Skills and Literacy Training for Better Livelihoodssiteresources.worldbank.org/.../Resources/skills_and_literacy.pdf · of adult literacy and livelihood skills, ... UNICEF, and ILO,

Africa Region Human DevelopmentWorking Paper Series

Skills and LiteracyTraining for Better Livelihoods

A Review of Approaches and Experiences

John Oxenham

Abdoul Hamid Diallo

Anne Ruhweza Katahoire

Anna Petkova-Mwangi

Oumar Sall

Africa RegionThe World Bank

© March 2002Human Development SectorAfrica RegionThe World Bank

The views expressed herein are those of the authors anddo not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of theWorld Bank or any of its affiliated organizations.

Cover photos by Dr. Josef Mueller, Sankt Augustin,Germany.Cover design by Tomoko Hirata.

ii AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

Forewords iv

Acknowledgements vii

1 Executive summary 1

2 Prologue 6

3 Objectives of the study 9

4 Scope and methods of the study 10

5 Literacy training with livelihood components 14

6 Livelihood training with literacy components 24

7 Synthesis of findings 35

8 Conclusions and recommendations 42

Bibliography and references 47

Annex 1 Persons thanked 54

Annex 2 Cases from Guinea 56

Annex 3 Cases from Kenya 74

Annex 4 Cases from Senegal 88

Annex 5 Cases from Uganda 104

Annex 6 List of programs/projects discussed in detail in the study 118

SKILLS AND LITERACY TRAINING FOR BETTER LIVELIHOODS iii

Contents

Foreword

his study looks at the intersection betweentraining in livelihood skills and basic educa-tion for illiterate and semi-literate youth and

adults. Can effective training in livelihood skills bedeveloped as an add-on to large scale literacy pro-grams? Or, are the effective combinations those thatadd literacy education to (usually small scale) pro-grams which are set up mainly to teach livelihoodskills to begin with? To examine such questions theInstitute for International Cooperation of the Ger-man Adult Education Association (IIZ/DVV) wascommissioned to conduct the present investigationwhich examines documentation from 18 programs—all serving very poor people, mostly women. Spe-cial analysis is also carried out on four countrycases—Senegal, Guinea, Uganda and Kenya.

The study concludes that combinations of liveli-hood skills training and adult literacy educationhelp improve poor people’s livelihood. Firstly, thereis a widely noted “empowerment effect”—thatlearners acquire enhanced confidence and social re-sources which help them take initiatives to improvetheir livelihoods. Second, literacy and numeracyskills are a clear advantage in market transactions inthe informal economy, and thus especially impor-tant for entrepreneurship. Thirdly, more productiveagricultural or livestock practices result from learn-ing new vocational skills. These effects should not beseen as isolated but as arising from complementaryinputs. For example, not only are skills and marketopportunity needed, but also access to credit. Theseconclusions also gain support from other reviews on

adult basic education or about how people makeends meet in the informal economy.

The study breaks new ground by finding thatdifferent kinds of staff are needed for teaching voca-tional skills for teaching literacy and that livelihoodskills training is a better vehicle for teaching literacythan the other way around. This has the importantpractical implication that it is probably best to thinkof combinations of livelihood skills and literacyteaching as an activity that, like other vocationaltraining, requires intensive support and is not easilyscaled up quickly.

The team conducting this study, led by JohnOxenham made extraordinary efforts to assembleexisting documentation on the combined teachingof adult literacy and livelihood skills, before under-taking their careful analysis.

The study is part of an ongoing regional study ofvocational skills development conducted by theAfrica Region of the World Bank and its HumanDevelopment Department. Other publications onAdult Basic Education are available from the AfricaHuman Development Department. The NorwegianEducation Trust Fund for Africa has generouslyfinanced the present study and is, along with DfIDand the Bank itself, financing the ongoing regionalstudy of vocational skills development. This sup-port is very gratefully acknowledged.

Birger J. FredriksenSenior Education AdviserAfrica Region, The World Bank

T

iv AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

n April 2000, the delegates at the World Educa-tion Forum in Senegal collectively drew up theDakar Framework for Action, in which they

committed themselves to do everything possible to:

• achieve a 50 percent improvement in levels ofadult literacy by 2015, especially for women, andequitable access to basic and continuing educa-tion for all adults;

• improve and ensure excellence in all aspects ofthe quality of education, so that recognized andmeasurable learning outcomes are achieved byall, especially in literacy, numeracy and essentiallife skills.

The World Bank was one of the key players in thepreparation and implementation of the Forum,along with UNESCO, UNICEF, and ILO, amongother concerned UN organizations. Our Institutewas involved in the preparatory process in Ger-many and participated in Dakar as a member of thenongovernmental organizations (NGOs) workingin education and development. For us, this markedanother milestone in our almost four decades ofcontinuous support for adult literacy with partnersin Africa, Asia and Latin America.

When the Human Development Sector of theAfrica Region of the World Bank asked whether wewould be interested in managing a study of literacy

and livelihoods, we could not but immediatelyagree on both the importance of the research andour readiness to support it. We considered it a greatopportunity to inject fresh information and ideasinto discussions on approaches to improving liter-acy interventions in practice and theory, whetherfrom our own many projects and publications orfrom the programs and documents of others. Overthe years, our partners have again and againdebated with us questions like, “Does literacy comefirst and development follow?” or “How much lit-eracy is needed as a prerequisite to development?”or “How can both be integrated?” The issues of therelationships between literacy, skills training, andlivelihoods widen this quest for improved develop-mental outcomes. We think that the title “Skills andLiteracy for Better Livelihoods”, adequately reflectsthe findings of the study. It is at the same time a pro-grammatic title for future literacy endeavors bygovernments, NGOs, co-operating agencies, andthe participants themselves.

It is our feeling that the study team has done anexcellent job. At the beginning of the study, a work-shop including the four authors of the countrycases, the lead researcher and members of our staff,created a clear common understanding of the ques-tions and a plan of work. At another workshop atthe end, the five draft reports were reviewed and aset of common conclusions was formulated. Whatyou have in front of you is the team’s product.

SKILLS AND LITERACY TRAINING FOR BETTER LIVELIHOODS v

Foreword

I

We would like to thank the study team and allthose who supported their work. There were indeedmany, especially Jon Lauglo from the World Bankwho was at the heart of the matter and associatedwith the study from its very beginning. We appreci-ated his sound professional input throughout. Wesee the study as an important contribution towardfulfilling our commitment to literacy learners andtheir providers and to high quality education for all.

Prof.(H) Dr. Heribert Hinzen Henner HildebrandDirector, Task Manager,IIZ/DVV IIZ/DVV

vi AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

he first acknowledgements must go to theAfrica Region of the World Bank and to theGovernment of Norway. By initiating and

financing this study, they are helping to enrich afield that has not generated the attention and highquality evaluation and research that the rhetoric ofpoverty reduction, education for all, and lifelongeducation might have led the world to expect. Thenext salute goes to Dr. Josef Mueller, formerly of theGerman Foundation for International Develop-ment, now an independent consultant, for hisTrojan work in collecting and annotating materialsfrom a number of organizations in Germany andelsewhere.

The study itself depended to a large extent on doc-uments that are not in the public domain. Most ofthem had to be identified, located, and retrievedfrom the files and archives of many organizations inmany countries. That meant that many people had tomake the time and take the trouble to suggest whatwork might repay attention, what documentationmight be available, and where it might be found.Many also assisted in obtaining the documents,although laying hands on them was not always easyor always successful. The study team is heavilyindebted to them all in the four countries of intensivestudy, Guinea, Kenya, Senegal, and Uganda, and inthe headquarters of many bilateral, multilateral, andnon-governmental agencies in Europe and NorthAmerica. The full list of them is so lengthy, that it isgiven as Annex 1 to this report. Here, only the namesof their organizations will appear.

The study is indebted also to 13 friends who,despite heavy work programs of their own, troubledto comment rapidly and extensively on the firstdraft of this paper: Terry Allsop, Julia Betts, DiptaBhog, Harbans Bhola, Michael Brophy, John Comings,Pat Davis, Heribert Hinzen, Richard Johanson, JonLauglo, Josef Mueller, Helen Sherpa and Chij Shrestha.We hope that they judge their advice has been satis-factorily taken in this revised text.

The study team expresses its deep gratitude to allits helpers and supporters and hopes that this prod-uct will help them feel that their time and effortwere well spent. All responsibility for any misre-porting, misunderstanding or misinterpretationthat appears in the report lies with the team.

In GuineaAide et Action

CAOPA La Mission Française de Coopérationen Guinée à travers le Centred’Appui aux OrganisationsProfessionnelles Agricoles de Kankan

CENAFOD Le Centre Africain de Formation pourle Développement

Les centres alpha avec leurs auditeursnous ont permis d’enrichir le présentdocument

CLUSA La Ligue des Coopératives des EtatsUnis d’Amérique en Guinée

EUPD L’Entraide Universitaire pour leDéveloppement

Le Forum des ONG de Guinée

SKILLS AND LITERACY TRAINING FOR BETTER LIVELIHOODS vii

Acknowledgements

T

IIZ/DVV Institute for International Cooperationof the German Adult EducationAssociation

PAPE-BGN Le Projet d’Appui aux PetitsExploitants en Basse Guinée Nord

SNA Le Service National ded’alphabétisation en Guinée

UNICEF- Le Fonds des Nations Unies pour GUINEE l’Enfance en Guinée

In KenyaBTL Bible Translation and LiteracyDAE Department of Adult EducationFAO Food & Agricultural Organization of

the United NationsGTZ German Agency for Technical

Co-operationIFAD International Fund for Agricultural

DevelopmentKAEA Kenya Adult Education AssociationKALA Kenya Adult Literacy AssociationKARI Kenya Agriculture Research InstituteKIE Kenya Institute of EducationMLHRD Ministry of Labour and Human

Resource DevelopmentOXFAM-UK OXFAM, United Kingdom BranchUNDP United Nations Development ProgramUNICEF United Nations International

Children’s Emergency FundUniversity of Nairobi, Faculty of

External StudiesUSK Undugu Society of Kenya

In SenegalANAFA Association nationale pour l’Alphabé-

tisation et la formation des AdultesCONGAD Conseil des ONG d’appui au

DéveloppementDAEB Direction de l’Alphabétisation et de

l’Alphabétisation de BaseDirection Générale de la SODEFITEX

(Société de Développement desFibres Textiles)

La Direction de l’EnseignementTechnique et de la FormationTechnique

PAPF Projet d’Alphabétisation PrioritéFemmes

In UgandaActionAid Bundibugyo and Buwekula Projects

and REFLECT Coordination UnitADRA Adventist Development and Relief

AgencyIACE Institute of Adult and Continuing

Education, Makerere UniversityLABE Literacy and Adult Basic EducationLITNET Literacy Network

In EuropeActionAid LondonADEA Association for the Development of

Education in Africa, BernDFID Department for International

Development, LondonDSE German Foundation for International

Development, BonnEED Church Development Service-–An

Association of the ProtestantChurches in Germany, Bonn

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United Nations, Rome

GTZ German Agency for TechnicalCooperation, Eschborn

IFAD International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment, Rome

IIEP International Institute for EducationPlanning, Paris

IIZ/DVV Institute for International Cooperationof the German Adult EducationAssociation, Bonn

ILO International Labor Organization,Geneva

MISEREOR The German Catholic Bishops’Organization for DevelopmentCooperation, Aachen

NCA Norwegian Church Aid, OsloNOVIB Netherlands Organization for

International Development, TheHague

SCF-UK Save the Children Fund, UK, LondonSDC Swiss Development Cooperation, BernSIDA Swedish International Development

Agency, StockholmSIL-UK Summer Institute of Linguistics, UK,

High Wycombe

viii AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization, Paris

UIE UNESCO Institute for Education,Hamburg

In North AmericaCAII Creative Associates International Inc.,

Washington, D.C.CIDA Canadian Agency for International

Development, Ottawa/HullGroundWork, Washington, D.C.

SIL Summer Institute of Linguistics, Dallasand Mexico

UNICEF United Nations InternationalChildren’s Emergency Fund, NewYork

USAID United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment, Washington, D.C.

WEI World Education Inc., Boston

SKILLS AND LITERACY TRAINING FOR BETTER LIVELIHOODS ix

Africa Region Human DevelopmentWorking Paper Series

Skills and LiteracyTraining for Better Livelihoods

A Review of Approaches and Experiences

rom the perspective of vocational educationwithin the purview of lifelong education forall, this report aims to use available docu-

mentary accounts to compare and assess the effec-tiveness of two types of education and training pro-grams for poor adults: (a) programs that haveattempted to incorporate training for livelihoodskills into mainly literacy instruction, and (b) pro-grams that have incorporated literacy instructioninto training for mainly livelihood skills. The com-parison should help answer four questions aboutsuch efforts:

1. What approaches have been used?

2. What are the documented outcomes and impactsof these approaches?

3. What are the lessons regarding management,implementation, and resource requirements?

4. What approaches are likely to be most effectiveunder conditions prevailing in Sub–74 Africa,and what are the pitfalls to avoid?

Sources of information

Because there is little published literature on thefour questions, this report has had to rely largely ondocumentation internal to many organizationslocated in four countries of Africa, as well as inWestern Europe and North America. However, in

Guinea, Kenya, Senegal, and Uganda, brief fieldobservations and interviews with interested partieshave supplemented the documentation.

Much of the helpful documentation came fromorganizations that are in principle more concernedwith employment and livelihoods than with educa-tion, but that find training in literacy and numeracyto be essential for their own purposes. Examples areFAO, IFAD, ILO and nongovernmental organiza-tions (NGOs) that strive for holistic development.Unfortunately, we must emphasize that the natureof the available evidence makes the conclusions andrecommendations of the study only tentative. Theyare more in the nature of reasonable hypothesesthan incontrovertible facts.

Also, it is the case that the documentation did notyield satisfactory responses to Question 3 on man-agement, implementation, and resource require-ments. Neither did it further any discussion of thecrucial issues of organizational and institutionaldevelopment. The report shows that, without theconstruction of effective organizations and soundinstitutional norms, very poor people will not beenabled to use literacy to make their livelihoodsmore productive.

Approach to study

The study’s basic task was to examine two broadapproaches to combining livelihood training withliteracy instruction. One approach is to enrich alivelihood-led program with components in calcu-

1

1

Executive summary

F

lating, writing, and reading. The other is to enrich aliteracy-led program with training for one or morelivelihoods. Within these two approaches, a frame-work developed by Rogers (1997) that distinguishesfive sub-categories, proved useful to the study.They are:

1. Literacy as a prerequisite or in preparation fortraining in livelihood or income-generationactivities. That is, training in a livelihood is thelonger term aim, but people are encouraged notto start training in a livelihood, until they havefirst mastered reading, writing, and calculatingsufficiently to cope with the livelihood’s operat-ing and development requirements. There is aplanned progression between the two.

2. Literacy followed by separate livelihood or in-come-generation activities. Here, learning literacyis regarded as a self-standing and worthwhile aimin itself and is undertaken first. Thereafter, train-ing is offered in either livelihoods or some form ofincome-generating activity. There are no system-atic connections between the two components.

3. Livelihood training or income-generation activi-ties leading to literacy. In this sub-category,groups start out learning to develop a businessbut come to recognize that their progress will befrustrated, unless they learn to calculate morecomprehensively, record their incomes and out-goings and read their records. The content of theliteracy and numeracy grows out of the liveli-hood and income generation.

4. Livelihood and income-generation activities andliteracy integrated. In this sub-category, trainingin a livelihood and instruction in literacy andnumeracy begin simultaneously, often with thecontent of the literacy derived from or influencedby the livelihood.

5. Literacy and livelihood and income-generationactivities taking place in parallel but separately.Programs in this sub-category recognize theimportance of both components, start bothsimultaneously, but omit to develop any system-atic connections between them.

The first two sub-categories fall within literacy-led programs, the third and fourth fall within liveli-hood-led programs, while the type of programs ofthe fifth sub-category would depend on their ori-gins and emphasis.

Findings in summary

The report yielded 17 findings.

1. In all the countries studied, the diversity of pos-sibilities for improving established livelihoodsand developing new ones appears so wide as todemand extreme flexibility, imagination, andresourcefulness.

2. All the programs examined dealt with verypoor people, mostly rural and mostly women.

3. Examples of effective efforts were found ineach of the five program sub-categories. Suc-cess in both sets of immediate objectives islikely if two conditions are satisfied: first, theprogram is well run with competent, reliable,and adequately supported instructors and,second, the program is well adapted to theinterests and conditions of its participants.

Data were not available on the impacts oflivelihood training on production, productiv-ity, and standards of living. However, therewas virtual unanimity in both individual andfocus group discussions that people who hadcompleted literacy courses tended to be moreconfident and more willing to take initiativesin developing their livelihoods or in taking anactive interest in the operations of their coop-eratives. Claims by successful learners thatthey were now following more productiveagricultural or livestock practices werecommon, as were claims that people felt theycould no longer be easily cheated, when theybought inputs or sold produce. These psy-chosocial aspects are not normally consideredin designing vocational education policies.Nonetheless, as they do impinge on the pro-ductivity of current livelihoods and on thewillingness to seek opportunities to developnew livelihoods, they should be taken into

2 AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

account as desirable and likely effects of liter-acy training.

4. Education and training programs for very pooradults need to offer very clear, concrete andimmediate reasons to justify enrollment andensure perseverance.

5. Programs that start from livelihood skills seemto stand a stronger chance of success. They can,after all, demonstrate an immediate reason forlearning.

6. Organizations, that are more concerned withlivelihoods and other aspects of developmentseem to be better at designing and deliveringeffective combinations of livelihoods and liter-acy than organizations that are more focused oneducation. Projects run by NGOs that integratedevelopment and literacy appear most effec-tive. The implication is that policy for voca-tional/livelihood education with literacyshould consider operating through agencies,both governmental and non-governmental, thatwork with people in their actual livelihoodsand employment.

7. NGOs seem to be more flexible than govern-mental agencies in responding to local andchanging needs. Policy makers for vocational/livelihood education should consider both(a) stronger alliances with NGOs and (b) formsof governmental organization that would allowlocal offices the kind of wide but accountablediscretion that would enable them to developthe required flexibility.

8. Deriving literacy/numeracy content from live-lihood skills and integrating it with the liveli-hood training from the very start seems morepromising than either running the two compo-nents parallel with each other or using standardliteracy materials to prepare people to train forlivelihoods.

9. Livelihood-plus-literacy/numeracy programscan greatly improve their chances of success, ifthey incorporate training in savings, credit, and

business management, along with actual accessto credit.

10. Chances of success are even greater in a pro-gram that works with established groups ofpeople who share a common purpose, ratherthan with individual applicants. In the absenceof such groups, it would probably still be betterto take the time to identify promising commonpurposes and to work on forming new pur-pose-driven groups than to resign the programto unconnected individuals.

11. Early evaluations of the Somaliland EducationInitiative for Girls and Young Men (SEIGYM)use of vouchers to buy their training are veryfavorable. Further observation of the initiativeseems desirable, particularly regarding its suit-ability for established groups.

12. Experience seems to have produced a strength-ening consensus that programs that are wellnegotiated with their prospective learners inassociation with local authorities and leadersare likely to be more effective than programsthat are simply put on offer.

13. While differing levels of proficiency in differentlivelihoods required different periods of learn-ing, the minimum period needed by a reallyilliterate person with normal learning abilitiesto attain a degree of literacy and numeracy suf-ficient to support advancement in a livelihoodseemed to be some 360 hours of instruction andpractice.

14. The broad experience of income-generating proj-ects suggests that arranging for both livelihoodspecialists and literacy instructors is more pru-dent than relying on literacy instructors toundertake livelihood instruction or income-gen-erating activities in addition to teaching literacyand numeracy. The broad trend appears to treatliteracy instructors on a similar basis to liveli-hood specialists and to pay them for their efforts.

15. On the important issue of financial resources,data on costs were largely absent, so that the

SKILLS AND LITERACY TRAINING FOR BETTER LIVELIHOODS 3

study can offer no guidance on the issue. Theonly observations possible are that (a) the costsof programs that combine livelihood, business,and literacy skills are likely to be higher thanthose of simple literacy programs; and (b) evenso, the costs would not be inordinate.

16. To achieve financial sustainability, poor coun-tries would need an alliance of government,non-governmental and community organiza-tions, and people of goodwill and energy to setup (a) a mechanism to mobilize local voluntarysupplements to fiscal provisions, (b) long-termconsortiums with external donors, and (c) sup-port from international lenders.

17. Going to scale would require capacity building,decentralization, gradualism and underpinningby local infrastructure, natural and otherresources, norms, and institutions.

Recommendations in summary

Overall, the evidence suggests that it would beworthwhile for vocational or livelihood educationpolicy makers to develop livelihood training withliteracy/numeracy instruction for very poor, non-literate people, who tend to be mostly women, and,in Sub–74 Africa, mostly rural. The ten recommen-dations below give guidance on how this could bedone. Justifications and further discussion are givenin Chapter 8.

1. Vocational education policy should provide forassessments of what would be needed in partic-ular localities to ensure an environment thatwould enable training in particular livelihoodsactually to result in higher productivity,incomes and well being.

2. Vocational education policy should pursue astrategy of decentralization and capacity-nur-turing that will permit resourceful responses tolocal actual and potential patterns of livelihood.

3. Vocational education policy should provide forcourses that combine savings and credit train-ing with negotiated livelihood content and lit-

eracy/numeracy content derived from, but notlimited to, the vocabulary of the livelihood. Asa tool to strengthen the negotiating power ofprospective learners, the experience of SEIGYM(the Somaliland Education Initiative for Girlsand Young Men) warrants monitoring (seeChapter 5).

4. The fourth recommendation is twofold. First, toensure that the “average” adult learner mastersliteracy and numeracy well enough to use themin support and development of a livelihood, theliteracy component of a livelihood courseshould offer at least 360 hours of instructionand practice (the livelihood and business com-ponents will of course require additionalappropriate time). Second, to help optimizeperseverance, completion, and retention oflearning, the course should be offered in asingle session or term, if at all practicable.

5. The fifth recommendation is again twofold.First, vocational education policy should pro-vide for two cadres of instructors—livelihoodinstructors and literacy instructors. While nei-ther should be a permanent cadre, their patternsof recruitment, training and support can differfrom each other. Second, both cadres should beremunerated for the instruction they give.

6. Vocational education policy for non-literatepoor adults should promote active, participa-tory, and interactive forms of instruction andlearning in both livelihood and literacy compo-nents of training.

7. Vocational education policy makers shouldsupport further research on the issue of costs.

8. Countries should form local alliances of govern-ment, non-governmental and community agen-cies and energetic people of good will to (a) raiselocal fiscal and voluntary financing, (b) form ap-propriate consortiums with external donors and(c) attract resources from international lenders.

9. Strategies of capacity-building, decentralizationand gradualism should govern the process of


going to scale, with due attention to local infra-structure, natural and other resources, norms,and institutions.

10. Any review of vocational educational policyshould exert itself to identify, locate, and capi-

talize on the empirical experience and expertisethat those organizations have accumulated, andmake it more readily accessible than this studyhas found it.


6

2

Prologue

efore discussing the main study, a simplebackground note is desirable to clarify threepoints: the current linking of livelihoods

with literacy, what is meant by livelihoods, andwhat is meant by literacy.

Livelihoods and literacy

This section offers a historical or evolutionary per-spective on the relationships between livelihoodsand literacy. Adult educators have accepted for atleast the past half century that the skills of literacyare not ends in themselves but need to serve somepurpose and practice that is important to their users.The attempts to tie them closely to and even derivethem from livelihoods began at least three decadesago with UNESCO’s pioneering attempt to integrateliteracy and livelihoods in its Experimental WorldLiteracy Program, after the Teheran Conference in1965. That is when the term “functional literacy”came into currency. So successful was the idea ofsuch integration, that, even with the rise and rapidspread of Paolo Freire’s “conscientization” a fewyears later, it would be difficult to locate a contem-porary or recent literacy course, that did not claim tobe functional, even if it did not claim to prepare itsparticipants for a livelihood. In Kenya (Mwangi2001) as early as 1969, literacy instructors wereexpected to assist their classes set up income gener-ating projects and to invite technical officers in tohelp deepen knowledge, understanding, and skills.In Guinea, livelihoods and literacy are now so

closely entwined, that it is no longer realistic tospeak of two approaches there (Diallo 2001).Uganda’s national program is known simply as FAL,Functional Adult Literacy Program, while Ghana’s isthe Literacy and Functional Skills Program.

For their part, vocational educators have longaccepted that, without a sufficient mastery of read-ing, writing, and calculation, learners cannot takemore than limited advantage of possibilities toenhance their knowledge, skills, and capacities. Forexample, FAO (1980) had this to say “Thus, the con-cept that the stepping up of farm production bynew technology must have training and literacy aspart and parcel of the development process, andconversely, that training and literacy as an isolatedprocess are of little avail in a developing society, isnow well established.” More recently, ILO, workingin Nigeria on income-generating activities forwomen in health development, reported, “func-tional literacy should be included… to increase theimpact of training in new skills and technologies”(ILO 1994b: iii) and “In parallel… training inrecord/book-keeping, accounting, costing, pricing…” (ILO 1994b: 5). Similarly, a multi-country studyon the benefits of training for women observed,“While many of the women showed a great capac-ity for mental calculations and some an astute busi-ness sense, they remain relatively powerless in theworld of business if they have no written records”(Leach et al. 2000: 109).

From a somewhat wider perspective, some quotesfrom Easton (1998) are pertinent and reinforcing:

B

“Without introducing the technology of writing andeffective literacy—in whatever language or script itmay be, and acquired by any available type of edu-cation-training and assumption of new developmentfunctions both tend to remain stuck at the most rudi-mentary level of technical skill and the most incom-plete forms of participation” (1998: xix). “The train-ing necessary to support self-governance initiativesis not, of course, limited to literacy instruction –farfrom it. But if the “tool of writing” constitutes athreshold of effectiveness in the management of localinstitutions, mastery of this code is equally importantas a means of magnifying the scope and the impactof the training” (1998: xxiii).

In a balanced review of educational research inWest and Central Africa, Maclure (1997: 86–87)points, on the one hand, to the evidence that non-formal literacy training is strongly linked toimprovements in several domains, including agri-cultural production and other revenue-generatingskills, as well as enhanced managerial skills amongmembers of agricultural cooperatives. On the otherhand, he notes the frequency with which literacyand other training for poor, unschooled adults dis-appoint their sponsors and beneficiaries throughpoor implementation.

What has prompted the current study is the needto assess what seem to be the most effective strate-gies and methods for ensuring that the skills of lit-eracy and numeracy do support the struggles of thevery poor to develop livelihoods sufficient to liftthemselves out of poverty.

Defining livelihoods and income-generatingactivities

Livelihood: Because this report is contributing inthe first instance to a review of vocational andtechnical education, it treats the term “livelihood”more in its traditional, restricted sense of simplymaking a living, rather than in the recentlyexpanded senses initiated by researchers at theInstitute of Development Studies, University ofSussex,1 and adapted by some bilateral and multi-lateral agencies and international non-governmen-tal organizations. More specifically, “livelihood” inthis report restricts itself to the knowledge, skills,and methods used to produce or obtain the food,

water, clothing and shelter necessary for survivaland well-being, whether the economy is subsis-tence, monetized, or a mixture of both. “Liveli-hood” seems more appropriate than either“employment” or “income-generating activities,”because the majority of people in Africa who par-ticipate in programs with literacy componentsderive their living mainly from subsistence agri-culture, and often from the exchange of goods andservices, rather than from earning wages orsalaries. A livelihood can include more than oneset of knowledge, skills, and methods. Forinstance, in an agrarian economy, a woman mayearn her family’s livelihood by combining subsis-tence agriculture and horticulture on a small plotof land with remunerated labor on a neighbor’sland and with selling some of her produce asprocessed food in a local market.

Income-generating activities: Because mosteconomies are now monetized, the terms “income-generating activities” and “income-generating proj-ects” occur frequently in discussions of literacyprojects and programs. They are not synonymouswith “livelihood,” for the available literature sug-gests that they often—but do not always—generateonly small incomes to supplement main liveli-hoods. Further, the literature gives the impressionthat, in most instances, income-generating activitiesdo not involve much systematic training, in waysthat courses of vocational and technical educationwould. Instead, a learning group usually seems toundertake an activity that is common, well knownand established in the neighborhood and for whichlittle additional instruction is given.

In the main, then, this report will prefer the term “livelihood” rather than” “income-generatingactivities.”

A report on a project in Egypt makes thisimportant distinction: “Quite often the needsassessment identified the need for income-genera-tion opportunities of which vocational trainingmight be a part… An additional challenge is not toconfuse income-generation with vocational train-ing. Both are often important, but people develop-ing vocational skills often need further support(such as with credit schemes and marketing) to beable to generate income” (UKDFID 1999b: para.8.4.3 and 8.4.8).


In short, livelihoods and livelihood/occupa-tional training are not quite synonymous withincome-generating activities, even if the latter dorequire some training.

Clarifying literacy and numeracy

At the most basic level, literacy entails simply theskills of (a) recording information of some kind insome code understood by the person making therecord and possibly by other persons in some moreor less permanent form and (b) decoding the infor-mation so recorded. That is the essence of writingand reading. Similarly, numeracy is the skill ofusing and recording numbers and numerical opera-tions for a variety of purposes. During the past5,000 years or so, the human race has developedthese skills into systems that reach far beyond thesimple recording of information. The systems nowrange from personal signatures through to themazes of legal documents and higher mathematics.In this, they entail ranges of skills, usages, customs,and conventions in both recording and decodinginformation, which are conditioned by the particu-lar contexts where they occur. These ranges andvarieties have made defining literacy and numeracyin operational terms more than just difficult:UNESCO has been struggling with the task for halfa century and has still not been able to bring itsmember states to a consensus. Each member oper-ates its own definition for its own purposes.

The attainment of virtually universal primaryschooling in the industrialized countries initiallyled to defining permanent or sufficient literacy

operationally as the equivalent of four years of pri-mary schooling. The tendency to use schooling asthe standard against which to measure attainmentsin literacy persisted for some while, despite itsincreasing inadequacy in the face of shifting aver-age attainments at different levels of schooling indifferent countries.

In the light of the flux and because it examinessituations in a variety of countries and cultures, thisstudy uses no definition of literacy or numeracy. Itsimply uses the words in whatever sense was usedby the program under study. However, as will beseen in Chapter 7 under “Synthesis of findings fromthe two strategies,” the study does attempt to esti-mate the minimum amount of instruction and prac-tice a person needs to acquire sufficient skill in writ-ing, reading, and calculating to be able to go on toobtaining and exchanging new and possibly com-plex information to improve the productivity of heror his livelihood. The discussion makes it clear thatno hard and fast rule can be laid down. All that isoffered is what might be a safe minimum.

1. “A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (stores,resources, claims, and access) and activities required for ameans of living: a livelihood is sustainable which can copewith and recover from stress and shocks, maintain orenhance its capabilities and assets, and provide sustainablelivelihood opportunities for the next generation; and whichcontributes net benefits to other livelihoods at the local andglobal levels and in the long and short term,” Chambers R.and G. Conway, 1992, Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practicalconcepts for the 21st century, IDS Discussion Paper 296,Brighton, Institute of Development Studies at the Universityof Sussex.


9

3

Objectives of the study

ccording to this study’s Terms of Reference,its main objective is “to derive lessons fromprograms that have included livelihood

skills as part of literacy education and programsthat have included literacy skills as part of liveli-hood training.” The final report should provideanswers to the following questions:

• What approaches have been used?

• What are the documented outcomes and impactsof these approaches?

• What are the lessons regarding management,implementation and resource requirements?

• What approaches are likely to be most effectiveunder conditions prevailing in sub–74 Africa,and what are the pitfalls to avoid?

The fourth question makes clear that the studyaims to contribute to policy and practice mainly inSub–74 Africa.

A

10

4

Scope and methods ofthe study

Scope

his study focuses on efforts to combine liveli-hood training with literacy instruction eitherby incorporating livelihoods into primarily

literacy programs or incorporating literacy into pri-marily livelihood training. Rogers (1997: 47) pro-vides a convenient sub-categorization of these twobroad groups, although he uses the term “income-generation activities,” not “livelihood.” Each ofthese sub-categories constitutes an approach to thecombination. Also, while Rogers speaks only of“adult literacy programmes,” he does in his thirdand fourth categories below intimate that theincome or livelihood concerns may well lead anddetermine the literacy content.

“There are five possible relationships between theteaching of literacy and income-generation activi-ties in adult literacy programmes:

1. Literacy in preparation for income-generationactivities (rare);

2. Literacy followed by separate income-generationactivities (more common);

3. Income-generation activities leading to literacy(very rare);

4. Income-generation activities and literacy inte-grated (very, very rare);

5. Literacy and income-generation activities inparallel but separate (most common).”

This report will adapt Rogers’ framework toinclude livelihoods along with income generation.Thus the report examines the following five cate-gories or approaches:

1. Literacy as a prerequisite or in preparation fortraining in livelihood or income-generationactivities. That is, training in a livelihood is thelonger-term aim, but people are encouraged notto start training in a livelihood, until they havefirst mastered reading, writing, and calculatingsufficiently to cope with the operating require-ments of a livelihood, as well as with manualsand other literature. There is a connection andplanned progression between the two, even if theliteracy curriculum is independent of the liveli-hood training (for example, Women in EnterpriseDevelopment (Lim 1999)).

2. Literacy followed by separate livelihood orincome-generation activities. Here, learning liter-acy is regarded as a self-standing and worth-while aim in itself and is undertaken first. There-after, training is offered in either livelihoods orsome form of income-generating activity. Thereare no systematic connections between the twocomponents (for example, income-generatingand livelihood projects for individuals inBotswana (Legwaila 1996, 1997)).

T

3. Livelihood training or income-generation activi-ties leading to literacy. In this sub-category,groups start out learning to develop a business,but come to recognize that their progress will befrustrated, unless they learn to calculate morecomprehensively, record their incomes and out-goings and read their records. The content of theliteracy and numeracy grows out of the liveli-hood and income generation (for example,Mahila Samakhya in India (Nirantar 1997)).

4. Livelihood and income-generation activitiesintegrated with literacy. In this sub-category,training in a livelihood and instruction in literacyand numeracy begin simultaneously, with thecontent of the literacy derived from or influencedby the livelihood (for example, WEP–Nepal(Thomas & Shrestha 2000); ACOPAM–WestAfrica (ILO 1999)).

5. Literacy and livelihood and income-generationactivities in parallel but separate. Programs inthis sub-category recognize the importance ofboth components, start both simultaneously, butomit to develop any systematic connectionsbetween them (for example, Farmers’ FieldSchools (World Education 2000a)).

The study includes what are broadly known as“Functional Adult Literacy Programs,” even thoughthey do not offer what could be called systematictraining in the many topics contained in their curric-ula. In many such programs such as the practice inKenya, mentioned above, literacy instructors areadvised to invite specialists to discuss particulartechnical issues. Most experiences with this expedi-ent can scarcely be classed as training, howeverinformal. An excerpt from the Kenya portion of thecurrent study (Mwangi 2001) supports this view.The observer, an adult education officer surveyingliteracy classes in the Nyanza province, noted,“Functional literacy is practised without designingand conducting lessons in relation to the develop-ment they are required to encourage.” In Kenya’sWestern province, another adult education officerfound that the Vihiga district had a total of 110 liter-acy centers, only 10 of which had income-generatingprojects.1 Nevertheless, as both the present Kenya

and Uganda studies show below, these programscan offer instances where, even with standard cur-ricula for an entire country, with only tinctures oflivelihood training, their learners have learned andapplied useful ideas and appreciated the outcomes.For that reason, they feature in this study.

In terms of geographical scope, the studyincluded four intensive investigations in Africa inGuinea, Kenya, Senegal, and Uganda. In addition, itattempted to benefit from experiences in a largernumber of countries through a more general searchamong bilateral, multilateral, and non-governmen-tal agencies known to support adult education andtraining, both generally in terms of basic literacyand numeracy and more specifically, in terms oftraining for very poor people to enhance their pro-ductivity, production and incomes and to expandtheir repertoires of productive skills.

Methods and sources of information

The study had to be documentary because theperiod and budget within which the study had to becompleted ruled out any substantial original orfield research. The published literature on experi-ences in combining livelihoods training with liter-acy instruction is small, and what there is tends tobe insufficiently analytical to help policy makersassess the relative merits of different strategies andmethods. This study therefore sought informationfrom the “grey literature” of project documentation:proposals, designs, periodic monitoring reports,mid-term reviews, project completion reports, end-of-project evaluations, and impact evaluations.Agencies helped identify programs that fitted thestudy’s focus and agreed to grant access to mem-bers of the study team to review what files andarchives could be retrieved.

It is important to note that one reason for thedearth of published material could well be thedearth of “grey documentation” and the poor qual-ity of much of the documentation that is retrievable.The Guinea study found so little documentationavailable that it depended much more on interviewsand observations. Further, theoretical advances inmethods of evaluating outcomes and impact do notseem to have made headway in programs of adultbasic education. In the mid–1970s, the overall eval-


uation of UNESCO’s Experimental World LiteracyProgramme noted, ”Some of the most importantand crucial indicators such as production, produc-tivity and income were not measured because theywere found to be of enormous complexity,” andbecause “The (experimental) programme’s imple-menters were understandably more concerned withdoing than with recording” (UNDP/UNESCO1976: 13). This helped explain why the criticalassessment had to be more qualitative than quanti-tative and more in the form of hypotheses to be fur-ther tested than insights to be confidently shared.Much the same was the case with the IIEP’s effort toevaluate the literacy programs of Kenya and Tanza-nia more than a decade later (Carron et al. 1989;Carr-Hill et al. 1991). The unfortunate situation per-sists. This study encountered only two efforts thathave planned for both baseline and impact evalua-tions. Both are programs in Nepal (Thomas andShrestha 2000; World Education 2001a), which fea-ture in the following discussion.

Today’s implementers also seem to be too preoc-cupied with doing to have time for recording. How-ever, this excerpt from a World Bank report sug-gests that adult educators may not be alone indeficiencies of data and analysis: “After 30 years oflending, the Bank still knows little about the impactof its education projects on output measures such asquality, access, and internal efficiency, let alonedevelopment. The main problem is at the projectlevel. Staff appraisal reports seldom make adequateprovision for gathering and using such information,and frequently project goals are not stated in clear,monitorable terms” (IBRD–OED 1993). Indeed theobservation applies even more strongly to the liter-acy programs supported by the World Bank since1977. An example is the Ghana National Literacyand Functional Skills Program, where Crapper’steam found “… there are no reliable data on whichto assess cost-effectiveness” (for a pilot projectstarted in 1989–90 and evaluated in late 1995)(1996: 33).

Even more recently, ILO (2001a: 11.56) noted,“Very few of the projects under review undertookthe baseline studies that would ensure the reliabil-ity of impact assessment. The monitoring systemswere also not very effective.” At FAO, Coldevin(2001: 18) remarks, “…lack of evaluation continues

to undermine the perception of the value of partici-patory communication and learning.”

Where NGOs are concerned, the situation seemsno better. Riddell (2001) notes for example that of 13evaluations of REFLECT projects, only one offeredconclusions based on empirical and measuredevidence.

Therefore, those reports that did yield at leastsome of the information needed to answer the fourquestions in the terms of reference are all the morevaluable. We must frankly state that the documen-tation available did not permit satisfactoryresponses to the third question of the terms ofreference on management, implementation, andresource requirements. Neither did it enable anydiscussion of the crucial issues of organizationaland institutional development. Without the con-struction of effective organizations and sound insti-tutional norms, it is not possible to assist very poorpeople to use literacy to make their livelihoodsmore productive.

In Guinea, the study found little documentationavailable (Diallo 2001). It had to rely instead oninterviews and studies of the government’sNational Literacy Service and 23 NGOs involved incombinations of literacy and development training.All these programs link literacy so closely withlivelihood and other development skills that distin-guishing between two strategies—literacy withlivelihood or livelihood with literacy—makes littlesense. In addition, the study observed a number oflearning groups and interviewed a large number offarmers and craftsmen who had previously partici-pated in learning groups.

In Kenya, the sources were essentially literacyefforts that had always incorporated, at least in prin-ciple, some elements of knowledge for livelihoodsand some form of income-generating activity(Mwangi 2001). They provided accounts from anumber of non-governmental organizations in-volved in literacy, along with 10 vignettes of how thegovernment’s national program operates in differentparts of the country. The search located no instancesof programs that were primarily interested in train-ing for livelihoods and that had incorporated liter-acy/numeracy components as supplementarymeans towards their main objectives. Yet many of itsvignettes stress that, without elements of income-


generation, literacy programs tend to suffer frompoor rates of attendance and high dropout.

In Senegal, the major source of information wasthe livelihood-led literacy program offered to cottonfarmers by SODEFITEX (Sall 2001).

In Uganda, the study examined eight programs.Six were literacy efforts that incorporated “func-tional” knowledge from a range of topics, includingitems on agriculture, while the other two took upliteracy, as they felt that the lack of it hamperedtheir main efforts at development (Katahoire 2001).

In Europe and North America, multilateral andbilateral agencies as well as NGOs provided whatinternal documentation they could, as well aslesser-known publications.

Most of the documentation retrieved was in theform of proposals, plans, and descriptions. Very fewproject completion reports were available, nor werethere many evaluations, much less impact evalua-tions. Unfortunately, what was available does notallow thorough-going comparisons between differ-ent approaches, so our answers to the four mainquestions—rather in the manner of the UNDP/UNESCO critical assessment of the ExperimentalWorld Literacy Programme 25 years ago—will bemore tentative than firm.

In addition to collecting recent and contempo-rary documentation, the study tried to glean the les-sons from some of the earlier efforts to combinelivelihood with literacy training. The first of these,and the first major initiative in this direction, wasthe Experimental World Literacy Programme, ledby UNESCO and supported by a number of agen-cies, as well as the dozen or so countries that partic-ipated in the program (UNDP/UNESCO 1976: 162).Its potential relevance to this study is clear: “Voca-tionally oriented programs (chiefly agriculture, butalso including industry and artisanry) were organ-ized for 91 percent of EWLP enrollees, while only 9percent were involved in non-vocational (social andwomen’s) programmes.”

This current report constitutes a synthesis of theinvestigations in Guinea, Kenya, Senegal, Uganda,and documentation obtained from the bilateral,multilateral and non-governmental agencies.

1. Worth noting is that the 10 centers with income-generatingprojects had 80 percent attendance rates, while those withouthad on average attendance rates of only 20 percent.


14

5

Literacy training withlivelihood components

his chapter considers work that falls in thefirst two of Rogers’ categories, namely, “lit-eracy as a prerequisite or in preparation for

training in livelihood or income-generation activi-ties” and “literacy followed by separate livelihoodor income-generation activities.”

Before we examine particular projects, it is worthnoting the widespread mistake of expecting toomuch from education and training programs. Thisis clear from an experiment in the Andhra Pradeshstate of India in 1972.

Participants in the experiment were dividedinto four separate groups. Each group tookinstruction for one to two hours a day, six days aweek for 26 weeks, a total of 300 hours of tuitionand practice. Group 1 learned literacy and numer-acy from a curriculum derived from topics ofhealth, nutrition, childcare and family planning,that is, functional literacy. Group 2 had the samesubject matter taught only through lectures,demonstrations, and practice. Group 3 learned lit-eracy from a standard primer and the health topicsthrough conventional instruction and services.Group 4 was the control group, who received noinstruction or services at all.

At the end of the experimental period, the con-trol group, Group 4, showed little change on anyindicator. Group 1 (functional literacy) had attaineda level of sustainable literacy, but was inferior toGroup 2 in actually putting their health learninginto practice. Group 3 (traditional literacy plushealth instruction) proved inferior to Group 2 in

health practice and to Group 1 in both literacy andhealth practice (ICAE 1979: 42 et seq.).

At first glance, teaching wholly by demonstra-tion and practice seems to be the most effective wayto bring about changes in behavior. However, giventhat all three experimental groups had the sameamount of time to learn non-identical curricula, it isclear that Group 3 was asked to learn much morethan either Group 1 or Group 2 and that Group 1was asked to learn more than Group 2. Put anotherway, too much was expected of both Groups 1 and3 compared to what was expected of Group 2.

The implication is that, for every component of acourse of learning, an appropriate time needs to bebuilt in for learning it. In the present context, thatmeans that courses in livelihood and literacy mustallow enough time for the livelihood skills, plusenough time for the literacy skills. If the experimentabove is accurate in suggesting that 300 hours ofinstruction and practice suffice to attain sustainableliteracy, then a course of livelihood skills and liter-acy would need to plan for at least 300 hours for theliteracy and then add an appropriate number forthe livelihood skills. If it does not, it risks overload-ing its curriculum and disappointing its learners, aswell as its operators.

Literacy as a prerequisite to livelihood training

In Guinea, Kenya, and Senegal, none of the pro-grams studied required its participants to learn howto read, write, and calculate, before permitting them

T

to enter training in livelihood skills. However, theUganda study encountered one called FAL, con-ducted by the NGO, the Adventist Developmentand Relief Agency (ADRA).

ADRA, Uganda

The program takes its acronym from the nationalFunctional Adult Literacy Program—FAL—butuses the L to stand for “Learning” rather than“Literacy.” The reason is that ADRA has adopted acurriculum that goes well beyond literacy and aimsto enable poor women to develop better and sus-tainable livelihoods. It had originally taught onlylivelihood skills, but, as other organizations havedone, ADRA came to recognize that without liter-acy and numeracy, the development of such skills isvery restricted.

ADRA offers a course of three stages. The firststage, which is obligatory, involves learning to read,write, and calculate, with a particular emphasis oncalculating accurately. For this stage, ADRA usesthe standard literacy texts provided by the govern-ment’s program, but it adds exercises to help learn-ers to understand more thoroughly what isinvolved in the processes of buying and selling as abusiness. The second stage instructs the learners inhow to assess the feasibility of a project. It alsorequires each of them to save a small amount ofmoney and, without financial assistance, start amodest income-generating activity. The final stagerequires the learners to form “solidarity groups” offive members each, who trust each other enough toopen a joint bank account, into which they pooltheir savings and from which they will manage anyloans they take or make to each other. The threestages take up between nine and 12 months at therate of six hours a week, or 250 to 300 hours in all.

Once the stages are completed, ADRA is pre-pared to make micro loans of about US$30–60,repayable in installments over 16 weeks with aninterest rate of four percent per quarter. It reportsthat these smaller loans and short periods of repay-ment help sustain commitment and accountabilityand ensure success.

The national FAL program, under which ADRAalso falls, now enrolls more than 100,000 peopleannually—90 percent of them women. No system-

atic and widely drawn study appears to have yetbeen done on its attainments and outcomes. How-ever, using literacy/numeracy explicitly to pave theway to loans and businesses seems to sustain perse-verance in attending and completing the course, forADRA reports a retention rate of around 80 percentin its classes. As for longer-term effectiveness,ADRA reports loan repayment rates of close to 100percent within the stipulated time frame.

Further, a modest survey1 of eight ADRA groupsin three sub-counties found that six had qualifiedfor micro loans and had maintained their repay-ment schedules. A couple of micro-enterprises hadfailed, but the majority had made small profits,which they were investing in expansion. Interviewswith the members found that almost all of themclaimed that they were managing their farms andlivestock more productively and were becomingmore successful at starting and managing smallbusinesses. They felt more confident and moreindependent.

ADRA asks the learning groups, which maynumber between 40 and 70 members, to recruittheir own instructors within some simple guide-lines. No minimum standard of schooling is set, butpersons invited to act as instructors should be atleast 18 years old, more literate than their prospec-tive learners, fluent in the language used forinstruction, respectable, and acceptable both to allthe learners and to the local community leaders.Once selected, the instructors are trained to teachnot only literacy and numeracy but also livelihoodand business skills. Their initial training is followedat intervals with refresher and further training. Thisis a notable instance of systematically forminginstructors competent in two sets of skills.2

Remuneration of the instructors is an importantissue. Although the instructors are selected by theirlearners and serve voluntarily, they are notexpected to give their services for nothing; theyreceive an honorarium from ADRA itself. Theirlearners, being poor women, are not asked to con-tribute to this honorarium.

A crucial component of ADRA’s strategy is orga-nizational and institutional development. Its policyis eventually to withdraw from a locality. To ensurethe sustainability of its attainments, it works notonly to help the women’s groups to operate compe-


tently, but also—and equally important—to helpthe community develop sufficient organizationalcapacity to support the groups and take fresh initia-tives. This ADRA does through fostering associa-tions that are registered as Community Based Orga-nizations with legal rights and powers. ADRA helpscommunities elect officers for these organizationsand then trains the officers in managing the localproject and its finances and in raising finance fornew initiatives. ADRA reports that most officers aregraduates of the literacy and livelihoods program.

Reports from a number of project areas noteenthusiastic response to ADRA’s pattern of opera-tion from learners, local authorities, political lead-ers, and opinion leaders. Support in the form ofmoney, materials, and moral encouragement seemscommon. Overall, then, on the restricted evidenceavailable, ADRA’s strategy to work for a form ofholistic development, using literacy as an obliga-tory first step, appears effective and successful.Unfortunately, information on the costs of this suc-cess, either gross or unit, is not available.

