U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–020 PDF 2005

S. HRG. 109–155

COMBATING TERRORISM THROUGH EDUCATION:

THE NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIAN EXPERIENCE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINETH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

APRIL 19, 2005

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana, Chairman

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska

LINCOLN CHAFEE, Rhode Island

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware

PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin

BARBARA BOXER, California

BILL NELSON, Florida

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois

KENNETH A. MYERS, Jr., Staff Director

ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Democratic Staff Director

(II)

CONTENTS

Page

Ahmed, Samina, South Asia Project Director, International Crisis Group,

Islamabad, Pakistan ............................................................................................ 25

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29

Awadallah, Bassem, Minister of Finance, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,

Amman, Jordan .................................................................................................... 4

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7

Human Resource Development in Jordan ...................................................... 9

Burki, Shahid Javed, Consultant, Nathan Associates, Potomac, MD ................. 15

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 18

Cheney, Elizabeth, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern

Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC ................................................. 48

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51

Responses to questions submitted for the record by Senator Lugar ............ 79

Kunder, James, Assistant Administrator for Asia and the Near East, U.S.

Agency for International Development, Washington, DC ................................. 54

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58

Education Initiatives by Country .................................................................... 70

Lugar, Hon. Richard G., U.S. Senator from Indiana ............................................ 1

Method, Frank, Director of International Education Policy and Systems, Research Triangle Institute, Washington, DC ....................................................... 33

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 36

Nelson, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from Florida ........................................................ 3

ADDITIONAL STATEMENT SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Chafee, Hon. Lincoln, U.S. Senator from Rhode Island ....................................... 78

(III)

(1)

COMBATING TERRORISM THROUGH EDUCATION: THE NEAR EAST AND SOUTH

ASIAN EXPERIENCE

TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2005

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in room

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard G. Lugar,

chairman of the committee, presiding.

Present: Senators Lugar and Nelson.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD G. LUGAR, U.S.

SENATOR FROM INDIANA

The CHAIRMAN. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations

Committee is called to order.

Today, the Foreign Relations Committee meets to discuss American education assistance programs in the Near East and South

Asia and their contribution to United States national security. Outdated and poorly funded education systems in many Near Eastern

and South Asian countries have led to an education deficit. This

gap has contributed to the rise of extremist ideologies that have

provided fertile ground for terrorist recruitment during the last

decade. It is imperative that we focus sufficient attention and resources on promoting strong education systems as a way to counter

extremism at its roots.

The 2003 Arab Human Development Report by the United Nations Development Program highlights this ‘‘knowledge deficit’’ and

concludes that overhauling the region’s education systems should

be a critical priority. It notes that these changes should come from

within the region, drawing from its rich cultural, linguistic, and intellectual heritages.

The lack of educational opportunities for women in the Near East

and South Asia is of particular concern. Statistics show that while

73 percent of men in Arab States are literate, only 50 percent of

women in these countries can read and write. In Pakistan, only 39

percent of women are literate, compared to 63 percent of males,

with the largest disparities in rural areas. Finding ways to encourage the education of girls and women, while respecting cultural

norms, is crucial to fostering economic growth, democracy, and stability.

The Bush administration and the Congress have established the

Middle East Partnership Initiative, the Millennium Challenge AcVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
2

count, and the Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative to

promote reform. These efforts complement our bilateral education

assistance programs in countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan,

and Bangladesh.

Today, we want to assess the effectiveness of these efforts and

ask what can be done better. About 3 percent of total United States

foreign aid to Near Eastern countries, (excluding Israel), is devoted

to education. Can we achieve better results if we shift aid resources

from traditional forms of economic assistance to education? The

United States recently has tripled its education spending in Pakistan, where the connections between the education system and the

development of extremism are particularly acute. We need to assess whether national security benefits could be achieved by taking

similar steps in other nations.

I encourage the administration to devise and implement programs under the new authorities provided by the National Intelligence Reform Act, signed in December, to expand educational and

cultural exchanges. Last October, the Foreign Relations Committee

held a hearing to examine the impact of our visa policies on foreign

students studying in the United States. Several leaders of prominent United States universities testified on the benefits of international educational exchange programs and on the importance of

maintaining these programs despite new visa restrictions. The committee hosted two roundtables that focused on ways to ameliorate

the problems of visa delays without sacrificing national security. I

believe it is essential that we expand student exchange programs,

not scale them back, as they not only serve our national security

interests, but also enrich our society and our culture.

In June of last year, I introduced Senate Resolution 375, supporting reform and modernization initiatives in the Greater Middle

East, including a Twenty-First Century Trust. This resolution acknowledged that advancement in educational opportunities has yet

to reach large percentages of the people in the Near East and

South Asia regions. It further noted that reform and modernization

must come from the people of the region, and cannot be imposed

from the outside.

Next month, an Education Ministerial meeting in Jordan will

bring together leaders from the G–8 and the Greater Middle East

and North Africa to address challenges of modernizing education

through collaborative partnerships. I applaud this as an excellent

example of regional coordination.

We have two distinguished panels for today’s discussion. On the

first panel, we will hear testimony from Dr. Bassem Awadallah,

former Minister of Planning and newly appointed Finance Minister

of Jordan; Shahid Javed Burki, former Finance Minister of Pakistan, and now a consultant with Nathan Associates; Dr. Samina

Ahmed, South Asia Project Director for the International Crisis

Group, based in Islamabad, Pakistan; and Mr. Frank Method, Director of International Education Policy and Systems at the Research Triangle Institute. Each of these distinguished witnesses

has been active in education reform efforts in the Near East and

South Asia. The committee looks forward to their unique perspectives.

3

On the second panel, we will hear from two administration officials. Mrs. Liz Cheney is the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary

of State for Near Eastern Affairs and the point-person for the Middle East Partnership Initiative. Mr. James Kunder is the Assistant

Administrator for Asia and the Near East at USAID. Both Ms.

Cheney and Mr. Kunder bring a wealth of expertise to today’s

topic. We welcome them to the committee.

Let me note the distinguished presence of the Senator from Florida. Do you have an opening thought or comment?

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM

FLORIDA

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I do. First of all, I

want to thank you for recognizing the importance of this subject to

our Nation.

We’ve read in the newspapers recently about Pakistan, for exam- ple, wanting to purchase F–16s. It’s not in the $3 billion package

over 5 years that has been promised to support Pakistan. There’s

other money in there for P–3 aircraft, TOW–2A antiarmor guided

missiles, and Phalanx close-in weapons systems. All of that does

not include the F–16s. But of the $11⁄2 billion that is set aside for

domestic assistance, only $100 million over 5 years is suggested by

the administration for education reform; $200 to $300 million is set

aside, to go directly to budget support in Pakistan. That means

that the Pakistani Government can use it for virtually anything

they want.

And it seems to me—and thank goodness you are sensitive to

this, as our chairman, recognizing the desperate need for education

in, not only Pakistan, but other areas, other countries in that

area—of the money that we give to them, it is one of the greatest

benefits to the free world to elevate the educational awareness and

attainment of people in that part of the world?

And so, in the course of this hearing—and I must admit, I’ve got

to go to another one; we’re confirming the Deputy Secretary of Defense in another committee—but I wish the panel would address:

How big is the education program in Afghanistan by comparison to

Pakistan? What is your estimation of the amount of money that

Pakistan could use to truly reform its education system over the

next 5 years? And if there were real reform in the Pakistani education system, what types of jobs will these young people be able

to find with the new skills?

And perhaps the second panel could discuss: How much does the

Pakistani Government actually spend on education annually? What

is the percentage of their budget for that? And if you ranked the

priorities in Pakistan, where would education be on that scale? And

then, overall, why doesn’t our aid to Pakistan support that goal of

education?

I must admit that in a couple of trips to Pakistan, in discussions

with a number of officials there, it seems like we’ve got a long way

to go and that we could better further the interests of the United

States if we’d be serious about getting the money, not to the government, but making sure that it gets right down there to the level

of education.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

4

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much, Senator Nelson. The

panel can be reassured that you start with strong bipartisan support this morning, as well as a desire to hear more.

I will ask that you testify in the order that I introduced you. If

it is possible, please either give your statements or summarize

them within approximately a 10-minute period of time. The Chair

will not be unduly rigorous about that, because we’ve come to hear

you. At the same time, we want to have ample opportunity, as

Members appear, for questions. We also have a second panel. As

life goes on, we will have rollcall votes coming along at 11:30 or

11:45. So, we can accomplish a great deal in that period of time,

but I’m hopeful that you will help me in that respect.

Let me, first of all, call upon you, Dr. Bassem. We are delighted

that you are here. We congratulate you on your new assignment in

your country.

STATEMENT OF BASSEM AWADALLAH, MINISTER OF FINANCE,

HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN, AMMAN, JORDAN

Dr. AWADALLAH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am honored and privileged to represent the Government of the Hashemite

Kingdom of Jordan this morning in front of you, and I wish to

thank you and to express our gratitude, and that of His Majesty

the King and the Government of Jordan, to you, personally, for taking the initiative to look at reform and development in the Middle

East and to pay a lot of attention to the need for a Marshall Plan

for the reform and the development of our part of the world.

In particular, your emphasis on education is extremely important, and we very much value and appreciate the emphasis that

you have given to this, and this hearing, which we are proud to

participate in.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Dr. AWADALLAH. Mr. Chairman, I have taken the liberty of sending the testimony that I’m going to make, and the remarks that I’m

going to make, in to your office, and you most probably have a copy

of it.

The CHAIRMAN. We do, and it will be published in full. And that

will be true for each of the statements that you have written. They

will be published in full in the record; so that if you choose to summarize, please know that your full text will be a part of our hearing record.

Dr. AWADALLAH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I will depart from the written statement. I will just use some relevant parts of it and try to limit myself to the 10-minute——

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Dr. AWADALLAH [continuing]. Deadline that you’ve given.

Mr. Chairman, the most important point, which you referred to

in your introductory statement, is about the demography and the

demographic explosion that we will face in our part of the region.

Some statistics. By 2010, we will have 146 million people who

will seek employment in our part of the world, 185 million by the

year 2020. With unemployment rates now at about 15 percent, we

will need to create close to 50 million jobs in the coming 5 years,

and 100 million jobs by the year 2020. This is doubling the current

level of employment just within the first two decades of this cenVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
5

tury. So when we speak about reform in the Middle East, it’s not

because this particular administration of the United States has

paid attention to it, it’s because of the need for reform; because if

we do not have reform, there is no future for our part of the world.

And it starts with educational reform.

In Jordan, we have a population of 5.35 million people. Our population is growing at 2.4 percent per annum. And we have a demographic composition of a predominantly young people; 72 percent of

our people are under the age of 29, 60 percent of our people are

under the age of 25, and 51 percent of our people are under the

age of 18.

Now, our ability in Jordan to transform into a knowledged-based

economy and to join the ranks of the more advanced nations will

be significantly determined by the contribution capacity of the

young and the growing population; and there is only one way to do

that, and that is educational reform.

This is exactly what the Government of Jordan, under the leadership of His Majesty the King, did in 1999 upon his accession to

the throne. Through a public/private partnership, he got together

more than 180 people to come up with a blueprint for reform for

Jordan, to accelerate reform; hence, the homegrown nature of that

kind of reform.

We identified what we needed to do in our public schools. We

identified the need to introduce kindergartens for early-childhood

development in public schooling. We identified the need to introduce English in grade one in our public schools, and not in grade

five. And we identified the need to bring computer skills to the curriculum of our school system.

Five years later, we have spent more than 250 million U.S. dollars. More than 85 million U.S. dollars came from the Senate and

the House and the administration of the United States in support

of this initiative. And we are proud to say that our educational reform not only includes brick and mortar and the construction of

new schools, but it includes the training of teachers, it includes the

development of e-learning capabilities, the revamping of our curricula to introduce e-content. And the introduction of an e-learning

platform that was designed by a Jordanian company, and now that

is being exported to Saudi Arabia, to Bahrain, and even to the New

Jersey system of education.

So, we are proud of the amount of achievement that we have

made over the past few years, and we have started to see the results, in terms of the achievement of the public school.

Perhaps most importantly, Mr. Chairman, we had a dichotomy in

our society between those who had and those who did not have.

Those who had, could afford to go to private schools, could afford

to have personal computers and learn English, and even French, in

their private schools; and those who didn’t—and those are the majority of the people of Jordan—had to go to a public schooling system, where they did not see a computer throughout their education,

until they graduated, and where they only received English at

grade five. Today, that dichotomy is being addressed, and equal opportunity is being given to everybody in Jordan through an education system. We believe that that’s where equal opportunity

6

starts, this is where reform starts, and this is where pure and good

governance comes along.

Mr. Chairman, one of the major ideas that we initially started

with, which was the introduction of computers and English language in public schools, was not very favorably accepted by our

people. They thought that this was being imposed on us, and, Why

do we need to introduce computers, when kids did not have milk

in school? They said, ‘‘Instead of the computers, why don’t you have

milk?’’ Five years later, there’s a tremendous buy-in by the people

of Jordan for the need for educational reform. They all know, they

all realize now, that through the educational reform initiative,

their kids are being offered equal opportunity, and that if you offer

them computers, it is not mutually exclusive to offering them milk

or anything else in schools.

So the public buy-in and the popular support for reform initiatives is extremely important to sustain these initiatives. Beyond

just writing about them or testifying about these initiatives in front

of you, our own people need to see value for these reforms, they

need to realize that these reforms are going to be reflected on their

lives in a positive and tangible manner.

I am proud to say that the partnership we’ve had with the U.S.

Government and with the U.S. Congress over the last 5 years has

been a very, very positive factor in accelerating the pace of the reforms, and people in our part of the world are realizing that.

When opposition groups in our Parliament, the Islamic Action

Front, accused us of importing the educational e-curricula from the

United States, we stood tall, and we said, ‘‘We developed this curricula. We, in Jordan. We did it in 1999, even before this administration came to power. We did it in order to focus our minds and

our entire mental ability on reforming the educational system in

Jordan. Yes, it is true, we got the American taxpayers’ money to

help us fund these programs, and the American administration and

the Congress were very positive and understanding and supportive

in this effort. But it was a homegrown effort of educational reform

supported by external powers?’’ And this is extremely important to

continue to remember.

One last thing, Mr. Chairman. In the year 2000, in Davos, in

Switzerland, His Majesty met with a group of American companies,

U.S. corporations, led by Cisco—by John Chambers, of Cisco.

They’ve identified Jordan as one of the areas which can be an example for other developing countries in harnessing IT for educational purposes. As a result, an initiative grew. It’s called the

Jordan Education Initiative. We have, today, 35 United States—35

corporations, many of them are United States corporations, including Intel and Microsoft, that are participating in this public/private

partnership to build 100 Discovery Schools in Jordan. I hope you

will have the time, on your next visit to Jordan, to come and visit

these schools, which have become a real shining example of what

educational reform is all about.

This initiative is currently being modeled in the Palestinian

areas. In Davos, in January of this year, we met with the Minister

of Finance of Palestine and with Cisco and with representatives of

the MEPI program in the State Department, and we all agreed

that this example should be replicated in the Palestinian areas.

7

And it is. It is also being replicated in Egypt, and it will be replicated in Bahrain in order to introduce a model house, if you will,

of what educational reform products will be like in 5 years’ time.

It will show people how achievement in schools will be able to

change their lives and to offer them opportunities.

Obviously, the main challenge remains, Mr. Chairman, for us to

find the jobs and to matchmake between the educational output

and the input that is required by the labor markets. This is something that requires governments, private sector, and academicians

and universities, in particular, vocational training centers, as well,

to cooperate together in order to identify what are the needs, what

are the projected needs in the economies of the Middle East, and

how the educational reform process can help prepare all the young

minds, all these big numbers that I mentioned at the start of this

testimony, in order to get them the jobs, to give them hope, to give

them a vested interest in the moderation and the stability of our

region. Failing that, we are going to have a major catastrophe.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement and additional material submitted by

Dr. Awadallah follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. BASSEM AWADALLAH, MINISTER OF FINANCE,

HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN, AMMAN, JORDAN

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to share with you my thoughts on

educational reform in the Middle East, the nexus between education and terrorism,

and our efforts in Jordan to place education at the center of the reform and development agenda. To be sure, the Middle East is faced with the immense challenge of

its demographic trends: By 2010 some 146 million workers will seek employment,

185 million by 2020. With unemployment rates now at about 15 percent, the ambitious goal of absorbing unemployed workers in addition to the new job entrants implies the need to create close to 50 million jobs in the coming 5 years and 100 million jobs by 2020; that is, doubling the current level of employment within the first

two decades of this century.

But within this stark statistic lies the hope of regional renaissance. Regardless

of natural resource endowment, the future of the region will hinge on its ability to

harness its human potential. Human resources, nurtured and provided with the opportunity to produce and innovate is the only way toward closing the knowledge and

development gap that currently exists.

Hatred, bigotry, and violence are not caused by the lack of access to knowledge,

but rather, by the lack of opportunity. And education is central in allowing people

to seek opportunity.

Education must reflect a culture, a distinct understanding of the role of the individual and that of society. Closed societies with a reference point long lost in the

past cannot teach knowledge as culture, but rather teach dogma as truism.

This, Mr. Chairman, should be, in my modest opinion, the starting point and driver for any educational reform effort in the region. The central role that education

plays is not lost on anyone in the region—we live in young societies that yearn for

it, whether through popular culture, media, or how we used to do it when I was

in school, through reading.

Terror and ideology are taught as doctrine in many places around the world. But

helping build schools and pay for more teachers is not the solution—it is part of it

though. The solution is the creation of an incentive-based system of assistance, particularly in education, in which countries modernizing their educational systems, encouraging creative thinking, problem solving, and trusting their students to make

their own judgments about what is right and wrong are asssisted.

There are three principal difficulties that challenge education in East Asia today:

(i) The poor quality of basic education; (ii) limited access to educational opportunities, especially for girls; and (iii) the inadequate relevance to economic, social, and

health needs.

For our part in Jordan, the primacy of education in our development process has

long been established, and we have long sought to invest heavily in our youth. The

focus of Jordan’s human resource development covers wide-ranging activities includVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
8

ing public and higher education, vocational and technical training, and youth development. We find a pressing need to incorporate enhanced levels of student learning

capabilities to include analytical skills, team-based activity, and computer literacy

at every stage of the education system, enabling citizens to become increasingly

highly educated, broadly skilled, adaptable, and motivated.

This has been carried out through a 5-year comprehensive program (2003–2008) at a cost of US$380: The Education Reform for the Knowledge Economy program

(ERfKE), devised in close coordination with the World Bank and other donors. It

sets out a coordinated and integrated plan of action to meet the current and future

needs of society in Jordan in the context of the knowledge economy. That is, relevant knowledge, adequate physical environments, and an environment in which

students can discover, absorb, and contemplate values, thoughts, and knowledge. Since 2002, more than US$180 million have been channeled in human resource

development, 39 percent of which was provided by the United States (US$70.6 million). Double shifts have been phased out in almost all schools; about 180 schools

are being established, 140 kindergartens have been established, 650 science laboratories were built and equipped, while more than 500 schools have already been computerized, resulting in the ratio of students to personal computers decreasing from

42 to 16. Further, 14 new vocational training centers have been established, and

8,000 people have received, or are currently receiving, increasingly demand-driven

training.

Today, Jordan ranks 51st of 127 countries (and first among Arab States) in

UNESCO’s Education for All (EFA) Development Index (measuring primary enrollment rates, adult literacy rates, gender specific EFA, and survival rate to grade

five).

The Middle East region today is home to 130 million children who constitute 50

percent of the population. While most governments have made tremendous strides

toward extending access to basic education to all children, the region is characterized by great underlying variation at the country level. For example, Egypt, Jordan,

and Tunisia have achieved near universal enrollment, while literacy in Morocco is

less than 40 percent. Similarly, access to education continues to be uneven across

the population.

Clearly much more needs to be done. USAID investments in education in the re- gion of US$43 in 2003 are not sufficient. Educational reform will continue to occupy

center stage, and we cannot but start with our young to lead a comprehensive national renaissance. Schools still need to be built, old curricula need to be revised,

new e-curricula needs to be developed, and youth need to be trained with relevant

skills. They must be provided with the tools necessary to lead productive and fulfilling lives.

Within the framework of change to meet the economic needs of the future, and

given the similarities and differences between countries of the region, there are a

number of success stories that could be replicated through adaptation and modification in other locations and countries in the region. Given the pressing need to improve education and training, and given the scarcity of resources, it is important for

all countries to consider what the necessary changes are, what approaches to change

can be employed, and how sustainable change can be achieved. We have much to

learn from each other through discussion, sharing of ideas, debate, and application.

At the heart of any modernization plans in the region must be a review of the

educational systems and a discussion of the modalities for reshaping them into true

vehicles for advancement. Knowledge societies that cherish innovation and scholarship are the bedrock of development. The region’s history of innovation is indeed a

suitable backdrop for discussion, and a true revival of this tradition lies at the heart

of a meeting of Education Ministers from the Middle East and the G–8.

A renewed faith in partnership and shared interests is the main impetus for the

meeting. This process was launched at the Forum for the Future meeting in Rabat,

Morocco, in December 2004, where Jordan outlined its suggestions for cooperation

between the G–8 and BMENA countries in educational reform.

In a preparatory meeting held in London in February 2004, Jordan presented the

following areas as what it expects will be the outcomes that will emerge from the

ministerial meeting on education.

a. A renewed commitment by countries of the BMENA region to initiate and

pursue homegrown and credible educational reform initiatives.

b. A clear and practical framework of action based on technical consultations

to explore the mechanisms of implementing educational reforms. This is to be

reviewed and vetted at the Forum for the Future meeting in Bahrain in November 2005.

c. A commitment by countries of the G–8 to render support (financial, technical, and political) to the educational reform efforts in the region.

9

Agreement has been reached on the agenda for the ministerial to tackle four main

agenda items, as follows:

Agenda item I: Critical success factors for educational reform

a. Political commitment.

b. Financial commitment (importance of budgetary transparency and access to resources).

c. Building on best practices.

d. Systemwide governance.

e. Monitoring and evaluation.

f. Partnership with schools, parents, civil society, business, and donors.

g. Systemic approach to reform.

Agenda item II: Literacy and access

a. Support and commit to the framework of action to halve illiteracy as agreed

upon in the Literacy Workshop to be held in Algeria in April 2005 (agreement on

regional program).

b. Support for regional and national plans to enhance access to, and participation

in, education.

c. Develop mechanisms for lifelong learning and out-of-school children.

Agenda item III: Equity and social inclusion

a. Innovative uses of ICT in special education programs.

b. Specialized outreach programs for disadvantaged students.

c. Mechanisms to provide equal opportunities for girls and people in need.

d. Inclusive models of schooling.

Agenda item IV: Quality of education

a. Curricula renewal that maintains national identities and respects cultural particularities while facilitating modernization and development.

b. E-content development.

c. Quality assurance at all levels based on international standards and benchmarks.

d. Occupational standards to ensure quality and facilitate labor mobility.

e. Skills-based pedagogy backed by support for efficient professional development

programs.

The ministerial meeting on education will take place in the period 22–23 May

2005, on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum meeting. Given the wide participation of the private sector and civil society, the ministerial meeting on education will have a rich pool to draw upon in its consultations.

On 22 May 2005, a sub-Cabinet meeting on education will be held, in which

roundtables will be formed to discuss each of the four agenda items outlined above.

Each roundtable will include representatives from BMENA and G–8 countries, as

well as representatives from the private sector and civil society organizations. Discussions will aim at producing a framework for action within each agenda item. The

resulting frameworks for action will then be collated into a general framework that

will be presented the following day for the ministerial meeting. The ministerial

meeting will then review and discuss the document, with the aim of reaching agreement on the framework by the end of the day, and will be making an announcement

to that effect.

The support of the G–8 to the reform efforts of countries in the region is instrumental in their timely implementation and in ensuring their success. With the realization that regional reforms that reflect the realities of the region and address the

fears of the people and the deficiencies of the existing systems are undoubtedly necessary, the G–8 countries have much to contribute, in both expertise and resources.

Education is no exception.

Thank you very much.

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT IN JORDAN

INTRODUCTION

Following the economic crisis that was witnessed in 1989, Jordan underwent a series of deep structural economic reform programs that were primarily aimed at

eliminating macroeconomic imbalances and reinstating macroeconomic stability.

However, despite the reform efforts throughout the 1990s, strong and sustainable

growth in real output continued to be low, and per capita income remained stagnant. This, combined with the high population and labor force growth, has led to

10

a marginal reduction in unemployment and poverty levels. Furthermore, Jordan remained to be faced with a number of other critical challenges such as a high external debt, a high budget deficit (after grants), chronic water deficit, and an unproductive private sector.

Reform efforts were hence revisited in 1999 when His Majesty King Abdullah II

ascended the throne, prompting an accelerated pace and the launch of new strategies and initiatives aimed at enhancing the welfare of the Jordanian people and propelling economic growth to higher and sustainable levels. During the past 5 years,

the government began to focus on devising and implementing measures to combat

the critical challenges facing the economy, while at the same time laying the foundation for building a new Jordanian model that is commensurate with the evolving

global trends. This new model is based on the premise of transforming into a knowledge-based society that is built on the vast potential of the people—its most valuable asset.

With a population of 5.2 million that is growing at 2.8 percent per annum, coupled

with a demographic composition that is predominantly young (72 percent of the population are below the age of 29), Jordan’s ability to transform into a knowledgebased economy and join the ranks of the more advanced nations will be significantly

determined by the contribution capacity of its young and growing population. Although education has always ranked high on the government’s development agenda,

the educational system is yet to meet the evolving labor market requirements of excellence, innovation, competitiveness, and productivity.

The need for citizens to be highly educated, broadly skilled, adaptable, and motivated has been recognized and validated. In this regard, educational reform efforts

and investment in human resource development began to intensify in recent years,

and particularly following the launch of the Social and Economic Transformation

Program (SETP) in November 2001, which made funding more readily available for

such extensive endeavors.

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT OF THE SETP

Human resource development (HRD) comprises one of the major cornerstones of

the SETP, an integrated socioeconomic development program, spanning a period of

3 years (2002–2004), with the main aim of attaining sustainable development, and

elevating the quality and standard of living of all Jordanians. Acknowledging the

global shift from a resource-based to a knowledge-based economy, the government

recognized the pressing need to emphasize analytical skills, team-based activity, and

computer literacy at every stage of the educational system.

Total investment in the Human Resource Development component over the 3-year

period 2002–2004 amounts to US$180.6 million, of which US$64.1 million has been

allocated for 2002, US$81.8 million has been allocated for 2003, and US$34.7 million

has been allocated for 2004

The HRD component of the SETP focuses mainly on investing in public education,

higher eucation, and vocational and technical training.

(1) Public Education

Modernizing the public education system has been an ongoing process since 1989.

Nevertheless, initial reform efforts were mainly focused on building and expanding

school facilities, particularly in the disadvantaged areas of the country. In recent

years, however, efforts began to focus on transforming and modernizing the educational system to meet the challenges and needs of a knowledge-based economy

through designing a system that adequately prepares future participants in the

labor force, as well as improving the skills of the current labor force. The growing

mismatch of skills was giving rise to higher unemployment rates, as secondary education graduates were increasingly unable to secure jobs in the highly complex and

evolving labor market. In fact, the unemployment rate for this segment currently

stands at an alarming 40 percent.

In addressing this challenge, the government identified the need to realize lifelong

learning in the medium to long term, and to adjust curricula to meet market requirements. In the near term, early childhood education opportunities need to be extended and gains at the basic education level to be consolidated. The SETP will enable the government to target additional public investments in the qualitative reform of the educational system to enhance Jordan’s competitiveness, domestically,

regionally, and globally.

To this end, the government is concentrating its efforts on training students to

think creatively, flexibly, and critically. The ultimate goal is to enable students to

become socially active and responsible, to be more productive and work-oriented,

and to be more self-reliant and independent in learning. Therefore, the government

11

is keen to modernize the educational system by adopting new curricula development

processes that meet the highest standards.

Total SETP investment in public education projects over the 3-year period 2002– 2004 amounts to US$72.6 million, of which US$21.1 million was allocated for 2002,

US$25.2 million was allocated for 2003, and US$26.3 million was allocated for 2004.

EDUCATION REFORM FOR THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY

The guide for government investment in public education is the ERfKE program,

which was devised by the government in close coordination with the World Bank

and other donors. It sets out a coordinated and integrated plan of action to meet

the current and future needs of learners and society in Jordan in the context of a

knowledge-based economy. The total cost of the first phase of the project is estimated at US$380 million, and implementation will span over the 5-year period

2003–2008.

