Integrating Food and Nutrition, Health, Agricultural and Environmental
Education towards Education for Sustainable Development: Lessons Learned
from the Healthy Learning Programme in Kenya
Vandenbosch, T.E.2,3; Ouko, B.A.1; Guleid, N.J.1; Were, R.A.2; Mungai, P.P.1;
Mbithe, D.D.4; Ndanyi, M.1; Chesumo, J.1; Laenen-Fox, L.2; Smets, K.2; Kosgei,
C.K.1; Walema, B.1
Presenters: Vandenbosch, T.E.2,3 and Ouko, B.A.1
Email contacts corresponding author:
t.vandenbosch@cgiar.org; tom.vandenbosch@vvob.or.ke
1
Ministry of Education, Kenya
2
Flemish Association for Development Cooperation and Technical Assistance
(VVOB), Kenya and Belgium
3
World Agroforestry Centre, Kenya
4
Kenyatta University, Kenya
Suggested conference sub-theme: Best practices on education for EE/ESD
1
ABSTRACT
Education for sustainable development (ESD) in seen as an opportunity for Kenya and
other countries to continuously build its citizens’ capacity towards healthy measures
for utilizing the country’s resources to foster sustainable livelihoods and improve the
overall quality of life. The Kenya Education Sector Support Programme (KESSP) and
the ESD Strategy for Kenya provide useful policy frameworks to make optimal use of
this opportunity.
The Healthy Learning programme is contributing to this process by creating
opportunities for schoolchildren, their parents and their communities to acquire
relevant skills and knowledge related to healthy living and productive lives. The
programme resulted from diverse experiences in school health, nutrition and feeding
in Kenya. Despite the many positive impacts achieved, most current school feeding
programmes have some shortcomings. The food provided is insufficient in quantity
and quality, the role that local agriculture can play has largely been ignored, and there
are frequent delays in the sourcing and supply of the food to schools. Most school
feeding programmes have lacked integrated approaches involving local communities
and have ignored other factors such as health and nutrition, sustainable energy sources
and use, environmental conservation, and learning about nutrition, agriculture and the
environment. The Healthy Learning programme aims to fill this gap by supporting
capacity strengthening activities at different levels (national level, district level, and
school/community level), encouraging practical learning activities and demonstrations
in model schools and their communities, and documenting and researching lessons
learned for wider application. The programme facilitates the introduction and
strengthening of educational projects like school gardens, agroforestry technologies,
livestock development, water management, and other school projects to support
learning in sustainability, food and nutrition security and natural resources
management in primary schools and their surrounding communities, while at the same
time linking current school feeding programmes to local solutions, especially in arid
and semi-arid areas. The programme does this by making optimal use of the locally
available capacity and resources at district and school levels and by facilitating new
and emerging multi-disciplinary partnerships.
2
Based on the experiences and lessons learned in the Healthy Learning programme,
this paper describes suggested approaches and methods for the integration of food and
nutrition, health, agricultural and environmental education toward ESD.
Recommendations are made for effective partnership development among schools,
districts, the Ministry of Education and other ministries and agencies, NGOs,
development partners and the private sector to facilitate ESD in the formal education
system, both within the curriculum and co-curricular activities. Ways of addressing
multi-sectoral issues, sustainability, and continuous learning and programme
improvement processes in education are also discussed.
3
1
INTRODUCTION
The Healthy Learning programme in Kenya facilitates the integration of food and
nutrition, health, agricultural and environmental education in primary schools and
Kenya. This paper presents a synthesis of lessons learned in the programme since
early 2008. These lessons are expected to be useful for similar interventions in
education for sustainable development in Kenya and elsewhere.
4
2
BACKGROUND
2.1
Kenya country profile
Kenya is located in East Africa has a surface area of 587,000 km2 of which 576,000
km2 comprise land surface and 11,000 km2 water. The equator passes almost along
the middle of the country and altitudes vary between sea level and 5,230 m at the peak
of Mount Kenya. Between this topography are diverse landforms such as plains,
plateaus, mountain ranges, hills and the glaciated Mount Kenya peak. Rainfall
distribution varies between 200 mm in arid lands and up to 2,000 mm and is usually
bimodal, with the highest amounts received in March and April and lower amounts in
October and November. About 88 per cent of the country lies in the Arid and SemiArid Lands (ASALs) mainly in the northern and eastern regions. Most of the
population is concentrated around the high potential areas, which are characterized by
adequate rainfall and mild temperatures mainly in central, south-western parts of the
Rift Valley, plateau regions and metropolitan Nairobi.