For the purposes of planning and budgeting, it isworth noting that ADRA reports a dropout rate of20 percent. This indicates, as does the case of SOD-EFITEX below, that adult education and trainingprograms, however well conceived and imple-mented, may have to accept that some attrition isunavoidable. Planning needs to devise measures tominimize it.

Five more examples

Outside the four African countries intensivelystudied, three contemporary programs that insiston literacy as a prerequisite for livelihood trainingare found in Bangladesh, the Philippines andNepal, while two others, in Ethiopia and Soma-liland, do not quite fit the description but are closeto it. A sixth was in Egypt, but no information laterthan 1993 is available about it, and there appears tohave been no evaluation of its impact on its benefi-ciaries. The ILO report on it, “Training RuralWomen in Income Generating and Basic Life Skills”(1993a: 28), notes that “Literacy training is compul-sory for the loan beneficiaries and enrollment ispart of the application procedure.” In addition,“The Project beneficiaries had significantly better

education levels compared to the control groups”(partly perhaps because of the literacy classes). Italso noted, “Village women in El Minya openedtheir own houses for literacy classes because a largenumber of women applied and distances to theProject site were excessive” (1993a: 23). Theabsence of more detail on the project and its smallscale—it enrolled only 51 women for training in1991–92 (1993a: 53)—make it unsuitable for furtherconsideration in this report.

In the other five countries—Bangladesh, thePhilippines, Nepal, Ethiopia, and Somaliland—theprograms examined are all conceived and imple-mented by local and international NGOs. Whilethey may have the moral support of the govern-ments, all of them, like ADRA, rely on private fund-ing, much of it from international sources.

In Bangladesh, the Saptagram organization aimsto improve the status of women through enablingthem to develop non-traditional forms of livelihoodand income generation (Guttman 1994).

In the Philippines, the Notre Dame Foundationfor Charitable Activities runs many programsthrough a network of branches. The program dis-cussed here is its Women’s Enterprise DevelopmentProgram, which offers both livelihood and literacytraining (Lim 1999).

In Nepal, World Education Inc., an internationalnon-governmental organization based in the U.S.A.,works in partnership with 25 local non-governmen-tal organizations on “Women’s Economic Empow-erment and Literacy,” which aims to equip womenwith sufficient literacy to manage savings, credits,and loans to develop new businesses (World Edu-cation 2001).

The WISE (Women in Self-Employment) pro-gram in Ethiopia (Berhanu 2001) and the SEIGYM(Somali Education Initiative for Girls and YoungMen) in Somaliland (AET 2000 and Tomlinson 2001)are additional instances of programs that use liter-acy as a preparation for livelihood training.

Saptagram and Women’s EnterpriseDevelopment

The Bangladesh Saptagram and the PhilippineWomen’s Enterprise Development Program offertraining in a range of skills that enable women to


enhance their livelihoods and incomes. However,since these skills involve the use of literacy andnumeracy, both organizations require applicants toshow that they can handle the course materialsbefore admitting them to the course. If applicantscannot do so, they must take a six-month course inbasic literacy and numeracy to qualify for entry.3

In both organizations, the literacy course is“functional” in that its content and vocabularyfocus on topics of everyday importance, like health,nutrition, child care, hygiene, and sanitation; and itis said to derive from surveys of local situations, asare the occupations in which training is offered. Infact, Saptagram and its participants, after trying outmaterials developed by other organizations,decided that they must produce their own. In thissense, both organizations ensure that their offeringsare led by interest and demand. Even though thetwo literacy courses are not derived from a specificlivelihood—as understood in this report—bothorganizations report that more than 90 percent oftheir enrollees complete the course, after whichnearly all of them then register for training in anincome-earning occupation.

Saptagram takes rigorous measures to prepare itsparticipants to develop their livelihoods: “This year(1994) Saptagram plans to give its first individualloans to women actively involved in the organiza-tion for at least five years. Women can apply for anindividual loan if they have shown leadership andmanagement skills in social actions and income-generating projects. They must also be graduates ofthe adult literacy course and have sound account-ing skills” (Guttman 1994: 11).

Guttman adds, “Part of the adult education pro-gramme’s success comes from women’s perceptionthat it can improve their living standards. Thisunderlines the importance of tying education tobroader rural development, specifically income-generating projects” (1994: 23).

Both Saptagram and the Notre Dame Foundationuse trained and paid instructors for their courses.

Both organizations deal with learners as individu-als and not as groups. Therefore, although both or-ganizations take care to consult local communities andauthorities before they open new operations, they donot extend their reach to community, organizational,or institutional development, as ADRA does.

WEEL, Nepal

In Nepal, the Women’s Economic Empowermentand Literacy program (WEEL) uses the curriculumof the National Literacy Programme4—also “func-tional”—or other existing curricula, as preparationfor training in savings, credit, business develop-ment, and management (but not in specific occupa-tions). However, in order to emphasize the connec-tion with livelihoods and thus maintain interest andmotivation, WEEL supplements the content with 12poster and discussion sessions on women’s roles,benefits of being in a group, and benefits of savingsand credit. Its whole course takes 21 months inthree phases. The first is preparatory literacy andnumeracy. The second focuses on savings, credit,and business management. The third requires onlyone group meeting per month to advance businessand literacy skills.

Initiated in 1994 and moving through carefulpreparatory phases, WEEL now combines income,food security, credit, micro-enterprise, and literacy-numeracy in its curriculum. Its 3,000 initial enrolleeshave now graduated (a study of what they havedone with their learning is in process and should beavailable later in 2001). They have formed over 300savings and credit groups and helped 100 alreadyexisting groups to learn literacy, numeracy, andmore advanced topics like marketing. Its currentenrollment has 10,000 women. Most are illiterate,but some are partly literate either from earlier liter-acy programs or from some years in primary school(Sherpa et al. 2001). WEEL has also entered under-served areas and formed new women’s groups. Itrequires only that a core number of women in agroup master the literacy/numeracy skills, so thatthey can independently manage group accounts andrecords and lead group learning. The other membersare welcome to learn if they wish, but WEEL doesnot demand that they do so.

WEEL recognizes that this partial literacy makessome women reluctant to start from the beginningagain. In response, it has developed a “bridging”course that helps women revive their skills andqualify themselves for training in savings andcredit.5

Like ADRA, WEEL encourages its learners to select their own literacy instructors according


to a few personal and educational criteria. It thentrains and pays an honorarium to the peopleselected.

Unlike ADRA, WEEL does not train its literacyinstructors as trainers either in particular liveli-hoods or in business identification and manage-ment. Instead, it trains personnel of the 25 partici-pating NGOs to be the trainers in those skills. Atthe same time, it works to reduce the groups’dependency on the NGOs in tasks that can bemanaged with adequate skills in literacy andnumeracy.

Like ADRA and unlike Saptagram and the NotreDame Foundation, WEEL prefers to work withgroups rather than individuals. Unlike ADRA,however, it does not attempt to develop communityinstitutions to support the groups, even though ittakes care to consult the local authorities. Instead,its component of institutional development con-cerns the non-governmental organizations that areworking on the program. It is they who arestrengthening their own capacities to organize andexpand programs for very poor women.

SEIGYM, Somaliland

The Somaliland Education Initiative for Girls andYoung Men (SEIGYM), supported by the AfricaEducational Trust, has adopted an unusual, possi-bly unique, approach for its urban participants. Itgives them vouchers they can use to obtain thetraining they want. As all the vocational and tech-nical training on offer requires some school quali-fication, non-literate participants can locate andpay for instruction in literacy and numeracybefore moving on to specifically livelihood train-ing. Over three years, 5,000 disadvantaged girls,young women, and young ex-militia men havereceived literacy/numeracy and/or vocationalskills training.

The scheme took care to win the support of thelocal authorities and leadership and indeed workspartially through them. Two main committees wereformed with representatives from the Ministry ofEducation, women’s groups, youth groups, localNGOs, international NGOs, and UN agencies.Later, there were also four “district” committees.These committees, working with tribal elders and

community groups, select the disadvantaged girlsand young men to receive vouchers.

Two systems operated: In the first system, stu-dents could receive a voucher, which they could useto purchase education or training of their choice.The voucher was redeemable only through theAfrica Educational Trust (AET) and only if AETinspected the training provider and certified its stan-dards. AET also provided training courses for alter-native trainers, craftsmen, and women who wantedto run small training courses (such as carpenters,driving instructors, painters, tailors, nurses).

This system worked best in the larger townswhere there were craftsmen and women whowanted to provide the training and where therewere enough students with vouchers to make itworth their while to run a course—usually 10 to 15students for one particular subject.

The second system, in effect outside the largerurban areas, also offered vouchers, but in addition,there were meetings and discussions with the stu-dents to ask what they wanted to purchase withthem. Based on this, AET then recruited local train-ers to provide the course, paying them against thevalue of the vouchers. This worked best in thesmaller towns and was also important when themajority of students wanted literacy and numeracy.

In a number of cases, a local committee agreed tosupport a project in which a local trainer was settingup a course for a specific group, e.g. a literacy classfor 40 disabled people or a basic education class forthe children of outcastes, to allow them to gainaccess to normal schools.

To identify the people who could apply forvouchers, AET worked with each local committee toreach agreement on definitions on who was eligible.Then AET and the committee worked on fair andtransparent selection procedures in that locality.The AET worked with different committeesbecause, given the fractured nature of the local soci-ety, AET aimed to cover different clan areas, so thatthe central committees would not be accused of biastowards their own clans. Based on the agreed pro-cedures, the committees take responsibility forworking with the local community groups,women’s groups, local authorities, Imams, and clanelders to select the young people who wouldreceive vouchers.


The vouchers are redeemed through a system ofsupervision and accountability. A local AET staffmember monitors each “class” monthly. In the moreremote areas, a local teacher or community workeris paid to do the monitoring, using an agreed pro-cedure and reporting form. Voucher payments arethen made against satisfactory performance. Atpresent, this is measured very simply—attendancerecord of students and teacher over the month,teacher’s written lesson plans over the month, com-parison of work in a random sample of students’exercise books with objectives and work set out inlesson plans, and the actual ability of students tocomplete exercises studied over the past month, asshown in their books and lesson plans.

In many cases, local classes are organized andrun by women’s groups, community groups, andyouth groups in an area. In such cases, payment ismade to the management of the group. For voca-tional courses, individual local trainers or crafts-people train small groups. Again, these are moni-tored and payment made against delivery.

Although SEIGYM does not aim directly at insti-tution or capacity-building beyond the skills andlivelihoods of its learners, it is in effect forming newinstitutional norms, capacities, and skills.

WISE, Ethiopia

The Ethiopian Women In Self-Employment (WISE)program also focuses on training women todevelop and manage businesses. It found thatkeeping proper track of orders, stock, and salesrequires the abilities to read, write, and count.Therefore, WISE introduced a course to assist itsmembers develop those skills. However, Berhanu(2001: 29) reports: “The Record Keeping module ofthe Business training requires that participants areable to read and write. In this regard the illiteratestatus of most of the women posed a problem. Tosolve the problem WISE launched a Literacy andNumeracy Skills improvement program scheduledduring late afternoons. However, the programfailed because of dropouts for various reasons,among which are, as stated by women themselves,lack of time, lack of interest, seeking allowance,sight problems and inability to see the advantagesof being literate.”

Literacy as a prerequisite—reflections

All six programs discussed above address mainlyvery poor women in very poor, mostly rural com-munities. One difference between them is that Sap-tagram, the Notre Dame Foundation, WISE andSEIGYM deal with individual applicants, each onher own account, whereas ADRA and WEEL preferto deal with groups of women who cooperate witheach other in securing, managing, and enlarging thefinances needed to develop businesses, as well as tomeet other exigencies of life. Except for WISE, theyare satisfied that their approaches serve their aimsadequately. The scanty information available doesnot allow any study of comparative effectiveness onany level.

A second difference is that ADRA, WEEL, andSEIGYM contribute to some form of local commu-nity capacity-building, which may in turn serve topromote the development and diversification ofavailable livelihoods. Again, the available documen-tation does not allow any conclusion on that score.

The experience of Ethiopia’s WISE raises thequestion of whether requiring literacy and numer-acy for livelihood training discourages demand forthat training. Verbally reported experience of WEELsuggests that it does. A proportion of women “sus-pend” their enrollment in the preparatory liter-acy/numeracy classes, despite the supplementarymaterials on group development, savings andcredit, but they rejoin, when the course moves on tobusiness development proper. Indeed, additionalwomen enroll, so that the final registration is higherthan the initial. Women in Ethiopia and Nepal seemthen to resist literacy/numeracy that is not directlyconnected with livelihood training.

On the other hand, Saptagram in Bangladeshand the Notre Dame Foundation in the Philippinesreport that the dropout rate from their preparatoryliteracy/numeracy classes is less than 10 percent.Similarly, SEIGYM’s figures for completion andsuccess are high: completion rates of close to 90percent—and successful attainment rates of over 70percent.

These inconsistencies in experiences could resultfrom at least six factors:

• the composition of the learning groups;


• the content of the preparatory courses;

• the way the program is run;

• the adequacy of instructor training;

• the quality of the actual teaching;

• the possibility of cultural differences between thecountries observed. Unfortunately, the documen-tation available does not permit any assessmenteither of the weight of each factor or of how eachfactor might vary according to context.

The composition of the learning groups: The NepalWEEL program recognized that a proportion of itslearners felt that they were already sufficiently liter-ate and numerate and did not need to go throughfurther literacy instruction. The Philippine NotreDame Foundation, on the other hand, requires liter-acy instruction only after ascertaining that its appli-cants really cannot cope with the vocational coursematerials.

The content of the preparatory course: Both thePhilippine Notre Dame Foundation and theBangladesh Saptagram found existing coursesunsatisfactory and designed their own to fit theinterests and needs of their participants. They alsoappear to be successful in implementing very activeand interactive forms of instruction. The EthiopiaWISE program does not report having done so.

The way the program is run: Both the Philippine andBangladesh programs have existed for many yearsand have doubtless developed expertise in helpingparticipants to sustain their interest and motivationand to persevere until completion. While the Soma-liland SEIGYM is a relatively new program, the factthat its participants have vouchers to purchase theirinstruction may create a dynamic of power andaccountability between them and their instructorsthat buoys their interest and perseverance.

Although this report can venture no assessmentof these factors, clearly curriculum designers mustbear them in mind when contemplating similarcourses of literacy and numeracy as preparationand prerequisites for training in livelihoods.

These instances have all been the work of NGOs,both local and international. This characteristic hasrelieved them of obligations to reach mass audi-ences rapidly and has enabled them to pay attentionto local contexts and interests. The Philippine NotreDame Foundation and the Bangladesh Saptagramdo not open operations in a locality until they havesurveyed the communities likely to be involved andascertained what sorts of training programs arelikely to appeal to them. They also take care to gainthe support of the local authorities. The NepalWEEL aims to work with groups of women who arealready clear on what they would like to achievetogether, so that WEEL is confident it is respondingto demand.

From a slightly different angle, the Somalilandwomen and young men who participate in SEIGYMknow that they can purchase what they seek andhave some control over the supplier. By and largethen, it appears that founding literacy-cum-liveli-hood programs on identified interests and usingthem as bases for expanding into new interests issound strategy.

Instructors for the literacy courses: There is someencouragement for participants to recruit their owninstructors from among their schooled friends. Theprograms hope for people who have completed fullsecondary school or at least eight or nine grades,but are prepared to train people with less schooling,if they exhibit the right attitudes and aptitudes forassisting their neighbors to learn new skills. Theprograms accept that a single preparatory session oftraining is insufficient to make these lay personsfully effective literacy instructors and that thesenon-specialists need regular support and periodicrefresher training. They also accept that the literacyinstructors are non-specialists, part-time workersdoing work that has often been the realm of volun-teers. Most come from relatively poor householdsand tend to do better in terms of commitment, reg-ularity, reliability, and general effectiveness, if theyearn some cash remuneration. Some of the pro-grams tend to expect the beneficiary participants tomake some contribution towards the remunerationof their instructors.

While the literacy instructors are non-specialists,the instructors for the livelihood skills are more for-


mally qualified and remunerated as such. Althoughthey can come from the localities where the coursesare offered, as in ADRA, the nature of the trainingrequired generally means that these instructorscannot be selected by their learners.

In terms of impact, the Uganda ADRA couldoffer a small sample of learners who felt their liveli-hoods had benefited materially from the linked lit-eracy and livelihood programs. Both the Bangla-desh Saptagram and Philippine Notre DameFoundation can offer a good many instances of suc-cess stories of women, who learned much and haveturned their learning in both literacy and liveli-hoods to good account in their livelihoods, incomes,family well-being, and education, and also in theirsocial roles and status. However, it is not possible toassess how representative these success stories arein proportion to the total populations that have ben-efited from the two programs.

In its four to five years of operation, the NepalWEEL reports considerable reach and has experi-enced sufficient empirical, if not as yet documented,success to encourage World Education Inc. to adaptthe approach for the states of Andhra and MadhyaPradesh in India. Its impact evaluation, comparingconditions in 2001 with those of the 1998 baselinestudy, should make a rare and significant contribu-tion to knowledge and understanding, when itappears. The impact evaluation will also provide aclearer estimate of the costs of the program, boththose borne by the international and national organ-izations, and those borne by the participants.

The Ethiopia WISE and Somaliland SEIGYM pro-grams have not yet had time to generate long-termimpacts. However, an evaluation by Tomlinson(2001) of the first two years of SEIGYM concludedthat there was ample evidence that the intendedaims of the SEIGYM project had been realized, andthat it was also clear that the program hadunleashed a widespread desire for more courses tobe provided.

In short, the evidence on impact, particularly onthe productivity and diversity of livelihoods ismeager, but what there is, is positive.

Unfortunately, the documentation on costs iseven more meager. No assessment is possible of theoverall and unit costs of any of the programs dis-cussed above.

On the basis of what is reported, the concludingimpression is that making literacy a prerequisite forlivelihood training can be effective if (a) the agencyis, as ADRA, Saptagram and the Notre Dame Foun-dation seem to be, well experienced, well knownand trusted and (b) the passage from the qualifyingliteracy to the desired livelihood training is clear, asthese three organizations, WEEL and SEIGYM seemto substantiate.

Organizing the kind of work that is describedabove is not easy; there have been failures, as WISEillustrates. Another example is a project in India toimprove literacy, agricultural production, and eco-nomic opportunities for the poorest villagers in itstarget area. It formed development units, providedliteracy training for its members, and after they sat-isfied the literacy prerequisites, arranged interest-free loans for them, repayable over 12 months.Despite these good features, the faulty implementa-tion of other aspects led to its premature closing(CIDA 1985).

Other projects combining literacy and liveli-hoods and requiring literacy as a prerequisite arereported from Senegal (PNVA and the Senegal Fed-eration of Village Associations of Fouta) and Burk-ina Faso (MARA–INADES, TINTUA), but in toolittle detail to be discussed here (Closson et al. 1997;and UNESCO, n.d.: 17–18). Closson makes an alltoo familiar observation, “Monitoring and evalua-tion is falling through the cracks” (Closson et al.1997: 22). There is little information on costs andcost-benefit.

Literacy followed by separate livelihood trainingor income-generation activities

Organizations discussed in the preceding sectionused literacy specifically as a preparation for liveli-hood training they conducted themselves. This sec-tion considers instances where the literacy course isconducted by one organization, which then leavesthe livelihood training to another or moves intoincome-generating activities unconnected to previ-ous learning. Current observation in Kenya(Mwangi 2001) echoes the findings of Carron’s team(1989) and suggests that, while participants doindeed appreciate and come for such activities, amajority of instructors either implement them


defectively or not at all. A substantial body of expe-rience from many countries supports this percep-tion. Observations by Lind (1986) in Zimbabwe;Rogers (1997) in Bangladesh, Egypt, India, andKenya; Korboe (1998) in Ghana; and Okech and histeam in Uganda (1999) all tend to the conclusionthat the training and support available for liveli-hoods tends to be rudimentary and unsupported byservices in business development and management.Although the training and income-generating activ-ities may lead to slightly improved incomes forsome of the participants, the outcomes seem to begenerally disappointing. The present companionstudies in Guinea, Senegal, and Uganda foundnothing counter to this broad finding. In fact, thefollowing excerpts tend to confirm it.

From the present study in Kenya: “Vihiga dis-trict…only 10 centers of 110 have income-generat-ing projects. Moyale district…Out of 29 projects,only 9 are functioning.”

From Bangladesh: “Annual income from most ofthe Income Generating Activities as reported by theWomen’s Small Local Organizations (if not underreported) is considerably low to meet the cost of theWSLOs (even to supplement family income).Advice is needed on making IGAs viable and prof-itable” (CCDB 2000: 29).

From Botswana: Of 27 income-generating proj-ects, 13 not doing well, 1 doing very well, 2 doingwell, 1 doing fairly well, 3 are new, 5 need moretraining in skills and business management, 2 haveno information (Legwaila 1996: 13).

From Congo (formerly Zaire): The Evaluation ofOctober 2000 found:

• the collective development activities in whichthe women are engaged do not generate sub-stantial and stable incomes for the women andtheir families;

• fundamental structural problems confront thewomen, which limit their productivity, e.g., re-stricted access to land, no access to technology,difficulties in conserving and marketing theirproduction;

• the system of follow up of credits is insufficientlysystematized and formalized;

• lack of expertise in issues of gender (ELIMU2000: 16).

From Ghana: “The success of this component(income generating activities) has been varied andis difficult to assess. Some initiatives have sufferedfrom lack of proper technical advice” (Crapper et al.1996: 35).

From Ghana: “It has been identified throughgroup discussions that the projects need large scaleIncome Generating Projects in order to realize agreater impact. The small profits made by the IGPsare not adequate to meet the objectives for whichthey were instituted. The small scale IGP also doesnot make it possible for the women’s groups to beable to use the money on an individual basis asloans to improve their living standards” (GILLBT1998: 10).

From Lesotho: “…the income-generating activi-ties are operating such that their assumed or evenknown income-generating qualities are highly ques-tionable. There was poor communication betweenthe management and the participants; as a result, theexpectations of the participants did not coincidewith the project’s intended outputs” (UNDP 1990).

From Namibia: “The strong bias on sewing/needle work training seems to be based on populardemand and is not backed up by income genera-tion/market possibilities and business manage-ment support…[A] direct relationship betweenincome generating options in the program areasand related vocational training could not be estab-lished” (Jansen et al. 1994: 15).

From Uganda: “Here skills training was a featurethat was arranged by project staff as an add-on activ-ity, responding to demand from REFLECT partici-pants as and if means were available. Usually, thesewere one-day sessions on agricultural or small-scaleenterprise themes. Though they were not systemati-cally integrated with the programs, participants wereclearly keen on such events and I saw on severaloccasions that people tried to work with the agricul-tural advice they had been given” (Fiedrich 2001).

These largely negative perceptions do not dimin-ish the fact that successful instances can be found,even if in a very small minority. It is clear that, if thisoption is considered, great care must be taken toensure that the factors that produced the successes


are operating. Despite the lack of information, somespeculation on the factors that produced the disap-pointing results may be helpful.

An obvious immediate point concerns the liter-acy instructors. Large proportions of them, whetherpaid or volunteer, lack either much schooling ormuch grounding in the livelihoods they areexpected to teach. While they may have some ele-mentary knowledge, they are usually not equippedto deal with more complicated technical questions.Nor have they normally had any training in identi-fying market niches, feasibility studies, businessmanagement, accounting, or marketing. They aresimply not qualified for the complex set of tasksthey are urged to undertake. Consequently, theirefforts, while often gallant and admirable, too oftentend to lead to meager effects and disappointment.

Similarly, the organizations that support the lit-eracy instructors tend to specialize in general edu-cation and to possess insufficient, if any, technicalcapacity of their own to support livelihood training.Nor do they usually have the resources to hire tem-porary expertise to support the literacy instructors.Often, they cannot even help the instructors to meetthe travel expenses of invited experts. They dependin effect on wholly voluntary goodwill, which isforthcoming only occasionally.

Further, even where organizations with dis-parate missions agree to cooperate and coordinatetheir efforts, actual implementation falls short ofintentions. The FAO supplies this example: “TheFarmers’ Training and Functional Literacy Pro-gramme in India required three ministries (Agricul-ture, Education and Information and Broadcasting)to implement a joint plan of action all the way downto the local level, involving a number of differentcomponents. The interim evaluation carried out bythe programme’s Evaluation Committee in 1977noted that the “kind of coordination and integra-tion, both in planning and in operations, that hadbeen visualized at the time of the initiation of theprogram was hardly ever achieved in practice”(FAO 1980: 39–40).

In sum, literacy programs that lead on to trainingin livelihoods offer a worthwhile option for policymakers, only when two conditions can be satisfied.First, the link between the literacy content and thelivelihoods in view must be explicit and clear (pos-sibly some skills in reading, writing, and calculatingare required as conditions for entry to livelihoodtraining). Second, the subsequent livelihood train-ing or income generating activity must be of goodquality with fully competent instruction. Alsoneeded are the usual requisites of good materials,good support, and good administration.

As for organization, it is worth noting thatADRA, the Notre Dame Foundation, Saptagram,WEEL, and SEIGYM have evidently used accumu-lated experience to put these requisites in place.Further, these are single organizations that do notdepend on others for the actual implementation oftheir work. In that respect, they are unified com-mands, not coalitions of cooperating partners. Theydo not suffer from the problem the FAO reportnoted above, namely that coordination and cooper-ation between organizations with different missionsis too often unreliable.6

1. Personal survey by Ms. Heidrun Siebeneiker of theGerman Development Service, working in the Governmentof Uganda’s Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Develop-ment.

2. It is not clear whether ADRA trains different instructorsfrom a locality in different sets of livelihood skills to cater fordifferent livelihood possibilities.

3. This is a pragmatic improvement on the former practice ofrequiring some form of school certificate.

4. The international non-governmental organization spon-soring WEEL, World Education, assisted the government ofNepal in creating the national literacy curriculum.

5. WEEL is exceptional in that it undertook a baseline studyof its participants and monitored them over three years. Theevaluation of its impact is due to be published in August orSeptember, 2001.

6. This point does not deny the possibilities of successfulcooperation on specific, finite tasks, like developing hand-books on specialized topics. It casts doubt only on reliance onhopes of open-ended, indefinite commitments to cooperationin the face of competing obligations and commitments.


24

6

Livelihood training withliteracy components

Livelihood training or Income-generationactivities leading to literacy

his chapter examines work that began withlivelihood skills, then found that somedegree of literacy and numeracy was neces-

sary to develop the skills further. The ADRA–FALprogram in Uganda and the Ethiopia WISE as wellas the Bangladesh Saptagram’s work, described ear-lier, are examples; they originally attempted toteach only livelihood skills, but found that the lackof literacy blocked their efforts. Saptagram’s partic-ipants actually requested literacy and numeracyinstruction (although bookkeeping remains a sub-ject that they shy away from!) (Guttman 1994: 16).

The Rukungiri Women’s Groups1 A somewhat simi-lar experience occurred in the Rukungiri district ofUganda. Women’s groups had been well estab-lished there, with savings and credit schemes andengaged in traditional income-generating activitiessuch as bee-keeping, poultry raising, basket weav-ing, and the like. In 1996, some of these groupsasked to participate in the national FunctionalAdult Literacy (FAL) program, even though theirmembers had on average attended primary schoolfor five years.2 Focus group discussions discoveredthat the groups wanted to strengthen their literacyskills to feel more confident and in control in under-standing loan agreements and managing their sav-ings and credit accounts.

After the FAL course, these women’s groups feltthat, in addition to achieving their immediate aims,they had benefited from the functional literacy cur-riculum in unexpected ways. Some had used theidea of organic farming to start their own marketgardens, which had enhanced both home consump-tion and domestic income through sales. Some hadbegun tree nurseries and had sold seedlings. Anumber had taken up fuel-saving stoves, which hadreduced their need for firewood and releasedincome for other purposes. Overall, nearly nine outof ten of the women interviewed claimed to havestarted new income-generating work as a result ofparticipating in the FAL program and that they hadin consequence improved their conditions of living.An evaluation in 1999 (Okech et al. 2001) showedthat the Rukungiri sample of FAL graduates scoredhighest in the national sample on complex compre-hension and numeracy tests and that overall,respondents in Rukungiri were the most “modern,”particularly in the adoption of improved agricul-tural practices.

As is customary with the FAL program, thesewomen’s groups needed to find their own literacyinstructors. Given the relatively high degree ofschooling among their members, this had provedeasy, and, as the instructors were themselves groupmembers, teaching free of charge was no problem.The government’s community development staffarranged for the necessary training in how to teachthe course, but they were unable to arrange for sup-

T

plies of texts and other teaching materials. How-ever, most of the women were able to buy theirown, which suggests that they were poor, but notdestitute.

In this instance of the Rukungiri women’sgroups, the literacy effort was clearly stronglydemand-driven, arising from a sharply felt need.Hence, there were apparently no problems aboutmotivation, inappropriate curriculum, poor instruc-tion, or unobtainable teaching and learning materi-als. As the 1999 evaluation confirmed, the outcomeswere good.

There can be no dispute that the Rukungiriwomen’s groups are an exceptional example of self-selection and are not typical in either literacy pro-grams or vocational education. Also, many, perhapsmost, of them had a head start, in that they hadalready had some primary schooling. Nevertheless,they do signal to policy makers that identifyinggroups whose activities could clearly benefit fromnumeracy and literacy—that is, “literacy second,”to use Rogers’ phrase—could raise the efficiencyand effectiveness of training programs as well aslower the costs.

A less direct message concerns the curriculum.Although the Rukungiri women’s groups soughtnumeracy and literacy mainly for business andaccounting purposes, they worked with the FALprimers, which deal with such topics only tangen-tially. Nonetheless, the Rukungiri women not onlyused the curriculum to suit their own purposes,they claim to have reaped unexpected ideas andbenefits from it as well. The signal seems to be that,given purpose, demand, and motivation among thelearners, the detailed content of a curriculum maybe of only secondary importance.

Animators and hand-pump technicians

A second experience where groups came to realizethat they needed literacy to fulfill their purposesoccurred in the Banda district of India with an NGOin the women’s movement, Mahila Samakhya(Nirantar 1997). The experience included twogroups of women with a common interest inwomen’s empowerment and betterment, but withdifferent responsibilities. The behavior of the twogroups towards literacy illustrated how carefully

interests, motivations, and family circumstancesneed to be taken into account, even in consideringlivelihood training.

One group of non-literate, poor village womenfrom “untouchable” castes were trained as paid“awareness animators” in the employ of MahilaSamakhya, while another very similar group, weretrained in the maintenance and repair of waterhand pumps. Unlike the first group, the latterreceived no regular pay, but variable and notalways reliable honoraria for their work from thevillagers whose pumps they maintained. It soonbecame evident to both groups of women that theywould be able to operate more effectively with theskills of literacy, so a special camp for intensiveinstruction of 180 hours (approximately threeweeks full-time) was organized with a specially tai-lored curriculum.

Although a majority of the awareness animatorsfelt able to take part in the course, only a few pumptechnicians did. The explanation seemed to betwofold. First, the animators did not lose incomefrom being absent from work, whereas the pumptechnicians did. In other words, the pump techni-cians faced a high opportunity cost. Second,whereas the animators needed to write quite fre-quently to a number of offices on a variety of topics,the pump technicians needed mainly to read theirmaintenance manuals occasionally, which theycould usually manage through the schooled mem-bers of their families and friends. In other words,there was an inequality of need and hence aninequality of motivation.

Also, the mastery of literacy after only 180 hoursof instruction and practice was fragile for bothgroups, but more so for the pump technicians thanfor the animators. The reasons for this are notgiven. Later follow-up found that the animatorshad for the most part been able to practice andimprove their new skills through producing regu-lar local broadsheets for their groups. In otherwords, they were doing their jobs more effectively,even though they might not have been earning anymore money. In contrast, the pump technicians hadnot found much use for reading or writing andallowed their literacy skills to deteriorate, eventhough their performance as technicians remainedsatisfactory.


This experience seems to confirm the signal fromRukungiri: education designers who plan to insertliteracy into livelihood training, should appreciatekeenly that the more participants are convinced thatthe skills of literacy are indispensable to their work,productivity, and effectiveness, the more stronglythey will be willing to undertake the necessarylearning and to bear all the costs, in terms of time,effort, direct expenses, income foregone, inconven-ience and other indirect costs. Fiedrich’s observa-tion in Senegal would seem to support this: “Myimpression from a two-day visit was that the liter-acy training here was accepted as a loop thatwomen and girls felt they had to jump through soas to get to the real goodies” (Fiedrich 2001).

Unlike the Rukungiri women’s groups, NotreDame Foundation, Saptagram, WEEL and SEIGYM,the Mahila Samakhya did not ask the animators andpump technicians to elect their own literacy instruc-tors. Just as it had selected the trainers in the skillsof animation for “social awareness” and negotiatedfor the trainers in the maintenance of hand waterpumps, so Mahila Samakhya itself supplied andpaid the literacy instructors at the special intensivecamp. Like Saptagram, Mahila Samakhya foundthat the literacy instructional materials availablelocally did not suit its participants’ and its owninterests. It therefore developed its own.

No other programs were found that began withlivelihoods and came to recognize that literacyinstruction was needed to bring them to betterfruition.

The two cases just discussed highlight an impor-tant difference between programs that are govern-ment-led and standard across a country and thosethat are instigated by smaller organizations. TheRukungiri women’s groups had to use and makethe best of the standard FAL curriculum. In con-trast, Mahila Samakhya rejected the standard localmaterials and developed its own to suit the interestsof its learners more closely. This illustrates the flex-ibility and responsiveness that a small, client-cen-tered organization can exercise, compared to therelative rigidity of a larger, centrally-driven, andhierarchical program (the officials of Rukungiri dis-trict had neither the authority nor the resources todevelop special materials for the women’s groups).The inference is that policies that aim to be client-

centered would need to devise frameworks thatencourage the kind of responsiveness exhibited byMahila Samakhya.

On the other hand, the success of the Rukungiriwomen’s groups with the standard curriculum doescounsel against underestimating the capacity of peopleto learn under less than ideal circumstances, whenthey really want to. This in turn underlines the impor-tance of demand, when designing policies for adulteducation and training. Conversely, where demand isnot strong, devices are needed to reinforce it.

No information on costs was available for theMahila Samakhya project. For the Rukungiri women’sgroups, the only data are those calculated for theUganda FAL as a whole. These put the cost per certi-fied graduate at US$4–5 (Okech et al. 2001: 96).

Integrated literacy and livelihood and income-generation activities

Among the first efforts to integrate occupationaland literacy training were the curricula developedin UNESCO’s Experimental World Literacy Pro-gramme in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Theyincluded both agricultural livelihoods, like cottonfarming in Iran, and waged employment in facto-ries and urban centers. The overall evaluation(UNDP/UNESCO 1976) found that the experiencesand outcomes had unfortunately not been suffi-ciently well recorded to be of strong use to educa-tors and policy makers. More recently, in the 1990s,Rogers in his survey of Bangladesh, Egypt, India,and Kenya found that efforts to integrate livelihoodand literacy training were very rare. However, somedo exist.

SODEFITEX

The first such program in the current intensive studycomes from Senegal (Sall 2001) and concerns cottonfarmers. Senegal might have provided three moresimilar programs for study, but the public corpora-tions that sponsored them were abolished duringstructural adjustment, and all records have disap-peared with them. The program in this study wasinitiated by SODEFITEX (Society for the Develop-ment of Textile Fibers) when, after nine years of exis-tence, it decided in 1983 to open a literacy program


for cotton producers. Its decision was driven by therecognition that literacy was one of the strongestlimiting factors in modernizing cotton productionand transferring responsibility for distribution andmarketing to the cotton farmers themselves.

In view of the scale of the problem—one estimateput the rate of illiteracy among the producers atmore than 80 percent—SODEFITEX selected aninteresting strategy. It aimed first to train and makeliterate five members of each of its 1,740 producerassociations (Associations de Base des Produc-teurs). For the longer term, it aimed to enable atleast one member in each of its 27,179 farming fam-ilies to become sufficiently literate to take advan-tage of technological and management advances. Inline with this gradualist approach, SODEFITEXorganized classes and training for some 2,400 farm-ers per year between 1984 and 1999, reaching a totalof 35,865 learners in the 15 years (5,908 of themwere women).

The specially designed curriculum comprisestraining in cotton production, and other aspects ofagriculture and livestock raising, combined with lit-eracy and numeracy derived from the requirementsof these activities. The technical instructors are SOD-EFITEX employees. At first, the literacy instructorswere also engaged from outside by SODEFITEX, at aratio of approximately 25 learners per instructor(moniteur). However, as farmers became literate,SODEFITEX began to select the more successful new“graduates” as literacy instructors, giving them thenecessary training for the task.

For the first six years, 1984–1989, SODEFITEXran an eight-month literacy course, spread over twoyears. Finding that this pattern resulted in non-con-tinuation with some participants and a loss of skillswith others, SODEFITEX introduced what it calledan intensive course on a trial basis in 1990 and 1991,then generalized it in 1992. This new patternrequired participation over only four months in asingle year, January to April, in the slack agricul-tural season, rather than the original eight monthsover two years. However, to offset the shortening, itrequired four hours a day, six days a week for 17weeks—a total of 400 hours of tuition and practice.This pattern seems to suit the farmers and achieveits technical and literacy objectives, and it still pre-vailed in 2001.

In addition to supplying learning materialsworth US$10.00 per learner, SODEFITEX contractedwith the Cotton Producer Groups for the learners toobtain loans for the various inputs required for pro-duction. There is thus immediate and continuingsupport to learn and to implement and practicewhat is learned.

In terms of livelihood results, SODEFITEXreports that producers, who had had the trainingand mastered literacy/numeracy, showed six per-cent higher productivity than those who remainedilliterate. It cannot be determined whether this out-come is due more to the technical content than tothe literacy skills of the program.

However, SODEFITEX believes a more importantoutcome of combining technical with literacy train-ing is the emergence of producer organizations capa-ble of (a) managing the commercialization of thecotton crops; (b) managing agricultural credit; and(c) serving the public interest through assuring foodsecurity and organizing village stores for veterinarymedicines, agricultural inputs, and other supplies.These village teams have become an essential link forthe rapid increase of production and incomes.

For their part, the graduates of the training feelthat the determining factor in their being able totake over increasing responsibilities from SODEFI-TEX is precisely the fact that they can now read,write, and calculate accurately. They are also awarethat their growing ability to take responsibility forthe affairs of their villages is due to their literacy. Ineffect, the pattern of training fosters individual pro-ductivity, group responsibility, and eventuallysocial responsibility. In other words, the SODEFI-TEX package starts with improving livelihood, thenempowers people to “democratize” and take morecontrol over local affairs.

This experience of incorporating literacy intocapacity-building and institutional development tosustain and enhance livelihoods recalls the similareffects generated by ADRA in Uganda, SEIGYM inSomaliland, and WEEL in Nepal. Vocational andlivelihood education policies should adapt and incor-porate these successful aspects to reinforce and sus-tain the effects of education and training programs.

For all its impressive success, the SODEFITEXexperience, like ADRA’s, also sounds a warning notto expect too much of adult education and training.


Despite its focused and intensive curriculum, well-tested materials, well-trained technical instructors,well-trained and supported literacy instructors andlinks with credit and supplies, as well as its expert-ise accumulated over 15 years, the program wit-nessed a dropout rate of around 20 percent in1998/99 during the four-month “intensive” period.A further 10 percent or so declined to take the liter-acy and knowledge test at the end of the course. Ofthose who did take the test, about 80 percentachieved the pass mark or better. These statisticsshow that more than half the original enrollees per-severed and succeed according to the criteria set bySODEFITEX itself. These numbers do not of coursenegate all the benefits that even those who earnedless than the pass mark or declined to take the testgained from the knowledge, skills and ideas theyderived from the course. But they do signal thathigh quality implementation and long-term sup-port are required to achieve even these less-than-perfect outcomes.

An intriguing sidelight from the SODEFITEXexperience concerns the comparison between maleand female participants. Statistics about the 35,865participants (29,957 men, 5,908 women) over theperiod 1984–1999 show the following:

Female % Male %

Enrolled 100.0 100.0Tested 57.4 71.5Passed 55.4 54.6Percent who passed of those tested 96.5 76.4

These figures suggest that, among the cotton pro-ducers of SODEFITEX, higher proportions of thewomen are more reluctant to attempt the test, butthose who do are almost certain to succeed. Higherproportions of the men are willing to brave the test,but lower proportions succeed at it. Further, if theSODEFITEX participants can be taken to representwider populations, they signal that adult educatorsshould find more ways than conventional tests toassess what their learners have actually learned.

WEP/Nepal

The second case in this sub-category, the Women’sEmpowerment Program of Nepal (WEP/N), is par-

ticularly interesting, because it runs in the samecountry as WEEL and has similar objectives. It aimsto enable very poor women to identify, develop,and manage opportunities to improve their liveli-hoods and incomes. At the same time, it seeks toenable local NGOs to build their capacities to dolikewise. Also like WEEL, it undertook a baselinestudy of the conditions of its prospective partici-pants and their communities before it launchedoperations. Similarly, its first impact evaluation wasdue for publication during the autumn of 2001.

Like WEEL, WEP/N is supported by an interna-tional NGO, PACT. Unlike WEEL, however,WEP/N does not teach literacy as a preparation orprerequisite for livelihood training, but combinesthe two from the start of the course. It does not usethe national literacy curriculum, as WEEL does.Instead, it has developed its own curriculum out ofthe vocabulary and practices of savings, credit, andmicro-enterprise. Its booklets make a progressiveseries: “Our Group,” “Forming Our Village Bank,”“Grow Your Business With Credit,” “Micro-Enter-prise,” and finally “Linkages” (CRI Consult1999: 6–7).

This approach seems to respond to a lesson in theUNDP/UNESCO (1976: 159) critical assessment ofthe Experimental World Literacy Programme:“EWLP does offer evidence supporting the linkbetween a problem-oriented curriculum, on the onehand, and results judged to be favorable, on theother… Analysis of all programmes that producedstatistically significant socio-economic effectsdeemed to be positive led the Evaluation Unitattached to UNESCO’s Literacy Division to formu-late the following hypothesis: ‘The more closelycontent focuses on problems actually encounteredby workers in the course of their productive activ-ity, the more effective the functional literacy pro-grammes.’ Data selected from two projects (Indiaand the United Republic of Tanzania) tend gener-ally to confirm this hypothesis.”

However, a further observation follows on thevery next page to caution against an excessivelynarrow interpretation: “It may therefore be con-cluded that very high curricular specificity is notnecessarily a sufficient precondition for success. Adynamic environment seems to be more conduciveto success than a static one. The above-mentioned


research concluded that functional literacy ‘bringsabout a change for the better on condition that it isassociated with a process of genuine innovation (ofa political, social or technical nature) in which theparticipants are themselves involved.’

“By and large then: (a) relevant problem-basedcurricula seem to have produced results judged tobe positive by EWLP when (b) subject matter wasnot necessarily narrowly, rigidly or mechanicallyspecific in terms of the learners’ jobs, but when (c) ittook into account a broader environment that was(d) characterized by true innovations that person-ally concerned the participants.

“The more the content of the course takes intoaccount the workers’ cultural environment, themore effective the functional literacy programme”(1976: 160).

Like WEEL, WEP/N works with local NGOs thatwork with groups of poor women rather than withindividuals. The program has so far reached 6,500groups with a total membership of some 130,000poor women (many more than WEEL). The prelim-inary and provisional findings of the evaluation(Ashe & Parrott 2001) are that literacy rates in thegroups have risen from 28 to nearly 80 percent,while the proportion of women in business hasrisen from 14 to 66 percent. Cumulative savingsmore than doubled between June 1999 and March2001, from US$720,000 to US$1,600,000, while thenumber of members taking out loans during a six-month period increased from 17,000 to 58,000.(Households with per capita incomes of less thanUS$162 per year make up 80 percent of the mem-bers.) At this point, the evaluation is tending to theoverall conclusion that WEP/N’s approach is moreeffective than other strategies in accomplishing itsobjectives for establishing a sustainable savings andcredit system without external micro-finance insti-tutions, encouraging soundly run micro-enterprisesand imparting usable and permanent literacy andnumeracy.3

WEP/N appears to enjoy high rates of regularattendance by its participants and very low rates ofdropout. Two factors may help explain this. One isthe close linking of literacy/numeracy with thelivelihood core of the program. The other may beWEP/N’s parallel emphasis on social action. A 1999evaluation suggested that, in the light of WEP/N’s

progress, “… a package of interventions hoping tohave a positive impact on women’s empowermentin Nepal should include i) some form of literacy; ii)rights, responsibilities and advocacy; and iii) eco-nomic participation of women in productiveendeavors” (CRI Consult Inc. 1999: 33).

ACOPAM

The third program that integrates livelihood andliteracy training was in existence for 21 years andended in 1999. Based in Dakar, Senegal, it includedseveral countries in West Africa. Although the gov-ernments of these countries were involved, theprogram was sponsored and promoted by the Inter-national Labour Office and the Norwegian govern-ment. Its acronym was ACOPAM, which stood forthe French title, “Appui associatif et coopératif auxInitiatives de Développement à la Base”. The finalreport (ILO 1999) cites 17 impact and case studies onwhich its conclusions are based.4

ACOPAM aimed chiefly to help poor ruralpeople, especially women, to improve their liveli-hoods and make more productive use of availableresources. It also aimed to enable members of coop-erative groups, again especially women, to gainfuller information about the state of their groups, tomake their elected officers and employees moreaccountable to them, and to take more active part inthe running and development of the cooperatives. Itaimed, too, to help the elected officers carry outtheir obligations more effectively. In current parl-ance, ACOPAM was concerned with production,the environment, and empowerment.

Literacy—and even more, numeracy—were nec-essary for these purposes, and not only for the basiclivelihoods themselves. Like WEP/N in Nepal,ACOPAM found that existing literacy instructionalmaterials did not fit its purposes. Over the years, itdeveloped no fewer than 22 of its own literacy cur-ricula in several West African languages, all derivedfrom the vocabularies and practices of crops, coop-eratives, savings, credit, and micro-enterprise man-agement and marketing. The instructional methodcombined straightforward technical content with anadaptation of Paolo Freire’s consciousness raisingapproach. As Millican (1990: 7) observes, “Literacyfor self-management within cooperatives requires a


combination of these two approaches; one that isboth tied in to production and has the capacity toempower. Its importance is needed and recognizedby the farmers themselves, which makes it poten-tially a powerful programme. It not only serves theadministrative needs of production, but provides aframework for increasing agricultural knowledgeand improving organizational skills.”

As other programs have done, ACOPAM workedwith local groups and encouraged them to recruittheir own literacy instructors from among suitablyqualified friends and neighbors, whom it thentrained for the task and helped to remunerate. Thetechnical instructors in agriculture, horticulture andcooperative management, however, were specialistsrecruited and paid by the program.

Here, we may note that the UNDP/UNESCO(1976: 135) critical assessment of the ExperimentalWorld Literacy Program recorded, “… the impres-sion that technicians who also taught the three R’sachieved better overall results than most schoolteachers who instructed technical as well as three Rsubjects.”

Although the final report itself offers little quanti-tative data on reach, impact, or costs, it makes clearthat the two decades of trial, review, and adaptationvalidated the strategy, methods, and materials thatACOPAM developed and used. The program suc-ceeded in enabling large numbers of poor ruralpeople, particularly women, to learn how to bringunused and new resources into production, tomanage new production techniques for familiarcrops, and to handle new crops and products to theconsiderable benefit of themselves and their families.It also enabled them to take more active, competent,and confident interest in their cooperative organiza-tions and their day-to-day operations and financing.

Costs

In all three cases discussed above, no informationon costs was available.

Institutional development

These three programs, like others already dis-cussed, all pay attention to institutional develop-ment in support of livelihood development. They

recognize that education and training for individu-als and small groups on their own are insufficient toprovide the supporting frameworks that enablepeople to earn and enhance their livelihoods.

Workplace literacy – 1

In addition to the three programs just described, thepresent study found some documentation on twoinstances of “workplace literacy,” one in Egypt, andthe other in Botswana. Whereas the first three pro-grams cater to people who are self-employed, thesetwo address people in waged employment. Becausethe project in Egypt developed special curricula forits workers, it will be discussed here. In theBotswana project, the integration of the curriculumcontent with the job milieu is not clear, so it will belooked at later.

The project in Egypt ran from 1990 to 1998 (GTZ1999: 3). Its curricula were oriented to the workerswho were to take the courses, and the employerspermitted all the instruction to take place duringworking hours (1999: 9). In the whole seven-yearperiod, the project enrolled about 4,500 participants(1999: 19). An attempt to evaluate the benefits of theproject concluded, “In this respect, the economiceffects for the target group, as also for the enterprises,are not significant. But one might infer that, in thelonger term, industry would profit in severalways…”

Unfortunately, the evaluation of this eight-yearprogram offers no information on any of the attain-ments of the learners, the selection and training ofthe instructors, the application of learning, or thecosts, either gross or unit. Neither does it analyzewhy a program, which appears to have all factorsoperating in its favor, should produce such insignif-icant effects.