From this new vision for human resource development in Jordan, four broad national initiatives were identified in transforming the current educational system to

meet the requirements of the new knowledge economy. These include:

• Structuring the educational system to ensure lifelong learning; • Ensuring responsiveness of the educational system to the economy; • Accessing and utilizing information and communications technologies to support

effective learning and system management; and • Ensuring quality learning experiences and environments.

ERfKE represents a landmark step in the progress of change in education in Jordan, embodying all four initiatives. A relevant and responsive quality education system is the bridge to the achievement of these goals. The program sets out in detail

the intentions for reform of early, basic, and secondary schooling within an extensive and inclusive framework. The need for, and value of, highly educated, broadly

skilled, adaptable, and motivated citizens has been recognized and validated in the

program. These citizens will be the people with the knowledge and skills to make

Jordan’s economy competitive in the global marketplace and maintain and extend

the security and stability of Jordanian society. It is also possible that due to the

rapidly changing social and economic environment, certain skills and areas of content will consequently have a relatively short lifespan. Therefore, the knowledge

economy will require lifelong learners who can readily acquire new skills sets and

access, create, adapt and share knowledge throughout their lives.

Jordan has made remarkable progress in education coverage over the past decade.

The net enrollment rate in 2000/2001 was reported at 96 percent for grades 1–6 (primary cycle), 92 percent for grades 1–10 (basic cycle) and 80 percent for grades 7–

12 (lower and upper secondary). The primary completion rate in the same year is

estimated at 100 percent for boys and girls. Significantly, Jordan is also well advanced with regard to the elimination of gender disparities: In 2001, female enrollments accounted for 46 percent of all kindergarten enrollments, 49 percent of all

basic education enrollments, and 50.5 percent of the upper secondary enrollments.

Reform efforts are intended to have an additional positive impact upon these encouraging enrollment and participation statistics.

The reform program is organized into four major interconnected and interdependent components:

Component I: ‘‘Reorient Education Policy Objectives and Strategy through Governance and Administrative Reform.’’ This component supports the development and

implementation of policies and strategies to reorient and enable the effective management of the education system to serve the needs of the individual learner and

society at large. It includes the formulation of a clear vision, the articulation of a

comprehensive and integrated national strategy, and the effective transfer of authority and responsibility to regional and local education authorities, including the

schools. The intentions and activities for reform in Component I are crucial elements for initial and continued success in each of the other components.

Component II: ‘‘Transform Education Programs and Practices to Achieve Learning

Outcomes Relevant to the Knowledge Economy.’’ This component confronts the central issue of education reform as it deals with the nature of, and expectations for,

learning and teaching within the context of a new curriculum, designed to prepare

students for life and work in the knowledge economy. Furthermore, professional development and training, as well as providing the resources to support effective training, are central to this component.

Component III: ‘‘Support Provision of Quality Physical Learning Environments,’’

The purpose of this component is to describe and explain the goals and activities

that have been determined as the most effective ways in which to improve the quality of education by improving the physical quality of the learning environment in

12

public schools. Substantially, this involves the alleviation of overcrowding, the replacement of unsafe buildings, and the upgrading of facilities to support the education reform initiatives for transformations in the learning for the knowledge economy.

Component IV: ‘‘Promote Learning Readiness through Early Childhood Education.’’ The ERfKE project will directly assist the government, specifically through

the Ministry of Education, in partnership with a wide range of international and

local funding organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector,

in the implementation of a comprehensive approach to improving the scope and

quality of essential early childhood services. This component has been subdivided

into four main areas of activity and intended outcomes. These areas cover a series

of important themes, and success in each of them over the next 5 years will make

significant inroads into the realization of better opportunity, support, and achievement of 4–6-year-old children in Jordan.

Following is a brief on the progress of the ERfKE project by component:

• Component I: Reorient Education Policy Objectives and Strategy Through Governance and Administrative Reform

—National Public Relations Campaign: Negotiations with the selected firm

started 5 December 2004, and have been concluded successfully.

—Gender issues: Further attention will be given by the Ministry of Education

(MOE) in regards to gender issues and ERfKE as the MOE has indicated that

part of the curriculum renewal process under ERfKE will investigate the gender stereotyping in the curriculum and work on addressing them. There will

also be a gender specialist attached to the project (funded by CIDA) for the

next 2–3 years to assist in integrating gender further into ERfKE activities.

—Integrated Education Decision Support System (EDSS): An inception report

was completed and an awareness workshop on the nature and purpose of

EDSS was held in October 2004.

—National Learning Assessment: A National Learning Assessment Test has

been administered and the results are currently under analysis.

—Learning Readiness Assessment: Pre-pilot, pilot, and main surveys have been

administered, analysis is underway, and the final report is scheduled for

March 2005.

• Component II: Transform Education Programs and Practices

—Curriculum and Learning Assessment Framework: The General Curriculum

and Learning Assessment Framework document has been appraised and approved.

—Institutional Capacity Building of DCT and Exams: An international consultant is in the process of following up on the implementation of an integrated

plan and designing a leadership training plan in the MOE.

—Curriculum Development: A master schedule for curriculum renewal; phasing

and resource acquisition completed.

—Monitoring and Review of Curriculum Implementation: A UNESCO consultant submitted an inception report on M&E needs of ERfKE.

—ICT Training of Teachers, Principals, and Administrators: 18,000 teachers

successfully completed training on ICDL, 600 teachers completed training on

Worldlinks and 14,000 teachers on Intel.

• Component III: Support Provision of Quality Physical Learning Environment

—Construct 160 new schools to replace confirmed existing unsafe facilities: 40

schools funded by WB (construction phase) are all under construction; 42 of

the 45 schools funded by EIB (design phase) are ready for construction; 38

schools funded by the Arab Fund (construction phase) are under construction;

9 of the 26 schools funded by IDB (construction phase) have been awarded;

approximately 15 schools are to be funded by the KFW (design phase).

• Component IV: Promotion of Learning Readiness Through Early Childhood

Education

—Development and Monitoring of Early Childhood Development (ECD) curriculum: The curriculum is in place, and was officially launched under the patronage of Her Majesty Queen Rania along with the Kidsmart program on

September 1.

—Recommendations for the monitoring and evaluation framework for the national curriculum has been prepared.

—Learning Readiness Assessment: Pre-pilot and pilot surveys have been completed, and the main survey has also been conducted. Analysis of the main

survey is underway and the final report is scheduled for March 2005.

13

—Train Trainers, Teachers, Supervisors and Principals: 89 teachers successfully

completed training on Wisconsin and have been certified in 2004.

—Buildings and Facilities Extensions Design phase: The design of 140 KGs is

underway.

—Furnishing 100 KG Classrooms: A contract for the renovation of 4 KGs has

been signed, and delivery is scheduled for the end of January 2005.

(2) Higher Education

Universities are increasingly assessed by their relevance and contribution to national economic performance and quality of life. While there has been rapid quantitative expansion of the higher education system in Jordan, it has not yet been accompanied by a sufficient qualitative shift. Jordan’s capacity to reach its goal of becoming more competitive within the global economy will be largely dependent upon

the orientation of its higher education graduates.

There are currently 21 universities in Jordan (13 private and 8 public), with

around 150,000 enrolled students. The government has recently identified the major

issues for higher education reform, and will embark on a major reform agenda that

will encompass the following:

• Focusing on quality control issues to enhance the level of higher education.

• Updating and modernizing the higher education curricula to meet the hard and

soft skill requirements labor market (both domestic and international).

• Revisiting admission requirements to allow students to pursue their desired career tracks.

• Allowing for the licensing of new private universities.

• Channeling more funding for higher education.

• Promoting research and development.

• Amending the necessary legislation to allow for greater private sector participation in higher education and allow for their affiliation with prominent higher

education institutions.

SETP projects will work in tandem to improve the performance of public higher

education institutions, strengthen the accreditation process with the aim of meeting

international standards, and improve the reputation and standards of universities

in the areas of computerization, information technologies, and English language

teaching.

The total cost of this subcomponent over the 3-year period 2002–2004 is US$49.6

million, of which US$19.8 million was allocated for 2002 and US$29.8 million was

allocated for 2003.

(3) Vocational and Technical Training

Recognizing that there has been limited change over the past several years in the

provision of vocational and technical training, the reform of this sector has recently

become a government priority. Vocational and technical education has tended to emphasize the supply of narrow, occupationally specific skills as opposed to broadbased, labor- and global-market relevant skills.

The SETP aims to reorient the focus of existing vocational and technical training

programs from an information-based training model, to one that is demand-driven,

competency-based and provides the employability skills required to increase worker

productivity, technological adaptation and innovation. Specifically, the SETP will reactivate the Higher Council for Vocational and Technical Education and Training

to improve the coordination of vocational training programs and services; computerize training centers to encourage the acquisition of information technology skills;

develop competency-based training programs and curricula that are more responsive

to labor-market needs; upgrade instructor skills; encourage private sector participation in adapting training to meet their human resource requirements; and support

additional activities for upgrading and updating the current technical labor pool.

Furthermore, support will also be provided for specialized, regional-based technical

vocational training centers, such as training centers for women and training centers

responsive to domestic labor market needs, such as those for the hospitality services, electronics industry, construction industry, and metal industries.

The total cost of this subcomponent over the 3-year period 2002–2004 is US$41.6

million, of which US$18.9 million was allocated for 2002, US$19.4 million was allocated for 2003, and US$6.7 million was allocated for 2004.

INTRODUCING ICT INTO THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

EduWave Project

One of the main pillars of educational reform is the increased access to information and communications technology (ICT). Extensive efforts have been made at

14

computerization of schools, as 500 schools that include about 173,000 students have

been computerized, resulting in the ratio of students to personal computers decreasing from 42 to 15. Moreover, 32,000 teachers have been trained on ICDL, and an

additional 2,070 schools now have Internet access. Providing schools with computers

alone, however, does not ensure a transformation in the educational process. The

deployment of the necessary tools that will allow students, teachers, and administrators alike, to effectively use ICT for their own benefit is as imperative as the

hardware itself.

With over 1.5 million students in schools, the educational system in Jordan directly affects over one-third of the population. The government realizes that a special initiative should be adopted to bring students, teachers, and administrators up

to pace. Thus, and as a result of a true partnership between the Jordanian public

and private sectors, the national Jordanian e-learning initiative was launched in

September 2002.

One of the main pillars of this initiative is EduWave, which is a comprehensive

e-learning solution that was fully designed and developed by a leading Jordanian

IT company. With EduWave, the 1.5 million students will be connected to a

broadband network and will be able to learn, and access learning content and information inside and outside their classrooms, during and after school hours. Furthermore, around 35,000 teachers will be able to work and interact with their students

online. They will be able to track individual student performance and accordingly

apply the appropriate educational schemes that suit each student’s individual

strengths. Teachers will also have access to a pool of learning tools, which they can

use and reuse to build a variety of courses and educational material from which students can learn. Through on-line group study sessions, resources will be maximized,

and teachers along with students will be able to share information and study sessions across distances. Furthermore, administrators will have access to educational

related data that would help them in decisionmaking and in better future planning.

The vision is to make learning available in places where there is none, to enhance

resources where there are few, and to open the learning place and expand the learning day. The prime goal is to make the learning experience more exciting and effective. EduWave will:

• Provide all school students, teachers, and education administrators with access

to information and resources relevant to their educational needs.

• Enhance productivity in the educational sector by integrating technology, innovation, and cutting edge educational practices to maximize student benefits.

• Provide students with tools to improve their learning and self-development and

to monitor their performance.

• Provide teachers with tools to help them communicate ideas and concepts and

measure students’ performance and developments.

• Provide administrators with tools that help them develop full school systems by

creating a data bank that can help them monitor development and performance

and adjust resources accordingly.

• Provide the educational sector with a system that utilizes reusable learning

tools to achieve predefined learning outcomes allowing maximum benefit from

all content.

• Personalize the learning experience according to every student’s needs in order

to maximize performance results.

• Offer new and innovative ways for faculty and students to engage in the process

of teaching and learning.

• Allow for smooth transition into the new digital era using easy-to-use tools and

authoring tools.

• Help bridge the digital divide and close the gap between the mere presence of

technology and its effective integration into curricula to deliver the skills needed for the 21st century.

• Allow easier and more equitable access to education.

• Improve the level and quality of education both inside and outside the classroom.

• Increase efficiency in the classroom, allowing for more room for innovation and

creativity.

• Allow for customization of the learning experience to maximize results.

• Increase efficiency in the process of student assessment.

• Allow for a high level of teacher-student interaction.

• Foster innovation and creativity in education, society, and the economy.

• Enhance and complement the teachers’ role in the classroom by allowing for effective guidance and support.

15

CONCLUSION

Human resource development has always ranked high on the development agenda

of the Government of Jordan. In recent years, however, a new direction was adopted

in the education reform agenda to ensure that the extensive investment in the

human capital will yield the desired returns of equipping people with the needed

skills that are required by today’s evolving labor market.

The course of this direction is also commensurate with the overall development

path that Jordan is taking. The ultimate goal is to build a sustainable resilient and

liberal socioeconomic model that effectively enhances the welfare of all Jordanians.

Without equipping people with the needed skills to compete in the global market,

Jordan’s growth potential will continue to be hindered by the mismatch between the

output of the educational system and the requirements of the labor market, and the

resulting high unemployment rates among the growing young stratum of society.

Educational reform and the extensive investment in HRD is necessary for attaining sustainable socioeconomic development. Thus, the government has identified the

weaknesses in the educational system and is embarking on a sweeping reform agenda to equip people with the needed skills to compete in the global arena.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Doctor, thank you very much for that very

exciting testimony of optimism and challenge. We thank you very

much.

Mr. Burki.

STATEMENT OF SHAHID JAVED BURKI, CONSULTANT,

NATHAN ASSOCIATES, POTOMAC, MD

Mr. BURKI. Mr. Chairman, first allow me to thank you for giving

me the opportunity to appear before you. It’s a singular honor, because under your leadership the United States has embarked upon

a very important program to bring education to the Muslim masses

in what has now come to be called the Near Eastern Region. And

with your devotion and your commitment and your leadership, I

hope both sides, working together, the countries in the Muslim

world and the American Government and the American Congress,

will be able to achieve good results.

Mr. Chairman, in my own introductory remarks, I really don’t

have a great deal of—a great deal to say about achievements. I will

focus much more on the problems that my country faces. And, as

you know, these problems are severe, they need to be handled with

a great deal of imagination, courage, and some commitment of resources. I’ll come to the question of resources. But it’s an area that

needs urgent attention. And I believe that it is right for the world

to focus on a country such as Pakistan, which has a very large population, growing very rapidly. Pakistan today has 155 million people; of this, about one-half of the population is less than 18 years

old. For a person like me, who’s been living in the United States

for a very long time, it’s interesting to make a comparison between

the structure—age structure of your population and the age structure of my country’s population. You have twice as many people in

the United States, but the number of young in the United States

is exactly the same as the number of young in Pakistan, with half

the population. So that gives you some flavor of the problem that

the country faces.

It is right for donor agencies, including the United States, to

focus on the Pakistani problem. This is not the first time that this

has been done. I was, for many years, at the World Bank, and my

old institution put together a program called Social Action Program, in which billions of dollars were committed. Unfortunately,

much of this money was wasted; and, therefore, the new donor inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
16

volvement in the reform of education in Pakistan has to be handled

with a great deal of care.

Mr. Chairman, one worry that I have is that there has been an

excessive focus on madrasas in Pakistan. It is correct to focus on

madrasas, but, at the same time, it is important to underscore that

madrasas don’t provide education to a very large number of people.

Estimates vary. I have seen estimates from 1 to 5 percent, but it’s

a relatively small number of school-going children who are attending madrasas.

The main problem, Mr. Chairman, is in public-sector education.

This has become dysfunctional over time. It caters to something

like 73 percent of the school-going population in Pakistan. And if

this system is not fixed, then we really have a big problem on our

hands. And my view is that if, as the 9/11 Commission report wrote

eloquently about this problem, it is not the madrasa that could provide manpower, pulling foot soldiers to jihadi causes, it will be the

dissatisfied, unhappy graduates of the public school system, who

have spent years in a system which doesn’t provide education, and

when they come out they are not ready to enter the modern economy.

I wish I could tell you the same about Pakistan as we heard

about Jordan, the great achievements that have been made. In the

case of Pakistan, those achievements are still in the future.

I’m convinced, Mr. Chairman, that the Pakistani problem will

not be solved by throwing more money at the problem. It has been

done before; and, as I said, there was a lot of wastage, a fair

amount of corruption. What is needed is a reform of the system.

And listening to a report, day before yesterday, at the Woodrow

Wilson Center, I was heartened to note that the United States involvement through AID is now, indeed, focused on systemic reform,

and not just providing easy access to lots of money to those who

are managing the Pakistani system.

One other thing that I would like to underscore, and this is

something that is not often recognized when people talk about the

Pakistani education, is the enormous role, and important role, that

the private sector has begun to play. There are estimates which

suggest that something like one-fifth—or one-fourth of the schoolgoing population now is attending private schools. Most of these

schools are run on profit basis; some of them are run on nonprofit

basis. Some of these schools are run very well. They provide Western liberal education. And they are producing the types of people

that a country like Pakistan, and an economy like Pakistan, will

need.

So, I say this, because it is my view, that in designing a reform

program for the education sector, it is extremely important to include within it the role of the private sector and how a private/public sector partnership could work.

Mr. Chairman, I have, as I was requested, put in a reasonably

long statement for the record, but I’ll just like to conclude by offering you, very quickly, 12 suggestions that I think would be appropriate for the reform of the sector.

As I said, my first suggestion is that reforming the entire public

sector should be the main area of focus.

17

Second, there is now evidence, from many parts of the world, to

indicate that for functional literacy it is important to have children

stay in school, not for 5 years, but for a much longer period of time;

as long as 10 to 12 years.

When I was at the World Bank, I was responsible for the region

of Latin America and the Caribbean, and folks in Chile did some

very interesting analysis and came to the conclusion that it is rather wasteful to say that compulsory education is only for 5 years,

if you really want to make a difference to how well people get

equipped with knowledge and behavioral change. And they suggested something like 10 to 11 years.

I would like to see something very similar done, in the countries

of the Muslim world, that just focus on primary education can be

wasteful. It has—children have to be kept in school for a much

longer period. And this particularly applies to female education,

where all these countries, barring none, have fallen way behind.

I’ve already indicated, and that’s one of my suggestions, that we

should just not focus too much attention on money, but we should

focus a great deal of attention on reforming the entire system, particularly, the institutional aspects of this system. One area that

needs tremendous attention, so much so, in one conversation I had

with President Musharraf, not—in fact, very recently—I said to

him that he should make this his passion, the education of girls,

because I am of the view, which everybody shares in the development field, that a country that condemns its women to backwardness condemns itself to eternal backwardness. And, unfortunately, Pakistan has done that, and continues to provide all kinds

of obstacles for the advancement of women. And so, women’s situation, starting with education, has to become a very important part

of this program.

It is important for the reformers to develop a comprehensive approach that includes curriculum improvement, teacher training,

improving the physical infrastructure, improving the quality of

textbooks, and so forth. So there are lots of things to be done.

What is very important, Mr. Chairman, is improving the quality

of governance in the country, particularly in Pakistan. My longer

paper talks about why Pakistan’s educational system has become

dysfunctional. It became dysfunctional because it was politicized.

And so, politics has to be taken out of the system.

And one other initiative which is taken by the present government, to—which I hope it does not backtrack from—is a devolution

of government authority right down to the community level. And

we saw this in Latin America, that whenever you brought education closer to the people, it worked very well, and this is something that Pakistan should do.

It is my view that the donor community should provide some of

its assistance directly to nongovernment organizations, private-sector institutions, and for student assistance. Some of the schools

that I talked about, which are providing excellent education, are

not accessible to children of poor families, because they charge very

high fees. So, it is important to put together a program of providing

assistance to children of poor families who can access these institutions.

18

When I was at the World Bank in Mexico, we started a similar

program in which the banking system was used in order to provide

scholarships and low-cost loans to the students.

One other aspect which should come into play is the economic

significance of the Pakistani diaspora in the United States. It’s a

subject about which I’ve done some work. There are about half a

million Pakistanis in this country. Their total income is roughly

equal to 25 percent of Pakistan’s GDP, so it’s an enormous resource

that is available, in terms of the proportion of GDP generated by

this particular group. Pakistani diaspora is one of the largest in the

world, and I know that these people are now very keen to help education in Pakistan through the creation of various foundations, and

so forth. So, it would be an appropriate time to get this particular

group involved.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, the role of the state. My own view is that

the state should unburden itself from directly managing public-sector institutions, but play much more of a role in a regulatory sense.

Regulate the training of teachers, regulate the certification of

teachers, regulate the certification of schools, develop a core curriculum that must be taught in all schools, whether they are

madrasas or Western oriented, and so on. So, this is the kind of

role that a state should be playing, rather than spending scarce resources on managing universities, colleges, and schools. And this,

I think, should become a primary interest on the part of the donor

community.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll stop with that.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Burki follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SHAHID JAVED BURKI, CONSULTANT, NATHAN ASSOCIATES,

POTOMAC, MD

EDUCATING THE PAKISTANI MASSES: THE WORLD NEEDS TO HELP

Introduction

Let me start this brief presentation with the main conclusions that I have to offer

with respect to the deteriorating state of education in Pakistan and how this could

affect the rest of the world. I would like to underscore the following six conclusions.

One, it is right for the world to worry about the larger impact of Pakistan’s dysfunctional educational system, especially when it has been demonstrated that poorly

educated young men in a country as large as Pakistan pose a serious security threat

to the rest of the world. Two, it is timely for the world’s donor agencies to offer help

to Pakistan to reform its system of education so that it can produce people who have

the right kinds of skills to operate in the modern economy. Three, it is correct to

focus on the reform of the madrasa system but it would be imprudent to give too

much attention to this part of the educational system in the country. Four, the part

of the system that really needs attention is the one managed by the public sector.

This is the system that looks after the education of some 90 percent of the school

going age. Reforming it is of critical importance. Five, the problem of public education will not be solved by throwing more money into the system. What is required

is systemic reform. Six, and finally, the private sector has an important role to play

in reforming the educational system. This is an area in which the large and wellendowed communities of Pakistanis resident in the United States could also participate.

I will develop these conclusions in five parts. In the first, I will provide a quick

overview of Pakistan’s demographic situation and how it has affected the system of

education. In the second part, I will give a brief description of the structure of the

educational system in the country from the time of independence in 1947 to the

early 1970s when it began to deteriorate. The third part will provide a quick overview of the reasons that led to slow collapse of the educational system. In the fourth

part I will indicate the lessons Pakistan can learn from attempted reforms in other

19

parts of the world to improve its own system. In the fifth and final part I will suggest some approaches to the reform of the Pakistani system.

Pakistan’s demographic situation and how it has impacted on the system of education

Pakistanis, both policymakers based in Islamabad and the public at large, were

slow to recognize that the country’s large and increasingly young population was

mostly illiterate and was singularly ill-equipped to participate in the economic life

of the country.

Pakistan’s young did not even have the wherewithal to participate in the process

of ‘‘outsourcing’’ that had brought economic modernization and social improvement

to many parts of India. The economic and social revolution that India is witnessing

today could have also occurred in Pakistan but for a number of unfortunate developments discussed below. For the moment we will reflect on the problem Pakistanis

face today—in 2005.

In 2005, Pakistan is the world’s sixth largest country, after China, India, the

United States, Indonesia, and Brazil. Its population is estimated at 155 million; of

this, one-half, or 77 million, is below the age of 18 years. Pakistan, in other words,

has one of the youngest populations in the world. In 2005, the number of people

below the age of 18 in the United States was less than those in Pakistan and yet

the American population is almost twice as large as that of Pakistan. What is more,

with each passing year the population is getting younger.

In spite of a significant decline in the level of fertility in recent years, Pakistan’s

population is still growing at a rate well above 2 percent a year. Even with some

further reduction in birth rate, by 2030 Pakistan could—a quarter century from

now—overtake Brazil and become the world’s fifth most populous country, with a

population of 255 million. Or, put in another way, Pakistan is set to add another

100 million people to its already large population over the next 25 years.

A significant number of this additional population will end up in the already

crowded cities of the country, in particular Karachi, in Lahore, and in the urban

centers on the periphery of Lahore. Karachi already has more than 10 million people; by 2030 it could have a population of 25 million. By the same time, Greater

Lahore may have a population of 15 million. Will such large urban populations live

in peace and become active contributors to Pakistan’s economic growth and development? Or will they become increasingly restive and disturb peace not only within

the country but also outside the country’s borders? The answers to these two questions lay in the way the authorities and people of Pakistan approach the subject of

education and what kind of assistance they can receive from the world outside.

There are four characteristics of Pakistan’s demographic situation that have attracted attention in the Western World, particularly in the United States, One, that

in two to three decades Pakistan will have the largest concentration of Muslims in

the world, more than in Indonesia and in India. Two, the population of Muslims will

be very young. Out of a population of some 255 million projected for 2030, about

170 million will be below the age of 18. Three, unless an ambitious program is

launched soon and implemented with the government’s full attention and energy,

a significant proportion of the young will be poorly educated and will have skills

that will not be of much use as a factor of production in a modern economy. Four,

an indifferently educated workforce made up of millions of young people, living in

a few crowded mega cities, will become attractive recruits for groups and organizations that are alienated from the global economic, political, and social system. In

a Muslim country such as Pakistan, the groups that will be able to attract the

young espouse various radical Islamic causes.

There are two questions that need to be answered in order to explain the situation

in Pakistan. One, why did the education system in Pakistan deteriorate to the point

where it now threatens economic, political, and social stability, not only within the

country, but also poses a real danger for the world at large? Two, what can be done

to redress this situation?

The structure of the system after the creation of the State of Pakistan

In the late 1940s and up to the early 1970s, Pakistan had a reasonably efficient

system of education, not much different from other countries of the South Asian

subcontinent. It was dominated by the public sector; educational departments in the

provinces administered schools and colleges while a small number of public sector

universities provided post-graduate instruction. The private sector was active at the

two extreme ends of the educational spectrum. On the one end were missionary

schools and colleges specializing in Western-style liberal education. At the opposite

end were religious schools, called dini madrasas that imparted religious instruction.

Some of the better institutions belonging to this genre were either imports from

20

India or were patterned after the old madrasas in what was now the Indian State

of Uttar Pradesh. The best known of these was the Darul Uloom at Deoband that

had developed its own curriculum and taught a highly orthodox or fundamentalist

interpretation of Islam. Following the partition of India and the birth of Pakistan,

a number of ulema (Islamic scholars) from Deoband migrated to Pakistan and established seminaries in the new country. Two of these, a madrasa at Mora Khattak

near Islamabad called Darul Uloom Haqqania and the other in Banori township of

Karachi played a prominent role in bringing an austere form of Islam to Pakistan.

We will return to the subject of these madrasas a little later.

The private schools catered mostly to the elite while the religious schools produced imams (preachers) for the mosques or teachers for the madrasa system of

education. These two systems are producing two different social classes with very

different world views and views about the way Pakistan should be managed. The

two groups are now clashing in the political and social arena. One recent example

of this is the controversy over the deletion of a box in the newly designed and machine readable passport that initially did not have a column indicating the religious

affiliation of the passport holder. This step was taken by the government headed

by General Musharraf as one small move toward what he has called ‘‘enlightened

moderation.’’ He was, however, beaten back by the religious parties and the ‘‘religion column’’ was reinserted in the passport.

In between these two social classes is a large inert group, the product of the public educational system, The large public school system includes all aspects of the

system of education. It starts with kindergarten and primary schools at the bottom,

includes secondary and higher schools, and has at its apex semiautonomous but

publicly funded universities. For several decades the standard of instruction provided by this system was adequate; the system’s graduates were able to provide

workforce for the large public sector and also for the rapidly growing private sector

of the economy. Those graduates of the system who went abroad for further education, either at their own expenditure or relying on the funds provided by various

donor supported scholarship schemes, did not experience much difficulty in getting

adjusted to the foreign systems. Some of Pakistan’s better known scholars and professionals, such as the Noble Prize winning Physicist Professor Abdul Salaam and

the well-known economist Mahbubul Haq, were the products of this system.

However, the system has deteriorated over time to the extent that it has become

common to describe Pakistan as the country that has done the least for the social

development of its large population. It is also common to fear that without major

investment in education, Pakistan may well become a large exporter of manpower

to the stateless Islamic organizations—al-Qaida being the most prominent among

them—that will continue their crusade against the West, Western values, and anything else they see from their narrow prism as anti-Islamic.

How did Pakistan travel the distance from a moderate Muslim country with a reasonably efficient educational system to a country in which the public system of education is virtually broken down and in which a large number of educational institutions are providing instruction that teaches hate for those who hold different points

of view and encourages jihad against them? Pakistan’s gradual transformation from

one state to the other occurred slowly under many different impulses. As such the

country offers a good case study of how a society can get derailed.

