Gender-sensitive pedagogy The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda Hawah Nabbuye ECHIDNA GLOBAL SCHOLARS PROGRAM POLICY BRIEF | NOVEMBER 2018 http://www.brookings.edu/universal-education 1 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda Hawah Nabbuye is a 2018 Echidna Global Scholar at the Brookings Institution and Deputy Country Director at Educate! Uganda. Hawah drives Educate!’s gender equity strategy to help ensure an outsized impact on girls and develop young leaders and entrepreneurs in Uganda. Her experience has allowed her to support over 40 widows and 4000 youth to start enterprises in their local communities. Hawah’s vast experience in the education sector including classroom, leadership, mentorship, gender- related initiatives and curriculum reform and policymaking allows her to inform the organization’s program strategy, policy, reforms, and scale. Ms. Nabbuye is an Acumen fellow and holds an MBA from Edinburgh Business School. While at Brookings, she has explored methods teachers are using to empower girls to improve attendance, participation in co-curricular activities, leadership positions, and academic performance. Acknowledgements Many thanks to the Echidna Giving and Brookings Institution for selecting me as an Echidna Global Scholar. This research would not have been possible without the continuous support of the staff from the Center for Universal Education (CUE) at Brookings—namely, Christina Kwauk and Amanda Braga. I want to sincerely thank Emily Richardson and Amy Crompton for walking this journey with me, reading all the drafts, and giving helpful feedback. Special thanks to the Educate! Team for giving me the opportunity to take a sabbatical and supporting me in the whole process especially Meghan Mahoney, Desiree Winges, Marit Blaak, Richard Luuba, Boris Bulayev, Maggie Appleton, Sarah Kayondo, Angelica Towne, Otai James and Lilian Nakalyowa. I want to thank teachers, students, and policy officials who supported me through their willingness to respond to the questionnaires and interviews and Educate! Program officers who assisted in administering these tools. ---- The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and policy solutions. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars. Brookings gratefully acknowledges the program support provided to the Center for Universal Education by Echidna Giving. Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, independence, and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment. Echidna Global Scholars Program The Echidna Global Scholars Program is a visiting fellowship hosted by the Center for Universal Education (CUE) at Brookings that works to catalyze and amplify the work of leaders in girls’ education in developing countries. The Echidna Global Scholars are selected through a rigorous, competitive selection process and spend nearly five months in-residence at Brookings on research-based projects and collaborating with colleagues on issues related to global education policy, with a particular focus on girls’ education in developing countries. After their fellowship, Echidna Scholars may implement projects in developing countries based on their research findings and join the Echidna Alumni network. For more information on the Echidna Global Scholars Program, please visit: www.brookings.edu/echidna-global-scholars-program. Support for this research and the Echidna Global Scholars Program is generously provided by Echidna Giving. 2 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 A brief background on girls’ education and gender-sensitive pedagogy in Uganda ................................................ 4 Potential benefits of gender-sensitive pedagogy ....................................................................................................... 6 What is at stake if pedagogies are not gender-sensitive? ........................................................................................ 7 Why teachers are not applying gender-sensitive pedagogy ...................................................................................... 8 Gender-sensitive recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 11 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................. 12 Appendix A. Gender in Education Policies ................................................................................................................ 13 Appendix B. Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 15 3 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda ABSTRACT Despite major progress in recent decades, girls’ education in Uganda faces several challenges, particularly low retention, high dropout, and a lack of skills development. The government has sought to address these issues by introducing gender-sensitive pedagogy into the curriculum and teacher training. Findings thus far suggest that this approach has not fully translated into changes in the classroom. This policy brief examines the education policies in Uganda with special attention to those that support the use of gender sensitivity in the curriculum and classroom. It explores the benefits of a gender-sensitive pedagogy and reflects upon the findings of a survey conducted with 70 teachers and 109 students from eastern and central schools in Uganda on the use and impact of this approach in schools and classrooms. Finally, this brief provides recommendations to policymakers on how to implement gender-sensitive pedagogy appropriately to improve girls’ education. 4 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION INTRODUCTION Uganda has recognized girls’ quality education as essential to increasing gender equity, equality, girls’ empowerment, and economic development. With one of the youngest populations in the world where half of people are under age 15,1 it is paramount that women contribute equally to economic development for the country to achieve its goal of middle-income status by 2040.2 In recent years, the government of Uganda has introduced several policies to empower girls. For example, the education sector emphasizes the importance of girls’ access to quality education, and their retention and equality. In the last three years alone, there has been significant progress in girls’ access and retention. In fact, the primary net enrollment ratio increased from 89 percent for boys and 93 percent for girls, to 93 percent for boys and 99 percent for girls in 2017.3 Nevertheless, despite these gains, girls in Uganda are missing out on key opportunities to gain skills because they are not being actively engaged in their studies as equally as boys. The government has tried to use gender-sensitive pedagogy—ensuring that all students have equal opportunities to learn and that stereotypical gender roles do not impose limitations on development—as one of the potential solutions, but has not been successful in getting teachers and school administrators to adopt its use in the classroom. This has led to a gap in the policies and their implementation. According