Accountability vs. Solidarity: Engaging Communities in School Management in Ugandan Primary Schools

• In Event: Scaling Educational Programs: Case Studies from Uganda, Honduras, and Colombia

Proposal

Involving communities in school management is recognized as a promising intervention for improving educational outcomes in low-income countries, but with limited evidence; more research is needed to understand how and under what conditions these interventions might work (Global Education Expert Advisory Panel, 2023). A school scorecard program implemented in Ugandan primary schools offers a unique opportunity to investigate one such intervention. An initial evaluation of the program found that one treatment variation – a “participatory” one – was highly effective: both student and teacher absenteeism decreased, and student test scores improved (Barr et al., 2012). Certain aspects of the research study suggest that the intervention didn’t work as expected, though, raising important questions related to its underlying mechanisms and theory of change.
In particular, the success of the “participatory” version indicated that an increased sense of collective action, particularly among parents, was a key mechanism. The study included a behavioral game intended to measure willingness to invest in the public good and found that the participatory version of the scorecard program increased parents’ collective action, as measured by the game. While the scorecard program, like many community monitoring interventions, was initially conceived of as an effort to improve accountability, the results of the original evaluation suggest that it might not be the power to hold someone accountable so much as the coordination and sense of solidarity between different stakeholders that determined the success of the participatory version. As Barr et. al (2012) concluded, the participatory version “better engaged the community in a process of discussing school goals, constraints, and progress” (Barr et al., 2012).
In the present study we replicate the participatory scorecard that was found to be effective in Bar et al., (2012) with the goal of better understanding these mechanisms and in particular the accountability vs. solidarity framing. There are multiple, significant differences between the two periods of implementation and research (seven years later, different NGO implementer, different region of Uganda, etc.) but the participatory version of the intervention was implemented in the same manner, using the program implementation guides and materials used in Barr et. al., (2021). A quasi-experimental study found mixed results, but some promising impact on reducing student dropout (Kabay, 2019).
As part of the replication, on-going qualitative research was used to understand how different stakeholders experienced the intervention. In addition, the same behavioral game was played and paired with survey questions to better understand collective action in this context. Findings reinforce a theory of solidary – stakeholders explained that the scorecard program “helps bring together the school, parents and the community.” In particular, it shifted the conversation away from blame or scapegoating across different stakeholders, as one respondent described, “We are now united in solving the challenges, without finger-pointing to individuals.” Similarly, disagreeing with the statement, “Parents often blame teachers for problems as this school” was strongly associated with collective action, as measured by the behavioral game.

Authors

• Vianney Mbonigaba, Innovations for Poverty Action

• Sarah Kabay, Innovations For Poverty Action