Systems progressive collapse over time

The Pakistani educational system collapsed slowly, at times its progressive deterioration was not even noticed by the people who later were to be most affected by

it. The collapse occurred for basically four reasons. The first jolt was given in the

early 1970s by government headed by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto

decided to nationalize private schools, in particular those run by various Christian

missionary orders. His motive was simple. He was of the view that private schools

encouraged elitism in the society whereas he wanted equality and equal opportunity

for all.

Bhutto was also responsible for delivering the system the second shock and this

time around the motive was political expediency. His rise to political power was

viewed with great apprehension by the religious forces in the country. They considered the socialism Bhutto espoused as ‘‘godless’’ and were determined to prevent

him, and the Pakistan People’s Party founded by him, from gaining ground. The two

sides—Bhutto and the Islamists—chose to use the college and university campuses

to fight the battle for the control of the political mind in the country. Both sought

to mobilize the student body by establishing student organizations representatives

of their different points of view.

For a number of years campuses of the publicly run institutions became the battle

ground for gaining political influence at the expense of providing education. It was

21

in this battle, waged in educational institutions, that Pakistan witnessed the birth

of another organization—the Muhajir Qaumi Mahaz—that was to use violence in

order to spread its word and make its presence felt.

The third development to turn the system of education dysfunctional occurred in

the 1980s when a coalition, led by the United States and included Pakistan and

Saudi Arabia, decided to use the seminaries as training grounds for the mujahideen

who were being instructed to battle the Soviet Union’s troops occupying Afghanistan. There was an unspoken understanding about their respective roles among

these three partners. The United States was to provide equipment and training for

the foot soldiers of the jihad. Pakistan was to set up madrasas in the Afghan refugee camps and along the country’s long border with Afghanistan. Its military, with

better knowledge of the Afghan terrain, was to be actively involved in training the

mujahideen. The government of Islamabad also reserved the right to choose among

the various groups that were prepared to do battle in Afghanistan. The Saudis were

happy to aid the effort with money as long as they were allowed to teach Wahabism,

their brand of Islam, in the seminaries that were to be used for training the jihadis.

This proved to be a potent mix of motives: The United States was able to recruit

highly motivated fighters to go after the occupying forces of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, Pakistan was able to further its influence in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia was able to introduce its extremely conservative interpretation of Islam into a

large Muslim country that had hitherto subscribed to a relatively liberal, accommodating assimilative form of religion.

The fourth unhappy development to affect the sector of education was the political

confusion that prevailed in the country for more than a decade, from the death of

President Zia ul-Haq in August 1988 to the return of the military under General

Pervez Musharraf in October 1999. In this period four elected governments and

three interim administrations governed the country. Preoccupied with prolonging

their stay, the elected governments paid little attention to economic development in

general and social development in particular. Under the watch of these administrations, public sector education deteriorated significantly.

The failure of Pakistan to educate its young was the result of the failure of the

state to provide basic services to the people. As already noted, the collapse of the

public sector began in the mid-seventies when the socialist-leaning administration

of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto nationalized some parts of the educational

system while denying an expanded public sector the resources it needed. In the 30-

year period since then, various governments, both military and civilian, continued

to neglect public education while allowing it to be politicized. Politicization took the

form of increased political activity on the part of student organizations representing

various political parties. It was the Islamic parties that gained the most in the battle to influence the campuses.

The progressive failure of the public sector to provide reasonable education to the

masses brought in two very different types of educational entrepreneurs into the

sector. On one end of the spectrum were groups of entrepreneurs who filled the

space for Western-style liberal education. Since there was enough demand for this

type of education on the part of the relatively well-to-do segments of the society, a

number of for-profit institutions were established. They have flourished over time,

providing high quality education to the upper end of the society.

At the other end of the social spectrum were the poor who needed institutions

that could provide basic education to their children without placing an unbearable

economic burden on the families. This is when the madrasas stepped in with the

financial wherewithal to take in male students, provide them with board and lodging, and give them instruction in religion. Most of these institutions did not have

qualified teachers who could give instruction in mathematics, sciences, and languages other than Urdu to their students.

The result of all this is that the Pakistani society today is split three ways when

viewed from the perspective of education. At the top are the students who have received reasonably good education from Western-style institutions that operate mostly for profit. They count for perhaps 5 percent of the student body in the 5- to 18-

year age group of some 70 million people. At the bottom are the religious schools

that provide education to an equal number of students. In between is 90 percent

of the student population dependent on a public system that is inefficient and corrupt. It is, in other words, dysfunctional. Before addressing the important subject

of the remedies that are available to improve the educational system, we should

take a look at the situation as it is today.

Reforming an educational system

There are several ways of assessing the status of an educational system in the

developing world. Among the more frequently used indicators are adult literacy

22

rates for both men and women in various parts of the country; enrollment rates for

both girls and boys at different levels of education and in different areas of the

country; the dropout rates at different levels of education; the number of years boys

and girls spend in schools; the amount of resources committed to education as a proportion of the gross domestic product, particularly by the public sector; the amount

of money spent on items other than paying for teachers’ salaries; and, finally, some

measure of the quality of education provided. To these indicators, one should also

add the quality of data and information available about education. Unfortunately,

Pakistan’s record is relatively poor on all these counts, including the quality and

reliability of the data which makes it difficult to provide a reasonably accurate description of the state of affairs in the sector.

The latest information available for Pakistan suggests an adult literacy rate of

only 43.5 percent for the entire population above the age of 15 years. The rates for

Sri Lanka and India are considerably higher than for Pakistan; 92.1 percent and

61.3 percent respectively. Of the South Asian countries, only Bangladesh has a

slightly lower rate, 41.1 percent. Since the level of literacy has a profound impact

on the quality of human development, Pakistan ranks 142 in terms of the UNDP’s

Human Development Index. Sri Lanka ranks at 96, India at 127, and Bangladesh

at 138.

There are noticeable differences in gender literacy and in the level of literacy in

different parts of the country. Some 58 percent of the male population qualifies as

literate while female literacy rate is estimated at only 32 percent. In other words,

two-thirds of the country’s women can’t read or write. There is not a significant

amount of difference in the rates of literacy among different provinces. Sindh, on

account of Karachi, has the highest rate at 60 percent while Balochistan at 53 percent has the lowest rate. However, it is among women living in different parts of

the country that literacy rates vary a great deal: In Balochistan the rate is as low

as 15 percent while it is 36 percent for Punjab’s women. It is clear that the women

of Balochistan must be targeted in any drive to educate the masses in the country.

There are wide discrepancies in the various estimates of enrollment provided by

various sources of information. My own estimates are for the year 2003 when the

number of children in the primary school age was 22 million of which 11.5 million

were boys and 10.5 million girls. According to the Ministry of Education in

Islamabad 9.6 million boys were in school, giving an enrollment rate of 83.4 percent.

The number of girls attending primary school was estimated at 6.6 million, giving

an enrollment rate of nearly 63 percent. There was in other words a gender gap of

almost 20 percentage points. Once again the policy implication of this information

is the need to focus on the provision of education for girls. Another conclusion suggested by these numbers is that we should expect a fairly significant increase in the

rate of literacy as the cohorts presently in school reach adulthood.

There is considerable disparity in the rates of enrollment among the richest 20

percent of the population compared to the poorest 20 percent. The gap is 21⁄2 times

as large in the urban areas and even larger in the rural areas. Applying these number to overall literacy rates, it appears that while universal primary education has

been achieved for the richest one-fifth of the population for both boys and girls, the

enrollment rate for the poorest 20, one-fifth is only a shade above 45 percent. Public

policy aimed at increasing the level of education must, therefore, focus on the poor

in both urban and rural areas. There is demand among the poor for education; if

it is not satisfied by the public sector, it will be met by the dini madrasas.

As is to be expected, the well-to-do families tend to enroll their children in high

performing privately managed schools while the poor are forced into the public sector system. According to a recent survey while only 27 percent of the children from

the richest 20 percent of the households were enrolled in government schools; these

schools catered to as much as 75 percent of the children from the poorest 20 percent

of the families. This means that the rich have been able to bypass the part of the

educational sector managed by the government while the poor have no recourse but

to send their children to public schools. This process of selection according to income

levels is reducing the quality of the student body in government schools.

There is a high-level dropout rate in the public system with the rate increasing

as we go higher up in the system. Barely 10 percent of the school going age children

complete 12 years of schooling; around 25 percent leave after 8 years of schooling

and another 15 percent by grade 10. Such a high level of dropout has serious budgetary implications. At least 50 percent of the educational budget is spent on the children who drop out early. This is a tremendous waste for a sector that is already

short of resources.

A high dropout rate has one other adverse consequence. Even if the level of literacy increases in the country, the level of skill acquisition will not improve. For

many years a number of development institutions emphasized the provision of priVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
23

mary instruction without focusing attention on higher level education. It is only recently that there is recognition that human development means more than primary

education. Some researchers maintain that universal education should mean more

than 5 years of schooling; it take a much longer stay in schools to be able to become

functional in a modern economy.

In light of this, what are the options available to policymakers and to the donor

community that is eager to help the country reform its educational system? The

donor interest in the country’s educational system reflects the understandable fear

that, unless the educational system is fundamentally reformed, it would create a

large body of young alienated people who would be prepared to lend a helping hand

to the forces of radical Islamic not just in Pakistan but in all corners of the world.

Educating the Pakistani masses: A new approach

The conventional approach for addressing the problem posed by the underdevelopment of the educational sector involved is based on five assumptions. One problem—

by far the most important one according to most experts—many societies face is that

the opportunity cost of sending children to school is greater than the benefit education is likely to bring. Parents bear costs even when education is free. Perceived

cost of education is likely to be more of an inhibiting factor for the attendance of

girls in schools than for boys. In poor households girls help their mothers handle

a variety of chores including the care of their siblings. One way of approaching this

problem is to provide monetary incentives to parents to send their children to

school. School feeding programs fall into this category of assistance; they lower the

cost of education for parents.

Two, the state may not be spending enough on education. The remedy is to increase the proportion of public resources going into education. The donor community

has been prepared to help with funds if there was the fear that the domestic resources were too constrained to allow for an increase in public sector expenditure

on education. This was one reason why development institutions such as the World

Bank significantly increased their lending for education.

Three, typically a state spends more on secondary, tertiary, and university education than on primary education. The cure is to divert more funds into primary

schooling.

Four, the quality of instruction is poor. The obvious solution is to invest in teacher

training, reforming the curriculum, and improving the quality of text books. Sometimes the quality may suffer because schools may lack proper physical facilities.

They may be poorly constructed or the buildings may be poorly maintained. The students may not even have chairs and desks on which they can sit and work. This

problem can be handled, once again, by committing more resources for public sector

education.

Five, the educational bureaucracy is too remote from the parents who wish to see

an improvement in the quality of education given to their children. This gap between the provider and the receiver can be bridged by organizing parents to oversee

the working of the educational system. Teachers can be made responsible to the parents’ association in addition to being responsible to the educational departments in

some distant place.

Six, in highly traditional societies, parents will be prepared to send their girls to

school only if they don’t have to travel long distances, if they are taught by female

teachers, and if the schools have appropriate toilet facilities. In some situations parents would educate girls if there are single-sex schools. The solution for this problem

is to build more schools for girls and to employ more female teachers.

All this was learned from a great deal of experience by the donor agencies from

their work around the world. Most of these lessons were incorporated in a high-profile program of assistance for educational improvement launched by the World Bank

in Pakistan in the late 1980s. Called the Social Action Program, the plan developed

by the Bank was supported by a number of donor agencies and billions of dollars

were spent on it for over a decade. The result was disheartening. The program was

inconsequential in achieving even the most fundamental objectives: Increasing the

rate of enrollment in primary schools for both boys and girls and bring education

even to the more remote areas of the country. The Bank made several attempts to

correct the course during the implementation phase but the program did not succeed. There was one simple reason for the program’s failure. It did not take full cognizance of the fact that the educational bureaucracy was so corrupt, inefficient, and

dysfunctional that it could not possibly deliver a program of this size. Ultimately

the donors decided to abandon the program.

Given this experience and given the magnitude of the problem the country faces

what options are available to the policymakers in the country and the donor community interested in providing help to Pakistan?

24

A variety of donors have already committed large amounts of finance for helping

Pakistan educate its large population. According to a recent count by the Ministry

of Education in Islamabad, foreign commitment for education is currently estimated

at $1.44 billion spread over a period of 7 years, from 2002 to 2009. Of this $450

million is being provided as grants with the United States at $100 million the largest donor. The remaining $1 billion is being given in the form of soft loans by the

World Bank ($650 million) and the Asian Development Bank ($339 million). These

commitments amount to some $370 million a year.

The government has also announced its intention to significantly increase the

amount of public funds for education. In 2000–2001, funding for education amounted to only 1.96 percent of the gross domestic product. This increased to 2.7 percent

by 2003–2004 when the government spent about $2 billion on education, of which

about one-quarter was provided by donors. It is the government’s intention to increase the amount of public resources committed to education to about 4 percent of

GDP which would bring the expenditure in par with that of most other developing

countries.

However, the experience with the World Bank funded and supervised Social Action Program tells us that a mere increase in the availability of resources will not

address the problem. What is required is a multipronged approach in which resource increase plays only a small part. For Pakistan to succeed this time around,

it will have to be imaginative and comprehensive in the strategy it adopts. There

are at least six elements of this approach.

First, the government must develop a core curriculum that must be taught in all

schools up to the 12th grade. Along with the prescription of such a core syllabus,

the government should also create a body to oversee the textbooks used for instruction. There should be no restriction on the submission of books that can be used

as authorized text and there should be a fair amount of choice available to schools.

They should be able to pick from an approved list. The selected books must carry

the ‘‘good housekeeping seal of approval’’ of the authority created for this purpose.

The members of the authority should be selected by an autonomous Education Commission which can be nominated by the government and approved by the national

assembly.

Second, no institution should be allowed to take in students unless it registers

with the Education Commission. The Commission should issue certificates of registration to the institutions which should indicate what kind of curriculum is being

taught in addition to the core syllabus. Overtime the Commission should develop

the expertise to grade schools according to their quality. A scale of the type used

by credit rating agencies could be used by the Commission as a way of informing

the parents about the type and quality of education on offer.

Third, either the Education Commission or a similar body should issue certificates

to qualified teachers. No school, no matter what kind of curriculum it teaches,

should be allowed to hire teachers unless they have been appropriately certified by

the authority. The certificate should indicate which subject(s) the teacher has the

competence to teach.

Fourth, in order to further encourage the participation of the private sector while

lessening the burden of the public sector, the state should encourage the establishment of Private Education Foundations that will be run on nonprofit basis and will

raise funds that will qualify for tax exemption. These foundations should also be encouraged to register abroad so that they can receive contributions from the members

of the Pakistani diasporas in the United States, Britain, and the Middle East. The

government should offer for sale to the Foundations the institutions it manages at

all levels. This will be a form of privatization with the intent to encourage not only

educational entrepreneurs to enter the field but to involve the people who are interested in improving the quality of education in the country.

Fifth, the government must reform the management of the educational system.

One way of doing this is to decentralize the system’s running to the local level. The

recent devolution of authority permitted by the reform of the local government

structure has created an opportunity for the involvement of local communities in

educational management. The development of the local government system as envisaged by the administration of President Pervez Musharraf is being challenged by

some vested interests including the members of the National and Provincial legislatures who fear erosion of power as more authority flows to the local level. The old

bureaucracy that had exercised enormous power under the old structure is also reluctant to loosen its grip. This resistance will need to be overcome.

Sixth, parent-teacher-administrator associations should be created that manage

funds and allocate them to the areas in which serious deficiencies exist. These associations should also have the authority to assess the performance of the teachers

and administrators based on the quality of education given. Parental involvement

25

in education, even when the parents themselves were not literate or poorly educated

yielded very positive results in several countries of Central America.

Seventh, the government should attempt to level the playing field by making it

possible for children of less well-to-do households to gain admission into the privately managed schools. The government could initiate a program of grants and

loans that should be administered by the commercial banks. Such an approach was

tried successfully in Mexico. Letting the bank’s manage these programs will save

them from being corrupted.

Eighth, to address the serious problem of youth unemployment in a population

growing rapidly and in a society that is becoming increasingly susceptible to accepting destructive ideologies, it is important to focus a great deal of attention on skill

development. This will require investment in vocational schools or adding technical

skills to the school curriculum.

Ninth, in undertaking a school construction program to improve physical facilities,

special attention should be given to the needs of girls. Only then will the parents

have the assurance that the schools to which they are sending their daughters can

handle their special needs.

Tenth, and finally, a serious review of current expenditure on public sector education should be undertaken. It is well known that the state pays to a large number

of ‘‘ghost teachers’’ who don’t teach but turn up to collect their monthly pay checks.

It is also well known that the annual recurrent cost in well-managed private schools

that are able to provide high quality education is one-half the recurrent cost of public schools. Rationalization of these expenditures will increase the productivity of resource use.

Conclusion

Pakistan’s educational system requires an almost total overhaul. It will not be reformed simply by the deployment of additional resources. This was tried once before

by the donor community under the auspices of the World Bank’s Social Action Program. That as we noted above did not succeed. What is required now is a well

thought out and comprehensive approach that deals with all facets of the system.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Burki.

Dr. Ahmed, may we have your testimony?

STATEMENT OF SAMINA AHMED, SOUTH ASIA PROJECT DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP, ISLAMABAD,

PAKISTAN

Dr. AHMED. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for allowing

me to testify on behalf of the International Crisis Group. Like you,

we are deeply concerned about the absence of meaningful educational reform in an area which, as you know, has, in the past,

and may continue to add to the numbers of the Islamic extremists

that threaten not just the stability of their own countries, but U.S.

national security, as well.

We’ve issued this report yesterday. It’s on sectarian conflict in

Pakistan. And I point this out because it is so important, when

you’re talking about educational reform, to talk about the political

context.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: The report, ‘‘The State of Sectarianism in Pakistan,’’ will be retained in the complete record of the hearing or can

be accessed at www.crisisgroup.org.]

I’m going to be touching on Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan. My focus will be on the issue of what should you do? How

do you reform the education sector to make sure that more and

more young people are not drawn to Islamic extremism, and that

they, too, become not just citizens in their own societies that contribute to their own state, but they also contribute to international

security and stability?

There is a problem here, and we need to address it. And the

problem lies in the fact that, in Pakistan at this point in time, you

26

have the moderate secular parties sidelined, the religious parties in

alliance with the ruling party, controlling the provincial education

ministries in two of the four federating units. How can you expect

reform from these people, who are the most resistant to reform, not

just the reform of the madrasas sector, which is their own turf, but

even of the public education sector?

So there is a challenge here, and the challenges lies in the fact

that we cannot ignore the threat, and that threat must be dealt

with. It is not the role of the United States to dictate to governments in Pakistan and in Bangladesh what they must do with

their educational systems, but, certainly, it is in United States national interest and in the interest of these states, themselves, to

regulate these institutions that we call madrasas, which are the religious ceremonies.

In both Bangladesh and in Pakistan, you have three different

educational systems at work. You have the public-school sector.

You have private schools, which are elite schools, a large number

of them. You need to have money to go to those schools. And then

you have the madrasas. And those numbers matter because when

we go to schools in the region, we see the state the students have

to study in. You have teachers who are barely literate. You have

schools with no infrastructure—no toilets, no running water, no

playing fields, very often not even a roof over the heads of these

children, no boundary walls.

We want to increase the enrollment of female children. Well, you

know what? Some of these schools are located so far away from the

villages that parents are scared to send their girls. This is not a

cultural matter here. People talk about cultural problems: ‘‘Well,

you know, these are Islamic countries; and so, there is a resistance

to female education.’’ That’s not true. We’ve gone to remote areas

of Baluchistan, where people have said, ‘‘If only I could send my

child to school, but it’s too far away, and it’s unsafe.’’ This is why

you see a gender disparity in particular in places like Baluchistan

and in the northwest frontier province, where, as you know, given

past history, it’s essential to bring about education reform of a people that have been exposed to, unfortunately, because of state policy, the madrasa system. It created the Taliban. The Taliban have

not gone away. There are Pakistani Taliban and Afghan Taliban.

They emerge out of these schools, and the schools are unregulated.

When we talk in terms of percentages of children in schools, we

forget one thing: Why is there such a very high dropout rate, first

at the primary level and then again at the secondary level? But it

does matter, when we are talking in terms of investing either the

United States taxpayers’ money into these educational systems or,

for that matter, Pakistani Government resources into these systems.

It’s really quite simple. The madrasas are booming. Absolutely no

doubt about it. If you actually look at the numbers, they’re astounding. In Bangladesh, you’ve had, at least, a tenfold increase in

the number of madrasas since 1986; in Pakistan, a fourfold increase since 1988. There are anywhere between 10,000 to 13,000

madrasa schools, and we really don’t know and the government

doesn’t know because there is no regulatory authority.

27

It’s true in Bangladesh, as well. There are no ways of regulating

what’s happening in the madrasas. What do they teach? Where do

they get their sources of finances from, which is so important? That

is a responsibility of the state, and, in fact, an international obligation, under U.N. Security Council resolutions. Who are the students? We don’t know. All of that is very disturbing.

However, the U.S. Government focus, in terms of allocating funding, is, and should be, on the public school system. The dropout

rates here are disturbing as well.

If you take an average number, given by government ministers,

of the students in madrasas, which is anywhere between 1, 1.5, to

1.7 million, nobody seems to know, and then you look at the dropout rates, which can be available from the data of primary schools

and secondary schools, by the time children drop out of primary

school, there are only 4.2 million children left in the primary

schools. And you know what? That only covers 4 years of education;

4 years of education. Just imagine if that was happening in the

United States. What kind of a youth would you have in the United

States? How could they contribute constructively? And then when

you go on further, to grade 12, all of a sudden you have a huge

dropout rate again. And then, in fact, at the high school you almost

get down to one on one, because so many kids have dropped out.

Why do they drop out, even where facilities are available? Because the education is bad. Because it doesn’t provide for job opportunities. Because parents realize the need to send their child to

school, but also realize, if the child only has under 4 years or 6

years or 8 years of schooling, how is that child going to get a job

with the education that child has got?

So it is so important to actually look at these issues. And I know

that the U.S. Government is addressing a number of these issues

on the ground, but one of the things we would strongly suggest is

that as part of the ongoing assessment of new districts that AID

will be allocating funds for, consider needs assessments from the

communities on the ground. Where is it the need is greatest?

Where is it that they have a real gender imbalance in the schools?

Where is it that you have more madrasas booming, being constructed there? Because with the absence of public schools, you are

going to have the children going to the madrasa. The madrasa is

also attractive—free board, free housing; but it’s also so dangerous,

because it’s indoctrination.

That said, it is equally important to reform the public school educational curriculum, because one of the policies that the Government of Pakistan seems to be adopting at this point in time—and

I’m sure the Bangladesh Government might be tempted to go down

that route—is to mainstream the madrasa. In other words, you introduce three or four subjects into the madrasa and don’t touch the

religious content of the education. So you would introduce computer sciences and maths and social studies. But children are being

taught in the public-school sector, in social studies and in history,

to demonize other religions—the Hindu is the enemy; Pakistan is

threatened by India—to demonize the neighbors, to demonize other

religions, as well, and, more so, to glorify the jihad. You actually

see that in the national curriculum. ‘‘Jihad. Describe how important the jihad is to you. Jihad is central to your existence.’’ This

28

is the indoctrination that the children are getting in their regular

school system. Now, if the children in the madrasas are going to

be taught that, what difference would it make?

To introduce English language, where one of the things the

madrasa administrations have said to this point in time, they said,

‘‘Fine, we’ll have our own English-language textbooks.’’ And you

can well imagine the content.

For us, it’s very, very important that with the funding that the

United States is planning to put into the educational sector in the

next few years, these are the issues that should be looked at. The

U.S. taxpayers’ money should not be given for the production of

textbooks in which children are asked to make speeches on jihad,

to recognize the importance of jihad in every sphere of life, to talk

about jihadi, which is martyrdom. That is not where the U.S. taxpayers’ money should be going. That should be conditional, ‘‘This

money shall not go to the production of these textbooks.’’ But the

money should go toward English-language textbooks since the

English language is so essential now for jobs and for opportunities.

And the U.S. Government can help produce good-quality Englishlanguage textbooks for schoolchildren, and that is important.

But should the Government of Pakistan depend on donors? I

think there’s a good point made here by you, Mr. Chairman, that

this has to be domestically driven. And one of the ways to judge

that political will is by the amount of GNP spent on education.

And, unfortunately, neither Pakistan nor Bangladesh fall into that

category of actually spending what they should be spending, which

is 4 percent of GNP. They fall far, far behind. So then to expect

that the internationals will pick up the rest of the tab, they should

be made to stick to their commitment, they should be made—this

should be conditional, and it is important.

So, other than that, where do we go, in terms of U.S. assistance?

One of the things the U.S. Government should not do at all is to

provide any assistance for the madrasa school system. Not in Pakistan. Not in Bangladesh. Not in Afghanistan. What is failing—and

that is where the emphasis should be—is the public school system.

On Afghanistan, let me very, very briefly say that there’s been

a sea change in some ways in Afghanistan because of the fall of

the Taliban. Female children have come back to school. But that

doesn’t mean that the challenges are still not immense. The infrastructure was totally destroyed; the country was destroyed in the

war. Rebuilding means that the Karzai government is going to

keep on needing massive U.S. assistance.

What is needed, of course, is also security, because, even after

the Taliban have fallen, girls are being attacked, their schools are

being attacked, teachers who are teaching them are being attacked.

Even though there’s a great will, right now, to enroll the girls in

school, physical insecurity is something that will discourage parents from sending their children to school.

The challenges are immense. At this point in time, the opportunity is also huge, in particular in Pakistan, because the United

States is engaging on education reform, to press upon the Pakistan

Government to undertake the measures that it should take, and

take them fast. I don’t think Pakistan has that much time that it

29

can afford to have yet another generation of children badly educated or illiterate or educated in jihadi madrasas.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Ahmed follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. SAMINA AHMED, SOUTH ASIA PROJECT DIRECTOR,

INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP, ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN

I want to thank Chairman Richard Lugar, and the ranking member, Senator Joseph Biden, for holding this important hearing, and inviting me to testify on behalf

of the International Crisis Group on the continuing challenges of education reform

in South Asia.

The Crisis Group has been in South Asia since December 2001, and has published

reports directly relevant to the issues under this committee’s review. We are deeply

concerned that the absence of meaningful education reform will aggravate social and

economic rifts, and feed the spread of extremism amongst the region’s youth.

Education in South Asia has been the subject of renewed international focus in

the wake of the attacks of September 11, and millions of dollars in donor funds have

been allocated for education programs. However, a lack of government commitment,

political interference, and a deteriorating physical infrastructure threaten to undermine these efforts. My testimony will expand on these concerns as they apply to

Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, with a particular focus on President Pervez

Musharraf’s education reforms, whose outcome will be absolutely crucial given Pakistan’s key role in the war against terrorism.

In a report that the International Crisis Group published yesterday on ‘‘The State

of Sectarianism in Pakistan’’ we emphasize that:

Sectarian conflict in Pakistan is the direct consequence of state policies

of Islamisation and marginalisation of secular democratic forces. Co-option

and patronage of religious parties by successive military governments have

brought Pakistan to a point where religious extremism threatens to erode

the foundations of the state and society....

Instead of empowering liberal, democratic voices, the government has coopted the religious right and continues to rely on it to counter civilian opposition. By depriving democratic forces of an even playing field and continuing to ignore the need for state policies that would encourage and indeed reflect the country’s religious diversity, the government has allowed

religious extremist organisations and jihadi groups, and the madrasas that

provide them an endless stream of recruits, to flourish.

As we look at the education system more specifically, it nevertheless is vital to

see and understand the broader political environment in which the education system functions.

Pakistan and Bangladesh have almost parallel education systems. As they did

under British colonial rule, both countries maintain a three-tiered education structure:

1. Private English-medium schools catering to privileged families;

2. A highly centralized public school sector including Urdu or Bengali medium

schools for the poor;

3. Religious seminaries, or madrasas.

Each sector has its own syllabus, exam systems, and fee structures. The growing

disparities between these sectors, in terms of the quality of education and the professional opportunities available to graduates, are exacerbating already sharp social

and economic divisions.