The population of Kenya in 2008 was estimated at around 38 million, and it continues
to grow at 2.7% per year. Kenya has a diverse socio-cultural context with some 42
ethnic groups. The diversity of these ethnic groups brings with it diverse cultural
beliefs and practices which influence ways of life, economic activities and
environmental management.
Agriculture is the backbone of Kenya’s economy, although only 15% of Kenya’s total
land area has sufficient fertility and rainfall to be farmed an only 7-8% can be
classified as first-class land. Most families rely on agriculture for their livelihood, and
75% of the labour force is engaged in farming. GDP per capita has been about
US$1,700 per year since 2007 and the agricultural sector generates 23.8% of GDP.
In Kenya, communities have generally relied on their vast indigenous knowledge and
technology to interact with the environment in a sustainable manner. However,
industrialisation, globalisation and population increase are bringing new challenges in
sustainable utilization of the country’s resources. This has partly resulted in some
disruption of natural and cultural systems.
5
Education and capacity strengthening are at the heart of sustainable development and
are therefore key means to achieving sustainable utilisation of natural resources. In
2006, the national adult literacy rate was 61.5 percent and the numeracy rate 64.5
percent.
2.2
Education policy in Kenya
The provision of education and training to all Kenyans is fundamental to the overall
development strategy of the Government of Kenya (GoK). The government
recognizes the strategic importance of raising the overall education level of Kenyans
within the context of poverty reduction and economic growth. Education is not only a
welfare indicator; it is also a key determinant of earnings and, therefore, an important
exit route from poverty.
The goals of both primary and secondary education in Kenya – as stated in various
policy documents – include the following:
- Preparing learners to fit in the world of work (the learner should get adequate
knowledge and skills to be able to earn a living);
- Preparing learners to fit into and contribute towards the well being of society
(the learner should know how to live with others and deal with daily
challenges in society).
The Government of Kenya (GoK) developed a Sessional Paper (Sessional Paper No. 1
of 2005, A Policy Framework for Education, Training and Research) which provides
a legal framework for reforms in the education sector. The Sessional Paper guides
education and provides policy guidelines that will ensure every Kenyan has the right
to education and training no matter his or her socio-economic status. The right to
education will be achieved through the provision of an inclusive and quality education
that is accessible and relevant to all Kenyans. This vision is guided by the
understanding that quality education and training contribute significantly to economic
growth, better employment opportunities and expansion of income generating
opportunities.
The Sessional Paper sets the overall policy framework which provides major reforms
in the current education system to enable all Kenyans to have access to and acquire
6
lifelong education and training of high quality. One of the goals outlined in the
Sessional Paper is “to improve all aspects of education and training quality so that
recognized and measurable learning outcomes are achieved, especially in literacy,
numeracy and essential life skills relevant to the world of work by 2010”.
To operationalize the Sessional Paper, the Government developed the Kenya
Education Sector Support Programme (KESSP), a Sector-Wide Approach providing a
comprehensive understanding of the issues and reform priorities in education, training
and research with a view to coordinate and harmonize all the education interventions
in the country. KESSP is reviewed annually by the Ministry of Education and its
development partners.
2.3
Structure of Kenya’s education system
The education and training sector in Kenya contains:
- Early Childhood Development and Pre-School Education
- Primary Education
- Secondary Education
- University Education
- Technical, Industrial, Vocational and Entrepreneurship Training (TIVET)
- Teacher Education and Training
- Non-formal Education
- Adult Basic Education
- Special Education
The structure of Kenya’s 8-4-4 education system (8 years primary education, 4 years
secondary education and 4 years university education) is represented in Figure 1. This
structure was implemented in 1985, to replace the 7-4-2-3 system (7 years primary
education, 4 years at ordinary level, 2 years at advanced level and 3 years at the
university level). The Government of Kenya (GoK) recognizes the need to create
opportunities for post-primary school graduates and children and youth who do not
complete primary or secondary school or do not transit to higher levels of learning.
Youth Polytechnics and Technical Institutes are being revitalized so that they can
offer market-driven courses to cater for these groups of children.
7
The broad objectives of education sector interventions in Kenya as described in the
Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation (ERSWEC) of
2003 are to achieve 100% net primary school enrolment rate (which was at an
estimated 91.6% in 2007 (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2008)) and reduce the
disparity in access and quality of education. Secondary objectives are to improve
access and quality and to reduce disparities at all levels of education. This is in line
with the vision for the education sector for 2030 which is “to have globally
competitive quality education, training and research for sustainable development”, as
described in Kenya’s Vision 2030.
