The document outlines proposals for a higher education think-tank aimed at addressing Education for All (EFA) challenges in Nairobi, Kenya. Key priorities include addressing socio-cultural practices, economic status, and mentorship to enhance educational access. It advocates for flexible education systems that align with local practices and emphasizes the necessity of free and compulsory education alongside citizen capacity to participate.

1. Perspective on top priorities in EFA: Proposed
Higher Education-EFA Research Think-Tank
By
Prof. Samson Gunga,
Cert. THE, B.Ed. (Nairobi), M.Ed. (Kenyatta), M.Sc. (Sunderland), PhD. (Nairobi)
Dean, School of Education, University of Nairobi
E-Mail: samsongunga@uonbi.ac.ke; Tel: +254722610869
IAU Collaborative Workshop
A three-step activity to envisage Higher Education for Education
for All locally
Nairobi, Kenya, 24-25 January 2013 in collaboration with the
University of Nairobi, Silver Springs Hotel, Nairobi 1

2. The following play a decisive role in addressing the
aims of EFA:
1. A people’s belief system
2. Socio-cultural practices
3. Socio-cultural preferences
4. Socio-economic status of individuals/families
5. Mentorship in an education system
Required: EFA Research Think-Tank 2

3. Uplift-Education:
To resolve challenges presented by the
following:
Poverty inclined mindset
 'Hereditary' poverty
Inability to recognize private potential
Misdirection of capacities 3

4. Uplift-Education (Cont.):
a) Absence of ambition
b) Economic vulnerability
c) Child labour
a) Parental irresponsibility 4

5. Flexible Education:
1. A variety of alternative education approach
2. Actualize coherence between socio-cultural
practices and education to enhance access
3. Actualizing coherence between a peoples
preferences and education
4. Blending modern education brand with a
peoples way of life 5

6. Institutionalization of mentorship :
1) As a public service a kin to
education
2) Policy driven integration of
mentorship in education
programmes
6

7. A. Free education for each citizen
Rhetorical question:
 Cf: Would you jail a hungry parent who has
no capacity to send a hungry child for ‘free’
education?
A. Compulsory Basic Education for citizens
Rhetorical question:
 Cf: Does the concept of ‘Basic Education’
vary from nation to nation?
Free compulsory education without a citizen’s
capacity to participate is counter
productive 7

8. Proposed EFA Research
Think-Tank
THE END
8