Literacy and livelihood and income-generationactivities in parallel but separate

Rogers observed that livelihood and literacyoccurred most frequently as quite separate, almostdivorced, components in the same programs. Hecited a program that promoted and taught goatproduction as a livelihood but used a literacyprimer that did not contain the word for a goat,


while the literacy instructor had not taught theword, precisely because it was not in the text. Thepresent Guinea study (Diallo 2001) describes Cen-ters of “Professionalizing” Literacy, many of themprivately run, that experience stronger demand forvocational training than for literacy, and, apartfrom some technical vocabulary, make little con-nection between so-called functional literacy andpractical activities. In similar vein, Kamauobserved that, despite a common literacy curricu-lum, classes undertook a diversity of income-gen-erating projects:

“Nine out of the twelve centres visited duringthe course of this study had agricultural demon-stration plots where the learners practised modernmethods of farming with the technical help of thelocal agricultural extension workers. Whateverproducts were harvested from these demonstrationplots were sold and the income given to the group.Two centres were making baskets and knitting. Thecompleted items were sold and in turn the membersgot cash which was used to expand group projectsor divided among the members. Four classes hadplanted napier grass which they sold to membersand to other local farmers. There were a further twoclasses which had planted tree seedlings and thelearners were able to sell the seedlings to them-selves and the local community raising an incomefor the group. One literacy class had a project ofselling charcoal and fuel wood to the local people.The evaluator learnt that this particular class hadbought a commercial plot at a cost of thirty thou-sand shillings (approximately US$1,500)” (Kamau1990: 60).

Although failure to demonstrate the relevance ofliteracy and numeracy to a particular livelihoodcould undermine interest and motivation (see theinstances of WEEL’s “suspended” enrollments inNepal and the water pump technicians in Indiaabove) the Kenya vignette at the Izava locationshowed that, although they used a common generalcurriculum not necessarily related to their incomegenerating activities, “Centres with income-gener-ating projects had 80 percent attendance rates,while centres without projects had only 20 percentattendance rates” (Mwangi 2001).

Nonetheless, most observation also shows thatattempts to run the two components in parallel tend

to emphasize one to the neglect of the other; and inany case not to generate much income or indeedmuch literacy. Nonetheless, we have encounteredtwo programs, which do seem to manage the bal-ance successfully.

Farmers’ Field Schools—Integrated pest andproduction management

The first example not only covers a number ofcountries but also seems to be favored by a numberof international organizations. It is the Farmers’Field Schools with Integrated Production and PestManagement. The United Nations Food and Agri-cultural Organization (FAO) in India and severalother countries, World Education Inc. in Nepal(2000), CARE International in Sri Lanka, and possi-bly others have applied it and advocate its widerapplication.

A Farmers’ Field School for Integrated Pro-duction and Pest Management takes a group offarmers through an entire season of a crop, fromsoil preparation to harvest, storage, and market-ing. It aims to help them optimally manage all theinputs in terms of nourishment, pest and diseasecontrol, and use of natural and manufactured aids.The farmers—men and women—continue to farmtheir own land throughout, but they observe asmall plot that demonstrates externally recom-mended practice for comparison with local currentpractices.

The observations and comparisons require closeand detailed measurements and recording by eachfarmer, which means they require the farmers to besufficiently literate and numerate to be able to takeand record the measurements. Although Kenya5

reports that most of its participating farmers wereliterate in both Swahili and English, many farmerselsewhere, even, surprisingly, in Sri Lanka(ASPBAE 2000f), are not able to manage the tasksand need tuition in literacy and numeracy. The factthat the farmers see the need and want to partici-pate in the program provides sufficient motivationto start learning the skills.

According to FAO,6 the motivation is strongenough to enable the program to use already exist-ing literacy materials and to apply the “user pays”principle in remunerating the literacy instructors.


The farmers recruit their own suitably qualifiedinstructors, and FAO contracts a suitably qualifiedorganization to train and to support the selectedpeople. FAO’s view receives support from an expe-rience in Senegal in the early 1990s. Millican writes,“The introduction of literacy was here intended forvery specific tasks, that of a move by the govern-ment to ‘responsibilize’ farmers, i.e. to make themresponsible for the management of their own irri-gation systems. There were specific tasks likeincome and management sheets, and forms for themaintenance and costs of looking after an irrigationpump, and management of a revolving fund thatfarmers had to learn to use.

“1. We had to address questions such as, do wefocus on learning these or look at literacymore broadly? We also had to include a lot ofinformation about marketing/storing/sell-ing grain, i.e. information that might increasepeople’s own choices.

“2. This programme like many others had toconfront the language of literacy, but ratherthan make a choice about language we choselanguage according to specific tasks, i.e. cer-tain forms had to be filled in in English,others in Pulaar, others using diagrams.

“3. The programme was a success in as far as itdelivered what people needed at the pointthey needed it, hence questions of motivationand keeping groups going became irrelevant,farmers needed the information and thereforekept coming” (personal communication 2001).

World Education believes that the Farmer FieldSchools constitute a proven model to promote bothsustainable agriculture and literacy supportive ofother dimensions of development. It concludes,“The key factor in all successful IPM programs inAsia has been high-quality training. At times, somecountries have chosen to reduce the quantity andoverall quality of training, and these programshave failed” (2000: 5) and “… we have also learnedthat gradual expansion is more prudent and leadsto a more stable program with broad, district-levelsupport” (2000: 6).

RDRS

The second example of “parallel” learning withlivelihoods on the one side and literacy and numer-acy, on the other, comes from Bangladesh. TheRangpur Dinajpur Rural Service (RDRS) offers apackage of livelihood skills, mainly in small-scaleagricultural production; social knowledge, attitudesand practices; health practices; and literacy for themajority of its members, who have had less than fiveyears of primary schooling (RDRS 1999). Its literacycourse is general, in the sense of including a range oftopics not necessarily related to any of the liveli-hoods in which it offers training. Its literacy instruc-tors and its technical instructors are separate cadres.Although the evaluation report studied does notcontain figures, RDRS nonetheless judges that it iseffective in both literacy/numeracy and livelihoods.

Once again, unfortunately, no information wasavailable on costs for either of these two programs.

Inference

Although the empirical evidence is certainly light,the overall impression is that, as long as the voca-tional or livelihood training is trusted and valued,the learners will accept the literacy/numeracy aswell. Examples cited in the next section will rein-force this impression.

Livelihood-led, but unclassified

This section examines sets of experiences, which,for the lack of sufficient information, cannot beclassed as either “integrated” or “parallel.” First,between 1982 and 2000, the International Fund forAgricultural Development (IFAD) supported agri-cultural programs with literacy components in atleast six countries: Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana,Guinea, Mali, and Senegal. The outcomes of the ear-lier efforts in the 1980s seem to have been suffi-ciently satisfactory to have encouraged furtherwork in 2000.

In 1982, the design of the Mali Village Develop-ment Fund (IFAD 1982: 15) included “a functionalliteracy programme to support credit, marketingand agricultural production.” The 1990 intermedi-ate evaluation report (1990: 37.105) stated (in


French) “Functional literacy in the Bambara lan-guage is one of the components which has met withthe most success.” 7 Similarly, the Guinea ForestRegion project (IFAD 1992: 29) proposed “func-tional literacy will be supported ‘in response totechnical requirements of production… financialmanagement needs… and social needs… Eight lit-eracy instructors will be supported… a total of 7,000beneficiaries would be trained…half of the func-tional literacy programme beneficiaries would bewomen.’ ” In 2000, the appraisal report for a projectto support small market gardeners stated, “Finally,in the villages where demand is expressed, the proj-ect will support programmes of functional literacy.Modules of functional literacy can be programmedafter the manner of those undertaken by AnimationRurale de Korhogo or by Projet d’Appui pour leDéveloppement Rural at the level of the rural funds,literacy in French for certain officers (requests forthis kind have been registered for learning to read)”(IFAD 2000: 17, 77).

Unfortunately for the purposes of this study,none of the documents available notes whether theprojects supported by IFAD follow the model ofACOPAM in integrating livelihoods and literacy orthe model of the Farmer Field Schools in runningthe two components parallel to each other.

The present Guinea study (Diallo 2001) examinesthe “Project in Support of Small Farmers in LowerNorth Guinea,” which, in the manner of ACOPAM,aims to promote agricultural production, especiallyrice, increase food security, improve conditions oflife, develop rural infrastructure, and strengthencommunity institutions. To help achieve and estab-lish all this, the project organizes literacy work thataddresses already existing groups of farmers, whocan identify their own voluntary instructors. Itappears that the project uses already existinginstructional materials, so that the literacy compo-nent is parallel to rather than integrated with theactivities designed to achieve the program’s objec-tives. Even so, the project finds that a four-month8

course suffices for its purposes: 80 percent of thelocal officials who take the course succeed in “grad-uating,” while some 50 percent of the ordinarymembers do. More practically, virtually everybodylearns to complete the various forms that thegroups use to manage their affairs.

Although no detailed evaluations or impactstudies were available, IFAD’s experiences havenonetheless clearly convinced it that including a lit-eracy/numeracy component in support of rural andagricultural development, that is, livelihoodimprovement programs, is necessary, feasible and,worthwhile.

Workplace literacy – 2

Botswana’s “Literacy at the Workplace Project”proj-ect was the second workplace literacy program thestudy found (the first was a project in Egypt—Workplace Literacy – 1). A number of mostly large,public-sector employers in Botswana arrange fortheir non-literate employees to spend some work-time learning how to read, write, and calculate,both for the purposes of their work and possiblepromotion and for more general education (Leg-waila 1996, 1997). Unfortunately, the documenta-tion available to the current study does not makeclear whether the courses use materials specific toparticular jobs or workplaces or materials availablefor the national literacy program. In 1996, the proj-ect enrolled 838 learners, of whom 331 (39.5 per-cent) were women. In 1997, enrollments haddeclined to 578, of whom 120 (20.8 percent) werewomen. The two reports available offer no furtherdetails on how the project functions or what it costs.The small and apparently declining scale of the pro-gram raises questions about the implementation,value, and effectiveness of such schemes. Theseissues are not explored in the reports. Nevertheless,the impression is that the employers believe that theliteracy courses are helpful.

The mining companies in South Africa, Zambia,and Zimbabwe have for several decades offeredtheir non-literate employees classes in English liter-acy and numeracy. Public corporations in India arealso known to have organized such classes. Thisstudy was unfortunately unable to locate anyassessments of the effects of these classes on eithertheir beneficiaries or their providers. It is possiblethat, as Mikulecky found in Canada, the corpora-tions regard these educational efforts more as wel-fare expenditures for the less qualified members oftheir workforces and less as investments in raisingthe quality of their human resources.


The Experimental World Literacy Programmefound that literacy classes offered in workplaceswere often less effective than hoped. The data avail-able to its evaluators did not permit any analysis ofthe various factors that might have explained this.The contrast with the positive impressions of workwith the self-employed suggests that the issuerequires some investigation.

1. For a related case, see the Kenya Karungu Women’sGroup, pp. 118–119.

2. In the country-wide sample, of which this was part, nearly40 percent of the successful graduates of the national Func-tional Adult Literacy Program had had five years or more ofprimary schooling.

3. Not surprisingly, there are arguments that these improve-ments cannot be ascribed solely to WEP/N.

4. At the time of writing this report, the ILO had not beenable to retrieve the studies.

5. Personal communication with FFS managers in Nairobi.

6. Interview with FAO/IPM staff, Rome, May, 2001.

7. The project closed in 1994. No impact evaluation appearedto be available.

8. Information to calculate the number of instructional hoursinvolved is not available.


35

7

Synthesis of findingsfrom the two strategies

t is important to remember that the evidencereviewed is not particularly strong, so any infer-ences necessarily lack a solid empirical base and

analytical rigor. Like the “Critical Assessment of theExperimental World Literacy Programme,” thisstudy was compelled to offer its findings more asplausible hypotheses than as proven facts. Thatsaid, this section broadly aims to provide more gristfor the debate on how best to operationalize theconcept of lifelong education within a frame of edu-cation for all, where “all” includes unschooled andnon-literate adults.

1. Conditions of effectiveness—The first observa-tion is obvious and almost banal:examples fromall five sub-categories of program signal that,whether a program starts from literacy/numer-acy and includes some livelihood training, orstarts with livelihood objectives and includesliteracy/numeracy, it is likely to be successful inboth sets of its immediate objectives, if it is welladapted to the interests and conditions of itsparticipants and—equally important—wellrun. “Quality of the teaching—this was a majorfactor for the success of a class” (Crapper andothers 1996: 79). That said, the cases of ADRA inUganda and SODEFITEX in Senegal warn thateven the best run programs will suffer someinefficiency in terms of irregular attendanceand dropout. Further, the longer-run outcomeswill not always fulfill all the hopes of the plan-ners and implementers, as shown by the fol-

lowing report on what had been judged a suc-cessful project:

From Thailand: “The Local Industrial andDevelopment Center trained 651 villagers inmarketing, cost analysis, packaging, exportpreparation. But the evaluation of 96 graduatesfound only 27% actually using skills for busi-ness, 17% for household purposes, 56% notusing the skills at all” (Itty 1991: 48). Concor-dant with the Thai experience are the findingsof the two IIEP studies of 1989 and 1990 inKenya and Tanzania and the 1999 evaluation inUganda (Carron et al. 1989, Carr-Hill 1991,Okech et al. 2000). All showed that the knowl-edge learned by many participants had notchanged their attitudes and that even changesin attitude had not necessarily led to changes inbehavior. This merely repeats the earlier warn-ing not to place too heavy a burden of expecta-tions on education and training programs.1

2. Motivation—The second observation, againalmost banal, is that education and trainingprograms for very poor adults would be wiseto offer very clear, concrete, and immediatereasons2 to justify enrollment and ensure per-severance, as the following, very typical quotefrom Ghana confirms: “We have also seen howimportant incentives and income generationactivities are for both learners, facilitators andthe community as a whole to embrace the pro-gram” (Adu-Gyamfi et al. 1996). A more recent

I

experience in Egypt offers further confirma-tion in its evaluation report: “Many illiteratepeople do not attend literacy classes becausethey have work to do. The ALTP (Adult Liter-acy Training Project) team together with theLWGs (Literacy Working Groups) in the vil-lages linked literacy activities to raising theincome of the students. New income-generat-ing projects in the villages help attract morestudents to literacy and link it to their every-day activities. ALTP recognized that literacy,or lack of literacy, is only a part of people’sreality and that the reasons why people havenot previously developed literacy skills are acomplex interweaving of lack of educationalopportunity, lack of exposure, gender, levels ofpoverty, culture, lack of self-confidence etc. Tohelp develop literacy skills, particularly ofthose in poorest sectors of society, and particu-larly women in this group requires more thanthe establishing of classes and waiting forpeople to come. It requires an holisticapproach to awareness raising and helpingpeople manage the other challenges in theirlives” (UKDFID 1999, chapter 8, section 4.1).

3. Leading from livelihoods—This observation,which follows reasonably from the second, isthat programs that start from livelihood skillsseem to stand a stronger chance of success.They can demonstrate an immediate reason forlearning. The earlier observations from thewestern province of Kenya (see Chapter 4,Scope and Methods of the Study) are supportedfrom other countries, as well as from otherprovinces of Kenya. From Bangladesh: “…interest in literacy by the rural people wasalmost nil” (BNPS 1997: 30), while Fiedrich(2001) writes of Senegal, “I have only seen oneprogram, a few years back, of Plan Internationalin Thies, Senegal, where vocational training(tailoring for women) was integrated with liter-acy. My impression from a two day visit wasthat the literacy training here was accepted as ahoop that women and girls felt they had tojump through so as to get to the real goodies.”In harmony with this observation, the presentstudy in Senegal concluded, “Incorporating ele-

ments of livelihood training undeniably has theeffect of raising the motivation of the learnersand ensuring their faithful attendance at the lit-eracy course. It gives a more utilitarian contentto the business of training adults.” Similarly, thepresent Kenya study speculates, “Part of thesuccess of the REFLECT circles in Kibwezi isattributable to the support Action Aid Kenyaaccords the circles for income generating proj-ects. This includes irrigated horticultural pro-duction, tree nurseries, goat rearing, poultrykeeping and basket weaving.3 These projectshave tended to provide a critical binding actionfor the groups and their participation in the lit-eracy program is noted to be high. This has alsosignificantly improved the men’s participationrate in the literacy centres” (Mwangi 2001).Again, the same study notes that 11 of 15 focusdiscussion groups linked literacy with startingand managing small businesses and farming.“Literacy would help them keep properrecords, calculate profits and use differentmeasures correctly. One group observed that, iflearners were taking practical subjects likeanimal husbandry, book keeping and child care,they would be more motivated to enroll.” Atthe risk of belaboring the point, a final quotefrom the Kenya study is pertinent: “Fourteenout of 16 dropout respondents said that theywould be willing to go back to the literacy class,if such (income-generating) projects werestarted.”

4. Livelihood leading—Organizations that aremore concerned with livelihoods and otheraspects of development seem to be better atdesigning and delivering effective combina-tions of livelihoods and literacy than organiza-tions that are more focused on education. FAO,IFAD, and ILO are examples among the multi-lateral organizations, while for most NGOs, lit-eracy and numeracy are only means to largerends. As the Guinea study notes, NGO-runprojects that integrate development and literacyachieve the most effective, really functional lit-eracy, based as they are on the problems andneeds of the target groups. They have all begunby undertaking a socio-economic survey of the


localities where they start work, and they oftenaddress organized groups in their localities.This observation implies that policy makers forvocational/livelihood education with literacyshould consider operating through agencies,both governmental and non-governmental, thatwork with people in their actual livelihoodsand employment, rather than through centersthat purport to train for, but tend to be detachedfrom, “the real world.”

5. Flexibility—In all the countries studied, thediversity of possibilities for improving estab-lished livelihoods and developing new onesappears so wide as to demand extreme flexibil-ity, imagination, and resourcefulness. NGOsseem to have more flexibility than governmentagencies to respond to local and changingneeds. Developers of national policy for voca-tional/livelihood education should emphati-cally consider stronger–but not dominating orcrippling—alliances with NGOs. At the sametime, they should explore forms of governmentorganization that would allow local offices thekind of wide, but accountable, discretion,which would enable them to develop therequired flexibility.

Further, two facts suggest that even the pri-vate sector might be induced to offer livelihoodand literacy training for poor people in certaincontexts. First, patterns of apprenticeship exist ina number of African countries, particularly in thewest of the continent. If master craftsmen pro-vide training in return for modest fees and labor,they may be open to paid partnerships with lit-eracy instructors. Second, private training insti-tutes are emerging in a range of crafts and skills,as evidenced by the “professionalizing” literacycenters in Guinea. Arrangements could be devel-oped to suit the interests of both instructors andlearners. What the specific possibilities might bein operational terms will of course depend onspecific localities and cultures.

6. Derivative literacy — The experiences ofACOPAM and SODEFITEX, along with a provi-sional comparison between WEP/N and WEELin Nepal, hint that deriving literacy/numeracy

content from the livelihood skills in view andintegrating it with the livelihood training fromthe very start seem more promising than eitherrunning the two components in parallel orusing standard literacy materials to preparepeople to train for livelihoods.4 This suggestiondoes not discount the experiences of the Rukun-giri Women, ADRA, Saptagram, RDRS, and theNotre Dame Foundation, which all use literacyprimers unrelated to livelihood content; itmerely points to a possible further advantage inengaging the learners’ perseverance.

7. Savings and credit—Livelihood-plus-literacy/numeracy programs can substantially reinforcetheir chances of success if they can start from orat least incorporate training in savings, credit,and business management, along with actualaccess to credit. Although ADRA and SODEFI-TEX provide the credit, WEP/N, WEEL, andother organizations demonstrate that it can becreated among the very poor themselves, with-out the agency of a micro-finance institution.

8. Group approaches and negotiation—Againdrawing on the experience of ADRA, ACOPAM,WEP/N, and WEEL, chances of success are alsoheightened by working with established groupsof people who share a common purpose, ratherthan with individual applicants. In the absenceof such groups, it would probably still be betterto spend time identifying promising commonpurposes and to work on forming new purpose-driven groups than to carry out the programwith unconnected individuals.

Experience seems to have produced astrengthening consensus that programs that arewell negotiated with their prospective learnersin association with local authorities and lead-ers, are likely to be more effective than pro-grams that are simply put on offer. Further,there is a longstanding consensus that teachingmethods that encourage activity and interactionbetween participants and their instructor aremore effective than those that leave the instruc-tor with most of the action. However, it isimportant acknowledge observations thatimplementing the active methods is often


beyond the competence and inclination of theinstructors, and quite often it not to the taste ofthe learners themselves. Despite such non-modern attitudes and practices, appreciablelearning can and often does occur.

9. Vouchers—There are very favorable early eval-uations of the initiative by the Somaliland Edu-cation Initiative for Girls and Young Men to usevouchers as a means to give very poor peoplemore power to negotiate what they learn andwith whom they learn (Tomlinson 2001). Thatsuggests the project merits further observation,particularly regarding its suitability for alreadyestablished groups.

10. Time on task—The projects examined offer nodecisive answer to how much time is needed toenable a person to become permanently or sus-tainably literate. Recall that the MahilaSamakhya experience (see Animators and handpump technicians in Chapter 6) found that 180hours of tuition, even of intensive instruction,led only to fragile literacy skills. ADRA (seeChapter 5) seems to be satisfied with 250 to 300hours, whereas SODEFITEX arranges for 400hours (see Chapter 6). To help clarify the issue,Medel-Añonuevo looked at four models of lit-eracy and livelihood programs in Nepal:

■ Model 1 offered a 12 month literacy course,followed by a 3-month vocational course andthe establishment of a community readingcentre.

■ Model 2 offered an 18-month course in 3phases: first, a 9-month basic literacy andnumeracy course, then, a 6-month courselearning the livelihood skills (the functionalphase), and finally, a 3-month course inactually generating and managing income.

■ Model 3 offered simply a 6-month basic liter-acy course, then encouraged its learners toseek livelihood training from other sources.

■ Model 4—which was most favoured bypractitioners—started with women’s saving

and credit groups, encouraged the develop-ment of income generating activities, offereda 6-months basic literacy course, followedby either 3 months follow up in both literacyand income generation, or 6 months of moreadvanced training (1996: 51) The overall per-ceptions were that six months are insuffi-cient for most men and women to developsatisfactory skills in reading, writing andcalculating and that the need to link theseskills with some form of income-generationwas strong.

A Syrian project went further and con-cluded, “The 9-month duration of a literacycourse is not sufficient to allow learners themastery of basic literacy skills” (UNDP1992). Yet a project in Afghanistan found,“Experience has shown that after 9 monthsof classes meeting 2 hours a day (some350–400 hours in all) women can be broughtto a fourth grade reading level” (USAID1994).

Ignoring differences of language, alphabets,literateness of environment, and levels of pre-vious or other literacy among the learners, itwould seem safe to reckon that the minimumtime for developing skills in literacy andnumeracy adequate to support livelihood andother development is 360 hours, plus morehours of learning and practice. Beyond thatminimum, the duration of courses woulddepend on the complexity of the livelihoodskills to be learned or developed.

11. Cadres of instructors—The broad experience ofincome-generating projects suggests thatarranging for two cadres of instructors, one forlivelihoods, the other for literacy, appears to bemore prudent than relying on “generalist” liter-acy instructors to undertake livelihood instruc-tion or income-generating activities in additionto teaching literacy and numeracy.

There is no argument about the need totrain, support, and re-train the literacy instruc-tors. However, there is weaker consensus abouthow they should be recompensed for their con-tributions. Most of the programs reviewedmake it clear that most literacy instructors do


not have much schooling themselves, are not insteady or waged employment, and are them-selves among the poorer of their societies. Nat-urally, they appreciate being paid in cash orkind. Most of the programs examined in thispaper do offer pay, some at modest, others atmore generous levels. Overall, it seems thatNGOs are more inclined than governments tooffer regular pay, rather than occasional moralor material awards. Some, like FAO’s FarmerField Schools, follow the principle that “userpays” and expect the participants to negotiatethe recompense with their literacy instructors(even though the agricultural instructors arepaid employees of the program). A few otherprograms rely on the literacy instructors beingpure volunteers, especially where they arerecruited and selected by their own par-ticipants from among the local community.Overall, the broader trend appears to treatliteracy instructors on a basis similar to liveli-hood specialists and to remunerate them fortheir efforts.

12. Costs—Very little information on gross or unitcosts was found in the documentation avail-able. However, on the basis of two programs,supplemented by inferences from observation,we believe that the unit costs of the programswe have studied are quite low. The Uganda FALreckoned a unit cost of US$4–5 per personenrolled. A project in Senegal, supported byCanada, estimated that the cost per enrolleewould be approximately CDN$20. However,faulty implementation raised the cost toCDN$45 per enrollee (CIDA 2001: 13). FAO’sPeople’s Participation Programme had some13,000 male and female participants in 12 coun-tries. The average cost per participant was esti-mated in 1989 to be US$63 (FAO 1990: 36). Allthat can be observed here is that even the high-est estimate does not appear inordinate.

That said, policy makers in vocational/technical education need to bear in mind that,just as voc/tech education in schools and col-leges is always more costly than general edu-cation, so analogous education for adults invillages and shanty-towns will unavoidably

be more costly than simple literacy programs.In the cases of SODEFITEX, WEEL andWEP/N which combine livelihood skills andthe three Rs with training in savings, credit,and business management and development,considerably more is involved than simple lit-eracy. In turn, teaching these skills will call forcadres of well-trained specialists, who willwithout doubt expect commensurate pay-ment. Further, supporting them, as well asholding them to account—without necessarilyemploying them on a permanent basis—willrequire a soundly devised administrativestructure.

13. Elements of cost—Although no specific sugges-tions are possible here, it may be helpful simplyto supply a non-exhaustive list of programcosts, without specifying how they are to beapportioned:

Learners: learning materials, learning sup-ports like space, lighting, heating.Instructors for livelihoods and for savings, credit,business management and business development(on the assumption that they already haveexpertise in these subjects): remuneration,travel, subsistence, instructional materials,initial training as instructors, refresher train-ing.Instructors/facilitators for literacy/numeracy andalso for rights, responsibilities, civic, health andother topics in demand: remuneration, initialtraining, instructional and recording materi-als, refresher training.Specialists for identifying new business opportu-nities (on the assumption they already havethe expertise): remuneration, travel, subsis-tence.Trainers/technical supporters (whether com-munity-based, contracted or public person-nel): remuneration, training, (initial andrefresher), travel, subsistence.Supporting administrative infrastructure (forproduction, storage, distribution, travel, pay-ments).Supporting infrastructure for monitoring (plusquality assurance in learning, attainments,application).


14. Financial Sustainability—Given that the po-tential clientele for livelihood-with-literacy/numeracy programs is currently large andlikely to remain large for a long time, and giventhe perspective of continuous, life-long educa-tion, the issues of cost require consideration offinancial sustainability. Here, the policy makerneeds to bear in mind that, even at fee-exactinguniversities, few, if any, students, howeveraffluent, meet the full cost of their education.Tuition fees usually cover only a proportion ofthe full costs of tuition. Since programs thatinclude basic literacy and numeracy alwayshave as their major clients people who areamong the poorest of the poor, they will requireproportionately more substantial subsidiesfrom external sources, whether public or pri-vate. This will hold true whatever the measuresto minimize dependency and expectations offree handouts, and whatever the measuresgradually to reduce subsidies and move tohigher proportions of local self-finance.

However, the poor are not homogeneous.They can range from the destitute, who need atotal subsidy, to those like the women ofRukungiri and participants in some of theFarmer Field Schools, who may be just abovethe poverty line but still able to contribute tothe costs of their education. Further, the cases ofWEEL and WEP/N suggest that groups of evenvery poor women can in a relatively short timemobilize their own savings and begin to pay forwhat they want. Thus, the proportion of sub-sidy could in principle vary from group togroup, and, for particular groups, from time totime. Operating with such sensitivity and flexi-bility could well be beyond the capacity of asingle central authority. However, decentral-ized approaches that set minimum standardsbut permit local adjustments to accommodatelocal conditions, communities, or groups couldbe feasible.

It is also true that the countries whose peoplecould benefit most from livelihood with liter-acy/numeracy education are among the poor-est and least able to provide subsidies fromlocal sources, whether public or private. Thecases considered earlier have shown that, even

where local public and private resources havecombined and been amplified by internationalofficial and non-governmental developmentassistance, they have still been insufficient tocover more than a small proportion of thepotential clientele. On the other hand, the casesfrom Bangladesh, Guinea, India, Nepal, thePhilippines, Senegal, and Uganda suggest thatNGOs, both local and international, can and dosustain themselves and their programs overlong periods, apparently at least to the suffi-cient satisfaction of their supporters.

If the government of a poor, indebted coun-try, in alliance with nongovernmental and com-munity organizations, and people of good willand energy, aimed to make livelihood-with-lit-eracy/numeracy education available to sub-stantially larger proportions of poor people andto maintain long-term financial sustainability, itwould need to take three steps. First, in addi-tion to fiscal allocations, it would need todevelop a mechanism to mobilize local volun-tary contributions to a special fund or even net-work of funds (village or community). Second,it would need to form large-scale and long-termconsortiums with international donors, bothofficial and nongovernmental. Third, the gov-ernment would need to persuade internationallenders, like the World Bank, its regional coun-terpart, the Islamic Development Bank, and theInternational Fund for Agricultural Develop-ment that investments in livelihood-with-liter-acy/ numeracy education would, in time, bothreduce poverty and strengthen its ability torepay its debts.

15. Going to Scale—Normally, vocational and tech-nical education policies are not associated withprograms of mass education. Yet the numbers ofvery poor people working in livelihoods thatcould be made more productive, force the ques-tion whether education in livelihood-with-liter-acy/numeracy can be conceived in mass terms.Clearly, the cases of SODEFITEX, WEEL, andWEP/N reflect the recognition that larger scaleprograms are necessary and that strategies toachieve larger scales need to be devised. SODE-FITEX chose an analogue to “point-line-net-


work,” whereby it started with educating just afew members per cooperative, then one memberper farming family, then gradually includedmore and more people. WEEL and WEP/Nselected a strategy of working through moreand more local organizations to reach more andmore groups of women. In five to six years, theyreached and helped respectively 10,000 and130,000 very poor people. For projects that haveharnessed the teamwork of only small NGOs,these scales and the time-scale within whichthey were achieved, command respect.

In all three cases, the initiative was takenvery carefully and gradually by a relativelysmall agency at a very local level. Yet the strat-egy of gradualism has not demanded an inordi-nate amount of time to attain a significant scale.These features point once again to the desirabil-ity of decentralized approaches that permitlocal organizations, whether public or private,to assess the pace and manner at which expan-sion can be soundly undertaken.

An additional factor counseling decentral-ization and gradualism is the complexity of thepackage needed to support livelihood-with-lit-eracy/numeracy education. Developing the

depth of capacity to support widespreadinstruction in a large range of livelihoods in avariety of environments, plus the necessaryskills of fostering savings, credit, business man-agement, and business development, requiresnot only time, but also careful amassing of localknowledge.

Finally, the findings of the PADLOS study ofdecentralization (Easton 1998) would counselthat assessing when to go to scale in a particu-lar locality must take into account local infra-structure, natural and other resources, norms,and institutions.

1. It may be salutary here to recall that schools, universities,and open universities also fall short of total efficiency.

2. This observation does not deny the attested fact that manyadults learn to read and write for the simple satisfaction ofbeing able to do so, while others learn for religious reasonsquite unconnected with considerations of material gain orbetterment. However, these motivations on their own havenot been sufficient to engage the majority of illiterate adults.

3. These activities have a history stretching back to the com-munity development days of the 1950s.

4. This point concords with Mikulecky & Lloyd’s observa-tions in Canada that people with relatively low levels ofschooling tend not to transfer literacy skills spontaneouslyfrom one domain to another (Mikulecky & Lloyd 1993).


42

8

Conclusions andrecommendations

his chapter attempts first to use the pro-grams reviewed to suggest pointers forpolicy and practice in vocational/livelihood

education for unschooled adults and adolescents inthe countries of Sub–74 Africa. More broadly, itaims to inform thinking and discussion elsewhereon how best to implement the concept of lifelongeducation within a framework of education for all,where “all” includes unschooled and non-literateadult women and men in both rural and urbanareas and in both waged and self-employment inboth monetized and subsistence sectors of an econ-omy. The nature and quality of the documentationand other information available limit the force ofthe pointers and suggestions.

Overall, the evidence suggests that it would beworthwhile for vocational or livelihood educationpolicy makers to develop policies that offered liveli-hood training to non-literate, very poor adults,especially women, who are unable to access knowl-edge and skills that might relieve their poverty.

Enabling environments—Knowledge and skills bythemselves cannot guarantee a decent livelihood.As UNDP/UNESCO, 1976, and the IIEP evalua-tions of the literacy programs of Kenya and Tanza-nia in 1989 and 1990 suggested, the economic envi-ronment must be supportive. Indeed, even moredemanding, Easton (1998) suggests that localnorms, broader institutional factors, local resourceendowments, infrastructure, and sources of finance

all need to be favorable before education and train-ing can be fully fruitful. Easton’s view is supportedby the approaches of ADRA in Uganda, SODEFI-TEX in Senegal, SEIGYM in Somaliland, and WEPand WEEL in Nepal, which have all found it neces-sary to include institutional development as a con-stituent of their programs.

If these organizations, most of them in Africa,have found it possible to design and implementpackages of livelihood training, literacy instruction,and institutional development, vocational educa-tion policy should be able to do the same. Further,while most of these organizations have needed toadopt relatively short-term perspectives for anygiven locality, national policy should be able to takethe longer view of SODEFITEX and plan in terms ofdecades rather than three to five years.

The first recommendation then is that vocationaleducation policy should assess what would beneeded in particular localities to ensure an envi-ronment that would enable training in particularlivelihoods actually to result in higher productiv-ity, incomes, and well being.

Strategy for diversity—The livelihoods and sets oflivelihoods that the very poor undertake arenotably diverse. So are the environments in whichthey work. So, too, are the possibilities of enhancingthose livelihoods and developing new ones. Man-aging these diversities calls for flexibility, imagina-

T

tion, and resourcefulness, and for institutions thatcan respond appropriately. It points ideally to astrategy that will:

• allow for considerable decentralization and dele-gation;

• first follow existing demand, then seek out latentpossibilities of new links with the mainstreameconomy, from which could arise new demands;

• foster flexibility and mobility;

• rely on and nurture freelance specialists in busi-ness and livelihood development;

• operate through institutions and procedures ofcomplete transparency and public accountability.

Such a strategy will avoid reliance on packages ofstandard curricula in fixed training centers withfixed equipment and permanent corps of specialists.

Capacities—High quality analysis, design, imple-mentation and support are required. “To be avoidedis a weak response in the form of low levels ofanalysis and design, and inadequate supervision”(Middleton & Demsky 1989: 101). Ballara shows thecomplexity of what is required: “Certain precau-tions should be taken when income-generatingactivities are included in literacy programs. Resultsobtained during the 1980s show that these activitieshave to be treated as enterprises related to therequirements of mainstream economic production,offering continuity and remuneration to the partici-pants. To avoid becoming involved in poorly-rewarded activities, literacy programs incorporat-ing an income-generating activity should beginwith a study of market needs; they should preparewomen in non-traditional sectors and for futureentry into the formal sector, rather than be directedtowards traditional low-level skills which barelysupplement home income and which finallybecomes a type of welfare” (Ballara 1991: 47).

A strategy of decentralization and delegationmust presuppose the capacity to diagnose currentneeds, detect future opportunities, and design anddeliver high-quality training. Where such capacity

cannot be assumed, capacity-building strategieswith appropriate incentives and inducements mustbe developed. As the present study attests, in alarge number of countries, the voluntary and non-profit sectors at international, national and locallevels have responded well to incentives and capi-talized on opportunities to deepen and expand theircapacities. It is possible, too, that private, profit-making vocational education specialists—alreadydetected in the Guinea study—may see opportuni-ties to help themselves as well as the poor. At thesame time, experience in several countries suggeststhat, where these sectors are weak, gradualist strate-gies to increase their capacities would be prudent.

If public resources are to be used to promote thedecentralization and delegation, supervisory mecha-nisms are needed to ensure that they are properlyapplied and that the intended beneficiaries doindeed enjoy a proper quality of instruction. Oneincreasingly well known model for such mechanismsis the “Faire-faire” strategy of Senegal (Diagne & Sall2001).1 Of course, the supervisory mechanism shouldbe so designed that it does not actually obstruct,rather than promote, the decentralization.

The second recommendation is that vocationaleducation policy should pursue a strategy ofdecentralization and capacity-nurturing that willpermit resourceful responses to local actual andpotential patterns of livelihood.

Savings, credit and content—As for actual coursesof vocational education, this review suggests threepointers. First, because the learners are very poor,the approaches of ADRA, SODEFITEX, WEEL, Sap-tagram, and WEP/N indicate that immediate con-nections and access to sources of credit should be acomponent of every livelihood training program,without necessarily involving a special micro-finance institution. SODEFITEX, WEP/N, WEEL,Saptagram, and other programs supply models forencouraging savings as a means to create theresources for credit for business development andensuring discipline in repayments. Special micro-finance institutions are not essential. However, insuch situations, the expertise for helping groupsmobilize savings and manage them through lend-ing and recovery needs to be very reliable.


Second, there is consensus that the actual contentof a livelihood-with-literacy/numeracy courseshould be the result of a local survey and negotia-tions with the prospective participants. At the sametime, current demand in a locality should form onlythe initiating basis for training in livelihoods.Opportunities for new livelihoods and businesses,especially those that would help people move intothe economic mainstream, would need to be soughtand demands stimulated for training to undertakethem. In connection with this point, to strengthenthe negotiating hand of would-be participants andto encourage accountability among instructors, theidea of vouchers, as used by the Somaliland Educa-tion Initiative for Girls and Young Men, meritsobservation and exploration.

Third, the literacy/numeracy component should,in the initial stages of the training, be subordinatedto the language and idioms of the livelihood andbusiness skills, in the manner that WEP/N hasselected. As educators in Melanesia have shown(ASPBAE 2000a), and as the REFLECT approachhas pioneered, instructional materials can be read-ily fashioned for particular languages, idioms andlocalities. This recommendation does not of courseimply that the literacy/numeracy componentshould be restricted throughout the course to thediscourse of the livelihoods in question; that wouldundermine the wider uses of the skills in otherdimensions of daily life (recall Mikulecky’s obser-vations that spontaneous transference did notoccur). A report on a current project in Egypt notes,“Women attending groups and classes whichtreated them as whole persons reported majorchanges in their lives: skill development, greaterincome-generating opportunities and confidencedevelopment” (UKDFID 1999: para 8.4.5).

Our recommendation does, however, urge thatthe experiences of ACOPAM, SODEFITEX, andWEP/N be used as capital to construct more effec-tive programs.

The third recommendation is that vocational edu-cation policy should provide for courses that com-bine savings and credit training with negotiatedlivelihood content and literacy/numeracy contentderived from, but not limited to, the vocabulary ofthe livelihood.

Time on task—One of the most common observa-tions in adult education, particularly in programsfor very poor women, is the difficulty of maintain-ing regular attendance and of sustaining attendanceover long periods. Against this is the need for ade-quate “time on task” in both the livelihood and theliteracy/numeracy components. As noted earlier,although there is no firmly settled opinion on theminimum time needed on average to attain “sus-tainable” or permanent literacy and numeracy, asafe minimum would be 360 hours of learning andpractice. To that minimum has to be added the timeneeded to teach the required livelihood and busi-ness skills.

Most literacy and livelihood programs nowstrive to negotiate their class times with their par-ticipants to minimize inconvenience and opportu-nity costs. Even so, if the daily commitments of theparticipants made a single stretch of time difficult,then the phased or modular approach used byWEP/N and WEEL (as well as the ILO’s use ofModules of Employable Skills for more than 20years) might be used to encourage attendance andperseverance. Nonetheless, the SODEFITEX experi-ence suggests that this could be a second-best solu-tion Further, because many participants, howeverwell intentioned, do miss sessions and attend irreg-ularly, a margin of as much as 20 percent might beworth adding to the duration of a course. Thatwould allow such participants some room to catchup, while affording the more regular some morespace for practice and reinforcement.

The fourth recommendation is twofold. First, toensure that the “average” adult learner masters lit-eracy and numeracy sufficiently well to use them insupport and development of a livelihood, the liter-acy component of a livelihood course should offerat least 360 hours of instruction and practice (thelivelihood and business components will of courserequire additional appropriate time). Second, tohelp optimize perseverance, completion, and reten-tion of learning, the course should be offered in asingle session or term, if at all practicable.

Instructors—The effectiveness of a course willstand or fall by its instructors. The experiences dis-cussed in this study counsel against having the lay


people who serve as literacy instructors to be liveli-hood instructors or organizers of income-generat-ing activities as well. Lay people who are suffi-ciently literate can be trained to be effective literacyinstructors. However, appropriate specialists seemto be the best people to handle instruction in liveli-hoods or income-generation. It is of course possibleto train livelihood specialists to teach literacy aswell. Indeed, the Experimental World Literacy Pro-gramme suggested that such people seemed toteach literacy and numeracy more effectively thanschool teachers. Where such a combination of skillsis feasible, it could be worth fostering.

All the programs reviewed place much impor-tance on not only training their literacy instructorsbut also supporting them closely and continuously,as well as offering them periodic refresher training.In this, they echo the Critical Assessment of theExperimental World Literacy Programme: “… aconsensus seems to have emerged from EWLP con-cerning the need to give great stress to in-service aswell as pre-service training of instructors” (UNDP/UNESCO 1976: 135).

As for remunerating instructors, it would seemprudent to follow the majority trend of paying bothlivelihood specialists and literacy instructors.Where literacy instructors are paid, either by theirparticipants or by the agency organizing the pro-gram, they tend to be more accountable, reliable,and regular. This may be one reason why mostNGOs choose to offer a salary or honorarium,rather than appeal for voluntary effort.

The fifth recommendation is again twofold. First,vocational education policy should provide fortwo cadres of instructors: livelihood instructorsand literacy instructors. While neither should be apermanent cadre, their patterns of recruitment,training, and support can differ from each other.Second, both cadres should be remunerated forthe instruction they give.

Instructional methods—The consensus on teachingmethods is that approaches that promote activityand interaction are likely to be most effective, how-ever hard these approaches are to put into practicewith instructors who have themselves had only lim-ited traditional schooling. Easton writes, “Observa-

tion at the forty sites strongly suggests that teachingliteracy and becoming literate in one’s own lan-guage or a familiar tongue, and acquiring newknowledge on this basis, are not terribly difficultprovided the application of the new knowledge isclear, and the pedagogy progressive and participa-tory” (1998: xxiii).

The sixth recommendation is that vocational edu-cation policy for non-literate poor adults shouldpromote active, participatory, and interactiveforms of instruction and learning in both liveli-hood and literacy components of training.

Finance—This study is not in a position to offer anyestimates of the financial resources needed (seeChapter 7, subhead “Conditions of effectiveness—Costs” for a brief discussion).

The seventh recommendation is merely that voca-tional education policy makers support furtherresearch on the issue of costs.

Financial sustainability—As education in liveli-hoods and literacy is likely to require long-termprograms, financial sustainability is a necessity.Although poor people, poor countries, and poorgovernments will probably be able to meet at leastpart of the longer-term costs on their own, they areunlikely to be able to shoulder all of them and willneed external assistance.

The eighth recommendation is that countries formlocal alliances of government, non-governmentaland community agencies, and energetic people ofgood will to (a) raise local fiscal and voluntaryfinance, (b) form appropriate consortiums withexternal donors and (c) attract resources frominternational lenders.

Mass scale—The numbers of people who could ben-efit from education in livelihoods and literacy are suf-ficient to warrant large-scale programs. However, thecomplex nature of such programs and the require-ment that they adopt local rather than general focusescounsel slower rather than rapid dissemination. Theexperiences cited suggest that slower disseminationneed not involve inordinately long periods.


The ninth recommendation is that strategies ofcapacity-building, decentralization and gradual-ism govern the process of going to scale, with dueattention to local infrastructure, natural and otherresources, norms, and institutions.

Capitalizing on knowledge—The final recommen-dation derives from the experiences of ACOPAM(ILO), ADRA, the Farmers Field Schools (FAO,CARE, World Education), and the programs sup-ported by IFAD.

The tenth recommendation is that any review ofvocational educational policy should exert itself toidentify, locate, and capitalize on the empiricalexperience and expertise that those organizationsand others like them must have accumulated intheir work in Sub–74 Africa and elsewhere; andmake it more readily accessible than this studyhas found it.

1. The faire faire strategy, supported by the World Bank, is notdiscussed in this paper, as the Senegal study found that itwas not yet linked to either livelihood training or to income-generating activities.


ADECOM M.M. 1998. Evaluation de l’ADECOM MokiliMwinda: Rapport de Synthese (M.A. Saya Kifula and A.Mayira Kapangana). Association de DeveloppementCommunautaire Makili-Mwinda. Kinshasa.

_______. 2000. Rapport d’Auto-Evaluation Annuelle pourl’An 1999. Association de Developpement Commu-nautaire Makili-Mwinda. Kinshasa.

Adu-Gyamfi, Juliana G., W.E. Biervliet, L.F.B. Dubbel-dam. 1996. The Literacy Mosaic in Ghana: A new mode forcapacity building for a nation-wide literacy program: moni-toring and research for improved action. Accra. Non-formal Education Division, NUFFIC/CESO. TheHague.

AET (Africa Educational Trust). 2000. Year Two Report toDFID on the SEIGYM PROJECT, Somalia. London.Africa Educational Trust (and other documents on theSomali Education Initiative for Girls and Young Men(SEIGYM) and the Women’s Village Education(WOVE) projects in “Somaliland” and “Puntland”).

Afenyadu, Dela, K. King, S. McGrath, H. Oketch, C.Rogerson, K. Visser. 1999. Learning to Compete: Educa-tion, Training & Enterprise in Ghana, Kenya & SouthAfrica. Education Research Serial No. 42. DFID(Department for International Development). London.

Akpaka, O. and L. Gaba, 1990. L’éducation non formelle etles groupements féminins de production. Cotonou: UNDPand UNESCO.

Aksornkool, N. 1995. Daughters of the earth: skills-based lit-eracy program for women, China. UNESCO. Paris.

Anderson, Robert S. 1986. Credit Can Lead to Rural Devel-opment: CIDA and the Very Poor in Bangladesh; mid-termreview of the Rural Poor Program. CIDA (Canadian Inter-national Development Agency). Ottawa/Hull.

Ashe, Jeffrey and Lisa Parrott. 2001. PACT’s Women’sEmpowerment Program in Nepal: a group-based literacyand savings-led approach to micro-finance: Part 1: Intro-duction to WEP, Implications for the field, the Case forBridge Funding. USAID (United States Agency forInternational Development). Washington, D.C.

ASPBAE, 2000a. Simo, Joel. Critical Literacy and Awareness:Melanesia.

_______. 2000b. Shrestha, Chij. From Literacy to Health:Nepal.

_______. 2000c. Cruz, Antonia Y. Functional Literacy, Heartof Empowerment: Philippines.

_______. 2000d. Rahman, Ehsanur. Ganokendra: An Innov-ative Intervention for Lifelong Learning and CommunityDevelopment: Bangladesh.

_______. 2000e. Monga, Nivedita. Knowing Her Rights:India.

_______. 2000f. Daluwatte, Mallikani and SujathaWijetilleke. Reading the Living Environment: Sri Lanka.

_______. 2000g. Attiq Ur Rahman, Shaheen. Taking Con-trol: Women Emerge from Poverty: Pakistan.

_______. 2000h. Rogers, Alan. Beyond Literacy: Some Gen-eral Thoughts.

_______. 2000i. Beyond Literacy: Case Studies from Asia andthe South Pacific. Mumbai, ASPBAE (Asian SouthPacific Bureau of Adult Education) and Bangkok,UNESCO/PROAP (United Nations Educational, Sci-entific and Cultural Organization/Principal RegionalOffice for Asia and the Pacific).

_______. 2000j. Reading the Wor[l]d: Understanding the Lit-eracy Campaigns in India, Malavika Karlekar, ed.,Mumbai, ASPBAE (Asian South Pacific Bureau ofAdult Education).

Azarbaijani-Moghaddan, Sepideh. 1999. Report on theEvaluation of the Hazarajat Rural Development Pro-gramme. NOVIB. The Hague.


Bibliography and References

Ballara, Marcela. 1991. Women and Literacy. London: ZEDBooks.

Belay, Teamrat. 2001. “Women’s Literacy Programs inTigray.” In Newsletter: Focus on Adult and Non-formalEducation in Ethiopia 8(May 2001):17–18. IIZ/DVV(Institute for International Cooperation of the GermanAdult Education Association). Addis Ababa.