University Education
(4 to 6 years)
Secondary Education
(4 years)
Form I - IV
Middle Level Colleges
(maximum 3 years):
National Polytechnics
Teacher Training Colleges
Vocational and Technical
Education and Training
Primary Education
(8 years)
Standard 1 - 8
Youth / Village
Polytechnic
Indicates a strong link (formalized)
Indicates a weak link (if there is any link).
Some links are in the process of being strengthened
Figure 1: The structure of Kenya’s education system
2.4
Primary education in Kenya
The minimum start age of primary education in Kenya is six years and it runs for
eight years. The eight years of primary education are concluded with the Kenya
Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) examination. Primary education in Kenya
promotes growth and imparts literacy and numeracy skills. It lays a firm foundation
for further formal education and training and life-long learning.
8
English is the official language and the medium of instruction from Standard 4 of
primary school, while the language of the school catchment area is used for
instruction in the first three grades.
The current policy in Kenya is that a primary school teacher should be able to teach
all the seven subjects in the primary school curriculum. However, the two years of
teacher training are not adequate for the teacher trainee to acquire mastery in subject
content and skills of pedagogy in all the seven subjects. This negatively affects the
quality of teaching offered after the training. Other factors that contribute to low
quality education include poor resource management in primary schools, inadequate
in-service training of teachers, poor learning environment due to overcrowding,
inadequate facilities, poor health and sanitation, gender-insensitive environments,
barriers for those with special needs and inadequacies in quality assurance.
The school year matches the calendar year and is divided into three terms: Term One
runs from January to March or April, Term Two from May to July and Term Three
from September to November. Primary school pupils typically range in age from six
to seventeen years. There are two main reasons for this wide age range. First, there is
no prescribed age to start school. A pupil typically begins Standard One around age
six or seven, however the age varies widely among children. Additionally since the
introduction of free primary education in 2003, students who had previously dropped
out years earlier due to a lack of school fees returned to school at the grade at which
they left. A second reason for the wide age range is the frequency with which pupils
repeat grades. Pupils with difficulties often repeat a year in the hope of achieving
higher marks. Rural pupils from poorer households and with little educational
background at home often have difficulty grasping the curriculum and so are held
back regularly. It is not uncommon for a pupil to repeat a year two or more times.
Kenya has made rapid progress toward the Millennium Development Goal of
universal primary education by 2015, in part due to the elimination of school fees in
2003. Enrollment in primary schools rose from 5.9 million to 8.2 million between
2002 and 2008, an increase of nearly 39 percent. Yet this progress creates its own new
challenges. First, the influx of new students has raised pupil-teacher ratios. Second,
integrating new students, many of whom have had little preparation, can be difficult.
9
This leads to overstretching of physical facilities with overcrowded classrooms which
leads to declined examination performance in some primary schools.
2.5
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Kenya
Sustainable development issues to be addressed through education in Kenya are
complex and interlinked. The issues can be classified as societal, economic and
environmental. Societal issues include: concerns of poor governance, corruption,
bigotry towards cultural diversity, ethnic animosity, gender inequality, HIV/AIDS,
incidence of malaria, tuberculosis (TB) and other communicable and noncommunicable diseases, human rights abuse, all forms of violence and increased
insecurity, scolded lifestyles and behaviour, drug and substance abuse, and erosion of
cultural values and morals, among others.
The Government of Kenya (GoK) recognizes the development challenges facing the
country and – being a signatory to many international agreements and conventions –
is keen and aware of its responsibilities to implement measures that promote
sustainable development through different modes of education. For this reason, the
government recognises Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) as an
opportunity to continuously build its citizen’s capacity towards healthy measures for
utilising the country’s resources to lead productive livelihoods and improve quality of
life. It therefore became paramount to develop an implementation strategy to guide
and give direction to the provision of ESD in all sectors of the economy.
The Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) Strategy for Kenya (National
Environment Management Authority (NEMA), 2008) has ‘domesticated’ the
objectives of the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD),
which are to improve quality of education at all levels, reorient education, enhance
public awareness and understanding, and build capacity for sustainable development.
One important emphasis in the strategy is that ESD’s goals can only be realised
through a multi-sectoral approach. ESD stakeholders are therefore drawn from the
government, civil society, private sector and development partners.
10
The integration of ESD across all sectors is expected to enhance the attainment of
sustainable development guided by the following strategy objectives:
- To enhance the role of education and learning for equitable, efficient and
sustainable utilisation of the country’s resources;
- To promote quality education through diverse learning and public awareness
for improved quality of life and productive livelihoods; and
- To promote teaching and learning that inculcates appropriate values,
behaviours and lifestyles for good governance and sustainability.