to the Uganda Gender in Education policy,4 gender-sensitive pedagogy holds the key to ensuring equitable quality education for all learners. This approach can help in several educational dimensions such as reducing gender stereotyping, increasing classroom participation, and developing skills to help girls attain employment post-graduation.5,6 However, the girls do not fully achieve these outcomes, which limits their experience of an empowering education. As the government is increasing its focus on quality education outcomes for girls, it has tried to include gender- sensitive pedagogy in policies like the Gender in Education Policy, the National Strategy for Girls’ Education, and Gender Mainstreaming 2015-2019. These policies share strategies such as promoting quality, relevant education, and sports for both boys and girls, and providing gender-sensitive curriculum and materials to deconstruct girls’ gender stereotypes in school. Although this is a significant and positive step in the right direction, gender-sensitive pedagogy has not yet been fully defined in relevant policy frameworks. While a gender-sensitive pedagogy has been included in the early childhood and primary curriculum, secondary curriculum and in-service trainings do not have adequate guidelines and strategies on adapting the pedagogies in a classroom context. If we are to achieve the benefits of a gender-sensitive pedagogy, policies must be more than just words on paper. This research looks at how policies that reference gender-sensitive pedagogy are translating into the classroom. The findings are based on a survey conducted with 70 secondary teachers and 109 students in central and eastern Uganda. A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON GIRLS’ EDUCATION AND GENDER- SENSITIVE PEDAGOGY IN UGANDA Girls’ quality education is a pertinent issue in Uganda, and provisions to improve it have been included in the National Development Plan (NDPII),7 Education and Sports Sector plan,8 Gender in Education policy,9 and the National Strategy for Girls’ Education.10 These policies have been reviewed to understand how to increase quality of education that can lead to relevant, empowering, and effective learning outcomes for both boys and girls. Although the above policies emphasize the quality of education through the use of gender-sensitive pedagogy, the implementation plans are geared toward measures of access and enrollment rather than measures of quality, such as number of girls participating in life skills activities, number of girls in leadership positions, and number of teachers using gender-sensitive pedagogy. This disconnect between aspirations for quality outcomes for girls and monitoring indicators such as access could explain challenges like continued gender stereotyping in secondary teaching materials, low girls’ performance, and education outcomes that we still see in the education sector. Even though the Gross 5 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda Enrollment Ratio (GER) for secondary education was 27.1 percent in 2017—up from 24.5 percent in 2016—the detailed ratios are 29 percent for boys, compared to 25.2 percent for girls. At the university level, only 44.3 percent of students are girls as only well-performing girls continue from secondary school to university.11 Generally, development plans and education policies reference providing girls with access to education. When analyzing progress over time, however, it becomes clear that performance rates are still low especially for girls. This has translated into few changes in women’s employment in the country. It should be noted that only 37.3 percent of women participate in paid employment, and they continue to struggle with payment inequality.12 As evidenced in the National Bureau of Statistics and Ministry of Education and Sports report in the table below, girls are indeed still struggling according to both academic and employment indicators. For example, there are fewer girls transitioning to lower and upper secondary school, and university compared to boys (See Table 1). Table 1. Performance indicators disaggregated by gender13,14 Indicator Male Female Primary leaving pass rates 89% 85% Performance index for Uganda Certificate of Education (UCE) 42% 37% Transition to S1 70.5% 67.8% Transition to S5 33.9% 24.2% Students who passed Uganda Advanced Certificate of Education (UACE) 51,343 37,391 Medium income in paid employment 132,000 shillings 66,000 shillings Unemployment 9.8% 18.1% The survey conducted with the teachers showed that girls’ participation in sports and leadership was lower compared to boys. It is clear both from ministry statistics and student and teacher responses that when it comes to performance, girls are still under-performing compared to their male counterparts—limiting girls’ progress toward quality education (See Figure 1). Figure 1. More teachers see low girls’ participation in sports and leadership activities Teachers’ perception of girls’ participation in activities as compared to boys Source: Author 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Leadership Sports Lower Equal Higher Much Higher 6 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION Quality secondary education beyond access and enrollment remains undefined in Uganda policy. The NDPII and education sector assign responsibility for defining girls’ quality of education to the Gender in Education policy, which also assigns the responsibility to the National Strategy for Girls’ Education. The result is that no policy provides indicators to measure quality learning outcomes beyond access, enrollment, and transitions for girls in secondary education. To make matters worse, one policy document often refers to another policy instead of addressing quality education issues directly. For example, though the Education Sector Plan outlines a few outcomes, it refers to the National Strategy for Girls’ Education for much more detailed outcomes and implementation, but this policy outlines quality education outcomes for girls at the primary level but not secondary. In this strategy, the primary and early childhood outcomes and indicators include gender-sensitive curriculum and instructional materials, number of girls participating in life skills activities, number of girls participating in leadership, and number of gender awareness trainings—all promising indicators for quality education. These same indicators, however, are not stipulated at the secondary level, leaving girls in secondary education without skills like leadership, which are important for growth and achieving quality education outcomes. In addition to the gaps in outlining quality outcomes and gaps in secondary education, these policies leave no clear direction for implementation in the classroom, and the outcomes outlined in the primary section of the National Strategy for Girls’ Education15 are not captured in the Ministry of Education and Sports Annual Reports.16 This confusion could partly explain why the policies have not achieved all the intended results for girls. (See Appendix A for more information on how gender-sensitive pedagogy is used in Uganda’s education polices.) It is in this context that this paper seeks to highlight that teachers are not using gender-sensitive pedagogy in the classroom—underscoring the significant gap in its implementation. If teachers are not using this approach, girls may receive a lower quality education and not actively participate in class activities like their male counterparts. This could have important consequences for girls’ skills development, the types of employment they can secure, the level of income they can earn, and their quality of life and empowerment as women. