide not to send children to school as well as bring their children involves in an income earning activities. Usually, female is the first priority in stopping to go to school and doing housework or taking care the younger and let other member age over 15 years old to find income to support family, especially boy.
Teacher’s Livelihood condition: Most of teachers are coming from poor family. Therefore, in order to survive, they need to generate additional income from other sources such as farming or get employed in other areas far away from school. Day by day, pressure in time allocation lead them to decide to stop teaching or come to teach irregularly. This factor causes big drop out rate.
Migration to Thailand: This province is located very close to Thailand and the habit of migration to work in Thailand has been practice for long time ago. Therefore, when they facing difficulty, the first coping mechanism by majority of poor family is to take risk to work as worker in Thailand rather than struggling in the village. And even the rate is about two times higher than get employed as worker in Cambodia. This problem cause dropout rate.
90% 91.30% 97.50% 98.80%
10.30% 9.60% 4.20% 3.30%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Total Female Total Female Total Female Total Female
Entire Province Mongkul Borei Entire Province Mongkul Borei
Enrolment Rate Dropout Rate
Figure 1: Four Years Net Enrolment & Drop-out Rate Disagregated by Province and Stoung District and Gender
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
33
Lack of school building: The district chief of EYS has raised the big average size per classroom is also a factor that makes student fell stressful or difficult to follow the lesson. This causes the result of having high repetition rate and then they decide to drop school.
Irregular teaching: Some teachers did not come to teach regularly. When students come many time and did not see teacher then they stop coming. This factor causes high dropout.
Low awareness of education: It was observed by the school principal that some households are not really poor but once they found an opportunity to earn an income they start to persuade children to involves with especially daughter. And usually, daughter are not expected to anything else rather than taking care of family even they got higher education. Furthermore, if there are many children in the household, the older need to do all housework while parent going out to earn an income. It’s causes both low enrolment rate and dropout rate.
Married: In rural areas, girl is allowed to get marriage in early age of 15 years old. In Khmer culture, parent quite interested to see their children getting married as soon as possible so that children will soon have a very good future. This causes high dropout rate.
2. Measures to improve access to education
Below are measures raised by key informants and villagers, especially advise from provincial director of EYS, during the field visit.
Create employment opportunity in district level: This was raised by many key informants especially school principal since he found this solution might lower in migration rate. By the way, the labor cost should also comparable with working condition in Thailand. This will help to reduce the dropout rate.
Incentive provision to teacher: There were several suggestions raised by the District office of education, mentioning that providing some special budget to teacher who are willing to teach in remote areas is a good option to encourage them to stay longer. This can help to increase the enrolment.
Put limitation on media not to broadcast too much news on employment opportunity in Thailand: It’s raised that there are more and more propaganda or recruitment announcement with higher salary that attract many people including children interested to migrate to Thailand.
Construct more school and school renovation: Bothe urban and rural areas are still need more school to reduce the average size per classroom, according to provincial director of EYS. Furthermore, building flower garden and sporting areas such as football site are the good way to attract children fell comfortable than staying at home or working in the farm.
Provision of accommodation to teacher: For teachers who are coming from other province to teach in remote areas should have proper accommodation near by that school. This solution can help teacher come to teach regularly and well prepared for lesson as well to follow up student at home. This can help to lower drop out rate.
Scholarship to poor student: This is very important to ensure that poor students are able to continue for higher education and to ensure equitable education program. However, scholarship should be sufficient to cover basic need, mainly for food.
34
Annex 2: List of Persons Met
No. Position, Organization and Location
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports
1 Chief of Office of Planning, Statistics and Cooperation, Department of Primary Education (MoEYS)
2 Official in charge of scholarship program (MoEYS)
3 Deputy Director, Department of Planning (MoEYS)
Steung Treng Province
4 Deputy Director of DoEYS
5 Siem Pang Vice Chief of Office of Education, Youth, and Sport
6 Teacher at Lun Primary School
7 Teacher at Lun Primary School
8 Teacher at Lun Primary School
9 32 persons (2 are females)
Mondul Kiri Province
10 Director of Department of Education, Youth, and Sport (DoEYS)
11 Pich Chreada Chief of Office of Education, Youth, and Sport
12 Krang Teh Commune Chief
13 Purapet Primary School Principle
14 10 persons, 8 are female
Kampong Thom Province
15 Director of Department of Education, Youth, and Sport (DoEYS)
16 Stoung Vice Chief of Office of Education, Youth, and Sport
17 Popok Commune Chief
18 Krasang Primary School Principle
19 7 female
Banteay Meanchey Province
20 Director of Department of Education, Youth, and Sport (DoEYS)
21 Monkul Borei Vice Chief of Office of Education, Youth, and Sport
22 Talam Commune’s Assistant
23 Talam Primary School Principle
24 4 persons, 2 are female
35
Annex 3: Data Collection Tools FGD Guide for Discussion
Date of Interview: ________________ Location: ______________
1. Participants Profile
Participants Code
Gender Age HH size Occupation AVR HH Monthly income
2. Socioeconomic Information
i. Main source of income? ii. Who are the main income earners? Male or Female?