2.6
The Healthy Learning programme in Kenya
The Healthy Learning programme in Kenya operates within the policy frameworks
earlier described, and more specifically falls within the Investment Programme
“School Health, Nutrition and Feeding” of the Kenya Education Sector Support
Programme (KESSP).
The Healthy Learning programme resulted from diverse experiences in school health,
nutrition and feeding in Kenya since 1980. Despite the many positive impacts
achieved, most current school feeding programmes have some shortcomings. The
food provided is insufficient in quantity (it is limited to covering lunch only) and
quality (the menu tends to consist mostly of maize and beans only). The food is
transported to the schools over long distances, often after being shipped in from
abroad. The role local agriculture can play has largely been ignored. There are
frequent delays in the sourcing and supply of food to schools, leading to high costs
and difficulties in sustaining the interventions. Most school feeding programmes have
lacked integrated approaches involving local communities and have ignored other
factors such as health and nutrition, energy sources and use, and environmental
conservation. Also, school feeding programmes have not been linked to formal
education and learning experiences in nutrition, agriculture and the environment. The
Kenyan Ministry of Education and other organisations – including the UN World
Food Programme (WFP) – now advocate moving away from over-reliance on food
aid for school meals, which creates disincentives for local farmers, to a system that
incorporates local agriculture and opportunities for learning about nutrition,
agriculture and the environment. WFP is currently reviewing its policy from relief
agency to food assistance agency.
11
This is why the Ministry of Education developed a “Healthy Learning” programme in
2007 in partnership with the Flemish Association for Development Cooperation and
Technical Assistance (VVOB) and the World Agroforestry Centre. The programme
started in early 2008 and includes capacity strengthening at different levels and
demonstrations in model schools and districts in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya,
while at the same time documenting and researching lessons learned for wider
application. The programme explores the introduction and strengthening of school
gardens/farms with agroforestry technologies, small livestock production units,
integrated water management, health and sanitation and other school projects to
support learning about food security, natural resources management, health and
nutrition in primary schools and their surrounding communities.
The Healthy Learning programme is a six year programme (first phase from 2008 to
2010; second phase from 2011 to 2013). One of the expected results of the first phase
(2008-2010) of this programme is that 25 model schools in disadvantaged areas will
be applying integrated and multi-disciplinary methods of life skills development for
improved food security, nutrition and health to the benefit of poor and vulnerable
children, their families and communities. The 25 model schools are located in 5 semiarid and arid districts in Kenya (Kajiado, Laikipia East, Machakos, Narok North and
Samburu), with 5 primary schools in each of these districts. Healthy Learning model
schools are accessible learning and information hubs on nutrition, agriculture,
environment and health practices where students, teachers, parents, community
members and other visitors can learn and share knowledge and experiences.
The Healthy Learning programme operates as much as possible within the existing
government frameworks and regulations and in terms of procurement policies. The
programme also encourages cross-sectoral partnerships and the use of locally
available expertise to support the schools.
12
3
METHODOLOGY USED TO ANALYZE LESSONS LEARNED
The Healthy Learning programme includes an important result area on documentation
and research on lessons learned. The lessons learned described in this paper were
drawn from the following sources:
1. Baseline study
2. Evaluations of training courses and workshops
3. Monitoring tools
4. Self reflection and team reflection
5. Critical stories of change
3.1
Baseline study
In order to be able to properly monitor and evaluate the effects of the programme, a
baseline study was carried out from April to August 2008. The survey addressed the
following issues:
- Is school feeding and agricultural, environmental and nutrition education
integrated in district development plans and projects?
- What are the interactions between different relevant line ministries at district
level in relation to school programmes?
- What is the current status of agricultural, environmental and nutrition
education and the diversity and sustainability of the school feeding
programme?
- What is the current status of school feeding in the schools? What about
hygiene, food storage facilities, kitchen facilities, qualifications of staff
involved? Where do the children eat? What are the strengths and constraints of
the current school feeding programme?
- Have district officers, school managers and teachers been exposed to any type
of in-service training related to nutrition education and sustainability of school
feeding? If yes, which trainings?
- Is there any dissemination of agricultural, environmental and nutritional
knowledge and skills taking place through the schools?
- Are there any school gardens/farms or livestock units which are used as
learning and demonstration centers on agricultural practices for the
schoolchildren and the communities? If yes, on which technologies? How are
they organized and managed? Is the community involved? What are the
13
challenges? Are they being used as educational tools in the school curriculum?