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF GENDER-SENSITIVE PEDAGOGY Gender-sensitive pedagogy promises that all learners have equal opportunities to learn while at the same time eliminating gender stereotypes. Literature suggests that teachers’ use of gender-sensitive pedagogy has several benefits that can lead to empowerment and quality education outcomes—for both boys and girls—as outlined below.17 Prevents gender stereotyping: Gender-sensitive teachers using a gender-sensitive pedagogy support children in questioning traditional gender roles and attitudes. A curriculum developed for the Sistema de Aprendizaje Tutorial, a secondary school program in Honduras designed to encourage teachers on how to use non- discriminatory methods, is a good example of how to teach both boys and girls. To illustrate, some teachers that were involved in a gender-sensitive pedagogy training started to equally engage both girls and boys in their classes.18 This curriculum encourages students to have discussions around these stereotypes, their constraints, and how to overcome them, which could lead to empowerment.19 This means that even when the curriculum is gender-blind, gender-sensitive teachers can point out biases and inequalities. Improves active classroom participation for both girls and boys: Students are encouraged to engage in learning equally and actively, which improves performance and attainment20,21 and ability to teach themselves. They engage and equally participate in group discussions, debates, field study trips, project- based learning, and presentations. A gender-sensitive program by Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE) implemented in Malawi, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Gambia, and Zambia led to a change in teachers’ attitudes and practices, increased girls’ access to and participation in school, enrollment, and enhanced retention.22 Develops skills: The economy is constantly changing, and students require skills to cope and compete in the workplace. These skills are critical in bridging the gap between what students learn in the classroom and what is required in the labor market.23 The Gender Equity Movement in Schools, a project in Mumbai, showed that gender-sensitive instruction could also prepare all students with the skills to navigate challenges outside of 7 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda school.24 Girls share their ideas and insights and gain practice in thinking through problems, formulating arguments, and responding to diverse points of view. As research has shown, these are skills required in and beyond school.25 Because gender-sensitive education can lead to girls’ empowerment and positive education outcomes, girls might remain in school longer and parents might be more convinced to send girls to school, which could lead to higher education levels and thus formal employment. WHAT IS AT STAKE IF PEDAGOGIES ARE NOT GENDER-SENSITIVE? On the other hand, when teacher instruction and curricula are not gender sensitive, girls often end up behind their male peers and do not perform well—as outlined below. School dropout rates surge: A study in Kenya showed that in classes where teachers provided boys with a more supportive environment in terms of advice, activities, and engagement, girls were discouraged, which increased their likelihood of dropping out of school.26 If girls leave school, they do not develop important life skills—falling short of the potential to function effectively as adults—which limits their economic potential.27 Increasing the unemployment gap between males and females: Gender-sensitive pedagogy can support girls to stay engaged in subjects such as STEM that can lead to high-paying jobs. If teachers encouraged and engaged girls in the same way as boys, this would help girls believe in themselves, develop skills, and choose careers that give them the best chance of employment.28 However, research shows that teachers’ unconscious bias often leads them to inadvertently discourage girls from participating in subjects in the STEM fields.29,30,31 Moreover, with respect to the broader issue of national labor force participation, the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) is 52 percent and the Employment to Population Ratio (EPR) is 48 percent. The LFPR was higher for males (60 percent) than females (46 percent).32 Given half the national population is comprised of women, this translates into lower economic development. Poverty perpetuates when girls and women are unable to provide for basic needs like decent housing, medical care, clothing, and quality nutritious food for their families. Reduces decisionmaking power: When teachers do not use gender-sensitive pedagogy, girls may not engage in their studies or different activities. This could harm their ability to negotiate and make tough decisions. For instance, educated mothers are more likely to engage in family planning, ensure their children receive an education, and save for emergencies. According to research, educated women are more likely to have fewer children than uneducated women, improve child well-being and community engagement, and their average life expectancy is higher.33 8 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION WHY TEACHERS ARE NOT APPLYING GENDER-SENSITIVE PEDAGOGY In many schools, the implementation of gender-sensitive and gender responsive pedagogy34 has been challenging. There are still numerous stereotypes associated with how girls are taught in the classroom, where teachers traditionally have lower expectations35,36and biases against female students. It also translates into how girls and boys are raised and treated at home and in the professional world. This study explored how teacher implemented gender-sensitive pedagogy and identified factors stopping them from using these pedagogies. From the research, it is clear that there is a gap between the policies and the implementation. Teachers’ gender bias for girls is unchecked It is important to note that teachers’ perception of their students’ abilities can sometimes affect how they teach, assign roles, and engage with their students.37,38 Some of these challenges could be solved by using gender-sensitive pedagogy as a means to get teachers to check their own gender biases and perceptions. Once this is achieved, teachers can actively