Pakistan and Bangladesh are signatories to the World Declaration on Education

for All (EFA, signed in Jometien, 1990), yet are falling significantly behind on

achieving agreed targets. Both spend well below the 4 percent of GDP on education

recommended by UNESCO (currently Pakistan has allocated 2.7 percent; and Bangladesh 2.3 percent). Most of this goes toward salaries, leaving extremely limited

funds for development and other productive inputs. Their public school infrastructure is deteriorating, with dropout rates in primary education fluctuating around 50

percent in Pakistan, and 33 percent in Bangladesh. In rural areas and urban slums

we’ve visited in Pakistan in the last year, many schools were in locations where

there was very little public transport and their learning environments were deplorable—many lacked boundary walls, water and toilet facilities, electricity, and proper

furniture. That parents are unwilling to send their children to such schools should

come as no surprise.

30

Not only do one of every two children in Pakistan drop out before completing primary school (5th grade), but also there is an equally devastating flaw in public

school education. The content of that education is increasingly irrelevant since it

does not prepare students for the demands of a modern economy (or for higher education). In Bangladesh, a National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB) devises

the national curriculum and produces public school textbooks. In Pakistan, a central

Curriculum Wing determines the government syllabus, and Provincial Textbook

Boards then produce all public school textbooks. Teachers are prohibited from deviating from the prescribed material. These virtual monopolies have prevented the

emergence of innovative and flexible education systems. Teachers and students

we’ve interviewed in the field argue that public school education is no preparation

for employment. As a result, many families chose instead to send their children into

labor, or to madrasas, which provide accommodation, food, and other basic necessities, and yield professional opportunities in mosques, madrasas, and other religious institutions.

Bangladesh’s madrasa sector has mushroomed, reaching an estimated 64,000

madrasas from roughly 4,100 in 1986, with little if any government oversight. This

has accompanied the rise of militant Islam, including increased numbers of radical

groups, some with ties to global terrorist networks, such as the Harkat-ul-Jihad-alIslami. Two Islamist parties, the Jamaat-e-Islami and Islami Oikyo Jote are coalition partners in the Bangladesh Nationalist Party-led government. According to the

latest official estimates (2003), there are 10,430 madrasas in Pakistan. However,

adding the numbers provided by each of Pakistan’s five madrasa boards, the figure

is closer to 13,000. Both figures mark a significant increase from the official estimate of 3,000 madrasas in 1988.

Both countries continue to harbor Islamist radical groups who seek recruits from

poverty-stricken and education-deprived areas. Increased jihadi rhetoric in

madrasas and mosques, including calls for an anti-American global jihad, is a major

cause of concern. Without a viable public school system that expands students’ economic opportunities, more and more children are likely to drift toward extremism.

REFORMS UNDER THE MUSHARRAF GOVERNMENT

The Musharraf government has publicly acknowledged the problem, and made

education reform a centerpiece of its modernization drive but has failed to follow

through. In January 2002, the government launched its Education Sector Reforms

(ESR) program, aimed at reforming the education system. In 2005, we continue to

have serious concerns about the program’s directions. Our findings indicate that

three main obstacles beset meaningful education reform.

First, the government has proved reluctant to divert more of its own resources

to education. Repeatedly pledging to raise the education budget to 4 percent of GDP,

it has yet to follow through on its commitment. To meet Pakistan’s commitments

to EFA, the government will need an estimated $7.9 billion. According to its EFA

Action Plan, the government expects $4.4 billion of this, more than 55 percent, to

come from foreign donors, symbolizing an unwillingness to invest its own resources

in education reform.

Second, Pakistan’s public education bureaucracy is highly centralized and inefficient. Since salaries and opportunity in the public and private sectors depend on

educational qualifications, positions within the education department—and degreegranting institutions are some of the most lucrative in government service. Appointments are based on politics rather than merit within the education sector, thereby

severely impairing the quality of teaching. Overly centralized control has further

prevented effective monitoring over public school teachers and administrators.

Third, the government has repeatedly yielded to political pressure from religious

parties that have openly opposed education and madrasa reforms. These lobbies

have managed to hijack curricular content to promote their own ideological and political agendas. We are particularly concerned about the public school curriculum’s

emphasis on religious indoctrination. General Zia-ul-Haq’s Islamisation policies in

the 1980s had resulted in a massive expansion in the numbers of madrasa, with

the numbers increasing from 1,745 in 1979 to almost 3,000 by 1988. During this

period too, militant interpretations of Islam were systematically incorporated into

the mainstream public school curriculum. Current national syllabus guidelines require students between classes I–VI, for example, to ‘‘recognize the importance of

Jihad in every sphere of life’’ and ‘‘make speeches on Jihad.’’

In 2003, an independent Islamabad-based research group, the Sustainable Policy

Research Institute (SDPI) documented religious, sectarian and gender biases in the

public school syllabus in a report entitled, ‘‘The Subtle Subversion: The State of

Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan.’’ Although a goverment-formed committee of

31

independent academics and education officials approved the report’s recommendations for an immediate and comprehensive review of the national curriculum, subsequent pressure from the religious parties prompted the government to finally reject

its proposals. Then Education Minister Zobaida Jalal had also announced that

Quranic references to jihad would be deleted from public school science books but

backtracked under pressure from the religious right, and those references remain

in place.

In this context, the ESR objective of streamlining the madrasa syllabus with the

mainstream curriculum is questionable. Any effort to do so would be premature

without a comprehensive review and improvement of the public school curriculum.

The government’s capitulation to the religious right on education reform stems

from its reliance on them to counter its civilian secular opposition. The six-party

Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal presently controls the NWFP government and governs

Balochistan in alliance with the ruling Muslim League. MMA officials head the provincial education ministries of both these provinces and have publicly opposed the

reform of the public school sector.

This reliance on the religious right has also led the government to back down on

its pledges to reform the madrasa sector. In June 2002 the government approved

a draft bill, the Deeni Madaris (Voluntary Registration and Regulation) Ordinance

calling for the voluntary registration of madrasas, imposing restrictions on foreign

grants and donations, and barring foreign students or teachers without valid visas

and official permission. A week after Cabinet approval, however, President

Musharraf opted not to sign the bill after it was strongly opposed by madrasa board

representatives.

The lack of effective registration requirements and oversight has resulted in the

madrasa sector’s alarming and unchecked expansion. Today most registered

madrasas are licensed under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 after the ban on

such registration, imposed in 1996, was removed in 2004. The act lacks any significant monitoring mechanisms over financial accounting, internal governance, or

madrasa curricula; its only practical requirement is for registered organizations to

submit an annual list of governing body members,

THE U.S. ROLE

The United States can, and should, play an important role in education reform

in Pakistan and Bangladesh. USAID should consider significantly expanding its current financial commitments for education in Bangladesh, which were below $5 million for fiscal year 2004, focused on early childhood and primary education, and are

planned at similar levels for fiscal years 2005 and 2006. USAID has allocated $100

million over 5 years to Pakistan’s education sector, aimed at teacher training, engendering democratic ideals, improving the quality of exams, and enabling greater

access to schools. The U.S. government has a stake in the direction and outcome

of educational reform and should adopt a more proactive approach. That approach

should affect both the direct primary education and literacy program but also some

portion of the $200 million in annual budget support provided to the government

of Pakistan over the next 5 years.

The United States should:

1. Condition continued education aid to Pakistan and Bangladesh on their raising

education expenditure to 4 percent of GDP. Comprehensive reform efforts will not

be sustainable under current expenditure levels. In that regard, some clear conditioning should provide for evidence of additionality in government resources going

to expand access and quality of education from the budget support the United

States is providing.

2. Expand programming to address educational content, and attach conditions

that its funds cannot be used, as they could under present circumstances, to support

a curriculum, and any textbook material, that promotes intolerance toward women,

and religious, sectarian, and ethnic minorities; and contains references to jihad, or

any historical inaccuracies. The United States should urge Pakistan to immediately

resume reviewing public school curriculum and textbooks to address historical and

factual inaccuracies, glorification of armed struggle and jihad and minority and gender biases. USAID should extend its programs to support the private production of

quality English language textbooks for public schools, presenting valuable substitutes to the Provincial Boards and NCTB’s texts. This is crucial to improving public school educational content.

3. Assist in the shift to English-medium instruction. Since the language of instruction in elite private schools is English, given the demand for English in Pakistan

and Bangladesh’s public and private sectors, the products of Urdu and Bengali medium government schools are at a severe disadvantage in competitive job markets.

32

The United States should assist in all aspects of this shift from textbooks to teacher

training to monitoring results.

4. Urge the Pakistan Government to follow through on its commitment to establish better oversight on the madrasa sector; to put in place a new madrasa law that

requires financial transparency, curriculum and management reform, and mandatory registration of all madrasas under this new law, including those currently registered under the Societies Act. Pakistan should also be urged to immediately resume reviewing public school curriculum and textbooks to address historical and

factual inaccuracies, glorification of armed struggle and jihad, and minority and

gender biases.

5. Ensure against politically motivated teacher and administrative transfers.

USAID should require all local partners to sign memorandums of understanding

with the relevant education ministry to curb the transfer of any teacher trained

under their programs for a minimum period of 3 years.

6. Target more funds based on district need. In Pakistan, much of the education

funding currently is limited to only a handful of Sindh and Balochistan districts,

some of which are relatively developed and pose no significant threat of extremism

amongst youth. A recent proposal to expand the $60 million USAID-funded Education Sector Reform Assistance (ESRA) program from 9 to 25 districts is a welcome

step, and should be followed through. However, the new recipients should be identified on the basis of need, the number of donors already active in the district, as well

as areas that have witnessed an expanding madrasa sector or increased jihadi activity. USAID should also consider extending ESRA to NWFP, where tribal customs

and the spread of extremism continue to hamper education especially for girls. In

some NWFP districts we found clusters of up to 14 villages without a single girls’

school. In 2004, female enrollment made up about 35 percent of total enrollment in

NWFP, the lowest ratio of any province.

7. Address infrastructure constraints. In determining any program’s performance

targets, USAID should take into account practical constraints. Targeted enrollment

rates in most rural areas of Pakistan cannot, for instance, be achieved without addressing factors such as transport and security problems, particularly relevant in

addressing education for girls and women.

8. Avoid diverting scarce aid funding to the madrasa sector. The United States

Government must not allocate any of its assistance for madrasa schools in Pakistan

and Bangladesh. Donor funding and engagement is unlikely to reform the madrasa

sector and the provision of modern facilities will only make madrasas more attractive educational venues, increasing the clergy’s social and political influence. United

States educational assistance should instead remain focused on strengthening Pakistan and Bangladesh’s failing public school systems.

9. Finally, with regard again to the broader political context in which the education system functions, the United States should strongly press the Government

of Pakistan to reaffirm the constitutional principle of equality for all citizens by repealing all laws, penal codes, and official procedures that reinforce sectarian identities and cause discrimination as well as those laws that discriminate against women

and minorities and to disband all private militias, particularly those organized for

sectarian and jihadi causes.

AFGHANISTAN

Afghanistan also presents a daunting set of challenges, linked directly to that

country’s reconstruction. Over two decades of war and repressive government have

left a shattered economy and physical infrastructure, and some of the lowest human

development indicators in the world. By all accounts, Afghanistan’s school system

is in ruins. However, the Taliban’s ouster has opened up new opportunities in education, especially for girls who were banned from attending school, and has led to

unprecedented levels of enrollment. Over 4 million students have registered in

schools since 2002, with female enrollment estimated at around one-third of the

total amount. Yet, the existing infrastructure is unable to meet the increased demand for schooling. An estimated 80 percent of schools were damaged or destroyed

by war, and many have yet to be restored. Millions of children remain out of school,

and current teacher/student ratios are unsustainable, by some accounts averaging

around 1:60.

Security remains a primary concern. Girls’ schools continue to face external

threats, and many have come under attack. In 2003, Afghanistan’s female literacy

rate was 19.6 percent (compared to 49 percent for males). Many regions remain

under warlord control. Militia forces and remnants of the Taliban and al-Qaida continue to operate in and around Afghanistan, seeking recruits amongst the country’s

disaffected youth. Former soldiers, including child soldiers, and returning refugees

33

are especially vulnerable in the current environment, and more extensive efforts are

needed to reabsorb them into Afghan society. According to an Asian Development

Bank (ADB) estimate in July 2002, there were 25,000 to 30,000 ex-child soldiers in

Kandahar alone. A strong education system would contribute significantly to such

efforts.

Given ongoing security concerns and limited resources, President Hamid Karzai’s

government will continue to require significant levels of external funding to rebuild

and revitalize its education system. We believe an effective approach should include

expanded efforts in:

1. Establishing a strong physical infrastructure, including new schools and

adequate educational facilities.

2. Policy-oriented capacity building of regional education departments and

other policymaking institutions, whose responsibilities include curriculum development and long-term education policy.

3. Involving Afghan civil society in the delivery of education.

4. Building a broad and equitable education system. Afghanistan’s education

infrastructure must extend its reach to accommodate a scattered, highly diverse, and multiethnic population.

5. Continued and expanded teacher training programs, geared especially to

induct more female teachers into the sector.

6. A sustained and coordinated international effort to provide security, especially in remote areas of the country where the writ of the central government

has proved limited, and where attacks against civilians, especially against

women and girls, continue.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, South Asia’s economic growth and security depend

on a strong education sector. The failure to implement meaningful reform in Pakistan and Bangladesh’s madrasa sectors and deteriorating public education systems

and to revitalize Afghanistan’s educational infrastructure will undermine regional

stability, promote extremism, and prevent the spread of democratic ideals.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much, Dr. Ahmed.

We now call on Mr. Method, as our final first-panel witness.

Mr. Method.

STATEMENT OF FRANK METHOD, DIRECTOR OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY AND SYSTEMS, RESEARCH

TRIANGLE INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, DC

Mr. METHOD. Thank you, Chairman Lugar. Good morning, and

thanks for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

Research Triangle International is a not-for-profit research institute working to support education reform around the world, primarily funded by USAID, including working with the Education

Sector Reform Program in Pakistan and a number of other countries in the region.

I’ve worked on international education policy and strategic planning most of my professional life. I’m particularly proud of having

been involved, over the last 15 years, in the international effort to

create policy consensus and advocacy for the investments needed to

achieve Education For All, which I consider one of the most powerful strategic agendas of our time.

I put the emphasis particularly on ‘‘all.’’ The emphasis on ‘‘all’’

is what drives the linkages between education and rights, citizenship, responsibility of government to meet its full commitment to

the society, and shape the society.

I submitted a statement for the record, and I’m only going to

summarize some of the key points.

First, education systems do more than educate children; they

also build and shape the nation. Education reform must be about

more than the schools and pedagogic inputs. National efforts to improve curriculum, to develop more appropriate reading and learnVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
34

ing materials which respect the dignity, rights, and beliefs of all

learners, are imperative. At least equally imperative, is attention

to the children who are not in school and whose opportunities to

learn have been frustrated. Tolerant, peaceful, and stable societies

cannot be built or sustained when large numbers of young people

reach adolescence frustrated, alienated, without opportunities to

participate effectively in their communities, economies, and political systems.

Educators cannot do it alone. Improving education requires fundamental changes in public policy, public administration, financing,

and the political will to make the changes. There is no easy, inexpensive, or quick solution to the problems.

It’s possible to paint a very bleak picture of education in the

Near East and South Asia Region. I agree with the characterizations that we’ve just heard. Class sizes and dropout rates are too

high. Education opportunities for girls and women are inadequate.

Too often, bureaucratic sclerosis wastes resources, slows change,

stifles innovation.

However, progress is being made, albeit slowly. There are reform

plans in place for many countries. Jordan is a particularly good example, but there are others—in Egypt, in Pakistan, Indonesia, and

elsewhere. The United States does not need to instigate reform so

much as it needs to respond aggressively and substantially to the

opportunities that exist. There are opportunities. There is reform.

We should get behind it.

Since the events of September 2001, United States education assistance levels have increased substantially, particularly in Asia, in

Near East, less so in other regions. There now are programs in Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India,

Bangladesh, Indonesia, Cambodia, in the Philippines, and under

development for Sri Lanka.

The main concerns are that the programs still are relatively narrowly focused on primary education and on quantitative measures.

There’s great pressure to demonstrate short-term impacts—schools

built, teachers trained, textbooks provided, rising examination

scores.

However, education systems change slowly and incrementally.

Advances toward more tolerant and resilient societies are first

demonstrated by increased participation in education decisions,

more open and informed public debate about education policies,

and increased public accountability at all levels, particularly at the

level of the school. Much more effort is needed on education standards, objective data and data-management systems, monitoring and

reporting systems.

Achieving broad agreement on what good education is, or should

be, and what parents have a right to expect, is the essential first

step toward the participation needed for accountability and

progress. A great deal can be done, and is being done by nongovernment organizations supporting programs for specific communities and needy populations. However, sustainable reform requires

public leadership, comprehensive planning, and broad mobilization.

The most effective reforms include efforts to decentralize education

systems, improving accountability, allowing flexibility, and creating

support for local initiatives. Additional resources would be used efVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
35

fectively both to expand the current programs and to support

emerging priorities. My recommendations are for increased attention to media and technology, quality standards, early-childhood

development, and secondary education. Those are discussed more

in the prepared statement.

There’s been success with the use of television and radio to support instruction and enrich the learning environment. The United

States-supported Alam Simsim Program in Egypt has been extraordinarily successful, and has now been extended to 21 other countries. Information technologies also are needed as management

tools for the more data-intensive approaches to quality improvement. These areas of media and the application of information

technologies are areas of particular strength and experience in the

United States. There is a lot that we can offer in this area.

Performance standards are key to managing for results, as well

as to increasing accountability and parent support for reforms. Improving data management and measurement tools are among the

most cost effective and politically acceptable strategies for external

support of national reforms, improving management and accountability at all levels.

Quality early-childhood development addresses the needs of the

whole child, not just preschool education. Community-based programs are particularly effective, engaging parents with the learning needs of children and helping to strengthen local civil-society

organizations. Such strategies also help in supporting new leadership roles, social and economic opportunities for women.

Young people, 12 to 15, in all cultures face decisions about their

identity and future. Discouraged or alienated adolescents are potentially dangerous, especially where there are few roles other than

illicit occupations or militant political movements. A priority area

for new initiatives is the development of new models of lower secondary education, operating at a smaller scale (so that they can get

closer to the communities) with integrated learner-centered curriculum, cross-trained educators, and effective use of media and

technology. The United States could lead such an effort and help

to set that agenda.

Secondary education also should include work-related skills development. The preferred strategy is to integrate skills development in the general secondary curriculum, including problem solving, critical-thinking skills, and other soft skills. I do not recommend vocational/technical education programs at the secondary

level.

With respect to madrasas, there are good reasons to be concerned

about some of the organizations supporting madrasas and other

forms of Islamic education, particularly those which operate outside

of the purview of government. The respective governments are

aware of the political agendas of these organizations, which, in

most cases, are directed as much against the secular nature of the

government as they are against the West in general, or the United

States in particular.

However, generalizations about the madrasas, themselves, are

very risky. The majority of Islamic schools are run by responsible

educators attempting to teach national core content along with Islamic studies and social values. Increasingly, these schools are

36

being integrated as part of hybrid systems of public education or

supported directly by governments as parallel systems of public

education. There is little reason to oppose such integration. Particularly in the poorer countries, it is difficult to see how the universal education goals can be met without some reliance on privately initiated, funded, and managed schools, including the religious schools.

The major danger in many communities is the lack of education

opportunities of any kind and low quality of existing schooling, particularly for the poor and rural. Raising the quality of public education, including addressing the issues of inappropriate content,

should be the priority. Strategies of direct support for madrasas

with externally funded inputs are not recommended. Many, perhaps most, Islamic education organizations or associations would

be reluctant to accept such support, particularly if it’s aimed, or

seen to be aimed, at influencing content or reducing autonomy.

Further, the political backlash against any initiative perceived as

externally directed or influenced may reduce the ability of governments to work with external assistance on other aspects of needed

reforms and improvements of the public education systems.

In conclusion, addressing the needs of education reform for all,

and in all countries, is among the most strategic steps the United

States can take toward helping countries become more tolerant,

democratic, open to new ideas, and capable of participating in the

changing global economy. There is much more to be done, and the

United States has many opportunities for leadership.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Method follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANK J. METHOD, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION POLICY AND

SYSTEMS GROUP, RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, DC

INTRODUCTION

Education systems do more than educate children; they build nations. Education

reform must be about more than the schools, and the pedagogic inputs to education;

it also must be about how education decisions are made, how resources are mobilized and distributed, how societies address special needs and the rights of all learners, how the school systems are accountable to parents and communities, and what

options parents have if they are dissatisfied with the education their children are

receiving.

The achievement of quality education, for all, is one of the most important challenges of our times. It is one of the most powerful ways of affirming basic rights

and supporting positive changes in the lives of children as well as their households,

communities, and nations. Improvements in education opportunities for girls and

other disadvantaged or marginalized populations are particularly important, affecting not just their personal opportunities and choices but also the health, economic,

and social progress of the larger societies. The positive and lasting effects of expanding education opportunities and improving the quality of education are well documented, and the policy priorities for doing so are a basis for international cooperation as well as for national investments. In fragile states and for countries such as

those in the Arab world and South Asia where there are challenges of political legitimacy and social cohesion, the efforts required to achieve quality education for all

are central to national reform.

Assisting countries to accomplish this priority agenda, fully and well, should be

one of the assistance priorities for the United States. There is no better investment

in terms of meeting basic human needs, the affirmation of basic fights, the reduction

of poverty and inequity and accelerating social progress. There is no more necessary

investment in terms of helping countries move toward democracy, moderate their

political and social dynamics and participate effectively and successfully in open,

competitive economies.

37

1See http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/index.shtml.

2See http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.

I. Overview of United States assistance to education in Asia and the Near East

The United States helped establish the goals for Education for All (EFA),1 beginning with cosponsorship of the World Conference on Education for All in Thailand

in 1990 and continuing through the World Education Forum (WEF) in Dakar in

2000, and the international mobilization related to the Millennium Development

Goals (MDG) 2 USAID currently cochairs the Fast Track Initiative by which funders

have committed to mobilizing the necessary funding for those countries putting in

place serious plans of action to achieve universal primary education of acceptable

quality for all students. The United States, both through official agencies and

through the involvement of the NGO communities, can be proud of its leadership

and constructive contributions to this shared strategic agenda. It is one of the most

far-reaching initiatives of the international community and the United States has

helped shape it and support it. This effort must be sustained and enlarged. There

is much more to be done.

The EFA and WEF commitments are to a broad international partnership including private sector and nongovernment communities as well as the bilateral and multilateral funders and international organizations. The international commitments

are to support national plans of action, led by national leaders with broad participation of the national partners, public and private, including civil society, nongovernment organizations and public opinion generally. UNESCO, the World Bank, and

other international organizations have taken responsibility for ensuring that these

plans are technically sound, well-documented and monitored against agreed goals,

metrics and indicators of progress. Basic education for all is to be understood in its

broad framework of learning systems beginning in early childhood and continuing

through community-based and lifelong learning. Central to these goals and commitments are improving instructional quality and learning standards, with explicit attention to distributional concerns, gender equity, and the learning needs of poor and

disadvantaged children.

Despite broad support for the EFA goals, it has been difficult to meet the promised funding levels. In part this reflected limited funds and the many competing priorities. In part this reflected ‘‘bean counting’’ approaches to education and development, which left countries making quantitative progress to rely on their own resources for further education improvement. Until the events of September 11, 2001,

forced attention to the social conditions, weak and nonrepresentative governments

and extremist political movements in much of the developing world, including the

countries of North Africa, the Middle East, Central and South Asia, most assistance

for education improvement focused narrowly on quantitative expansion, teacher education and better distribution of opportunities, particularly for girls. Issues of quality, administrative and financial decentralization, local accountability, curriculum

reform, early childhood education, and attention to youth and adults outside of

school received lesser priority.

Total USAID support for education across the Asia and Near East Region (ANE)

was only $71.8 million in fiscal year 2001, including $66 million of ESF funds. The

United States played a significant role in a few countries, but not a leading role in

any. There was an important program supporting education for girls in Morocco and

a significant program of school building in Egypt, scheduled to be completed in 2001

with no plans for further education programming.

Since fiscal year 2001 the assistance levels for the ANE Region have increased

substantially, the program priorities have broadened to include administrative and

financial reform, decentralization and local participation and the range of countries

assisted has expanded. ANE funding for education in fiscal year 2005 is projected

to be $239M (plus any supplementals) and countries with significant education sector programs now include Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan,

India, Cambodia, and Indonesia. Expanded programs are under development for

Yemen, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and possibly Sri Lanka.

Each of these programs responds to the particular circumstances and needs of the

country.

• They include countries undertaking major reform efforts such as the Education

Reform for a Knowledge Economy (ERfKE) initiative in Jordan—one of the most

ambitious reform efforts anywhere, combining reforms at the early childhood,

basic and secondary levels to produce graduates with the skills needed for the

knowledge economy. The integrated strategy includes: Governance and administrative reform, a sophisticated Education Decision Support System (EDSS) supporting policy analysis; effective system management, transparency and acVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
38

countability with comprehensive and coordinated educational research, policy

analysis, and monitoring and evaluation activities; and substantial investment

in school infrastructure, teacher training and e-learning application of instructional technologies and media. USAID is assisting with early childhood education, teacher training for new coursework related to business skills and development of an improved school-to-work strategy.

• They also include countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, where education systems need to be built or rebuilt virtually from the ground up.

• And, they include countries such as Yemen and Bangladesh, and to some extent

Pakistan, where the governments are relatively weak, financing for education

is inadequate, corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency waste resources and consensus on how best to achieve national education objectives for all, in all parts

of the country, does not yet exist.

• In a few countries such as Morocco, assistance now includes activities at the

lower secondary level and increasing attention to the linkages between education, workforce development, and job growth. This reflects the growing concerns about large numbers of youth and young adults without employment prospects, or skills for the jobs that do exist.

• In other countries such as Indonesia, Pakistan, and Egypt the focus is on helping countries decentralize education administration, improve local accountability, and increase the participation of parents and community leaders.

• An important new regional initiative is the Education and Employment Alliance, supported by USAID through the International Youth Foundation, which

seeks to mobilize the private and nonprofit sectors to work with youth in Egypt,

India, Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan, and the Philippines.

Additional education program support is provided regionally through the Middle

East Partnership Initiative focused on education opportunities for girls and strategies to improve access, quality, and skills development across the region, and

through other USG programs such as the child labor programs of the Department

of Labor.

One of the encouraging emerging trends is the substantial involvement of the U.S.

private sector in support of education improvement in the region. Private initiatives

such as the Education and Employment Foundation, initiated by Ron Bruder with

$10M of his own funds is an excellent example. Corporations such as CISCO, Microsoft, General Electric, and others are supporting programs both through their philanthropy and through their direct investments in programs managed by NGOs, or

in the case of CISCO, learning through a direct partnership with the Jordanian

Ministry.

For reasons that are not entirely clear, the major U.S. foundations which played

leading roles in earlier decades, including in countries with which the United States

found it difficult to work through official mechanisms, no longer play a leading role.

This is unfortunate as the foundations can more easily and appropriately support

strengthening of the social sciences and their application to education reform and

improvement, work on sensitive issues of language and curriculum content, research

and experimentation on leading edge approaches that cannot easily be supported by

official development assistance programs.

II.Overview of education in the region

It is possible to paint a very bleak picture of education progress in the region.

According to recent reports, up to half of adult women in the Arab world are illiterate and more than 10 million children in the region don’t go to school. In parts

of South Asia, illiteracy rates and the numbers of children not in school are even

higher. Countries have large young populations. Examination scores are low, both

against the standards of the countries and against international comparative measures. The physical quality of schools in rural areas is often very low, sometimes little more than the shade of a tree or a building without adequate water and sanitation. In urban areas schools typically are very crowded, often double-shifted, and

frequently in buildings such as large former residences not built as schools. Class

sizes of 60 children or higher are not uncommon. Teacher training is inadequate,

supervision ranges from bureaucratic and political to inattentive, absenteeism is unacceptably high, morale and incentives tend to be low, and in-service professional

support is unsystematic and infrequent. Dropout rates are high and for all but the

best students and students able to afford private education options, access to secondary education is limited and inequitably distributed. Even comparatively

wealthy states such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait lag badly in terms of EFA goals,

particularly in terms of the education of girls and the commitment to educate all

children.

39

However, I do not share the bleak view. Progress is being made and it is possible

to make further and faster progress with increased assistance and better national

leadership. Substantially more resources are needed and could be used effectively

both for existing programs and for complementary activities such as secondary expansion and improvement (particularly lower secondary), early childhood development, increased emphasis on workforce development and work-related skills (not

necessarily vocational-technical training in the schools), administrative decentralization and management improvement, improved monitoring, measurement and accountability systems.

Unquestionably, there are very large quantitative problems, most countries remain relatively poor and there are serious problems of distributional equity and access, particularly for girls but also for rural areas, cultural and linguistic minorities.