If yes, in which subjects and topics and how?
- Are there any income generating activities in the schools? If yes, which ones,
what is their purpose, and what are the challenges and opportunities?
- Which health and sanitation facilities do the schools have? Which health and
sanitation attitudes and activities (e.g. washing of hands, waste disposal) exist
in the schools? How appropriate are these activities and facilities for the
following groups: children with special needs, young children, and adolescent
girls.
- Are there any relevant co-curricular clubs active in the schools? If yes, which
ones and what are their activities?
- How are life skills being addressed in the schools? Are life skills taught in the
curriculum? Are any of the co-curricular activities addressing life skills?
- Is local production by the communities or the schools supplementing the
school feeding programme diet? What is the current capacity of the local
communities to contribute to school meals in kind? Are schools in any way
involved in the local agricultural product market chains?
- What action seems indicated by an analysis of the above responses?
The baseline study used a participatory descriptive cross-sectional research design for
the research in the 5 districts and 25 model schools participating in the Healthy
Learning programme. This research method was appropriate as it allowed extensive
data collection within a limited time frame and at the same time generated both
quantitative and qualitative data for the programme. Teachers, school support staff,
pupils, community members and district officials from key line ministries were
interviewed. Structured questionnaires, in depth interviews, focus group discussions,
observation records, and photographs were used to collect information.
3.2
Evaluations of training courses and workshops
Healthy Learning training courses and workshops are being evaluated using a model
developed by Kirkpatrick (1994) (see Figure 2). Starting with level 1, each level of
evaluation measures more far-reaching consequences of training.
14
Level 1, or reactions / response, evaluation gauges learners’ immediate reaction to
training. Did they like it? Did they even complete it? Was the material relevant to
their work? Did learners believe that they personally benefited from the training? Did
the training meet the expectations of learners? This type of evaluation is often called a
“smilesheet”.
Level 2, or learning, evaluation asks how much participants actually learned. What
specific skills, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, or understandings did they acquire as a
result of training?
Level 3, or transfer / performance / application, evaluation measures to what degree
learners can, will, and do apply learning to their jobs and lives. How much better can
learners perform their jobs as a result of training? Do trainees apply what they learned
at the right time and in an appropriate, accurate way?
Level 4, or results, evaluation gauges the business results of training. Were business
goals met? Was training a worthy investment of organizational resources? From a
business and organizational perspective, this is the overall reason for a training
program, yet level 4 results are not typically addressed. Determining results in
financial terms is difficult to measure, and is hard to link directly with training.
Figure 2: Kirkpatrick's four-level training evaluation model
According to Kirkpatrick’s model, evaluation should always begin with level 1, and
then, as time and budget allow, should move sequentially through levels 2, 3, and 4.
15
Information from each prior level serves as a base for the next level of evaluation.
Each successive level represents a more precise measure of effectiveness, but at the
same time requires a more rigorous and time-consuming analysis. Level 1 evaluations
do not measure training effectiveness: several studies have found that whether
learners liked a course correlated poorly with how much they learned or how well
they were able to apply their learning (Dixon, 1990).
Evaluations of training courses and workshops in the Healthy Learning programme
have so far mainly focused mainly on levels 1, 2 and 3 in Kirkpatrick’s model. Level
4 evaluation will only be possible at a later stage of the programme, when there will
be a more comprehensive overview available of income generated and learning
outcomes achieved through the Healthy Learning programme. So far, the following
tools have been used for level 1, 2 and 3 evaluations:
a. Informal feedback mechanisms during and after the training courses and
workshops to monitor the experiences and learning of participants (level 1 and
2 evaluation).
b. Anonymous feedback questionnaires for participants completed at the end of
each course or workshop (level 1 evaluation).
c. Assessment of project proposals developed by school teams after one of the
training courses. All Healthy Learning model schools were asked to develop
project proposals for Healthy Learning interventions. These proposals were
evaluated on criteria like stakeholders' involvement and participation in the
project, relevance of the proposed model to the themes of Healthy Learning,
contribution from the school and the community (financial and/or in-kind),
teaching and learning aspects of the project, sustainability of the intervention,
demonstrative value, technical feasibility, and budget (level 2 and 3
evaluation).
d. Self reflection exercises in Healthy Learning programme team meetings (level
1 and 2 evaluation).
e. Reporting and monitoring by model schools and district officers (level 2 and 3
evaluation).
f. Monitoring and technical follow-up visits to model schools and districts by the
Healthy Learning programme team (level 2 and 3 evaluation).
16
3.3
Monitoring tools
The Healthy Learning programme developed a set of monitoring tools for use at
different levels (school level, district level, programme level).