engage all students to build their confidence. In this paper’s survey, the findings suggest that teachers view girls through stereotypes—characterizing girls as struggling to actively engage in their studies even though they are attending school (see Table 2). In fact, the findings revealed that teachers made more assumptions about girls’ performance in the classroom than boys. Teachers tended to view girls as shy, afraid to give answers, and having low self-esteem. Table 2. Teachers’ assumptions about boys and girls Perceptions about girls Perceptions about girls and boys Perceptions about boys  Girls are too afraid to participate  Girls tend to be shy  Girls have a high rate of absenteeism  Girls lack self-esteem and are disempowered  Both boys and girls do not freely express themselves in school  Boys and girls do not freely interact with each other  Boys have a superiority complex, while girls have an inferiority complex  Boys need supervision to have organized work  Boys are more assertive than girls. Teachers are not trained to use gender-sensitive pedagogy Without proper training in gender-sensitive pedagogy, teachers lack the confidence to implement this type of pedagogy in the classroom.39 In the survey, teachers were asked whether they had received gender-sensitive pedagogy training at any point, and approximately 45 percent of teachers had not (See Figure 2). Given that student-teacher ratios are high,i the impact that a single teacher can have on many students is significant. Gender-sensitive pedagogy can make a big difference for the girls’ learning experience in the classroom.40 Figure 2. Teacher participation in gender sensitive pedagogy training Source: Author i The student to teacher ratio is 43:1 Primary and 53:1 in secondary. Yes 55.36% No 44.64% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Participation 9 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda Gender-sensitive pedagogy trainings last for variable amounts of time Training models are currently insufficient for preparing teachers to solve real-time classroom challenges using gender-sensitive pedagogy tools. Although some teachers in the research wanted to use these tools, they faced unexpected classroom scenarios such as large classrooms and unsupportive fellow teachers during the application of the pedagogy. Teachers could not respond to these challenges despite the support given to them. Of the teachers that had been trained in gender-sensitive pedagogy, 43 percent of teachers reported that the training was less than a week, 13 percent had training which ranged from two weeks to a month, and 26 percent received training for more than a month. The varying time spent in training could translate to varying quality and effectiveness. Looking into training content and the ideal length of effective gender- sensitive training could be worthwhile. Teachers default to traditional teacher-centered approaches Teachers appear to use methods that are comfortable to them and accepted in their schools. This makes them less likely to use gender-sensitive pedagogy. Most of these traditional methods are teacher-centered and limit student engagement. Teachers could use group discussions, debates, and class discussions while encouraging both girls and boys to participate equally, but because they continue to use the traditional methods like dictation and rote notetaking, this could explain why students are not developing skills. As highlighted in Figure 3, students reported that most of the time teachers used mainly lecture methods. Though government policies encourage the use of gender-sensitive pedagogy, there is a gap in what teachers ultimately implement in their classrooms. Figure 3. Methods teachers use during lessons, as reported by students Teachers do not have sufficient understanding and/or appreciation of gender-sensitive pedagogies Teachers do not appreciate gender-sensitive pedagogies partly because some have not received the training, while others do not see value in the approaches. Research showed that some teachers feel these gender- sensitive approaches are time-consuming and discriminatory against boys. Even in instances where the curriculum was revised to include gender-sensitive pedagogy, teachers could be biased against it if they were not bought in.41 As pointed out by UNESCO’s Libing Wang, “A school could have gender-sensitive curriculum, 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Role play Use of Portfolios Games/activities Case studies Student research Debates Brainstorming Field trips Class presentations Class discussions Question-answer method Lecture methods AMOUNT OF TIME METHOD IS USED 10 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION textbooks, and all of the most up-to-date resources at its disposal, but if teachers do not understand and believe in gender-sensitive education, you will not have gender sensitive classrooms.”42 Generally, many teachers do not have sufficient understanding of gender sensitivity as an approach or purpose. Contrary to what many teachers believe, gender-sensitive pedagogy is not meant to discriminate against boys, nor is it meant to focus on one gender. It involves using different learning methods while giving equal opportunities for both girls and boys to participate. Figure 4. Spectrum of understanding for gender-sensitive pedagogy Teachers do not want to take responsibility to empower girls When teachers do not share responsibility to empower girls, it is detrimental to the implementation of gender- sensitive pedagogy and government efforts to improve quality education for girls. Girls would benefit immensely from teachers who use these pedagogies and help both girls and boys to transition away from gender stereotypes and biases.43 Such responsibility is often delegated to senior women.ii It is important that male teachers also champion gender-sensitive pedagogies given there are notably more male than female teachers (i.e., 116,109 male and 86,508 female in FY 2016/17).44,45 Teachers do not have administrative and fellow teachers’ support Teachers that went through gender-sensitive training pointed out that they could not translate trainings into practice due to limited support from their administrators and fellow teachers. Some fellow teachers thought it was a waste of time, while others described using gender-sensitive pedagogy as discriminatory. Teachers who were ultimately able to implement gender-sensitive pedagogy in the classroom reported being supported and ii A female teacher who is responsible for mentoring all girls in a school. •Gender-sensitive approaches involve giving equal opportunities to learners •Gender-sensitive approaches emphasize both girls' and boys' participation Teachers who understand gender-sensitive pedagogy •Gender-sensitive approaches only concentrate on the vulnerable sex •Gender-sensitive approaches are discrimatory as they focus on only one sex •Gender-sensitive approaches show that boys have a higher IQ Teachers who misunderstand gender-sensitive pedagogy 11 