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
8. Funding of Inter-University Partnerships in EFA (Agencies)
AUCC
AUCC
AUF
AUF
DFID
NUFFIC
DDC
USAID
NUFIC
PIE
USAID
42%
58%
Yes No
9. Te
Tr 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 es
Tr 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
14. Total Number of Responses (Institutions)
35%
25 projects
63%
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 Africa
Latin 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
ist
Tr
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
hi
Tr 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 o
Tr 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 ri
Tr 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
ty
G
ov
er In
nm di
en v id
ta ua
lB ls
od
G 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
22. University involvement in EFA (Institutions)
18%
6%
9%
67%
Insufficient Non-existent Adequate No answer
23. Reasons for Non-Involvement (Institutions)
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of Lack of No answer
support opportunity recognition expertise interest demand
25. Changes Needed to Improve the Participation of HE in EFA
(Institutions)
25
20
15
10
5
0
Governmental policy in Donor agency funding Institutional policy International agencies
HE and organisations
26. Research on EFA (Institutions)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
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?