One set of the monitoring tools enable model schools to analyze and learn from their
own progress. These tools enable reporting and feedback in the following areas:
- Progress of activities;
- Sustainability of Healthy Learning projects;
- Links to learning activities;
- Collaboration with relevant agencies;
- Inventory;
- Performance of the projects;
- Planned activities;
- Financial reporting.
Another monitoring tool aims to assist district officers to follow-up school projects
and to provide guidance and relevant technical advice. Using this tool, qualitative and
quantitative data (and pictures) are being collected in the following areas:
- Basic school data and school enrolment records;
- School projects;
- Hygiene conditions related to school meals;
- School de-worming;
- Sanitation conditions;
- Environmental conditions;
- Children’s perceptions on Healthy Learning;
- Teachers’ perceptions on Healthy Learning;
- School Management Committee (SMC) and parents’ perception on the
appropriateness and success of Healthy learning project(s) and activities;
- Inventory;
- Financial data;
- Perceptions of the monitoring officer(s).
The information gathered with the monitoring tools is shared at the different levels of
the programme and used to make adjustments to the interventions when necessary.
17
3.4
Self reflection and team reflection
The Healthy Learning programme team regularly examines what has worked and
what hasn't. The reflection exercises address questions such as:
- Where did we fail in the past as a programme team? Where did we succeed?
What could we do better?
- What are our top goals for the future?
- What can we do to be more proactive?
- Are there any aspects we are ignoring out of fear of change or lack of
knowledge?
- How are our beliefs about ESD changing?
- What minor and/or major changes can we make in order to directly improve
the Healthy Learning programme?
3.5
Critical stories of change
Critical stories of change (developed by ActionAid International) are a learning tool
to help us understand how and why change happens. Critical stories of change create
a platform for critical assessment and accessible documentation. Instead of doing a
traditional case study – which involves few people and little transformation in
learning – critical stories of change attempt to facilitate learning at every level: from
dialogue around the process, to critically analyzing stakeholders and putting the
programme in the broader policy, social and economic context.
18
4
LESSONS LEARNED
A number of lessons learned have been drawn based on the wealth of information and
feedback gathered and analyzed with the methods described above. Lessons learned
so far include the following:
1. Food, nutrition, agricultural and environmental experiences can be used as a
way of making primary education more relevant to the local situation.
2. Relevant primary education can contribute to community development.
3. Teachers need more in-service training and support.
4. Relevant teaching and learning support materials are important.
5. Community ownership is crucial for relevant and effective change in primary
schools.
6. Primary schools as resource and outreach centres to the surrounding
community.
7. School pupils as knowledge transfer agents from experiences learnt in school
to the community.
4.1
Food, nutrition, agricultural and environmental experiences can be used as a
way of making primary education more relevant to the local situation
School curricula (in Kenya and many other countries) are mostly dominated by
competitive academic subjects. These subjects prioritize end-of-course examinations
and discourage the development of locally relevant skills. But decentralized curricular
interpretation and adaptation and contextualization of contents and methods is
possible within prescribed national curricula. National common core content can be
combined with content based on the local situation. Many of the subjects can be
taught in a contextualized way, providing students with a more effective way to
understand concepts. Contextualization of content and pedagogy using food, nutrition,
agricultural and environmental experiences offer encouraging options to improve the
relevance of primary education. School gardens and the local environment can be
used as media for contextualizing teaching and learning and have potential to enable
children to cope more effectively with general subject matter in school. At the same
time, contextualized teaching and learning can contribute to the skills formation
process.
19
In the Healthy Learning programme, the school projects are being used as entry points
to different topics and subjects in the primary school curriculum, including
Mathematics and Sciences.
4.2
Relevant primary education can contribute to community development
The relevance of primary education can positively influence community development.
Relevant education using examples from natural resources management enables
people to live more productive and healthy lives and helps imparting life skills which
are useful in alleviating poverty and conserving the environment. Policy makers and
shapers, schools and communities have to seek ways to make the content and
approaches of primary education more meaningful and effective within the local
context.
In the Healthy Learning programme, pupils and communities have already copied
ideas and technologies related to water harvesting, vegetable gardening and tree
planting from the school projects and they are implementing these at home.
4.3
Teachers need more in-service training and support
Teachers (including headteachers) are the key to effective learning and relevant
education of good quality. Unfortunately, teachers are sometimes inadequately
prepared, trained, supervised and supported in their work. Teachers must strive to
make education interesting and relevant through the use of appropriate teaching and
learning methods and through interpretation of the prescribed curriculum in relation to
the local context. Teacher training courses and programmes can empower teachers to
play an important role in making education relevant. Teachers who are allowed and
encouraged to participate in decision-making and to treat the curriculum with some
flexibility and room for contextualization are usually better motivated.