Improving these systems will take time, 10–15 years minimum, and the changes

will come slowly and incrementally. There is no quick fix, nor is there any inexpensive or risk-free and politically easy strategy. Progress will take sustained leadership, funding, technical and administrative expertise. It also will take a difficult

combination of patient confidence in long-term strategies and the courage to take

short-term risks and to learn from mistakes.

The encouraging trend is that most countries have now put in place plans for

moving toward Education for All. These are uneven and it remains to be seen

whether the countries will have the political will to actually implement the plans

fully and the international community will honor the commitments to mobilize resources to help these countries achieve the EFA objectives. But, they do exist and

are a basis for action and investment, as well as a benchmark for monitoring

progress. UNESCO, the World Bank, and others, including USAID, provide important support for improving data systems, monitoring and assessment against agreed

goals and internationally monitored indicators of progress. Further encouraging is

that most countries are making quantitative progress, albeit more slowly than they

need to achieve. Youth literacy rates for the 15–24-year-olds are rising along with

schooling rates and gender parity is improving in all but a few countries, particularly Yemen, Saudi Arabia, parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh. A third basis for optimism is, there is beginning to be more partnership with the private sector and

broader consensus across the public sector that education reform, expansion, and

qualitative improvement is essential for achieving social objectives, maintaining political cohesion and stability, and creating the conditions for investment and job creation. Finally, there now is substantial expertise in the region. A few countries such

as Tunisia, Jordan, and Qatar are becoming exemplars for the region and there is

increasing potential for regional cooperation and exchange.

This growing public policy consensus and broad support, reaching well beyond the

sectoral concerns of most educators, is articulated in the series of Arab Human Development Reports. For example, the 2003 Arab Human Development Report addressed the ‘‘knowledge deficit’’ in the Arab world, suggesting that overhauling the

region’s outdated education systems is necessary for future economic prosperity and

human development. The report noted that Arabs themselves need to drive this

process of change, drawing from their rich cultural, linguistic, and intellectual heritages.

The same point should be kept in mind for all countries of the region. Assistance

is much needed, and welcomed in most countries, but it is the national leaders, public and private and at all levels, who must assess and understand their issues, build

consensus, take the political risks and make the budgetary and administrative commitments to drive aggressive national plans of action. There is much the international community can do to provide technical support and critically needed inputs,

but sustainable and effective reform leading to full mobilization to achieve quality

education for all has to be nationally led, owned, and managed. There is much that

can be done, and is being done, working through nongovernment organizations and

alternative schooling systems in countries that have not yet made such commitments. Such programs often are very innovative and effective in addressing specific

needs, particularly for poor and marginal populations, girls and women and others

not being effectively reached by public education programs. However, other outcomes resulting from the building of national systems of public education, and the

administrative and accountability reforms necessary to build such systems fully and

effectively, will not be achieved by strategies bypassing the weaknesses of public administration and public leadership.

Public funding, public policy, and public administration of public schools will continue, for better or worse, to be the dominant influence in most countries (Lebanon

may be the exception). To effect major changes in these systems, donors must work

within the framework of national leadership and national plans of action. This is

often very delicate and cannot be externally driven except at the margins.

40

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I thank you very much, Mr. Method, for

your testimony.

We’ll now have a period of questioning. The Chair regrets to announce that a Democratic Senator or Senators have objected to the

committee meeting 2 hours after the Senate came in. Thank goodness we started early. And so, it would appear that we will be able

to continue until 11:45. But I mention that because we will have

a period of questioning, and then we want to hear the other witnesses, likewise, and have an opportunity for their testimony

today.

Let me begin by pointing out that you have all made a distinction between the preoccupation of many in the United States on

the madrasas schools—which you all see, at least in Pakistan, and

perhaps elsewhere, as a very real concern—and the much broader

concern of the public school movement, as a whole.

I think you, Mr. Burki, pointed out that many students who are

alienated by their public school experience, or lack of it, may be as

hostile to their countrymen and the rest of the world, as those who

have special indoctrination. Perhaps so. But, in any event, it indicates, as both you and Dr. Ahmed have pointed out, the enormity

of the problem. You’re suggesting that 4 percent, perhaps, of the

GNP of Pakistan should be devoted to education. Obviously, only

a small fraction of that is happening. Generous contributions by

the U.S. Government, or other governments, are going to supplement this. But Pakistan is a very large country with many students, as you pointed out. Perhaps close to half of the entire population is in what you might say an educable area. That is a big figure.

What is reasonable, in terms of the economic development of

Pakistan? I don’t mean to dwell entirely on that country, but clearly it’s a country in which GNP is rising. I suspect that per capita

income is rising, although I’m not certain of that, given population

increases. What is a reasonable percentage in, say, an intermediate

period, 10 years of time? Four? One? One and a half? In other

words, if you were taking a look at this from the rest of the world,

and you keep mentioning, strongly, to Pakistani leaders, ‘‘Spend

more on education,’’ and then there is a pushback factor there, and

they’re saying, ‘‘Listen, you don’t understand all of the problems

that we have. We’re not a wealthy country, and we’re developing

rapidly, but we can only do so much,’’ can you give us some parameters of what the argument should be?

Mr. BURKI. Mr. Chairman, at this point Pakistan is spending less

than 2 percent of its GDP——

The CHAIRMAN. I see.

Mr. BURKI [continuing]. On education. There is virtual consensus

amongst development people that a country should spend more

than 4 percent; preferably, 5 percent of GDP. So Pakistan has to

double its expenditure, in terms of GDP, from 2 to 4 percent.

I gather that this is the program that the government has

launched at the urging of the donors, that this would, indeed, happen over the next 3 to 5 years.

The CHAIRMAN. In 3 to 5 years, a doubling might happen?

Mr. BURKI. A doubling will happen. That is their intention.

Which also include—includes the money that is coming in from outVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
41

side. A total of $1.34 billion have been committed by various donors

to—for the support of education in Pakistan. These are over different periods of time. The World Bank is the largest donor, with

about $600 million of soft money and grants. Asian Development

Bank is also quite active in this. The United States is putting in

$100 million. There are several countries who have converted their

debt into grants for education.

So, my expectation is that by the year 2010, 5 years from now,

if everything goes well, Pakistan should be spending what developing countries normally spend on education; that is to say, about

4 percent of GDP. My expectation is that about one-fourth of this

will come from the outside.

The CHAIRMAN. So, maybe 1 percent of the 4?

Mr. BURKI. One percent of the four will come from outside.

The CHAIRMAN. Outside.

Mr. BURKI. It will be the donor money.

There is also a great deal of money which is now being sent to

Pakistan by way of contribution by the diasporas in the United

States and in Britain for educational reform. I have not seen any

numbers on this, but it is a significant amount, and it is increasing. And it is my suggestion that that money should also be used

in a way that it adds to the development of education.

The CHAIRMAN. Is the diaspora——

Mr. BURKI. Mr. Chairman——

The CHAIRMAN [continuing]. In any way organized? Are Pakistanis in the United States——

Mr. BURKI. Yes, diaspora is organized. It has—taking advantage

of your tax laws, a number of nongovernment organizations have

been set up in this country, which hold various functions around

the United States and raise money. There is an intention on the

part of some of these organizations, not to establish new schools,

not to spend money on new brick and mortar, but to go to the government and say, ‘‘Well, why don’t you sell this school to us, or sell

this university to us, and we will take it over, and we will improve

it, on the condition that we will provide education to poor children,

so we will not charge a large amount of money.’’

The Indian diaspora has been very successful in doing something

very similar, and some of us have been talking to the Indians to

learn some lessons from their initiatives.

In terms of the amount of income that the Indian diaspora has,

it is much greater than Pakistan’s, but then India is 10 times as

large as Pakistan. So, in terms of proportion of GDP generated by

the Pakistanis working in the United States, it is one of the largest

diasporas in the world, and willing to contribute a lot of money for

the social welfare of their own country.

Mr. Chairman, you also asked me the question about economic

performance in Pakistan. It has been good in the last 2 or 3 years.

Last year, the gross domestic product increased at the rate of 6.1

percent. Population increased at 2.2 percent, which means that

there was a 3.9 percent increase in per capita income. This year,

the government expects the increase in GDP to be above 7 percent;

so, population increasing at 2 percent will mean a GDP per capita

increase of 5 percent.

42

Now, these are gross numbers. These are aggregate numbers.

Pakistan is a country in which income distribution is highly

skewed. The top 10 percent of the population earns much more

than the bottom 10 percent of the population than is normal for

most developing countries. So, because of the skewness in the distribution of income, when GDP increases, a significant part of it

goes into the pockets of the rich, rather than the poor, and that is

a problem which can only be solved through education and creating

employment opportunities and so on.

I just want to reiterate what I said earlier, that things—developments are in the right direction in Pakistan. But Musharraf’s government—I think my colleague Samina Ahmed was alluding to this

in her own presentation—has been not always willing to take on

the forces of conservatism. And I think where the donor community

could come in, is to persuade Musharraf and his colleagues that it

is extremely important to move the country toward modernity,

rather than toward obscurantism. And there are sometimes efforts

to move the country forward toward modernization, but then the

molvees, the mullahs, come in and they make a lot of noise, and

the government does backtrack in several different ways.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Bassem, let me ask the same question to you

about the experience in Jordan. How much of the GNP of Jordan

is devoted to education? And what is the goal of the country in that

respect?

Dr. AWADALLAH. We are actually spending more than 4 percent

of GDP on education. Most of the expenditure, however, has been

in recurring—in current expenditure. And until we developed this

Education for Reform Initiative, very little was spent on capital expenditure. We were reliant on donor assistance, particularly on

loans from the World Bank, in order to construct new schools; and

those were project loans, they were not part of an overall strategy

for reform.

It was only in 1999 that we started thinking about this through

a public/private partnership, and it took us about 2 years to put

the plans together. In the year 2001, when we came up with the

social and economic transformation plan, one of its major tenets

was educational reform. So that’s when we came up with all the

requirements for educational reform—the construction of new

schools, the computerization of the schools, the linking of the

schools through a highspeed broadband network, the training of

the teachers, the educational platform, the revamping of the content, the introduction of e-learning. All of these formed the component of education reform for the knowledge economy.

We brought all the donors together, and we asked USAID, we

asked the Japanese, we asked the Europeans, we asked the Canadians, we asked the World Bank, we asked some of the Arab gulf

funds that have given us loans, as well, for this project, we asked

the Islamic Development Bank in Jeddah, and other donors—we

asked them all to form a donor group, which will support the educational reform in Jordan. Obviously, their support has to be

matched but what—by what we come up with, in terms of our

budget. So it has been more or less a 50–50 split between what the

donor community has provided us for the educational reform, and

43

what we have come up with, out of our domestic revenues in the

budget in order to accelerate and go ahead with this reform plan.

The first phase of this education reform for the knowledge economy is 500 million U.S. dollars. That’s the cost of it. And that will

take us into the year 2007 to 2008. The second phase will complete

the cycle, and we will get rid of the double shifts, which were referred to earlier. There were major constraints, social constraints,

especially with regards to girls and women going to school, especially during the wintertime, when the sun sets at early hours and

families will not allow, socially, their girls to go out of their houses

after 3:30 or 4 p.m. in the afternoon. So we had to deal with the

double shifts in many of the schools. We had to deal with a lot of

the schools in rural areas which were not really schools; they were

one rooms, which had a blackboard, and it was a small room taking

more than 40 or 50 students. We had to attend to all of these

issues, and we are making a marked improvement, in terms of the

educational reform.

One thing, Mr. Chairman, that I want to mention is, educational

reform is extremely important at the primary level; but, as the

Doctor mentioned, the tertiary level is extremely important. When

we speak about higher education, it’s even more important. One of

the key areas that His Majesty the King has focused on is the

Shari’ah teaching. Because we noticed that the rejects of the educational system, those who come last on their scores, on their high

school scores, get into the Shari’ah schools, or the Shari’ah departments at the different universities. And those are the ones who

turn out to become the preachers in the mosques, and who captivate their audiences every Friday at noon prayers, and captivate

them into thinking what they would like them to think.

We really think that the preaching and the Shari’ah teaching in

universities should be done along the lines of the law degrees in

the United States. It should be a post-graduate curriculum, rather

than an undergraduate curriculum. And this is what we are working on right now, in terms of reforming our higher education system in order to make sure that we address this issue.

Beyond the Shari’ah discipline, I think just focusing on areas of

vocational training—and I agree with you, sir, that perhaps vocational training should not be part of the educational training, but

it should be a separate, parallel system that would cater to the requirements of the labor market. And herein, as I said, is the major

challenge which we, in Jordan, have yet to face, matchmaking the

output of the educational process with the requirements of the

labor market, not only in Jordan, but across the Middle East. And

this is something which is extremely important.

In the past, we’ve relied on gulf countries to absorb Jordanian

labor force. Over the last few years, we’ve seen, in the gulf countries, a nationalization effort. They do not import labor from Arab

countries as much as they used to, before. We’ve noticed that visa

requirements and immigration to the Western, more-advanced

countries has been sharply curtailed, which necessitates the need

for us to create more jobs for our growing labor market. And this

is not only unique for Jordan, this is across the Middle East and

North African region; indeed, for the Bemina region.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

44

The CHAIRMAN. That’s a very important point. We are talking

about education and expansion, how vital that is, but each of you,

in your own way, has testified that there has to be something after,

that there has to be something there—a job, a career, an opportunity—or else you have another dislocation in society that is very

disquieting.

I just wanted to ask you, Mr. Method, as you take a look at several countries in your purview—we’ve had very, very good testimony about Pakistan and Jordan—is their experience unique? Can

you generalize, in any respect, about the countries that you have

surveyed, and how much they are spending, how much they’re obtaining from outside the job picture, as related to these elements

we’ve been discovering in Pakistan and Jordan?

Mr. METHOD. It’s difficult to generalize——

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, of course.

Mr. METHOD [continuing]. Across this set of countries that covers

several continents. Most countries are underspending. I think one

of the things to keep in mind is that it’s a matter of the political

commitment that is made to achieving this objective that drives the

funding. That’s part of what I meant when we talked about the importance of emphasizing all—the political will to make difficult

changes—where it’s treated as an imperative, you know, no excuses, ‘‘You’ve got to do it, like we do in the United States.’’ Somehow, governments have to find a way to raise those funds.

In most of the countries of the region, it’s not treated as an imperative. It’s treated as a public-administration task. People start

with, ‘‘All right, this is how much we have for resources. How are

we going to allocate it?’’ And that allocation becomes a political

process, rather than some kind of categorical commitment. By moving it to a categorical commitment—and I think external donors

can help to move it there—you force changes in fiscal policy, you

force politically difficult decisions as to who’s going to be taxed.

Pakistan could raise considerably more funds if it had the political

will and the political strength—and it is a fragile government—to

take on some of the feudal landholding practices in the 20 families

or so that control much of the wealth in Pakistan.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me interject to point out that in your testimony, you point to Jordan, Tunisia, and Qatar as models for reform. Do they have political will or some framework for achievement? Likewise, are they small countries, as opposed to large populations, and, therefore, do they have better hope of a comprehensive

plan becaise they have fewer persons to work with?

Mr. METHOD. Clearly, in Jordan, the fact that the King (and the

Queen) took a personal interest in this and made it happen, helped

to make it happen. In Qatar, the sheik and the sheikha have taken

a personal interest, and have driven that very hard.

I think Tunisia has done better than others. Jordan is trying to

do somewhat the same, trying to change the relationship to the employing sectors—much more consultation with the employers, many

more forms of advisory mechanisms, much more of a demand-side

approach to achieving education—whereas, other countries still are

rather stuck in an unreformed curriculum that is relatively rigid,

that tries to supply people to the labor market without really

knowing what the labor market wants, that tends to overemphasize

45

the hard technical skills and underemphasize the soft skills that

employers want, in terms of information-seeking capacities, criticalthinking skills, ability to work in teams, all of those aspects. I

think that’s one of the areas for further emphasis.

I do also agree that there needs to be—I don’t know about equal

attention—but certainly serious attention to the tertiary education

systems. I would like to see more variants of the U.S. communitycollege model being adapted in these countries. I think that that’s

a very effective way of linking the schooling system to the world

of work, intermediating with the employers through a variety of

advisory mechanisms, the consultative mechanisms that shape

those community colleges.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, you touched, each of you, in a way, upon

the jobs issue. At least two of you have mentioned that there may

be greater problems in students, from the countries we’re discussing today, finding work in the United States. Is this a part of

what I touched upon in my introductory statement, namely our

current visa restrictions? Or is there more reticence with exchange

programs and work-study programs? Maybe this is not an area

that you have studied, but certainly in the past this has been an

outlet for many talented persons. This committee has been seized

with the issue with a task force, as I mentioned, in talking with

Assistant Secretaries of State and Homeland Security and the executives at NIH and what have you, who have testified about what

a great contribution, particularly graduate students are making in

our medical research institutions, or, for that matter, in our engineering colleges. But this is obviously changing, because we have

apparently put more barriers in those areas, or more opportunities

are found elsewhere, and people are not selecting to come here. I’m

curious as to whether you have any comments in this general area.

Yes, Dr. Bassem.

Dr. AWADALLAH. Mr. Chairman, thank you for raising this issue.

If you look at the talent that is present from many countries—

Pakistan, maybe Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Egypt—you find enormous talent, particularly in the United States, but also in Europe—

but, in particular, in the United States—that has found equal opportunity here, that has found the ability to come and contribute

to American society, to American knowledge. And they have gone

back to their countries and to contribute to the improvement of life

in their own countries. And they are good emissaries and ambassadors of the American way of life and of what America stands for,

because they experienced equal opportunity and freedom in this

country.

We are terribly worried about what is happening right now. We

do understand, obviously, the security considerations, but this

should not be, in any way, used to stop the flow of people who are

coming into this country. Today, you look at the Jordanian Cabinet,

and over three-quarters of the ministers in the Jordanian Cabinet

were educated in the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. Very interesting.

Dr. AWADALLAH. Now, in—if the situation continues like it is

today, in 20, 30 years time this is not going to be the case. Now

you will see that the dichotomy in Iraq, people who have been

closed in Iraq for the last 30 years under Saddam Hussein. They

46

have no idea what the United States is all about. Probably all they

know about the United States today is just military occupation,

and they do not know anything about American values, they do not

know anything about American freedom. Whereas, people who

lived in the United States, Iraqis who lived in the United States

and who have gone back now to Iraq, see the United States in a

different light. Same applies for Palestinians. Same applies for Syrians or Egyptians. And it is a very important point, which I hope

that the administration will attend to.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I didn’t want to generalize the point, but

I’d just underline the fact that, in terms of our so-called public diplomacy—and we are still working at this arduously—we have

these opportunities that have come, historically, as you say, with

this high percentage of the Cabinet of Jordan. This is certainly true

of the young people in the Rose Revolution in Georgia, for example.

I had the privilege of entertaining six of them, 6 years ago in the

Senate dining room, without any idea that they were going to be

ministers in Georgia. But the fact is that we can give our money,

and some of our institutions are working, but it’s another thing if

a Pakistani or a Jordanian or a Tunisian, who has some idea of

what goes on in this country, and liked it, in fact, later becomes

the leader for reform, or among that leadership, in his or her home

country. We’re all talking about some indigenous, homegrown

qualities. But, as you say, if people have no idea—isolated in Iraq,

for example, all these years—as to what in the world we are doing

here, then an injection of money suddenly may have some benefit,

but not nearly what we think, and perhaps not in the forms that

we find is compatible with local needs. So I appreciate your making

that point.

Yes, Doctor.

Mr. BURKI. Mr. Chairman, I’d just like to reinforce what you’re

saying. The change that has come about, possibly, because of 9/11,

has produced an enormous amount of resentment in Pakistan, particularly amongst people who are naturally friends of the United

States. If you go back into my country’s history, you will see that,

for the first 20 years after Pakistan was born, in 1947, the preferred destination for higher education was Britain. I went there

as an undergraduate, myself. This was Colonial-linked, and so on.

But about the mid-1960s, it began to change, and the preferred

destination, therefore, became the United States. And up until very

recently, something like 10,000 students used to come to the

United States. Not all of them went back, but even those who

stayed back have performed very good service for their country. I

keep on talking about diaspora. These are the members of diaspora

who are now heavily engaged in the development of their own

country.

So, I would like to just reinforce what you’re saying, Mr. Chairman, that, as a part of United States public policy, it is extremely

important to reopen the United States to students in Pakistan and

other Muslim countries, rather than make it more difficult for

these people to access your wonderful institutions.

I have just finished reading Tom Friedman’s excellent book

called ‘‘The World is Flat,’’ and the picture that he paints of the

47

world is a picture of which Pakistan should be a part, which is supplying services to the aging populations of the United States,

Japan, Germany, and so on, without migrating to these countries,

but acquiring those skills first by coming over here, and then going

back to their own countries.

So, we’ve got to get that thing started once again. It has been

interrupted by 9/11, but I hope wiser counsels will prevail and access, once again, would become available to frustrated students becoming angry because they find it so difficult to gain access that

they desperately want.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Ahmed.

Dr. AHMED. Mr. Chairman, there was a question raised at the

beginning of this testimony which was on arms sales, and I will

link it to what you have said now. With the money that the United

States is providing for education reform, the United States is winning a lot of goodwill within Pakistan. These are not children of

families that can come to the United States to study. Only the elite

can do that. And that’s, as Mr. Burki said, a very thin layer of Pakistani society.

And let’s not assume that money and wealth means leadership,

not here in the United States, where opportunities are present for

people to find their way up the ladder just like that; in Pakistan,

with the opportunities being present, we would hope to see that

leadership emerge from all classes of society, not just for young

people who are economically mobile and socially mobile.

So, here is a thing that I think we need to understand. It is also

the type of assistance given and where it’s visible. In some of the

areas that I have actually seen USAID projects, there’s virtually

nothing, but there’s a little bit of money. It’s not very much, but

it’s made a difference.

What does Pakistan need? And this was a question that was

raised earlier on. You had asked that question, and I’d like to add

to the answer that you gave. It is a question of political will. It is

a question of saying, ‘‘This is a priority for my country,’’ not, ‘‘We

are poor, and we can’t afford it, and we’ll wait for another 5 years,

and we’ll have another, God knows, how many more children who

will probably be out in the streets or in madrasas.’’ That will come

from leadership, and that leadership, unfortunately, is lacking. The

United States is making a contribution, and we would hope that

that contribution would be in these areas that Pakistan so desperately needs—in social-sector development, in education, in

health.

If you actually look at the indicators—pick any indicator, it really

doesn’t matter—it’s abysmal.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we thank you very much for that wisdom.

I thank the entire panel, and I appreciate, so much, your papers,

which will be made a part of our record, and, equally, your

thoughtful responses to these questions. We look forward to staying

in touch with you. You are good friends of the committee, and good

friends of all the ideals that we have talked about today. And we

thank you.

The Chair would like to call, now, the witnesses who will be a

part of our second panel.

[Pause.]

48

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to call the meeting back to

order.

We are very honored to have, as a distinguished panel, Ms. Elizabeth Cheney, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for

Near Eastern Affairs, the United States Department of State; and

Mr. James Kunder, Assistant Administrator for Asia and the Near

East, in USAID.

I’ll ask you to testify in the order in which I have introduced you.

As in the case of the first panel, your full prepared statements will

be made a part of the record. We will ask you to summarize, hopefully in about a 10-minute period, and then we will ask questions.

Ms. Cheney.

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH CHENEY, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to be here and to speak with you this morning about what

is a really critically important issue of education reform in the

broader Middle East.

I think that, as we gather today, we really are in a moment of

historic opportunity for the people of the Middle East. I think if

you look at, sort of, what’s happened across the region in the last

several months—beginning with the elections in Afghanistan, the

elections then in the West Bank and Gaza, the elections in Iraq,

the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, and the uprising from

the people of Lebanon since then, as well as the Saudi elections,

the very bold announcement by President Mubarak that he will, in

fact, be pushing for constitutional reform and multiparty elections

in Egypt, the reforms that you heard about on the part of the Jordanians, in terms of their economic reforms, educational reforms,

and political reforms—there really, I think, is a movement of

change across the region. And I think for us, in the U.S. Government, the task is to do everything we can to help support that

change.

I think it’s a critical element for us in securing long-term victory

in the war on terror that we do everything we can to provide hope

and opportunity to the region’s young people, in particular. And I

think that means focusing on reforming schools so that we are sure

they teach tolerance, so we’re sure that they guarantee that people

have the skills they need to compete in the 21st century economy,

ensuring that economic systems are open and are growing enough

so they can create jobs, and ensuring that political systems, as

well, are open so people can have a voice in determining their own

destiny and their own future and how they’re governed, and I

think, finally, and, in my opinion, perhaps most importantly, that

we work to empower women and to ensure that women across the

regions have a voice in their society as equal participants and

equal players and have access to the same opportunities that the

men and the boys in those societies do. As the President has said,

increasingly ensuring that liberty spreads in other regions is necessary to secure our own liberty at home.

As you’re aware, Mr. Chairman, 50 percent of the population of

the broader Middle East and North Africa is under the age of 20,

49

and economies today are simply not growing quickly enough to create jobs that those people will require once they’re entering in the

labor market. We are faced, in most countries in the region, with

closed political systems, with illiteracy rates—I think it’s 75 million

men across the region, and 45 million women—sorry, 75 million

women and 45 million men are illiterate today. In many countries

we have a 50-percent illiteracy rate among women. At the same

time, you’ve got school systems, as I said, that are failing to teach

values of tolerance and failing to equip people with the tools that

they need.

As we look at the systems that we see in place, I think, as the

U.S. Government, this means it’s critical for us to support efforts

to help to reform those schools systems. We’re doing a number of

things. One is working directly with Ministries of Education in

countries where they’ve demonstrated that they’ve got a political

will to make change. We provided $4.5 million, for example, for the

Jordan Education Initiative that Minister Awadallah briefed on

earlier today. We also are working at—to ensure that our assistance is felt at a grassroots level. And in places where we see less

of a political will to change, we want to ensure that we are doing

everything we can to touch people’s lives, to teach women how to

read, and to provide scholarships both to attend school and also in

English language training.

I recently returned from—I was in Morocco last week, where I

had the opportunity to meet with some recipients of some of our

microscholarships. And it’s a very impressive and effective program, where, for a small amount of money, we’re providing 9

months of English language training to high school students and

college students, college-aged students, from some of the poorest

areas around Rabat and Casablanca, and really giving these kids

an opportunity to experience a better future that they clearly

wouldn’t have had otherwise.

We’re working both bilaterally and multilaterally on these issues

of education reform. Multilaterally, we signaled, beginning at the

Sea Island Summit last year, that the G–8 partners are very committed. We’ve launched a separate G–8 education initiative, which

is focused on improving school systems and also very much focused

on literacy. These goals were reaffirmed last December in Rabat,

at the Forum for the Future, and we’ll be having an educational

ministerial meeting in May at the Dead Sea in Jordan. Our Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, will be representing the

United States there.

Bilaterally, the largest portion of our funds on education reform

are provided through USAID, so I’ll let my colleague, Assistant Administrator Kunder, talk about those.

From the Department of State’s perspective, we’ve got several

different programs underway. Through our Bureau of Educational

and Cultural Affairs, we’ve got approximately $356 million, which

we anticipate will have a focus on the Muslim world and on youth

in the Muslim world. Issues like exchange programs, some of the

very things that the last panel was talking about, in terms of making sure students have the resources to come to the United States.

We recognize that that’s critically important to building relationships. We also, through ECA, are funding a teacher-training proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
50

gram in Afghanistan, and our Fulbright programs across the region, including new programs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In addition to that, we have the Middle East Partnership Initia- tive, which has dedicated $75 million, out of the $293 million appropriated to the Partnership Initiative, to education and women’s

literacy. And we have a number of different programs that the

Partnership Initiative is funding. We’ve launched partnership

schools. We’re working now, initially in Oman and Algeria, to identify schools, in conjunction with those governments, that the Partnership Initiative can then go into the schools and work on a whole

range of issues—work on curriculum, work on IT training, training

for the administrators and the teachers—to help use those as pilot

schools that very much can then become a model.

We also are providing translated textbooks and translated children’s books. We were guided in this by the findings in the first

Arab Human Development Report, in 2002, that demonstrated that

the numbers of books that are translated into Arabic every year

really are dwarfed by numbers across the rest of the world, in

terms of English translation, French translation, Spanish, even

Greek. So we provided a grant to help to get textbooks and children’s books into schools.

We’re also providing funding to an organization called Arab

Civitas, which is focused on helping to provide citizenship training

through the schools so that students are equipped to participate in

the emerging democratic political systems.