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda encouraged by their school leaders in teacher meetings. Motivated teachers might not be able to implement gender-sensitive pedagogy effectively without administrators’ and other teachers’ support.iii Teachers face implementation challenges in the classroom Teachers who believe they have insufficient time are another major hindrance to the full implementation of gender-sensitive pedagogy. They think this approach is time-consuming and would rather spend time completing the syllabus (see Figure 5 below for highlights on why teachers do not use the approach). Teachers are typically rewarded for the amount of content that is covered and the number of students that pass examinations, which is further reinforced by media hype46 around student pass rates. Yet, gender-sensitive pedagogy encourages teachers to use diverse techniques while teaching the same national curricular content and preparing students for examinations. It does not mean more teaching but a different kind of teaching. In addition, sometimes teachers experience “learner rigidity” where students are “unwilling to participate in new methods” introduced by the teacher. In such instances, teachers might not be able to successfully orient students to the changes in the classroom.47,48 Figure 5. Teachers’ reported reasons for not using gender-sensitive pedagogies Note: During data entry, teachers who did not respond to the question, teachers who thought the question was not applicable, and responses such as lack of administrative support and lack of materials were all grouped into the category “Other.” GENDER-SENSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS While it is clear there are challenges in Uganda in implementing gender-sensitive pedagogies in the classroom, there are several opportunities that can be leveraged to bridge the policy implementation gap. Currently, the Ministry of Education and Sports is developing national teacher policy that aims to provide a framework for leadership and continuous professional development for teachers, and teaching standards. The policy suggests gender-sensitive pedagogy will be one of its focus areas. As Uganda moves into the future of girls’ quality education, it is important to pay attention to some of the challenges that could hinder progress. This research identified several of those areas that must be addressed to successfully implement the policy. Design a simple, specific teaching framework or structure all teachers could use Quality education and gender-sensitive pedagogy should be clearly specified by giving teachers a framework or a specific teaching structure they can use.49 For example, the Philippines utilizes comprehensive competency- based teaching standards,50 complete with a comprehensive teaching guide. SKILLS LAB—developed by iii This is not confined to Uganda. A study showed that teachers in India have also faced challenges implementing gender-sensitive pedagogy in schools where the administration was not supportive. In this case, teachers were even mocked by fellow teachers because they did not understand it and lacked perspective. Insufficient time Lack of knowledge of approaches Learner Rigidity Other 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 12 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION Educate!, a nonprofit that tackles youth unemployment in Africa—breaks down teaching into three parts: build, practice, and present. This is a basic methodology teachers can use to design lessons, and using this structure could provide teachers with easy-to-apply detailed and context-specific guidance as they work toward implementing gender-sensitive pedagogies in the classrooms. Include gender-sensitive outcomes in the National Strategy for Girls’ Education policy and measure them regularly While it is easy to collect information on enrollment, access, science, numeracy, and literacy, it has proven challenging to find more data on the quality of education outcomes. The National Strategy for Girls’ Education policy should include other learning outcomes for secondary education as done in primary school, such as measuring girls’ participation in leadership positions, considering gender in the secondary school curriculum, and gauging girls’ participation in sports and in life skills like public speaking. These outcomes should also be measured and included in the Annual Ministry of Education and Sports report to measure progress and provide accountability. Additionally, gender-sensitive pedagogy must be integrated into the National Teachers’ Policy, and these outcomes should be explicitly outlined. Furthermore, gender-sensitive pedagogy should not be taught as a separate topic but rather embedded into teacher training content and included in a monitoring framework under the Department of Educational Standards. Utilize school policies to diffuse policy implementation Schools have their own policies in Uganda. School-level policies stipulate guidelines that teachers need to follow and be held accountable by school administrators. Policies should guide government ministries and departments on how to implement education goals. Though school policies are meant to reflect government policies, this is often not the case, as some schools are not familiar with the government policies or there is weak enforcement at the school-level. The government can work with school administrators to include gender-sensitive pedagogy as part of school policies and performance. Then, teachers can be held accountable for using gender-sensitive pedagogy in their classrooms. Perhaps even school administrators would be more incentivized to apply them and create a school-wide, system-wide structure of support for teachers to follow through with implementation. The Gender Unit and the Teacher Instruction Unit in the Ministry of Education and Sports can engage with selected schools to get a general idea on how implementation can be improved. Form strategic partnerships with grassroots NGOs to strengthen in-service teacher training Given that continuous in-service training and follow-up could be a stretch for the government due to lack of financial resources, the Ministry of Education and Sports could consider partnering with non-government organizations and other actors already supporting schools with gender-sensitive pedagogy in several districts and regions. This would be vital to not only consolidate learning but also to utilize them for scaling up the implementation of policies and interventions. In fact, there are initiatives already in place that the government can draw upon and utilize. For example, FAWE is implementing a gender responsive pedagogy curriculum51 and Educate!’s skills lab pedagogy is already in alignment with the government’s gender-sensitive pedagogy goals and has been mentioned as one of the pedagogies teachers are using in classrooms. CONCLUSION As Uganda works toward becoming a middle-income state with an increasingly growing youth population, quality education is now more important than ever. Gender-sensitive pedagogy will be pivotal in changing how girls are empowered, learn in the classroom, and contribute to the economy. Through gender-sensitive curricula and instruction, both boys and girls would be able to analyze stereotypes and constraints that could limit their opportunities. Gender gaps between boys and girls would be reduced and girls would gain skills to compete favorably in the labor market. Implementing gender-sensitive pedagogy may be hard, but it is vital for Uganda and higher-level learning. 