UKFIET 2015: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive

schooling in Nigeria

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

The provision of non-state education has been on the rise in Nigeria. National education statistics from 2010 report that across the country one in four children is enrolled in some form of independent school. In Lagos, one the fastest growing cities in Africa, a 2010/2011 census revealed the existence of over 12,000 private schools educating 57 percent of primary-aged children, from all socio-economic backgrounds.

With the sector expanding at around 1,000 schools per year, resource requirements for education in Lagos need to take adequate consideration of its prolific non-state provision. This paper therefore investigates the resourcing needs in Lagos, in particular around regulation practices, access to finance and school improvement services. It draws on a mixed methods study conducted in 2014 which examined the operations of 55 schools in Lagos across a range of fee levels. In particular, the research explored schools’ management practices, staff development and use of financial and non-financial services. The findings highlight an estimated market demand for finance in the region of USD 2.5 billion and emphasise government’s growing role as an enabler as well as a provider of education.

The paper concludes with reference to the Developing Effective Private Education Nigeria programme, a DFID-funded initiative, which since 2013 has been using a market-based approach to facilitate an enabling environment for independent schools and improved learning outcomes, particularly for children from low-income households. Activities aim to unblock constraints around regulation, information and school development, while informing education policies in Lagos and other similar contexts

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

1 Introduction

The boom in non-state education in developing countries around the world has posed a challenging conundrum for their governments. Should they deny, ignore or stifle the rise of private schooling as an indictment of their inability to provide adequate services for their people? Or should they embrace the emergence of a more pluralist system as an opportunity to facilitate higher educational quality, one that is more responsive to parental preferences and possibly at a fraction of the delivery cost?

The quandary is particularly pronounced in Nigeria, where one in four children is now enrolled in some form of independent school (NPC, 2010). Specifically, in Lagos, a bustling megacity with a reported population of 20 million (Lagos State Government, 2013), at least 57 percent of children currently attend private schools (Härmä, 2011). In some cases, these are exclusive institutions that cater for the wealthy elite; in most cases, however, the schools operate on shoestring budgets to meet the educational needs of families in poor communities.

To date, the majority of these ‘affordable’ private schools have functioned with little government recognition and limited support from market providers. With children’s learning potentially constrained by such deficiencies, this paper therefore explores the apparent resourcing requirements for non-state education in Lagos and similar contexts. In particular, the paper examines the practical needs of private schools serving low-income households and the roles that both government and market actors can play to enable improved and more inclusive pluralist systems1

Consequently, the first section considers the rise of non-state education both globally and in Nigeria, reflecting on the contentious debates around quality, equity and inclusion. The second section describes the research methodology for a survey of 55 private schools conducted across Lagos in 2014, while the third section sets out the key findings of that study. The fourth section reflects on the implications of the research for Lagos and beyond, with the final section drawing overall conclusions with reference to the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) Developing Effective Private Education Nigeria (DEEPEN) programme.

1 Day Ashley and Wales (2014) identify important differences in the operations of private schools, compared with philanthropic and religious schools. Notwithstanding the latter’s relevance within non-state education, a detailed consideration of the differences in their impact and resourcing requirements is beyond the scope of this paper.

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

2 The rise of non-state schooling

2.1 A global phenomenon

The role of non-state providers in achieving universal basic education has gained growing prominence in recent years. Across South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, parents in countries like India, Pakistan and Kenya have felt frustration with the public system and sought alternative options for their children’s schooling (Andrabi et al., 2015). Indeed, the non-state sector has made valuable contributions in the period up to 2015 as ballooning class sizes have highlighted the inadequacy of public resources to meet an expanding demand (Kitaev, 2004; Lincove, 2007). Beyond access, independent schools purport to deliver education for a fraction of the government cost, while offering parents increased choice to educate their children in accordance with their own heterogeneous values, linguistic preferences or religious beliefs (Kingdon, 2005; James, 1993; Rose, 2007).

Nevertheless, the rise of non-state schooling has faced considerable resistance and opposition, from governments and academics alike. Some view private schools as being driven solely by profit and commercial interests, or exploiting the hopes of uneducated parents unable to discern the real quality of their children’s schooling (Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013; PROBE Team, 1999). For others, non-state provision undermines the fundamental right to education and can create social injustice by requiring the poor to pay “for a service that could make a material difference to the future of their children, a service that should by law be freely available to them” (Härmä, 2013, p.549).