We’re also, finally, very focused on public/private partnerships,

such as the Jordan Education Initiative. And the other model, that

I think is very impressive, is the Alexandria, Egypt, model, where

the local community, the local private sector, has taken a major

role in helping to reform those schools systems. And, through

USAID in Egypt, we’ve provided funding to help replicate that

model in other cities across Egypt.

In addition to these programs, we’re also supporting university

partnership in 10 countries. We’re funding Visiting Student Leaders, which is another exchange program. We’re helping to provide

Internet service in Yemeni High School. And we’re very much looking at how we measure the success, going forward, of these. Some

of these programs’ results are relatively easy to measure. If you’re

talking about literacy training, for example, you can measure how

many people you’ve taught how to read. Scholarships for girls, you

can measure enrollment statistics.

It obviously becomes more difficult and will take more time to be

able to determine, you know, which programs are having a moderating influence in society, but it’s something that we will be following closely, obviously, as we go, in the coming months.

We’re working, right now, to produce annual—our 2005 country

strategies for every country across the region, which will be looking

at the whole range of foreign-policy issues we have in our bilateral

relationships, but will include, obviously, a large portion of freedom

agenda issues. And the education reform will be central to that.

So, in closing, I think I would just like to say we’ll continue to

stress the importance of education reform, both in our policy dialogs with governments in the region, as well as working with

NGOs, and in working to ensure that we’re doing everything posVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
51

sible to provide tangible, real, and effective assistance, recognizing

that, in many cases, we are not the largest or the only donor, and

we need to ensure that we aren’t being duplicative. But I think

there’s a lot of important work the United States can do, both at

the policy level and at the assistance level.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Cheney follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH CHENEY, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT

SECRETARY FOR NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on the important topic of

educational reform in the Broader Middle East and North Africa. The President’s

vision to promote freedom and democracy in the region is about giving young people

hope for their future—a positive future built on the prospect of opportunity and

prosperity—that strengthens regional stability and our own national security.

In the area of education reform, we need to support efforts to ensure that schools

in the region teach tolerance and prepare students to compete in the global economy. We need to work to improve literacy, particularly among women. We are willing to lend our strong support to Ministries of Education in the region that have

demonstrated commitment to reform.

We also need to do more to ensure that our assistance touches, is seen by, and

improves the lives of more people at the grassroots level in the countries to which

we provide assistance. In the area of education, this can be achieved by making

greater use of literacy programs, scholarships for women and girls to attend school,

and support for programs—such as those in Alexandria, Egypt—that involve the private sector in education reform.

THE CHALLENGE

Fifty percent of the region’s population is under the age of 20. Economies across

the region are not growing quickly enough—and are not sufficiently open to the outside world—to create jobs for these young people to fill. At the same time, rigid and

closed political systems do not give citizens in many countries a voice in shaping

their destiny or choosing their leaders. Finally, too many school systems across the

region are failing to teach tolerance or to provide students with the tools they need

to compete successfully in the global marketplace.

Regional stability and a reduction in the appeal of extremism depend on giving

people in the region more power to shape their lives, their societies, and their futures. This endeavor will require reform of political, economic, and education systems, and the empowerment of women. Reform efforts will need to ensure people

have a democratic voice in the governance of their countries, to strengthen the rule

of law to protect citizens’ rights, to modernize economic systems in order to create

opportunity, and to facilitate access to quality education, particularly for women and

girls, so that all citizens are properly equipped to participate fully in society.

The groundbreaking 2003 Arab Human Development Report was pivotal in drawing attention to the critical issue of failing education systems that produce citizens

ill-equipped for the challenges of the modern world. The authors of the report

stressed this point again in the newest Arab Human Development Report released

this month. Progress in the region is inextricably linked to strong democratic institutions and economic growth, which are not possible without significant reforms in

educational systems.

There is no question that implementing genuine educational reform is a difficult

process that entails overcoming numerous hurdles and working through a series of

challenges. The Broader Middle East and North Africa has some of the lowest literacy rates in the world—particularly among women. Over 75 million women are

illiterate, as are over 45 million men. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Morocco

are countries of particular concern. In Egypt alone, over 13 million Egyptian women

contribute to a national female illiteracy rate of 56 percent—according to the United

Nations.

Businesses in the region consistently report that national education systems are

not producing graduates with the skills and qualifications needed by the private sector in order to compete in the modern, international marketplace. Basic education

needs to be relevant to societal needs and workforce requirements if the region is

to make progress on economic growth and social development. So, support for indigenously led efforts to train teachers, reform curricula, and provide vocational training is also important in helping to address the region’s educational challenges.

52

The conversations on reform that are taking place throughout the Broader Middle

East and North Africa are encouraging. And there are encouraging signs of change

in the area of education in the region as well. As I already mentioned, the

governorate of Alexandria in Egypt has been leading the way toward a school system characterized by greater local-level control and by strong collaboration and involvement on the part of parents and local businesses in shaping the education that

is provided to their children.

The United States and its allies have clearly signaled their desire to support governments committed to education reform and to provide them with both material

support and the benefit of their international experience.

At Sea Island, GA, the United States joined with G–8 partners and countries of

the Broader Middle East and North Africa in committing to work together to support regional political, economic, and educational reform efforts, including support

for the improvement of educational systems and a literacy initiative to impart literacy skills to an additional 20 million people by 2015. At the historic Forum for

the Future in Rabat last December, G–8 and regional leaders reaffirmed these goals

and agreed to convene a meeting of Education Ministers in Jordan this May to discuss the critical success factors necessary for reform. The education ministerial is

sure to produce robust and constructive engagement and dialog on this key set of

issues.

The key for the United States is to allocate our resources in a targeted fashion

that does not duplicate other donors’ efforts. In addition, we need to take advantage

of opportunities where governments are committed to reform.

THE RESOURCES

Over $98 billion in assistance has been provided to the Broader Middle East and

North Africa by the rest of the world over the last 10 years. According to the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development, OECD countries provided in excess of $74 billion in bilateral assistance between 1993 and 2003. The World Bank provided more than $24 billion during the same period (primarily in loans, but also via a small number of grants).

Of the $74 billion provided by the OECD countries over the last 10 years, $4 billion went to support education; $2.4 billion of the $24 billion provided by the World

Bank was directed toward education during the same timeframe.

THE DONORS

The World Bank, and Germany and France have been the largest providers of foreign assistance to the Broader Middle East and North Africa in the area of education. The Bank provided over $2.4 billion in loans and grants between 1993 and

2003, while France and Germany provided approximately $1.5 billion each. According to the OECD, the United States provided $290 million over the same period;

all of the U.S. money was provided in the form of grants.

The picture is somewhat different when it comes to foreign assistance for basic

education. The World Bank is by far the largest donor; it provided over $900 million

between 1993 and 2003—primarily in loans, but also via grants. The United States

took second place with over $190 million, all provided via grant assistance.

Education reform is a difficult thing to do in any context, but particularly in the

Broader Middle East and North Africa. As I have described, a huge amount of assistance is being provided to education systems throughout the region. There are

many programs and there are many players. And the United States is not the biggest player in this area either.

In recent years, the United States has significantly increased the amount of education assistance provided to the region. In fiscal year 2005, we will dedicate almost

$200 million to BMENA countries. The fiscal year 2006 budget requests $270 million for education assistance to BMENA countries, an increase of 37 percent over

the 2005 levels.

Within the broader picture of total foreign assistance to education reform in the

Broader Middle East and North Africa, we need to focus our activities and to ensure

that we are not duplicating the effort of others.

Looking forward, the U.S. Government will focus its technical assistance funding

on Ministries of Education, which have demonstrated a true and tangible commitment to education system reform.

We will also focus our efforts toward the grassroots level by providing literacy programs and scholarships to attend or stay in school—particularly for women and

young girls. In this way, we can ensure that our assistance is not wasted, has a

tangible impact upon the lives of people in the countries we are assisting, is visible

at the street level and achieves results.

53

In countries where government Ministries of Education have demonstrated a commitment to reform, we will, of course, stand ready to provide governments with the

best support that we can mobilize. This means not just funding, but it also means

concerted action together with other donors to make the fruits of international experience in reforming education systems available to our partners in the region.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, the United States Government has three primary

avenues through which it directs bilateral assistance to education and educational

exchanges in the Broader Middle East and North Africa:

(1) USAID through development assistance and economic support funds;

(2) The Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs;

and

(3) The U.S. Middle East Partnership Initiative’s policy and program initiatives.

My colleague, Mr. Kunder, will speak in more detail about USAID’s activities in

the region. I would like to take a moment to describe the Department of State’s activities in the area of education reform.

The Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) promotes democracy and reform through global exchange programs. With a 2005 appropriation of $356 million, ECA exchanges will target youth and youth influencers

around the world. ECA’s special emphasis will be on countries with significant Muslim populations in order to reinforce positive trends toward economic and societal

change through professional and academic exchanges.

ECA sponsors a number of programs which support teachers and teacher-trainers

from the region, particularly in English language instruction, and provides them

with firsthand opportunities to learn about the U.S. educational system, the principles of student-centered teaching, effective democratic school governance, and parental involvement.

For example, the Afghanistan Teacher Education Project has brought more than

60 women educators from Afghanistan to the United States to enhance their professional and teacher training skills.

Similarly, the Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching Assistant program places

new English language teachers from the Broader Middle East and North Africa on

United States campuses for one academic year. They teach Arabic and other regional languages, and enroll in United States studies and/or English as a Second

Language (ESL) methodology classes. Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco have been regular

participants in the program.

THE U.S. MIDDLE EAST PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE (MEPI)

Let me now turn more directly to MEPI and its contribution to combating terrorism through education. Through MEPI we are linking the President’s vision for

democracy and freedom to our policy dialog with governments in the Middle East.

As such, MEPI partners with those countries that have demonstrated a clear, political commitment to enacting reform in the education sector.

The U.S. Middle East Partnership Initiative has received $293 million in appropriations since its inception. Close to a quarter of these funds, or approximately $70

million, is being spent—in some cases in countries unserved by USAID—on promoting educational reform. MEPI’s specific emphasis is on: Improving the quality

of basic education; expanding access to basic education for all people, especially girls

and women; and promoting skills development compatible with workforce needs.

The President’s 2006 budget requested $30 million for MEPI’s education reform

efforts. Of MEPI’s current funding, 25 percent supports programs that facilitate curriculum reform, teacher training, and community and private sector involvement in

education.

Based on new, innovative models, MEPI has helped launch creative alternatives

for improving the quality of, and access to, education for children in the primary

and secondary levels through its Partnership Schools Program. This program allows

MEPI to promote school autonomy in systems that have traditionally been very centralized. MEPI anticipates that by fall 2005 we will be able to conduct an initial

assessment of the impact of the program’s innovative instructional and management

methods in the classroom, and how the methodology translates into actual enhanced

autonomy and freedom of choice among students, teachers, and institutions.

The 2002 Arab Human Development Report noted that the Arab world translates

about 330 books annually, one-fifth the number that Greece translates. The authors

of the report also noted that the cumulative total of books translated since the times

of Caliph Maa’moun (9th century) is 100,000, almost the average that Spain translates in 1 year.

54

In an effort to encourage independent reading, critical thinking, and analytical

skills in young readers, MEPI launched ‘‘My Arabic Library,’’ a major program that

provides colorful and interesting Arabic language reading materials to third and

fourth grade classrooms in the region. MEPI can demonstrate that this program is

having a tangible impact. Three thousand schools will receive more than 1 million

books, targeting approximately 120,000 students and 6,000 teachers at its launch.

In the long term, the program will contribute to a substantive change in the approach toward education.

MEPI is targeted to respond quickly to emerging opportunities and to respond

with programs targeted at the individual challenges faced by each country. Through

the Arab Civitas civic education program, which is implemented in primary and secondary schools, MEPI also provides support to countries in the region wanting to

build public awareness of civic rights and responsibilities. The program promotes an

understanding of, and commitment to, democratic values and principles.

MEPI also has the flexibility to craft public-private partnerships to bring about

effective education reform efforts. In Jordan, MEPI has partnered with the Ministry

of Education and Cisco Learning to develop the Jordan Education Initiative, which

provides a high-quality on-line curriculum and teacher training programs in the

field of English. MEPI’s education programs provide viable options and effective

tools for people in the region who seek to implement reform in a manner that offers

security and prosperity for all of their people.

We are in the process of working with our Embassies and USAID missions to update our country strategies in the area of reform, including education, and would

be happy to discuss these with the committee as the process unfolds.

CONCLUSION

In closing, Mr. Chairman, the United States Government will continue to stress

the need for positive change in education in our ongoing dialog and relationships

in the Broader Middle East and North Africa and beyond. Where governments demonstrate a commitment to reform we will work closely with them to help make their

efforts succeed. We will also focus our effort toward the grassroots level where we

can be assured that our resources will have a tangible impact on individuals and

their education.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. I look forward to your questions and to our discussion of this important issue.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much, Ms. Cheney. We are

especially appreciative, in the construct of the hearing, that we’ve

heard from four distinguished witnesses, who have given us a view

of the situations in individual countries. We are equally privileged

to have a response by persons who, as you have illustrated in a

very comprehensive way with a variety of programs, are attempting to understand, to listen, and to meet those requirements.

We have asked our second witness to carry on in that spirit. Mr.

Kunder, we’re delighted to have you here, and would you give your

testimony?

STATEMENT OF JAMES KUNDER, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR

FOR ASIA AND THE NEAR EAST, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC

Mr. KUNDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do very much appreciate your calling the hearing. I know it’s obligatory to say that,

but it really does help us focus our analysis when you call these

kinds of hearings.

I wanted to start off by introducing you to four of the newest recruits in the global war on terrorism. These are Ikri Mikri,

Tuktuki, Halum, and Shiku. They are four Sesame Street characters introduced, just last week, to Bangladeshi television as part

of the Sisimpur Program, or Sesame Street in Bengali.

A couple of years ago, we would have been talking about how

this was an extension of the U.S. Sesame Street program. In fact,

55

it’s an extension of the Egyptian Sesame Street program, which

we’ve now rolled off into Bangladesh. So we’re trying to get out

these programs—teaching these values of tolerance and understanding of minority groups, and so forth, that we do with similar

programming in the United States.

I have another audio/visual display, if I can. This is a certificate

I received for Cisco Systems computer training a couple of weeks

ago, where I was taught by a very competent 19-year-old woman.

I have to admit, I wasn’t a very good student. She was a very good

teacher. The interesting thing was that I received this certificate

in the reconstructed Ministry of Women’s Affairs in downtown

Kabul, Afghanistan, and the young woman was an Afghani woman

participating in a joint U.S. Government/Cisco Systems training

program.

I raise these things, not to be humorous, but to display that, as

Liz has said, we are trying, across the region, to use the taxpayer

dollars we’ve been entrusted with, to use the best techniques we

can in audio/visual training, in telecommunications, in private/public, business/government partnerships to win this war on terrorism.

These are humorous examples, but, of course, we understand

we’re engaged in a deadly serious battle. We’ve got programs going

from the hardscrabble Hezbollah villages of southern Lebanon to

the jungles of Mindanao, where we’re doing demobilization programs for Moro Liberation Army fighters. So this is very serious

work. And I think the taxpayers would be gratified that the kind

of work that we’re trying to do with the dollars we have available

is as creative as possible.

I’d like to address, first, very briefly, the toughest question that

I think the committee asked us, and that is the question of the link

between education and moderate behavior. We have tried to do

very serious research at USAID using partners like the RAND Corporation and other think-tanks to understand, as carefully as we

can, whether there’s a causal link between education and moderate

behavior, or, ultimately, the avoidance of terrorism.

It’s very difficult to draw a direct causal relationship on a oneto-one basis. That is to say, it’s very hard to say that if an individual was educated to a certain level, he or she is less likely to

engage in terrorist behavior. However, what we think we can

show—and this is an important part, both of USAID programming

and MEPI programming at the State Department—is that democracy and participation lead to moderation across societies. Tolerance and democracy and moderate behavior come from participation in democratic processes. Education—public education, private

education, primary education, and secondary education—all contribute to democracy and participation. So we have an indirect link,

we think, between education and the kind of behavior we hope

folks will display across the region.

I have to tell you—truth in advertising—I wanted to make that

point, specifically, because, in part of your opening statement, sir,

you mentioned the shift in resources from other development programs in Pakistan into education. We believed that was a good

thing, and that’s why we did it. You also raised the question of

whether we should shift resources from what we call traditional development programs into education. Our answer to that would be

56

that the goal of increasing moderate behavior and combating terrorism across the region is simply not a question of shifting money

from one line item into another. Job training, participation for men

and women in the society, democratic principles, and education, all

contribute as a comprehensive package. The good news is, development works. As these societies advance, we will see less terrorist

behavior and immoderate behavior. But just to shift money between line items, we don’t believe is the answer to solving that

problem.

If I could, we have just a couple of charts here, and I’ll be very

brief. I believe you have these in front of you, sir. This chart tries

to summarize much of what the first panel said. The sheet that

says ‘‘Complexity of the Education Challenge,’’ the range of education problems that we try to highlight here is the result of our

research that indicates that it’s not just classrooms, it’s not just

teacher training, it’s not just numbers of students enrolled; there

are a range of access issues that have to do with how many schools

are built, how many kids are out of school, low literacy rates, especially for women, and lack of early-childhood development programs, like the Sesame Street programs I talked about earlier. But

then, these access problems have to be matched by investments in

quality. If we don’t have well-trained teachers and administrators,

if we don’t have systems to monitor education progress, if we don’t

have parental and community involvement in the school, and if we

don’t have pedagogy that increases student participation, that simply emphasizes rote learning, the education programs won’t achieve

the results we intend.

And, finally—and you were getting to this question with the previous panel, and Liz referred to it, as well—the programs have to

be relevant. The reason a lot of the kids aren’t in school, or the reason a lot of the kids drop out, is they simply don’t see any economic

advantage. So a lot of our programs have focused explicitly, on the

link between economic growth and jobs and relevant training.

The second sheet, then, talks about education as a moderating

influence, and talks about the kinds of strategies we’ve tried to

launch across the region. So we promote quality education and economic opportunities, increase education opportunities for unemployed and out-of-school youth. We’re not just focused on the kids

in school, but we’re focused on informal training programs for those

kids who are out of school, street kids and so forth, who might be

particular targets for terrorist recruitment.

Third, we’ve looked at providing alternative schools to radical

madrasas. We come out at the same point that the technical panel

talked to, that the best goal we can achieve is to support public

education and alternative education, and let the madrasa phenomenon wither, because the parents who are sending their kids

to madrasas are primarily sending them there because they don’t

see a good alternative.

Fourth, we’re trying to teach critical-thinking skills and tolerance, both in our early-childhood development programs and in the

public school system.

Fifth, we’re trying to increase access to education opportunities

through school repair and accelerated learning—these kind of programs are particularly critical in post-conflict situations, for examVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
57

ple, in Afghanistan, where girls missed so much schooling under

the Taliban; we’re trying to get them into accelerated training programs—provide training to bridge the school-to-work transition,

and improve education monitoring and information systems.

I’ll close with just two particular points. Your opening statement

talked about the fact that we’re spending only about 3 percent of

U.S. foreign-assistance dollars in education. We probably need to

provide the committee, with your permission, some additional numbers on that.

[The information referred to follows:]

PERCENT OF U.S. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE SPENT ON EDUCATION

The total Asia and the Near East (ANE) fiscal year 2005 budget (Economic Support Funds, ESF; Development Assistance, DA; Emergency Supplemental funding,

and IRRF apportionments) is $4.673 billion. Of this, $331.4 million or 8.6 percent

is for education programming. The fiscal year 2005 totals include $60 million in supplemental education funding for Afghanistan. The following table provides a country

breakdown of ESF, DA, Emergency Supplemental, and IRRF apportionment combined totals for education.

ASIA AND NEAR EAST EDUCATION BUDGET ($000)

Fiscal year

2002 total

Fiscal year

2003 total

Fiscal year

2004 total

Fiscal year

2005 total

Fiscal year

2006 total* Total

Afghanistan .................................. 6,500 8,400 107,405 97,937 97,000 317,242

Bangladesh ................................... 2,500 2,350 2,971 3,500 3,000 14,321

Burma ........................................... 3,000 1,500 1,500 1,000 1,000 8,000

Cambodia ..................................... 0 2,500 2,000 6,000 1,250 11,750

Egypt ............................................. 84,400 49,000 33,500 63,000 24,800 254,700

India ............................................. 2,658 4,008 8,912 7,580 6,700 29,858

Indonesia ...................................... 3,000 2,000 23,000 26,500 31,011 85,511

Iraq ............................................... 0 75,583 90,200 0 0 165,783

Jordon ........................................... 0 4,000 5,000 8,640 14,000 31,640

Lebanon ........................................ 4,000 3,100 4,200 4,000 4,000 19,300

Morocco ......................................... 1,428 1,528 2,000 14,640 12,400 31,996

Nepal ............................................ 0 0 811 392 392 1,595

Pakistan ........................................ 15,000 21,500 28,000 66,673 66,703 197,876

Philippines .................................... 0 2,000 4,000 9,680 6,680 22,360

Sri Lanka ...................................... 0 2,250 1,250 3,375 2,750 9,625

Vietnam ........................................ 350 600 0 0 0 950

West Bank/Gaza ........................... 0 2,800 2,200 8,700 11,000 24,700

Yemen ........................................... 4,800 7,898 3,270 4,996 12,703 33,667

ANE Regional ................................ 1,764 2,184 6,117 4,810 2,300 17,175

Total ANE ...................................... 129,400 193,201 326,336 331,423 297,689 1,278,049

* FY 2006 totals do not include all supplemental funding allocations.

Mr. KUNDER. We believe those numbers reflect the huge base, if

you will, that’s been established by the Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction programs over the last couple of years, and we think the

education expenditure is probably a little closer to 10 percent. Having said that, we agree with the basic assertion—I haven’t cleared

this statement; I’m not up here to request more funds without consulting with our OMB colleagues first—but we are talking about

launching, in 2007, what we call an Education for 21st Century

Jobs Initiative that would link together the basic education, the

skills training, and then bringing the private sector in so that the

jobs are relevant, so that the training and education are relevant

to 21st century jobs. That’s something we’ll want to talk to the

committee about.

58

And, second, in closing, we very much agree with the closing discussion that the chairman had with the last panel about the need

to do exchange programs. We cannot, no matter how much we increase funding, expect ourselves, the U.S. taxpayers, to build the

schools, print all the textbooks across the region. Even at the existing funding level, we’re probably spending about 50 cents per student, between Morocco and the Philippines. If we spent the entire

U.S. foreign-assistance program every year on this region, we’d

spend about $15 per student per year, and that’s not enough to

build the schools. Clearly, we have to get the governments mobilized.

What we’ve tried to do is come up with creative model programs,

like the parent-participation program that Ms. Cheney referred to

earlier, in Alexandria, Egypt, which we’re now rolling out across

Egypt. To do that, we’ve got to have good partners in the ministries. Dr. Bassem Awadallah is a perfect example of a Jordanian

who came to the United States for higher education. We need to

have those kind of partners.

In the early nineties, USAID, alone, was funding about 17,000

foreign students to come here for graduate or post-graduate work.

Now that number had declined to under 5,000. The State Department, through its exchange programs, has tried to compensate

somewhat, but the numbers aren’t backed up. And, most troubling,

we have all seen the numbers lately, that even the non-U.S.-Government-funded number of students coming to this country is declining, for a range of reasons. We’ve got to fix that problem.

We can do good model programs across the region, like Sesame

Street, like the girls’ and parent-participation program in Alexandria, but, ultimately, we’ve got to expect the governments of the region to take the models we’ve helped them develop and implement

them in their systems.

I would take respectful exception to what Senator Nelson said

earlier. The cash-support programs, the financial-support cashtransfer programs, like in Pakistan and Egypt, are not irrelevant,

because if we use these programs to engage in good policy dialog

with our colleagues, and then encourage them to roll out successful

model programs, they can make a valuable contribution for education.

So, thank you, again, for the opportunity to testify. These are

some of the things we’re doing that might be useful.

Thank you, sir.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kunder follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES KUNDER, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR ASIA AND

THE NEAR EAST, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC

I welcome the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the work of the

U.S. Agency for International Development in Asia and the Near East on the theme

of ‘‘Combating Terrorism through Education: The Near East and South Asian Experience.’’ We appreciate the importance of education as a force for peace and

progress, and welcome this opportunity to share the experiences of our ongoing education programs in these two critical subregions.

USAID works in 28 countries in Asia and the Near East—from Morocco to the

Philippines and as far north as Mongolia. The region is home to 64 percent of the

world’s population and two-thirds of the world’s poor. Across the region, there are

many religious and cultural traditions. Some of the countries working to address

terrorist threats have Muslim majorities. Some do not, such as Nepal and Sri

Lanka.

59

Understanding and responding to the drivers of terrorism in all the countries we

work in, requires a good knowledge of local conditions and putting in place programs that are directly relevant to those issues. Our field missions give USAID a

capacity to act effectively to make appropriate education interventions. They do so

within a framework of complementary investments which support stability, openness, and economic opportunity. Education alone is not ‘‘the answer’’ but it is absolutely critical to success.

I am proud that our many investments have shown positive results in improving

access, quality, and the responsiveness of national education systems. This statement outlines some of the problems we face, some of the work we have done and

notes accomplishments. There is an array of responses that can and do work. Oftentimes, in concert with host countries, other donors and the private sector, good ideas

can be scaled up. In many settings, the resources are not there for the kind of robust response that is required to provide national level coverage.

Given the current knowledge deficit in the Near East and South Asia regions,

education is one of our highest priorities. USAID’s program approach supports the

9/11 Commission Report recommendation that ‘‘the United States should reach out

to young people and offer them knowledge and hope.’’ The current education challenges in the region are: The lack of access to functioning schools, low quality and

irrelevant curriculum, a large number of out-of-school youths, high illiteracy rates,

particularly for females, and unemployed youth without the necessary skills to find

gainful employment. We have responded to these challenges by focusing our programs on increasing equitable access to education opportunities, improving the quality and relevance of education, improving literacy and strengthening workforce

skills. We are monitoring the impact our programs—we have enrolled over 170,000

(56 percent girls) accelerated learning students in Afghanistan and 69,214 students

are enrolled in literacy courses in Pakistan. We have printed and distributed 27 million textbooks in Afghanistan. We have recognized the important role of information

technology in changing the way education is delivered and incorporated in our programs. We are encouraging the use of public-private partnerships and are collaborating closely with MEPI, Peace Corps, and other agencies to leverage our impact

and to avoid duplication.

Since 2001, USAID’s education portfolio in the Near East and South Asian region

has dramatically expanded from 1 to 13 programs. The budget for education in the

following 13 countries rose from $99.5 million in fiscal year 2002 to nearly $274.5

million in fiscal year 2004: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, India, Iraq, Jordan,

Lebanon, Morocco, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Bank/Gaza, and Yemen. Four

of the USAID Missions housing these programs—Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen,

and Iraq—opened recently. We established them to handle priorities arising out of

U.S. foreign policy goals and ongoing development challenges in the region.

As noted in the 9/11 Commission Report, the Muslim world has fallen behind the

west politically and economically for the past three centuries. Governments find it

challenging to meet the population’s daily needs, including education. This has created an environment where young Muslims lack the tools and opportunities to effect

change in intolerant political regimes. This has also created an environment where

disaffected groups can be more easily turned against elements of western culture

and institutions. Creating an environment of opportunity, tolerance, and greater

openness to women and other marginalized groups must come from within Muslim

societies themselves. The United States can help support the development of a more

tolerant and open society by supporting quality education opportunities.

In response to the weakness of many national education systems, alternative

schools have emerged, such as madrassahs, a small proportion of which spawn extremism. USAID, regional experts, and researchers agree that providing access to

quality education for children and out-of-school youth of vulnerable populations is

one deterrent to radical or fundamentalist ideology which may lead to support for,

or participation in, acts of terrorism. As stated in the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, education programs diminish the underlying conditions that terrorists seek to exploit, particularly in rural, isolated areas. Access to a quality and

relevant education provides children and youth with independent and critical thinking skills, leadership and life skills, and exposure to democratic values.

Although the global commitment to ‘‘Education for All’’ have led to increased enrollments and general improvements in the quality of life, educational quality, and

increased learning opportunities in the Near East and South Asia, many countries

in the region continue to struggle to meet the population’s education needs.

60

CURRENT EDUCATION CHALLENGES

Current education challenges in the regions include a lack of access to functioning

schools, a large number of out-of-school youth, high absenteeism and drop out rates,

low transition rates from primary to secondary school, and high illiteracy rates.

High illiteracy rates, especially for women, are a critical problem facing the region. Key countries such as Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, and Morocco have 40–60-percent illiteracy rates and illiterate populations larger than 10

million. In the Arab States alone, women account for nearly two-thirds of the illiterate population.