iii. Distance to work place iv. How many participants who can read and write? v. Do any of you or your families have health issues that affect your livelihood?
vi. Number of households having toilet or latrine at home: ____________ vii. How many participants consider poor?
viii. Assessment percentage of poor households in your village
3. Traditional and Cultural Practice a) How long have this village or community exist? Who is the leader of this
village/community? Is he/she appointed by the people or politically appointed? b) Do you consider your community as IP group or Khmer? c) Does you community leader is different from chief of village? d) If yes, how was he/she appointed? By villagers or by other? e) What is your traditional practices that distinguish you from the ordinary Khmer
traditional practice? 4. Land and Natural Resource Dependence
a) Size of land you have owned or used or occupied (ha) b) Status of land tenure i.e. residential, farmland and others
Participants Code (HH)
Residential land
Farmland/ Agri. land
Year of occupation to Other land
Size (ha)
Tenure Size (ha)
Tenure Residential Farm/Agri. Size (ha)
Tenure
36
c) How much your livelihood depends on existing land you occupied? Discuss
dependency trend i.e. more or less depend on cultivated land d) Is there any natural resource nearby that you can have access for your livelihood? If
yes, how long you have made use of the natural resource? What do you collect from the forest?
e) Discuss the issues of access to natural resource, trend etc. i.e. trend in volume of collection from past to present, legal barrier of access (more difficult than before)
f) How much your livelihood depends on natural resource? Discuss dependency trend i.e. more or less depend on natural resources
g) How do you think about security to existing land you are occupying? Do you feel more or less secure from the past to present and also future
h) How do you think about security to access to natural resource? Do you feel more or less secure from the past to present and also future
5. Access to education
a. Is there school in you village? If yes, which grade available? b. If not, where is the nearest school? c. How many participants who have children go to school? Total and by Gender d. How many participants who have children drop out of school? (Boy or girl) e. How many participants who have children age for school but not go to school? By
Gender
6. Factors affecting access to education (deep discussion) a. What are reasons that age-school children did not go to school? Also look for gender
different a) Financial barriers b) Cultural barriers c) Resettlement d) Distance e) Other
b. What are reasons for children drop out of school? Also look for gender different a) Financial barriers b) Cultural barriers c) Resettlement d) Distance e) Other
c. If you are not able to send all your children to school who will you send Boy or Girl? Please give the reason?
d. Why it is so important to send Boy to school but NOT Girl? e. Are there ways to send all children to school? f. Are there ways to prevent children drop out of school?
7. Migration Issues
a. Are there in-migrants into the commune or village? b. If yes, when was it start?
37
c. What are the main reasons for in-migration? d. Does in-migration an issue to your commune or village? e. If yes, what are the issues? (Discuss advantage Vs. disadvantage) f. Are there out-migrants out of the commune or villages? g. If yes, when was it started? h. What are the main reasons for out-migrants? i. Do out-migrant issues for your commune or village? j. If yes, what are the issues? (Discuss advantage Vs. disadvantage)
38
KII-1 and 2: Checklist for Interviewing Provincial and District of Education, Youth and Sports
Date of Interview: ________________ Location: ______________
Name of Interviewee: __________________ Position of Interviewee: __________________
1. Education Facilities
a) Number of pre-school facilities: ________________ b) Number of primary school location: ________________ c) Number of classrooms in primary school: _______________ d) Number of secondary school location: ________________ e) Number of classrooms in secondary school: ________________ f) Does the school facilities in your province/district sufficient or over capacity (discussion)
2. Education Statistics
a) For Primary Education
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Primary completion rate
Out-of school rate
Average age to start school
b) For Primary Education by Gender
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Primary completion rate
Out-of school rate
Average age to start school
39
c) Repetition rate by grade
Grade 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
d) Repetition rate by gender
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
e) For Secondary Education
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Secondary completion rate
f) For Secondary Education by Gender
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Secondary completion rate
3. Access to Education
a) Poverty rate: ___________ b) Factors affecting access to schooling (discussion) _________________
a. Financial barriers
40
b. Cultural barriers c. Resettlement d. Distance e. Other
c) Does any seasonally affect the school attendant? If yes, is boy or girl more affected by seasonality? (Discussion)
d) Any different (discrimination) in access to education between boy and girl? (If yes, discuss why?)
e) How to improve better access to education of the children in your commune or village?
