OSSREA Publications

Gender In Nascent Module II Programmes In Kenyan Public Universities
A Descriptive Survey

Michael Wainaina

1.1 Introduction

This study addresses the intersection of issues of gender and the nascent Module II Programmes in public universities in Kenya. The onset of the new millennium has seen an unprecedented growth of these programmes in Kenyan public universities. The nascent nature of the programmes is borne by the fact that the earliest started in 1998, and the rest have grown over the subsequent years. Different terminologies are being used to describe these programmes, namely, parallel, evening, part-time, self-sponsored, school based, direct entry, full fee-paying academic and Module II. Within the context of this study, I have used the term Module II programmes to refer to all the adult/continuing/lifelong education programmes in public universities in Kenya that are being offered to mature students who are not selected through the Joint Admissions Board (JAB).

According to Morris (1999), the differential access to, and control over, the resources and benefits men and women encounter through developmental programmes, educational or otherwise, are inextricably linked to the gendered nature of the organization providing the programme. Stated in terms of the concerns of the proposed study, we appreciate that gender affects the differential access to, and control over, the resources and benefits men and women will derive from the Module II programmes. Therefore, this study was a diagnostic one, aiming at identifying key issues of intersection between gender and the Module II programmes in order to establish potentialities, opportunities, challenges and trends that should inform gender parity in the programmes. The term “gender parity” is used to refer to an approach that ensures that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages by the universities mounting Module II programmes. The ultimate goal would be to ensure that men and women benefit equally from the chances of advancement offered by these programmes in Kenyan public universities.

1.2 Background to the Problem

The Gender Equality and Education Task Force of the United Nations Millennium Project  working on the project’s gender equality goal envisions the elimination of gender disparities in primary and secondary education, and in all levels of education, preferably by 2005 and 2015, respectively (United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2003; Gender Equity Report) . These goals had previously been emphasized at the World Education Forum held in Dakar, Senegal, in April 2000. This focus on gender equality in education is informed by the fact that gender disparities that disadvantage women are present at all levels of education and are worse in Third World countries. With special reference to tertiary education, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) (2003) identified gender inequality as one of the challenges besetting higher education in sub-Saharan Africa. The problem of this study is conceptualized against this background of sustained international efforts and concern over gender disparities in education, and the measures being put in place to rectify the situation. These efforts need to be localized and interpreted within the demands of a rapidly changing local higher education environment.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

As noted earlier, there has been a phenomenal expansion of Module II programmes in Kenyan public universities. This expansion has been engendered by various socio-economic circumstances given impetus by globalization, forcing universities to transform in an effort to diversify their capital base in the face of consistently decreasing capitation from governments. Thus, the discourse and operational environment that informs transformation and hence the diversification into Module II programmes seems to revolve around economic and structural adjustment problems.

Yet, the Module II programmes are being offered not just in an environment of economic and structural problems, but more importantly, within an educational set up that has well-documented gender disparities. The danger is that unless a very deliberate effort is made to foreground this gendered context and mainstream gender at this nascent stage of the programmes, gender and all its manifestations will be sidelined and suffocated by the overwhelming issues of economic survival that have given impetus to development of the programmes in the first place. The result will be that Module II programmes will perpetuate the gender disparities that currently characterize the educational sector in Kenya, or worse still, create new ones that will diminish or undermine any gains that could have been made towards gender parity in this and other levels of education. Eventually the benefits of Module II programmes will not benefit men and women equally. Yet gender trends in Module II programmes have not been examined. The current study recognizes this gap and seeks to address it by examining gender trends in the Module II programmes from the perspective of both the male and female students who are undertaking these programmes.