Another critical gender concern has to do with large numbers of disaffected youth,

mainly boys, who may come to form the primary social base for radical Islamist

movements. Without immediate alternatives, the current breakdown of conventional

institutions of family, schools, and community (compounded by increasing urbanization and bleak employment prospects) will continue to foster youth alienation, a

sense of fatalism and lack of dignity. Unemployed and disenfranchised youth form

a restive pool of recruits for extremist groups.

Compounding this problem is the curriculum, which is often outdated and irrelevant to socio-economic needs. Poorly qualified and trained teachers and school administrators are recurring problems. The lack of reliable systems to assess and monitor education imposes another obstacle to solving the problems. Finally, resources

for education support fall short of the need.

The Asia and Near East region has experienced a drastic demographic shift and

now houses the largest generation of youth ever—368 million young people (age 15–

24) in the 19 countries where USAID has a presence. The youth bulge puts enormous pressure on governments with limited capacity and resources to provide education and employment opportunities. The quality of education is low and too many

students leave school without the skills and knowledge needed to find gainful employment.

The following section presents USAID’s strategy for helping the nations in the

Near East and South Asia overcome their education challenges. Driving this strategy is the recognized need to help nations in the region open access to information,

create learning environments that encourage critical thinking skills and democratic

practices, and provide education that will lead to gainful employment. Target populations include girls, women, and disenfranchised youth.

USAID’S EDUCATION STRATEGY

To prevail over these challenges, USAID’s strategy for education programs is to

provide learners the opportunity to gain the general skills and knowledge needed

to function effectively in all aspects of life. This is done through programs that focus

on:

1. Increasing equitable access to education opportunities: Targeting groups that

have been marginalized in the education system, such as out-of-school youth, girls,

and disabled children, and those who have been impacted by conflict or disaster is

of primary importance for ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities and

the continuation of skills development. In post-conflict and post-disaster situations,

transitioning children and youth into learning environments as soon as possible to

normalize their lives is a priority.

2. Improving the quality of education and providing more relevant education opportunities: Improving the quality and relevance of education is a pivotal goal in

that it encourages children to attend and to stay in school. It also offers the additional benefits of workforce development. This is particularly important in countries

that lack relevant education materials, qualified teachers, and accountability for

student learning in the school system.

3. Improving literacy and strengthening workforce skills: Education programs that

improve literacy rates, develop curriculum, human capacities, and livelihood skills,

and aim to link skill development with employment opportunities; particularly in

areas with high youth unemployment are another priority for the region.

INCREASING ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION: ACHIEVING RESULTS

In order to respond to the multifaceted educational challenges confronting the region, USAID supports a variety of education programs which include both formal

and nonformal education efforts. Support for improving the formal basic education

system spanning preprimary to secondary school and which also encompasses literacy and training programs, are the primary focus of USAID’s support. Increasingly, school-based efforts linked to employment, and higher education and univerVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
61

sity programs are also critical components of our overall approach to provide technical skills and expand cultural understanding in the region.

To increase access to education opportunities, particularly for vulnerable populations, USAID supports scholarship programs, nonformal education activities, and

school construction and rehabilitation. For example, in Pakistan, more than 2,873

literacy centers have opened and in a project cofunded by the Japanese, 130 schools

are in the process of being rehabilitated to improve school access for children in Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Frontier Regions (FR) which are remote and border Afghanistan. In Iraq we have rehabilitated over 2,400 schools. In

Yemen we are working with the government on school construction and renovation,

equipment and supplies for teachers and children, and teacher training in remote

areas. These have been promising strategies for attracting out-of-school youth to

classrooms.

In key post-conflict programs, there is demonstrated success in school enrollments; for example, over 170,000 students (56 percent girls) are enrolled in accelerated learning classes in Afghanistan. These kinds of programs are highly visible and

well-received as they flexibly address immediate needs, and provide a full primary

school cycle in 3 years. They also target those who have been historically neglected

by the primary school system. In Pakistan and Yemen, helping to provide improved

schooling systems in the most isolated communities and involving community members in the rehabilitation and management of schools have been successful.

In Afghanistan, 10,000 students, largely out-of-school children and youth, will be

trained in sustainable literacy, numeracy, and life skills through the Afghan Literacy Initiative & Community Empowerment Program. The programs often combine

literacy skills with relevant labor market needs.

Teacher training is one key area for quality improvement. USAID education programs work with teachers to provide both in-service and preservice training that

modernizes teaching methods so that they impart critical thinking and democratic

values. Training often integrates content with introducing more active learning and

child-centered methods. Over 15,000 teachers in Pakistan have received this type

of training, as well as 33,000 teachers in Iraq. We have also printed and distributed

27 million primary and secondary textbooks in Afghanistan, and 8.7 million revised

math and science books in Iraq. Finally, radio-based teacher training in Afghanistan

has been received positively by teachers in 17 provinces.

Integral to the success of an education program is to make quality improvements

and increase the relevance of the educational content to socio-economic realities. In

Jordan USAID is enhancing the curriculum for a new Management and Information

Stream track in secondary school to prepare youth for the workforce.

Preparing learners at an early age for education is important. USAID support will

enable innovative ‘‘Sesame Street’’ series in Bangladesh and Egypt to reach large

audiences in quest of this goal. As many as 4 million preschool-age children will

watch Sisimpur in Bangladesh, which premiered on April 15, Alam Simsim reaches

86 percent of rural Egyptian children and 45 percent of their mothers. Program

themes include learning to be tolerant, practicing good hygiene, and getting a head

start in school. Furthermore, early childhood development programs increase parent

involvement in the child’s education and school involvement. In Jordan, underprivileged families now have access to kindergartens, and in Pakistan 47,500 children

and their parents have benefited from an early childhood project in the FATA district.

Quality is also improved by strengthening involvement of the local communities

in their schools (ex. training community school management committees) and making parents and students more responsible for their education (ex. developing school

improvement plans). School management is improved at the local level, and experiences in various regions have influenced the way host country decisionmakers view

solutions for the education issues. Such initiatives are underway in Bangladesh,

Pakistan, Egypt, Morocco, and Yemen. Also, in Jordan, merging Information Technology and curriculum reform has been successful. This program has also brought

private sector involvement into the area of curricula reform so that it better provides students with an education that links to market demands and needs.

As mentioned earlier, the growing population of uneducated, unemployed youth

is severely straining government efforts in all countries to provide adequate education and employment opportunities. USAID recognizes the importance of linking

access to quality education to the 21st century workforce demands. In countries

such as Pakistan, India, Jordan, Egypt, and Morocco, USAID is linking education

to the real needs of the job market, by giving students the adaptable and portable

skills needed to confront the changing workplace, especially information and communication technology (ICT) training. Jordan is developing e-Learning curriculum

62

modules and upgrading teachers’ skills in support of teaching and learning to improve the transition of gaduates from school to a work career.

USAID fosters cultural understanding, openness, tolerance, and critical thinking

with education exchange programs and scholarships. In Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, providing scholarship support to students from disadvantaged social and economic backgrounds to enroll in American education institutions have been successful. By the mid-1990s, more than 3,000 Jordanian students had won USAID scholarships to study at United States universities and the American University in Beirut.

Many of them are leaders today. Five of Jordan’s Cabinet Ministers in 1987 and

three Ministers in the 2002 Cabinet had studied under these scholarships.

Furthermore, in-country post-secondary education programs support institutions

to meet international standards and educate young people and academic professionals so that they can participate in the global economy. We support linkages between American universities and universities. These range from university linkage

partnerships, such as the five United States-Iraqi higher education partnerships

currently underway, to supporting the establishment of the American University of

Afghanistan, a private, independent university.

Finally, programs that model best practices in education on a small scale in order

to demonstrate the positive effects of change has also proven successful. Pilot programs mobilize support from the public and from within the ranks of the local and

national government officials who are charged with administering and delivering

education services. Egypt’s New School Program in Upper Egypt was a pilot that

proved effective in increasing girls’ enrollment. The lessons learned are being used

to ‘‘scale up’’ models of quality primary education with an emphasis on girls and

learner-centered teaching methodologies. The models will be applied nationally

through the new USAID-supported Education Reform Program. These positive experiences tend to galvanize support for broader change and have the potential to impact the educational system beyond the local environments in which the projects operate.

MEASURING THE IMPACT OF OUR PROGRAMS

Despite the growing security challenges, our education programs have brought

about substantial and measurable results. USAID measures program impact and

success in a variety of ways, commensurate with its diverse portfolio.

One validation of our success happens when we see many of our ‘‘models’’ adopted

and brought to scale by host countries, relying on local, other donor, and private

sector resources. Unfortunately, the capacity to do that across the region is constrained. Our recent education initiative has increased the U.S. commitment to education but much more needs to be done.

At the project level, USAID measures the impact of providing education and training opportunities to out-of-school youth and vulnerable populations through student

enrollment. Access and equity measurements include the number of students completing primary and secondary school, and increases in the percentage of girls and

women enrolled in USAID-funded schools, literacy, and life skills classes. Using

baseline data as the starting point, gender disaggregated enrollment numbers in

USAID schools are tracked on a quarterly basis by the implementing partners on

the ground. USAID has enrolled over 170,000 students (56 percent girls) in our accelerated learning program in Afghanistan.

Many of our programs are aimed at nonformal education programs aimed at improving literacy, especially for women, and training opportunities for out-of-school

youth. USAID gauges enrollment increases and differentiates between students participating in programs as opposed to completing the required courses. In Pakistan,

69,214 students are enrolled in USAID funded literacy courses and 17,850 have

graduated from USAID’s literacy centers. This process enables us to gauge not only

enrollment increases and completion rates, but also dropout and repetition rates.

Different measures are used to gauge nontraditional programs; success in measuring educational television programs is gauged by viewership: A 2003 study in

Egypt concluded that Sesame Street (Alam Simsim) reaches 86 percent of rural

Egyptian children under 8 years of age and 45 percent of their mothers. In Bangladesh, where Sisimpur aired on April 15, viewership will be regularly monitored

and reported.

In response to the poor quality of educational facilities and the need to provide

quality alternatives to radical madrassahs, USAID tracks numbers of schools constructed and rehabilitated, and nature of the effort. This process differentiates between USAID’s work in building stand-alone schools as opposed to rehabilitating a

single classroom in any given school. In Egypt, for example, since 1975, USAID has

tracked the construction of more than 2,000 new schools and 4,000 classrooms; in

63

Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA), USAID will be tracking new

school construction, the surveys and designs for 112 of which have been completed.

In addition to infrastructure, USAID also provides students with textbooks and

learning materials to increase retention and enrollment. USAID tracks both the production and dissemination of materials to ensure that numbers of textbooks delivered are commensurate with numbers printed; in Afghanistan we have thus far

printed and distributed 27 million textbooks.

USAID’s teacher training and curriculum development programs are aimed at

promoting tolerance, building democratic values, and fostering critical thinking in

students and teachers. Measurements of educational quality include indicators of

teacher quality, system efficiency, and learner achievements. Learner achievement

can be measured by the number of basic education students who acquire critical

thinking and problem-solving skills by administering pre- and post-achievement

tests. In Pakistan, teaching methodologies improved by 97 percent (based on classroom observation by experts), and student attendance is 10 percent higher, on average, in participating schools. Monitoring data suggest that teachers are using materials effectively 95 percent of the time.

USAID tracks enrollment and successful completion of teachers in training classes

in both in-service and pre-service programs. In innovative teacher training programs, such as the radio-based teacher training program for Afghanistan primary

school teachers, teacher training is tracked by numbers of teachers enrolled in the

class; currently 10,000 primary school teachers have enrolled for this radio-based

teacher training. USAID measures and tracks progress in this area through enrollment and completion numbers and qualitative assessments that include interviews,

questionnaires, and classroom observation.

In Morocco indicators such as percent of target beneficiaries employed post-intervention, percent of graduates with portable and adaptable skills, and replication of

school-to-work modules in areas beyond the immediate target are used to monitor

learning improvements.

Finally, another indicator of impact is the adoption by Ministries of Education of

USAID-supported efforts for countrywide expansion. This has happened in Jordan

with early childhood education programs, and in Egypt, with modeling quality

schools including using learner centered teaching.

By supporting public participation in education through NGO development and

community-elected trustee boards, USAID’s education programs encourage democratic activities. To measure the impact of these programs, USAID tracks community satisfaction with the performance of USAID-supported community-based organizations and the number of decisions made and implemented at the community

level.

By improving the quality of education, and making it more accessible and relevant

to the workforce, USAID’s education interventions improve the employability of

youth, lay an important foundation of support for economic growth and development

of democratic institutions, and ensure a more equitable distribution of education.

ADJUSTING EDUCATION PROGRAMS

USAID has adjusted its education strategies to create a healthier learning environment for children, youth, and adults in the Near East and South Asia on the

basis of feedback from the most successful programs in the region.

USAID recognizes that Information Technology (IT) is one way to change the way

that students learn and teachers teach. There are now more efforts to link IT to

schools and curriculum. Internet access is limited in the Arabic speaking world, resulting in a knowledge gap that negatively impacts both economic and political development, making Arab populations less competitive in the world economy. By providing future leaders and adults with increased access to the Internet, these students are exposed to many more ideas and increases cultural understanding. Teachers can use IT in the classroom to encourage critical thought and democratic values.

Technology also helps to reach larger audiences, as in the radio-based training for

teachers in Afghanistan and Sesame Street episodes in Egypt and Bangladesh.

ANE has also learned that public-private partnerships are important to support

education programs. USAID/ANE has committed $10 million to a regional Education and Employment Alliance which involves Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, and Philippines to increase private sector participation in education. Activities mainly include working with local and multinational organization to provide resources to upgrade schools and provide technology inputs for schools. These activities aim to give children and youth a higher quality basic education and an education that leads to livelihood skills and gainful employment. As of January 2005,

64

outreach activities continue with multinational companies, including Cisco, GE,

Intel, Lucent, Microsoft, Nokia, Pearson, Unocal, and First Data Western Union.

USAID has also been more directly working with host governments to make comprehensive reforms to education systems. Holistic changes have a broader impact in

that they reach all levels from the students and parents, to administrators at the

local and national levels. This systemic approach for improving education with Ministries of Education will lead to long-term improvements that can be sustained.

Finally, USAID continues to refine programs to reach the most vulnerable populations. Those who have been marginalized from the education systems are primary

targets for our programs. In the Near East and South Asia regions, illiterate adults,

out-of-school youth, and marginalized children are the most vulnerable to the messages of terrorists. For this reason, USAID works closely with the State Department

on the Broader Middle East and North Africa initiative.

COLLABORATING WITH MEPI

Under the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), managed by the State Department, USAID administers a variety of activities across the MEPI pillar areas

of economic reform, political reform, education reform, and women’s empowerment.

The MEPI education pillar supports education systems that enable all people, especially girls, to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in today’s

economy and improve the quality of their lives and that of their families. MEPI and

USAID have similar education goals: Access, Quality, and Skills Development which

makes coordination between USAID and MEPI programs both essential, and synergistic.

USAID has collaborated with MEPI in a variety of projects to jointly fund programs to establish United States-Middle East university partnerships to strengthen

programs in such areas as education, business/economics, journalism, and information and communications technology.

In fiscal year 2003, USAID/Egypt completed the integration of the MEPI strategy

into a new program design that was launched in 2004 to support the Egypt Government’s education reform initiatives. USAID also began implementing its first MEPI

book project by distributing supplementary reading materials to 3,000 classrooms in

Alexandria.

In Jordan, MEPI is funding e-Learning modules for the English as a Second Language and Civics for the Jordan Education Initiative and the USAID mission monitors and manages some or this entire program in country.

In Morocco, MEPI’s literacy initiatives complement current USAID efforts to improve the quality of schools. The literacy program consists of two parts: A 10-month

basic literacy training program for 2,000 women that also includes health and nutrition literacy; and a 6-month ‘‘post’’ literacy training program for a selected number

of participants (approximately 80), that teaches simple business skills as a basis for

income generation activities. The program also includes assistance and coaching for

the creation and initial management of small businesses.

In Yemen, USAID works closely with MEPI and the Public Diplomacy Office of

the United States Embassy to design and implement an Internet communication

and collaborative learning network for 20 high schools through Yemen with each

other and with schools in the United States.

With the development of a new education strategy, the USAID education team ensured that its new strategy aligned with MEPI pillars. Additionally, the education

team participates in strategy and planning meetings and provides technical comments and assistance for the review of MEPI education proposals.

USAID is also working with the MEPI office to support key tenets of the G–8

partnership with countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa (BMENA).

Several initiatives have developed under this partnership, one of which is on improving literacy in the region. USAID is providing policy and programmatic direction for this BMENA literacy initiative and coordinating its efforts directly with

MEPI and the U.S. Department of Education.

In conclusion, I would like to reassure the committee that education will continue

to be a high priority in the region. While our current education approach responds

to the overall goal of moderating radical intolerance and anti-Western ideologies, we

also recognize that education needs to be complemented by a multisectoral strategy

that fosters socio-political stability and economic growth. To build upon our current

successes and take our existing programs to scale, we have launched a public-private partnership initiative focusing on creating training opportunities for youth employment in the workforce. While we will continue to monitor developments to ensure that we are ahead of the curve in addressing emerging issues, we will not rest

65

on the laurels of our successes—it is far too important to the well-being of our Nation.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Kunder.

Let me make a comment, based upon an Aspen Institute breakfast that occurred a couple of years ago. An author and participant

in U.S. Government a while back, Jessica Stern, had written a

book about her experience interviewing some male students at

madrasa schools. One of the comments that she made at the breakfast, and, likewise, that she portrays in her book, is a chilling revelation, but maybe has a great deal of truth. She was asking, Why

do young men in Pakistan—these are the people that she was dealing with—contemplate suicidal conduct? What happens to somebody, who is very young, who, at least from our standpoint, has

decades of life still to live?

At least, from the interviews with these young men, some of

them, she gained the impression that some come together, and it’s

almost a fraternal experience in the madrasa schools, in which they

come to a conclusion there really is no hope for them in this life.

They see no prospects, in terms of political expression, no prospects

of jobs, no prospects, really, of much education, beyond whatever

they happen to be involved in. And along come—not into every one

of the madrasa schools, but into some—persons who suggest, ‘‘The

next life will surely be better. As a matter of fact, we have an answer for you in a new world. And, as a matter of fact, a very important action method of getting to this may very well be your own

willingness to give your life, a suicidal mission in behalf of that

faith that will sustain you and bring you something else.’’

Now, for many Americans, this may seem farfetched and extreme. We find it hard to contemplate. But, on the other hand, Ms.

Stern was making the point that—not very many people, but if a

percentage of persons even contemplate such conduct because of despair and total hopelessness, why they have a problem, but we also

have a problem. And all of the educational attempts that we’ve

been describing this morning are not addressed to a very minute

percentage, perhaps, of young males in Pakistan who might contemplate suicidal conduct and try to work it out under the guidance of whoever. But, at the same time, Americans do need to come

to, I think, an understanding of the vast amount of pessimism, despair, and difficulty among so many young people. As we’ve heard

today—whether it’s the age of 25 or 21 or 18—well over half of the

country may be in many of these bleak situations.

Therefore, what we are involved in has a strong humanitarian

quality. It should, and always has, as American educators, American Government has reached out. But one of the reasons why we

have been reaching out more vigorously is the whole change in our

foreign policy after 9/11. We thought the seas were big enough to

protect us. And we found they were not. But young people who had

valid visas—some of them, sadly enough, educational visas—were

involved in 9/11 activities in this city and in New York. And the

world changed.

Now, I make this point because we have reacted. And the programs that you have outlined today are comprehensive in scope.

But again and again in this committee, as well as elsewhere in the

Congress, we will find some colleagues who will say, quite rightly,

66

that we have a lot of work to do here at home. We’re debating our

educational budgets now. What should be the Federal component

of that? Or what should be the governmental component at the

State and local levels? How are Americans doing? And so forth.

So, we come, and we point out what we must improve in this

country. No Child Left Behind. You mentioned Secretary Spellings

and her advocacy, which has been remarkable. The President’s.

And yet this is a struggle for us, as we disaggregate statistics in

our own country of students who are African-American, students of

Hispanic backgrounds, students of color in other backgrounds.

I mention this because in this committee there’s a compatibility,

in talking about students abroad. There is, perhaps, a compatibility

in some other committees as well. But the case, in part, is national

security; in part, humanitarian. But then, in part, it comes back to

something we were discussing earlier on with the first panel, and

I would like your reflections on, too. And that is, regarding our exchange programs, or other opportunities available that require

visas. In the past, many foreign students and researchers were admitted, for example, to Purdue University in my State, to engineering programs, and to NIH programs—we heard from those authorities on April 4 at our student/research visa task force roundtable—

and these students enriched our society enormously.

Now, many of these young people, students and researchers

alike, at some point return to their home countries and they offer

leadership within their own education systems, such as the Minister from Jordan whom we heard from today, as well as fully

three-quarters of the Jordanian Cabinet. So, if the United States

is not participating fully in these programs—because of national security concerns—where are future leaders gaining the inspiration,

if not with an experience here that they find to be a good one? And

how will we ever succeed in public diplomacy without having public

diplomats who are Jordanians, Pakistanis, and the like?

These seem to me to be issues that are really gripping this committee. Let me share, anecdotally, as I attended the trustee meeting at Denison University—my alma mater—over the weekend, the

admissions office claimed that last year at Denison, a small college

of 2,100 students, that there were 90 applicants from India 2 years

ago, but last year there were only 26. Now, it could be that, for

some reason, Indians decided that Denison was not the place for

them, all in 1 year. But the fact is, without going tediously through

the statistics country by country, the discouragement level has

been profound. Even though, on the aggregate side, we’ve heard, in

our task force, that student enrollment worldwide is off only maybe

3 percent, as you add up everything; clearly, the dropoff is severe.

Now, we have security problems. I mentioned the other side of

the coin. Students had visas, and they came and bombed the

United States. On the other hand, in trying to change that situation, we have, I think, radically changed the picture, so that even

as we have the output of programs and moneys that you suggested

today, the personnel in the countries, the indigenous leadership

that may carry it forward, we may be faltering, unless we are

thoughtful about this.

How do we invigorate the exchange programs, or create more of

them? How important are they? Have you both been working on

67

these visa problems? You can’t do it all by yourselves, but, clearly,

within the administration, some changes are occurring in rulemaking and in provisions so that times of inspection or examination or various other processes are not being entirely removed, but

they’re being modified so that a more user-friendly situation is

being created. Can you describe, with any optimism, how this

whole business might be going?

Ms. Cheney, do you have some thoughts?

Ms. CHENEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I share, completely,

your view, and the administration shares your view, that exchanges are critically important and that, whether you look at the

military-to-military exchanges we’ve historically undertaken, or the

exchanges through our colleges and universities, and down to the

high school level, it clearly helps to build friendships, and those are

very important as we, you know, pursue our foreign-policy objectives.

I think that the situation has improved. I think that in the immediate aftermath of September 11, for, as you noted, completely

understandable reasons, we, you know, were faced with the need

to clamp down and to review our system and to ensure that we had

a better system in place so that the people that wished us ill were

not able to get into the country. In the process of doing that, there

were, you know, numerous examples of students who had gone

home for the summer, weren’t able to return, people who were

caught in that.

I think that, as I have traveled the region and talked to people,

there is still concern about it. I do think that it’s improving. And

I do think people understand that our intent is never to cause offense, it’s never to prevent students from studying in the United

States—we recognize how important that is—but we have to maintain, obviously, our own national security concerns.

One of the things that Maura Harty, who handles consular affairs for us at the Department, has been very effective in doing is

traveling across the region, and she’s very interested and willing

to go into these countries and have large meetings with groups of

nongovernmental organizations, the governments, to talk about

what the new processes are. And I would be happy to come back

to you with more details on, sort of, specifically, the improvements

we’ve made. But I do think it’s very important that we have exchanges.

One of the issues we deal with on exchanges is, sort of, What is

the balance? Given that there are limited resources, as there are

for everything, determining whether it makes sense to put those resources into providing scholarships for 4 years or for post-graduate

study for a small number of people, or looking to do more scholarships for a shorter period of time for a larger number of people.

And I don’t think we have, sort of, scientifically determined what

the right balance is. I think we’re trying to do both.

I think that one of the reasons it’s so important for us to reach

out with—sort of, to larger numbers of people with shorter time periods spent in the United States goes back to this issue that you

began with, in terms of, How do you get to those people that are

the most likely recruits for the terrorists? And in many cases

they’re people who perhaps don’t have English, who have not comVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
68

pleted secondary school, or clearly, are not in university, and I

think those that are the people that need exposure to the United

States. And it’s why we’ve started a range of new programs we’re

calling microscholarships, which provide English language training

and then enable them—give them the skills to compete for other

programs we’re funding so they can be student leaders, be student

interns to come to the United States, but so that we reach out to

a broader range of people.

The CHAIRMAN. That’s true. How many people might be involved

in those programs, the microscholarships?

Ms. CHENEY. We’ll have to get you the numbers.

The CHAIRMAN. If you would, that would—that’s——

Ms. CHENEY. I think it’s very important.

The CHAIRMAN [continuing]. I think, an insight that we haven’t

heard about before, and I——

Ms. CHENEY. Well——

The CHAIRMAN [continuing]. Think that’s very important.

Ms. CHENEY. We are also expanding it significantly. It’s a program—it started just last year as a pilot program——

The CHAIRMAN. I see.

Ms. CHENEY [continuing]. In a couple of the Near East countries,

and it’s been very successful and very effective way for us to reach

people we wouldn’t, otherwise. So we’re going to be putting more

money into that from the Partnership Initiative this year, and we’d

be happy to come back up with the specific numbers we’ve reached

already.

The CHAIRMAN. Great.

Ms. CHENEY. One final point I think is, when you talk about the

issue of the attraction of terrorists and the attraction of extremists

for young people, in a number of countries in the region you have

a phenomenon where political activity has been banned on campuses, but religious groups can operate on campuses. And it’s something that I think we all need to work to, to open up that system.

You know, now, in a number of countries, if you’re 18 years old,

and you’re a university student, and you feel, like most university

students do, that you want to change the world, your outlet for

doing that is the Islamist groups, and that’s clearly not a healthy

situation for those countries or for us. And so, it’s why there is

such an important synergy between our political reform efforts and

our education efforts, so that we can help expand the groups that

those people can have access to and can give a voice to.

The CHAIRMAN. This may not be a useful analogy, because, obviously, Germany is a wealthy country, but in 1983 when the United

States was attempting to diplomatically work with the Germans to

support the NATO resolution to put Pershing missiles in Germany,

I was one of those that was sent to Germany to do some missionary

work of that sort with German institutions. The late Senator John

Heinz, was very, very helpful when I got back, in introducing legislation that created the Congress-Bundestag Exchange Program,

which commenced in 1983 as a part of that diplomacy, but it continues, with well over 10,000 students—they long ago passed that

mark, and are now heading toward 20,000—from both sides, about

500 a year, from the grassroots of Germany and the United States

go to the grassroots of the other country for 1 year. It’s a high

69

school program, as opposed to post-graduates or something of this

variety. Even after you have 20,000 Germans and Americans over

the course of time, this is a small percentage of either country, but,

nevertheless, just getting to your point, the microbusiness, here are

people who suddenly, on both sides, have to begin thinking about

another language, about living with families, about the hinterland,

not the capitals. Perhaps other countries could not match this level

of exchange that we now have with Germany. Just take Jordan,

which we’ve been talking about today. Jordanians might say, ‘‘Well,

we’d be hard-pressed to support American exchange students in

Jordan, in the same way you might support Jordanians in the

United States.’’

I don’t want to make too much of a stretch of this, but I’m wondering whether that model, the Congress-Bundestag Exchange Program, offers some possibilities so that this is perceived, literally, as

one from each of the congressional districts. And that was one of

the ideas of Congress-Bundestag. We have 435 districts and 100

Senators, so, ipso facto, about 500-and-some Americans ought to be

eligible to go to Germany, and they have districts and so forth.

I’m intrigued by what you’re saying. I wonder whether somebody

is stimulated to ask that question or to ask you to study what

might be in the cards, so that we will have individual programs tailored to each country and there would be individual responses from

countries. Perhaps we have become equally excited about their initiatives, as with Millennium Challenge. We’re offering incentives.