Belloncle, Guy. 1983. “Participatory agricultural andhealth research in rural West Africa: Results of a pro-gram for new literates.” In Bock, J. and G. Papagiannis,eds., Nonformal Education and National Developmentpp.261–370. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Bennell, P. 2000. Improving youth livelihoods in Sub–74Africa: A review of policies and programmes with particularreference to the link between sexual behaviour and economicwell being. USAID. Washington, D.C. and IDRC.Ottawa.

Berhanu, Serkalem. 2001. “Women in Self-Employment:Will REFLECT be a Solution?” in Newsletter: Focus onAdult and Non-formal Education in Ethiopia 8(May2001):28–30. IIZ/DVV (Institute for InternationalCooperation of the German Adult Education Associa-tion). Addis Ababa.

Beshah, Tesfaye and Workneh Negatu. 1999. AGRI-SER-VICE Ethiopia: Impact Assessment of the training andextension service. NOVIB. The Hague.

Bhola, H.S. 1996. “Functional literacy, workplace literacyand technical and vocational education: interfaces andpolicy perspectives.” Indian Journal of Adult Education57(3):5–18. New Delhi.

Biervliet, Wim, Adu-Gyamfi. 1996. Towards a researchagenda for the second phase FLP Ghana. Ghana nationalliteracy and functional skills project. NUFFIC (Nether-lands Organization for International Cooperation inHigher Education). The Hague.

Biervliet, Wim, Tettega, Indira, Amekudzi, Vivian Seisime.1996. Bringing literacy in a small rural community inGhana: A concise descriptive study of Gbetsile community,Tema district, Greater Accra Region. NUFFIC (Nether-lands Organization for International Cooperation inHigher Education). The Hague.

BNPS. 1997. Annual Report, January–December 1996. BNPS(Bangladesh Nari Progati Sangha). Dhaka.

_______. 2000. Annual Report, 1999. BNPS (BangladeshNari Progati Sangha). Dhaka.

Carr-Hill, R.A., A.N. Kweka, M. Rusimbi and R. Chen-gelele. 1991. The functioning and effects of the TanzanianLiteracy Programme. IIEP Research Report No. 93. Inter-national Institute for Educational Planning. Paris.

Carron, G., K. Mwiria, and G. Righa. 1989. The functioningand effects of the Kenya Literacy Program. IIEP ResearchReport No. 76. International Institute for EducationalPlanning. Paris.

Carron, G., R. Carr-Hill. 1991. Non-formal education: Infor-mation and Planning Issues. IIEP Research Report No.90. International Institute for Educational Planning.Paris.

Cawthera, A. 1997. Let’s Teach Ourselves: The Operation andEffectiveness of a People’s Literacy Movement, Centre forAdult and Higher Education. University of Manchester.(Master’s dissertation).

CCDB. 2000. Evaluation Report on Women’s Small LocalOrganization Program, by Abdullah Tahrunnesa,Yasmin Ahmed, Dilruba Karim. CCDB (ChristianCommission for Development in Bangladesh). Dhaka.

CIDA. 1985. Evaluation of the Rural Development Pro-gramme (RDP) of the Unitarian Service Committee (USC)Bangladesh. CIDA, (Canadian International Develop-ment Agency). Ottawa/Hull.

_______. 1995. Concept paper 170/0017715, BRAC/AKFC. Rural Development Program/Nonformal PrimaryEducation, Bangladesh. CIDA, (Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency). Ottawa/Hull.

_______. 2001. Action Plan Support Project for Literacy andNon-formal Education in Senegal: Audit Report. CIDA(Canadian International Development Agency).Ottawa/Hull.

Closson, Rosemary, Chris Capacci, and Paul Massima.1997. Private Sector-Public Sector Collaboration in Pro-moting Nonformal Education. ABEL/Academy for Edu-cation Development and USAID (United StatesAgency for International Development). Washington,D.C.

Coldevin, Gary. 2001. Participatory Communication: A Keyto Rural Learning Systems. Communication for Devel-opment Group, Food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United Nations. Rome.

Comings, John P. 1995. “Literacy skill retention in adultstudents in developing countries.” International Journalof Educational Development 15(1):37–45.

Consuegra, M. A. 1997. “CAFAM’s Continuing AdultEducation Program (CAFAED): A Human Develop-ment Project (Colombia).” In Mauch, W. and Papen,U., eds., 1997. Making a difference: Innovations in AdultEducation pp.121–135. UNESCO Institute for Educa-tion and German Foundation for International Devel-opment, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, GmbH.

Crapper, D., S. Rodwell, and S. Jones. 1996. Ghana LiteracyProject: Evaluation Report EV pp.586. ODA/Depart-ment for International Development. London.

CRI Consult Inc. 1999. USAID/NEPAL SO/3 REVIEW.“Women’s Empowerment Program.” USAID (UnitedStates Agency for International Development). Wash-ington, D.C. and Kathmandu.


Daluwatte, Mallikani and Sujatha Wijetilleke. 2000. Read-ing the Living Environment: case study from Sri Lanka.BEYOND LITERACY SERIES, Mumbai, Asian andPacific Bureau for Adult Education, and Etul Kotte, SriLanka, Association for Development and Peacethrough Community Action.

DANIDA. 1997. Functional Literacy and Post Literacy for RuralWomen in the Gambia. UNESCO (United Nations Educa-tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization). Paris.

_______. 1998. Alphabétisation fonctionelle des parents par lesécoles de l’enseignement privé catholique du Sénégal :Résultats et recommendations du projet. UNESCO. Paris.

Dardour, Mohamed. 2000. “The literacy campaign inrural Morocco—drawing some lessons.” Prospects30(1):125–142.

Dembélé, K.E. 1989. Les deux gratins: Rapports entre educa-tion et développement dans cinq villages du pays Minyanka(Mali), Bamako, ISFRA, thesis of the third cycle.

De Ravignan, Antoine. 1998. Working and Inventing on theStreets of Africa. UNESCO. Paris.

Development and Research Services. 1999. Impact of theNational Literacy Mission and Its Contribution to EFA inIndia. Education Unit, Development and Research Ser-vices. New Delhi.

Diagne, Amadou Wade, Bineta Rassouloula, and AW Sall.2001. Program de Formation sur la Strategie du “Faire-faire” en Education des Adultes, Washington D.C.: TheWorld Bank.

Diallo, Abdoul Hamid. 2001. Strengthening Livelihoodswith Literacy: the Guinea case—version 1. Institute forInternational Cooperation, German Adult EducationAssociation (IIZ/DVV). Bonn.

Dombrowsky K., G. Dumestre, and F. Simonis. 1993. L’al-phabétisation fonctionnelle en Bambara dans unedynamique de développement: Le cas de la zone cotonnière(Mali-Sud). Marquis. Paris.

Doronila, M.L.C. 1996 Landscapes of Literacy: an ethno-graphic study of functional literacy in marginal Philippinecommunities. UNESCO Institute of Education. Ham-burg and LUZAC Oriental. Manila.

DSE (Deutsche Stiftung fuer Entwicklung, GermanDevelopment Foundation). 1997. Learning to survive:Exploring linkages between adult education and survival.Zentralstelle fuer Erziehung, Wissenschaft und Doku-mentation. Bonn.

Easton, P. 1998. Decentralization and Local Capacity Buildingin the Sahel: Results of the PADLOS-Education Study.OECD/Club du Sahel/CILSS (Comité Inter-état deLutte contre la Sécheresse au Sahel). Paris.

ELIMU. 2000. Rapport d’Activités 2000. Uvira, Sud-Kivu.Association.

Faccini, Benedict. 1999. Recycled Rags, Renewed Lives;Working with the garbage collectors of Cairo, Egypt. Inno-vations for Youth, No. 3. UNESCO. Paris.

FAO. 1980. Agricultural Training: Report of an EvaluationStudy. Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations, Rome.

_______. 1990. Participation in Practice: Lessons from theFAO People’s Participation Program. Food and Agricul-ture Organization of the United Nations. Rome.

Fiedrich. March, 2001. Personal communication to Oxen-ham.

Fujisawa, Miki. 2001. “Adult Literacy Education andDevelopment in Kenya.” Paper delivered at the 2001Annual conference of the Comparative and Interna-tional Society. University of Minnesota.

Ghai, Dharam. 2000. Social development and public policy: Astudy of some successful experiences, United NationsResearch Institute for Social Development (UNRISD).Basingstoke: Macmillan.

GILLBT. 1998. Semi-Annual Report: April–September, 1998.GILLBT (Ghana Institute of Linguistics, Literacy andBible Translation), Accra.

Gorham, A. and A. Espinoza. 1991. Rural Vocational Train-ing: Recent Experiences and Lessons Learned. Interna-tional Labour Office. Geneva and International Train-ing Centre of the ILO. Turin.

Greenstreet, Miranda. 1991. Functional literacy and healtheducation or women in Ghana: a case study, Adult Educa-tion and Development 36:133–144. Institut für Interna-tionale Zusammenarbeit, Deutsche VolkshochschuleVerband. Bonn.

GTZ. 1999. Final Report on the Implementation of the Project“Literacy and Adult Education.” (Egypt, 1990-1998).GTZ (German Society for Technical Cooperation).Bonn.

Guindo, P. 1983. Des Entreprises éducatives Non-conven-tionelles à une Prospective d’éducation permanente.Bamako. ISFRA. Master’s thesis.

Gustaffson, Uwe. 1991, Can literacy lead to development? Acase study in literacy, adult education and economic devel-opment in India. Dallas: University of Texas at Arling-ton International Academic Bookstore.

Guttman, Cynthia. 1994. In our own hands, Paris: UnescoPress.

_______. 1995. Breaking through: TOSTAN’s non-formalbasic education program in national languages in Senegal.UNESCO. Paris.

Hirsch, Donald and D.A. Wagner. 1995. What Makes Learn-ers Learn: The role of incentives in workplace education andtraining. Cresskill NJ: Hampton Press.

IBRD-OED. 1993. Developing Human Resources in sub–74Africa. Operations Evaluation Department of TheWorld Bank.

ICAE. 1979. The World of Literacy, Policy, Research andAction. International Council for Adult Education.Toronto.


IFAD. 1982. Mali Village Development Fund, Segou Region,Project appraisal. IFAD (International Fund for Agricul-tural Development). Rome.

_______. 1992. Guinea Smallholder Development Project inthe Forest Region: Report and Recommendations of thePresident to the Executive Board. EB/47/92/R.75. IFAD(International Fund for Agricultural Development).Rome.

_______. 1998a. Republic of Côte d’Ivoire: Rural DevelopmentProject in the Zanzan Region: Pre-evaluation report, Vol. 1.IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Develop-ment). Rome.

_______. 1998b. Republic of Ghana: Upper-East Region LandConservation and Smallholder Rehabilitation ProjectSecond Phase: Appraisal Report. IFAD (InternationalFund for Agricultural Development). Rome.

_______. 1998c. Gambia: Agricultural Services Project,memo of 18.6.98. IFAD (International Fund for Agri-cultural Development). Rome.

_______. 1998d. Senegal: Village Organization and Manage-ment Project (1993–1999). IFAD (International Fund forAgricultural Development). Rome.

_______. 2000. Republic of Côte d’Ivoire: Project in Support ofSmall Market Gardeners in the Savannah Regions: Pre-evaluation Report. IFAD (International Fund for Agri-cultural Development). Rome.

IIED. 1998. Participation, Literacy and Empowerment. IIED(International Institute for Environment and Develop-ment—Rural development). London.

ILO. 1980. Ghana: Tarkwa Women’s Income Generating Activ-ities (TWIGA). ILO (International Labur Organization).Geneva.

_______. 1993a. Egypt—Training Rural Women in IncomeGenerating and Basic Life Skills: project findings and rec-ommendations. International Labor Organization.Geneva.

_______. 1993b. Togo—Training Rural Women in IncomeGenerating and Basic Life Skills: project findings and rec-ommendations. International Labor Organization.Geneva.

_______. 1994a. Nigeria Training of Rural Women in Produc-tive Workskills: project findings and recommendations.International Labor Organization. Geneva.

_______. 1994b. Nigeria Income-generating Activities forWomen in Health Development: project findings and rec-ommendations. International Labor Organization.Geneva.

_______. 1995. Action to Assist Rural Women: Lessons fromAfrica. International Labor Organization. Geneva.

_______. 1999. Environnement sahélien et lutte contre la pau-vreté: Démarche participative et partenariat pour ledéveloppement à la base et local, Document de fin de Pro-gramme. ACOPAM (Appui associatif et coopératif aux

Initiatives de Développement à la Base, Final Report.ILO (International Labor Organization). Geneva.

_______. 2001a. “Thematic Evaluation: ILO projects ontraining for employment.” GB.280/TC/1. GoverningBody 280th session. ILO (International Labor Organi-zation). Geneva.

Itty, C.I. 1991. Lessons from a Unique Development Program.Report of an evaluation on “Rural Education andSocio-economic Development Program” implementedby the YMCA of Chiang Mai, Thailand, from June 1,1986, to May 31, 1991, in partnership with the YMCAof Metropolitan Toronto, Canada. CIDA (CanadianAgency for International Development). Ottawa/Hull.

Jakway, Martha A. 1981. “Adult Education: Education forEveryday Living.” in Larson, M.L. and P.M. Davis,eds., 1981, Bilingual Education: An Experience in Peru-vian Amazonia pp. 327 seq. Dallas: Summer Institute ofLinguistics.

Jansen, Ruud, Neville Pradhan, and John Spencer. 1994.Bushmen Ex-Servicemen and Dependents Rehabilitationand Settlement Program: Evaluation Final Report. Evan-gelical Lutheran Church in Namibia. Windhoek andNorwegian Church Aid. Oslo.

Kamau, J.K. 1990. A Study to Assess the Participation ofAdult Learners in the Literacy Program in Kiharu Divisionof Muranga District (Kenya) from 1983 to 1987. GermanFoundation for International Development, Educa-tion, Science and Documentation Centre. Bonn andUniversity of Nairobi College of Education and Exter-nal Studies. Nairobi (processed).

Katahoire, Anne Ruhweza. 2001. Strengthening Livelihoodswith Literacy: the Uganda case—version 1. Institute forInternational Cooperation, German Adult EducationAssociation (IIZ/DVV). Bonn.

Kater, Adri, V. Mlekwa, M. Keregero, P.A.K. Mushi, andN. P. Kadege. 1994. Peasants and Educators: a study of theliteracy environment in rural Tanzania.

Korboe, J. 1998. Ghana: a Mid-Course Evaluation of theNational Literacy and Functional Skills Program. Nonfor-mal Education Department, Ministry of Education,Accra and The World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Kpumbu, T. 1985. “The Importance of Functional Educa-tion as Perceived by the Dzekwa River Population.”INJS memorandum. Yaounde.

Larson, M.L. and P.M. Davis, eds. 1981. Bilingual Educa-tion: An Experience in Peruvian Amazonia. Dallas.Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Leach, Fiona, S. Abdulla, H. Appleton, J. el-Bushra, N.Cardenas, K. Kebede, V. Lewis, and S. Sitaram. 2000.The Impact of Training on Women’s Micro-Enterprise.Development Education Research Serial No. 40. DFID(Department for International Development). London.


Legwaila, Marty I. and A.T. Manowe. 1996. Annual Reporton the Literacy Program (Botswana). Department of Non-Formal Education, Ministry of Education. Gaborone.

Legwaila, Marty I. 1997. Annual Report on the Literacy Pro-gram (Botswana). Department of Non-Formal Educa-tion, Ministry of Education. Gaborone.

Leonardos, Ana Cristina. 1995. Effective Strategies andApproaches for Reaching Street and Working Childrenthrough Education: reviewing recent developments. Inter-national Institute for Educational Planning. Paris.

Leonardos, Ana Cristina. 1999. Non-formal VocationalTraining Programs for Disadvantaged Youth and theirInsertion into the World of Work: towards a framework foranalysis and evaluation. Occasional Paper 83. Interna-tional Institute for Educational Planning, Paris.

Lim, Myrna. 1999. “The Women in Enterprise Devel-opment (WED) Project: Monitoring and EvaluationPractices.” In Carolyn Medel-Añonuevo, ed. BreakingThrough: Engendering Monitoring and Evaluation inAdult Education pp. 67–82. UNESCO Institute forEducation. Hamburg.

Lind, A., and A. Johnston. 1990. Adult Literacy in the ThirdWorld. Swedish International Development Agency.Stockholm.

Lind, A., M. Gleditsch, and T. Henson. 1986. Literacy andIncome Generating Activities in Zimbabwe. SwedishInternational Development Agency. Stockholm.

Maclure, Richard. 1997. Overlooked and Undervalued: ASynthesis of ERNWACA Reviews on the State of EducationResearch in West and Central Africa. USAID (UnitedStates Agency for International Development). Wash-ington, D.C.

Makoni, B.M. 1989. An Assessment of the Performance ofAnimators of the Rushinga Community Development Pro-ject, Rushinga District, Zimbabwe. German Foundationfor International Development, Education, Scienceand Documentation Centre. Bonn and ZimbabweInstitute of Development Studies. Harare.

Mamatona, Tonic and Marty Legwaila. 1998. An Analysisof Post-Literacy Activities in Botswana. Gaborone, Uni-versity of Botswana: Faculty of Education (unpub-lished).

Mauch, W. and U. Papen (eds). 1997. Making a difference:Innovations in Adult Education. UNESCO Institute forEducation and German Foundation for InternationalDevelopment. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, GmbH.

McCormack, Jeanne, Martin Walsh and Candace Nelson.1986. Women’s Group Enterprises: a study of the structureof opportunity on the Kenya coast. World Education Inc.Boston.

Medel-Añonuevo, Carolyn, ed. 1996. Women Reading theWorld: policies and practices of literacy in Asia. UIE Stud-ies no.6, UNESCO Institute for Education. Hamburg.

_______. 1997. Negotiating and Creating Spaces of Power:Women’s Educational Practices amidst crisis. UNESCOInstitute for Education. Hamburg.

_______. 1999. Breaking Through:Engendering monitoringand evaluation in adult education. UNESCO Institute forEducation Hamburg.

Middleton, John and Terry Demsky. 1989. Vocational Edu-cation and Training: A Review of World Bank Investment.World Bank. Washington, D.C.

Mikulecky, Larry and P. Lloyd. 1993. The Impact of Work-place Literacy Programs. Bloomington, Indiana Univer-sity (NALD Website).

Mikulecky, Larry. 1995. “Workplace Literacy Programs:Organization and Incentives.” In Hirsch and Wagner.1995:129–150.

Millican, Juliet. 1990. Reading, Writing and Cultivating: theRole of Literacy in Irrigation. ODI (Overseas Develop-ment Institute). London and IIMI (International Irriga-tion Management Institute). Colombo.

_______. 2001. Personal communication to Oxenham.Mueller, Josef. 1997. “Literacy and Non-Formal (Basic)

Education—Still a Donors’ Priority.” Adult Educationand Development 48:37–60.

Mwangi, Anna Petkova. 2001. Strengthening Livelihoodswith Literacy: the Kenya case—version 1. Institute forInternational Cooperation, German Adult EducationAssociation (IIZ/DVV). Bonn.

Nessa F., B. Rokeya and A. Mazumder. 1998. REFLECT,savings and credit in Bangladesh. PLA notes No. 32. June1998, pp. 54–56. International Institute for Environ-ment and Development.

Nirantar. 1997. “Innovating for change: Women’s Educa-tion for Empowerment. An Analysis of the MahilaSamakhya Program in Banda district (India).” InMauch, W. and U. Papen (eds). 1997. Making a differ-ence: Innovations in Adult Education pp. 33–47.UNESCO Institute for Education and German Foun-dation for International Development. Frankfurt amMain: Peter Lang, GmbH.

NLM (National Literacy Mission). 1994. Literacy cam-paigns— an evaluation digest. Government of India,Ministry of Human resource Development, Direc-torate of Adult Education, National Literacy Mission.Delhi.

OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment). 1995. Literacy economy and society.Results of the first International Adult Literacy Survey.OECD. Paris.

OECD/CERI. 1992. Adult illiteracy and economic perform-ance. OECD and CERI (Centre for EducationalResearch and Innovation). Paris.


Okech, Anthony, Roy A. Carr-Hill, Anne R. Katahoire,Teresa Kakooza, Alice N. Nididde, and John Oxen-ham. 2001. Adult Literacy Programs in Uganda. TheWorld Bank. Washington, D.C.

Patten, Frances, Jose Pinelo, and Eduardo Ayllon. 1999.Evaluation Institucional. IPTK, Suare (Bolivia): InstitutoPolitecnico “Tomas Katari.”

POCET. 1996. Education for Employment. Proyecto de Edu-cación para el Trabajo. Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

Puchner, Laurel D. 1995a. “Literacy links: issues in therelationship between early childhood development,health, women, families and literacy.” InternationalJournal of Educational Development. 15(3):307–319.Oxford.

Puchner, Laurel D. 1995b. “Incentives for Adult Learningin Developing Countries: Lessons and comparisons.”In Hirsch and Wagner, pp. 161–180.

Ramzy, Nahed and Safurat Farag. 1996. Non-Formal Edu-cation and Training for Child Workers. InternationalLabour Office, Cairo.

RDRS. 1999. Evaluation of RDRS Education and TrainingActivities by a Staff Peer Group: Self-Evaluation March1999. RDRS (Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Service). Dhakaand NCA (Norwegian Church Aid). Oslo.

Riddell, A. 2000. A Review of 13 Evaluations of REFLECT.(second draft). ActionAid. London.

Robinson, Bernardette. 1997. In The Green Desert, GlobalAction Program. UNESCO (United Nations Educa-tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization). Paris.

Robinson-Pant, A. 2000. “Women and literacy—a Nepalperspective.” International Journal of Educational Devel-opment 20(4):349–364.

_______. 2001. Why Eat Green Cucumber at a Time of Dying?Exploring the link between women’s literacy and develop-ment: a Nepal perspective. UNESCO Institute of Educa-tion. Hamburg.

Rogers, Alan. 1994.Voices on literacy. Case studies of literacyprograms in developing countries. Education for Devel-opment. Reading.

_______. 1997. Women, literacy, income generation. Educa-tion for Development. Reading.

_______. 2001. Widening Literacy: a training manual. Savethe Children (US). Westport, Connecticut.

Saldanha, Denzil, Lalita Ramdas, Ram Kowgli. 2000. TheREFLECT Approach to Adult Education in India: Processand Policy Implications (Draft report, March, 2000). TataInstitute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Department forInternational Development. London.

Sall, Oumar. 2001. Strengthening Livelihoods with Literacy:the Senegal case—version 1. Institute for InternationalCooperation, German Adult Education Association(IIZ/DVV). Bonn.

Saxena, Sadhna. 2000. “Ajmer: Revisiting the Total Liter-acy Campaign.” in Malavika Karlekar, ed. Reading theWorld: Understanding the Literacy Campaigns in India.ASPBAE (Asian South Pacific Bureau of Adult Educa-tion). Mumbai.

SCF (UK). 2000a. Review of Save the Children (US) Comple-mentary Activities Pilot Project. Save the Children Fund(UK). London.

_______. 2000b. Impact Assessment Field Test (Gaza andHebron micro-finance). Save the Children Fund (UK).London.

Sherpa, Helen, Pamela Civins, and Cristine Smith. 2001.Linking Nonformal Education to Development: Women’sEconomic empowerment and Literacy (WEEL) Program.World Education Inc. Boston, Mass.

Sipin, Cecile. 1996. “The Education Forum’s Literacy-Numeracy Program.” In Medel-Añonuevo. 1996.pp.65–68.

Smith, Cristine A., John P. Comings, Chij Shrestha, and K.Shrestha, (n.d.), Effectiveness and Achievement in theNepal National Literacy Program. World Education Inc.Boston.

Stercq, Catherine. 1993. Literacy, socialisation and employ-ment. UNESCO Institute for Education, Hamburg andJessica Kingsley. London.

Stromquist, N.P. 1995. “Adult Learning under conditionsof Hardship: Evidence from Developing and Devel-oped Countries.” pp.181–191.

_______. 1997. “Literacy Practices among Adult Women:an attempt at critical conceptualisation.” In Medel-Añonuevo, C. 1997. pp.25–31. Negotiating and CreatingSpaces of Power: Women’s Educational Practices amidstcrisis. UNESCO Institute for Education, Hamburg.

Sultana, Parvin and Khandaker Mainuddin. 2000. ImpactAssessment and Evaluation: Integrated Development Pro-gram of Community Development Association. NOVIB.The Hague.

Tera, Kalilou. 1991, “Adult education based on literacy—an action orientated research carried out with theNational University of Cote d’Ivoire.” Adult Educationand Development. pp. 145–158. Institut für Interna-tionale Zusammenarbeit. Deutsche VolkshochschuleVerband. Bonn.

Thomas, Gwen and Ava Shrestha. 2000. Breaking NewGround: a case study of Women’s Empowerment in Nepal,Kathmandu. USAID. Nepal.

Tomlinson, Sally. 2001. Evaluation report: The SEIGYM Pro-gram (Somali Educational Incentives for Girls and YoungMen). Africa Educational Trust. London.

Touré, S. 1983. Alphabétisation et développement coopératif:évaluation d’impact de l’alphabétisation sur la cooperationen 7ème region. Bamako. ISFRA/DNAFLA, master’sthesis.

52 AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES52 AFRICA REGION HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES


Turner Lomperis, Ana Maria. 1991. “Teaching mothers toread: evidence from Colombia on the key role ofmaternal education in preschool child nutritionalhealth.” Journal of Developing Areas 26(1):25–51.Macomb.

UKDFID. 1999a. Egypt: Adult Literacy Training Project: Pro-ject Completion Report. United Kingdom Departmentfor International Development. London.

_______. 1999b. Egypt: Adult Literacy Training Project: Eval-uation report (Surridge). United Kingdom Departmentfor International Development. London

_______. 1999c. “Egypt: GALAE Capacity Enhancementfor Lifelong Learning: Project Memorandum.” UnitedKingdom Department for International Development.London.

UNDP. 1990. Development of Rural Technologies (Lesotho).UNDP (United Nations Development Program). NewYork.

_______. 1992. Two Pilot Centres for Literacy and VocationalTraining for Rural Women (Syria). UNDP (UnitedNations Development Program) New York.

UNDP/UNESCO. 1976. The Experimental World LiteracyProgram: a critical assessment. UNESCO (UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organiza-tion). Paris.

UNESCAP. 1997. “Productive Employment for Youth:1995 ESCAP HRD Awards.” UNESCAP. Bangkok

UNESCO. 1973. Final Evaluation Report, UNDP-UNESCOWork Oriented Adult Literacy Pilot Project in the LakeRegions of Tanzania. UNESCO. Mwanza, Paris. (quotedby Yusuf O. Kassam in “Literacy and Development:What is missing in the jigsaw puzzle?” Adult Educationand Development 31:125–131.)

_______. undated. UNESCO’s Mobilizing Project to CombatIlliteracy: Igniting the Spirit of Change. UNESCO BasicEducation Division. Paris.

UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emer-gency Fund). 1999. A Synopsis of Innovations and LessonsLearned in UNICEF Cooperation. UNICEF (UnitedNations International Children’s Emergency Fund).New York.

_______. 2001a. Egypt Country Office Annual Report for2000. UNICEF. New York and Cairo.

_______. 2001b. Swaziland Country Office Annual Report for2000. UNICEF New York and Mbabane.

_______. 2001c. Vietnam Country Office Annual Report for2000. UNICEF New York and Hanoi.

USAID (United States Agency for International Develop-ment). 1997. Evaluation of World Education grants forwomen’s micro-enterprise and urban re-vitalization (inMali) by Roush, James L., Maryanne LeBlanc,Ahmadou Diallo, Development Associates Inc. USAID(United States Agency for International Development).Washington, D.C.

_______. 1994. Project Assistance Completion Report: educa-tion sector support project (306–0202) Afghanistan.USAID. Washington, D.C.

_______. 1997. Evaluation of World Education grants forwomen’s micro-enterprise and urban re-vitalization (inMali) by Roush, James L., Maryanne LeBlanc,Ahmadou Diallo, Development Associates Inc.USAID. Washington, D.C.

Velis, Jean-Pierre. 1999. The Women’s Literacy and BasicSkills Training Project, Lao People’s Democratic Republic.UNESCO. Paris.

Villrosa-Tanchuling, M. Linnea. 1997. The Fisherfolk Envi-ronmental Education Project: A Timely Innovation on Pop-ular, Environmental Education (Philippines), in Making adifference: Innovations in Adult Education pp.157–171.UNESCO Institute for Education and German Foun-dation for International Development. Frankfurt amMain: Peter Lang, GmbH.

Walters, Shirley. 1997. Globalization, Adult Education andTraining: Impacts and Issues. London: ZED Books.

World Education. 2000a. Farmer Field Schools in Nepal: aproven model to promote sustainable agriculture. WorldEducation. Boston.

_______. 2000b. Women’s Economic Empowerment and Liter-acy Project (WEEL), Nepal: Final Narrative Report—Year3. World Education. Boston.

_______. 2001a. Women’s Economic Empowerment and Liter-acy (WEEL)—Nepal, First Interim Narrative Report for thePeriod February 1, 2000, through January 31, 2001. WorldEducation. Boston.

_______. 2001b. Women’s Empowerment through Literacyand Livelihoods Development (WELLD), Andhra Pradesh,India (draft). World Education. Boston.

_______. 2001c. Women’s Empowerment through Literacyand Livelihoods Development (WELLD), Madhya Pradesh,India (draft). World Education. Boston.

_______. 2001d. World Education/Mali’s Integrated LiteracyWork. World Education. Boston

_______. 2001e. Supporting Community Participation inEducation via Adult Literacy: Two Approaches. WorldEducation. Boston.

_______. 2001f. Literacy and Livelihoods: Piyeli, Mali. WorldEducation Boston.

54

he study team wishes to thank the followingpersons warmly for their assistance in seek-ing and accessing documentation useful to

the study (their names are listed before their insti-tutions, which appear in alphabetical order).

David Archer, ActionAid, London

Ms. Nandago, REFLECT Coordination Unit.ActionAid, Kampala

Jean-Marie Ahlin Byll-Cataria, Association for theDevelopment of Education in Africa (SwissDevelopment Cooperation Agency), Bern

ADRA (Adventist Development and ReliefAgency), Uganda

Michael Brophy, AET (Africa Educational Trust),London

John Aitchison, Durban

Jerome Gedfroy, AIDE ACTION, Conakry

Sonja Fagerberg-Diallo, ARED (Associates inResearch & Education for Development Inc.),Dakar

Maria Khan, Nasreen Contractor, ASPBAE (Asianand South Pacific Bureau for Adult Education),Mumbai

Jules Nteba Bakumba, Association ELIMU, UviraSud-Kivu

Herbert Baryayebwa, Commissioner in Charge ofLiteracy, Kampala

Simon Koppers, BMZ (Federal Ministry forEconomic Cooperation), Bonn

Katy Anis and Don Graybill, CAII (CreativeAssociates International), Washington, D.C.

Mr. Nyereke and Mr. Bokoum, CAOPA (Centred’appui aux organisations professionnellesagricoles)

Mme Souadou Diallo, Mr. Billo Sylla and Mr.Boubacar Sylla, CENAFOD (Centre Africain deFormation pour le Developpement)

Don Pau, CIDA (Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency), Ottawa/Hull

Anja Frings and Ingrid Jung, DSE (GermanFoundation for International Development), Bonn

Rudolf Heinrichs-Drinhaus, EED-ChurchDevelopment Service (An Association of theProtestant Churches in Germany), Bonn

Maxim Koivogui, EUPD (Entraide Universitairepour le Developpement), Conakry

Lavinia Gasperini, Manuela Allara, Philippe Ardouin-Dumazet, Kevin Gallagher, Peter Glasauer, M. Kato,John Rouse and L. Van Crowder, FAO (Food andAgricultural Organization of the United Nations),Rome

Peter Easton, Florida State University, College ofEducation, Tallahassee

Christina Rawley, GroundWorks, Washington, D.C.

Hubert Hartmann and Gert Flaig, GTZ (GermanAgency for Technical Cooperation), Eschborn

Sapho Haralambous, Cristina Moro and Carla Secchi,IFAD (International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment), Rome

Françoise Caillods and Françoise du Pouget, IIEP(International Institute for Educational Planning),Paris

Annex 1

Persons Thanked

T

Torkel Alfthan, Remo Becci, K. Kamdem and Staff ofthe ILO Library, ILO (International LaborOrganization), Geneva

Okello Atwaro, Teresa Kakooza, Alice N. Ndidde andAnthony Okech, IACE (Institute of Adult andContinuing Education), Makerere University,Kampala

Marc Fiedrich, Institute of Development Studies,University of Sussex, Brighton

Jeffrey Ashe, Institute for Sustainable Development,Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass.

P. Kiirya, LABE (Literacy and Adult BasicEducation), Kampala

H. Muhangi, LITNET (Literacy Network), Kampala

Juliet Millican

Clemens Kronenberg, MISEREOR (The GermanCatholic Bishops’ Organization for DevelopmentCooperation), Aachen

Asle Kristiansen, Lars Erling-Hovlid and IngerFrydenborg, NCA (Norwegian Church Aid), Oslo

John Comings, NCSALL (National Center forStudies in Adult Learning and Literacy), HarvardUniversity, Cambridge, Mass.

Wouter Bolding, NOVIB (Netherlands Organizationfor International Development), The Hague

Jean Pierre Camara, Djenabou Savane and AlphaOumar Diallo, PAPE-BGN (Projet d’Appüi auxPetits Exploitants en Basse Guinee Nord), Conakry

Tanya Huq, RDRS (Rangpur Dinajpur RuralService), Dhaka

Alan Rogers, Uppingham

Rachel Marcus, Anne Mulcahy, Chris Saunders andKaren Wyatt, SCF-UK (Save the Children, UK),London

Agneta Lind, Hans Persson and Kenth Wickmann,SIDA (Swedish International DevelopmentAgency), Stockholm

Patricia M. Davis, Sheila Harrison, BarbaraHollenbach, Pat Kelley, Linda Seyer and KathleenTacelosky, SIL (formerly Summer Institute ofLinguistics), Dallas and High Wycombe

Falilou Bah and Abdourahmane Conde, SNA/DPA(Service Nationale d’Alphabétisation), Conakry

Denzil Saldanha, Tata Institute of Social Sciences,Mumbai

Mark Gilmer, Martine Bousquet, Sayeeda Rahman, U.Miura and Staff of the UNESCO Library, UNESCO,Paris

Imke Behr and Carolyn Medel-Añonuevo, UIE(UNESCO Institute for Education), Hamburg

Carew Treffgarne, Sheila Round and Digby Swift,UKDFID (United Kingdom Department forInternational Development), London

Elaine Furniss and Sheldon Shaeffer, UNICEF(United Nations International Children’s Fund),New York

Mouctar Balde and Mme Maimouna, UNICEF,Guinee

Jim Hoxeng, USAID (United States Agency forInternational Development), Washington, D.C.

Shirley Burchfield, Pamela Civins, Valeria Rocha andHelen Sherpa, WEI (World Education Incorporated),Boston


56

Annex 2

Cases from Guinea

Abdoul Hamid Diallo

(Original French Version)

Sigles et acronymes

ACT Association de Coopération TechniqueAEC Association d’éducateurs

communautairesAFV Association Financière VillageoiseAGAKFEM Association Guinéenne pour

l’Allègement des ChargesFéminines

ASF Association de Services FinanciersCAOPA Centre d’Appui aux Organisations

Professionnelles AgricolesCECI Centre Canadien d’études et de

CoopérationCENAFOD Centre Africain de Formation pour le

DéveloppementCONEBAT Commission Nationale pour

l’éducation de base pour tousCVEP Comité Villageois d’Entretien des

PistesDPA Direction Préfectorale de

l’alphabétisationDPE Direction Préfectorale de l’EducationDRA Direction Régionale de

l’alphabétisationDRE Direction Régionale de l’EducationEPT Education pour tousEBA Education de Base des AdultesEUPD Entraide Universitaire Pour le

Développement

FAC Fonds d’Aide et de CoopérationFrançaise

FIDA Fonds International deDéveloppement Agricole

FED Fonds Européen de DéveloppementGEV Groupement d’éducateurs villageoisMAEF Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Eaux et

ForêtsMEPU-EC Ministère de l’enseignement pré-

universitaire et de l’éducationcivique

NAFA Ecole de la deuxième chanceONG Organisation Non GouvernementaleOCED Organisation canadienne pour

l’éducation au service dudéveloppement

PAPE–BGN Projet d’Appui aux Petits Exploitantsen Basse Guinée Nord

PDL Plan de Développement LocalSAF Service Administration et FinanceSFA Service Formation AnimationSNA Service National d’AlphabétisationSCIO Service de Coordination des

Interventions des ONGTDR Termes de référenceUNICEF Organisation des Nations Unies pour

l’EnfanceVSF Vétérinaires sans frontière

Introduction

n République de Guinée, il convient dedissocier au niveau des politiques, l’alphabé-tisation de l’éducation des adultes général.

En effet, l’alphabétisation est sous la responsabilitédu Service National (SNA), lequel est rattaché auMinistère de l’enseignement pré-universitaire, tan-dis que l’éducation des adultes est sous la respon-sabilité du SCIO (Service de Coordination desinterventions des ONG), lequel est rattaché auMinistère de l’Intérieur et de la Décentralisation.

La formation professionnelle, elle, est dispenséeà deux niveaux : (i) les centres nationaux de forma-tion professionnelle qui sont rattachés au Ministèrede l’enseignement technique et professionnel (ii) laformation professionnelle non formelle, réalisée parles ONG de la place dans des domaines divers (agri-culture, cueillette, artisanat etc.).

Le ministère de l’enseignement technique etprofessionnel gère actuellement plusieurs centresoù des élèves et étudiants de niveau Baccalauréat etplus, reçoivent des formations diplômantes con-duisant à diverses professions (agriculture, Géniecivil, mécanique, artisanat etc.). Le niveau est siélevé que l’apprentissage d’une langue locale n’estabsolument pas nécessaire, aux dires même desétudiants.

Sur le terrain, ce sont plutôt les ONG, les agencesd’appui au développement et quelques fois le SNAqui interviennent aussi bien dans le cadre del’alphabétisation que dans les formations intégrantl’alphabétisation comme base nécessaire auxapprentissages visant l’amélioration des compé-tences et des moyens d’existence, pour les per-sonnes peu lettrées voire analphabètes, surtout enmilieu rural.

Si pour l’alphabétisation, le sujet est précis etpeut être cerné par le SNA (en définissant unepolitique et des stratégies en la matière), pour laformation des adultes d’une manière générale, étantdonné la multiplicité des domaines d’action et ladiversité des publics cibles, il n’existe pas de poli-tique précise d’intervention. Chaque Départementministériel tente de définir sa propre politique, etd’en informer les intervenants dans le secteur. C’estpour cela que les ONG s’organisent de leur côtépour mettre en place des réseaux. Exemples :

Réseau des ONG de lutte contre le SIDA (Ministèrede la Santé), le Forum des ONG (Ministère de ladécentralisation), etc.

Dans tous les cas on note qu’il y a :

a. Utilisation des programmes d’alphabétisationpour améliorer les moyens de subsistance desapprenants ; ou

b. Exploitation des programmes de formationprofessionnelle pour y intégrer des élémentspertinents de lecture, d’écriture et de calcul.

La présente étude tente de répondre aux lesquestions suivantes :

a. Quelles sont les expériences capitalisées en lamatière ?

b. L’intégration de cette double approche pourra-t-elle accroître l’efficacité des programmes(d’alphabétisation et aussi de formation)fidéliser les apprenants et améliorer leursréalisations ?

c. Pourra-t-elle également promouvoir l’usage descompétences apprises et avoir plus d’effets et unmeilleur impact ?

En ce qui concerne l’étude, contrairement auxprévisions initiales (basées essentiellement sur uneétude documentaire), nous avons fait une brèverecherche et des enquêtes sur ces questions. Ce sontles bénéficiaires des actions qui ont alimenté notreétude plus que les contenus des documents trouvés.En effet, comme déjà annoncé, ceux-ci sont en trèspetit nombre et de plus tous ne traitent quepartiellement le sujet.

Dans les chapitres qui suivent, nous présenteronssuccessivement : (i) un résumé de l’étude, issu desinformations recueillies, (ii) ces informations elles-mêmes et (iii) les principales conclusions etrecommandations.

Résumé de l’étude

En République de Guinée, compte tenu de l’histoiredu pays et notamment du contexte éducatif, il y a eu


E

peu de capitalisation. Il n’y a donc guère dedocumentation sur le sujet malgré son intérêt et sapertinence.

D’autre part, les deux approches selon lesquellesl’étude devait être menée ne sont pas dissociées enGuinée. En effet, La presque totalité des ONG deGuinée travaillent sur le terrain dans l’apprentis-sage de compétences visant les moyens de subsis-tance et l’amélioration des conditions de vie.Aucune d’entre elles ne travaille dans l’option« Environnement lettré ». Toutes font donc de l’al-phabétisation ponctuelle ou semi-permanentelorsque celle-ci s’avère indispensable pourdépasser une situation difficile dans le cadre d’unprojet précis. Exemples (i) les groupements decoton sont alphabétisés puis formés tout simple-ment pour assurer eux-mêmes la commerciali-sation du coton en étant sûrs de n’avoir pas ététrompés (ii) les groupements maraîchers sontformés pour tenir les outils de gestion de leurexploitation, et ainsi améliorer leur productivité etaccroître leurs revenus, etc.

Cela veut dire qu’en Guinée, dans la pratiqueactuelle, les deux approches (de l’alphabétisationau sens strict ou formations intégrant l’al-phabétisation comme base de l’amélioration descompétences et de l’accroissement des moyensd’existence) sont jumelées et menées par les mêmesintervenants.

Pour cette dernière raison le rapport n’a pastraité séparément les deux approches du fait deleur incorporation, aussi bien dans la conceptiondes projets que dans la pratique des ONG et mêmedu SNA dans les centres communautaires, lescentres NAFA et les centres d’alphabétisationprofessionnalisante.

A partir des cas étudiés et des quelques docu-ments exploités, nous pouvons formuler les recom-mandations suivantes :

1. Concernant les stratégies, il est important pourla Guinée de poursuivre, comme le prévoit lanouvelle stratégie, (i) de créer un environnementlettré, fournir un appui aux écoles communau-taires et à la scolarisation et, (ii) l’appui àl’alphabétisation professionnalisante et soutenirles activités des apprenants à travers les cinqvolets suivants, prévus dans le projet EPT1.

• Projet 1Alphabétisation des femmes et des jeunesdans les centres de formation et d’appren-tissage, dans les groupements féminins, etc.,dans les zones rurales, péri-urbaines eturbaines ;

• Projet 2Alphabétisation des jeunes apprentis desdifférents corps de métier (mécanique, électri-cité, électricité du bâtiment, etc.) et desartisans (forgerons, cordonniers, etc.) ;

• Projet 3Alphabétisation des jeunes filles-mères etjeunes garçons en situations difficiles (jeunesvictimes de la petite délinquance) ;

• Projet 4Alphabétisation des élus locaux des collecti-vités de base et des leaders d’opinions ;

• Projet 5Alphabétisation des adultes (hommes,femmes) de la tranche d’âge de 15 à 49 ansdans les secteurs de production (agriculture,élevage, pêche, etc.) dans les groupements, lespré-coopératives et coopératives et autresassociations.

2. En ce qui concerne le projet EPT1, nous recom-mandons de limiter les fonctions du SNA auxactivités listées ci-dessous et de le doter desmoyens adéquats qui lui sont nécessaires pourles conduire de façon satisfaisante :

• La conception et l’élaboration de la politiquenationale d’alphabétisation et du suivi de samise en œuvre ;

• L’élaboration des méthodes, des stratégies etdes programmes d’alphabétisation des diffé-rents groupes concernés ;

• La conception et l’élaboration du matérield’alphabétisation et de post-alphabétisation,son expérimentation et son évaluation ;


• Le suivi, le soutien et l’évaluation des activitésd’alphabétisation.

3. Concernant les structures institutionnelles etorganisationnelles, nous recommandons que laGuinée s’inspire largement de l’exemple du Séné-gal, à cette différence prèsqu’on devrait insister surla privatisation de l’opérateur et à la mise ne placede coordinations à divers niveaux : (i) entre lesopérateurs et (ii) le SNA. C’est pourquoi, de l’avisde l’ensemble des partenaires techniques rencon-trés sur le terrain ainsi que des professionnels del’éducation des adultes dans le pays, un opérateuraurait un rôle très important à jouer notammentdans les domaines suivants : assurer harmonisationet coordination, constituer une plate formed’échanges, apporter une assistance technique etune aide à la gestion dans le cadre du projet EPT1.Un tel dispositif permettrait à la Guinée de releverle défi de l’illletrisme. Pour cela, il faudra choisir :(i) une institution qui jouisse d’une expérienceconfirmée et d’une efficacité certaine dans ledomaine de l’éducation des adultes en général etde l’alphabétisation en particulier ; (ii) il conviendraen outre qu’elle bénéficie de la confiance de toutesles autorités techniques et administratives dudomaine ainsi que des ONG de la place et (iii) elledevra enfin être capable d’instaurer la rigueurnécessaire pour « limiter les dégâts généralementobservés en Afrique dans le cadre de la gestion desprogrammes » et servir de contre poids en faveurdes opérateurs (ONG) et des bénéficiaires.

4. Concernant les opérateurs, on note aujourd’huides insuffisances notamment en ce qui concerneà la post alphabétisation et à l’élaboration destratégies cohérentes dans un processus d’auto-promotion. Pour cela, nous recommandons forte-ment de tout faire pour accroître les compétencesdes opérateurs… ne serait-ce qu’au moyen devoyages d’étude et d’échanges, par exemple.

5. Concernant cette approche d’auto-promotion,elle doit obéir aux principes suivants :

• le besoin en matière d’alphabétisation doitêtre exprimé par le groupe cible lorsque celui-ci en est conscient ou alors, il doit être suscité ;

• l’alphabétisation s’adresse à des adultesorganisés autour d’activités de production, decommercialisation, d’épargne et de crédit outout simplement d’ordre social ou culturel ;

• par contre, pour les plus jeunes, dans la perspec-tive de promouvoir un environnement lettré,elle peut s’instaurer au même titre que l’école etdans la perspective de l’éducation pour tous ;

• les attentes et les besoins exprimés par lepublic cible sont fidèlement pris en comptedans l’élaboration des matériels didactiquesou autres outils pédagogiques ;

• les coutumes et les mœurs des bénéficiairessont strictement respectés ;

• la méthode et les outils pédagogiques utiliséssont simples et facilement transférables auxbénéficiaires.

6. Pour y parvenir, les étapes suivantes sontnécessaires :

• prise de contact et identification des besoinsen alphabétisation, élaboration de matérielsdidactiques et outils pédagogiques ;

• formation de formateurs sélectionnés sur labase de critères déjà présentés dans les chapi-tres précédents ;

• réalisation de sessions d’alphabétisation debase et de post-alphabétisation ;

• encadrement des centres d’alphabétisation parun système de suivi rapproché ;

• suivi ;

• évaluation des effets, des performances ;

• évaluation d’impact au terme des cycles.

7. Par ailleurs et d’une manière générale, les conclu-sions de notre recherche rejoignent et nous nous enfélicitons, les recommandations de Jon Lauglo réa-


lisée à la demande de la Banque Mondiale, dansson étude « Inclure les adultes » ainsi que celles del’étude PADLOS. Dans tous les cas, l’approcheméthodologique recommandée est que le groupecible soit à la fois demandeur, acteur et bénéfi-ciaire. Pour cela sa demande doit être identifieée,analysée ou suscitée selon les cas.

8. Concernant les différents acteurs institution-nels, à titre personnel, nous recommandons queles relations institutionnelles suivantes s’in-scrivent dans la réalité :

• L’Etat, à travers l’administration, devient véri-tablement garant du financement extérieur eten même temps assure sur le budget national,le financement correct du secteur.

• Du côté du pouvoir législatif, l’assembléenationale, se préoccupe de la problématiquede l’analphabétisme dans le pays et œuvre àvoter des lois et élaborer des politiquesnationales en faveur de la lutte contre ce fléau.

• Le secteur privé de son côté contribue aufinancement du secteur, car grâce à l’alphabé-tisation fonctionnelle, il pourra se développerdavantage. Il s’agit de trouver un mécanismede motivation et de financement pour attein-dre cet objectif.

• Les ONG quant à elles, qui représentent lapièce maîtresse pour mener une lutte efficacecontre l’analphabétisme dans le pays, ellesexercent mieux leur rôle de catalyseur dans lamobilisation des financements extérieurs.

• Les projets de développement qui permettentd’intégrer aisément le volet alphabétisationdans les projets d’assistance (agriculture,Elevage, pêche…) intensifient cette activité.

• Quant aux Institutions de financement, ellesdevront plus que jamais encourager cetteactivité dans toutes leurs interventions. Lesstructures d’accueil par exemple méritent uneattention particulière pour leur équipement,leur entretien et le fonctionnement.