41
KII-3 and 5: Checklist for Interviewing Chief of Commune and Village
Date of Interview: ________________ Location: ______________
Name of Interviewee: __________________ Position of Interviewee: __________________
1. Education Facilities
a) Number of pre-school facilities: ________________ b) Number of primary school location: ________________ c) Number of classrooms in primary school: _______________ d) Number of secondary school location: ________________ e) Number of classrooms in secondary school: ________________ f) Does the school facilities in your province/district sufficient or over capacity (discussion)
2. Access to Education
3. Factors affecting access to schooling (discussion) _________________ a. Financial barriers b. Cultural barriers c. Resettlement d. Distance e. Other
4. Does any seasonally affect to school attendant? If yes, is boy or girl more affected by seasonality? (Discussion)
5. Any different (discrimination) in access to education between boy and girl? (If yes, discuss why?)
6. How to improve better access to education of the children in your commune or village?
7. Demographic Information ix. Demographic Information by benchmark year
Number of villages 1998 2005 2008 2012
Total population
Number of households
Percentage of poor households
Number of poor households
Number of schooling age children
Number of schooling age children without go to school
x. Demographic Information by benchmark year by Gender
Number of villages 1998 2005 2008 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
42
Total population
Number of households
Percentage of poor households
Number of poor households
Number of schooling age children
Number of schooling age children without go to school
2. Socioeconomic Information
a) Main economic activities in the commune or village (%) a. Agriculture: _________ b. Commercial: ___________ c. Trading: _______________ d. Services: _______________ e. Industries: _______________ f. Others: _____________
b) Discuss distance to the work place c) Access to natural resources (discussion): ______________ d) Literacy rate: ___________________ e) Health issues: _________________ f) Percentage of households having toilet or latrine at home: ____________
3. Land and Natural Resource Dependence
i. Land Use and Status of land tenure i.e. residential, farmland and others
Name of village Residential land Farmland/ Agri. land Other land
Size (ha) Tenure Size (ha) Tenure Size (ha) Tenure
ii. Number of households purely depend on farm and agriculture land for livelihood:
_____ iii. Number of households purely depend on access to natural resource for livelihood:
_________ iv. Number of households depend on both farm/agricultural land and access to natural
resources for livelihood v. Number of households not depend on both farm/agricultural land for livelihood:
_____ vi. Discuss the issues of access to natural resource, trend etc. i.e. trend in volume of
collection from past to present, legal barrier of access (more difficult than before)
43
vii. Discuss security of land i.e. individual ownership, collective ownership, no ownership viii. Any possibility that communities will lose land they have been occupied?
4. Access to public facilities
Facilities Available in commune or village (N/Y)
If not available, distance to the nearest one (km)
Pre-school facility
Primary school
Secondary school
High school
Health post/center
Market
5. Migration Issues
a) Are there in-migrants into the commune or village? b) If yes, when was it start? c) What are the main reasons for in-migration? d) Does in-migration an issue to your commune or village? e) If yes, what are the issues? (Discuss advantage Vs. disadvantage) f) Are there out-migrants out of the commune or villages? g) If yes, when was it started? h) What are the main reasons for out-migrants? i) Do out-migrant issues for your commune or village? j) If yes, what are the issues? (Discuss advantage Vs. disadvantage)
44
KII-4: Checklist for Interviewing Primary School Principal
Date of Interview: ________________ Location: ______________
Name of Interviewee: __________________ Position of Interviewee: __________________
1. Primary School Facilities
a) Is there pre-school facility in the campus? ________________
b) Number of primary school building: ________________
c) Number of classrooms in primary school: _______________
d) Does the school facilities sufficient or over capacity (discussion)?
2. Primary Education Statistics
a) For Primary Education
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Primary
completion rate
Out-of school
rate
Average age to
start school
b) For Primary Education by Gender
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Enrollment rate
Admission rate
Drop out rate
Primary completion rate
Out-of school rate
45
Average age to start school
c) Repetition rate by grade
Grade 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
d) Repetition rate by grade and gender
Indicators 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
3. Access to Education
a) Poverty rate: ___________
b) Factors affecting access to schooling (discussion) _________________
a. Financial barriers
b. Cultural barriers
c. Resettlement
d. Distance
e. Other
c) Does any seasonally affect school attendance? If yes, is boy or girl more affected by
seasonality? (Discussion)
d) Any different (discrimination) in access to education between boy and girl? (If yes,
discuss why?)
e) How to improve better access to education of the children in your commune or village?