The quality of education available in non-state schools has proved a source of particular contention. Early accounts report decentralised management, increased efficiency and short routes of direct accountability between schools, teachers and parents (Kingdon, 1996; World Bank, 2003). These appear to manifest themselves through improved learning inputs such as smaller class sizes, greater teacher attendance and more time on task (Tooley, 2005). In terms of learning outcomes, studies across countries as diverse as Colombia, the Dominican Republic, India, Tanzania and Thailand, suggest that pupils in private schools perform better than those in state schools, even after controlling for their different socio-economic backgrounds (Kingdon, 1996; Colclough, 1996). More recently, a rigorous review of existing international literature found strong evidence of better teaching in private schools, as well as moderate proof that their children score relatively higher than those in public schools (Day Ashley et al., 2014). In absolute terms, however, many children still fail to achieve basic competencies, even in non-state schools, and learning gains are relative only.

Competing claims around the inclusiveness of independent education and its impact on equity, especially for poor children and girls, have further fuelled the debate. Studies have suggested that among some cities’ most deprived neighbourhoods, enrolment levels are high with private schools offering alternative education options and accommodating many children from low-income families (Alderman et al., 2001; Tooley, 2005). Indeed, Tooley and Longfield (2014) argue that “if some proportion of the poor and poorest is able to afford private schools now…this means…some private schools have managed to find ways of bringing their costs low enough to serve the poorest” (p.39). Nevertheless, even at minimal costs, nonstate schooling may be beyond the reach of the most marginalised and reproduce social inequality across various divisions (Lewin, 2007; Rose, 2007; Watkins, 2004). For example, evidence suggests that girls are less likely than boys to access private schools, particularly in contexts with security concerns around travel or fewer career prospects for women in the labour market (Day Ashley and Wales, 2014; De et al., 2002; Drèze and Gazdar, 1997; Brighouse, 2004; Kingdon, 1998).

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Notwithstanding the ideological discourse and debates on equity and quality, millions of parents have already ‘voted with their feet’ and as long as they perceive greater opportunities in non-state education, the situation looks likely to continue. Governments worldwide face the reality of burgeoning non-state education and must find an effective way of engaging with private players to improve the learning of all children. In many cases, the forced and often reluctant cooperation represents unknown terrain as authorities reconceive themselves as facilitators, and not just providers, of education.

This new role raises questions around resourcing requirements and how best governments and the market can foster a more enabling environment. Research to date paints a somewhat bleak picture: save in limited contexts (such as Punjab in Pakistan), governments across developing countries lack the capacity, understanding or fundamental data to support non-state education effectively (Day Ashley et al., 2014). Efforts to create policy frameworks experience unsuccessful implementation, often undermined by mutual suspicion after years of extortion, antagonism and suppression. Regulations are unrealistically stringent and unequally enforced. Meanwhile, systemic constraints in different aspects of the education market prevent growth and improvement (Andrabi et al., 2015). Limited or asymmetrical information impedes stakeholders, notably parents, from demanding better quality, and schools struggle to access formal finance or external services to enhance their practices.

2.2 A Nigerian perspective

The need for effective resourcing for non-state education has likewise been building in Nigeria. In response to public shortages, the country has witnessed nationwide private school proliferation since the 1970s and “unapproved schools are providing schooling opportunities to a significant number of children, particularly in urban and peri-urban areas” (Adelabu and Rose, 2004, p.64). Across Nigeria, one in four children is now enrolled in an independent school (NPC, 2010), while in the northern states 8.7 million pupils attend Islamiyya, Qur’anic and Tsangaya institutions (UBEC, 2010).

The situation in Lagos, one of the fastest growing cities in Africa and the focus of this paper, is similarly mixed. A 2010/2011 census revealed the existence of over 12,000 private schools educating at least 57 percent of all children (in excess of 1.4 million) and 70 percent at nursery and primary levels (Härmä, 2011). With 961 new schools opening in 2010 alone and current total estimates possibly closer to 18,000 (DFID, 2013), the sector continues to evolve rapidly and dwarf the state system of around 1,600 schools. Independent education is hugely diverse in scale and clientele, catering for both wealthy and poor, and delivered by actors including “NGOs, faith-based organisations, communities and commercially-oriented private entrepreneurs… each with different motives for their involvement in education” (Rose, 2007, p.2). In many cases, however, private schools are small, owned and managed by an individual proprietor, funded through the payment of fees and targeted to meet the needs of lower socio-economic households (Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013; Härmä, 2013).