The Healthy Learning programme provides in-service teacher training courses and
workshops, as well as on-the-job support for teachers by education officials and other
relevant experts. Our experiences show that teachers often have different levels of
interest and commitment and more research is needed into factors affecting teacher’s
performance in Healthy Learning.
20
4.4
Relevant teaching and learning support materials are important
Even if teachers are competent and well trained, they often find it difficult to teach
effectively because of the lack of adequate teaching and learning support materials
that are relevant to the local situation. Learning materials should be linked to the local
environment and learners’ experience. The school environment can be used as a
learning resource and teaching and learning support materials can draw on natural
resources as the local context for learning.
An example of good practice in terms of relevant learning materials is the Young
African Express, an innovative monthly educational newspaper for young people
aligned to the curriculum of several East African countries and filled with illustrated
articles, cartoons, facts and games focusing on essential life skills, improved health
and nutrition, and environmental sustainability. Model schools and districts
participating in the Healthy Learning programme have all been subscribed to the
Young African Express. Both teachers and pupils have expressed satisfaction with the
magazine in terms of content, relevance and lay-out.
The Healthy Learning programme has been supporting partnerships with relevant line
ministries (including Agriculture, Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid
Lands, Environment and Mineral Resources, Forestry and Wildlife, Public Health and
Sanitation, Livestock Development, and Water and Irrigation) as well as NGO’s and
other stakeholders, and these often have learning support materials available which
are useful to schools.
4.5
Community ownership is crucial for relevant and effective change in primary
schools
Successful interventions to make primary education more relevant empower local
communities and use their expertise. Education for sustainable development thrives
on the conviction that a cause is important to others and also relevant to one’s own
life (GreenCOM, 2000). Therefore it is necessary that the needs of the community are
identified (MacJessie-Mbewe, 2004). Logically the community itself can best locate
the most crucial problems. Most projects use Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)
techniques to assist the community in this process. Parents can also identify problems
in the school (Uemura, 1999), and help with monitoring and evaluation of school21
community linkages. Involving community members in the process of planning,
implementation and evaluation also helps in ensuring sustainability of schoolcommunity linkages. When parents are involved in school-community linkages, they
become more willing to cooperate with the school to improve the children’s learning
and to develop the community. Teaching children about topics that are directly
relevant to their communities, such as agroforestry, the environment and natural
resources management will strengthen bonds between schools and communities and
possibly create more involvement of these in the teaching and learning process.
In the Healthy Learning programme in Kenya, parents and communities are
contributing part of the required resources in the projects in kind (e.g. labor,
materials) or in cash and are actively involved in the implementation and management
of the school projects. Training of representatives of the School Management
Committees (SMC’s) from the onset of the programme has enhanced ownership and
participation of parents in the activities at the school level and enabled schools to start
off activities even before any funds were received.
School Management Committees (SMC’s), parents, teachers, pupils and sometimes
other relevant stakeholders have been involved in the identification and selection of
viable Healthy Learning projects in their schools. Projects identified by the Healthy
Learning model schools include tree planting, small livestock production units, water
harvesting activities, school gardens and poultry projects. Parents are also involved in
the purchase of project inputs and are also donating some of the required inputs.
Parents and pupils are often involved in practical activities such as planting of crops
or watering of the school garden.
4.6
Primary schools as resource and outreach centres to the surrounding community
Good practices can be shared between a primary school and its community. Schools
can function as experimental grounds and sustainable development centers where both
modern and local knowledge is exchanged through interaction and involvement of
different actors. Local experts have a vast wealth of relevant knowledge and skills,
can be invited as resource persons to schools and can help teachers and students learn
about agriculture and the local environment. On the other hand, parents and
22
community members can learn new ideas, methods and techniques from their children
and teachers and from school gardens and school demonstrations.
This approach is being put into practice in the Healthy Learning programme in Kenya
where primary schools are establishing relevant projects related to food, nutrition,
agriculture, livestock, water, health and environment which become accessible
information hubs on good practices where students, teachers, parents, community
members and other visitors share knowledge and experiences.
Officers from different line ministries, civil society organizations and the private
sector can assist with technical knowledge and link schools to other institutions and
experts. The Healthy Learning programme has been facilitating partnerships between
primary schools (Ministry of Education) and other relevant local stakeholders.