Contexte et données recueilliés

Contextes et attitude des communautés

1. Contexte économiqueLa République de Guinée, malgré ses immenses

potentialités agricoles, hydrauliques et minières, ap-partient au groupe des pays les moins avancés, sousajustement structurel depuis 1985, avec un PNB percapita qui a cependant doublé en une décennie (de300 US$ en 1984 à 575 US$ en 1995). Depuis 1992, laGuinée a été classée parmi les pays présentant unindice de développement humain parmi les moinsélevés. Plus de 40 % de la population vit au dessousdu seuil de pauvreté et plus de 13 % en situation d’ex-trême pauvreté. Pourtant, la libéralisation des initia-tives privées, initiée par le régime en place, a permisun taux de croissance annuel du PIB de l’ordre de 4 %.Malheureusement, la chute des prix des produitsminiers et la faiblesse du recouvrement des recettesfiscales ont fortement fragilisé les équilibres macro-économiques.

2. Contexte social (santé/nutrition)Avec une population de 6.476.400 habitants en

1995 et un taux de croissance démographiqueannuel élevé (2,8 %), la Guinée reste l’un des paysafricains dont les performances sont manifestementmédiocres. Ceci est reflété par le faible niveau del’espérance de vie (50,6 ans en moyenne, 52 anspour les femmes et 49 pour les hommes), l’impor-tance de la mortalité infantile (223 pour mille chezles enfants de moins de 5 ans), autant d’indicateursqui, combinés avec un taux élevé d’analphabétisme,reflètent le bas niveau des conditions de vie.

3. Contexte linguistiqueLa Guinée est un état plurilingue, les langues

recensées sont les suivantes : pular, soso, maninka,kissi, toma, guerzé, baga, landouma, mani, sarakolé,djalonké, kono, mano, mini, kpéléwoo, lomagoi. Les6 premières langues sont dominantes.

4. Contexte éducatifLe Gouvernement de la République de Guinée,

persuadé que la scolarisation de base conditionnetout apprentissage ultérieur, s’est engagé dans unprocessus de réorganisation de son système éduca-


tif, fondé sur la Déclaration de politique éducativeadoptée le 19 septembre 1989 et confirmée en 1990,dans le cadre des recommandations de la con-férence de Jomtien, par l’adoption d’un pland’action à long terme d’éducation de base pour tous(1991–1999), avec pour objectifs :

• l’accroissement du taux de scolarisation de28 % en 1989 à 53 % en l’an 2000 ;

• l’abaissement du taux d’analphabétisme de74 % à 37 % ;

• la recherche de l’équité dans l’accès àl’éducation ;

• la réduction des disparité entre les zones etentre les sexes ;

• le renforcement des capacités de pilotage et degestion du système éducatif, entre autrespriorités…

Voici quelques chiffres extraits du dernier avant-projet Education pour tous (EPT1), actuellement ennégociation avec la Banque Mondiale :

• Le nombre actuel d’écoles offrant un cycle com-plet est faible pour deux raisons conjuguées ;(i) la taille, en moyenne assez petite, des écoleset (ii) le faible nombre de classes multigrades.Des efforts importants ont été faits pour : d’unpart accroître le nombre des écoles à 6 salles declasse et plus — principalement en zone ur-baine puisque celui-ci est passé de 25 % à 30 %au cours des 4 dernières années, et, d’autrepart, concentrer les écoles de moins de 6 classesvers un modèle à 3 classes — devant permettreun enseignement multigrade couvrant les 6niveaux — dont la proportion est passée dansla même période de 24 % à 27 % tandis que lepourcentage d’écoles à 1 et 2 salles de classediminuait de 39 % à 30 %. Cependant, 60 % desécoles du pays ont encore en 1999–2000, unnombre de salles de classe inférieur ou égal à 3.

• Le taux de scolarisation varie selon la localitéet le sexe. Il était de 46 % en 1995 (mais seule-

ment 28,75 % pour les filles) avec des dispa-rités importantes entre le milieu rural (22 %) etle milieu urbain (58 %). Les disparités entrefilles (30 %) et garçons (60 %) restent encorenotables, même si les efforts en faveur de lascolarisation des filles ont permis de doublerleur taux de scolarisation entre 1989/1990 et1994/1995 (c’est dans la capitale que ce tauxest le plus élevé avec 60 %). Cependant, l’évo-lution qualitative n’a pas suivi l’évolutionquantitative, la qualité de l’enseignement restemédiocre, ne répondant ni aux besoins collec-tifs ni aux besoins individuels. Le taux d’aban-don dans le cycle primaire était de 3,7 % en1993–1994 (12,10 % pour les filles).

• Le taux de redoublement était pour la mêmeannée, de 20,30 % (32,1 % pour les filles).L’effectif des classes est en moyenne de 50élèves au niveau primaire, avec des disparitésimportantes entre les zones rurales et leszones urbaines et des effectifs pléthoriquesdans ces dernières, atteignant fréquemment100 élèves par classe dans la capitale.

• Quant au taux d’analphabétisme, son esti-mation est passée de 72 % en 1990 à 67 % en1995 (81 % chez les femmes et 56 % chez leshommes). Concernant la répartition par ré-gions, ce sont la Moyenne Guinée et la HauteGuinée qui atteignent les taux les plus élevés,pour les hommes comme pour les femmes.

Etudes de cas

Nous nous intéresserons plus particulièrement auprogramme d’alphabétisation du Projet d’Appuiaux Petits Exploitants en Basse Guinée Nord (PAPE-BGN) à ses méthodes et ses moyens. Notons que sesobjectifs et ses stratégies sont très proches de ceuxdu CENAFOD et de l’EUPD, les deux ONG les plusexpérimentées de la place.

Brève présentation du projet d’appui aux petitsexploitants en Basse Guinée Nord (PAPE-BGN)Désireux de promouvoir le développement ruralnotamment par un appui aux organisations de baseainsi qu’à leurs initiatives locales de développe-


ment, et en privilégiant les populations les plusdémunies, le Gouvernement Guinéen a mis en placeun Projet d’Appui aux Petits Exploitants en BasseGuinée Nord.

Ce Projet a pour objectifs l’augmentation de laproduction agricole, spécialement celle du riz,l’amélioration de la sécurité alimentaire et desconditions de vie de la population bénéficiaire, ledéveloppement des infrastructures rurales et lerenforcement des institutions de base.

Le projet vise plus particulièrement une augmen-tation des revenus et la protection de l’environne-ment. Pour cela, le projet se propose dans sacomposante « Appui aux Institutions de BasseGuinée Nord » de :

• Promouvoir des organisations paysannessolides, capables d’encourager l’auto-dévelop-pement en milieu rural ;

• Recycler et/ou former les animateurs etcadres du projet, chargés d’appuyer les collec-tivités et associations de producteurs ;

• Renforcer les collectivités locales par la forma-tion des responsables de districts, de Collecti-vités Rurales de Développement (CRD) et deCommunes Urbaines (CU) ;

• Informer et sensibiliser les populations en vuede leur plus grande participation au dévelop-pement de leurs localités et en particulier, deleur meilleure compréhension de la politiquede décentralisation, une de leur participationaccrue à la réalisation d’infrastructures com-munautaires et leur appropriation de celles-cien vue d’une gestion saine et durable.

Intérêt du programme d’alphabétisationComme chacun sait, il n’y a pas de développementdurable et équilibré sans une prise en main par lespopulations (les organisations paysannes) et lescollectivités (CRD et CU) de leur propre devenir, cequi passe nécessairement par une gestion saine ettransparente de leurs activités et de leurs ressources(humaines, matérielles et financières). Mais enmême temps, nous savons que le public cible du

projet (responsables d’organisations paysannes etélus locaux) est en majorité illettré. Et comme dit leproverbe chinois, « … Si on veut nourrir le peuplepour l’éternité, il faut lui apprendre à lire et àécrire ».

Dans cet objectif, pour une participation pleine etresponsable des bénéficiaires à leur propredéveloppement et pour pérenniser les actions, leprojet prévoit la mise en place et le suivi de centresd’alphabétisation partout où le besoin s’en ferasentir pendant toute la durée de sa mise en œuvre.

StratégiesDans le respect de l’approche qui consiste à fairefaire, le projet s’est proposé d’utiliser les com-pétences existantes sur le terrain pour la réalisationde l’ensemble des activités d’alphabétisation.

Pour atteindre cet objectif, une collaboration estenvisagée avec les Directions Préfectorales del’Education qui abritent chacune une Direction del’alphabétisation, structure déconcentrée du ServiceNational d’alphabétisation. Ceci aurait pour avan-tage d’une part, de conclure un Protocole d’accordde collaboration plutôt qu’un contrat de prestationsde service et, d’autre part, d’inscrire les actions dansla politique nationale d’alphabétisation et enfin depouvoir capitaliser à tout moment les expériencesétant donné qu’il s’agit d’une structure pérenne.

Critères de sélection des centres d’alphabétisation ouprécisément des OP bénéficiairesGroupement du niveau 2 de maturité à savoir :

• Disposant d’un règlement intérieur écrit etapprouvé par tous les membres ;

• Qui mène des activités concourant à larésolution de leurs divers problèmes ;

• Qui a un plan d’action et un programmed’activités ;

• Qui tient régulièrement des réunions ;

• Mais qui connaît cependant des problèmes defonctionnement et de gestion, notamment liésaux outils de gestion ;


• Groupement d’un effectif d’illettrés supérieurà 15 personnes ;

• Groupement dont le village dispose d’uneécole ;

• Groupement dont le village dispose d’unpotentiel d’alphabétiseurs villageois ;

• Groupement demandeur.

Critères de sélection des alphabétiseurs villageois :

• être natif du terroir ou bien maître enseignantdans le village ;

• connaître parfaitement la langue du terroir ;

• avoir des qualités sociales et morales et êtrebien accepté par le village ;

• avoir un niveau scolaire supérieur ou égal à laclasse de Terminale ;

• être âgé de 25 à 45 ans, à l’exception desfonctionnaires à la retraite ;

• être en résidence stable au village ;

• être volontaire ;

• réussir au test de sélection (maîtrise de lalangue, pédagogie des adultes etc.).

Chronogramme d’activités

Période Activités Responsables

Septembre Concertation pour Projet, Prestatairespréparatifs campagne Bénéficiaires, autres

partenaires

Octobre Identification des appre- Prestataires en collabora-nants et des moniteurs tion avec projetalpha

Novembre Formation des moniteurs Prestataireset multiplication manuels

Décembre Préparation hangars Bénéficiairesou négociation salles de formation

Janvier Mise en place comité Prestataires et de gestion du centre bénéficiaires

Janvier Démarrage des cours Prestataires

De Janvier Suivi/évaluation et Prestatairesà Avril rapports

Mai Evaluation finale Consultant bilan campagne

Grille d’évaluation de l’alphabétisation

SituationN° ord Indicateurs recherchée

1 Taux d’alphabétisation des 80 %responsables

2 Taux d’alphabétisation des membres 50 %

3 Remplissage des différents outils 100 %de gestion

4 Utilisation des supports pendant 50 %les réunions

5 Utilisation des documents post-alpha 30 %(revues, livrets, journaux)

6 Circulation de documents écrits 60 %de gestion du groupement


Expérience de l’ONG Aide et Action

• Public cible : hommes et femmes de 20 à 35 ans

• Objectifs : améliorer les conditions de vie desparticipants en (i) leur apprenant à lire, à écrireet à calculer (ii) appuyant des activités géné-ratrices de revenus (iii) encourageant l’épargneet le crédit (iv) renforçant la vie associative etles capacités de gestion des apprenants

• Langue d’alphabétisation : langue nationaleen milieu rural et le français (pour les besoinsde communication) en milieu urbain

• Structuration : mise en place des groupementd’éducateurs villageois (GEV), des associationsd’éducateurs communautaires (AEC), descomités de gestion (COGES) des centres et, pro-gressivement, de l’institutionnalisation de lamaîtrise d’ouvrage au niveau des CRD, à partirde leur plan de développement local (PDL)

• Partenariat : les structures ci-dessus citées,composées essentiellement de jeunes et lesservices déconcentrés du SNA que sont lesDRA et les DPA

• Déroulement des cours : le calendrier est fixéen partenariat avec les apprenants. En général,ils se tiennent de janvier à mai en 3 séances de3 heures chacune par semaine, avec un effectifmaximum de 30 apprenants

• Evaluation : il existe une évaluation annuelledes centres et une évaluation de cycle au boutde la 2ème année. Lorsque cette dernière estconcluante, l’auditeur a droit à une attestation

• Post-alphabétisation : pour permettre auxnéo-alphabètes de consolider, transférer etréinvestir les acquis, des documents didac-tiques sont élaborés ou traduits sur des sujetsdivers

• Evaluation : des outils de suivi et d’évaluationexistent pour tous les niveaux avec desindicateurs appropriés.

Expérience de l’entraide universitaire pour dedéveloppement (EUPD)Créée en 1989, l’EUPD a pour objectif premier demettre en place une structure de volontairesnationaux. Son programme est orienté selon quatreaxes : (i) support technique et partenariat (ii) dé-veloppement rural local (élaboration de projetfinanciers avec les villageois et exécutés sous leurresponsabilité), (iii) formation et animation, dontl’alphabétisation, (iv) aide à la création d’entreprise.L’EUPD collabore avec d’autres ONG assurant laformation des agents de certains opérateurs etl’animation de leurs activités et réalise des études.Elle œuvre très largement en partenariat (FAO,PNUD, FAC, CEE, VSF, MFFP, CECI, etc.).

La cellule d’alphabétisation a été mise en placeen 1993 et situe ses interventions dans les villages,surtout en zone forestière. Elle œuvre dans troisdirections : (i) alphabétisation de base, dans le cadrede l’appui à la structuration du milieu paysan et desassociations villageoises d’alphabétiseurs et del’aide à la mise en place de systèmes d’autofinance-ment, (ii) post alphabétisation, (iii) conceptiond’outils d’alphabétisation. Le responsable de laformation a été formé au SNA.

La stratégie comporte quatre étapes : (i) l’iden-tification du mécanisme d’opérationalisation duprogramme (le point de départ étant l’émergence etla mise de conscient d’une problématique), (ii) ladéfinition des contenus, avec la participation despaysans et la conception d’outils didactiques sur lesthèmes retenus, adaptés aux besoins identifiés,(iii) la mise en place d’une structure paysanne deprise en charge (comité d’alphabétisation), (iv) lesuivi et l’évaluation des actions d’alphabétisation,menés par les villageois eux-mêmes.

Elle a conduit une vingtaine de programmesd’alphabétisation et de post alphabétisation, surl’ensemble du pays, particulièrement dans les zonessuivantes :

• le projet « Assodia » (1991–1993), à Coyah,Forécariah, Boffa et Boké ;

• le projet « RC 2 » pour la relance du café (1992–1997), en Guinée Forestière, notamment àMacenta, N’zérékoré, Lola, Yomou, Guéckédou,Kissidougou ;


• le projet « AFVP » (1995–1996), avec l’associationFrançaise des Volontaires du Projet pour desmaraîchers, à Gaoual et Koundara ;

• le projet « MFPG » (1995–1996) pour des groupe-ments féminins de pêche (fumage du poisson) àConakry, sur financement Canadien (NewBrunswick) ;

• le Projet « Gui0091/FAO » (1995–1996) pour desgroupements de pêcheurs sur les îles Kakossa etKaback ;

• le projet « PNUD/PAIB » (1996–1997) qui appuie les initiatives de base à Kankan etKissidougou ;

• le projet « VSF » (1992–1997), avec l’associationvétérinaires sans frontière à Dabola, Diguiraye etKouroussa sur financement CE/ FED actuelle-ment PDD (Projet Dabola-Dinguiraye ;

• le projet d’élevage « SAGE/DNE » (1996–1997)qui concerne la formation des animateurs enmoyenne et Basse Guinée ;

• le projet « AGFC » (1997) en collaboration avecl’association des femmes (chercheurs et avecl’unité pilote de l’USAID), pour la création degroupements d’appui aux femmes (maraîchageet aspect culturels). Un volet alphabétisa-tion vient en appui aux groupements fémininsde producteurs, réalisé grâce à des fondsCanadiens ;

• Un autre projet à Boké, « KAPAKCHEZ ».

Plus de 3500 adultes ont été alphabétisés et 2000sont en cours d’alphabétisation. Le taux deréussite est estimé à 80/85 %, le taux d’abandon nedépassant 10 %. Les langues utilisées sont lefrançais et les langues nationales ; la durée descours varie entre 3 et 5 mois à par jour. Lepersonnel comprend un superviseur par zone (unevingtaine en tout) disposant d’une moto, assurant,dans certains projets, le suivi de la démarchepédagogique, des alphabétiseurs qui sont despaysans, recrutés sur test (niveau de fin d’études

primaires) qui perçoivent entre 1000 et 1500 FG parjour et encadrent entre 15 et 20 apprenants. Si cespersonnes sont étrangères au village, un logementleur est attribué. Les villageois fournissent égale-ment le local.

Les apprenants participent en s’acquittantd’environ 2000/4000 FG pour la durée du cycle. Ilest chaque fois constitué un comité villageois pourl’alphabétisation. EUPD publie un journal enFrançais « le planteur » et un journal en pular,« badiar Koloba » ainsi que des livrets de postalphabétisation sur la gestion, la vie pratique, lecrédit, les organisations paysannes, les banquescéréalières, entre autres.

Les critères de sélection des alphabétiseurs et desauditeurs sont pratiquement les mêmes que ceuxdu PAPE-BGN.

Différents résultats enregistrés(participation, mise en pratique, effets et impacts)

Les recherches ont maintes fois mis en lumière leseffets bénéfiques d’une éducation de base chez lesplus vulnérables de la société : les filles, les groupesethniques minoritaires, les orphelins, les personneshandicapées et les habitants des régions rurales.

Une éducation de base de qualité est un moyenefficace de donner aux participants les com-pétences nécessaires pour participer pleinement àla vie économique et d’en bénéficier. L’éducationest un des moyens les plus efficaces de préventioncontre la pénurie ; elle permet d’améliorer lesrevenus, d’accroître la mobilité professionnelle, defaire la promotion de la santé auprès des parentset des enfants, de réduire les taux de fécondité etde mortalité, ainsi que de donner aux plusdémunis une chance de prendre leur place dans lasphère publique et de participer au processuspolitique.

L’alphabétisation des adultes constitue unestratégie importante de lutte contre la pauvreté. Ladémocratisation de l’éducation primaire contribue à éliminer graduellement l’analphabétisme chez les adultes.

Cependant, pour la Guinée, l’attente sera troplongue avant de pouvoir bénéficier des impacts


économiques dû à la réduction de l’analpha-bétisme. L’acquisition d’une éducation de base àpartir de programmes non formels pour adultes etjeunes déscolarisés contribue non seulement àaméliorer la situation économique de la famille,mais aussi l’état de santé de chacun de sesmembres, le rendement scolaire des enfants ainsique la capacité de gérer efficacement les ressourcesnaturelles. Une plus grande autonomie et confianceen soi en public sont des effets souvent rapportéspar les apprenants adultes.

L’éducation de base des adultes est importanteen terme d’équité parce qu’elles s’adressejustement aux plus pauvres de la société. Il en estde même pour l’égalité entre les hommes et lesfemmes : les femmes sont beaucoup plus nom-breuses que les hommes dans les programmesd’éducation de base des adultes. l’écart est parfoismême considérable dans les centres NAFA. Ensomme, en attendant que ladémocratisation del’éducation primaire soit menée à son terme, lesprogrammes d’éducation non formelle permettentaux plus démunis d’acquérir les compétencesnécessaires pour participer pleinement à la vieéconomique et sociale et, grâce à l’acquisition d’certaine autonomie, à contribuer à l’édificationd’une société juste et équitable.

C’est pour cela que nous rejoignons une fois deplus les conclusions des deux ateliers tenus récem-ment à Dakar sur le sujet.

En Guinée, l’alphabétisation a eu un impactdivers et varié sur la vie des apprenants. Selon lesendroits et les personnes interrogées, elle leur adonné des capacités d’analyse, un nouveau rôlesocial, une fierté culturelle, et aussi du courage.

L’impact personnel Les expressions qui reviennent assez souvent, et quisont les mêmes dans la sous région, sont lessuivantes :

• « Etudier m’a ouvert mon intelligence » ;

• « Maintenant je peux prendre les notes de mapensée » ;

• « Je peux maintenant écouter les choses et faireun choix » ;

• « C’est seulement à travers étudier qu’une per-sonne peut changer » ;

• « Au début, je ne connaissais même pas commentécrire mon nom. Maintenant je sais quoi faire dema vie » ;

• « Je connais maintenant mon propre esprit, et jerefuse d’être triche ! » ;

• « Dès maintenant, toute chose que je ferai, jem’arrêterai premièrement pour y penser, pourobtenir une information et savoir si c’est unebonne ou mauvaise action » ;

• « Etudier m’a réveillé, m’a donné connaissance, eta amélioré mon comportement et ma patience » ;

• « Ce qui a changé dans ma vie est que mainte-nant, je suis devenu une personne plus humble etpardonnant » ;

L’impact économiqueAu CAOPA de Kankan, nous avons particulière-ment relevé comme effets et impact :

• la participation des bénéficiaires à la prise encharge financière du programme à hauteur de59 % ;

• Le recensement des intentions de culture parl’équipe technique du groupement de produc-teurs de coton (GPC) ;

• La maîtrise des itinéraires techniques ;

• La gestion des stocks intrants ainsi que celle descaisses des groupements ;

• La commercialisation du coton par l’équipepaysanne ;

• La participation des paysans à la rédaction desarticles du journal des producteurs de coton ;

• La tenue des documents de comptabilité pourasseoir une gestion transparente des revenuscollectifs ;


L’impact social Des changements dans le comportement en publicsont également mentionnés et les expressions quisont souvent revenues sont les mêmes qu’auSénégal, à savoir (citations) :

• « Etudier m’a donné le courage de m’arrêter aumilieu des gens et de parler la vérité » ;

• « Maintenant quand j’entre dans un groupe, pre-mièrement j’écoute ce que les autres ont à dire,j’essaye de comprendre et alors j’ajoute respec-tivement ce que peux ; basé sur la technique debonne écoute » ;

• « Ce qui a changé dans ma vie est que mainte-nant j’ose m’asseoir avec les grands, choses je nepouvais pas avant » ;

• « Si les personnes sont vieilles ou jeunes, unhomme ou une femme, je connais maintenantcomment nous pouvons être ensemble commeégaux » ;

• « Etudier m’a enseigné beaucoup sur les gens » ;

• « Etudier a amélioré mes relations sociales » ;

• « Ce que nous avons vu en étudiant est quehommes et femmes sont égaux dans le travail » ;

Catégories des ressources mises en œuvre

En 1983 dans le cadre du programme régional d’éli-mination de l’analphabétisme en Afrique (BREDA/UNESCO, Dakar), ont été mis en place une commis-sion nationale guinéenne pour l’élimination de l’analpha-bétisme et aux niveaux décentralisés, des comitésrégionaux et des comités préfectoraux d’élimination del’analphabétisme. Ses attributions ont été absorbéespar la commission nationale pour l’éducation de basepour tous (CONEBAT), créée dans le cadre du suivide la conférence mondiale sur l’éducation pour tous(Jomtien, 1990) et présidée par le Ministre del’enseignement Pré-universitaire et de l’EducationCivique (MEPU). Cet organe de concertation etd’appui aux activités d’éducation de base est com-posé des représentants des départements parte-

naires (plan et finances, intérieur et sécurité, agri-culture, ressources animales, information affairessociales, santé et population, jeunesse). Il n’a pas deramifications au niveau des structures décen-tralisées, sinon au niveau régional un coordonnateurdes centres Nafa, les DPA en étant les cor-respondants au niveau préfectoral.

Nature des intervenants

Aujourd’hui, tout le monde s’accorde à admettreque la lecture, l’écriture et le calcul sont des élémentsindispensables pour acquérir et pérenniser unsavoir, un savoir-faire et un savoir être. Lesorganisations d’appui au développement constatentque l’acquisition des moyens d’existence passe deplus en plus par un minimum d’alphabétisation debase et un maximum d’alphabétisation fonctionnelle(peu importe la langue). On sait par exemple que :

• le tailleur a besoin d’enregistrer les mesures duclient ;

• le menuisier a besoin d’utiliser le mètre pourprendre des mesures ;

• le maraîcher a besoin des normes techniques ;

• le conducteur doit savoir lire ne serait-ce que lespanneaux de signalisation ;

• le voyageur a besoin de savoir lire son ticket deréservation et les indications dans les aéroports.

Ceci signifie que l’alphabétisation, comme based’acquisition des moyens d’existence et d’améliora-tion des compétences, est depuis bien longtempsperçue en Guinée comme un élément incontourn-able du développement. C’est pourquoi l’Etat a trèstôt mis en place le SNA.

L’ensemble des ONG de la place, la plupart desProjets et les organisations confessionnelles et privéesfont de l’alphabétisation avec la philosophie sui-vante : Alphabétisation, non pas comme une fin ensoi, mais comme un moyen pour (i) acquérir un sa-voir et un savoir-faire en vue (ii) d’améliorer le travail(iii) accroître ses revenus et améliorer ses conditionsd’existence et enfin être mieux reconnu au sein de la


société et mieux communiquer avec les siens. Cesorganisations sont présentées dans le section qui suit.

Identification des opérateurs

De manière générale, les bénéficiaires ne sont quepeu ou pas impliqués dans l’identification desopérateurs. Par contre les projets et certainsorganismes passent par des appels d’offre pouridentifier les opérateurs.

Il existe actuellement 23 ONG et programmes dedéveloppement impliqués, directement ou indirec-tement et à des degrés divers, dans des activitésd’alphabétisation. La plupart sont de créationrécente, l’alphabétisation ne constituant souventqu’une partie, plus ou moins importante, de leursactivités. Les ONG en Guinée sont récentes et laplupart ont des difficultés à se procurer des res-sources notamment auprès des bailleurs de fondsqui pensent (quelquefois à juste raison) que leurcapacité de gestion et de suivi ainsi que leurpotentiel humain ne sont pas très développés. Il enrésulte que leurs interventions sont souventréduites. Les limites des ONG sont classiques :moyens financiers, accessibilité, capacité de gestion,infrastructures, équipements, capacité de dévelop-per des programmes, etc.

Il faut dire aussi qu’une autre des raisons de leurfaiblesse est la compétition, voire la méfiance quirègne entre elles, principalement pour bénéficier dela « manne » que pourraient constituer pour elles,les financements extérieurs.

L’origine de l’initiative

Quand on aborde la question d’initiative en matièred’alphabétisation, il faut remonter aux questions dedéveloppement d’une manière générale et de for-mation à l’apprentissage ou à l’amélioration d’unmétier en particulier.

Dans le cas de la Guinée, l’initiative d’alphabéti-sation se situe à deux niveaux : (i) l’alphabétisationest jugée nécessaire par un intervenant extérieur et(ii) l’alphabétisation jugée plutôt utile par des béné-ficiaires potentiels est demandée en conséquencepar eux.

Le premier cas est le plus courant. Les organisa-tions d’appui aux développement sont les initia-

teurs de l’alphabétisation surtout lorsqu’il s’agitd’une alphabétisation de base. Il n’est donc pas sur-prenant de constater que toutes les ONG de laplace, de même que les projets pratiquent ou fontfaire de l’alphabétisation.

Le deuxième cas, lui, est très rare. On ne le ren-contre que dans deux situations précises : (i) lesbénéficiaires savent déjà lire et écrire et souhaite-raient dépasser ce cap. On parle alors de post-alpha,(ii) l’approche adoptée par l’intervenant obéit à ladémarche d’auto-promotion, (iii) les bénéficiairespotentiels voudrait absolument acquérir ou amé-liorer un métier pour lequel savoir lire, écrire oucalculer constitue un préalable (centres NAFA,centres communautaires et centres d’alphabétisationprofessionnalisant).

En Guinée, dans près de 80 % des cas, l’initiativevient de l’intervenant et pas du bénéficiaire, mêmesi par la suite, ce dernier est sensibilisé et devientvolontaire et même plus tard, demandeur.

Les sections qui suivent présentent les approchesutilisées.

Identification des apprenants, de leurs désirset de leurs besoins

On observe une relative homogénéité chez lesopérateurs pour l’alphabétisation de base qui initieles apprenants à l’écriture, à la lecture et au calcul.On note une plus grande diversité en ce quiconcerne la post-alphabétisation où un manque demaîtrise se fait sentir chez la plupart des opérateurs.

La plupart des opérateurs invoquent néanmoinsla mise en place des structures locales pour parlerde pérennisation. Aussi la post-alphabétisationbien que moins maîtrisée est considérée commefacteur-cléf de pérennisation des acquis par lesopérateurs.

Concernant le cas où l’initiative doit émaner dubénéficiaire, l’alphabétisation est généralementinscrite dans un programme global de développe-ment à l’intérieur duquel il existe un volet « anima-tion, formation et alphabétisation » .

L’approche consiste, dans une démarche par-ticipative (avec et au profit des bénéficiaires) àprocéder tout d’abord à une identification desbesoins de formation, à les analyser puis à élaborerun plan de formation.


Il s’agit en particulier d’identifier les savoir, lessavoir-faire et les savoir être nécessaires pour satis-faire les aspirations du public. Il s’agit de catalyserun processus de changement social, conçu, produitet évalué par les populations elles-mêmes. Cepartenariat est matérialisé par un document deconvention qui définit les objectifs communs pour-suivis, les résultats attendus ainsi que les obli-gations des partenaires engagés dans la mise enœuvre des activités.

L’approche est donc essentiellement basée sur le principe de l’auto-promotion selon lequel le public cible est auteur/acteur de son pro-pre épanouissement dans un processus d’auto-apprentissage.

Nous présentons tout d’abord les stratégies enmatière de formation puis celles adoptées enmatière d’alphabétisation.

En matière de formation et d’animation :Les formations s’appuient constamment sur lapratique : chaque phase d’instruction part del’expérience concrète préalable « d’application »,puis « d’entraînement », pour lesquels les outilspédagogiques nécessaires sont préalablementpréparés.

Puis les comportements ou savoir-faire nou-veaux sont mis en pratique par les intéressés, envraie grandeur, entre deux séances d’animationformation.

La séance suivante est l’occasion d’analyser lesquestions nouvelles survenues au cours de cettepratique et de consolider les connaissances. Ainsi,sera mise en place une pédagogie de l’alternance,débouchant tout naturellement sur la mise enœuvre dans la réalité, des savoir-faire et/ou savoirêtre visés à travers la formation.

C’est dire que la démarche est centrée surl’atteinte d’objectifs clairement formulés, dé-coulant de l’analyse de l’activité concrète quenous voulons voir assumer par le bénéficiairede la formation. Il est ainsi possible à toutmoment de procéder à l’évaluation des résul-tats obtenus.

La démarche s’appuie sur le groupe, commelieu et moyen de formation (discussions degroupe, méthodes de cas, etc.), soit à l’occasion desséances de sensibilisation au niveau du village (où

la notion de groupe prime de façon habituelle surcelle d’individualité), soit dans des sessions auniveau micro régional.

En matière d’alphabétisation, la stratégieconsiste à :

• Favoriser la mise en place d’associations villa-geoises d’alphabétisation à travers le choixd’alphabétiseurs par les villages et par les vil-lageois auxquels incombera, l’animation del’après-programme.

• Assurer la formation des facilitateurs assis-tés dans leur travail par la section alphabéti-sation.

• Utiliser dans la mesure du possible comme facili-tateurs dans certaines localités les enseignants,déjà familiarisés avec populations locales etayant acquis de l’expérience dans l’exercice deleur profession.

• Collaborer avec les services publics, les ONG etinstitutions d’alphabétisation en sollicitant leurparticipation à la mise en œuvre de l’ensembledu programme.

Capitalisation des expériences

Comme déjà annoncé, les documents de capitalisa-tion relatifs au sujet sont rares.

Cependant, l’EUPD, avec l’appui financier deIIZ/DVV a produit deux documents : (i) Capitalisa-tion des acquis et expériences en alphabétisationfonctionnelle et (ii) Guide méthodologique d’alpha-bétisation fonctionnelle.

Le CENAFOD à son tour, a produit : (i) Rapportd’atelier CPD/RAF sur les axes de l’alphabéti-sation et de l’épargne crédit, (ii) Rapport decapitalisation des expériences du CAOPA, et (iii)plusieurs guides sur l’alphabétisation.

Qu’il s’agisse de l’une ou de l’autre de cesdeux ONG qui sont aujourd’hui les plus ex-périmentées en la matière en Guinée, l’approcheméthodologique recommandée est que le groupecible soit à la fois demandeur, acteur et béné-ficiaire.


Identifier, former et soutenir les instructeurs

Le choix et la formation des instructeurs constitueune préoccupation majeure pour quelques uns desintervenants mais plus particulièrement pour IIZ/DVV, le CENAFOD et Aide et Action. Pour d’autres,une autonomie du monde rural en la matière neferait que réduire leur « portefeuille de contrats » .

En tout cas, l’objectif, pour tous ceux quiœuvrent dans le sens d’une auto-promotion dura-ble, est de doter les communautés des capacitéspouvant leur permettre d’identifier, d’organiser etde satisfaire de façon durable les besoinsd’éducation des populations.

C’est pourquoi, de plus en plus, avec l’im-pulsion de IIZ/DVV et de « Aide et Action » , sontmis sur place des GEV (groupements d’éducateursvillageois) et des AEC (association des éducateurscommunautaires).

Le GEV permet de donner plus d’autonomie etde pérenniser les activités d’alphabétisation tandisque l’ AEC intervient au niveau des sous-préfec-tures pour jouer le rôle d’interface et de repré-sentativité entre les communautés à la base, lesgroupements d’éducateurs, les autorités de l’éduca-tion et les autres intervenants.

Avant donc d’appartenir au GEV, les animateursalpha reçoivent une formation en méthodes et entechniques d’alphabétisation. Les thèmes portentgénéralement sur :

• Alphabétisation (définition, alphabétisation fonc-tionnelle, étude du milieu, démarche pour l’alpha-bétisation fonctionnelle) ;

• Techniques de gestion des centres ;

• Méthodologie d’enseignement (lecture, écritureet calcul) ;

• Connaissance de l’apprenant adulte ;

• Qualités requises de l’animateur ;

• Documents des centres alpha ;

• Suivi et évaluation des centres, des campagnes etdes cycles.

Adéquation entre contenus d’alphabétisationet formation aux moyens de subsistances etd’amélioration des compétences

En dehors des campagnes traditionnelles d’alpha-bétisation dont l’objectif est de donner à chacun lapossibilité de savoir lire et écrire, tous les pro-grammes entrepris intègrent une formation visantl’accroissement des moyens de subsistance. C’estainsi qu’en Guinée, le SNA a mis en place : (i) lescentres communautaires d’alphabétisation, (ii) lescentres NAFA ou l’école de la 2ème chance, et (iii) lescentres d’alphabétisation « professionalisante ».

Les projets et ONG, dans le cadre d’appui audéveloppement réalisent de leur côté des activitésd’alphabétisation avec des objectifs d’améliorationde la qualité du travail et des compétences.

Les centres communautaires d’alphabétisationCréés en principe à l’initiative des communautés debase, la plupart ne reçoivent aucun appui ni del’Etat ni des bailleurs de fonds, sinon de la craie etquelques cahiers de brouillons pour les participantssitués en majorité en milieu rural.

L’encadrement est le plus souvent constitué d’uninstituteur volontaire et d’un membre de lacommunauté, non rétribués. La plupart sontdévoués et motivés mais sont assez vite gagnés parle découragement, compte tenu des conditionsmatérielles d’apprentissage et de l’absence dematériel didactique.

Les locaux utilisés sont les salles de classe del’école primaire. Les cours ont lieu souvent le soir,avec un éclairage déficient, utilisant une lampe àpétrole (souvent celle de l’alphabétiseur) ou desbougies. Certains remédient à cet inconvénient enutilisant les locaux scolaires pendant les deux jourshebdomadaires de congé des élèves, mais le risqueest alors que tous les apprenants ne soient pasdisponibles dans la journée ! Dans les centres ouvertspar le SNA l’alphabétisation se fait dans les languesnationales (alphabet latin), parfois en français.

Les autres centres utilisent l’arabe « harmonisé »ou l’alphabet Guékédou, exclusivement dans leslangues nationales (principales pular et maninka).Ils se reçoivent aucune aide, à l’exception parfois dela craie donnée par le directeur de l’école.


Les locaux utilisés sont divers, allant de la sallede classe à la mosquée ou à l’abri rudimentaire, la« classe sous l’arbre ». Les cours durent 5/6 mois,les centres fermant pendant l’hivernage.

Seuls les alphabétiseurs possèdent un syllabaireet un livre de calcul (fournis par le SNA) et encorepas tous. La plupart ont été formés par l’antennepréfectorale du SNA, mais la plupart utilisent uneméthode d’apprentissage plutôt scolaire (du moinsdans les centres visités par la mission) et le calcul estpeu fonctionnel. Les centres utilisant N’ko et l’arabeharmonisé ont pour la plupart une approche del’apprentissage de la lecture proche de celle utiliséeà l’école coranique, le calcul est parfois absent. Dansles localités sans école, la majorité des participantssont des enfants.

Les livrets complémentaires de lecture sont raresau niveau des alphabétiseurs, les participants n’enpossédant pas ou peu. Dans l’ensemble, l’appren-tissage est lent et les résultats disparates, allant dumédiocre au satisfaisant, le médiocre dominant.Parmi les facteurs négatifs qui conditionnent cesrésultats, il faut citer le manque de motivation, laparticipation irrégulière, la formation inadaptée desalphabétiseurs, l’absence de matériel didactique, ledésintérêt des responsables locaux et les conditionsmatérielles de la « classe ».

Pour 1996, le SNA donne le chiffre de 2.404centres communautaires et centres d’alphabétisa-tion professionnalisante, dont 1.908 dans les zonesrurales, se répartissant comme suit : SNA (654),ONG (134), projets de développement (724), confes-sions religieuses (892).

Les centres d’alphabétisationprofessionnalisante Ces centres assurent aux jeunes des possibilités deformation générales (lire, écrire et calculer), tout enleur permettant l’apprentissage de compétencesliées au métier de leur choix. L’enseignement estdonné en français (à la demande des participants)dans la majorité des centres, parfois dans la languenationale adéquate, suivi, après sept mois, d’unapprentissage en français. Les effectifs sont souventpléthoriques (la demande est plus forte que l’offre,la motivation étant plus forte pour la formationprofessionnelle que pour l’alphabétisation),l’équipement et l’outillage (parfois rudimentaire)

très insuffisants. Les locaux sont exigus sans sani-taires ni eau courante. L’encadrement est constituéle plus souvent d’un instituteur détaché et d’unvolontaire (non rétribué) pour l’alphabétisation etde moniteurs (souvent des artisans) pour les activi-tés professionnelles. réalisées.

La mission n’a pas constaté dans les centresvisités de lien entre l’alphabétisation censée êtrefonctionnelle et les activités pratiquées sinonl’apprentissage limité d’un vocabulaire technique.Les remarques faites concernant les centres commu-nautaires d’alphabétisation s’appliquent égalementà ces centres. Au terme des études, les jeuness’installent à leur compte soit isolément soit encoopérative, mais le plus souvent ils continuent àutiliser les équipements des centres en leur versantune ristourne sur la vente de leurs produits.

Par ailleurs, le terme de « professionnalisante »nous paraît ambitieux, s’agissant plutôt de pré-apprentissage professionnel. En conclusion, commenous le verrons pour les centres Nafa décrits ci-après, l’initiative est heureuse, originale et à encou-rager et pourrait donner de meilleurs résultats,pour peu que soit revues les méthodes d’apprentis-sage, notamment pour l’enseignement du français.Il s’agit en effet principalement de jeunes nonscolarisés et n’ayant pratiquement aucune connais-sance orale de cette langue au départ. Un grandnombre sont des centres privés. Par ailleurs, uncertain nombre d’ONG travaillent dans ce secteur,associant souvent formation professionnelle et aideà un groupe défavorisé tels enfants des rues, handi-capés ; l’alphabétisation étant censée être associéeaux activités.

Les centres NAFALes centres NAFA (le terme signifiant dans la plupartdes langues « bénéfique, profitable, intérêt évident »),ouverts en principe aux jeunes déscolarisés ou nonscolarisés de 10–16 ans, en donnant avec une prioritéaux filles, devaient permettre aux apprenantsd’acquérir les connaissances instrumentales de base(lecture, écriture, calcul), de développer des savoirs etdes savoir faire, de promouvoir de meilleurespratiques en matière d’hygiène, de santé et de sécuritéet des droits et d’offrir une chance, à ceux qui en ont lacapacité et le désir, d’accéder au système formel. Leprogramme, élaboré pour 1.080 heures (4 H. par jour


à raison de 3–5 séances hebdomadaires) sur trois ans,comprend trois domaines de capacité (i) la communi-cation et la résolution de problèmes, (ii) la con-naissance de l’environnement, et (iii) le dévelop-pement des compétences de base.

Ces centres sont gérés par la CONEBAT au niveaucentral et par un coordonnateur directement rattachéà l’IRE au niveau régional, mais sont par contre sousla responsabilité du DPA au niveau préfectoral. Lapresque totalité des participantes sont nonscolarisées. Les mêmes remarques faites ci-dessusconcernant les locaux, l’équipement, les effectifs etl’alphabétisation pour les centres d’alphabétisationprofessionnalisante s’appliquent à ces centres. Car ily a peu de différences entre ces deux structures, si cen’est que les centres Nafa ont ou vont avoir deslocaux à la construction desquels contribuent lescommunautés et que l’UNICEF contribue auxéquipements, aux fournitures et à la formation.

Ces deux types de structures visent implicitementdeux objectifs : formation professionnelle et pour lesplus jeunes (10–12 ans), réinsertion scolaire. Or, cesdeux objectifs exigent des stratégies et des approchespédagogiques différentes et ne peuvent êtreconfondus, s’agissant de l’apprentissage d’un métierdans une structure non formelle pour le premier etde réintégration dans le système scolaire pour lesecond. En fait dans les motivations des plus jeunescomme dans l’enseignement dispensé, c’est l’objectifscolaire qui domine (la mission, qui avait demandé àl’instituteur de faire parler les élèves en français, aassisté à la révision d’une leçon de conjugaison deverbes du 1er et du 3ème groupes comme à l’écoleprimaire) alors même que le pourcentage de ceux quiréintègrent le formel est très faible (7 %).

Il nous semble qu’il devrait y avoir deux struc-tures distinctes, l’une pour l’objectif préformation ouformation professionnelle, l’autre pour l’objectif deréinsertion scolaire, s’inspirant du programme dusystème formel et pouvant être confiée à ce dernierdes passerelles devraient être mises en place entre cesdeux voies de formation.

L’alphabétisation, volet de projets dedéveloppementIl s’agit le plus souvent de projets intégrés menéspar certaines ONG (CAOPA, EUPD, Aide et Action)et des programmes de développement qui font

l’alphabétisation la plus efficace, une alphabétisa-tion réellement fonctionnelle basée sur la problé-matique et les besoin des groupes cibles visés. Ilsont tous commencé par entreprendre une enquêtesocio-économique préalable des milieux concernés.Ils faut dire que ces opérateurs s’adressent à desgroupements organisés et disposent de moyensimportants sur financement extérieur.

Conclusions

Pour conclure, nous soulignerons les principauxpoints suivants :

• On constate donc que dans le cas de la Guinée, lapremière et la seconde approche, capacités debase et formation visant l’améliorations desmoyens de subsistance se recoupent fortement.Cependant, ces stratégies méritent encore desaméliorations, notamment au niveau de lapérennité et de la reproductibilité. Il faudrait :(i) mettre en place des GEV (groupements d’édu-cateurs villageois) et des AEC (association deséducateurs communautaires) (ii) élaborér unestratégie précise pour arriver à une Guinéedélivrée de l’analphabétisme. (iii) confier lamaîtrise d’ouvrage (aussi pour l’alphabétisation)au niveau des collectivités décentralisées (iv)trouver une solution au problème des languespour une Guinée lettrée et communicative. LeGEV permettrait d’autonomiser et de pérenniserles activités alpha tandis que l’AEC inter-viendrait au niveau des sous-préfectures pourjouer le rôle d’interface et de représentativitéentre les communautés à la base, les groupe-ments d’éducateurs et les autorités de l’éduca-tion et autres intervenants.

• Il a existé en Guinée, notamment sous la premièreRépublique, une alphabétisation qui était unealphabétisation de masse, sans grande retombéeaussi bien du point de vue de l’impact que de lapérennité. Les stratégies étaient peu adaptées.C’est l’un des scandales qui aura marquénégativement plusieurs promotions d’élèves etétudiants de l’époque, aujourd’hui en fonction. Cesont pour la plupart aujourd’hui des travailleursdont la qualité des prestations laisse à désirer.


• Le SNA a divorcé avec le passé, même si l’onenregistre encore, pour des raisons de moyens oude personnes, des insuffisances. Heureusementque l’UNICEF, la Banque Mondiale, l’étudefinancée par IIZ/DVV ainsi les ONG en général,proposent tous la stratégie présentée dans lechapitre I à savoir :

■ La conception et l’élaboration de la politiquenationale d’alphabétisation et le suivi de samise en œuvre ;

■ L’élaboration des méthodes des stratégies etdes programmes d’alphabétisation des diffé-rents groupes concernés ;

■ La conception et l’élaboration du matérield’alphabétisation et de post-alphabétisation,son expérimentation et son évaluation ;

■ Le suivi/appui et l’évaluation des activitésd’alphabétisation.

• La presque totalité des ONG de Guinée tra-vaillent sur le terrain dans l’apprentissage visantles moyens de subsistance et quelques fois pourun savoir et un savoir être favorables à l’amé-lioration des conditions de vie. Toute font del’alphabétisation dans l’objectif d’une améliora-tion des conditions de subsistance ou toutsimplement des conditions d’existence.

• L’alphabétisation fonctionnelle et profession-nalisante est pratiquement généralisée. Mal-heureusement, au stade actuel, tout le mondes’accorde à admettre que celle-ci s’arrête enchemin dans la plupart des cas car (i) les sup-ports post alpha manquent cruellement même sipar endroit, il existe quelque publication,(ii) l’activité est très liée au financement, et(iii) comme on vient de le voir, la stratégie GEV et AEC n’est que peu développée par lesopérateurs.

• Dans les centres communautaires, les centresNAFA et centres d’alphabétisation profession-nalisante, on emploie l’alphabétisation commesupport à l’amélioration des moyens de subsis-tance et des compétences. Cette alphabétisationpermet parfois une plus grande reconnaissanceau sein de la société et plus de confiance en soi.Elle est bien accueillie et elle constitue un outilindispensable à la motivation et à la réussite dansles apprentissages de métier.

• L’intégration du français, au-delà de la langueinitiale d’apprentissage de la lecture et de l’écri-ture, est également bien accueilli et permet àl’apprenant de sortir de son terroir pour êtrereconnu et utile dans d’autres horizons. Unapprentissage autodidacte est possible étant don-née la plus grande possibilité d’accès à des docu-ments en français qu’en langue locale.

• Il existe une liste exhaustive de livrets élaboréspar les ONG et le SNA. La plupart de ces livretssont des livrets de lecture mais quelquefois ilssont thématiques. En matière d’alphabétisationfonctionnelle, certains portent sur des sujetsdivers (agriculture, santé, environnement, etc.)selon l’activité principale de l’organisme d’appuiayant commandé l’élaboration du document.

• Les difficultés exposées par la majorité desopérateurs sont d’ordre logistique et financière,exception faite des ONG étrangères qui ren-contrent des difficultés d’ordre socio-économi-que au niveau des apprenants.

• Enfin, la combinaison des deux approches « for-mation pour obtenir, accroître ou améliorer lesmoyens de subsistance et l’alphabétisation etformation générale comme base à l’accès » estdéjà combiné en Guinée. Pour cela, on peut seréjouir de constater que cela se matérialise unefois de plus à travers le projet EPT actuellementen négociation avec la Banque Mondiale.


74

Annex 3

Cases from Kenya

Anna P. Mwangi

Abbreviations

BTL Bible Translation and LiteracyDAE Department of Adult EducationDIT Directorate of Industrial TrainingGoK Government of KenyaGTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische

Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbHGerman Agency for TechnicalCo-operation

FL Functional literacyIFAD International Fund for Agricultural

DevelopmentILO International Labour OrganisationKDDP Kilifi District Development ProgrammeMEHRD Ministry of Education and Human

Resources DevelopmentNFE Non-formal EducationNGO Non-governmental OrganisationNPEP National Poverty Eradication PlanPLP Post-Literacy ProjectREFLECT Regenerated Freirian Literacy through

Empowering Community Tech-niques

SRDP Special Rural Development ProgrammeUBEP Undugu Basic Education ProjectUNDP United Nations Development Pro-

grammeUNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific

and Cultural OrganisationUNICEF United Nations Children’s FundUSK Undugu Society of KenyaWTO World Trade Organisation

Executive summary

This study undertook a critical examination of theuse in Kenya of two specific educational programstrategies. The first of these incorporates livelihoodskills as part of literacy education, while the secondincorporates literacy skills as part of livelihoodtraining, and has been termed the “literacy secondapproach.”