In terms of quality, learning inputs and outcomes vary, even across more affordable private schools. On the one hand, classes enjoy lower pupil-teacher ratios, closer monitoring of teachers and greater time in teaching activities than their government counterparts (Adelabu and Rose, 2004; Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013). On the other hand, many schools employ untrained and unqualified teachers, and operate with unsuitable infrastructure in poor quality physical environments (Härmä, 2013; Save the Children, 2013). Nevertheless, findings on actual performance present a potentially brighter picture. Tables 1 and 2 below show a comparison of children’s scores in English literacy and mathematics from two studies in Lagos, with higher results recorded in private schools. In the case of the 2006 data, scores are adjusted for

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

several background characteristics, including variables relating to the selection of schools and the effect of peer-groups. Similarly, emerging data from the DEEPEN programme disaggregate performance using proxies for household wealth and reveal markedly higher average scores for children attending private schools across all socio-economic bands.

Data source: ESSPIN (2010)

Recent statistics on enrolment and school choice also suggest an inclusive system of non-state schooling. Studies by Yngstrom (2014) and Tooley (2013) in Lagos corroborate earlier findings (Härmä, 2013; Save the Children, 2013) that parents do not discriminate by gender in selecting their children’s school. Girls are equally likely to attend a private school and represented at all levels of education. In some communities, secondary-aged girls even appear to outnumber boys who drop out to learn the fishing trade. In terms of poverty, the data also show that a majority of children are enrolled at private schools at every decile of family income (Tooley, 2013). Figure 1 shows the trends of enrolment against household wealth. Although scholarships, concessions or the underreporting of parental earnings might account for children in the lowest decile who appear to attend private schools, the figures suggest a largely inclusive system that appears to accommodate the budgets of a large proportion of poor families.

Resourcing for the sector, both in terms of government and market support, has been limited to date. Like authorities in similar contexts, the Lagos State Government has set such demanding approval standards2 with so few benefits that a majority of private schools (74 percent) operate ‘illegally’ without approval (Adelabu and Rose, 2004; Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013). This situation has created a relationship of tension and distrust between schools and the state, exacerbated by government officials’ interference to extort payments and ‘taxes’. Schools have therefore created representative associations to influence the

2 There are also suggestions that many public schools would not meet such standards.

Table 1: 2006 Average Performance of Lagos Pupils in English and Mathematics

Data Source: Tooley and Dixon (2006)

Table 2: 2010 Performance of Lagos Primary 2 and Primary 4 Pupils in English and Mathematics

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

content of the regulations and to lobby government on the multiplicity of different taxes claimed (Adelabu and Rose, 2004).

The prevailing informality of non-state education causes wider challenges within the sector. Many schools already struggle to collect their fees and few can access financial resources to effect quality improvements:

It is reportedly more difficult for schools to access loans when they are unapproved, resulting in a vicious cycle, since it is difficult to meet approval requirements without credit (Härmä and

Beyond finance, proprietors display little concern to enhance the capacity and practices of their staff (Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013). Head teachers provide in-house training with questionable skills and little reliance on external expertise, save that offered by publishing companies to complement their particular textbooks.

Looking forward, Lagos State Government already has limited capacity to inspect and resource its own schools (Adelabu and Rose, 2004). The enforcement of regulations against institutions whose very existence stems from shortcomings in public supply and whose success affects the future of so many children raises difficult political and ethical questions. Arguably, a lighter touch approach to regulation could help to create a more enabling environment for other market players to provide more direct support. The study below therefore examines what affordable non-state schools in Lagos actually need, and makes suggestions for how such requirements could be met.

Adefisayo, 2013, p.146).

Figure 1: School Choice by Family Income Deciles

Data Source: Tooley (2013)

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

3 Research methodology

The research investigated the operations of 55 non-state schools working across Lagos in 2014. For the purpose of the study, ‘non-state’ refers to schools owned, financed and operated without government involvement (Bray, 1996). Indeed, the survey focused on private schools that function, or aspire to function, as financially sustainable enterprises, collecting fees to pay costs such as rent and teacher salaries. This does not preclude them from pursuing additional sources of income, nor affiliation to a particular religious or social group3 Similarly, the research concentrated on schools as “institutions operating according to a formal timetable, following a standard syllabus, for children who attend during school hours” (Tooley and Dixon, 2006, p.448). This excluded crèches, casual learning centres and nonformal tuition or lessons, but expressly included schools operating with and without government approval.

