Universal free education is one of the darlings of development experts. What is not said, but often assumed in development and policy circles, is that this will come in the form of public education. After all, it is simply illogical to expect families in total poverty, relying on subsistence farming or fishing in the developing world, to find the funds to send their children to private school, let alone a private school that might be of any worth. And yet, it happens.
As Tooley explains it, with what little funds available, parents reject poorly managed government schools and place their children in small private schools where teachers are held accountable to parents, and the rules of quality within private enterprise govern their success. An excellent concept, and one that Tooley could explore a little further.
One factor that Tooley does not consider in his analysis of public education’s failure is the possibility of private schooling as a rejection of the values and priorities of state education. Two examples of this are China and India. In his book, Tooley asserts the economic and practical reasons for parents’ selection of private schools, such as higher quality and better accessibility. Indeed, these are significant reasons that cannot be ignored. Cultural values, however, may also play a role in these decisions. One example of this is on pages 60-64 where Tooley describes a typical day for the Supreme Academy, a private school in a fishing village outside Accra, Ghana. All the teachers, except one, come from the local village and understand local dynamics. When a family is late in payment due to poor fishing catches, the administrator, also from the village, allows them time to get caught up in dues. The teachers and administrator also know that the families value education, despite repeated examples throughout the book where Tooley quote education officials stating that poor people simply do not care about educating their children. Perhaps the parents have picked up on these biased attitudes and know that their children will be valued and educated more fairly by local teachers who are members of the same community.
Essentially, private schools may exist to provide a culturally safe place for the poor and marginalized to educate their children effectively. In India, and similarly in Nigeria and Ghana, public schools that serve mainly the poor and lower middle-classes [in all countries Tooley visited, China excepting, the upper classes routinely sent their children to elite private schools] serve as de facto tools of oppression where poor curriculums and neglectful teachers maintained class hierarchies and status quos. This notion flies in the face of the idea in development circles of education as the great equalizer. The problem that Tooley points out inadvertently is, when education (or lack of) does not equalize, but perpetuates inequality and poverty. A Dalit student, neglected by her teacher and taunted by classmates in an Indian public school is educated not in academics, but her place at the bottom of society. Poor Kenyans from the slums who go to school where teachers don’t even bother to show up learn the value of their academic progress. In situations like this, the school is a tool of power for the elite, and a lesson for the poor regarding their place in society. Further, public schools that charge fees, employ worthless teachers and cram 60 to 100 children in one classroom send powerful messages to poor sending families about the importance of their children’s futures.
Overall, an excellent book and eye-opening discovery in much need of further research. Highly recommended.