13 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda APPENDIX A. GENDER IN EDUCATION POLICIES Policy Vision Inclusion of gender-sensitive pedagogy Monitoring and evaluation indicators National Development Plan (NDPII) 2015/16- 2019/20 Strengthening Uganda’s competitiveness for sustainable wealth creation, employment, and inclusive growth Not mentioned Primary to secondary school transition rate Net Secondary completion rates Education and sports sector plan Quality education and sports for all Not mentioned Number of students Enrollment ratios Gender parity index Transition rates Repetition rates Student classroom ratio Student-teacher ratio Percentage of students eligible for tertiary institutions Student proficiency in biology, math, and English Gender in education policy An inclusive and equitable quality education and sports and lifelong learning. Learning opportunities for all girls, boys, women, and men in Uganda Secondary education curriculum, materials, approaches, and delivery that takes gender into account; life skills integrated therein Review and mainstream gender approaches in secondary school curriculum and emphasize the acquisition of appropriate life skills in all programs Gender-responsive teacher instructor education and training curriculum development and implementation Review the teachers’ and instructors’ education and training curriculum and incorporate gender in delivery Promote gender-responsive teaching and learning instructional materials for schools and colleges Gross enrollment rate Net Enrollment rate Number or early childhood development teachers and caregivers by sex Completion rates Survival rates Numeracy rates Performance index for primary and secondary Science to arts ratio Participation in sports Average participation in co- curricular activities 14 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION National strategy for girls’ education: Primary section Promote girls’ education as an integral part of efforts to create gender equity and equality in the education system in Uganda Incorporate gender into the school curriculum and learning materials for ECD centers and primary schools Involve girls in life skills training activities to develop their self - esteem and leadership. Deconstruct gender stereotypes surrounding girls in school by introducing gender training as a comprehensive and integral part of teacher training curriculum and performance review Scale up gender training for teachers. Introduce gender training as an integral part of teacher training curriculum and performance review Inclusion of Gender-sensitive in Early Child hood Development (ECD)curriculum & instructional materials Number of teachers (by sex) that have undergone gender training Girls’ participation in science subjects Number of girls participating in life skills activities Number of girls in leadership positions Number of girls who can confidently express themselves in class and other activities Number of gender awareness trainings for teachers Girls’ participation in non- stereotypical roles and subjects Use of gender-sensitive language, and illustrations Girls’ empowerment, confidence and ability to share with others their life experiences National strategy for girls’ education: Secondary section Promote girls’ education as an integral part of efforts to create gender equity and equality in the education system in Uganda Scale up gender training for teachers Introduce gender training as a comprehensive and integral part of teacher training curriculum and performance review Number of teachers (by sex) that have undergone gender training Teachers’ change in attitude toward gender equality Number of teacher trainings organized 15 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda APPENDIX B. METHODOLOGY This research findings and discussions are part of a larger education study. For this policy brief, I focused on gender-sensitive pedagogy in Ugandan education policies and insights from teachers. The study adopted a mixed–method design, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative approaches.52 Research questions o What are the gender gaps teachers observe in their classrooms? What are teachers’ perceptions of gender-sensitive pedagogy? Are these pedagogies used in the classrooms? What are the challenges that prevent teachers from using these methodologies? o Have teachers been trained on how to use the methods? Did the trainers use gender-sensitive pedagogy during the training? Did the training and follow-up support help solve the gender-sensitive challenges in the class? The data was collected using a variety of instruments, including questionnaires, structured interviews, and secondary data from national reports. Questionnaires were administered to 70 teachers and 109 students in eastern and central Uganda. Interviews were conducted with six policy officials. Participants from schools that received the questionnaires were sampled using convenience and purposive strategies to capture data in the most time-efficient way. Teachers were selected according to their willingness to participate and were employed in schools that had a gender-sensitive pedagogy training led by any stakeholder. 16 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION 1 Uganda population: 2018-Quick facts about the population of Uganda. http://countrymeters.info/en/Uganda (Visited 8/21/18) 2 Uganda National Planning Authority. http://npa.ug/wp-content/themes/npatheme/documents/vision2040.pdf (Visited 8/20/18). 3 The Uganda Education and Sports Sector Annual Performance Report Financial Year 2016/17. https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf. (Visited 8/18/18). 4 Ministry Of Education And Sports [MoES] Gender in Education Sector policy (2016). https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/GENDER%20IN%20EDUCATION%20SECTOR%20POLICY.pdf. 5 Leah Njambi Wanjama & Felicita Wanjiru Njuguma. Documentation of Gender Responsive as a Best Practice by the Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305650739_Documentation_of_Gender_Responsive_Pedagogy_as_a_Best_Practice_by_the_ Forum_for_African_Women_Educationalists_FAWE (Visited 08/12/18). 6 Achyut, P., N. Bhatla, S. Khandekar, S. Maitra, and R.K. Verma. 2011. Building Support for Gender Equality among Young Adolescents in School: Findings from Mumbai, India. Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women. 7 Uganda National Development plan (II) 2015/16 – 2019/20. http://ngoforum.