Given the debate around inclusion and equity, the survey also targeted schools used by low-income families living around or below the poverty line. To this end, schools were classified as follows, based on their annual fees:

 Low-cost: N 0-25,000 (approximately £0-80);

 Medium-cost: N 25,001-50,000 (£80-160); and

 High-cost: N 50,001 and above (£160+).

The ‘low-cost’ classification was derived on the basis of what would be affordable for a poor family spending between 10 and 11 percent of its total expenditure to cover the schooling costs of all the family’s children4 (Tooley, 2013). Likewise, a medium-cost school would be affordable to families living on incomes up to twice the poverty line. Low- and medium-cost schools therefore constituted the majority of schools surveyed (44 out of 55) on the basis that they educate 82 percent of poor children enrolled in private schools in Lagos (Tooley, 2013).

The research adopted a mixed methods approach to survey the operational, resourcing and systemic market constraints affecting the 55 private schools. Such an approach enabled the study to tackle the core investigation using both quantitative and qualitative parameters to achieve multiple perspectives (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2012). Schools tended to cater for nursery and primary levels only and were selected in collaboration with their representative associations, given the strained relationship with government and sensitivities around data collection. This could give rise to some self-selection bias since more established schools were likely to be known to the associations and more willing to share their information. Indeed, some proprietors declined to provide details of their finances for fear of potential tax implications, notwithstanding clarifications about how the data would be used.

Schools were chosen from 15 local government and council development areas within Lagos and across the different fee bands, as shown in Table 3. The instrument was initially piloted in four schools to check for the validity and reliability of responses. The final surveys were then administered by trained enumerators across the 55 schools.

The instrument comprised qualitative and quantitative questions related to schools’ planning and resource requirements, in particular relating to regulation, access to finance and use of school improvement services. Specifically, the survey examined topics including: cash flow and financial management

3 There are several private school associations operating in Lagos that represent schools operating with a specific religious ethos or affiliation.

4 This calculation uses a Lagos-specific absolute poverty line of N309 per capita per day based on the need to purchase adequate food and essentials for one adult (Yngstrom, 2014).

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

capabilities; human resource and school management practices; business strategy and planning; staff development and leadership training; and the use of both financial and non-financial external services. Further, the research was triangulated using evidence from other investigations and observations in order to make informed inferences on such complex issues as regulation. Responses were analysed through a mix of descriptive statistics and qualitative evaluation. Overall, a wide dataset was obtained although the sections below focus on key findings in respect of school’s resourcing requirements.

This calculation uses a Lagos-specific absolute poverty line of N309 per capita per day based on the need to purchase adequate food and essentials for one adult (Yngstrom, 2014).

Table 3: Breakdown of Sampled Schools by Fee Classification

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

4 Key results

The surveys covered a wide range of school’s practical operations and resourcing needs. For the purposes of this paper, however, the main findings below concentrate on regulation, access to finance and the use of school development services to improve systems and staff capacity.

4.1 Regulation practices

In line with earlier studies (Adelabu and Rose, 2004; Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013), the research found that a majority of schools surveyed continue to operate outside the formal approval process. Table 4 below shows a breakdown of sampled schools by recognition status, compared with the 2010/2011 census. The significance of these figures and their implications for resource planning can be understood from both supply and demand perspectives.

On the supply side, the growth in the number of private schools from 12,098 in 2011 (Härmä, 2011) to an estimated 18,000 (DFID, 2013) implies a major resource pressure on government as regulator of non-state education. The low numbers and percentages of approved schools and those awaiting approval suggests that government has failed to keep pace with the rapid rate of market expansion. They indicate that current resource in a government department of under 50 staff to meet the regulatory needs of up to 18,000 schools may already be stretched (authors’ personal knowledge). Indeed, the government will need to build substantial additional capacity if it wishes to channel unregistered private schools through the ninestage process required for approval as set out in Figure 2, let alone increase its functions to assure a minimum level of quality in all schools.

