Search

In some low-income countries, low-fee private schools targeting relatively poor communities have sprung up in considerable numbers meeting growing demand. This is often the case where government is not providing enough school places, but also where parents could access government schools for their children but choose not to, due to perceived low quality of provision. This research study sought to find out if non-state schooling has developed to any considerable extent in the Mozambican context, where government education is of poor quality and learning outcomes are low. This paper reports that non-state provision is playing some role in providing places at the secondary level where government under-provides, and it is providing differentiated demand for some primary pupils. The study finds that the only level at which a true market appears to be developing is at the pre-primary level where government does not provide at all, which has resulted in complete inequity in access to early learning opportunities. At this most crucial level most schools are established, owned and run like typical low-fee private schools, i.e. as small businesses with individual owners. Overall non-government schools are few and far between and are playing a small role, with the only indications of recent growth evident at the pre-primary level.

The rise in low-fee private (LFP) primary schooling serving relatively poor clients is becoming well-documented. However much of this literature focuses on urban areas whose dense populations are favourable to market growth and competition. This paper goes some way to filling a gap in the literature on whether LFP schools are serving the needs of the poor in rural areas, taking the case of one Nigerian state. It contrasts the situation in rural areas with that of urban Ilorin, where private schools cater to over half of all enrolled children. The paper shows that private schooling is currently inaccessible to the poor, with only 3.3% of children in the poorest 40% of the population attending them, and only 13% of enrolled children in rural areas. The key message is that redoubled efforts are needed to improve government schools as providers of last resort to those bypassed by the market.