Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Maputo pres turmaine
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Maputo pres turmaine

202

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
202
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Higher Education and Education for All: The Case of Two Solitudes? IAU Experts’ Seminar 25-26 January 2007 Maputo, Mozambique
  • 2. Reasons for IAU’s involvement• Importance of EFA globally and to UNESCO• IAU’s commitment to holistic view of education and intra-sectoral inter-dependence• Concern of IAU’s membership• Lack of knowledge about intersections• Relatively low level of involvement by HEIs in EFA
  • 3. Justification of the TORs• Feasibility (pilot project; scope limitation)• Interest to all our membership (inter-universities; worldwide)• The data should be easily available (North-South)• In harmony with our values (partnerships)
  • 4. Partners• Financial partner: – SIDA (Swedish International Development Agency)• Collaborating partners – For the Expert’s Seminar • EMU; UNESCO Harare; WGHE; AAU – For the pilot project • UNESCO Harare; WGHE; AAU; AUF; AUCC; NUFFIC
  • 5. Methodology Aspects• Three phases – Data collection – Meeting – Networking and advocacy• Two targets/Two questionnaires – Development agencies/associations (22 contacted/13 responded) – Institutions (88 contacted/33 responded)
  • 6. Total Number of Responses (Agencies) 5%36% 59% Questionnaire not completed Questionnaire completed No answer
  • 7. % of Projects Linked to EFA (Agencies)76543210 1 < 10% 10-20% 25-50% 50-75% > 75%
  • 8. Funding of Inter-University Partnerships in EFA (Agencies) AUCC AUCC AUF AUF DFID NUFFIC DDC USAID NUFIC PIE USAID42% 58% Yes No
  • 9. TeTr Q ach ai ni ua e ng lity r T 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 of of r ain M E in g an d u a g ca Te em tion ac en hi ng t St M aff G et Te en h ac de od s hi r ng Iss R u es es Ad o m urc in es ist No ra n- t io Fo n r m Lite al ra Di Ed cy st a n uc ce atio n EF Mi L ea A no rn in Im r ity g pa G ct ro on up Areas of Involvement (Agencies) So s c Le iety gi sla t io Ev n al ua tio IC n T of O EF th er A s: H IV
  • 10. Di s ta nc e Te L 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ac ear he n in rT g G ra Te en i de nin ac h rI g Q ing ss ua R ue s lity esTr o ou ai r ni Ev f Ed ces ng a u of lu at ca ti M io n on an ag of E Te em F ac en A hi ng t St M aff et ho ds No n- IC Fo Li T rm te al ra Ed cy Ad uc m a in tion E F Mi is A no tra Im r ity tion pa G ct ro on ups Areas Where HEIS Should Be Involved (Agencies) So c Le iety gi s O latio th n er s: H IV
  • 11. University Involment in EFA (Agencies) 17%33% 50% Inexistant Insufficient Average
  • 12. Demand From Universities in the South (Agencies) 17%17% 66% Yes No No answer
  • 13. University Expertise in EFA (Agencies) 25% 50% 25% Yes No No answer
  • 14. Total Number of Responses (Institutions) 35% 25 projects63% 2% Questionnaire completed Questionnaire not completed No answer
  • 15. Target Regions (Institutions) 4% 11% 11% 49% 25%Sub-Saharan Africa Asia & the Pacific Middle East & North AfricaLatin America & The Caribbean North America & Europe
  • 16. Q ua l ity of Te edu 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 ca Te ac h t io ac er n hi t ng ra in re in g Ad so u m rc Re in es istTr se ra t io a i a rch ni n ng in G of to t en d I m ea er CT an c i a g hing ssu em m es en et t/a hod Di st dm s an in ce st af le ar f ni ng M O in th or ity er s EF gr A ou im ps Areas of Involvement (Institutions) pa Li No ct te n- on ra cy fo rm soc i Ev al e ety al d u a u ca tio t io n of n Le EF gi A sla t io n
  • 17. Te ac Te he ac rt r 0 5 10 15 20 25 hi Q ng a in in Re ua re EF lity so g se A o ur ar im f ed ces ch in pa uc to ct at te on io ac so n hiTr ng ciet ai m y ni ng G et h en of de ods m an A ri ss a g dm ue em in s ist en ra t/a ti dm on in st af Di st f No a n ce IC n- fo le T rm ar al ni ed ng uc at io Ev al Li n u a ter tio ac n y M of in EF or ity A Areas Where HEIS Should Be Involved (Institutions) gr o Le ups gi sla t io n O th er s
  • 18. Te ac hi Q n ua g r e lity so 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 of ur Te ed ces uc ac at he io rt n EF G A en ra in im d in Re pa er i g se ct ss ar Ev on ue ch in a so s to lu at c te io iety ac n hi oTr ng f EF ai ni Di st m A ng a n eth of ce od m le s an Ad ar ag m n em ini ing en stra t/a ti dm on No in n- st fo af rm Li te f al ra ed cy uc at io M n in or ity ICT gr o Involvement Areas as Seen from the North (Institutions) Le up gi s sla t io n O th er s
  • 19. Q ua Re se l ity ar of ch ed uc 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 in Tea to ch at te io ac er t n hi ra Te n in ac g m ing hi et ng ho re d so s No ur n- ce fo s rm al I ed CT uc at i EF G Li on e te A r im n de a cy pa riTr ct ss on ue ai ni Di st s s ng a n oci of ce et m le y an A ar a g dm n em ini ing en stra t/a ti M dm on in i or n st ity a Involvement Areas as Seen from the South gr ff o Ev Le ups al g u a isla tio t io n n of EF A O th er s
  • 20. Pa rtn 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 er 18 U ni ve rs it y Le ad Un iv er si tyG ov er In nm di en v id ta ua lB ls odG y ov (H er os nm tC en ou ta nt lB ry od ) y (L ea d Co un tr y ) Project Initiator(s) (Institutions) NG O s No an sw er
  • 21. Problems Encountered (Institutions)14121086420 No problem Support from Others EFA Expertise Funding Recognition of encountered Local within University Authorities University Competence
  • 22. University involvement in EFA (Institutions) 18%6%9% 67% Insufficient Non-existent Adequate No answer
  • 23. Reasons for Non-Involvement (Institutions)109876543210 Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of No answer support opportunity recognition expertise interest demand
  • 24. Demand from Universities in the South (Institutions) 39%43% 18% Yes No No answer
  • 25. Changes Needed to Improve the Participation of HE in EFA (Institutions)2520151050 Governmental policy in Donor agency funding Institutional policy International agencies HE and organisations
  • 26. Research on EFA (Institutions)14121086420 Insufficient Non-existent Adequate Excessive Non-responses
  • 27. Two Workshops• State of the Art: Experience in Supporting EFA: Opportunities and Challenges – Thursday afternoon• The Way Forward: Towards a Greater Implication in EFA: Perspectives and Priorities – Friday morning
  • 28. Expected Outcomes• Why and How HE should (or should not) contribute more to achieving EFA goals?• What HE could do concretely for EFA through its three principal functions (education, research and services)?• What effective tools could be developed to improve, if necessary, the involvement of HE in EFA?

×