Table 4: Recognition Status of Sampled Schools against 2010/2011 Census (Härmä, 2011)

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

On the demand side, the high proportion of unapproved schools shows limited current interest in engaging in the formal regulation process. The 42 percent of schools in the 2010/2011 census displayed considerable appetite to obtain approval, notwithstanding practical constraints to meet the guidelines. However, the reduced figure among schools sampled in 2014 suggests that an increased number now lacks the incentive, resource or both to apply for approval.

In terms of reasons, 61 percent of unregistered schools perceived the approval process as too cumbersome and costly, both in terms of compliance and application. Schools must own their property of a minimum size (around four plots of land) to obtain approval under the current guidelines. Meanwhile, costs associated with the approval process were reported to range from N 350,000 up to N 500,000 (approximately £1,160-1,660) depending on the type of school concerned. These figures represent a significant increase on fees recorded in 2004 (N 50,000) (Adelabu and Rose, 2004) and exclude annual renewal charges. Overall the benefits of approval, namely greater credibility and access to state examinations, do not justify the considerable expense involved.

4.2 Access to finance

Difficulty accessing finance was cited by 58 percent of the schools surveyed. This broadly accorded with earlier findings by Härmä and Adefisayo (2013) that “70% reported that finance was their single biggest obstacle (75% of approved schools and 69% of unapproved schools)…[and] hindered efforts to making lasting improvements to school buildings” (p.144). More than half of schools reported use of credit as a top priority in order to expand, improve and meet parents’ demands and expectations. However, of the schools that had applied for a loan with a financial institution (49 percent), under half had been successful. They cited lack of collateral, unapproved status and inadequate savings history with the bank concerned as main reasons for their rejection, with rates of refusal comparable across the different school fee classifications.

Figure 2: Approval Process for Non-State Schools in Lagos

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Going beyond past experiences, the research aimed to quantify the likely future financial needs of private schools to deliver efficient and quality services, as well as the intended use of any credit. Figure 3 shows the level of borrowing sought by the schools sampled for the next three years. Within the 55 schools alone, there is an articulated demand for USD 1,168,000. The high proportion of borrowing planned by high-cost schools is likely to reflect the additional expense of serving wealthier families, greater confidence around financial eligibility, and the relatively modest requests by low- and medium-cost schools. Nevertheless, the responses indicate considerable interest among low- and medium-cost schools to build their operations through credit if available. Figure 4 goes a step further to extrapolate the loan demand to the 18,000 nonstate schools believed to be operating in Lagos. Using school classification proportions from the 2010/2011 census, the analysis estimates market demand for finance in the region of USD 2.5 billion.

Additional disaggregation of the responses reveals the intended use for loans. Priorities focus on property, furniture, equipment and vehicles (Table 5 sets out a more detailed breakdown). Loans for the purchase or refurbishment of property comprise a significant majority, not least because only 35 percent of respondents own their land. Such proposed investments could be driven by a range of proprietor motivations, not least aspirations to expand their operations, the desire to attract more parents, or the need for stability and protection against rent rises by predatory landlords.

Figure 3: Credit Demands for Non-State Schools Surveyed for the Next Three Years

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

4.3 School development

In stark contrast to the importance of physical improvements, proprietors in the schools surveyed tended to place less value on staff training and other ‘softer’ aspects of their institutions’ development. In particular, they displayed little use or awareness of effective school processes, or the different non-financial services available that could build their or their teachers’ capacity.

For example, the vast majority of schools (77 percent) had not prepared a school development plan. When asked, proprietors showed little understanding of its purpose, use and potential benefits. Some spoke of informal intentions to train their teachers, but saw little need for documentation or felt there were more pressing issues at hand, especially given existing resource constraints:

I didn’t know that I should write it down (Proprietor, low-cost school).

Figure 4: Total Estimated Demand for Loans from Non-State Schools in Lagos for the Next Three Years

Table 5: Intended Use for Loan Demand over the Next Three Years (Percentage)

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

What is the essence of writing it down when you don’t have the means to achieve it? (Proprietor, low-cost school).

The availability of sufficient resources was often cited as a prerequisite for effective planning, both in terms of the time required to develop a plan and the means for its implementation. Even among the 33 percent of sampled schools that had drafted a plan, only one high-cost school covered such comprehensive issues as financial management, teacher and pupil development, and infrastructure improvements.

