Gender Inequality and Collective Action in School Committees: Evidence from Tanzania

Abstract

The making of education governance reforms has led to the transfer of school management powers to teachers’ and parents’ representatives through primary school management committees. However, the committees have been found to be inadequate in ensuring that collective action is taken by their male and female members in most low- and middle-income countries. In response, this paper examines the possibilities that collective action by school committees is related to gender inequality, controlling for demographic and socio-economic factors across the rural (Iringa District) and urban (Arusha City) contexts of Tanzania. The results of a simple linear regression analysis using Ordinary Least Square techniques show that gender inequality predicts the collective action in school committees in both Arusha City and Iringa District. However, the multiple linear regression model predicts gender inequality in Arusha, and not in Iringa, controlling for membership experience and occupational status for both the rural and urban samples. This paper has implications for both policy and practice. In particular, the next round of school autonomy reforms needs to consider the criteria for school committee membership to incorporate membership experience and occupational status into the qualifications of parents’ representatives. In practice, head teachers need to devise innovative, sustainable approaches using the readily available resources to provide planning, budgeting and monitoring skills-based training to newly elected parent representatives.

Keywords

• Gender inequality
• Collective action
• School committee
• Parent representatives
• Teacher representatives

References

1. ActionAid Tanzania. (2011). Transforming education for girls in Tanzania: Baseline research summary report. https://actionaid.org/sites/default/files/aategintbaselinetanzaniafinal.pdf
2. Akdoğan, N., & Alparslan, K. (2020). Do members of disadvantaged groups possess a motivation of favouritism towards advantaged groups? Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 11(4), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.36941/mjss-2020-0041
3. Archambault, C., & Ehrhardt, D. (2022). The committeefication of collective action in Africa. World Development, 153, 105825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105825.
4. Barreto, M., & Doyle, D. M. (2023). Benevolent and hostile sexism in a shifting global context. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(2), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00136-x
5. Beard, V. & Dasgupta, A. (2006). Collective action and community-driven development in rural and urban Indonesia. Urban Studies, 43(9), 1451-1468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980600749944
6. Becker, J. C., & Wagner, U. (2009). Doing gender differently: The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women's endorsement of sexist beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.551
7. Berhanu, K. Z. (2023). Practices, challenges, and prospects of implementing school-based management (SBM) system in Ethiopian schools: Implications for policy makers. Research in Educational Administration & Leadership, 8(2), 465-504. https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1275282
8. Branisa, B., Klasen, S., & Ziegler, M. (2009). The construction of the social institutions and gender index (Discussion Papers No. 184). Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research (IAI). https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/57322/1/608908010.pdf