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2015/03/NDPII- Draft-3rd-March-2015-1pm.pdf. (Visited 07/15/18) 8 Uganda Education Sector Strategic Plan 2010-2015. http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/en/2010/updated-education-sector-strategic-plan- 2010-2015-5186. (Visited 07/20/18). 9 Ministry Of Education And Sports [MoES] Gender in Education Sector policy (2016). https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/GENDER%20IN%20EDUCATION%20SECTOR%20POLICY.pdf. (Visited 08/05/18). 10 Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES) National Strategy for Girls’ Education (NSGE) in Uganda (2014 – 2019). https://www.unicef.org/uganda/NSGE__Strategy_FINAL__January_2015.pdf. (Visited 07/15/18). 11 Uganda Bureau of Statistics -2017 Statistical Abstract. https://www.ubos.org/wp- content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf (Visited 10/10/18). 12 Uganda Bureau of Statistics -2017 Statistical Abstract. https://www.ubos.org/wp- content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf (Visited 10/10/18). 13 The Uganda Education and Sports Sector Annual Performance Report Financial Year 2016/17. 14 Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES) National Strategy for Girls’ Education (NSGE) in Uganda (2014 – 2019). https://www.unicef.org/uganda/NSGE__Strategy_FINAL__January_2015.pdf. ((Visited 07/15/18).). 15 The Uganda Education and Sports Sector Annual Performance Report Financial Year 2016/17. https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf. (Visited DATE). 16 UNESCO Bangkok, 2008. Gender-Responsive Life Skills-Based Education - Advocacy Brief. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0017/001781/178125e.pdf. (07/10/18). 17 Leah Njambi Wanjama & Felicita Wanjiru Njuguma. Documentation of Gender Responsive as a Best Practice by the Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE). 18 Achyut, P., N. Bhatla, S. Khandekar, S. Maitra, and R.K. Verma. 2011. Building Support for Gender Equality among Young Adolescents in School: Findings from Mumbai, India. Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women. 19 UNESCO Bangkok, 2008. Gender-Responsive Life Skills-Based Education - Advocacy Brief. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0017/001781/178125e.pdf. ((07/10/18). 20 Shirley J. Miske, Ph.D. Miske Witt & Associates Inc. Exploring the Gendered Dimensions of Teaching and Learning Background Paper for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report. 2013. 21 Leah Njambi Wanjama & Felicita Wanjiru Njuguma. Documentation of Gender Responsive as a best practice by the Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE). 22 Cynthia Luna Scott. The Futures Of Learning 2: What Kind of Learning for the 21st century? Research, Innovation and Policy Directions from recent OECD analyses. https://www.pearsoned.com/21st-century-skills-the-future-for-students-academic-and-career-success. (Visited 08/30/18). 23 EFA Global Monitoring Report. 2000-2015. Achievement and Challenges: Gender Summary. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002348/234809E.pdf. (Visited 8/7/18). 24 Bernie Trilling, Charles Fadel. 21st century skills: learning for life in our times. February 2012. 25 Lloyd, Cynthia B., Barbara S. Mensch and Wesley H. Clark, ’The Effects of Primary School Quality on School Dropout among Kenyan Girls and Boys,’ Comparative Education Review. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/447600?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents. (Visited 8/13/18). 26 Quentin Wodon, Claudio Montenegro, Hoa Nguyen, and Adenike Onagoruwa. July 2018 report Missed Opportunities: The High Cost of not Educating Girls. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/missed- opportunities-the-high-cost-of-not-educating-girls. (Visited 7/9/18). ENDNOTES http://countrymeters.info/en/Uganda http://npa.ug/wp-content/themes/npatheme/documents/vision2040.pdf https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/GENDER%20IN%20EDUCATION%20SECTOR%20POLICY.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305650739_Documentation_of_Gender_Responsive_Pedagogy_as_a_Best_Practice_by_the_Forum_for_African_Women_Educationalists_FAWE https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305650739_Documentation_of_Gender_Responsive_Pedagogy_as_a_Best_Practice_by_the_Forum_for_African_Women_Educationalists_FAWE http://ngoforum.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2015/03/NDPII-Draft-3rd-March-2015-1pm.pdf http://ngoforum.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2015/03/NDPII-Draft-3rd-March-2015-1pm.pdf http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/en/2010/updated-education-sector-strategic-plan-2010-2015-5186 http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/en/2010/updated-education-sector-strategic-plan-2010-2015-5186 https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/GENDER%20IN%20EDUCATION%20SECTOR%20POLICY.pdf https://www.unicef.org/uganda/NSGE__Strategy_FINAL__January_2015.pdf https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/03_20182017_Statistical_Abstract.pdf https://www.unicef.org/uganda/NSGE__Strategy_FINAL__January_2015.pdf https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0017/001781/178125e.pdf http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0017/001781/178125e.pdf https://www.pearsoned.com/21st-century-skills-the-future-for-students-academic-and-career-success http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002348/234809E.pdf https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/447600?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/missed-opportunities-the-high-cost-of-not-educating-girls https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/missed-opportunities-the-high-cost-of-not-educating-girls 17 Gender-sensitive pedagogy: The bridge to girls’ quality education in Uganda 27 Claire Crawford and Jonathan Cribb, Reading and Math Skills at Age 10 and Earnings in Later Life: A Brief Analysis Using the British Cohort Study. London: Centre for Analysis of Youth Transitions, March 2013. 28 Girls’ education and discursive spaces for empowerment: Perspectives from rural India,’ Comparative and International Education. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2304/rcie.2011.6.1.90. (Visited 9/20/18). 29 Murphy‐Graham, Erin, ‘Opening the Black Box: Women’s empowerment and innovative secondary education in Honduras,’ Gender and Education. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228678573_Opening_the_black_box_Women's_empowerment_and_innovative_secondary_ed ucation_in_Honduras. (Visited 9/17/18). 30 Hill, C., Corbett C., and St. Rose, A. Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. https://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_pdf.php?file=why-so-few-research. (visited 7/8/18). 31 Uganda National Population Fund. (UNFPA). https://www.unfpa.org/data/transparency-portal/unfpa-uganda. (Visited 7/8/18). 32 M. Anne Hill and Elizabeth King. Women’s Education and Economic Well-being (June 2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/714042230. (Visited 8/19/18). 