On governance and participation, responses were similarly mixed. Among the proprietors surveyed, 31 percent had a formal board of governors for discussing and agreeing their school’s strategic direction. Meanwhile, 93 percent of schools had established a parent-teacher association, with 62 percent of associations meeting termly and 22 percent convening twice a term. The surveys did not elicit information about the format, purpose or content of parent-teacher meetings but there is the possibility that they took place more as an opportunity to chase unpaid fees and pursue fundraising, rather than to review or enhance the learning of their children.

Schools were also asked about their interest in and use of external training providers. Uptake across leadership and management was fairly limited: only 38 percent of proprietors and only one low-cost school had engaged external services to build their capacity. However, respondents expressed willingness to pay for courses on financial management and technology for teaching, if such services could be made affordable. In terms of teacher training, all high-cost schools had used providers at an average cost of N 23,333 (£78) per term, while 65 percent of medium-cost schools had purchased services to improve teaching at an average of N 20,000 (£67) per term. By contrast, only 29 percent of low-cost schools had engaged providers to improve teaching on what seemed to be an annual basis.

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

5 Discussion and implications

The research generated rich and valuable data to better understand how private schools, in particular those that serve low-income communities, operate in Lagos. The following section reflects on the findings in light of existing literature to explore implications for resourcing inclusive non-state education going forward.

In terms of regulation, the research corroborated earlier studies showing that a majority of private schools in Lagos function without approval and under the government’s radar (Härmä, 2011). Indeed, the proportion of ‘illegal’ schools appears to have increased. This has various implications for Lagos State Government as regulator of the emerging pluralist system. First, it implies that schools experience significant constraints in accessing formal processes if most now prefer to operate outside the official guidelines. This may result from them having insufficient incentives or inadequate resources (or both) to complete the stringent approval process, but warrants further investigation. Secondly, parents as consumers of education are patronising unregistered schools, notwithstanding their unapproved status, which calls into question the validity and legitimacy of the wider system. Third, the findings indicate a shortage in government resources to engage effectively with the private sector to facilitate a better level of non-state quality.

In light of these, Lagos State Government needs to reconceptualise its role as an enabler and not just a provider of education. Specifically, the Ministry of Education needs to commit more human and financial resources to support and oversee private schooling, given its enrolment of the majority of children. These amounts would be minimal compared to the cost of public delivery but could focus on quality assurance and the dissemination of relevant information to parents and other education stakeholders. Resources should also address the existing regulatory framework with realistic reforms to reduce costs, increase incentives, and include rather than exclude private schools.

The stringent current guidelines have a wider adverse effect on non-state education and undermine schools’ ability to access formal finance. Respondents cited their unapproved status, in addition to a lack of collateral, as major impediments in obtaining loans. As Härmä and Adefisayo (2013) note above, these constraints are mutually reinforcing, with ‘illegal’ schools unable to access the credit needed to purchase their properties and thereby meet the criteria for approval. Indeed, for those proprietors that can obtain loans, the interest rates are typically very high (15-50 percent) and repayment terms customarily short (Härmä and Adefisayo, 2013).

The funding gap to improve private schools in Lagos is significant, possibly around USD 2.5 billion over the next three years. With government likely to be both unable and unwilling to shoulder such costs, there could be a growing role for the financial sector, including commercial banks and microfinance institutions, to meet schools’ particular demands. If Lagos State Government can enable more inclusive regulation, schools would present a lower credit risk and banks may be able to differentiate their services with lower interest rates and products that accommodate the requirements of all schools. Indeed, evidence emerging from Pakistan (Andrabi et al., 2015) suggests that an increased availability of finance to all schools in a market can yield overall quality improvements and gains in children’s learning outcomes.

Finally, the huge number of private schools in Lagos combined with the limited use of external training among low-cost schools could represent a significant opportunity for service providers. Specialists who can reduce their overheads and deliver courses at affordable rates could achieve commercial scale in the market while building the capacity of proprietors and teachers to improve their practices. Again, such an

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

initiative is underway in Pakistan to examine the sustainability and impact of this approach (Andrabi et al., 2015).