I have found, I’m sure, as you have, in my travels, that countries

want to get on the list, they want to be a part of the 16 countries

chosen to participate in the Millennium Challenge program, or, at

least, on the waiting list. That may be totally improbable, because

they sort of understand that this is a remarkable way of sharing,

without giving up sovereignty, of using indigenous resources and

leadership, and still meeting what we think are important standards—freedom of the press, enterprise, women’s rights, things of

these sorts.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chairman, I think that’s exactly right. And I

think that it’s very important—we have focused on having students

from these countries come to the United States, but I think that,

too often, it’s true that we, in the United States, view all of these

countries—we call it ‘‘the region,’’ or ‘‘the regions,’’ and we talk

about it as though it’s a unified whole, when, in fact, each country

is very different.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Ms. CHENEY. And I think that having American students visit

these countries and study in these countries really helps to improve

our knowledge base about what’s happening in each country.

When I was in Morocco, last week, there was a group of American high school students there meeting with a group of Moroccan

high school students, you know, doing, basically, a model United

Nations, talking about ways that we can move forward on reform

and on the peace process. And, on both sides, when you get to meet

somebody face to face, it really does help to destroy the stereotypes

that exist. So, I think it’s——

The CHAIRMAN. Terrific.

Ms. CHENEY [continuing]. Very important.

70

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Kunder, with USAID and the budget and the

organization that you have, are you able to identify to Members of

the Congress the mission that USAID is performing? I do not necessarily seek to break it out from everything else that you are

doing, but, at the same time, there is certainly a constituency of

interest in what we’re talking about today. Your charts are helpful

in giving the objectives, but do you also have statistics, data, that

you would give to Members who wanted to inform themselves more

comprehensively about what you’re doing? Without violating administration tenets, could you give some hint as to, if we were to

invest more money, where would it be wise to look? What kind of

things should we be discussing in this committee as we try to gain

a constituency of consent with our Members in the body, as a

whole?

Mr. KUNDER. As you might well imagine, sir, we probably have

more data than you can possibly want, but I think what might be

useful is, we do have a country-by-country breakdown of the types

of initiatives we’re doing in each country in the education and

training field. We’d be glad to provide that to the committee. And

then if there are some issues of interest we could focus in on and

provide more in-depth information. So the information is definitely

available.

I just want to thank you for saying what you said about the

United States humanitarian interest in the region, because, naturally, we’ve focused in on the issue at hand today, which is combating terrorism, but I think the American people do honestly care

that men and women, and boys and girls, succeed across the Asia

and Near East Region. That’s what makes us the kind of country

that does invite people to come here and learn something about our

values, and I think that’s the kind of message we want to send, as

well.

But we have the information available. We’ll make that available

initially, a breakout of our country programs, and then if you want

to focus on more detail, we’ll be glad to provide it.

[The information referred to follows:]

EDUCATION INITIATIVES BY COUNTRY

Education initiatives are designed to meet the needs of the people and overcome

the various challenges within each country context. Below is a chart that describes

the complexity of improving education in the ANE region in three specific areas of

access, quality, and relevance.

COMPLEXITY OF THE EDUCATION CHALLENGE

Access Quality Relevance

• Large numbers of out-of-school children and youth.

• Insufficient access to quality schooling alternatives.

• Low literacy rates, especially for

women.

• Lack of early childhood education

opportunities.

• Poorly trained teachers and administrators.

• Lack of systems to assess and monitor education.

• Inadequate community and parental

involvement in schools.

• Pedagogy focuses on role memorization, leading to lack of critical

thinking skills.

• Outdated and inappropriate curricula

for the job market.

• Large numbers of underemployed

youth without skills needed for workforce.

• Inadequate links and training opportunities for global market.

• Inadequate links with private sector

for market-driven training.

Within this challenging context, education initiatives have had many successes.

Below is an illustrative overview of some of the ways USAID has had regional imVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
71

pact in moderating terrorism through education. Below are the results to some key

education indicators organized in the same three-prong typology as above.

Illustrative Regional Overview

Access Quality Relevance

• Built or rehabilitated 15,000 schools

in 10 countries.

• Currently, there are 720,000 students

in Accelerated Learning programs in

Afghanistan and Iraq.

• 165,000 women, girls, and boys now

literate in Afghanistan, Egypt, Morocco, and Pakistan.

• 4,000 literacy and/or community centers opened in Afghanistan, Egypt,

Morocco, and Pakistan.

• Sesame Street reaches over 8.5 million children (not including parents)

in Egypt and Bangladesh.

• Support for early childhood education

reaching approximately 120,000 students in Bangladesh, Jordan, and

Pakistan.

• 5,500 students from 10 ANE countries were provided scholarships for

long-term study in the United States

and other countries.

• 120,000 pre-school, primary, and

secondary school teachers trained in

8 countries.

• Approximately 50 million textbooks

printed in Afghanistan and Iraq.

• 50,000 back to school kits distributed to teachers in Afghanistan and

Iraq.

• In 7 countries, Education Management Information Systems (EMIS)

support and development used to

better monitor education-related

progress.

• 1,100 ‘‘Model Schools’’ to exemplify

the importance of girls’ access to

education, technology improvements

in schools, relevant curricula, and

active teaching methods in 6 countries.

• 40,000 professionals provided support for short-term training opportunities from 8 ANE countries.

• 25 higher education partnerships

(American Liaison Office) established in 7 ANE countries.

• 110,000 students with access to

technology in classrooms and/or

schools in 7 countries.

• 70 centers supported to bridge links

between school and work in 5 countries.

• Life skills training provided for

100,000 participants in 9 countries.

• 250 public-private partnerships established to support various education activities in 7 countries.

In addition, there are three regional education initiatives that USAID undertakes:

• A Regional Education and Employment Alliance was launched last year to increase private sector participation in education. This Alliance provides innovative solutions to improve education and enhance opportunities for gainful employment. USAID has committed $10 million over 2 years to the program. Its

initial phase will focus on six priority countries: Egypt, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan, and the Philippines.

• Jobs for the 21st century aims at matching education and training with labor

market needs through a variety of approaches that combine job-relevant education, trade initiatives, and private sector engagement.

• The Arabic Book Translation Project begun this year, assesses the feasibility of

a regional, demand-driven program to make modern, affordable textbooks available in Arabic and English for the Middle East by creating partnerships among

U.S. and Middle Eastern publishers and universities and building a more coherent regional market.

The following chart is a closer look at the country-by-country breakdown of education programs in the Asia and Near East Region. The table displays the total

amount of funds provided for education initiatives from fiscal year 2002 through fiscal year 2006 with some illustrative highlights of accomplishments in the field.

72

ILLUSTRATIVE COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY RESULTS

[Budget, fiscal years 2002–2006 ($000)]

Access Quality Relevance

AFGHANISTAN—$317,242

• Trained 6,800 teachers and enrolled

170,138 students, of which 58% are

girls, in the Accelerated Learning

(AL) program which has expanded to

cover all 17 provinces.

• Establishing the American University

of Afghanistan, a private Americanstyle university in Kabul.

• Rehabilitating the Kabul Women’s

Dormitory to accommodate 1,100

women from mainly rural areas who

will attend university in Kabul. The

first students arrived for the new

academic year in March 2005.

• Built or refurbished 315 schools, primarily in remote areas, since 2002.

An additional 184 schools are under

construction.

• Launched Radio Teacher Training in

2003 in three pilot provinces, and

expanded it to all 17 provinces in

2004. This program currently

reaches 65,000 teachers by radio

and 7,479 additional teachers

through face-to-face training.

• Funded three technical advisors to

the Ministry of Education to improve

overall quality and strengthen ministry capacity.

• Funding three technical advisors to

the Ministry of Higher Education to

strengthen and develop higher education policy and strategic planning.

• Begun the establishment of an

International School in Kabul to provide modern American-style curriculum to expatriate and Afghan

children.

• Funding a U.S university consortium

in 2005 which will support Balkh

University Faculty of Agriculture

(BUFA) in Mazar-e Sharif, in their

efforts to modernize curriculum,

teaching technologies and techniques.

• Training 8,000 students around the

country in functional literacy, economic self-reliance grassroots democracy and women’s rights

through the Literacy and Community

Empowerment Program.

• Teaching 5,500 women to read and

write, qualifying them for further

training as community health workers or midwives.

• Established the Women’s Teacher

Training Institute in Kabul in 2004

as a central resource for government and agencies to access training, materials, and modern pedagogical approaches that support

practical and sustainable literacy,

numeracy, and life skills.

BANGLADESH—$14,321

• Sisimpur (Sesame Street) debuted on

April 15, 2005; potential audience of

8 million children.

• Training 1,800 pre-school teachers

in new interactive teaching methodologies.

• Establishing 1,800 pre-schools

across the country, parent and childto-child learning and reading group.

BURMA—$8,000

• Education opportunities provided to

over 2,500 student and adult learners.

• 50 special education students now

attending classes.

• Science instructional materials supplied to the schools for 6,000 middle school students to access.

• Close to 200 students were trained

in adult literacy classes, which were

taught in 7 different languages.

CAMBODIA—$11,750

• Activities starting in all 22 provinces, in all 18 provincial teacher

training colleges and in 6 regional

training colleges.

• Curriculum and standards being developed (including life skills) and

teacher training.

73

ILLUSTRATIVE COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY RESULTS—Continued

[Budget, fiscal years 2002–2006 ($000)]

Access Quality Relevance

EGYPT—$254,700

• Since 1975, USAID has constructed

more than 2,000 new schools and

4,000 classrooms.

• 170 multigrade classes were established with community contributions

and support resulting in the enrollment of over 30,000 new students

(80% girls) previously out of school.

• Training and technical support was

provided to 4,000 educators.

• More than 45,000 girls and young

women have received scholarships

and literacy, life-skills, and health

information and training.

• 3.5 million children view Alam

Simsim (Sesame Street), often with

their mothers.

INDIA—$29,858

• 250,000 children mainstreamed and/

or retained in schools through transitional bridge programs, back-toschool camps and improved quality

of education.

• Over 2 million primary school children are receiving radio instruction

from this school year (2005–2006).

• 690,000 children will benefit from

the program; health and hygiene

concepts issues incorporated in the

curriculum and teachers, Village

Education Committees and Children’s Cabinets trained in these

concepts.

• Through public-private partnerships,

the effective use of Education Technology to enhance quality and relevance of education and skills

training will be promoted.

INDONESIA—$85,511

• $157 million DBE initiative launched

in April 2005 to work in 100 districts with 4,500 schools, 4 million

students, and 55,000 teachers.

• USAID and Chevron signed a $10

million public-private alliance supporting vocational education for men

and women in Aceh.

• Improved local government and community management of schools in

20 districts in East and Central

Java through MBE pilot program.

• Working with 2,600 teachers, and

70,000 students in 200 schools

(20% are religious-based).

• 900 other schools have adopted

USAID models developed under MBE,

using their own resources.

IRAQ—$165,783

• 2,529 schools rehabilitated.

• 84 model schools established.

• 10,000 out-of-school youth enrolled

in an Accelerated Learning program.

• Early childhood learning television

series developed and broadcast.

• 10 students given scholarships to

study for Masters degrees and

Ph.D.s in U.S. universities.

• Printed and distributed 35.7 million

textbooks for grades 1–12 in both

Dari and Pashto since 2002. An additional 6.2 million have been printed and are ready for distribution.

• 130,000 primary and secondary

school teachers and administrators

trained.

• More than 8.7 million math and

science textbooks edited, printed,

and distributed.

• Education Management Information

System (EMIS) developed for Ministry

of Education.

74

ILLUSTRATIVE COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY RESULTS—Continued

[Budget, fiscal years 2002–2006 ($000)]

Access Quality Relevance

• Hundreds of thousands of desks,

chairs, chalkboards, teacher supplies distributed.

• 2.9 million school bags and supplies

distributed.

• 5 U.S. university consortia developed

partnerships with 10 Iraqi higher

education institutions.

• 43 computer labs and spcialist

science (e.g., cell biology, soil

science, GIS/remote sensing) labs

renovated and provided with stateof-the-art equipment.

• More than 1,500 faculty have attended refresher courses, seminars,

workshops, and conferences in Iraq,

the region, and the United States.

• 23 specialist libraries (e.g., law, agriculture, public and environmental

health, archaeology) refurbished and

provided with more than 20,000

books and given access to online

resources.

JORDAN—$31,640

• 40 supervisors and all 258 teachers

were trained on the first national

curriculum for kindergarten.

• 400 teachers and 42 supervisors

were trained on IT content knowledge and pedagogy.

• School-to-Careers Programs are

being piloted in 12 public schools.

• 5 Cisco Networking Academies have

been established.

• Basic life skills have been promoted

in 100 schools.

LEBANON—$19,300

• Support more than 1,000 students

coming from financially disadvantaged backgrounds with scholarships.

• Higher education support to 4 colleges and universities.

MOROCCO—$31,996

• 100 young Moroccan women from

various parts of the country are enrolled in CISCO CCNA training,

thanks to the WIT scholarship program.

• Literacy and numeracy classes provided to some 4,000 women.

• Over 180 poor rural girls are in the

program today, enjoying safe and

conducive environment for life-long

learning.

• A public-private partnership provides

job readiness training (with a focus

on women) to 12 Moroccan institutions.

• 700 students (40% women) are attending Cisco Certificate programs

combined with job-preparedness

training.

75

ILLUSTRATIVE COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY RESULTS—Continued

[Budget, fiscal years 2002–2006 ($000)]

Access Quality Relevance

NEPAL—$1,595

• More than 7,500 children in 14 districts received NFE and psychosocial

counseling.

Approximately, 8,000 women gained

knowledge and leadership skills, increasing their participation in key

leadership positions by 23%.

• More than 1,300 families received

vocational education for income

generation.

PAKISTAN—$197,876

• 2,873 adult literacy centers were

opened, graduating 17,850 out-ofschool youth and adults.

• 7,004 school management committees are developing school improvement plans.

• 765 teachers provided early childhood education training benefiting

25,500 students.

• 109 master teachers and school administrators trained in the United

States.

• 63 local NGOs were awarded small

grants to conduct literacy classes,

train teachers, and organize parentteacher association.

• 24 public-private partnerships established between corporate Pakistan and the education sector in

support of school improvement.

• 234 schools were rahabilitated, and

enrollment for 5- to 9-year-olds increased from 25–50%.

• Education Management Information

System (EMIS) developed for Ministry

of Education.

PHILIPPINES—$22,360

• 58,842 children from grades 1–3

now have access to better learning

systems in math and reading.

• 1,500 elementary and high school

teachers trained to improve teaching

of English and ICT.

• 6 private-public alliances established, matching USAID resources at

more than a 1:1 ration.

• Social mobilization and advocacy led

to new enrollments of 3,000 at the

elementary level.

• 13 model schools for increasing

teacher, parent, and community involvement in activities.

• Alternate Learning System provided

for 10,500 children and out-ofschool youth.

• 100 community learning centers constructed or improved in school-less

barangays.

• 14 private madaris adopted Department of Education curriculum.

• 120 schools equipped to use Educational TV.

• Over 1 million new textbooks and

learning materials donated.

SRI LANKA—$9,625

• Emglish language amd IT training. • Skill development for unemployed

youth.

• Vocational school development in

tsunami area for construction and

tourism skill development.

76

ILLUSTRATIVE COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY RESULTS—Continued

[Budget, fiscal years 2002–2006 ($000)]

Access Quality Relevance

WEST BANK AND GAZA—$24,700

• 1,500 scholarships to vocational and

technical students.

• 476 talented and financially challenged undergraduate students (199

male and 277 female) received

scholarships.

• Awarded 160 scholarships for master’s degrees in U.S. universities.

• Modernized computer labs at 20

community colleges to improve internet access.

• Conducted 8-month needs assessment survey of higher education.

• Improved efficiency of Ministry of

Higher Education by providing staff

training in Project Cycle Management, Communication Skills, Human

Resources, and Strategic Planning.

• Funded Higher Education Management Information System assessment.

• Provision of access to and training

for electronic journals for all universities in West Bank/Gaza; provision

of 5 computers for each university.

• Provided state-of-the-art skills training for 5,000 students at 20 community colleges.

YEMEN—$33,667

• Identified 77 schools for renovation.

• Training of trainers conducted.

• Teacher and student kits for the

more than 540 students and 37

teachers in grades 1–9 developed

for dissemination.

ANE REGIONAL EDUCATION & EMPLOYMENT ALLIANCE—$17,175

• Discussions have begun with six priority countries: Egypt, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan, and Philippines.

• Several corporations have been identified as participants including

Shell, Nike, Nokia, and Microsoft.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just ask a specific question. And this may

be a university with whom you’ve not had contact. But I’ve been

intrigued in the progress at Forman University, in Pakistan, in

large part because the president of the university is now an American, Dr. Peter Armacost, who was president of Eckerd College, in

Florida, prior to this calling. He is a very close friend of mine, and

this is why I’ve admired his going to Pakistan. That university was

attended by President Musharraf, so there’s a certain high-profile

quality when the President of a country has an interest in it. But

the mission there is to try to have a student body of several thousand students who are Christian, Muslim, and of various other religions, under the same tent and with a curriculum and faculty that

are devoted to this interdenominational or multifaith situation.

Now, to say the least, creating more university opportunities of

a more liberal arts character in Pakistan is a challenge. Doing so

with Christians, Muslims, and others, comingling and so forth, is

even more so. But it strikes me that this is an important innovation, even if a small one, in a country of 150 million people, as we

heard earlier today. Because it does have the knowledge of the

President of the country, and the support, I would direct the attenVerDate 11-MAY-2000 15:14 Oct 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 963447.SEN SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1
77

tion of some of your associates in that area, not specifically in behalf of Forman, but to find if there are other innovations of this

sort, because it does bring a coming together. In this particular

case, the denomination within the United States that is supporting

Dr. Armacost is the Presbyterian Church ministry, which has a

good amount of contributions worldwide. But all of this is not going

to occur only through the U.S. Government, as we’ve heard earlier—but also through NGOs, religious groups, and other actors

aiding the humanitarian situation. In this particular case, the

Presbyterians, as I understand it, are not there in an evangelical

capacity, specifically; they really are attempting to open up a degree of religious diversity and tolerance in the area.

All of this coexists together. I’m wondering how USAID manages

resources, U.S. Government responsibilities, but, at the same time,

keeps track of the NGOs, and religious institutions, such as the

Presbyterians, in this case, as well as others. For that matter, how

does USAID work with Ms. Cheney and the State Department people? Are you on the same page? So you have regular meetings? In

other words, how much coordination is there of this block activity?

When I asked the Pakistani gentleman, earlier on, What part of

the 4 percent, say, if that’s the goal, of GNP?—and he said about

1 percent might come from outside gifts—ours, from other countries, NGOs, and so forth. I’m curious about the coordination of

that one, quite apart from its coordination with the other 3 percent

of the Pakistanis. Do you have any comment about this convoluted

question that I’ve asked?

Mr. KUNDER. I do. First of all, on the question of the college in

Pakistan, higher education is an area that I think we didn’t——

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. KUNDER [continuing]. Touch on in great detail. But, of

course, we do have a number of U.S. Government-supported institutions across the region. American University of Beirut, American

University——

The CHAIRMAN. Yes——

Mr. KUNDER [continuing]. Of Cairo, and——

The CHAIRMAN [continuing]. Of course.

Mr. KUNDER [continuing]. So forth.

The CHAIRMAN. Right. Well known.

Mr. KUNDER. And so, we do recognize these types of institutions

as important components.

I think, back to Deputy Assistant Secretary Cheney’s comments

about the cost-effectiveness issue, we can’t bring everybody here for

a 6-year graduate program, so to some extent we’ve got to look at

short-term training, we’ve got to look at institutions in the region.

So we do try to take a look at the full range of tools in the toolkit,

if you will.

The question of coordination of resources, trying to get the maximum impact for the taxpayer dollars, is something we try to pay

attention to. I can’t say we do it perfectly, because the subject matter is so vast, but we do try to pay attention to what the governments themselves are investing in, what the international financial

institutions are investing in, the other bilateral donors are involved

in, and, of course, the NGO community. Now we have this new

78

partner that we’re trying to leverage, the private-sector institutions, especially American firms, investing in the region.

So across the region—we try to take all these things into account, and that’s why I said earlier that we believe our niche is to

develop innovative model programs, and then attempt policy dialog

with the governments to try to roll these programs out.

From my perspective, we work extraordinarily well with the

MEPI program and our State Department colleagues. Of course,

with the vagaries of organizational structure, the Asia/Near East

Bureau of USAID overlaps with three State Department bureaus,

but especially in the Middle East, both with MEPI and then, more

broadly, on Middle East peace issues, we are working very closely

together. Because we have invested, as a nation, in having USAID

missions on the ground, U.S. professional employees on the ground,

at our Embassies, and aid missions across, at least, 19 countries

of this region, we have a focused venue in which to do that coordination so that Liz’s team and the MEPI folks and our team are

talking through what’s the best policy in Jordan or Egypt or anyplace else in the region. At least that’s my perspective on it.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, let me just indicate that unhappily, 11:45

a.m., has come, and so has a rollcall vote. The buzz that you just

heard signals that Senators will be doing their duty in a different

forum.

But let me just thank both of you, again, for the tremendous

preparation you made for this hearing in your testimony, as well

as the publications you have shared with us. Our invitation to provide more are sincere. And, as you provide this data, we will make

it available to all members of our committee and others in the Senate who, we pray, will have an interest in this subject. But you’ve

contributed substantially to a good morning of thoughtfulness for

Americans.

And, having said that, the hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

ADDITIONAL PREPARED STATEMENT AND QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LINCOLN CHAFEE, U.S. SENATOR FROM RHODE

ISLAND

There is no question how important education is to combating the spread of terrorism. It is my strong belief that many of the conflicts and problems in the world,

and particularly in the Near East and South Asia, could be lessened by strong investments in education.

I have always been a strong supporter of funding for programs that bring students to the United States, knowing that international exchange plays a valuable

role in decreasing the use of stereotypes and allowing students from other countries

to experience American culture. It is also important to support fledgling programs

in the Near East and South Asia. While many of these programs are small, these

students tend to stay in the region and work as advocates for freedom and democracy.

The situation in the occupied territories is a poignant example. With unemployment high and investments in the infrastructure of everything including education

very low, it leaves little option but extremism for many. However, there are success

stories. Take, for instance the American Studies Institute at Al-Quds University in

the West Bank. Dr. Mohammed Dajani, the program founder, and a visiting scholar

at Salve Regina University’s Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy, recently visited my office to share the hope he has in the good a small, and

79

growing, program is accomplishing. The value of a program run primarily by Palestinians, for Palestinians, in the West Bank about American culture and values is

unmatched. These students have begun to open their minds to a world far removed

from their own, without leaving their homes, which is necessary due to the high cost

of schooling abroad and the difficulty in traveling.

It is inspiring what a small program with a strong leader like Dr. Dajani can accomplish with very little resources. Programs like this should be held up as a model

for others in the region.

RESPONSES OF PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY ELIZABETH L. CHENEY TO

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR RICHARD LUGAR

Question. Please provide more detail on the number of participants in micro-scholarships in the Broader Middle East and North Africa. What does it cost to fund each

participant and what are your future plans for this program?

Answer. The English ACCESS Micro-scholarships program was launched and

funded by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) in fiscal year 2004.

It provides English training to nonelite high school students and helps prepare them

for potential participation in future exchanges with the United States while giving

them skills that will lead to greater economic opportunity. Three thousand six hundred students from 39 countries are participating in the English ACCESS Microscholarship program worldwide.

Department guidelines indicate that approximately $1,000 should be budgeted per

student for up to 2 years of instruction. In the chart shown below, the programs

in countries covered by the Bureau of Near East Affairs (NEA) and Afghanistan

paid for 1 year of instruction per student with these funds. ECA-administered

ACCESS Micro-scholarship programs in other countries with significant Muslim

populations, including Turkey and Pakistan and 22 other countries in the East Asia

and Pacific, Africa, and South Asia regions will run for 2 years.

In fiscal year 2004 the ECA Bureau provided a total of $1,947,565 to fund English

ACCESS Micro-scholarship programs for 1,724 students from the Broader Middle

East and North Africa at a cost of circa $1,130 per student. In other words, more

than 47 percent of the total number of students funded by the program came from

the Broader Middle East and North Africa and more than 54 percent of the total

funding available to the program was spent on this region. The table below provides

the most detailed data available from the field on the manner in which these funds

were spent.

In fiscal year 2006, the Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural

affairs plans to spend $4 million on the English ACCESS Micro-scholarship program

and plans to spend at least half of this total amount on the Broader Middle East

and North Africa.

MEPI staff and ECA staff are discussing ways in which MEPI funds can be used

to expand this ECA-administered micro-scholarship program.

BMENA MICRO-SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS AND FUNDING

[1 year of instruction in all countries, except Pakistan and Turkey which have 2 years]

Country Cost Students Cost/student

Afghanistan ............................................................................................................. $20,000 20 $1,000

Algeria ..................................................................................................................... 80,000 80 1,000

Bahrain ................................................................................................................... 84,600 45 1,880

Kuwait ..................................................................................................................... 135,000 75 1,800

Lebanon ................................................................................................................... 212,685 200 1,063

Morocco ................................................................................................................... 108,600 100 1,086

Oman ....................................................................................................................... 250,000 106 2,358

Pakistan .................................................................................................................. 93,000 90 1,033

Qatar ....................................................................................................................... 52,560 40 1,314

Saudi Arabia ........................................................................................................... 100,000 50 2,000

Syria ........................................................................................................................ 148,000 140 1,057

Tunisia .................................................................................................................... 101,800 100 1,018

Turkey ...................................................................................................................... 100,000 185 541

UAE .......................................................................................................................... 100,000 100 I,000

West Bank ............................................................................................................... 198,000 198 1,000

Gaza ........................................................................................................................ 135,000 135 1,000

Yemen ..................................................................................................................... 48,320 80 604

80

BMENA MICRO-SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS AND FUNDING—Continued

[1 year of instruction in all countries, except Pakistan and Turkey which have 2 years]

Country Cost Students Cost/student

Total BMENA ........................................................................................................... 1,947,565 1,724 1,130

Question. Please provide more details on the amount of time students and prospective exchange participants have to wait in order to receive a visa for travel to

the United States. What measures are being taken to improve visa wait times for

students and exchange participants?

Answer. The table below compares the current amount of time students and exchange visitor program participants have to wait in order to receive an appointment

for a visa interview with the time required for all other visa applicants in the

Broader Middle East and North Africa. Islamabad issues visas for both Pakistan

and Afghanistan. The amount of time required to process a visa from the time of

the appointment to the final judgment varies with individual cases, although the

majority of applicants receive visas within a few days of application.

As shown in the table, in order to expedite the processing of visas, students and

exchange participants receive priority treatment. As a matter of policy, if a student

or exchange participant can show a need to obtain an earlier visa interview appointment in order not to miss the opportunity to study in, or travel to, the United

States, such requests are granted. Appointment wait times are updated by our posts

on a weekly basis and vary depending on workload, resources, and time of year. For

example, some posts give higher priority to students the closer they are to their program start times. A student applying 3 months before they intend to travel might

wait longer for an appointment than a student whose program of study begins in

a week. We are committed to ensuring that no student misses the start of classes

due to a delay in being interviewed.

BMENA VISA WAIT TIMES

[All visa applications vs. students and exchange participants)

Post

Appointment wait time

F&J visas All visas

Abu Dhabi ..................................................................................................... Same day ........................... 1 day.

Algiers ........................................................................................................... 2 days ................................ 2 days.

Amman .......................................................................................................... 40 days .............................. 40 days.

Cairo ............................................................................................................. 2 days ................................ 17 days.

Casablanca ................................................................................................... Same day ........................... 14 days.

Damascus ..................................................................................................... 2 days ................................ 2 days.

Doha .............................................................................................................. Same day ........................... Same day.

Dubai ............................................................................................................ 1 day .................................. 5 days.

Isalamabad ................................................................................................... Same day ........................... 25 days.

Jerusalem ...................................................................................................... 1 day .................................. 12 days.

Kuwait ........................................................................................................... 2 days ................................ 52 days.

Manama ........................................................................................................ Same day ........................... Same day.

Muscat .......................................................................................................... Same day ........................... Same day.

Riyadh ........................................................................................................... 7 days ................................ 14 days.

Sanaa ............................................................................................................ 2 days ................................ 2 days.

Tel Aviv ......................................................................................................... 22 days .............................. 22 days.

Tunis ............................................................................................................. Same day ........................... Same day.

Note.—Amman and Tel Aviv have special designated dates for students once a week, so the appointment wait time is shorter than indicated above; it is usually a week or two.

Question. Would you support the creation of a program similar to the CongressBundestag exchanges for the Broader Middle East?

Answer. We review our portfolio of exchange programs on an ongoing basis to ensure that they are helping to achieve the Nation’s foreign policy goals and will give

active consideration to a program of this type. My staff would be happy to consult

with the committee’s staff on the details of this program in order better to understand the benefits of a similar program targeted at the Broader Middle East.

Æ