The study was based on extensive consultationwith key agencies and organizations that have sup-ported skills development in Kenya and on a reviewof both unpublished and published documentation.

A fact to bear in mind during this account is thatthe official rates of illiteracy in Kenya are muchlower than those in the other three “case” coun-tries: in 1997, they were estimated at 13 percent formen and 28 percent for women over the age of 15years. This difference is reflected in the observa-tion by FAO, SIDA, and the Kenya AgricultureResearch Institute (KARI) that the farmers in theFarmer Field Schools in the Central Provinceneeded no instruction in literacy or numeracy, asall the participating farmers could read and writeSwahili, and some could manage English. Most ofthe difference is explained not by the govern-ment’s literacy programs, but by its success in pro-moting the virtual universalization of primaryschooling.

The main provider of adult literacy in Kenya isthe Department of Adult Education (DAE) in theMinistry of Labor and Human Resource Develop-ment. In spite of ambitious policy goals to eradicate

illiteracy, the government’s literacy programremains severely under-financed. Although thegovernment’s allocation is supplemented by inter-national donor agencies, international and localNGOs, and community and individual contribu-tions and reaches all corners of the country throughthe government’s administrative system, the num-bers actually enrolled are too few to reduce the ratesof illiteracy substantially.

The under-financing of adult literacy programs isreflected in numerous other constraints: a lack ofincentives for instructors leading to a lack of skilledinstructors and unreliability among those who areavailable, a lack of suitable teaching materials, alack of adequate learning facilities, and unsurpris-ingly high drop out rates.

Attempts have been made to promote functionalliteracy through the introduction of economic andsocial projects as components of adult educationprograms. Adult learners are expected to improvetheir skills in areas such as agriculture, livestockrearing, home economics, and small-scale business,as they learn to read and write.

The study found that the “literacy secondapproach” has not been prominent in the Kenyancontext. Available vocational or livelihood trainingprograms required a Primary School Leaving Cer-tificate as an educational prerequisite, so that basicliteracy does not feature in curricula.

On the other hand, the findings of the study indi-cate that adult literacy education programs tend tobe more effective if they incorporate livelihoodskills training. Programs that did so had higherattendance rates and lower drop out rates andreceived better ratings on average from their partic-ipants than programs that focused solely on theprovision of literacy and numeracy skills.

The study generated several recommendations,which should help improve the effectiveness ofboth livelihood and literacy skills training:

• Programs should be more responsive and partici-patory, encouraging clients to articulate their needsto ensure program relevance to participants.

• Programs should be put into contexts to enablecourses and curricula to be shaped to meet therequirements of participants. The diverse and

stratified nature of Kenyan society must be takeninto consideration in an effort to create programsthat are relevant to all sections of society.

• Funding for adult education programs needs tobe increased. This indicates the need for morestudies to demonstrate how literacy programsresult in real returns and thus to encourageincreased government resource allocation.

• Programs need to be more sustainable in order toensure that they do not become redundant priorto fulfilling their objectives. In addition, coordi-nation between the different service providersmust be improved to ensure effective delivery ofservices.

Literacy and livelihoods

The first literacy campaign (1967)

The first National Literacy Campaign waslaunched in 1967. An evaluation in 1971 concludedthat, despite several weaknesses and shortcoming,those sections of the campaign that had adoptedthe functional approach, combining literacy learn-ing and acquisition of other practical skills, hadproven the most suitable for the design of an over-all national literacy strategy. Following this, awork-oriented literacy project was launched in1972 as an integral part of the Special Rural Devel-opment Program (SRDP) in six districts in thecountry. On the model of this effort, income-gener-ating projects became an essential component of lit-eracy classes.

The second literacy campaign (1979)

The 1978 Gachathi Report on the objectives andpolicies of education recommended the develop-ment of a National Literacy Campaign Program toeradicate illiteracy and to integrate literacy pro-grams into development projects, a move in linewith the literacy training with livelihood compo-nents approach. Accordingly, the approach pro-moted by the Department of Adult Educationaimed at establishing systematic links between lit-eracy teaching and the everyday activities of the


participants. The “functionality” of the programincluded the following features:

• The literacy materials are locally designed andtheir content reflects local socio-cultural condi-tions and economic activities.

• Each group of learners is encouraged to under-take some form of collective project work as anintegral element of their learning. Such projectscan be directly income-generating for the learn-ers or for community improvement or just forentertainment.

• Teachers are encouraged to invite local officers ofdifferent development sectors to address their lit-eracy learners on topics related to their respec-tive fields of competence.

Such activities are expected to help learnersacquire skills for home management and in areassuch as agriculture, livestock rearing, poultry keep-ing, and small-scale business. Unfortunately, due tolack of start-up money, most literacy classes do notfully incorporate these activities.

However, the Department of Adult Educationhas been able to secure the collaboration of suchministries as Agriculture and Health in producinglearning and reading materials that support thefunctional approach.

The functional approach appeals to adult learn-ers, as evidenced by the reports from 11 of 15 focusgroup discussions held with prospective partici-pants and local leaders. The general view linked lit-eracy with the ability to start and manage smallbusinesses and commercial farming. Literacy wouldhelp in keeping proper records, calculating profits,and using different measures correctly. One groupobserved that, if learners were taking practical sub-jects like animal husbandry, bookkeeping, and child-care, they would be more motivated to enroll.Another group expressed similar sentiments ; thechairman of the Village Development Unitexplained that, if literacy would support incomegeneration, people would spend less time lookingfor casual employment and would be available forclasses. They would also be able to contribute to thecost of the literacy program. They mentioned micro-

enterprises such as poultry keeping, piggery, beekeeping, crop production and crafts. Any proposedfunctional adult literacy program needs to respondto such needs in very practical ways. The projectsreciprocally reinforce the need for literacy, as theydemand proper record keeping, search for furtherinformation, and general business communication(Kiogora & Wambugu 2000: 2).

Despite these policies and ambitious goals, thefinancing and implementation of the National Liter-acy Campaign and other literacy programs havefallen far short of hopes. A large factor in the imper-fect realization of the functional approach is that mostliteracy teachers are primary school teachers whoassist the DAE in teaching adult learners as part-timeinstructors. They have neither the time nor the expert-ise to instruct people in ways to generate income or tostart and run small businesses successfully. Further,in 1996, the then Director of Adult Education, DavidKirui, disclosed that out of the 8,000 full and part-time teachers employed by the DAE, only 2,000 werequalified (Daily Nation 10/08/96).

Added to all this are the facts that the teachersand learners do not have adequate teaching andlearning materials to match the “functional” aims:lower primary school textbooks are often the onlyinstructional materials at hand. Lack of training, dis-satisfaction at the level of reward for teaching, andabsence of prospects for any kind of advancementtend to exacerbate the situation, while the absence ofdecent learning spaces does not help matters.

International and local NGOs

The role of NGOs in supplementing the govern-ment’s efforts and in promoting innovative ap-proaches to literacy education should not be under-estimated. They have stabilized literacy centers,initiated new strategies, and mobilized citizens forparticipation in adult basic education (Patel1999: 8–9). Further, through their own programs,NGOs supplement the efforts of the government inpromoting adult literacy education. In Kenya,ACTIONAID, Plan International, Literacy andEvangelism, Bible Translation and Literacy, theKenya Adult Education Association, and KenyaAdult Learners Association have contributed signif-icantly over the years in promoting adult literacy.


The small and focused literacy programs ofNGOs are often much more effective than those ofthe government in imparting critical literacy skillsand empowering adult learners. Here is only oneexample of an NGO:

ACTION AID–Kenya (AAK) started the KibweziREFLECT Literacy Development Program in 1989.The emphasis of the program was functional liter-acy – providing literacy and skills for the learners toenhance their capacities to develop solutions topractical problems. AAK organizes income-generat-ing projects, which include irrigated horticulturalproduction, tree nurseries, goat rearing, poultrykeeping, and basket weaving. These projects havetended to provide a critical binding action for thegroups and their participation in the literacy pro-gram is noted to be high. This has also significantlyimproved the men’s participation rate in the liter-acy centers.

By 1995 AAK was supporting 72 FAL centers inKibwezi with an enrollment of 585 learners,between eight and 10 percent. The AAK supportincluded training of teachers and supply of learningmaterials. The Kibwezi FAL Program was based onFreire’s methodology (psychosocial method). A Par-ticipatory Review Report of July 1996 noted thatwhile the FAL program has been successful and itsimpacts were visible, it recommended that AAKshould take up ActionAid’s revised Freireanmethod, REFLECT.

AAK commenced implementation of theREFLECT method in Kibwezi on a pilot basis in1996. After this successful pilot phase, it expandedto other centers and in 2000 there were 751 partici-pants in the program. Part of the success of theREFLECT circles in Kibwezi is attributable to thecare AAK takes in ensuring that the instructors aretrained and well equipped to implement their newteaching method.

Attitudes of local communities towardliteracy and livelihood projects

Community attitudes toward literacy projects vary.In a study on Tukjowi Center, in Rongo Division ofNyanza Province, Fujisawa (2000: 22) notes that theattitude towards adult education in the communityis quite negative. Adult learners are seen as igno-

rant and lazy and are categorized as people withplenty of time to do nothing. As farmers, mostpeople in Tukjowi do not attach any importance toadult education, which they see as having little ornothing to do with their daily lives. Similarly, inKikambala Division, Kilifi District, Coast Province,the community displays negative attitudes towardsadult learners who, they claim, spend more time atliteracy classes than they do with their families(Nyawana 1999). Negative attitudes towards adulteducation among the general populace have alsobeen cited as one of the primary factors discourag-ing potential and continuing adult learners at inKamariny Division, Keiyo District; Rift ValleyProvince (Moturi 2000).

On the other hand, people in Siala Center valueeducation more than those in Tukjowi do, eventhough the two centers are not too far from eachother and are in the same division Fujisawa(2000:23). Their positive attitudes may be attrib-uted to the fact that many of them are employed oroperate their own businesses, and they are able toassess and appreciate the value of functional adulteducation. Furthermore, in that Center, prominentmembers of the community are regularly invitedto participate in learning programs. For instance,educated women regularly attend classes toencourage other female learners. Literacy is alsopromoted through the local Seventh Day Adven-tist Church, and the program supervisor is often amember of the community). This level of interesthas been linked to the fact that a former cabinetminister created awareness of the important roleadult education in providing people with educa-tional opportunities to raise the living standard ofthe community.

Community attitudes have been positive towardclass projects, which incorporate an element ofincome generation into literacy classes. Accordingto Kering, for literacy projects to succeed, they mustincorporate an income-generating approach be-cause this enables the community to discern thebenefits of participation. Kering noted that, on aver-age, members of the public exhibited negative atti-tudes towards adult education classes. However,this attitude was modified and tended to be morepositive toward projects that incorporated liveli-hood components. Fifty-five percent of the mem-


bers of the public and users of adult centers inKeringet viewed class projects as one way ofimproving their standard of living and contributingto development. This has resulted in extremelyeffective learner motivation and in the maintenanceof a constant attendance record (Kering 2000).

In conclusion, literacy classes that include anincome-generation component appear to be moreeffective than standard adult education courses.The former have attracted many adult literacy stu-dents, many of whom have left regular programs ofadult study for the chance to attend a course thatthey perceive to offer future economic benefits. Thissuggests that incorporating livelihoods projects intoliteracy classes acts as a pull factor for a large sec-tion of the low-income population because it pro-vides the opportunity to study and also acknowl-edges the importance of being able to make a living(Mwale 1998).

Out-of-school youth

A new phenomenon that is causing great concern inKenya is the fact that while the number of adult illit-erate people is decreasing, the number of illiterateyoung adults is increasing. This is a direct result ofa growing number of families unable to providebasic needs for their children. A positive recentdevelopment is the increasing number of local andinternational NGOs beginning to get involved inalleviating the plight of street children and takingcare of their basic needs. One of the most activeKenyan NGOs in the field of children and youngadults in especially difficult circumstances is theUndugu Society of Kenya (USK).

As part of the implementation of its Co-opera-tion Action Strategies in Basic Education (CASE)Africa Project, the UNESCO sub-regional office forSouthern Africa wanted to identify and documentinnovative educational experiences in key areas inbasic education. Functional literacy was one of thekey areas identified, with particular focus onprocesses of the empowerment of disadvantagedyouth to survive and overcome economic pressures.The CASE Africa Project carried out an in-depthstudy on the Undugu Basic Education Project(UBEP), a non-formal education program targetedat street children.

The objective of this program is to provide func-tional literacy and practical skills-training opportu-nities for children in especially difficult circum-stances, particularly street children and those in theslums of Nairobi. The program has three phasesand each phase lasts for one year. After phase three,the learners receive vocational training in carpentry,sheet metal, and tailoring. The subjects offered inphases one to three are similar to those in primaryschools. The success of UBEP is attributed to soundmanagement and a high level of communityinvolvement. Management support from the Min-istry of Education was called for in such areas ascurriculum development, monitoring, inspection,and supervision.

The study reported the following findings:

• Undugu Basic Education Program is meeting thelearning needs of students in reading, writing,and practical skills.

• Learners use the skills they acquire from UBEP togenerate income.

• UBEP has contributed to the reduction of educa-tion wastage and to the rehabilitation of streetchildren.

• Lack of adequate physical, teaching and learningfacilities was reported.

• UBEP is dependent on donor funding. This calledthe sustainability of the program into question(Thompson 2001: 18).

Bible Translation and Literacy

Bible Translation and Literacy (BTL) is a Christiancharitable organization, incorporated in Kenya in1981 and registered as an NGO. It is a good exam-ple of the new trend developing in Kenya of NGOswhose primary concern had initially been solely lit-eracy but are now changing their policies to incor-porate livelihood training BTL also provides a goodexample of management that closely involves thecommunity, collaborates with other organizations,and works with minimal staff at the headquartersbut expands (bottom-heavy) at the community


level. It is also a good example of what a small butdedicated staff can achieve with limited resources.

A typical BTL project would make contact withall the churches in the area and with local and divi-sional District Development Committees. Theobjectives would be to:

• Analyze the language and produce a good alpha-bet.

• Assist local people to develop their languagein a written form under the auspices of a lan-guage committee. This would help give them agreater appreciation of their language and cul-tural heritage.

• Assess the community literacy needs. Assist inthe development of primers and literacy materi-als and prepare an adequate literacy program toprovide functional literacy skills to a critical massin the community.

• Assist the church to translate portions of theScripture to meet church needs. Normally theNew Testament and portions of the Old Testa-ment are translated, but that would depend onthe needs of the churches and the users of theScriptures.

• Work with the local churches to foster the use oftranslated Scriptures.

• Train literacy workers and translators in the com-munity to continue literacy and translation workas an ongoing church ministry.

• Motivate the community to set up self-sustainingand self-managing systems that would enablethem to respond to their felt needs in communitydevelopment. When it was not possible to assistdirectly, then assist indirectly by involving othercommunity development agencies that couldrespond to the felt needs of the community.

BTL’s coordinating office is in Nairobi with askeleton staff for administration and consultancyservices. The BTL staff is a combination of salariedKenyans and volunteer expatriates. However, the

actual work carried out by this organization is donein the field. This is where most of its staff membersare stationed. BTL has managed to develop a rea-sonably substantial project system that includeslocal supporting committees, project staffs, theinclusion of voluntary expatriate personnel, and areasonably strong support structure.

Despite evident program weaknesses, BTL hasconsiderable promise as a delivery vehicle for liter-acy for the following reasons: the staff commitment,development of the local infrastructures, and thefact it occupies a niche no one seems to be filling inKenya. A board of directors are elected from BTLmembers manages the operations and policies of theorganization. The general secretary is the chief exec-utive officer and reports to the board of directors.The various programs undertaken by BTL are coor-dinated by program coordinators. Each project areahas an operational base in the language group witha project leader, who develops a team to work with.

Although BTL projects started with basic adultliteracy, following recommendations from an evalu-ation done in 1996, there is now more emphasis ontransition literacy programs. The transition literacytakes less time, and BTL has been able to recruit vol-unteer teachers because they do not need to put inmany hours, as opposed to the basic literacy pro-gram, which takes up a whole year.

BTL has evolved from having literacy compo-nents of only transition literacy, basic literacy, andfunctional literacy, to literacy components using theliteracy and livelihood approach. The literacy withlivelihood component is expected to:

• Integrate basic literacy with community develop-ment activities. This may build a motivation forthe learners who may realize immediate gainsfrom the program, but it may not necessarilymotivate the teachers.

• Integrate basic literacy with income-generatingprojects. This may be aimed at raising income tosupport the program by providing money tooffer incentives to the teachers. The challenge isto have income-generating-programs that wouldgenerate enough income to support the teachers.The learners, too, may want to have an income,given the level of poverty of learners in the proj-


ect. Management and accounting are a challenge,and money for such income-generating projectsmay be needed from other funding agencies out-side the traditional BTL funders.

• Approach local NGOs that have interest in pro-moting basic adult literacy. They may assist inpartnering with the community in many ways,such as providing the seed money for theincome-generating projects.

This approach to literacy is still at the earlystages of development and BTL is currentlyinvolved in establishing structures that will helpdevelop and establish it at the projects level.

PLAN International

PLAN International is an example of collaborationbetween the government and an internationalNGO. Furthermore, it is an example of involvingeven the poorest members of the community in costsharing. PLAN addresses five interrelated areas offocus, which lay the groundwork for its communitydevelopment interventions. These are growing upand health; learning; habitat; livelihood; and build-ing relationships. Adult literacy falls under thelearning domain.

Under the learning domain, PLAN recognizeseducation for adults and children alike as a processthat enables individuals, families, and communitiesacquire basic tools needed to access information fortheir empowerment. This means that PLAN seesboth formal and nonformal education as powerfultools for preparing community members to acquireessential life skills, which in turn result in improvedunderstanding of and interaction with their socialand physical environments.

PLAN works directly with children, their fami-lies, and communities to design, implement, andevaluate development projects. To achieve thisobjective, PLAN has incorporated CommunityBased Organizations (CBOs) as partners in the pro-gram delivery. This support takes the form of tech-nical assistance, financing,and capacity-building.Through this support, it is hoped that CBOs will inthe long run be self-sustaining and be effective vehi-cles for aiding development from below. CBOs in

the Thika PLAN operational areas are called VillageDevelopment Units (VDUs). A VDU’s mandate is totake effective responsibility for the developmentprocess of their communities—with support fromPLAN—from initiation, planning, and design, toimplementation, monitoring, and evaluation of allprojects in their villages. In essence, the effectivemanagement of the entire project cycle is the currentchallenge facing the VDUs, given the past prevalentculture of dependency on PLAN funds.

Vignettes of literacy groups1

Following are the summarized findings of someDiploma in Adult Education candidates from theUniversity of Nairobi. These are mature studentswith wide experience in the area of adult education.The studies have been conducted in all provinces ofthe country, starting from the capital city to the far-thest corners of the ASAL (arid and semi-arid lands)areas. Most of them focus on and evaluate theextent to which livelihood projects have been inte-grated in the FL program of DAE. These examplesare offered to give the reader a direct impression ofhow the literacy program works on the ground andalso to answer questions on as rates of attendance,dropouts and causes, psycho-social effects of theprogram on the learners, approaches used to iden-tify and mobilize learners, and combining and bal-ancing literacy content with livelihood content.

Keringet Division, Nakuru District, RiftValley Province (A study by Kering, 2000)

In Keringet division, many government and non-gov-ernmental agencies, provide some form of adult edu-cation. These programs mainly take the form of exten-sion programs run by government ministries in theareas of health, agriculture, livestock development,culture, and social services. These programs providedifferent services. NGOs have similarly based socialwelfare and education programs aimed at improvingthe quality of life of the client communities.

Official policy directs that the Department ofAdult Education should plan, organise and laydown strategies for the implementation of pro-grams. The department is also responsible for pro-viding tangible resources in the form of finance and


materials. The content of literacy materials is sup-posed to be based on the socio-economic and cul-tural activities of the learners’ environment. In real-ity, the department is handicapped in that it hasbeen allocated too small a share of the total budgetavailable for educational resources. Keringet hasnot received any material resources for a long time.Teachers often have to contribute personal funds tomeet the International Iiteracy Day expenses.

The upshot is that, of a total estimated populationof 11,084 illiterate adults in Keringet division, thereis a current enrollment of 17 male and 126 femalelearners, 143 learners in all in literacy classes,amounting to 1.3 percent of the target group.

Teaching is conducted by unskilled or semi-skilledteachers. Just over half, 55 percent, of the classes do notattempt to link their learning activities with livelihoodsor other development. The other 45 percent try to moti-vate learners by integrating their teaching with otherdevelopment activities such as. farming, knitting, andmerry-go-round (revolving loan fund). Among 11 cen-ters observed, one uses a primer and one uses a text-book; five use improvised materials, and four use pre-primary materials. This is one clear indicator of thepoor standards the DAE maintains in equipping liter-acy centers. Adult teachers and the institutions wherethey teach constitute 82 percent of material providers,while the department provides only 18 percent.

Seven of the 11 literacy centers have invitedguest speakers. It has been noted that guest speak-ers enhance the performance of the teachers andmotivate the learners.

Kakamega Municipality Division, WesternProvince (A study by Owenga, S. Violet)

In the Kakamega Municipality division the enroll-ment totalled 295 adult learners—126 men and 169women (Statistics at year-end 1999). Eight adulteducation centers had class projects, and one didnot. The projects included Merry-go-round (revolv-ing loan fund), Making of fireless cookers, andBroom making.

Most learners reacted positively to the projects,and they were perceived as beneficial because a lotof income was generated for those who had partici-pated in economic activities. Participants also bene-fited socially because the projects created a cohesive

group. The projects served to maintain learnerinterest and motivated participants to complete theprogram. Learners benefited from the literacy skillsin the following ways:

Economically• They used the skills they acquired to make fire-

less cookers, which they sold.

• Those who were engaged in business were ableto calculate their profit or loss margins.

• Those who were engaged in agriculture haveraised their production as a result of their abilityto use new technology. This has resulted in sur-plus yields, which can be sold as a means of gen-erating extra income.

Socially• Working in the groups ensured more intensive

learner interaction and encouraged participantsto draw on each other’s experiences.

Problems encounteredFour out of nine teachers complained about the lackof teaching/learning materials. Three teachersstated there was no community support for theircourses. Four teachers said that there were inade-quate facilities. All nine teachers indicated that thelearners decide on what they should learn. How-ever, teachers stressed that a post literacy programfor the neo-literates should be started so that they donot relapse into illiteracy. In addition, they felt thatan adult literacy curriculum should be designed.

The learners, meanwhile, said they had joined liter-acy classes primarily to learn how to read and write(4), to learn business (3), to socialize (3), to learn to carefor their family’s health (2), or because they lackedmoney for formal education (2). When asked whetherthey were able to read and write, all the learners saidyes. Twelve of them had taken proficiency testsbetween 1978–1984; one had not passed. Two of theinterviewees had not sat for the test. Learners wereasked how they were using the knowledge and skillsacquired in literacy classes. The following responseswere received in order of frequency:

• Improved farming (4)


• Reading and writing own letters and keepingrecords (3)

• Started business (3)

• Furthering education (2)

• Read doctors prescription (1)

• Improved communication through socializa-tion (1)

When asked how literacy contributed to theirroles and responsibilities, the participants gavethese responses:

• As fathers, learners felt they could now moreeffectively monitor their children’s progress inschool. Their increased income was budgetedtowards paying school fees for their children andproviding for their families’ basic needs. Severalof them stated that they no longer believed inwitchcraft and now took any member of theirfamily that was sick to hospital. They were nowalso able to keep family records.

• As mothers, learners felt they were betterequipped to care for their health of their familiesby preparing a balanced diet. They were nowtaking their children for immunization and keep-ing homesteads clean. They also knew how tobudget for their family needs. They could supple-ment family income by starting a small business.

• As maids, learners believed they could now dotheir jobs more effectively by keeping the housesclean and preventing diseases. They could not beabused as they were now aware of their rightsand, in return, they could now not misuse theresources that their employer had put at theirdisposal.

The researcher also interviewed a carpenter whoran a wood workshop and who had attended anadult education center between 1982 and 1983. Heresponded that the knowledge acquired in the lit-eracy classes had helped him in his businessbecause it had given him the confidence and ability

to communicate with different customers. In addi-tion, he could now read measurements and evalu-ate his progress. He could take stock of hisbusiness, keep written records, and conduct trans-actions with customers by writing out orders. Afemale interviewee show sold horticultural pro-duce attended literacy classes between 1991 and1993. She said she had learned how to calculatewhether her business was yielding a profit or aloss. Consequently, since she became literate, herbusiness has improved.

Izava Location, Vihiga District WesternProvince (A study by Luyayi, V.E.R.)

This study provides an example of the parallel exis-tence of income-generating projects and literacyprojects and of learners making use of both pro-grams. It would be interesting to know if the usersbecame members first of the income-generationproject or the literacy program. Unfortunately, thestudy does not document this.

Vihiga District has a total 110 of literacy centerswith 26 full-time teachers, 69 part-time teachers, 13self-help teachers, and two NGO teachers. Only 10out of 110 have income-generating projects. Izavalocation has 10 centers with only three income-gen-eration projects. There are two full-time teachers,five part-time teachers and one self-help teacher.The location also has more than 20 women’sgroups, according to statistics in the office of thesocial development officer.

Three centers have enrollments of more than 51learners, and two centers have enrollment figuresof between 41 and 50 students. One center hasenrolled 31–40 learners, one have up to 20 andanother has up to 30. However, in five of the cen-ters a maximum of only ten learners attend classes.Three centers record attendance of between 11and20, one center records attendance of between 21and 30, and one of between 31 and 40. In otherwords, half of the classes have fewer than 10 oftheir learners actually attending. Findings showedthat literacy learners were not attending classesdaily, but 60 percent of the learners attend threetimes a week. The findings further show that on thedays learners are not attending classes, they go tothe market to sell their wares or participate in


income-generating activities organized bywomen’s groups.

Class projects include cow keeping, merry-go-round, and vegetable farming. These projectsencourage learners to attend classes and to have theirown source of income. Findings indicated that 90percent of learners in classes with class projects ben-efited in the form of income after selling their prod-ucts. The remaining 10percent were not sure whetherthe project had helped them. The study found thatcenters with projects had 80 percent attendance rates,while centers without projects had only 20 percentattendance rates. Observation indicated that incorpo-rating projects into adult education classes encour-aged learners to attend in larger numbers.

Kikambala Division, Kilifi District, CoastProvince (A study by Nyawana, John, 1998)

This study is a good example of a concern expressedearlier about the rising number of illiterate youngadults. The increasing number of underage learnersmay limit implementation of livelihoods projects infunctional literacy classes.

The findings of the study indicate that 27.5 per-cent of the learners were between the ages of 21and30 years and 25 percent were in the 10–20 yearbracket. Learners at this age who attain the firstlevel of literacy usually want to continue learningand are interested in education will offer thememployment opportunities or daily life skills. Theyare most interested in learning about business skills,health care, and home economics.

Moyale location, Central Division of Moyale District, North Eastern Province (A study by Shariff, Omar)

Moyale District is situated in the far north and isbordered by Ethiopia. The majority of people arepastoralists and practise nomadic lifestyles. Pros-perous businesses are found in the border town ofMoyale, which is also the district headquarters.Women’s group projects were started in 1975. Theyengaged not only in sewing, weaving, buying plots,growing vegetables, and cookery, but also in spear-heading educational activities in all fields of sociallife. Success was not universal: out of 29 projects

only nine are functioning. The failure in promotingincome-generating activities in many instances hasbeen attributed to the women’s groups themselvesand blamed on the age and the illiteracy of themembers and the leaders’ insufficient leadershipskills due to illiteracy.

Interviews with some members of the nine sur-viving groups revealed that they meet to undertakesewing, weaving, tailoring, bee keeping, growingvegetables, renting houses, embroidery, cooking,and other minor activities.

Reasons given for joining the women groupsincluded:

• Buying plots for commercial purposes (20)

• Learning how to sew and weaving baskets (15)

• Learning better methods of growing vegetables(10)

• Learning how to read and write (5)

Achievements

• Made baskets for their own use and sale (6)

• Earned money to pay school fees from growingvegetables(10)

• Literacy (3)

Problems encountered by the members of thegroup:

• Illiteracy (20)

• Lack of enough finance (15)

• Poor leadership (18)

• Lack of security (10)

• Lack of combined effort from other officers (12)

Illiteracy was the most disturbing issue to bothleaders and members of the projects. Most of the


active members do not know to read or write. Theleaders also quoted the same problem of illiteracy,which resulted in poor leadership. Even if theyattend seminars or courses organized by someNGOs, the participants do not get the full informa-tion, as they cannot record the discussions.

Mwatate Division, Taita Taveta District (A study by Mwale, C.J., 1998)

Virtually every literacy project in every countrystarts with over enthusiasm and over subscriptionof enrollment where people would indeed like tobe literate. However, when they attend classes fora certain period and find that the program doesnot provide any immediate benefit or any clearprospect for the future, they develop a negativeattitude and hence they start dropping out.

In many cases where literacy education is notassociated with learning of survival skills, partici-pants withdraw. This has become a major problem.Daily attendance of the adult learners is extremelylow. The majority of the learners who attend literacyclasses belong to the deprived group. They join theseclasses with a hope that their economic situation willbe improved. If literacy does not cater for their needs,they will abandon classes. Experience has shownthat the most vibrant and sustainable literacy classesare those that have income-generating activities.Economic projects, therefore, will solve the problemof dropout and poor attendance in literacy classes.

It is evident that in most literacy centers thelearners are mainly female with only one or twomales. In Kenya women join together in groups forthe common purpose of securing and promotingtheir socio-economic survival.

• Apart from increasing women’s skills, the activi-ties also Hold the members together

• Aim at improving the welfare of the groupmembers

• Create an atmosphere for learning other newthings, and have many benefits.

Learners are motivated when they see the resultsof work-oriented literacy because it is usually

planned in such a way that the learners make rapidprogress and are able to use their new skills quickly.This encourages them to continue.

Teachers who are not capable of incorporatingsuch activities in their classes may lose most oftheirclass members in due course.

The learners were asked their reasons for joiningadult literacy classes. Among those interviewed, 40percent had class projects and 60 percent had noprojects. Of the 40 percent, 41.7 percent said thatthey used the money from selling their project itemsto buy their writing materials, as well as to meettheir children’s and other family needs. Twenty-fivepercent relied on these projects as their sole sourceof income, while 33.3 percent said that theyacquired knowledge and skills on the project.

Respondents suggested that in order to sustainclass attendance, each class should start an income-generating project by:

• Holding seminars for adult learners on projectmanagement.

• Visiting other centers that have started projects inorderto learn form them.

• Having government and NGOs provide fundsfor these ventures because financial assistance istheir major problem.

• Initiating fund-raising specifically for adult liter-acy center projects, so that they can start suchprojects and attract others to class.

Reasons for dropping-out

The largest proportion of the dropouts (37.5 per-cent) said they were bored with being taught onlyreading and writing. Twenty-five percent said thatthey had other work to attend to, and 25 percentsaid that their center had no project, which wastheir main interest. Some 6.25 percent said that bythe time they dropped out, they had learned how toread and write. The remaining 6.25 percent said thatthey did not see the use.

This survey shows that what they were taught inclass could not meet the learners’ needs. Some 87.5percent of the drop-out respondents have since


joined other groups with income-generating proj-ects that are not linked to literacy classes. Clearly,these members were very interested in such proj-ects, but since they were not available in their liter-acy center, they were forced to drop out and joinother groups. This evidence links unsustainableclasses to lack of income-generating projects. Four-teen out of 16 dropout respondents said that theywould be willing to go back to the literacy class ifsuch projects were started.

Of the 10 literacy teachers interviewed, four hadclass projects and six did not. It was observed thatin centers with projects, the attendance was higherthan in centers without projects.

Livelihood training with literacy components

Although there is indeed much training for liveli-hoods and employment, little of it caters to peoplewho have not had much schooling and who are toall intents and purposes illiterate. However, theKarungu Women’s Group provides an interestingexception.

The Karungu Women’s Group

The Karungu Women’s Group (KWG) started in1981 as an income-generating project but laterincorporated literacy training as a service to newmembers and to the community in general. Theinitiators were a few local women who had somebasic primary education. In 1982, the group wasregistered as a self-help group in the Ministry ofCulture and Social Services. They approached theKenya Adult Education Association (KAEA) tohelp them to write a proposal to the Hellenic Insti-tute for International Co-operation (HELINAS)for a loan to construct a building for the group’sactivities.

Through hard work and with the help of thecommunity, they managed to construct the groundfloor of the building. With the help of HELINAS,the group started a cow project: some members ofthe group were given a grade cow-in-calf and whenthe cow calved, the calf would be given to amember of the group who had not received a cowpreviously. With the help of KAEA, the groupapproached the Ministry of Agriculture to provide

an extension officer to train the women in bettermethods of cow care. While the agricultural exten-sion officer remained employed by the government,the donor (HELINAS) topped up his salary for theextra work he was doing for the group. Later on,HELINAS donated a project vehicle, which theyused to deliver the milk and to hire to the public toraise additional funds. Furthermore, a secondtrainer was employed to train the women in homeeconomics.

As the group attracted more members, some ofwhom were illiterate, it became evident that a liter-acy class was needed to enable these non-literatemembers keep records and receive training inhealth, agriculture, and livestock rearing. Theseclasses were also made available for any othermembers of the local community.

With financial assistance from CARE Kenya, theKenya Adult Education Association developed afunctional literacy training curriculum, specificallydesigned for the KWG literacy classes. This curricu-lum was designed with the participation of repre-sentative members of KWG, using the task-orientedmethod.

The group has now expanded with over 400members and also has male members. Perhaps, thebest unexpected result of the success of this group isnot only the members of the group but also thecommunity in general benefit from its activities.

A multi-purpose building was built, housing adispensary, pharmacy, agro-vet shop, TV/video,classrooms for the literacy class and basic educationclasses as well as some utility rooms. In this way,the group provides, for a minimal fee, importantservices to the surrounding community. Further-more, when the Ministry of Livestock Developmentdiscontinued the services of artificial inseminationfor livestock in the districts, two members of thegroup were trained as AIs and provide the neededservices to all members of the community.

The project is run by a management committee,which includes members of the group and of theKAEA Executive. Narrative and financial reportsare sent to KAEA quarterly. KAEA evaluates theproject regularly and sends reports to the donor.KAEA also organizes exchange visits between thisgroup and other groups to enrich their experiencesand generate new ideas.


Conclusions

Perhaps the most important observation on adult lit-eracy programs in Kenyais one that helps to explaintheir lack of effectiveness: most programs have beenlargely confined to the education sector. Kenyaappears to be a firm believer in literacy for literacy’ssake. However, the findings of the study suggestthat such a strategy is misplaced. Literacy programsshould not be confined simply to issues of educa-tion. They would be considerably more effective ifthey were embedded within the wider framework ofboth individual and community development. Afterall, literacy is expected to contribute to more thansimply educational achievements.

Literacy skills contribute not only to peoples’economic opportunities and financial capital, butalso to their self-esteem and confidence to partici-pate in public affairs. A willingness to do a job iseven more crucial than the knowledge and skillwith which to do it. A good general education laysan essential foundation for training and employ-ment, increased earnings, and employee mobility.Furthermore, it should also be noted that people’slivelihoods are not static, but change according totheir circumstances. Literacy programs embeddedin livelihood skills and training therefore must alsobe flexible and adaptable to meet changing needs.

The emphasis on livelihoods as a strategy inpoverty eradication is a positive step in the rightdirection. However, if it is not integrated with pro-viding opportunities for basic education, it may notachieve its aims. In discussions with a number ofproject officers who provide excellent services in thefield of vocational training, it became clear thatwhile the illiterate population forms the vast major-ity of the poorest people, they are often notinvolved, for various reasons, in the developmentprograms. A major reason is that they cannot fullyparticipate in the skills training programs, sincesuch programs demand some level of basic educa-tion. Secondly, a high percentage of illiterate peoplefeel intimidated by the bureaucracy, which involvesfilling out various forms.

In conclusion, we may say that literacy and liveli-hoods should be fully integrated if they are toachieve their goals.

References

Abagi, Okwach. 2000. Situational Analysis of the Educa-tional Sector in Kenya: Background Document prepared forCARE-Kenya. Nairobi: Institute of Policy Analysis andResearch/CARE Kenya.

Carron, G., K. Mwiria & G. Righa. 1989. The Functioningand Effects of the Kenyan Literacy Program, IIEP ResearchReport No. 76. Paris: UNESCO International Institutefor Educational Planning.

Faulu Kenya Limited. Information Brief on Faulu KenyaLimited (an undated office document).

Fujisawa, Miki. 2001. Rural Women’s Perspective on AdultLiteracy Education and Development in Kenya, A paperpresented at the annual conference of the Comparativeand International Education Society. Washington, D.C.March 14–17.

Gachathi, P. 1978. Report on the National Committee on theObjectives and Policies of Education. Nairobi: Govern-ment Printer.

Government of Kenya. 1996. Kenya Economic Reforms for1996–1998: The Policy Framework Paper. Prepared by theGovernment of Kenya in Collaboration with the Inter-national Monetary Fund and the World Bank, October.

Kalweo, J. I. and D. Macharia. n.d. “Kenya’s Literacy Pro-gram from the 1960s into the1980s.” In H. S. Bhola, J.Muller & O.P. Dijkstia. The Promise of Literacy: Cam-paigns, Programs and Projects. Baden-Baden: DSE,Nomos Verlags-gesellschaft.

KPLP. 2000. Kilifi District Development Program: Informa-tion Folder. August KPLP. PLP News. A newsletter ofthe Kenya Post Literacy Project.

______. 2001. Kilifi District Development Program: Creatinga Difference. March. Kilifi: KPLP.

______. n.d. Terms of Reference for the Project ProgressReview, Kenya Post-Literacy Project: Community LearningResource Centers.

Moturi, W. Kinara. 2000. Assessing Factors Contributing toLow Attendance in Adult Education Classes in KamarinyDivision of Keiyo District. Unpublished dissertationsubmitted for the award of Diploma in Adult Educa-tion from the University of Nairobi.

Murage, Cyrus. 2001. Literacy Training with LivelihoodComponent. June, Nairobi.

Ng’ang’a, S. Ngigi. 2000. Assessment of Factors Contribut-ing to Low Enrollment Rate in Adult Literacy Classes inMakadara Division (Nairobi Province). Unpublished dis-sertation submitted for the Award of a Diploma inAdult Education to the University of Nairobi.

Ole, Kwallah. Sammy in The Flash, December Issue.Nairobi: Undugu Society of Kenya.

OXFAM. 2001. OI and OGB: SCOs the latest wording.Office document stipulating Oxfam’s objectives and areas ofinterest. 9th April 2001.


Patel, Ila. 1999. End-of-Decade Assessment of Jomtien Goals:Emerging Trends in Adult Literacy Policies and Practice inAfrica and Asia. NGO Perspective. Draft Synthesis Doc-ument. Mumbai. ASPBAE.

Pendekezo, Letu. 2000. Program for the Rehabilitation ofStreet Girls and their Families. Kenya. 2000. Annual Nar-rative Report Covering the Period Dec 1999 throughNov. 31, 2000. Submitted to Oxfam (GB).

______. 2000. Proposal for the Rehabilitation of Street Girlsand their Families. Kenya, East Africa, Dec 1,1999–November 30, 2000. Submitted to Oxfam (GB).

Republic of Kenya. 1973. Report on Special Rural Develop-ment Program. Unpublished report.

Thompson, Ekundayo J.D. 1999. Kenya Post-Literacy Pro-ject: Three Years on 1996–1999. Nairobi: German Agencyfor Technical Co-operation (GTZ).

______. 2001. Non-Formal Education in Urban Kenya: Find-ings of a Study in Kisumu, Mombasa and Nairobi. Nairobi.German Technical Co-operation (GTZ).

Wema Center. 1998. A Rehabilitation Program for StreetGirls. Progress Report to Oxfam as of October, 1998.

1. Language used is often that of the respondents or theresearchers.


88

Annex 4

Cases from Senegal

Oumar SALL

(Original French Version)

Introduction

ans cette étude sur le Sénégal, nous nousintéresserons principalement aux aspects« contenus et approches » de l’alphabétisa-

tion et de la formation des adultes dans les languesnationales ; en d’autre termes, au secteur del’éducation non formelle.

L’activité d’alphabétisation au Sénégal remonteà plusieurs décennies, avec les expériences entre-prises par les précurseurs de l’ARP (Associationpour la Renaissance du Pulaar) et autres militantsdes langues nationales et de l’éducation desadultes.

Cependant, les Etats Généraux de l’Education etde la Formation, qui se sont tenus en 1981, consti-tuent le repère le plus net pour situer historique-ment l’intervention systématique de l’Etat dans cedomaine, ainsi que la participation active des ONGoeuvrant en matière de formation et de dévelop-pement.

Signalons qu’en 1983, un décret présidentiel aofficiellement fixé les règles de transcription de sixlangues nationales, à savoir : le Wolof, le Pulaar, leSereer, le Joola, le Mandinka, et le Soninké.

A côté de ces langues, parlées par les différentescomposantes de la population, on retrouve leFrançais qui est la langue officielle du pays.

L’enseignement formel dans les établissementsprimaires, secondaires et supérieurs, ainsi que dansles écoles de formation technique et professionnelleest dispensé en langue française.

L’accès aux fonctions et emplois dans le secteurmoderne dépend, dans une large mesure, de la plusou moins bonne maîtrise du Français.

Cependant, la faiblesse des ressources budgé-taires disponibles, ajoutée aux insuffisances etlacunes du système formel rend de plus en plusdifficile l’accès de tous à l’éducation, à la formationet à l’emploi.

Que faire alors de tous ces adultes, femmes ethommes illettrés qui constituent la force de travailet sur lesquels doit reposer le développementéconomique et social du pays ?

Comment leur donner les compétences qui leurpermettraient d’améliorer la productivité de leurtravail ?

Quels mécanismes institutionnels doivent êtremobilisés, quelles approches adopter liant la forma-tion et les moyens de subsistance des apprenants ?

L’Education Non Formelle tente d’apporter une ré-ponse à ces interrogations, à travers différents pro-grammes d’alphabétisation et de formation desadultes.

Sur le plan institutionnel, le secteur de l’EducationNon Formelle est placé sous la responsabilité et latutelle d’un département ministériel aux domainesde compétences désormais élargis. En effet, d’impor-tantes mutations viennent renforcer le secteur de l’al-phabétisation qui est passé du statut de « Ministèredélégué » à celui de « Ministère de l’EnseignementTechnique, de la Formation Professionnelle, del’Alphabétisation et des Langues nationales ».

D

Dans cette formulation actuelle, la connexionavec la formation professionnelle se trouve claire-ment établie. Une telle approche institutionnelle dela question, aussi clairement exprimée, est tout àfait nouvelle au Sénégal et épouse parfaitement laproblématique de notre étude.

Elle semble également indiquer un renforcementet une amplification de la démarche du « faire-faire » de rigueur depuis bientôt quelques années,particulièrement depuis le démarrage du ProjetPAPF (Projet d’Alphabétisation Priorité Femmes).

Actuellement, les activités d’alphabétisationsont menées principalement par quatre catégoriesd’intervenants :

• L’Etat et les structures décentralisées ;

• Les Projets Nationaux de développement ;

• Les Sociétés parapubliques Nationales ;

• Les Organisations Non Gouvernementales na-tionales ou étrangères.

Cependant, le défi à relever est celui de la per-tinence et de l’efficacité des programmes d’alpha-bétisation, de leur impact positif sur le vécu desapprenants.

Or, la situation des apprenants, dont la majoritéest constituée de femmes, est caractérisée par unecertaine précarité des conditions d’existence. Ce quipose d’emblée la question de la liaison entre les pro-grammes d’alphabétisation et les moyens desubsistance.

Autrement dit, il est indispensable d’articuler lesprogrammes d’alphabétisation avec les stratégiesde lutte contre la pauvreté.

Ne devrait-on pas, d’ailleurs, aller plutôt vers lanotion de « Formation pour le développement » ?

Nous examinerons successivement ici les deuxprincipales stratégies qui sont :

• Une formation « lettrée » intégrant des moyensde subsistance ;

• Une formation aux moyens de subsistanceintégrant une formation « lettrée » .

En ce qui concerne la première stratégie, nousprésenterons deux expériences menées grâce àl’implication d’organisations non gouvernemen-tales d’alphabétisation et de développement, enpartenariat avec des structures extérieures simi-laires. Toutes les deux mettent l’accent sur unealphabétisation tournée vers l’amélioration desconditions de vies des apprenants, composés enmajorité de femmes rurales des régions de Louga(avec ANAFA) et Fatick-Kaolack (avec ALPHAFEMMES). Nous mentionnerons aussi brièvementd’autres cas.

En ce qui concerne la deuxième stratégie, nousavons retenu le cas d’une société de développementqui a intégré dans sa démarche l’alphabétisationdes populations de sa zone d’intervention.

Enfin, des expériences étudiées nous tirerons unesérie de recommandations destinées aux profes-sionnels et autres intervenants de l’Education NonFormelle en Afrique SubSaharienne.

Formation « lettrée » avec composantesmoyens de subsistance

Au Sénégal, beaucoup d’ONG et de Projets par-ticipent activement à la promotion et au développe-ment des communautés de base, en particulier pardes activités d’alphabétisation, accompagnéesgénéralement d’activités génératrices de revenus.Ces différentes expériences se déroulent dans uncontexte en pleine mutation.

Contexte

La longue tradition de multipartisme au Sénégal afinalement débouché, le 19 Mars 2000, aprèsbeaucoup de péripéties, à ce qu’il est convenud’appeler l’alternance politique à la tête de l’Etat. Lepays franchit une nouvelle étape dans laconsolidation démocratique.

De fait, le principe de continuité et le maintien decertains grands programmes, initiés avec l’appui departenaires au développement, font que dans ledomaine de l’alphabétisation et de la formation, lesoptions ont été confirmées, voire renforcées.

A partir des années 90, beaucoup de partenairesau développement ont consacré de nouvelles res-


sources au financement de l’alphabétisation, en par-ticulier celle des femmes. Ces dernières se sont sou-vent organisées dans des structures dénomméesGPF (Groupements de Promotion Féminine).

Les groupements de femmes, dont le nombre dé-passe aujourd’hui 5.000, sont à leur tour organisésdans une structure fédérative, la Fédération Natio-nale des Groupements de Promotion Féminine. Celle-ci compte des structures décentralisées au niveau desrégions et des départements, voire des arrondisse-ments et des communautés rurales du Sénégal.

La Fédération des Groupements de PromotionFéminine représente une formidable force sociale surlaquelle il est possible de compter pour modifier fon-damentalement les paramètres de la situation so-ciale, culturelle et économique du pays, caractériséepar la précarité et l’insuffisance de la productivité.

La plupart des structures intervenant à la basedans le domaine de la formation et du développe-ment considèrent les groupements féminins commeune structure adaptée au déploiement durable deleurs activités.

C’est ainsi que de nombreux Projets et Pro-grammes ont été mis en place pour soutenir la luttecontre l’analphabétisme et les mauvaises conditionsde vie des populations, surtout chez les femmes. Eneffet, la lutte contre la pauvreté ne peut avoir d’effi-cacité sans prise en compte de l’une de ses dimen-sions les plus fondamentales, à savoir la formation.

• Programme Elargi de Lutte Contre la PauvretéPELCP ;

• Programme d’Action Décennal de la Femme,suite à la Conférence Mondiale de Pékin sur lesfemmes ;

• Programme Décennal de l’Education et de laFormation PDEF ;

• Projet Développement des Groupements dePromotion Féminine ;

• Projet de Développement des RessourcesHumaines.

Le secteur formel est marqué par un très grandtaux de chômage en même temps qu’un faible taux

de productivité. Cette situation d’insuffisance de laproductivité est due, dans une large mesure, à unfaible niveau de formation et de qualification. D’oùtoute l’importance d’une activité de renforcementdans ce domaine.

Aussi bien en ville que dans les campagnes, lemanque de qualification technique se fait sentir etlimite considérablement la qualité du travail et leniveau de la productivité.

Sur le plan des orientations, on remarque defortes tendances à la décentralisation des activités, ycompris dans le domaine de l’alphabétisation et dela formation par le principe du « faire-faire ».

Dans le même temps, une demande sociale deplus en plus « impérieuse » et pressante se mani-feste on observe une grande volonté de participa-tion citoyenne, sous l’égide d’une « Société Civile »naissante.

Pourtant, des milliers de personnes adultesrestent encore dans une situation marquée parl’analphabétisme qui est un élément caractéristiquedu sous-développement économique et social.

Il n’y a pas encore de solution pertinente à cetimportant problème qui, pourtant, conditionnedans une large mesure le devenir des Etatsafricains.