9. Brown, B., & Duku, N. (2008). Negotiated identities: dynamics in parents' participation in school governance in rural Eastern Cape schools and implication for school leadership. South African Journal of Education, 28(3), 431-450. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v28n3a122
10. Bruns, B., Filmer, D., & Patrinos, H. A. (2011). Making schools work: New evidence on accountability reforms. World Bank Group. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/483221468147581570/pdf/600500PUB0ID181s0Work09780821386798.pdf
11. Caricati, L., & Owuamalam, C. K. (2020). System justification among the disadvantaged: A triadic social stratification perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(40). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00040
12. Carr-Hill, R. (2017). Exploring the composition of school councils and its relationship to council effectiveness as an accountability tool (Background Paper). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000259567
13. Cerise, S., & Francavilla, F. (2012). Tackling the root causes of gender inequalities in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=a6ddb787b1419f065e7263553ece588a7aa23f6b
14. Cocco, V. M., Vezzali, L., Kola-Daisi, T. I., & Çakal, H. (2023). The role of common ingroup identity in promoting social change among tribes in Nigeria. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302231162038
15. Coinco, E. (2012). Women’s participation in school‐based management and communities within the complex socio‐cultural context of Nigeria (Programme Report). Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN). https://www.esspin.org/resources/reports/programme/supporting-community-and-civil-society-demand
16. Cossyleon, J. E., & Woolley, K. R. (2020). Gender and collective action. In Naples, N. A. (Ed.). Companion to women’s and gender studies (pp. 385-408). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119315063.ch20
17. De Cristofaro, V., Pellegrini, V., Giacomantonio, M., Livi, S., & van Zomeren, M. (2021). Can moral convictions against gender inequality overpower system justification effects? Examining the interaction between moral conviction and system justification. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(4), 1279–1302. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12451
18. Dhakal, R. K. (2019). Promoting gender inclusive governance to deliver better education in Nepal. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 6(1), 83-95. https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v6i1p83
19. Dhakal, R. K. (2021). How are ‘included’ excluded and vice-versa: Negotiated participation of women in school governance in Nepal. Journal of Social Inclusion Studies, 7(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/23944811211020369
20. Dick, P. (2024). Rethinking gender inequalities in organizations. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
21. Duku, N., & Salami, I. A. (2017). The relevance of the school governance body to the effective decolonisation of education in South Africa. Perspectives in Education, 35(2), 112-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie. v35i2.9
22. Gilbert, M. (2007). Rationality in collective action. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36(1): 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393105284167.
23. Guha, P. (2023). School committee composition: Exploring the role of parental andfemale representation in India. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8182&context=lkcsb_research
24. Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., & Brewer, M. B. (2017). Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217690909
25. Holme, J., & Rangel, V. (2012). Putting school reform in its place: Social geography, organizational social capital, and school performance. American Educational Research Journal, 49(2), 257-283. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211423316
26. Jain, C., & Nandwani, B. (2022). Female representation in school management and school quality (Working Paper No. 2022-002). Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR). http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/WP-2022-002.pdf
27. Jost, J. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12297
28. Jost, J.T., & Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
29. Jost, J.T., Banaji, M.R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
30. Kekana, L., & Makura, A. (2020). The importance of school governing bodies in the effective governance of the public schools: Do women have a role? The ADVED 2020 - 6th International Conference on Advances in Education, Virtual Conference. https://www.ocerints.org/adved20_e-publication/papers/x255.pdf
31. Masanyiwa, Z. S., Magaria, B. R., & Shauri, N. E. (2023). Participation in school committees in monitoring primary school projects in the Nyang’hwale district in Tanzania. Rural Planning Journal, 25(1), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.59557/kykk3z52
32. Mazzuca, S., Moscatelli, S., Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (2022). Men’s reactions to gender inequality in the workplace: From relative deprivation on behalf of women to collective action. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 999750. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.999750
33. Meinzen-Dick, R., Di Gregorio, M. & McCarthy, N. (2004). Methods for studying collective action in rural development (Working Paper No. 33). International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/CAPRiWP33.pdf‎.
34. Mikołajczak, G., Becker, J., & Iyer, A. (2022). Women who challenge or defend the status quo: Ingroup identities as predictors of progressive and reactionary collective action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 626-641. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2842
35. Nemes, J. (2013). School committee in the context of preparing and implementing whole school development planning. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(7), 73 –79. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210350
36. Norman, G. (2010). Likert Scales, Levels of Measurement and the “Laws” of Statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459–010–9222–y.
37. OECD. (2022), SIGI Country Report for Tanzania. OECD Publishing
38. Okitsu, T., & Edwards, B. D. (2017). Policy promise and the reality of community involvement in school-based management in Zambia: Can the rural poor hold schools and teachers to account? International Journal of Educational Development, 56, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.07.001
39. Oliver, P. Marwell, G., & Teixeira, R. (1985). A theory of the critical mass: I. Interdependence, group heterogeneity, and the production of collective action. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 522–556. https://doi.org/10.1086/228313
40. Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M., & Spears, R. (2018). Addressing evidential and theoretical inconsistencies in system-justification theory with a social identity model of system attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(2), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417737136
41. Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M., & Spears, R. (2019). Revisiting 25 years of system motivation explanation for system justification from the perspective of social identity model of system attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 362–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12285
42. Owuamalam, C. K., Caricati, L., & Bonetti, C. (2023). A large-scale test of the reality constraint and ingroup bias accounts of women’s support for male privilege. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 48(1), 38-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/03616843231176222
43. Pandolfelli, L., Dohrn, S., & Meinzen-Dick, R. (2007). Gender and collective action: Policy implications from recent research (CAPRi Policy Brief). International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://ebrary.ifpri.org/digital/collection/p15738coll2/id/32849/
44. Peshkovskaya, A., Babkina, T., & Myagkov, M. (2019). Gender effects and cooperation in collective action: A laboratory experiment. Rationality and Society, 31(3), 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463119858788
45. Poteete, A. R., & Ostrom, E. (2008). Fifteen years of empirical research on collective action in natural resource management: Struggling to build Large-N databases based on qualitative research. World Development, 36(1), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.02.012.
46. Prinsen, G., & Titega, K. (2008). Uganda’s decentralised primary education: Musical chairs and inverted elite capture in school management committees. Public Administration and Development, 28(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.487
47. Robitzsch, A. (2020). Why ordinal variables can (almost) always be treated as continuous variables: Clarifying assumptions of robust continuous and ordinal factor analysis estimation methods. Frontiers in Education, 5(589965), 177. https://doi.org/10.3389/ feduc.2020.589965.
48. Rubin, M., Owuamalam, C. K., Spears, R., & Caricati, L. (2023). A social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA): Multiple explanations of system justification by the disadvantaged that do not depend on a separate system justification motive. European Review of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2022.2046422
49. Sijapati, D. P. (2019). Gender status in the community school of Nepal. Patan Pragya, 5(1), 209-218. https://doi.org/10.3126/pragya.v5i1.30476.
50. Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse and the very limited usefulness of Cronabch’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74(1), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336–008–9101–0.
51. Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting data from Likert-type scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5–4–18.
52. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13(2), 65 – 93. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847401300204
53. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin, W.G., & Worchel, S. (Eds.). The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-37). Brooks/Cole
54. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Basil Blackwell
55. United Republic of Tanzania. (1995a). The Education and Training Policy 1995. Government Printer
56. United Republic of Tanzania. (1995b). The Education (Amendment) Act 1995. Government Printer
57. United Republic of Tanzania. (2000). Women and Gender Development Policy. Ministry of Community Development, Women's Affairs and Children
58. United Republic of Tanzania. (2001). Primary Education Development Plan. Government Printers
59. United Republic of Tanzania. (2018). Education Circular No. 1 2018: Guideline for formation and management of school committee and boards. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST).
60. Unterhalter, E., North, A., & Ward, O. (2018). Accountability for gender equality (Background Paper). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000261596
61. van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
62. van Zomeren, M., Kutlaca, M., & Turner-Zwinkels, F. (2018). Integrating who “we” are with what “we” (will not) stand for: A further extension of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action. European Review of Social Psychology, 29(1), 122–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1479347
63. Wade, R. (1987). The management of common property resource: Finding a cooperative solution. Research Observer, 2(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/2.2.219.
64. Wojtkiewicz, R. (2017). Elementary regression modelling: A discrete approach (pp. 53-78). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506303451