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

6 Conclusions

This paper has examined the resourcing requirements for non-state education in Lagos, as a parallel and dynamic market that already meets the needs of a significant majority of children. Indeed, parents at all socio-economic levels are choosing private schools for a host of different reasons, including perceptions of quality (Tooley and Yngstrom, 2014), and the situation looks likely to continue. The Lagos State Government, like those in India, Pakistan, Kenya and a growing number of contexts, must therefore reconsider their role with regard to education and find effective solutions that reflect the reality of a pluralist system.

In Lagos, this process is being supported by the DEEPEN programme, a five-year DFID-funded initiative which started in 2013. DEEPEN is using a market-based approach to facilitate an enabling environment for independent schools, particularly those that serve children from low-income households, to improve their conditions and enhance pupils’ learning outcomes. Specifically, the programme is working to unblock systemic constraints revealed by the research as impeding schools’ development. For example, DEEPEN is assisting the Lagos State Government to pioneer an inclusive regulatory framework, with schools graded on a scale that provides information for parents, and incentives and guidance towards improvement. In parallel, the programme is piloting activities with banks, microfinance institutions and service providers to better serve the needs of low- and medium-cost schools.

Throughout the process, DEEPEN will be conducting research to help inform education policies in Lagos and, if appropriate, other countries. Indeed, governments around the world can no longer deny or ignore the rise of non-state schooling, nor will the growing numbers of families permit the suppression of practices that they deem in their children’s best interests. Similarly, authorities cannot leave private expansion to go unchecked lest poor parents suffer the double injustice of paying precious household resources only to learn, too late, that substandard teaching has added nothing to their children’s prospects. These shifts suggest a more multifaceted role for the state but do not suggest and cannot permit the replacement of public education, which retains a critical function in universalising basic schooling and reaching the most marginalised. Rather, governments need to strike a delicate balance and think more holistically and inclusively if they really want to ensure a quality education for all.

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Adelabu, M. and Rose, P. (2004) ‘Non-state Provision of Basic Education in Nigeria’ in G. Larbi, M. Adelabu, P. Rose, D. Jawara, O. Nwaorgu and S. Vyas (eds.) Nigeria: Study of Non-State Providers of Basic Services, available online at http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-socialsciences/government-society/idd/research/non-state-providers/nigeria-report-23march05.pdf, accessed on 11 August 2015.

Alderman, H., Orazem, P. and Paterno, E. (2001) School Quality, School Cost, and the Public/Private School Choices of Low-Income Households in Pakistan, The Journal of Human Resources, 36(2), 304326.

Andrabi, T., Das, J. and Khwaja, A. (2015) Delivering Education: A Pragmatic Framework for Improving Education in Low-Income Countries, available online at http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/06/02/090224b082ee757c/2_0/Re ndered/PDF/Delivering0edu0low0income0countries.pdf, accessed on 11 August 2015.

Bray, M. (1996) Privatisation of secondary education: Issues and policy implications, International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, Paris: UNESCO.

Bray, M. (2004) Sharing the burden of financing: government and household partnerships for basic education, Economic Affairs, 24(4), 22-26.

Brighouse, H. (2004) What’s wrong with privatising schools?, Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38(4), 617-631.

Colclough, C. (1996) Education and the Market: Which Parts of the Neoliberal Solution are Correct?, World Development, 24(4), 589-610.

Day Ashley, L., Mcloughlin, C., Aslam, M., Engel, J., Wales, J., Rawal, S., Batley, R., Kingdon, G., Nicolai, S. and Rose, P. (2014) Education Rigorous Literature Review: The role and impact of private schools in developing countries, London: DFID.

Day Ashley, L. and Wales, J. (2014) The Impact of Non-State Private, Philanthropic and Religious Schools in Developing Countries: A synthesis of the evidence from two rigorous reviews, London: ODI.

De, A., Majumdar, M., Noronha, C. and Samson, M. (2002) ‘Private Schools and Universal Elementary Education’ in R. Govinda (ed.) India Education Report: A Profile of Basic Education, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Department for International Development (DFID) (2013) Business Case and Intervention Summary: Developing Effective Private Education – Nigeria (DEEPEN), available online at http://devtracker.dfid.gov.uk/projects/GB-1-202678/documents/, accessed on 14 August 2015.

Drèze, J. and Gazdar, H. (1997) ‘Uttar Pradesh: The Burden of Inertia’ in J. Drèze and A. Sen (eds.) Indian Development: Selected Regional Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Education Support Sector Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN) (2010) Monitoring Learning Achievement, Baseline Assessment 2010, Lagos State, Abuja: ESSPIN.