La lutte contre l’analphabétisme ne peut êtreengagée sans aller de pair avec celle de la promotionindividuelle des apprenants et de leur motivation.Telle semble être la perception de nombre d’ONG etProjets parmi lesquels on peut citer :

• Le PAPF « Projet d’Alphabétisation PrioritéFemmes » qui, dans sa phase actuelle dite Inté-grée, semble aller dans la direction qui fait l’objetde notre présente étude. Cependant, cette expé-rience n’en est qu’à son début, ce qui fait qu’onne dispose pas encore de documentation perti-nente utilement exploitable.

• L’intérêt de cette expérience du PAPF est que lorsde sa phase de lancement et d’extension auniveau des régions concernées par le Pro-gramme, il ne s’est d’abord agi que de donnerdes capacités instrumentales dans une perspec-tive « fonctionnelle » et de post-alphabétisation.Aucune composante « moyens de subsistance »n’était prise en considération ; il n’y avait alors


aucune activité de soutien économique pouraméliorer le vécu quotidien des apprenants(composés à plus de 75 % de femmes dont l’âgevarie de 15 à 45 ans). C’est d’ailleurs lors dudéroulement du programme que la nécessitéd’intégrer des activités génératrices de revenuss’est imposée.

• Projet Alpha-Femmes qui intervient dans lesrégions de Fatick et de Kaolack, grâce à l’appuide la coopération allemande.

• Organisation ANAFA (Association Nationalepour l’Alphabétisation et la Formation deAdultes) dans la région de Louga.

• TOSTAN qui intervient dans plusieurs régionsdu Sénégal.

Pour illustrer la stratégie de formation intégrantune composante « moyens de subsistance », nousretenons ici le cas de deux expériences déve-loppées au niveau des régions dites « de l’inté-rieur » par des structures d’éducation non for-melle. Il s’agit de :

1. Projet de Développement des Groupements dePromotion Féminines de la Région de Lougaavec ANAFA (Association Nationale pourl’Alphabétisation et la Formation des Adultesde Louga).

2. Projet Alpha-Femmes dans les Régions deFatick et Kaolack. L’approche retenue par lesdeux Projets (ANAFA-Louga et Alpha-Femmeà Fatick et Kaolack) est bien de lier alphabéti-sation et sa lutte contre la pauvreté, et celaaussi bien quant aux régions concernées (lesplus déshéritées du pays) qu’aux catégories depopulation (les femmes, couche à la foisvulnérable et déterminante dans la lutte contrele sous-développement du Sénégal).

Iles deux projets présentent beaucoup de simili-tudes sous l’angle de la présente étude. D’où l’in-térêt qu’ils représentent dans une certaine mesurecomme modèles d’approche pour la communautédes praticiens de l’éducation des adultes.

Les deux Projets travaillent sur les deux leviersque sont : les éléments de formation et l’ intégrationdes moyens de subsistance ayant comme finalitél’amélioration des conditions de vie des apprenants,dont la grande majorité est composée de femmesorganisées au sein des Groupements de PromotionFéminine au niveau des régions.

Les composantes « moyens de subsistance »trouvent un support d’application dans la mise enoeuvre d’activités économiques concrètes quirenforcent et améliorent considérablement lesconditions de vie des personnes bénéficiant desactivités d’alphabétisation et de formation.

Le Projet de Développement des Groupementsde Promotion Féminine dans la Région de Louga adémarré dans un contexte marqué par la recon-naissance, un peu partout dans le pays, du rôle queles femmes peuvent et doivent jouer dans ledéveloppement économique et social du Sénégal.

Les femmes rurales en particulier ont entamé unprocessus d’organisation et ont créé des l structuresconnues partout sous la dénomination de Groupe-ments de Promotion Féminine.

L’essentiel des travaux domestiques, (produc-tives et de reproduction) reposent sur elles. Elle sontpar conséquent de véritables « protagonistes dudéveloppement ».

Pour qu’elles puissent jouer véritablement etpleinement leur rôle, il est nécessaire de leur fournir,simultanément, les deux instruments que sont : uneformation de qualité (y compris organisationnelle) etdes moyens de production économique.

Les efforts de formation, dans cette doubleapproche apportent en effet une réponse à leurspréoccupations, leurs attentes et leurs demandes.La preuve en est donnée par leur forte adhésion auxprogrammes.

Le Projet de développement des groupements depromotion Féminine dans la Région de Louga, ainsique celui d’Alpha-Femmes dans les régions deFatick et kaolack viennent en appui à la politique depromotion de la femme, engagée par les pouvoirspublics du Sénégal depuis déjà plusieurs années.

La promotion de la femme recouvre, entre autres,les aspects liés à la valorisation des ressources hu-maines, l’éducation, l’organisation et l’améliorationdes conditions de vie et le statut des bénéficiaires.Dans le cadre de leurs Groupements, elles se posent


de plus en plus comme protagonistes actives, dudéveloppement.

La volonté des femmes d’apprendre est forte,mais elles posent le problème simplement en cestermes : A quoi sert-il d’apprendre à lire et écrire sion sait que l’on n’aura ni la possibilité ni les moyensde mettre en pratique notre savoir-faire ?

Il se manifeste effectivement, un besoin de plusen plus pressant de formation au bénéfice desfemmes qui demandent une formation utilitaireprenant sérieusement en compte leurs motivationsmais aussi s’insère dans des activités socio-éco-nomiques d’accompagnement.

De telles activités nécessitent la mobilisation debeaucoup de ressources tant sur le plan humain quematériel.

Sur le plan humain :

Pour ce qui est du Projet ANAFA, une équipe devolontaires est constituée qui prend en charge lesprogrammes de formation.

Elle est composée de :

• des alphabétiseurs (de 20 à 30 selon les années) ;

• des superviseurs (1 superviseur pour 10 alphabé-tiseurs) ;

• d’un coordinateur, responsable du Projet.

Pour ce qui concerne l’expérience de ANAFA, lesalphabétiseurs sont des jeunes ayant déjà atteint aumoins le niveau de l’enseignement secondaire etquis’engagent, pour la durée du Programme de for-mation, à servir comme alphabétiseurs au niveau deslocalités touchées par le Projet. Ils reçoivent une for-mation qui leur permettra d’effectuer convenable-ment le travail.

La structure se compose également de super-viseurs chargés d’appuyer pédagogiquement lesalphabétiseurs sur le terrain, deux fois par mois.

Sur le plan matériel (Projet ANAFA) :

Des supports didactiques sont mis en place : livres,cahiers d’apprentissage et d’exercices, écritoires,tables, tableaux, locaux pour faire les cours.

Outre ces moyens matériels, l’alphabétiseur dis-pose d’un support pédagogique, le Manuel ou« guide du moniteur ».

Le financement des projets économiques estégalement assuré grâce aux partenaires techniques.Les activités des femmes consistent à mettre enplace des banques de céréales villageoises, deséquipements qui allègent les travaux des femmes,des boutiques d’approvisionnement.

Sur le plan logistique (Projet ANAFA) :

Des voitures sont également mises à dispositionpour effectuer les missions de suivi rapproché aussibien du programme de formation que des activitéséconomiques, les supervisions et les contrôles sur leterrain.

Aussi bien dans le cas d’ANAFA que d’ALPHAFEMMES, une structure ayant l’équipement adé-quat se trouve au niveau de la Région d’interven-tion pour assurer un suivi et une exécution correctedes activités.

Partenariat avec les structures d’appui

Beaucoup de partenaires au développement, enaccord avec les autorités de la Direction de l’Alpha-bétisation et de l’Education de Base, apportent unappui institutionnel et financier qui permet auxstructures d’intervention de procéder non seule-ment à la formation des apprenants dans ledomaine de la lecture et de l’écriture, mais aussi à lamise en place d’activités qui puissent améliorerleurs conditions d’existence.

C’est ainsi que des activités génératrices derevenus (unités de transformation des céréaleslocales, unités et espaces de commercialisation,caisses d’épargne et de crédit, embouche ovine) ontpu être mises à la disposition des groupements defemmes. C’est le cas pour le Projet ALPHAFEMMES qui bénéficie du soutien de la coopérationallemande par le canal de la GTZ (Gesellschaft fürTechnische Zusammenarbeit).

De même, ANAFA a pu réaliser ses programmesd’alphabétisation et d’activités de promotion écono-mique grâce au partenariat technique avec uneONG étrangère, la CISV, et au financement del’Union Européenne et d’OXFAM-Grande Bretagne.


Participation en nature des populationsbénéficiaires

Les populations apportent une contribution auxprogrammes par l’hébergement des moniteurs quisont généralement bien intégrés au milieu et par unapport forfaitaire dans le cadre de certaines activitéséconomiques.

De même, elles mettent à la disposition desprogrammes les locaux nécessaires.

Choix des organisations pour l’élaboration d’un projet, mise en place d’une coopérationet d’un soutien institutionnel

Les associations de langues et les organisations dela société civile ont été actives depuis de longuesannées dans le domaine de l’alphabétisation.

Tout récemment, le Gouvernement du Sénégal ainitié la politique du « faire-faire » dans ce domaine,sur la base d’un cahier des charges.

Une expérience de cette démarche a été le démar-rage du Projet d’Alphabétisation Priorité Femmes(PAPF), financé par la Banque Mondiale.

Toutes les organisations juridiquement recon-nues sont habilitées à postuler la conduite d’unepartie de ce Projet. Les coûts de fonctionnementsont assurés sur les fonds publiques qui fournissentainsi un appui institutionnel à des associations quise professionnalisent de plus en plus dans cetteactivité. ANAFA a pu bénéficier de cette opportu-nité pour enrichir son expérience.

Dans les cas qui nous intéresse ici, c’est à la suited’un appel d’offre que les organisations sontretenues pour entreprendre le Projet. Elles sontsélectionnées en fonction principalement de leurcapacité à conduire de tels programmes et de leurbonne insertion dans le milieu. Un cadre departenariat est mis en place pour garantir le respectdes engagements de la part des différentes partiesimpliquées.

Origine de l’initiative

Ce sont les populations appuyées aussi bien parALPHA FEMMES que par ANAFA-Louga quisollicitent, à travers leurs structures organisation-nelles (Groupements Féminins et Fédération des

Groupements) un appui en matière de formation,sous-tendue par une activité à caractère économi-que et un renforcement sur le plan organisationnel.

Au préalable, ANAFA, tout comme ALPHAFEMMES, ont procédé à des enquêtes et études demilieux pour déterminer les contours de lademande et la pertinence des besoins.

Dans le dispositif du Projet, il est prévu desoutenir les efforts d’auto promotion des cibles. Lesactivités de développement sont soutenues etaccompagnées par l’alphabétisation et la formation.

Mais en tout état de cause, les bénéficiaires pourl’essentiel, adhèrent à l’initiative qui est donc prisede manière participative et consensuelle.

Identification et mobilisation des apprenants

Dans un premier temps, des assemblées généralesd’information et de sensibilisation sont tenues auniveau de toutes les localités touchées par le Projetaussi bien dans le cas d’ANAFA-louga qued’Alpha-Femmes. Des tournées de sensibilisationsont régulièrement organisées dans le but d’iden-tifier les personnes volontaires pour participer auxséances de formation.

Leurs coordonnées sont enregistrées dans descarnets de classes ou figurent lenom de la localité,les noms et prénoms des apprenants, leur âge,leur sexe.

La mobilisation des apprenants se fait sur la basedu volontariat, mais les candidats prennent uncertain nombre d’engagements qui garantissentl’assiduité aux séances d’alphabétisation et deformation jusqu’à la fin du programme.

De plus, les apprenants mettent sur pied danschaque centre d’alphabétisation un comité degestion de la classe. Ce comité est chargé de main-tenir la mobilisation et de renforcer la motivation,tout en veillant sur la discipline.

Centres d’intérêt des apprenants, leursattentes et leurs besoins

Le contenu de la formation comporte toujours unaspect « normatif », à savoir, les capacités instru-mentales à acquérir en lecture, écriture et en calcul.Ce contenu peut, pour ainsi dire, être considérécomme « obligatoire » pour tout apprentissage.


Outre cet aspect didactique, les centres d’intérêtdes apprenants sont identifiés de manière partici-pative, à l’occasion des rencontres d’animation et desensibilisation avec les bénéficiaires.

A cette occasion, la curiosité des apprenants semanifeste par exemple très fortement. Ils exprimentleur besoin de connaître des éléments de géo-graphie et des sources de financement qui permet-traient une amélioration croissante de leursconditions de vie. C’est également lors de ces ren-contres que les apprenants fixent les lieux de de for-mation, les jours et les horaires des cours.

Des discussions sont engagées pour conformerles horaires aux normes généralement admises entermes de durée minimale pour un programmed’alphabétisation (au moins 300 heures).

Les besoins des bénéficiaires sont donc déter-minés, aussi bien par ANAFA-Louga que parAlpha-Femmes, de façon participative.

Evolution des attentes des participants

Pour connaître les attentes des apprenants et ce quipeut être un plus pour eux, les Projets (ANAFA-Louga et Alpha-Femmes) effectuent des études demilieu et des enquêtes de terrain. De plus, pendanttoute la durée de la phase initiale, le moniteur et lesuperviseur notent l’évolution de la demandesupplémentaire en formation.

Les Projets organisent en outre régulièrementdes assemblées générales pour tester la conformitéde la démarche avec les attentes des populationsconcernées par les programmes. En cas de besoin,des inflexions peuvent être apportées en coursd’exécution.

Amendement et adaptation au fur et àmesure de la mise en œuvre du Projet

Dans la mesure du possible, le programme deformation en lecture et écriture prend en compte lafinalité qui est de donner aux apprenants descapacités pratiques étroitement liées à leursconditions de vie. Mais au fur et à mesure de sondéroulement, le programme évolue et intègre deséléments que les apprenants considèrent commeessentiels dans le cadre de leur vécu quotidien ouà venir.

Les activités de post-alphabétisation visentjustement à renforcer certains aspects des capacitésqui ont été acquises lors de la phase d’alphabéti-sation proprement dite.

Identification, formation et soutien des formateurs

Recrutés parmi les jeunes (garçons et filles)diplômés au chômage, sur la base de leurs compé-tences (pédagogie, communication sociale, tech-nicité), et de leur engagement personnel, lesalphabétiseurs de ANAFA vivent au village duranttoute la durée du programme. Cette proximité leurpermet à la fois de connaître et d’adapter leurpratique aux réalités villageoises et d’entretenir desrelations soutenues avec l’ensemble des com-posantes de la communauté. Cette position leurconfère un rôle de facilitateur et de régulateur deschangements sociaux visés.

Pour certains, c’est aussi un apprentissage de lavie, puisqu’ils découvrent, parfois pour la premièrefois, la réalité du milieu rural. Cette expérience per-met à ANAFA-Louga de contribuer à la lutte contreles préjugés entretenus entre ville et campagne.

Des séminaires de formation des formateurs sontorganisés pour donner aux moniteurs la capacitéde conduire les enseignements et d’être en mesured’évoluer dans un milieu composé d’adultes, grâcedonc à la maîtrise des éléments de pédagogiedes adultes.

Durant toute la durée des sessions d’alphabéti-sation, le moniteur reçoit l’appui pédagogique dusuperviseur qui, lui-même, travaille sous ladirection d’un coordinateur du Projet.

Des sessions de recyclage sont régulièrementorganisées à l’intention des moniteurs pour ren-forcer et compléter leurs capacités.

Ceci est fondamental pour la bonne réussite d’unprogramme d’alphabétisation. En effet, il estindispensable d’accorder un grand soin à la for-mation des formateurs chargés en dernière instancede dispenser les cours aux apprenants.

C’est sans doute un des plus grands facteursd’efficacité pour la réussite d’un programmed’alphabétisation.

Alpha-Femmes choisit de travailler avec des« opérateurs » évoluant dans ses régions d’interven-


tion (Fatick et Kaolack). Le Projet assiste égalementles opérateurs dans l’estimation des coûts et dans laplanification financière, ce qui constitue en soi unappui institutionnel appréciable. L’objectif visé iciest renforcer les capacités des intervenants dans lesecteur de l’Education Non Formelle au Sénégal.Donc, Alpha-Femmes met en pratique, au niveaulocal, la politique du « faire-faire » telle que déjàinitiée par le Gouvernement du Sénégal au niveaucentral.

Articulation entre enseignement général et formation visant d’amélioration desmoyens de subsistance

Le contenu des séances de formation est conçu defaçon à permettre aux apprenants de se familiariseravec les moyens de promotion socio-économiquenécessaires à une amélioration de leur situation. Laméthode d’enseignement est toujours associée àune animation portant sur les préoccupation dugroupe d’apprenants.

C’est ainsi qu’une formation spécifique est tou-jours associée au programme général d’initiationstricto sensu à la lecture, à l’écriture et au calcul. Auniveau du Projet de Développement des Groupe-ments Féminins de Louga, les activités génératricesde revenus sont mises en place après la premièresession d’alphabétisation. Tandis que Alpha-Femmes met dès le démarrage des cours un petitfonds 5.000 cfa pour chaque centre d’alphabéti-sation ouvert.

Méthodes et matériels d’instruction

Les matériels d’instruction relatifs aux contenusd’enseignement général sont produits par desstructures spécialisées en la matière ; on note, il estvrai, une certaine insuffisance dans le domaine de laproduction et de l’édition en langues nationales.

Une partie des coûts de ces matériels est prise encharge par les apprenants. Cela illustre le niveaud’engagement et de motivation des bénéficiaires deces programmes de formation.

Quant aux moyens de soutien économique pourles activités génératrices de revenus, ils sont assuréspar le Projet, avec également une participationforfaitaire des bénéficiaires.

Système interne et externe de contrôle,évaluation formative, validation desconnaissances, évaluation finale, feedback, adaptation

Le Projet ANAFA-Louga met en place un systèmede supervision : deux fois par mois les taux deprésence, les absences et abandons sont enregistrés,les superviseurs suivent également le niveau desmotivations (sur le plan domestique, sanitaire,social, et autres), ainsi que le niveau de progressionatteint par les apprenants. Ce système permet ausside déceler les insuffisances et autres difficultés quise présentent et de proposer des solutions auxapprenants et à l’alphabétiseur.

La supervision est également un moment derenforcer la mobilisation, le dialogue avec lespopulations. Elle permet de déceler les éventuellesdifficultés de quelque nature qu’elles soient et d’yapporter la solution la plus appropriée possible.

Elle est une occasion pour mesurer les progrèsréalisés dans la gestion des activités de promotionmises en place par le Projet (Ligne de crédits, petitsprojets économiques, fonctionnement de la struc-ture organisationnelle, etc.).

Des carnets individuels d’évaluation permanentepermettent au moniteur de suivre les performancesde chaque apprenant et le niveau de progression dela classe en général.

Cela lui permet d’accorder une plus grandeattention aux personnes qui rencontrent le plus dedifficulté.

Des tests à mi-parcours et à la fin de la sessionsont organisés pour voir les résultats obtenus parles apprenants.

Tout le long du processus d’appui aux initiativeséconomiques, un suivi est effectué sur le terrainpour accompagner les efforts fournis par lesbénéficiaires, surtout en matière d’autonomie.

Résultats en termes de fréquentation,d’achèvement et taux de «succès»

Les taux de fréquentation sont assez élevés etavoisinent souvent plus de 70 % des effectifs duProjet de Développement des GPF de Louga. Lesabandons constatés sont très faibles dans l’en-semble. Les abandons sont généralement dus à la


santé (il n’est pas rare, par exemple, que les femmessoient en état de grossesse en cours de programme).

Le nombre total de personnes impliquées dans leprogramme de Alpha-Femmes de 1997 à 2000 s’estélevé à 5 685 adultes.

Pour ce qui du Projet de Développement desGroupements de Promotion Féminines dans laRégion de Louga, le nombre s’élève à 5 530 femmesavec un taux de réussite de 76,6 % et un tauxd’abandon de 12 %.

Résultats en termes d’utilisation del’apprentissage

Il est évident que les acquis des apprentissages nepeuvent être maintenus que s’ils sont régulièrementutilisés par les apprenantes. C’est le cas lorsque desouvrages sont disponibles en langues nationales.C’est le cas également lorsque la gestion quoti-dienne d’une activité économique fait l’objet dedocuments écrits.

La première mesure prise par Alpha-Femmes estde mettre de petites bibliothèques d’une vingtained’ouvrages à la disposition des apprenantes afinqu’elles se perfectionnent en lecture ou, toutsimplement, se familiarisent avec le médium écrit.Le choix des livres est assez varié pour répondreaux intérêts individuels de tous (poèmes, contes,documents techniques sur la santé, l’élevage, l’agri-culture, bandes dessinées, etc.).

La gestion de leurs activités se trouvent égale-ment sensiblement améliorée sur le plan qualitatif.

Au terme de l’apprentissage, dont la durée est dedouze mois pour le Projet de Développement desGroupements de Promotion Féminine avecANAFA-Louga, les femmes commencent à tenir uncahier de caisse, remplir des reçus et des décharges,ouvrir un compte en banque.

L’usage et la manipulation, par exemple, de lamontre pour lire l’heure et du téléphone constituedes utilisations pratiques que les apprenantesaccueillent favorablement.

La maîtrise du calendrier, aussi banale que celapuisse être pour quelqu’un qui a fréquenté l’école,n’en constitue pas moins pour la « néo-alphabète »un acquis très important.

Au niveau du savoir-être, la mise en place de laclasse et de l’activité économique amène les

femmes à négocier, à prendre des décisionscommunes, à faire face ensemble aux difficultés quise présentent. Ces acquis présentent un premierpas vers l’autonomie et la prise de conscienceréaliste des forces et faiblesses de la classe en tantque groupe.

Une forme de démocratie élémentaire se metainsi en place, fondée sur le choix électif et libre desdirigeantes et responsables des activités duGroupement.

Résultats en termes d’effets sur lesapprenants et les groupes en matière de revenus, de qualité de vie, et sur le plan psycho-social

Les apprenants savent mieux gérer leurs revenuset conduire leurs activités économiques avec beau-coup plus d’autonomie et de contance, ce quiaccroît le niveau de confiance des femmes en elles-mêmes.

En outre, l’organisation interne des groupementsest nettement améliorée, grâce à une plus grandedémocratie dans les modes de fonctionnement dugroupement.

L’introduction d’une gestion écrite des activitéséconomiques collectives, dans des documentsaccessibles à toute personne sachant lire, est unedonnée fondamentale pour promouvoir les prin-cipes de la transparence et introduire les notions derentabilité économique.

Les mesures d’hygiène et de prévention dans ledomaine de la santé sont de plus en plus intégréesdans les habitudes courantes.

Le statut social et économique de la femme setrouve fortement revalorisé. Une perception nou-velle de la femme se répand. Le groupement desfemmes atteint de ce fait un niveau de fonction-nalité beaucoup plus grand.

Dans la plupart des villages où intervient leProjet ANAFA-Louga, l’habitude se crée de prendreexemple sur le groupement des femmes.

Il ne faut pas perdre de vue que le niveau desocialisation est très élevé chez les femmes ruralesoù la personne est fortement imprégnée des valeursdu groupe.

Ces résultats sont également constatés au niveaudes villages appuyés par Alpha-Femmes.


Les avantages d’une « alphabétisationintégrée »

L’expérience de ANAFA dans la Région de Louga faitapparaître concrètement une synergie des activitésd’éducation et de formation avec celles de dévelop-pement socio-économique (santé, environnement,citoyenneté, activités génératrices de revenus,renforcement organisationnel et institutionnel).

La plupart des apprenants posent toujours laquestion de savoir à quoi servira finalement laformation, sans une application concrète dans lesdifférents actes de la vie. Généralement, l’adulten’aime pas « perdre son temps ».

Autrement dit, la lutte contre l’analphabétismedes femmes c’est aussi la lutte pour la transforma-tion des rapports sociaux fondés sur l’inégalité dessexes, de leurs bases infra-structurelles et de leursprolongements institutionnels et idéologiques.

L’alphabétisation et la formation peuvent ycontribuer, mais elles sont loin de suffire à ellesseules. Il est donc important de procéder à uneréflexion riche et approfondie sur les connexions àfaire entre l’alphabétisation d’une part, et Emploi,Production, Santé, Population, Environnement,Démocratie et Culture d’autre part.

De là ont émergé des approches, des pro-grammes et des projets d’alphabétisation intégréequi constituent des réponses stratégiques et opéra-tionnelles à l’analyse multifactorielle de la situationet des besoins des apprenants, surtout des femmes.

L’incorporation d’éléments touchant les moyensde subsistance a donc indéniablement pour effetd’augmenter la motivation des apprenants etd’assurer une plus grande assiduité aux coursd’alphabétisation.

Elle donne un contenu plus « utilitaire » àl’activité de formation des adultes et réduit le tauxd’absence et d’abandon des auditrices.

Une telle stratégie de formation « lettrée » avecune composante « moyens de subsistance » seretrouve, à certains égards, développée dans lapratique par un certain nombre d’autres Projets etd’Organisations Non Gouvernementales parmilesquelles-ci on peut citer la SEFEFOD qui a faitd’importants efforts pour donner un contenu concretau processus de décentralisation et de « dévelop-pement des capacités » des élus locaux au Sénégal.

Cette activité s’est accompagnée d’une grandeproduction de supports et a ouvert la voie à l’élabo-ration d’un programme de formation similaire inti-tulé le PADEN (Projet d’Alphabétisation Des Elus etNotables locaux) lequel met l’accent beaucoup plussur le renforcement des capacités des élus, dans lecadre de la décentralisation administrative et locale.Indirectement, il donne aux élus locaux l des possi-bilités accrues de prendre plus tard en charge lesproblèmes de développement de leurs localités.

En revanche, les sociétés de développement ontcommencé par prendre en charge les préoccupa-tions de subsistances des populations en y intégrantune formation « lettrée ».

Formation aux moyens de subsistancesintégrant lecture et écriture

Sur une longue période, les Pouvoirs Publics ontpris d’importantes initiatives institutionnellesdestinées à traduire concrètement sur le terrain lavolonté politique d’alphabétisation au Sénégal.

C’est ainsi que des structures d’Etat ont pu êtremises en place :

• La Direction de l’Alphabétisation et del’Education de Base

• Le Ministère Délégué Chargé de la Promotiondes Langues Nationales

• Ministère de l’Enseignement Technique, de laFormation Professionnelle, de l’Alphabétisationet de langues nationales.

Parallèlement à ces mesures d’envergure enmatière d’alphabétisation, des pratiques de for-mation et de qualification professionnelle ont étédéveloppées par les pouvoirs publics princi-palement en direction des secteurs productifsmodernes.

Parmi les premières sociétés parapubliques d’en-cadrement des agriculteurs à avoir introduitl’alphabétisation dans les programmes de dévelop-pement, on peut citer :

• la SODEVA (Société de Développement et deVulgarisation Agricole) qui intervenait dans la


zone de production arachidière. Elle a incorporédes éléments de formation destinés à rendre lesproducteurs beaucoup plus performants. Lasuppression des activités de cette structure a misfin à l’expérience.

• La SODESP (Société de Développement de lazone Sylvo Pastorale) qui a également aujour-d’hui disparu. Elle était active dans l’appui etl’encadrement des éléveurs.

• Toujours dans cette catégorie de structures, onpeut parler de la SAED (Société d’Aménagementet d’Etude du Delta) qui intervient dans la partieNord du Sénégal, pour soutenir les producteursdu riz dans la Vallée du Fleuve Sénégal.

• Le PAPEL (Projet d’Appui à l’Elevage)

• La SODEFITEX (Société de Développement desFibres Textiles), société d’Etat créée en 1974. Ellea pour mission le développement de la filière ducoton et du maïs dans la partie orientale duSénégal.

Nous avons choisi de nous intéresser à cettedernière structure à titre d’exemple de « formationvisant les moyens de subsistances avec intégrationd’éléments de formation générale de base ».

Pendant près d’une trentaine d’années, laSODEFITEX s’est consacrée au développement dusecteur agricole en encadrant des producteurs de lazone cotonnière dans la Région du Sénégal Orientalet en réalisant des investissements matériels etfinanciers considérables.

La SODEFITEX dépendait à ses débuts duMinistère du Développement Rural et de l’Hydrau-lique. Elle est actuellement sous tutelle du Ministèrede l’agriculture. Dès sa création par l’Etat du Sénégal,en 1974, comme société mixte, la SODEFITEX s’estassignée, entre autres objectifs, d’améliorer lesrevenus des producteurs de coton de la Région et destimuler la croissance économique de la zoned’intervention, en misant notamment sur :

• le renforcement du dispositif de vulgarisation etd’appui aux organisations de producteurs (plusde 80.000 personnes) ;

• la modernisation des pratiques agricoles ;

• l’organisation et la responsabilisation desproducteurs ;

• la mise en place de programmes d’alphabétisa-tion et de formation.

Après une dizaine d’années de présence sur leterrain, la SODEFITEX a finalement pris la résolu-tion de lancer un programme d’alphabétisation enfaveur des producteurs.

En effet, elle en était arrivée à la conviction qu’undes freins les plus importants à la responsabilisationdes producteurs et à la modernisation de l’agricul-ture était assurément l’analphabétisme.

C’est pourquoi la Société a décidé de démarrer,au cours de la campagne 1983/84, un vasteprogramme d’alphabétisation et de formation desproducteurs.

Contexte

Cette période de démarrage du programmed’alphabétisation et de formation de la SODEFITEXcorrespond à la mise en place de ce qu’il estconvenu d’appeler, la « Nouvelle Politique Agri-cole » au Sénégal, qui traversait une situation deprofondes et difficiles réformes économiques alorsen cours dans tout le pays.

Un des axes essentiels de cette NouvellePolitique Agricole était précisément « la responsabi-lisation des producteurs » du monde rural.

Le monde rural représente plus de 70 % de lapopulation en âge de travailler. Mais malgré sonimportance en termes de création d’emplois, le tauxd’analphabétisme y est très grand. Certains avancentdes chiffres qui dépassent 80 %.

Cette situation ne manque pas de se répercuterau niveau de la productivité du travail est donc surles performances globales du secteur agricole.

Partant de ce constat, la plupart des structuresd’appui et d’encadrement du monde rural ont initiédes politiques d’accompagnement de leurs activitésde production par des activités ’d’alphabétisation etde formation.

La SODEFITEX s’était fixée comme objectif àmoyen terme l’alphabétisation et la formation de 5


agro-pasteurs pour chacune des 1740 Associationsde Base des Producteurs (APB) dans sa zone(objectif atteint à hauteur de 78 %).

A long terme, la SODEFITEX œuvre pour quechacune des 27.179 exploitations agricoles qu’elleencadre dispose d’au moins une personne« lettrée » en mesure de se comporter en agriculteurmoderne susceptible de capitaliser les progrèstechniques et d’assurer une comptabilité et unegestion rigoureuses.

Les objectifs quantitatifs cités ci-dessus montrentclairement tout ce qu’il reste encore à faire dans ledomaine de la lutte contre l’illettrisme. Celan’enlève rien au mérite de la SODEFITEX, et à lapertinence de la direction choisie : donner des élé-ments de formation aux producteurs.

Mais il faut reconnaître que le nombres depersonnes touchées par l’alphabétisationcomparativement à la masse des producteursorganisés est naturellement encore très faible pourle moment.

Ressources actuellement affectées : sur lesplan humain et matériel

Sur le plan humain, un personnel est mis en placechaque année. A titre d’exemple, pour le pro-gramme de l’année 1998/99, avec un effectif de2.898 auditeurs à alphabétiser dans l’une des troislangues nationales parmi les plus parlées dans lazone (le Wolof, le Mandinka, le Pulaar), laSODEFITEX a engagé 117 moniteurs.

Ces moniteurs sont placés sous la responsabilitésde 26 superviseurs. En outre, il y a 6 responsablesde programmes qui sont mobilisés pour les besoinsde la campagne d’alphabétisation 98/99.

La moyenne calculée sur une période de 5 annéesdonne les chiffres suivants : 147 classes ouvertes parannée (donc, autant de moniteurs) pour 3528auditeurs.

Au tout début, la période d’alphabétisation sedéroulait sur 8 mois répartis sur un cycle de 2années. Mais depuis 1990, une méthode dite« intensive » a été testée, puis généralisée à partir de1992. Elle se déroule sur 4 mois, de Janvier à Avril,à raison de 24 heures par semaine, soit 400 heuresd’enseignement pour le cycle qui, lui, a été ramenéentre temps à une année.

Les membres du personnel (agents-vulgarisa-teurs et assistants superviseurs) disposent chacund’un vélomoteur pour assurer le suivi du pro-gramme, l’animation des associations de villages, laformation générale et la formation permanente etcontinue des techniciens paysans.

Nature des organisations qui entreprennentpareille formation

La SODEFITEX est, comme déjà indiqué, unesociété mixte de développement. Mais le pro-gramme de formation est assuré actuellement grâceaux structures-relais des producteurs qui ont établiavec la société un contrat de partenariat qui garantitla poursuite des activités déjà engagées.

Coopération et soutien institutionnel

Les organisations effectuent les programmes grâceaux « néo-alphabètisés » issus des villages auxquelsla Société garantit un soutien institutionnel dans lecadre d’un partenariat.

Origine de l’initiative

L’initiative de mettre en place un programmed’alphabétisation est venue de la SODEFITEX,mais les producteurs ont très vite adhéré à ceprojet.

Au début, les cours étaient assurés par le per-sonnel technique de la Société, avant que lesvillageois eux-mêmes ne prennent le relais commemoniteurs.

Identifier et mobiliser les apprenants

Les auditeurs sont choisis parmi les volontairesdu village qui abrite le centre d’alphabétisation.Ils peuvent aussi provenir des villages envi-ronnants.

Ces volontaires dont l’âge est compris entre 20 et40 ans, s’engagent devant l’assemblée villageoise àsuivre avec assiduité les cours d’alphabétisation.Leur intérêt pour les apprentissages est très grand,conscients qu’ils sont du fait que l’autonomie et leprogrès dans leurs méthodes culturales passentnécessairement par l’alphabétisation.


Centres d’intérêt des apprenants, leursattentes et leurs besoins

Les centres d’intérêt des apprenants sont identifiésgrâce aux multiples rencontres et assemblées queles encadreurs de la Société effectuent régulière-ment auprès de producteurs. Ils tournent essen-tiellement autour du besoin de plus grande maîtrisedes techniques et méthodes modernes de pro-duction, ce qui détermine dans une large mesure, leniveau de leurs revenus.

Amendement et adaptation au fur et àmesure de la mise en œuvre du Projet

Au fur et à mesure que l de nouvelles données etinnovations apparaissent, elles sont intégrées dansle programme de formation tout en répondant aumieux aux préoccupations des apprenants.

Identification, formation et soutien des formateurs

Comme nous l’avons signalé plus haut, lesformateurs étaient tout d’abord issus du personneltechnique de la Société. Mais avec l’accroissementdu nombre de personnes alphabétisées, le recrute-ment s’effectue parmi elles à l’aide de tests desélection. Un séminaire de renforcement estorganisé pour les préparer à leur travail deformateurs.

Articulation entre enseignement général etformation visant l’accroissement des moyensde subsistance

Le relais technique villageois alterne la formationd’enseignement général et l’acquisition demeilleures capacités de production agricole. En faitla formation « lettrée » va de pair avec la formationtechnique qu’elle contribue à « éclairer ».

Méthodes et matériels d’instruction

Le matériel pédagogique est composé de livrets, decahiers, d’ardoises et d’écritoire dont la valeurspeut arriver approximativement à la somme de5000 Cfa par apprenant.

Pour ce qui concerne les moyens d’accroissementde la production (donc des revenus), la SODEFITEXmet à la disposition des apprenants des intrantsagricoles (semences, matériel) et un système definancement et de commercialisation, le tout, sur labase de contrats de partenariat signés avec lesorganisations paysannes dénommées Groupementsde Producteurs de Coton (GPC).

Système interne et externe de contrôle,évaluation formative, validation desconnaissances, évaluation finale, feedback, adaptation

Les superviseurs et autres responsables del’alphabétisation effectuent des tests, aussi bien encours de programme qu’à la fin du cycle, pourconnaître les niveaux des connaissances acquisespar les auditeurs.

Les résultats finaux sont également établis à lafin de chaque campagne.

Résultats en termes de fréquentation,d’achèvement et taux de « succès »

En considérant toute la période couverte par lesdifférentes campagnes d’Alphabétisation de laSODEFITEX, c’est à dire de 1984 à 1999, les résultatscumulés sont les suivants :

• Nombre total de centres d’alphabétisationouverts : 1 378

• Nombre total de villages inscrits : 5 013

• Nombre total d’auditeurs inscrits : 35 865 dont 5908 femmes

• Nombre total d’auditeurs testés : 24 814 dont 3393 femmes

• Nombre total de « succès » : 19 634 dont 3 275femmes.

NB : Il faut signaler que les femmes sontparvenues à réaliser un taux de « succès » plusélevé que les hommes. Peut-être sont-elles plusmotivées ?


Pour ce qui est des fréquentations et desabandons, la seule indication dont nous disposionsporte sur la campagne 1998/99 qui montre unemoyenne de 20 % d’abandons.

Résultats en termes d’utilisation del’apprentissage

Globalement, le programme de la SODEFITEX setraduit par la mise en œuvre d’un message tech-nique basé sur l’intégration agriculture-élévage.

En outre, on assiste au remplacement du per-sonnel technique de la Société par des villageoisdevenus moniteurs d’alphabétisation, ce qui indi-que un réinvestissement des connaissances acquisesen formation.

Dans le domaine des activités productives, desagriculteurs assument avec compétence le relais desservices de vulgarisation au profit de leur commu-nauté de base.

Un des résultats de l’assistance aux APB estl’émergence d’organisations d’agriculteurs capablesd’assurer la commercialisation primaire du coton,de gérer le crédit agricole et diverses activités d’inté-rêt public : sécurité alimentaire, boutiques villa-geoises, pharmacies vétérinaires, magasins d’in-trants, entre autres.

Dans notre contexte de développement, ces relaistechniques villageois sont devenus un maillon essen-tiel pour un accroissement rapide de l’ensemble de laproduction, et par conséquent, des revenus.

Résultats en termes d’effets sur lesapprenants et les groupes en termes de revenus, de qualité de vie et sur le plan psychosocial

Les responsables de la SODEFITEX ont pu constaterun accroissement de 6 % du rendement agricole parrapport à celui du producteur analphabète., et doncde la productivité du travail chez les agriculteursayant bénéficié d’une alphabétisation.

Cela se traduit par une demande en alphabéti-sation de plus en forte de la part des producteurs.Les avantages liés à l’autonomisation dans sontégalement un élément très apprécié par lesalphabétisés qui savent que le facteur déter-minant dans la responsabilisation qu’ils ont

obtenue de la SODEFITEX a été justement l’al-phabétisation.

Désormais, ils sont bénéficiaires de transferts decompétences croissants dans le cadre de leursorganisations de base que sont les Groupements deProducteurs de Coton.

En résumé :

L’expérience de la SODEFITEX montre que laformation peut parfaitement servir les activités deproduction de moyens de subsistance qu’ellecontribue à améliorer dans une large mesure. Lespaysans sont aujourd’hui conscients du fait quel’autonomie villageoise et partant, le progrès,passent nécessairement par une alphabétisation dequalité.

Conclusions et recommandations concernantprincipalement l’ Afrique subsaharienne

Il semble se dessiner partout dans le monde, uneforte volonté d’admettre la nécessité d’articuler lalutte contre la pauvreté et la lutte pour une politi-que de formation des hommes. Il s’agit donc d’unepart, d’un engagement politique, s’assurant la par-ticipation des populations concernées et, d’autrepart, d’une mobilisation des ressources humaines etmatérielles nécessaires à une telle entreprise.

La position déterminante des femmes dans leprocessus de développement semble également unedonnée acquise. Les statistiques indiquent qu’auSénégal, les femmes assurent 60 % du travail agri-cole et 40 % de la main-d’œuvre dans le secteurinformel. Mais l’accès aux progrès techniques pourrenforcer leurs aptitudes à tirer profit de leurs res-sources est hypothéqué par l’analphabétisme fémi-nin qui avoisine 80 %.

La réponse à cette situation de fait est à cherchernon seulement dans la structure de la population,mais dans l’ensemble des finalités économiques,sociales et culturelles que recèle toute opérationd’alphabétisation.

Il est vrai que des efforts notoires ont été faits dansle domaine de l’alphabétisation par différentsintervenants (Etats, ONG, Projets de développement,Partenaires institutionnels extérieurs). Néanmoins,beaucoup de problèmes demeurent encore.


Une échelle de priorité

Il est possible de s’inspirer des outils utilisés dans lesecteur formel pour les adapter dans le domaine del’éducation non formelle, tout en tenant comptebien sûr, des spécificités de chacun des deux.

Faire en sorte que l’alphabétisation ne soit plusune action d’appoint, mais plutôt une action priori-taire préalable à tout projet de développement.L’alphabétisation permet d’accroître la productivitédes producteurs à la base, des ouvriers, et des opé-rateurs du secteur informel. Elle permettra auxalphabétisés de maîtriser leur environnementimmédiat et de s’épanouir pleinement dans le cadrede leur milieu naturel.

Les deux stratégies doivent, comme nous l’avonsdit plus haut, pouvoir aller de pair et tout sembleindiquer qu’une formation qui s’en tient à la lecture,à l’écriture et au calcul, même si elle présente unintérêt pour un adulte, reste toutefois insuffisante.

De même une formation visant uniquement lesmoyens de subsistance sans un « éclairage » obtenugrâce aux symboles du code écrit est loin de levertous les handicaps.

La question des langues

Dans les entreprises, les ouvriers manifestent lebesoin de s’alphabétiser en Français, mais hélas tropsouvent les budgets ne prévoient que des pro-grammes de perfectionnement des cadres, en vued’accroître leurs performances.

Par ailleurs la non utilisation des languesnationales dans l’administration et les servicespublics n’est pas de nature à encourager les travai-lleurs à s’alphabétiser dans les langues nationales.Cependant, un espoir apparaît avec la récentedécision des autorités du Sénégal de faire alpha-bétiser tous les fonctionnaires de l’Etat dans l’uneau moins des langues nationales. Cette mesureconstitue un signal fort en direction de lavalorisation et de la promotion de ces langues.

Il faut également s’orienter vers des mesures etinitiatives qui puissent donner des raisons supplé-mentaires aux apprenants de comprendre et d’ac-cepter que s’alphabétiser dans les languesnationales n’est pas une « perte de temps », maisplutôt une voie d’accès à la maîtrise de certains

outils nécessaires à leur information, leur formationet leur promotion sociale.

Le personnel d’appui sur le terrain

Le problème qui se pose ici est celui d’une bonnemaîtrise de la gestion administrative et budgétairequi nécessite la formation des intervenants et lerenforcement des capacités dans un secteur quirequiert de plus en plus de professionnalisme.

Il est nécessaire de faire appel à des formateursayant déjà une bonne formation technique, pour lesengager comme alphabétisateurs.

Le choix de moniteurs ayant déjà une technicitéserait un gage de succès.

L’efficacité d’un programme de « formation audéveloppement » dépend dans une grande mesuredes capacités et de la technicité des alphabétiseurseux-mêmes. C’est pourquoi, ils doivent être sélec-tionnés avec un grand soin. L’esprit de volontariatet l’engagement de respecter les principes quiguident l’action de formation sont une pré qualifi-cation nécessaire chez les instructeurs. De même, ilest bon qu’ils aient un certain background qui leurpermettre de bien assimiler notre problématique, àsavoir : la nécessité d’une connexion étroite entre lasphère de l’éducation et de la formation d’une part,et la sphère des conditions de vie et moyens desubsistance, d’autre part.

Une formation permanente est égalementrequise pour que l’alphabétisateur soit en mesurede donner « une valeur ajoutée » aux apprenants,pas seulement des notions de lecture, écriture etcalcul, mais un plus dans les domaines depréoccupation des bénéficiaires des programmes.

Il doit être capable de s’ouvrir aux nouvellesinnovations et approches qui pourraient intervenirdans le secteur de la formation et de l’éducation desadultes, qui est en constante mutation.

Une valorisation des acteurs de l’alphabétisationest nécessaire afin de formaliser de plus en pluscette activité, voire la « normaliser ».

Approches et articulations qui semblentpromettre une plus grande efficacité

Il est donc important de procéder à une réflexionriche et approfondie sur les connexions à faire entre


Alphabétisation d’une part, Emploi, Production,Santé, Population, Environnement, Démocratie etCulture d’autre part.

De là ont émergé des approches, des pro-grammes et des projets d’alphabétisation intégréequi peuvent apporter des réponses stratégiques etopérationnelles à l’analyse de la situation et la satis-faction des besoins des apprenants.

Réfléchir sur les connexions entre l’alphabétisa-tion, la production des moyens de subsistance, dansune dynamique mettant la femme au premier planse révèle alors d’une importance capitale.

Il est nécessaire d’arriver à une harmonisation desactions d’alphabétisation à travers un cadre de réfé-rence qui définira une Grille Nationale d’Evaluation.

Cette harmonisation des méthodes devra cepen-dant permettre aux acteurs sur le terrain de l’alpha-bétisation de garder leurs spécificités.

Il est nécessaire d’identifier le contenu, les ap-proches matérielles et pédagogiques et les supportsles plus efficaces.

L’articulation entre la formation générale et laformation visant l’amélioration des moyens d’exis-tence est la voie la plus indiquée pour apporter unplus aux apprenants. Ce programme doit s’accom-pagner d’une politique de conception d’ouvragesqui traitent de façon spécifique tous les aspects liésau développement des ressources productives.

Ressources nécessaires sur les plansquantitatif et qualitatif pour une efficacité satisfaisante

Pour atteindre une efficacité satisfaisante, il néces-saire qu’un consensus résulte d’une concertationentre les différents acteurs du développement.

La combinaison entre les activités productives etles activités de formation doit trouver un terraind’application dans la conception de tous les projetsde développement.

Il doit être possible d’établir un pourcentage deformation à intégrer dans tout projet qui vise ledéveloppement.

En s’inspirant de l’indice de développementhumain (qui semble bénéficier d’un consensusminimum) il est parfaitement possible de mesurerle «coût du développement humain » pour une per-

sonne adulte considérée. Il peut constituer une basede référence.

Les coûts

L’extrême variabilité des coûts de formation, descrédits horaires d’une structure à une autre nefacilite pas la mise en œuvre de programmes deformation élaborés et homogènes. Nous partageonsbien cette conviction selon laquelle l’ éducation n’apas de prix, même si elle comporte un coût.

Systèmes de monitoring, estimation,évaluation et feedback

Des normes reconnues partout en la matière sontindispensables. Elles auront l’avantage de permet-tre une mesure fiable de tout programme de forma-tion, grâce notamment à l’adoption d’indicateursobjectivement vérifiables et validés. Il est nécessaired’arriver à un cadre de référence qui définira uneGrille Nationale d’Evaluation.

Partenariat solidaire

De par la nature même du contexte actuel de lacoopération dans les domaines aussi bien dudéveloppement que de la formation qui sont, denotre point de vue, deux sphères indissociables, ilest indispensable de travailler en partenariat soli-daire, cela signifie que tous les acteurs soient sou-mis aux règles et principes unanimement reconnusen matière de Planification, Suivi, Evaluation etRéalisation.

La nécessité de la coopération impose de fait unecertaine ouverture d’esprit, le partage desrésultats, des processus pour les atteindre, de leurimpact et du contexte d’évolution.

Références

SODEFITEX. Rapport annuel d’alphabétisation – campagne1998/99.

SODEFITEX. 1996. Bilan du PDRSO – Période intérimaireprolongée, Juillet 1994/Juillet 1996.


104

Annex 5

Cases from Uganda

Anne Ruhweza Katahoire

Preliminary note

he study’s basic task was to examine twobroad approaches to combining livelihoodtraining with literacy instruction. One

approach incorporates training for livelihood skillsinto mainly literacy instruction or “literacy first.”The other incorporates literacy instruction intotraining for mainly livelihood skills or “literacysecond.” The study used available documentaryaccounts to come up with the case studies presentedin this report. While there are many literacy pro-grams and projects currently being implemented inthe country, only a few cases are presented here. Itwas evident during the course of the study thatthere is very little systematic documentation of lit-eracy programs in Uganda, especially documenta-tion that could help those not directly involved inthe programs to learn about them and to draw les-sons from their experiences. Many of the reportsavailable were very scanty indeed, with hardly anyanalytical descriptions of the programs. Systematicdocumentations of the impact of the literacy pro-grams were also almost non-existent.

Particularly difficult to find were reports on liter-acy programs run by local NGOs and CommunityBased Organizations (CBOs). An evaluation studyof literacy programs in Uganda in 1999 observedthat the explosion of NGOs and CBOs on theUganda scene in recent years has seen quite anumber of them involved in literacy and adult edu-cation. Attempts to get documentation on these pro-

grams however were fruitless. Those that wereavailable had very scanty information indeed.There is a very urgent need in Uganda for both gov-ernment and NGOs engaged in literacy to system-atically document their experiences in a detailedmanner that will enable others to understand theprocess they have been through and to learn fromtheir experiences. There is also the urgent need toconduct detailed impact studies of these programs.This kind of documentation of literacy programs inUganda seems to be currently non-existent. Reasonsfor this are not very clear. While as previously notedthere are many adult literacy programs in Uganda,those presented in this report are those programsthat have tried to combine literacy with livelihoodtraining. Secondly because this study was a docu-mentary review, the cases described are those thathave documented their experiences over the yearsor that have been documented through processreview and evaluation. These programs include theGovernment Functional Adult Literacy Program,Action Aid’s Literacy Programs and ADRA‘s Func-tional Learning Program.