33 Leah Njambi Wanjama & Felicita Wanjiru Njuguma. Documentation of Gender Responsive as a best practice by the Forum for African Women Educationalists (FAWE). 34 Karlson, I. and M. Simonsson. (2011). A Question of Gender-Sensitive Pedagogy: Discourses in Pedagogical Guidelines. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 12(3). http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2304/ciec.2011.12.3.274. 35 Tatar, M., & Emmanuel, G. (2001). Teachers' perceptions of their students' gender roles. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(4), 215-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220670109598755( Visited 10/9/18) 36 Achyut P., Bhatla N., Verma H., Uttamacharya, Singh G., Bhattacharya S. and Verma R. (2016). Towards gender equality: The GEMS journey thus far. New Delhi, International Center for Research on Women. 37 Ayodeji Ifegbesan. Gender-Stereotypes Belief and Practices in the Classroom: The Nigerian Post-Primary School Teachers’ Study, January 2010. 38 Achyut P., Bhatla N., Verma H., Uttamacharya, Singh G., Bhattacharya S. and Verma R. (2016). Towards gender equality: The GEMS journey thus far. New Delhi, International Center for Research on Women. 39 The Education and Sports Sector Annual Performance Report Financial Year 2016/17. https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf. (8/17/18). 40 Achyut P., Bhatla N., Verma H., Uttamacharya, Singh G., Bhattacharya S. and Verma R. (2016). Towards gender equality: The GEMS journey thus far. New Delhi, International Center for Research on Women. 41UNESCO. Bangkok-Gender Responsive Classrooms need Gender Sensitive Teachers. https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/gender- responsive-classrooms-need-gender-sensitive-teachers. (Visited 07/20/18). 42UNESCO Bangkok Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education (2017): Gender Responsive Classrooms Need Gender Sensitive Teachers. https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/gender-responsive-classrooms-need-gender-sensitive-teachers. (07/20/18. 43 Education Planning and Policy Analysis Department, Ministry of Education & Sports, Financial Year 2016/17: The Education and Sports Sector Annual Performance Report. https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf. (Visited 09/10/18). 44 Gene B. Sperling and Rebecca Winthrop with Christina Kwauk. (2016) What Works in Girls’ Education: Evidence for the World’s Best Investment? https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/What-Works-in-Girls-Educationlowres.pdf. (Visited 8/05/18). 45Daily Monitor. “UNEB results: Media must help parents to make right choices.” http://www.monitor.co.ug/OpEd/Commentary/Uneb- results-Media-must-help-parents-make-right-choices/689364-4309208-si0foj/index.html. Visited 8/24/2018). 46 Jeffrey Froyd, Nancy Simpson. Student-Centered Learning Addressing Faculty Questions about Student-centered Learning. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.526.348. (Visited 9/05/18). 47 Felder, R.M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student–centered instruction. http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Resist.html. (Visited 9/16/18). 48 Department of Education Philippines. National competency-based teacher standards (ncbts): A professional development guide for Filipino teachers. https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development- guide-for-filipino-teachers.html ( visited 9/7/18) 49 Department of Education Philippines. National Competency-based Teacher Standards (ncbts) a professional development guide for Filipino teachers. https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development- guide-for-filipino-teachers.html ( visited 9/7/18) 50 Penina Mlama, Marema Dioum, Herbert Makoye, Lornah Murage, Margaret Wagah, and Rose Washika. Gender Responsive Pedagogy: A Teacher’s Handbook. http://www.ungei.org/resources/2762.htm. (Visited 20/8/18). 51 John W. Creswell. (2015) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Third Edition. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1524839915580941. (Visited 17/05/18). http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2304/rcie.2011.6.1.90 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228678573_Opening_the_black_box_Women's_empowerment_and_innovative_secondary_education_in_Honduras https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228678573_Opening_the_black_box_Women's_empowerment_and_innovative_secondary_education_in_Honduras https://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_pdf.php?file=why-so-few-research https://www.unfpa.org/data/transparency-portal/unfpa-uganda https://doi.org/10.1080/714042230 http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/00220670109598755 https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/gender-responsive-classrooms-need-gender-sensitive-teachers https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/gender-responsive-classrooms-need-gender-sensitive-teachers https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/gender-responsive-classrooms-need-gender-sensitive-teachers https://www.education.go.ug/files/downloads/ESSAPR%20%202016-17.pdf http://www.monitor.co.ug/OpEd/Commentary/Uneb-results-Media-must-help-parents-make-right-choices/689364-4309208-si0foj/index.html http://www.monitor.co.ug/OpEd/Commentary/Uneb-results-Media-must-help-parents-make-right-choices/689364-4309208-si0foj/index.html http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.526.348 http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Resist.html https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development-guide-for-filipino-teachers.html https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development-guide-for-filipino-teachers.html https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development-guide-for-filipino-teachers.html https://docplayer.net/18423120-National-competency-based-teacher-standards-ncbts-a-professional-development-guide-for-filipino-teachers.html http://www.ungei.org/resources/2762.htm http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1524839915580941 18 CENTER FOR UNIVERSAL EDUCATION 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20036 www.brookings.edu/universal-education | @BrookingsGlobal The Center for Universal Education (CUE) at Brookings is one of the leading policy centers focused on universal quality education, particularly in the developing world. We develop and disseminate effective solutions for quality education and skills development. We envision a world where all children and youth have the skills they need to succeed in the 21st century. CUE plays a critical role in influencing the development of policy related to global education and promotes actionable strategies for governments, civil society, and private enterprise. http://www.brookings.edu/universal-education https://twitter.com/BrookingsGlobal http://www.brookings.edu/universal-education