Healthy Learning model schools are now increasingly seeking technical expertise
from relevant line ministries, NGO’s and local experts. This ensures that schools
receive useful technical input for their projects and also serves to promote
collaboration among various line ministries at the local/district level, contributing to
the effective coordination of education interventions.
The demonstration projects in Healthy Learning model schools are encouraging pupils
and community members to acquire useful skills and competencies and schools are
becoming change agents in the local communities.
Healthy Learning model schools serve as multi-disciplinary entry points to the
surrounding communities. Attitude and behavior change is already being witnessed in
some communities. In Kathiani Primary School for example, parents now view the
Healthy Learning programme as beneficial to both their children (in terms of
nutritional and educational value) and to themselves (new skills, income generation).
Community members are taking up ideas from the school (e.g. water tanks for
rainwater harvesting, small-scale irrigation). The school has also given pupils seeds to
grow crops and vegetables at home, thus contributing to the transfer of knowledge and
skills from the school to the home environment.
23
4.7
School pupils as knowledge transfer agents from experiences learnt in school to
the community
Knowledge and skills learnt in childhood are more likely to be retained and practiced
in future life and therefore offering sustainable solutions to existing problems. The
child's mind is receptive to new ideas and technologies. Studies have documented that
schoolchildren are effective change agents; whatever is learned – including new
technologies in food production and environmental sustainability – is likely to be
transferred to the community (Sherman, 2003). Other studies show that nutrition,
agricultural and environmental education to school children is among the wisest
investments that any government and donors can make to address existing problems
(WFP, 2000).
The child and the school are inseparable. The school offers a proper setting for such
education since the child spends most of its time in school (9 months in a year)
(Mbithe, 2008). The school is also a protected environment, which instills confidence
and builds self-esteem to a child (FAO, 2003; FAO 2005). The teachers “in loco
parentis” (in place of the parent, as role models) play the role of the parent(s) in
instilling helpful nutrition habits until when the child goes back home (Piek, 1996).
The Healthy Learning programme plans to do more research on potential assessment
of impacts on communities of nutrition, agricultural and environmental education in
schools and school gardens.
24
5
CONCLUSION
Successful interventions in education for sustainable development are usually multidisciplinary and complex. It is therefore essential to share good practices and
document lessons learned. The Healthy Learning programme in Kenya has shown that
coordination is needed at the macro level between the Ministry of Education and other
ministries and organizations, as well as at the micro level between schools,
communities and relevant stakeholders. Each partner has assets and expertise critical
to make such programmes succeed. Teacher training and technical support, relevant
learning materials and community ownership and involvement are all crucial and can
be addressed more effectively when working in partnership. The experiences in
Healthy Learning also show that children can be effective change agents in their
communities. The Healthy Learning programme is taking these lessons learned into
account for the future of the programme.
More research is still needed on the use of school projects as teaching and learning
aids and the impact on learning, as well as on the effects of Healthy Learning on
communities.
25
6
REFERENCES
Mbithe, D., J. Kimiywe, J. Waudo, J. Orodho (2008). Promotion of Nutrition
Education Interventions in Rural and Urban Primary Schools in Machakos District,
Kenya. Journal of Applied Biosciences 6: 130-139.
Dixon, N.M. (1990). Action Learning, Action Science and Learning New Skills.
Industrial and Commercial Training 22(3): 10-16.
FAO (2005). Setting Up and Running a School Garden: A Manual for Teachers,
Parents and Communities. FAO, Rome, Italy.
GreenCOM (2000). Lessons from School-Based Environmental Education Programs
in Three African Countries. Academy for Educational Development (AED),
Washington DC.
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2008). Kenya Facts and Figures 2008. Kenya
National Bureau of Statistics, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1994). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. BerrettKoehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
MacJessie-Mbewe, S. (2004). Rural Communities-Education Relationship in
Developing Countries: The Case of Malawi. International Education Journal, 5: 308330.
National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) (2008). Kenya: Education
For Sustainable Development Implementation Strategy. National Environment
Management Authority (NEMA), Nairobi, Kenya.
Piek, G.C. (1996). School Management 2. Maskew Miller Longman, Cape Town
South Africa.
Sherman, J. (2003). From Nutritional Needs to Classroom Lessons: Can We Make a
Difference? Food, Nutrition and Agriculture 33: 45-51.
26
Uemura, M. (1999). Community Participation in Education: What do we know?
Effective Schools and Teachers and the Knowledge Management System HDNED.
World Bank, Washington DC.
WFP (2000). School Feeding Handbook. WFP, Rome, Italy.
27