Introduction

Uganda’s estimated population is 22.2 millionpeople, of which 50.8 percent are women. The liter-acy rate for Uganda is currently estimated to be65percent, but this is a very crude estimate, giventhat the last national census was in 1991. Adult lit-eracy rates are higher in the urban (87 percent) than

T

in the rural (59 percent) areas, and the literacy rateamong women (51 percent) is lower than thatamong men (77 percent) (National HouseholdCensus 2000: 16–17).

In Uganda 75 percent of the total population areemployed in the agricultural sector working as sub-sistence farmers who get very little return throughcash crop production. This has heightened rural-urban migration, which has led to unemploymentand underemployment. The government has put inplace programs like the modernization of agricul-ture, micro credit schemes (like Entandikwa) tar-geted at decreasing rural poverty. These programs,however, mainly benefit those already literate. Illit-erate people lack the skills to use such monies andhence miss out on what could have helped their sit-uation (Okech et al. 1999 and FAL 2000 AnnualReport on the Functional Adult Literacy Program,Functional Adult Literacy Strategic Investment Plan2001). In 1997, Uganda introduced Universal Pri-mary Education, and parents are increasinglyexpected to play an active role in their children’seducation, but this may be impossible when aparent cannot read, write, or count. In addition,illiterate people continue to miss out on vital healthinformation by not understanding what is beingsaid or passed on, due to the lack of reading andwriting skills. Consequently, Uganda’s populationis still characterized by high levels of infant mortal-ity, maternal mortality, morbidity, malnutrition,poor sanitation and hygiene, unemployment, andpoverty. Over the years there has been a greatdemand for literacy programs, with the majority ofparticipants being women. The critical question forthis study is how and to what extent are literacyprograms strengthening poor people’s livelihoods.

The Programs

Livelihood in this study is taken to mean simplymaking a living. It restricts itself to the knowledge,skills, and methods used to produce or obtain food,water, clothing and shelter necessary for survivaland well being, whether the economy is subsis-tence, monetized, or a mixture of both. Livelihoodseems more appropriate than either “employment”or “income generating activities,” because themajority of people who participate in programs

with literacy components derive their living mainlyfrom subsistence agriculture (Oxenham et al. 2001).

The Functional Adult Literacy Program

The government Functional Adult Literacy (FAL)program in Uganda is an example of literacy first. Itincorporates training for livelihood skills into liter-acy instruction. As demonstrated by the case study,this approach attempts to integrate livelihood train-ing, income-generating activities, and literacy. Oneof the aims of the FAL program is to help learnersestablish the usefulness of literacy and their newknowledge through combining instruction withactual applications to a range of activities. Theapproach used is called “integrated” and coversthree dimensions:

Integration of subject matter: The approach appliesthe knowledge from different subjects (or programareas as they are called in this program) to the prob-lem or effort at hand. Such integration has beenfound to be necessary because in real life, one prob-lem may arise from several causes, and it is usuallynot possible to solve a problem or promote an effortby looking at one aspect only.

Integration among service providers: The approachis also integrated because it makes use of differentprofessionals or sectoral workers in the field toaddress the learning or development issues at hand.It is often not possible for the literacy instructoralone to adequately cover the different subject areasneeded to address the learners’ needs. They aretherefore encouraged to bring in extension workersfrom agriculture, health, co-operatives, and so on tostrengthen the learning process.

Integration of learning and life: The approachkeeps learning and life together by tying the learn-ing to those things that the learners are alreadydoing, first helping them to do those things better,and then enabling them to start on new activities. Toensure this link to life, the approach aims at imme-diate application of what is learned in real life situ-ations. Follow-up activities are therefore designedto take the instructors and learners from the class-rooms to the learners’ work, which for the vast


majority of the learners, is in their homes and sur-rounding fields (Okech 1994).

The FAL program under the Ministry of Gender,Labour and Social Development is by far the largestliteracy program currently being implemented inUganda. Because it is a government program, therehave been deliberate efforts to cover the wholecountry within a short time. With the help of theGerman Adult Education Association (DVV) andUNICEF, implementation of the FAL pilot phasebegan in 1992 covering eight pilot districts. From1996 onwards, the program gradually expandedfrom eight districts to 26 by the end of 1998. Theprogram is currently being implemented in 37 dis-tricts and has approximately 127,000 learners (FALAnnual Report 2000). Its actual geographical cover-age, however, is much more limited; the program isonly operational in a maximum of four parishes ineach of the districts in which it is in effect.

Although the program activities started in 1992,the launching of the actual teaching and learningtook time. The government went through a com-prehensive and systematic process of preparing thecurriculum and materials in advance. These were inresponse to needs identified through a needs assess-ment survey. Professionals in adult education, cur-riculum development and language took part, andattempts were made to ensure that different pro-gram areas were covered, namely, agriculture, co-operatives and marketing, health, gender and cul-ture, and civic consciousness (Okech 1994).

The instructors in the FAL program were selectedby the learners, based on given criteria. Theseinstructors were then trained, encouraged to iden-tify income-generation projects, and to initiate proj-ects with the learners. In reality, the methodologyactually used by the FAL instructors is a practicalimprovisation whose final shape depends on theability and ideas of the instructor. Therefore, it wasnot possible to say that any one particular method-ology is in general use.

A process review of the FAL program was carriedout in October 1995. The team observed that therewas overwhelming demand for adult literacy at alllevels, evidenced by the fact that there were almostas many literacy classes outside the program’s areasof operation as inside. Those had sprung upbecause of the strong demand for literacy. The

majority of learners, who were women, testifiedthat the program had increased their self-esteemand confidence in participating in political and eco-nomic activities. They also testified that, with liter-acy, they had improved their domestic hygiene,agriculture, and diet. The team observed that withmore investment in the training of instructors, theprogram would be even more effective. They notedthat the methodology and its delivery were soundin terms of problem-solving but needed to bebacked up by a rural credit scheme and more imag-inative approaches on the part of instructors.

The team recommended that the functional liter-acy program should be expanded in a controlled,systematic, and planned manner, starting with itsconsolidation in the eight pilot districts. They fur-ther recommended that a decentralized programstructure should complement the political processwith clear definition of roles of the center and thedistricts. They recommended that a system of incen-tives for instructors should be worked out, with thecost borne by districts. The center should be respon-sible for the cost of teaching and learning materials,the training of trainers and allowances from Com-munity Development staff. They also recom-mended that a large-scale credit scheme be set upand actively linked to the literacy program (AProcess Review of Functional Literacy Projects inUganda 1985).

In 1999, the Ministry of Gender, Labour andSocial Development, with support from the WorldBank, commissioned an evaluation of this program.Its purpose was to compare and contrast theresource requirements and the effectiveness of theFAL approach and the Regenerated Freirean Liter-acy through Empowering Community Techniques(REFLECT) approach. The evaluation attempted toassess the implementation of adult literacy educa-tion and recommended future policy on the devel-opment of adult literacy education.

The evaluation analyzed effectiveness in twoareas: (a) the attainment and retention of reading,writing and arithmetic skills and (b) facilitatingpractical knowledge, attitude change and skills. Ele-ments considered were (a) the factors affecting per-formance in each those area, (b) the quality of thematerials, (c) the extent of local commitment, and(d) the adequacy of monitoring and supervision.


These evaluation was specifically required toemphasize outcomes and cost effectiveness ratherthan process or methodology. The evaluation wascarried out in 19 sub-counties of eight districtslocated in six of the country’s eight regions. Thiscase study draws heavily on the findings of theevaluation, while also drawing from the annualreports of the program.

The 1999 evaluation noted that the overwhelm-ing majority of participants in this program werewomen. The participation of such high proportionsof women made a strong case for the program’spotential for bring about socio-economic transfor-mation. The evaluation noted, however, that the lit-eracy programs were in danger of missing their pri-mary clients, who were the people who have notbeen to school. Almost three-quarters of the gradu-ates sampled had been to school, many for morethan five years. Surprisingly, even those who grad-uated from the program did not leave but contin-ued attending classes. During the focus group dis-cussions, some of the FAL graduates explained thatthey continued to attend the FAL classes because ofthe opportunities offered through these classes tolearn skills other than literacy and numeracy.

The majority of the graduates, regardless of theirschooling and age, had attained a level of reading,writing, and numeracy higher than that of Primary4 pupils. However, the average level of attainmentwas very limited. The quality of implementation ofthe program was the major explanation for the vari-ations in the learners’ attainment. Graduates per-formed considerably better than non-literates in thesame communities in terms of their functionalknowledge, attitudes, and practices. Further, animpressive number of income-generating projectshad been started in the communities, and manyindividuals attributed their initiative to their partic-ipation in the FAL program.

The findings suggested that the literacy pro-grams had equipped the learners with practicalknowledge, especially in the areas of agriculture,crop and animal husbandry and handicrafts. Otherbenefits mentioned by the sampled graduatesincluded (a) stronger participation in the gover-nance of their communities in terms of frequencyand in the significance of roles played, (b) adoptionof better health practices, especially through better

personal and environmental sanitation, and estab-lishing successful income generating activities.

It proved difficult to extract consistent informa-tion about either enrollments or expenditures forthe FAL program, and the team found no consistentpattern. Although the community developmentofficers (CDOs) and community development assis-tants (CDAs) had received new monitoring forms,they appeared to be having difficulty persuadingvolunteer instructors to complete them regularly orsystematically. The average attendance rate over thefour years in all the districts was estimated to be 80percent. Although this varied widely among thedistricts, the year-on-year average was surprisinglystable. The 20 percent of irregular attendeesincluded those who had never attended classes,even though they had enrolled, as well as thosewho were absent from time to time.

There were large disparities in the resourcesavailable to the FAL program in the different dis-tricts. The program was generally under-resourced.Two-thirds of the instructors reported that classestook place outside–under a tree or in someone’sbackyard. Many of the classes still depended onborrowed blackboards and relied on other collabo-rating organizations for chalk. The learners boughttheir own materials like exercise books, pencils, andpens. The government provided the primers.

All the FAL instructors were unpaid volunteers.Their median level of schooling was two years ofsecondary education. Only 13 of the instructorsreported being primary school teachers and onlyfour others had salaried employment. It was notedthat the use of unpaid volunteer instructors was notvery sustainable. Some incentive system wouldhave to be introduced–whether in cash or in kind—if the program was to retain and recruit good qual-ity instructors (Okech et al. 1999).

The training of instructors was particularly lim-ited. Most of the sampled instructors (78 percent)had received the initial training of one or two weeks,and just over half of these had received follow uptraining. This varied widely between districts andtended to be dependent on outside support. In one ofthe districts, half the instructors had not receivedeven the initial training. Many of the instructors hadbeen trained for just three days and had never hadany refresher training. This was true of their supervi-


sors, most of whom had received no orientation inadult education and literacy methodology.

The instructors received limited support in theform of supervision and monitoring from the exten-sion workers in the district. Of the 46 instructorswho reported having received a visit from a CDA,fewer than half had received a visit in the last sixmonths. While the graduates appreciated the helpthe instructors gave them, a number of them didsuggest that some of their instructors needed train-ing, as they were unable to expand on some topics.In particular, when some of the instructors reachedpractical lessons, which required the participationof an extension worker, they often skipped thosesections because they could not get extension work-ers to come.

FAL Rukungiri — A case of literacy second

The FAL program in Rukungiri is an example of lit-eracy second. In this case, the women’s groups wereengaged in different kinds of economic activities,then they realized that their progress was beingfrustrated, unless they learnt to calculate more com-prehensively, record their incomes and outgoingsand read their records. So literacy training wasintroduced into already existing women’s groups attheir request.

The establishment of this FAL program is differ-ent from the other programs in the other districts, inthat the establishment of this program was demanddriven. Rukungiri district’s FAL program wasincluded in the 1999 evaluation and to some extentit provides an interesting contrast in terms of out-comes and impact when compared to the FAL pro-grams in other districts. Data for this case study aredrawn mainly from the 1999 evaluation and alsofrom an interview with the commissioner in chargeof literacy in the Ministry of Gender, Labour andSocial Development.

The literacy program in Rukungiri started in1996. It was adopted by women’s groups that werealready in existence and engaged in income-gener-ating activities such as bee keeping, poultry keep-ing, basket making, and savings and credit. TheFAL program started in four sub-counties ofKirima, Bwambara, Kebisoni, and Nyarushanje.When the women’s groups in these areas requested

literacy programs, the Assistant Community Devel-opment Officer asked them to identify instructorsamongst themselves. Once this was done, the Com-munity Development Staff helped the groups gettheir instructors trained and also helped them getsome learning materials, like primers.

According to the 1999 evaluation, these groupswere made up of relatively young women, withnearly half being under 30, while fewer than a fifthwere aged 45 and over. The majority of them (76.9percent) were married and 83.3 percent of the grad-uates sampled in the evaluation had been to school.The period of schooling was years. AlthoughRukungiri district had the highest number ofwomen graduates sampled in the study (97.5%),this high percentage of women graduates wascommon to almost all other sampled districts.

The focus group discussions with the literacygraduates in Rukungiri revealed that one reasonthey joined FAL classes was to consolidate theirreading, writing, and numeracy skills. Other rea-sons given for joining were that they wanted tolearn how to read and write so that, when signingagreements they could understand what wasinvolved. In saving and credit groups, often somekinds of agreements were signed. Also to accessloans from micro credit schemes, members of agroup were sometimes required to sign agreementsthat bound them as a group, so it was important forthese women to read and comprehend what was inthese agreements. The majority (83.8 percent) weresubsistence farmers. Only 8.8 percent were engagedin small-scale cash cropping. None were engaged inbusiness or employed. Due to scarcity of land,women who were farmers were increasingly beingforced to venture out into trade, so numeracy skillswere becoming increasingly essential for commer-cial transactions. Women explained that someunscrupulous traders cheated them when sellingand buying produce by using faulty weighingscales and by not giving them back the rightchange. Women also wanted to be able to write andread confidential letters.

Although these women had some education,they were relatively poor. The majority lived inhouses with mud walls (88.4 percent) and mudfloors (83.5 percent). While all their homes hadlatrines, 71.9 percent of them used paraffin candles


and fewer than half (41 percent) had a workingradio. These women had come together in groups inan attempt to improve their socio-economic well-being and that of their families.

The women observed that being part of alreadyestablished groups had made it easier for them tostart literacy classes. As one learner observed:

“For those who were not in groups already, itwas difficult to start literacy classes and getvoluntary instructors. Groups which werealready in existence identified some of their lit-erate members as good instructors and thesewillingly volunteered to teach without pay.”

The learners’ enthusiasm was revealed in their highinvestment in the classes, especially when com-pared to investment by learners in the FAL pro-grams in the other districts. The majority (89.2 per-cent) of the learners paid for the basic materials. Theevaluation study noted that Rukungiri was one ofthe more deprived districts in terms of materials;this was probably because it was one of the newerdistricts to be included in the FAL program, and thegovernment’s contributions to the program werediminishing. However, just under three-quarters ofthe graduates did not have to share primers, andthey kept their own copy after graduating. In someof the other districts the investment was as low as32.8 percent. Slightly more than a third of the learn-ers (35 percent) of the Rukungiri learners made acontribution to the instructors, mainly in kind, suchas baskets of beans during harvest, a few eggs, pota-toes, bananas and similar items.

The majority of the instructors interviewed inRukungiri had more than two years’ experience.They were rated quite highly by the learners interms of attendance, clarity, commitment, teacher/learner relationship, and making lessons interest-ing, but not so well in terms of bringing outsidespeakers and using teaching aids. All the instructorsin Rukungiri reported that their learners kept time,were always present, participated fully, did home-work, and were generally assiduous.

In a test administered by the evaluation team, theliteracy graduates in Rukungiri scored highest onthe complex comprehension and numeracy tests.One of the reasons suggested for the high scores

was the enthusiasm for the program. The majorityof the graduates reported further improvementsince the proficiency test. In the functional knowl-edge questions, like those on HIV/AIDS and gover-nance, respondents in Rukungiri also scored high-est. Apart from the two questions where there wasalmost universal adoption of modern practices,respondents in Rukungiri were overall the mostmodern, with the highest proportion giving themodern answers to eight of the 19 questions.Respondents in Rukungiri were particularlymodern regarding agricultural practices.

A high percentage of the learners in Rukungiridistrict (88.4 percent)—second highest in thenational sample—reported that they did generateincome. Three-quarters of them had subsequentlydone income-generation and nearly all (96.5 per-cent) said that they had improved their life becauseof this project. Unlike the graduates in the other dis-tricts included in the evaluation, nearly all theRukungiri learners (94.2 percent) had taken a finaltest, and all of them had continued to go to literacyclass after the test.

The women in Nyarushanje mentioned that,among the benefits of the literacy classes, they wereeconomically empowered in their groups to buymattresses and blankets and even repair theirhouses, since their men did nothing but drink. Fromtheir handicrafts, they managed to sell at least threeitems every three months and get some money tosupport their families. Focus group discussionswith sub-county officials from the same place indi-cated that community members had also noted animprovement in the lives of these women. As oneofficial observed:

“We notice that those who have been to FALclasses send all their children to school andseem to appreciate the value of education. Thewomen have learnt the importance of safewater. We have also noticed that even peoplewho do not attend are trying to copy goodpractices from those who attend.”

According to the women and some of the sub-county officials the functional component of the lit-eracy program, particularly regarding modern agri-culture, had proved to be very useful. Literacy was


also said to be helping the women to get informa-tion on their own through reading the local news-paper, the “Orumuli.”

Sub-county officials in Kirima Sub-County feltthat women’s groups that had literacy injected intothem had benefited. One remarked that:

“Our people have gained self esteem and selfreliance through attending literacy classes, wefeel more children are being sent to schoolsince mothers now appreciate the value ofeducation. Our women are no longer cheatedin selling their produce; mothers can followhow to administer drugs to their sick children.Women who are literate now get more infor-mation from reading our weekly newspaperthe ‘Orumuri’ the new literates are now able tomake written wills and agreements. The agri-cultural methods are better.”

The women themselves said that they could nowbudget for their homes. The functional knowledgeon fuel-saving stoves had helped to reduce theamount of wood fuel they used. They felt that theyhad improved their status and that the knowledgeof organic farming had helped them to grow veg-etables both for home consumption and for sale.They felt that they had gained self-confidence andhad learned how to prepare tree nursery beds andhow to give their children a balanced diet. The FALprogram in Rukungiri shows that, when a group oflearners truly feel a program is important, they arewilling to invest in it and to benefit from it fully.

ADRA: Uganda’s Functional Adult LearningProgram (FAL)

The Functional Adult Learning Program sponsoredby ADRA is an example of literacy first. Literacy inthis case is a prerequisite for livelihood training. Inthis case, training in a livelihood is the longer-termaim, but people are encouraged not to start liveli-hood training until they have mastered reading,writing and calculating enough to cope with itsoperating and development requirements. There isa planned progression between the two. Materialsfor this case study were drawn from a conceptpaper and progress reports on the program and

from interviews with the program staff. Unfortu-nately there has been no systematic impact study ofthis program so far.

ADRA is an independent, humanitarian, world-wide agency. In Uganda, ADRA was establishedand registered with the government in 1987, soonafter the civil strife. It mainly started relief activities.Since then, ADRA has evolved into a reputable,community-based development agency operatingin many parts of the country. FAL is one of the com-munity-based development programs in which it isinvolved. ADRA has four active literacy projects,and four others are in the pipeline.

ADRA’s vision is for a better–informed and liter-ate society, which has the ability to positively con-tribute to development activities in the local com-munity and beyond. Their mission is to Promoteliteracy and functionality for adult women and menby promoting their ability to exploit the limitedresources around them for the purposes of develop-ing their surroundings and eventually becomingself reliant.

The objectives of the FAL projects are:

• To empower adults with reading, writing, andnumeracy skills and to raise the current literacyrate to a projected percentage, depending on theliteracy levels in different areas;

• To equip learners with essential life skills for per-sonal and community development;

• To build the capacity of the community forincome generation and self-reliance;

• To administer loans for income-generatingactivities;

• To build the culture of continued learning athome and at work;

• To enable learners to appreciate and conservetheir environment for developmental purposes.

ADRA Uganda is operating four FAL projects inthe western, central, eastern and northern parts ofUganda, with a retention rate of 80 percent so far.There are over 18,500 learners in all, 90 percent of


whom are female (ADRA Annual Report 2000). Theproject goal as stipulated in the project paper is “toimprove learning and the income levels of the dif-ferent target communities. It is for this reason thatmicro finance components are also put in place forpurposes of boosting the activities in the form ofinputs, loans, and demonstration sites.” ADRAUganda has adapted Functional Adult Learning asa broader concept that takes into account manycomponents, the major one being adult literacy.Designed in line with the government FunctionalAdult Literacy Policy Guidelines, ADRA Uganda’sFAL is an expansion of the government FAL cur-riculum. In addition to adult literacy, ADRAUganda’s Functional Adult Learning Program is afunctional one with practical implementation madepossible by the inclusion of the loan component thatsupports income-generating activities (IGAs)through micro-financing.

The instructors are volunteers who are drawnfrom a cross section of people within the communityand are chosen by the learners themselves. Some areschoolteachers, health workers, civic leaders, oropinion leaders who offer service to guide the learn-ers on a voluntary basis. They get a monthly stipendfrom ADRA as a form of motivation. The instructorsare supposed to fulfill the following criteria: theyshould (a) have a basic education backgroundhigher than that of the learners, (b) be conversantwith the language used, (d) be acceptable to thecommunities and the learners in particular, (e)haveintegrity and maturity, and (f)be at least 18 years old.The instructors are given initial and follow-up train-ing on instructing learners in literacy, life skills, andincome-generating activities (IGAs).

ADRA’s FAL classes in different places make useof whatever venue is available: community centers,churches, school classrooms, or even shady tree.Where possible, the communities contribute by pro-viding the premises. ADRA gets its primers fromthe Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Develop-ment. When these are not enough, they photocopythem, so that learners can have easier access tothem. The learners cover reading, writing, andarithmetic integrated with functionality (the abilityof the learners to put into practice what they havelearned). The topics are progressively set up inlearners’ primers in level 1 and level 2. The teaching

aids such as blackboards and paper charts are pro-vided on a cost-sharing basis from the government,community, or donor.

The learners are first made literate through theuse of modules, which are professionally and tech-nically designed for adult learner. They use theprimers developed by the government. The inten-tion here is to enable the individual learners tobecome literate, which is demonstrated by theirability to read, write, and manipulate figures. This,according to ADRA, is a form of capacity-buildingbecause the person is empowered to read instruc-tions, write and record his activities, and count hisor her money with confidence. At this level, thelearner’s self-esteem and confidence are boosted.

According to ADRA, the adults they work withneed to have a livelihood strategy that is viable andsustainable in order to be self-reliant. Since sustain-able livelihoods involve a complex network ofsocio-cultural, economic, and political components,learners are trained in essential life skills activitiesthat enhance productivity, social and environmentalhealth, and social and civic responsibility. Learnersare encouraged to choose those activities in whichthey have a competitive niche and receive trainingto master them. These include improved agricul-tural methods, income-generating activities, IGAidentification, and management.

ADRA works with the poor who do not have therequired capital to kick-start the economic activitiesthey are interested in. For this reason, the learnersare trained in loan management and encouraged toform solidarity groups that act as collateral, afterwhich they are advanced micro-loans at an interestrate of 4 percent per quarter. Using the skillsattained during the learning process, the learnersare able to start and manage economic activitiessuccessfully and meet their domestic and personalobligations more easily. The learners are able in thisprocess to apply the knowledge and skills acquired.Apart from building the individual learners’ capac-ity, the FAL program also aims at community andorganizational capacity-building to sustain the proj-ect activities when ADRA finally phases out.

Learners are divided into groups of between 40and 70 per class. They are given six hours of train-ing a week, divided into sessions of two or threehours a day, depending on the season (learners usu-


ally prefer to come for two three-hour sessions aweek during the rainy/planting season). They aretaught continuously for a period of nine to 12months before they take the proficiency test.

ADRA has introduced micro credit schemes, inseveral districts, Mbale being one of the first ones in1998. In order to guarantee successful operation ofthe scheme, ADRA chose to use the FAL classes toimplement the program. Continuous training andregular follow-up proved essential for the assuredreturn of the small-scale loans. FAL classes offeredbackground training and management of small-scale business. ADRA’s micro loans are between50,000 and 100,000 Uganda shillings (between 30 to50 US$), returnable in installments within 16 weeks.

ADRA’s project in Mbale has established the fol-lowing strict criteria for issuing micro loans: Duringthe first stage, the participants must: participate inFAL training, know how to count, and understandthe process of buying and selling. During thesecond stage, the participants must: be able toassess the feasibility of a project, start a small activ-ity without financial assistance, and be able to savea small amount of money. During the third stage theparticipants must build solidarity groups of fivetrusted members, open an account at a bank of theirchoice, and put their savings, together with theloans, into one group fund.

The assumption is that at that stage, the membersare mature enough to grasp the concept of moneyand the importance of accountability. Due to ongoinggroup pressure and guidance, their determinationdoes not relax, and they often find that their team-work can lift projects onto larger scales. ADRA staff’sexperience is that smaller loans and short periodskeep the commitment alive and ensure success.

Literacy classes without financial support aremainly frequented by women. When there is thepossibility of getting loans, men are not only readyto allow their wives to attend the classes but theclasses themselves become socially acceptable forthe men to attend. This has popularized the ADRAFAL classes to the extent that spontaneous enroll-ment of 200 learners at the launch of a new class isnot unusual.

During project implementation, the communitymembers form an association committee with acommunity-oriented constitution. This is registered

as a Community Based Organization (CBO) withlegal rights and powers. The association then electsthe officers, who are then trained to take over theadministration of the project. ADRA officials trainthe officers on how to run the loan fund. Uponhanding over the project to the community, ADRAmonitors the project for some time to ensure that itis running properly. The CBOs are usually made upof the graduates of the literacy program.

Community capacity-building begins with the indi-vidual members who collectively make up the com-munity. According to ADRA, the most critical proof ofthat capacity is the community group’s ability to pro-vide an alternative sustainable source of income. It wasevident from the different project reports that in allproject areas, learners have shown enthusiasm, andthis has inspired local authorities, political leaders, andopinion leaders to contribute moral, material and mon-etary support to the program.

Ms. Heidrun Siebeneiker of the German Develop-ment Service and a technical advisor to FAL projectsin the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Devel-opment, conducted a small case study of ADRA’sproject in Mbale. On the basis of visiting eight FALclasses in three different sub counties, six of whichhad qualified for and enjoyed the benefit of ADRAmicro financing, she observed the following:

The combination of the ADRA micro-financingscheme and the FAL training has boosted both pro-grams and set standards for a good concept thatworks. It reaches the poorest of the poor, and, with-out immense budgets, makes a difference at thegrassroots. The successful combination of FAL andmicro finance spoke for itself. All six groups hadclose to 100 percent repayments within the requiredtime frame. No one had been found wasting money.One or two participants had aimed too high in theirenterprise and failed or delayed, but they hadlearned from the experience. Many even had madesmall profits, which were now being invested intoexpansion. The two classes that had been strugglingwithout financial input, on the other hand, also man-aged to get some small-scale businesses going, but allof them had found it frustrating, with many notbeing able to get off the ground. While learners of allclasses emphasized the value of FAL education, theeffects on those who had gained independencethrough financial support was remarkable. All the


participants reported positive change in their com-munities, in their homes, and in their own attitudes.

There was now money to send children to school.Women have become more independent becausethey earn their own money. There was less drinkingand abuse because people have an aim. People’shouses were cleaner. Farming and animal hus-bandry were managed more successfully. Peoplehave higher self-esteem, as they could manage theirown affairs. Businesses were more successfulbecause of the new management skills, and peoplewere more successful at managing their lives. Com-munities had become more peaceful.

Besides Ms. Siebeneiker’s observations, there is areport from the Kioga Integrated Functional AdultLiteracy Project. According to its progress report,during the first session, the project trained 4,222learners, 3,229 (76.5 percent) of which passed theproficiency test. During the second session, a totalof 2,204 learners registered, of whom 1,880 turnedup to start classes. The FAL program guide recom-mends 20 to 40 learners per class. The reportobserved that in the last year, the instructors com-plained about the large numbers in their classes.This high turn-out of learners is partly explained bythe fact that ADRA gives loans to learners who suc-cessfully complete their literacy training.One of thechallenges noted by the project manager in Kiogawas that many learners had approached them forloans, but they did not have proper business plans.Therefore the managers decided to go slowly inorder to limit the chances of defaulting.

The report noted that they had so far given loansto 11 groups. Seven of the groups were dealing withagriculture and four in petty trade. A total of1,540,000 shillings had been disbursed and a total of1,780,000 had been repaid, reflecting the. low inter-est that is charged. According to the project man-ager’s report, there have been marked changes inthe community lifestyle, including improvement inthe area of micro finance. Petty traders who joinedthe project in the year 2000 have acquired businessskills, and they can now sell and make some profit.

ActionAid’s FAL Buwekula Project (ABP)

This case and the one that follows on REFLECT areboth instances of literacy first, and are both run by

the international NGO, ActionAid. Literacy trainingin this case is followed by separate livelihood orincome-generation activities. Here, literacy isregarded as a self-standing and worthwhile aim initself and is undertaken first. Thereafter, training issometimes offered in either livelihoods or someform of income-generating activity under the otherprogram components.

An important principle applied to ActionAid pro-grams is that of participatory approaches to devel-opment. The strategy is meant to create awareness inthe community and assist in enhancing the capacityof the community to do for themselves those thingswhich will enable them to raise their standard ofliving through education, improved agriculture, andcommunity-based health care. It is this recognitionof the importance of awareness and of the need forthe people to manage all aspects of their life in a sus-tainable manner that led ActionAid to accord animportant place to adult literacy.

“By teaching them how to read and write, andthrough a functional literacy approach, bygiving them knowledge and skills in healthand agriculture, these people will have beengiven the empowerment they require to moreeffectively control their environment” (Okech1994).

From 1989 to 1995, ActionAid’s adult literacy pro-grams in Buwekula used the functional literacyapproach (Okech 1991). However in 1993, Action-Aid introduced into one district in Uganda theREFLECT approach to literacy education. After atrial of two years, it introduced it in 1995 to its pro-gram in Buwekula (ABP).

The six-year FAL project covered two sub-coun-ties that had a population of approximately 73,000people engaged mainly in agriculture, with about20 percent of them pastoralists. Much of the popu-lation at the time consisted of newly settledmigrants from various parts of western Uganda. Acombination of a poor road infrastructure, poorsocial infrastructure, and pastoralism resulted inweak economy in this area. The new settlers werepeople who had had no opportunities for educationin their areas and had arrived empty-handed tostart from scratch, just with their labor. Some were


on the look out for opportunities to improve them-selves. The adult literacy activities in ABP were partof a broader intervention and were initially meantto strengthen other program activities (Okech 1994).

The integrative approach used by the project,placed literacy in the context of development. Thiswas perceived as a strength because it led to imme-diate use of the new ideas and skills to solve real lifeproblems. Community involvement in identifyingneeds, mobilizing learners, recruiting instructors,selecting class centers and erecting shelters was alsopositive, in that it made the community membersfeel that they were really part of the project. The fair-ly adequate funding ensured the availability of learn-ing/teaching materials, remuneration of instructors,and supervision and monitoring (Okech 1994).

The discussions in the literacy classes revolvedaround 21 generative themes: reading, work, farm-ing, government, immunization, taxes, roads, nutri-tion, trade, reproduction, development, writing,AIDS, breastfeeding, sanitation, animal industry,war, money, hospitals, and alcohol. These themesserved as a curriculum or syllabus for the basicstage of the learning. The approach emphasized theneed to link the new literacy skills and new aware-ness to practical work back at home and in thefields, such asin health and sanitation, agriculture,business promotion, and participation in commu-nity activities (Okech 1994).

The ABP manager at the time stated that, whilethe program had indeed made an impact on theindividual participants and general communitydevelopment, it was difficult to ascertain to whatextent the impact was a result of adult literacy inter-vention or of the overall integrated approach ofActionAid programs. Among the positive changesmentioned were improved agriculture, ability toparticipate better in business transactions, andmotivation to start income-generating activities.

Several weaknesses were also noted. Theseincluded insufficient community understanding ofthe importance and functions of literacy, lack oftrained adult educators to manage the program,and imposed structures that were not linked to theexisting structures, thus at risk of not being sus-tained. In addition, the supervisory and monitoringstaff were distracted and over-stretched by other

work and there were no assessment proceduresappropriate for adult education (Okech 1994).

These weaknesses notwithstanding, the inte-grated thrust was clearly effective, and the twotracks of development and literacy did seem to rein-force each other.

Bundibugyo Action Aid Project (REFLECT)

This second case of “literacy first” differs from thepreceding case only in that it used the REFLECTapproach instead of the FAL curriculum.REFLECT as an approach seeks to build on thetheoretical framework developed by the BrazilianPaolo Freire, but it also provides a practicalmethodology by drawing on Participatory RuralAppraisal (PRA) techniques. An important char-acteristic of this approach is that there are no text-books, no literacy primers, and no pre-printedmaterials other than a guide for facilitators, whichis produced locally, preferably with input of thefacilitators themselves. The material for this casestudy is drawn from an earlier study by Okech(1994) and from annual reports from the REFLECTCo-ordination Unit. There were no systematicimpact studies available on this program. It wasnot possible to include this project in the 1999evaluation because of insecurity in the district atthat time.

REFLECT in Uganda was first piloted inBundibugyo, a district isolated from the rest of thecountry by the Rwenzori mountain range and poorinfrastructure and therefore very disadvantaged inthe context of national development. Research car-ried out there by ActionAid in March 1993 hadidentified two major problems: long-standing iso-lation and rising population density. The isolationstemmed from the physical features of the area,lying beyond the mountains, which made it diffi-cult to reach from the central parts of Uganda, fromwhich all modern development seemed to radiate.The district had only one road, which served as alifeline through the mountains from Fort Portal toBundibugyo town. The road infrastructure withinthe district was very poor, making most partsaccessible only with great difficulty. It was thistwo-fold problem that prompted ActionAid tointervene in Bwamba County, using literacy as an


entry point to lead to other development activities(Okech 1994).

The stated objectives of the program were:

• To increase local communities’ access to skillsand knowledge;

• To promote group formation through assistanceprovided towards small-scale projects and exten-sion services;

• To build and strengthen local capacity so thatthey could manage their own developmentprocess.

The aim of the literacy program was to strengthenthe capacity of local communities to deal with theirpredicaments and later fully participate in the man-agement of their own development process.Through the use of Participatory Rural Appraisaltechniques (PRA), the Bundibugyo ActionAid Pro-ject (BAP) tried to use literacy as the entry point fortheir involvement with the people. The PRAapproach provided a variety of techniques thatenabled the people to analyze their problems andidentify solutions.

The literacy class participants used this approachto decide on what topics they felt like handling,which would enable them to derive maximum ben-efits from the classes. The method did not use aready-made primer, but the participants themselvesdeveloped the learning/teaching materials as theylearned in class. Both the facilitators and the learn-ers learned from each other as they discussed, drewmaps, pictures, and charts, and wrote what thoughwas important. At the end of the process, the classcame up with an “action point.” This was their deci-sion on the action to be taken on the matter they haddecided to dealt with. It was this action point thatbecame the developmental activity to be imple-mented by BAP.

The number of participants in the BAP literacyprogram at the time (1994) was 1,625, of whom 325were male and 1,300 female. Although the partici-pants seemed to find the approach interesting andinvolving, BAP was suffering the same irregularityof attendance and high dropout rates common toother adult literacy programs. The dropout rate was

blamed mainly on the war in Zaire and the subse-quent famine in Bwamba (Okech 1994).

According to the BAP staff at the time, it was tooearly to assess the impact of the program on bothparticipants and the community. The researchernoted as a strength the importance and central rolegiven to literacy and to integrating literacy into thedevelopment efforts of the community. An addi-tional strength was the involvement of the commu-nity in the management of the program and the set-ting up of a community-based supervision andmonitoring committee (Okech 1994). Unfortunately,the project was disrupted quite early on by war, andit is now not possible to draw any conclusive les-sons from this project. Among the challenges high-lighted even at that time was the difficulty ofrecruiting the right caliber of instructors capable ofimplementing the methodology and their need forconstant supervision and support. According to thedocumentation from the coordination unit, this con-tinues to be a major challenge when using theREFLECT approach. In a recent review exerciseinvolving the REFLECT Co-ordination Unit (RCU),specifically, Action Aid Buwekula Project, and aCBO, Children And Women of Disabled SoldiersAssociation (CAWODISA), a representative fromthe CBO observed:

“Despite the inadequate time we’ve had tocarry out an audit of the REFLECT programfor ABP, I have really learnt a lot. For exampleI’ve learnt that REFLECT circles need closemonitoring if they are to continue runningproperly. Facilitators require help in unitdevelopment, session preparation, and eventhe facilitation itself. The more they are visitedthe more confidence they develop and themore motivated they become. I got this fromthe few facilitators I interviewed in Kasam-bya” (RCU, Bi-Annual June 2000).

The RCU has also noted that the conventional wayof supporting REFLECT requires more time andresource commitment than simply training andmonitoring what is going on and how it is beingimplemented or used. The lesson about the com-mitment required is that more time spent with thecircles and hands-on development of learning mate-


rials and aids is much more useful to methodologi-cal development and eventual gain for the poorthan are the other training and supervisory roles.(RCU, Bi-Annual June 2000).

Reflections

The majority of documented adult education pro-grams in Uganda have literacy as their lead ele-ment. The major challenge for these programs ishow to effectively design and implement a programthat has a good balance between literacy trainingand practical knowledge and skills that can be ofimmediate use to the learners in improving theirliving conditions. According to the 1999 evaluationof the government FAL program and, to someextent, programs using the REFLECT approach,some programs are more successful than others.There are several reasons. Some programs, such asthe FAL government program, rely too heavily onthe good will and initiative of voluntary instructors.

While the design of a program may emphasizethe integration of learning and life, in practicemuch less emphasis is given to livelihood skills.The 1999 evaluation noted that the instructors wereexpected to bring in livelihood resource persons.This however was not always possible, especiallywhen travel and other costs were involved. Fur-ther, the design seems to assume that livelihoodspecialists are available in all areas and that theyare willing to be brought into the program. This isnot always the case, as the 1999 evaluationrevealed. A more solid system linking the differentprograms with the livelihood specialists should bein place at the outset. This will involve identifyingthe specialists and then making contractual agree-ments with them that will then hold them account-able. There must be clearer stipulations regardinghow and when the specialists will be brought in,how often, and for how long. At the moment thesearrangements are too loose and left to the volun-tary instructors to manage. The fundamental prob-lem of this kind of arrangement at the moment isthat the development of livelihood skills is left tochance, depending on the local organization andmanagement of the program.

The Rukungiri case, however, provides an alter-native arrangement that seems to suggest that, evenwithin a context of limited resources, poor peoplecan have their livelihoods strengthened through lit-eracy if they are well organized. This presupposeshowever that the learners are already engaged insome form of livelihood training or income generat-ing activities in established groups. So this case isbased on a group approach, not an individual one.It suggests that programs that start with livelihoodmay be more successful in organization and man-agement than those that start with literacy. Themanagement of the program is under the control ofthe group, which seems to make maximum use ofthe resources available to it. Since this program wasintroduced at the learners’ request and since it wasinjected into already established groups, the learn-ers had strong reasons for enrolling in the programand for staying on. It is also more closely integratedinto what they are already doing, and this helpsthem to perform better.

ActionAid’s REFLECT approach, even thoughmore innovative in its approach to literacy training,has not been very successful in linking literacyeffectively with livelihood skills. Although thedesigners of the program think that literacy is self-standing and worthwhile, the learners think differ-ently. This is also true for those FAL programs thathave failed to effectively integrate literacy andlivelihood training. The 1999 evaluation revealedthat many learners left programs because theirexpectations that these programs would strengthentheir livelihoods were largely unmet.

After the necessary literacy and livelihood train-ing, ADRA’s programs, make micro credit loansaccessible to learners’ groups as a revolving fund.These programs have been more successful inattracting and retaining adult learners in their liter-acy classes.

Literacy programs need to be planned as long-term interventions with long-term goals and not asshort-term projects. In that way, special attentioncan be paid to developing more sustainable man-agement and implementation structures that can becontinued by the communities, even without majorresource inputs from outside.


References and Documents consulted

ADRA Uganda. Concepts For Functional Adult Learning(FAL).

_______. ADRA, UWDP FAL Report for March (2001)._______. ADRA, UWDP FAL Report for April to May

(2001)._______. Kisoro FAL Project, Progress Report, May 2001._______. Kioga FAL Project, Progress Report, Jan 2000 to

December 2000.Carr-Hill, Roy, ed. 2001. Adult Literacy Programs in

Uganda. The World Bank. 2001.Cottingham, Sara et al. 1995. “A Process Review of Func-

tional Literacy Project in the Uganda Ministry ofGender and Community Development.” Kampala.

Ministry of Gender and Community Development.1996a. National Plan for Functional Literacy. Kampala.

_______. 1996b. Functional Adult Literacy Curriculum.Kampala.

Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development.2000a. Annual Report 1991 of Functional Adult LiteracyProgram. Kampala.

_______. 2001b. Annual Report 2000 of Functional Adult Lit-eracy Program. Kampala.

_______. 2001c. A Ugandan Success Story, ADRA Micro-credit Scheme and Functional Adult Literacy Program inMbale District. Kampala.

_______. April 2001. Draft Functional Adult Literacy Strate-gic Investment Plan 2000/1 –2006/7. Kampala.

Okech, Anthony. 1994. Innovative Approaches to Adult Lit-eracy/Education Currently Used in Uganda. SNV, theNetherlands Development Organization. Kampala.

Okech Anthony, Roy A Carr-Hill, Anne. R. Katahoire,Teresa Kakooza, and Alice. N. Ndidde. 1999. “Reportof Evaluation of the Functional Adult Literacy Pro-grams in Uganda.” Ministry of Gender, Labour andSocial Development in collaboration with the WorldBank. Kampala.

REFLECT (Regenerated Freirean Literacy ThroughEmpowering Community Techniques) Co-ordinationUnit. Annual Report 2000.

_______. Annual Report 1999.Save the Children (UK). West Nile. 1997. Needs Assessment

Survey of Female Literacy Education._______. West Nile. Mid-Term Review Report of Female

Adult Literacy Project (1999)._______. Peri-Urban FAL/DFID Project Annual Report 1999._______. 2000. Functional Adult Literacy for Community

Empowerment (FALCE) Project, Draft Proposal.WEP (Women’s Empowerment Program). West Nile.

1997. Annual Report._______. Literacy Needs Assessment. Women’s Empower-

ment Programme, West Nile. 1997._______. Annual Report 1998._______. Completion Report 1997–2000._______. 3 Years of WEP, 1997–2000._______. Women Empowerment Through Functional Adult

Literacy: A West Nile Experience, 2000.


118

Annex 6

List of programs/projectsdiscussed in detail in the study

ABP ActionAid’s FAL Buwekula Project in Uganda. Content:Literacy training followed by separate livelihoodtraining or income-generating activities. Functional lit-eracy approach from 1989 to 1995. From 1995 onwards,introduction of the REFLECT approach. Participatoryapproaches placing literacy in the context of develop-ment. NGO funding. Ongoing.

ACOPAM Appui associatif et coopératif aux Initiatives deDéveloppement à la Base. Senegal and other West-Africancountries. Content: Production, environment, empow-erment and literacy. Duration 21 years, from 1978 to1999. Sponsored by ILO.

ActionAid Project in Bundibugyo, Uganda, using theREFLECT Approach. Participatory Rural Appraisaltechniques using literacy as the entry point for anintervention to manage village development. Startedin 1994 with 1,625 Learners (325 male, 1,300 female),interrupted by the war in Zaire and the subsequentfamine in Bwamba.

ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency, Uganda.Content: Literacy as preparation for livelihood train-ing, IGAs, loans. Teaching hours 250–300. Learnersenrolled 18,500 (now) 90 percent women. Private fund-ing. Ongoing.

FAL Functional Adult Literacy Program in Uganda. Content:Incorporation of training for livelihood skills into liter-acy instruction (“literacy first”). Attempt at an inte-grated approach: integration of subject matter, integra-tion among service providers, integration of learningand life. Started in 1992. Program is currently imple-mented in 37 of 45 districts and has approximately127,000 learners. Large-scale program under theresponsibility of the Ministry of Gender, Labour andSocial Development. Ongoing, in process of review.

Farmers Field Schools with Integrated Production and PestManagement. Introduced and supported by FAO inIndia and several other countries, by World EducationInc. in Nepal, by CARE International in Sri Lanka.Content: Agriculture and food production, pest anddisease control, marketing. Use of existing literacymaterial. Users pay for literacy instructors.

The Kenya Literacy Campaigns. The first campaign waslaunched in 1967. It adopted the functional approach.The second campaign started in 1979. Content: Liter-acy with IGAs and systematic links with everydayactivities of the learners. Upon commencement, thecampaign intended to recruit 3,000 full time and 5,000part-time plus some 5,000 self-help teachers. Trainingof teachers through a specially developed distanceeducation course. Over 22 years, a total of 4,197,638adults have participated in the basic literacy program,76.4 percent of them women. A Post-Literacy Programstarted in 1996 in 12 districts, is now in 15 out of 68 dis-tricts. Phase one 1996 –1999, phase two 2000–2003. Sofar some 200,000 learners have been reached by theprogram. Purpose: Using reading skills to acquire andto sustain functional skills, knowledge, and attitudes(“Learn and Earn”). Use of adult education teachers as“community learning and development facilitators.”A curriculum leading to a certificate (equivalent to theKCPE) is under preparation. A competency-basedpost-literacy curriculum in eight learning areas isready. 48 titles of post-literacy material in a variety offunctional thematic fields are available. Kenyan contri-bution for both phases 500,000 DM German contribu-tion through GTZ 4 Mio DM. The current literacy rateis 74.8 percent.

Mahila Samakhya, Banda District, India. Content: Anima-tion for low-caste women as awareness animators andtechnical knowledge for low-caste women as handpump mechanics plus literacy. Literacy camps with180 hours of instruction. Low participation of handpump mechanics. NGO-funding. Ongoing.

RDRS Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Service, Bangladesh. Con-tent: Livelihood skills, small scale agriculture, socialknowledge, health plus general literacy. NGO fund-ing. Ongoing.

Rukungiri Women’s Groups, Uganda. Content: Income-gen-erating activities, savings and micro-credit schemesplus participation in the government’s FunctionalAdult Literacy Program (FAL). Teaching materials ofthe FAL bought by learners (“user pays”). Costs percertified graduate of the FAL: US$4–5. Ongoing.

SAPTAGRAM Bangladesh. Content: Functional literacy aspreparation for livelihood training, income-generatingactivities, loans. NGO-funding. Ongoing.

SEIGYM Somaliland Education Initiative for Girls and YoungMen, Somaliland. Literacy as preparation for livelihoodtraining. NGO-funding: Voucher-system of the AfricaEducational Trust. Started in 1998. Ongoing.

SODEFITEX Société de Développement des Fibres Textiles(Society for the Development of Textile Fibers), Senegal.Content: Agricultural development with focus oncotton growing. Initiated in 1974. After 9 years of exis-tence (1983), began a literacy program for cotton pro-ducers to modernise cotton production. In view of thescale of the program, SODEFITEX decided first to

make five members of each of its 1,740 producer asso-ciations literate: Later it aimed to enable at least onemember of its 27,179 farming families to become suffi-ciently literate. SODEFITEX organized classes forsome 2,400 farmers per year between 1984 and 1999,reaching a total of 35,865 learners in the 15 years. Ofthese, 5,908 were women. SODEFITEX funding.Ongoing.

Unesco, World Experimental Literacy Program. 1965–1975.Content: Functional Literacy. UNDP sponsored.

WEEL Women’s Economic Empowerment and Literacy (WorldEducation Inc.), Nepal. Content: Functional literacy,food, credit, micro-enterprise. Initiated 1994. Currentenrollment: 10,000 women. Graduates: 3,000. NGO-funding. Ongoing. Impact evaluation expected in2001.

WEP/N Women’s Empowerment Program of Nepal. Started inmid–1990s. Content: Integration of literacy with liveli-hood training from the beginning, savings, credits,micro-enterprise. Program reached 6,500 groups with130,000 women. Supported by PACT. Ongoing. Impactevaluation expected late 2001.

WISE Women in Self-Employment, Ethiopia. Content: Liter-acy as preparation for livelihood training and small-scale business. Started in mid–1990s. Ongoing. NGO-funding.

Women’s Enterprise Development Program, the Philippines.Content: literacy and livelihood. Ongoing. NGO-funding.