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Härmä, J. (2011) Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN) Lagos Private School Census 2010 ‐2011 Report, available online at http://www.esspin.org/resources/report/296, accessed on 11 August 2015

Härmä, J. (2013) Access or quality? Why do families living in slums choose low-cost private schools in Lagos, Nigeria?, Oxford Review of Education, 39(4), 548-566.

Härmä, J. and Adefisayo, F. (2013) ‘Scaling up: challenges facing low-fee private schools in the slums of Lagos, Nigeria’, in P. Srivastava (ed.) Low-fee private schooling: aggravating equity or mitigating disadvantage?, Oxford: Symposium.

James, E. (1993) Why Do Different Countries Choose a Different Public-Private Mix of Educational Services?, The Journal of Human Resources, 28(3), 571-592.

Kingdon, G. (1996) The Quality and Efficiency of Private and Public Education: A Case-Study of Urban India, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 58(1), 55-80.

Kingdon, G. (1998) Does the Labour Market Explain Lower Female Schooling in India?, The Journal of Development Studies, 35(1), 39-65.

Kingdon, G. (2005) Private and public schooling: The Indian experience, Paper presented at the Conference, Mobilizing the Private Sector for Public Education, Co-sponsored by the World Bank, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, October 5-6, 2005.

Kitaev, I. (2004) EFA and Private Education: Some Regional Experiences and Findings, Economic Affairs, 24(4), 27-30.

Lagos State Government (2013) Lagos State Development Plan 2012-2025, available online at http://www.lagosstate.gov.ng/subpage.php?k=133, accessed on 13 August 2015.

Lewin, K. (2007) The Limits to Growth of Non-Government Private Schooling in Sub Saharan Africa, Falmer: CREATE.

Lincove, J. A. (2007) Do private markets improve the quality or quantity of primary schooling in subSaharan Africa? NCSPE Occasional Paper No. 136, New York: NCSPE, Columbia University.

National Population Commission (2010) Nigeria DHS EdData Survey 2010: Education Data for DecisionMaking, Abuja: NPC.

PROBE Team (1999) Public Report on Basic Education in India, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Rose, P. (2007) Supporting Non-state Providers in Basic Education Service Delivery, Falmer: CREATE.

Save the Children (2013) The potential of low-cost community private schools to boost children’s education in Lagos: Research report, Abuja: Save the Children.

Enabling environments for education: Resourcing requirements for inclusive non-state schooling in Nigeria

Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2011) ‘Mixed Methods Research: Contemporary Issues in an Emerging Field’ in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tooley, J. (2005) Is Private Education Good for the Poor? Working Paper from a study in sub-Saharan Africa and India, June 25th 2005.

Tooley, J. and Dixon, P. (2006) ‘De facto’ privatisation of education and the poor: implications of a study from sub-Saharan Africa and India, Compare, 36(4), 443-462.

Tooley, J. (2013) School Choice in Lagos State, available online at http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/ pdf/outputs/Educ_Nigeria/61517_Tooley_School_Choice_Lagos_June2013.pdf, accessed on 5 August 2015.

Tooley, J. and Longfield, D. (2014) The Role and Impact of Private Schools in Developing Countries: A Response to DFID-commissioned ‘Rigorous Literature Review’, available online at https://research.pearson.com/content/plc/prkc/uk/open-ideas/en/articles/role-and-impact-of-privateschools/_jcr_content/par/articledownloadcompo/file.res/150330_Tooley_Longfield.pdf, accessed on 14 August 2015.

Tooley, J. and Yngstrom, I. (2014) School Choice in Lagos State - Final Summary Report, available online at http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs/Educ_Nigeria/61517_Final_Summary_Lagos_ School_Choice.pdf, accessed on 6 August 2015.

Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) (2010) National Framework for the Development and Integration of Almajirai Education into UBE Scheme, Abuja: UBEC.

World Bank (2003) Making Services Work for Poor People, World Development Report 2004, Washington DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press.

Yngstrom, I. (2014) Household Poverty and School Choice in Low-income Areas of Lagos: a qualitative case study approach, available online at http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs /Educ_Nigeria/61517_Yngstrom_Qualitative_School_Choice_Lagos_March2014.pdf, accessed on 5 August 2015