Content uploaded by Freya Perry
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Freya Perry on Apr 25, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Understanding the constraints on teachers to deliver
education for social transformation in conflict-affected
Burundi.
Freya Perry, Institute of Education, University of London
Introduction
Critical pedagogy, as advocated for by Freire (1996) and developed in recent years by
a number of Western academics (see Apple 2015; Darder et al. 2016; Giroux 2010;
McLaren 2016), argues education should be democratic, questioning and
transformative. It seeks to address the power structures within society, to enable the
oppressed to break free through the process of conscientization (Freire 1996; Freire
2015). Such critical pedagogy moves away from the ‘banking’ processes of education
which frames students as passive ‘receptacles’ in which knowledge is deposited by
teachers, towards a new teacher-student, student-teacher relationship enabled
through dialogue (Freire 1996, p.61). In doing so, one can learn to read the World as
well as the Word (Freire 1996).
The role that the teacher plays within education for social transformation is
fundamental – both as “public intellectual” (Giroux 2004) and as pedagogical
practitioner in the classroom (Freire 1996, p.61). Yet there is a notable absence of the
role of teachers as peace-builders in the literature discussing conflict-affected contexts
(Horner et al. 2015) despite education increasingly being viewed as important in wider
peacebuilding strategies (Gill & Niens 2014, pp.12–15). Whilst recent efforts have tried
to rectify this (noteably Sayed & Novelli 2016), the voice of the teacher – as an
individual and potential agent of change – is lost, with the emphasis falling on the
teaching profession as a whole and on education systems more broadly. Teachers act
in immensely complex situations, that include the interplay of dynamic power relations
and structures (Apple 2015: 302) which are further exasperated in conflict-affected
societies. It is important that we understand how this impacts upon teachers’ roles as
transformative agents.
This paper therefore seeks to highlight the constraints facing the teacher in their
professional and personal capacities to ignite positive change. The paper takes as its
que Freire’s comment that “For men, as beings of praxis, to transform the world is to
humanise it” (Freire 2015, p.7). Such notions of humanization and transformation of
unjust social structures resonates deeply with the conception of social justice
advanced by Sen (Snauwaert 2011). Employing the Capabilities Approach, I
tentatively map out some of the possible constraining factors on teachers’ functionings
and freedoms, where freedom is viewed as a process towards ‘positive’ peace, free
from direct, structural and cultural violence (Galtung 1990). The case study of Burundi
is selected, in part because it is more neglected in the academic literature than its
neighbours the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda, but also because
the ongoing civil unrest following President Nkurunziza’s decision to run for a third
term in the elections in 2015 requires critical attention (UNICEF 2015; FIDH 2016).
First, I provide an overview of the conflict and how education has been implicated in
Burundi. Next, I present the analytical framework of the 4Rs as the paper will pay
special attention to issues of redistribution, representation, recognition and
reconciliation. This is followed by a summary of the Capabilities Approach (including
how this might be enriched by Critical Realism) before an exploration of some of the
personal, social and environmental conversion factors required for teachers to engage
in education for social transformation.
The Conflict in Burundi
Burundi is a land-locked country in East Africa bordering Rwanda, the DRC and
Tanzania. It is one of the poorest countries in the world, ranking 184 out of 188
countries on the Human Development Index with a score of just 0.404 which is further
reduced to 0.276 when adjusted for inequality (UNDP 2016). More than 81% of the
population live below the poverty line with 94.8% of those employed earning just $2 a
day (Ibid). The country is small (27,834 km²) and densely populated with a population
of over 11 million (World Bank 2015). There are three socio-identity groups
1
: the Hutu
(85%), Tutsi (14%) and Twa (1%). The national language which everyone speaks is
1
Frequently, the Hutu, Tutsi and Twa are referred to as ‘ethnic’ groups, however, Obura argues that there is
only one ‘ethnic’ group in Burundi and so the term should only be used to refer to the Burundi / Barundi people
as a whole. Rather, these are social categories or ‘socio-identity groups’ (Obura 2008, p.49). The reason for this
is that, prior to colonization by the Belgians, a Hutu could become a Tutsi (a process known as kwihutura) should
they significantly increase their wealth and social status; likewise, a Tutsi could become a Hutu through loss of
income (Obura 2008, p.53). This distinction helps to clarify the causes of the conflict, which might be viewed in
terms of ‘greed’ rather than ‘grievance’ as argued by Collier & Hoeffler (2012), reinforcing the importance of
redistribution for reconciliation.
Kirindi, though, due to the return of many refugees from Tanzania, Kiswahili is widely
spoken in the suburbs and urban centres. French is the language of instruction in
schools (Timpson et al. 2015, p.2).
Like Rwanda, Burundi was initially colonized by Germany, before becoming a Belgian
colony in 1916 and gaining independence 46 years later in July 1962 (Vandeginste
2014, p.264). Under Belgian rule, the Tutsi were favoured for political positions,
disrupting a long history of peaceful cohabitation and creating tensions between the
Hutu and Tutsi (Lemarchand 1995). This led to profound social, economic and political
consequences (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009b, p.38), epitomized by the Burundian
government continuing to be led by a Tutsi minority from the Southern Bururi Province
from 1962 until the first democratic elections in 1993 (Berckmoes 2015, p.5).
Post-independence in Burundi has been punctuated by a series of violent conflicts. In
1965 King Mwambutsa’s refusal to appoint a Hutu Prime Minister led to an attempted
coup against the appointed Tutsi leader and a violent backlash against the Hutu
‘rebels’. Then, in 1972, the Tutsi-controlled army undertook mass killings, sometimes
referred to as ‘genocide’ (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009b; Curtis 2015) of the Hutu elite
(Taylor 2014, p.197; Bird 2007, p.178). A further uprising and massacre of thousands
of Hutus took place in 1988. In 1993, following the assassination of President Melchior
Ndadaye, leader of the Hutu-dominated Front for Democracy party, by Tutsi soldiers,
civil war erupted and lasted until 2005 (Timpson et al. 2015; Berckmoes 2015, p.6).
Surges of violence have circulated elections in 2010 (Berckmoes 2015, p.5) and 2015
(UNICEF 2015; FIDH 2016), despite the Arusha Peace Agreement being signed in
2000.
The ‘two faces’ of education (Bush & Saltarelli 2000) are apparent in the Burundian
context, playing both victim to and instigator of conflict. Exclusion from education and
social discrimination within education has been seen as one of the principal
contributing factors to social divisions (Mariro, 1998, p.55 in Obura 2008, p.26;
Skonhoft 2000, p.116), being “used to deepen the rift of opportunity” (Timpson et al.
2015, p.5). Oppression through education began under Belgian rule with different
curricula for Hutus and Tutsis, with arithmetic, natural sciences and French
compulsory for Tutsis, and singing and optional natural sciences taught to Hutus
(Obura 2008, p.62). The post-independence era has seen unequal distribution of
teaching staff and resources across rural regions, deliberate tampering of exam results
(Skonhoft 2000, p.119) and exclusion from tertiary education (Timpson et al. 2015,
p.7). In 1972, the discrimination became explicitly violent, with 60 Hutu students killed
and a further 250 Hutu students disappearing from the Tutsi-dominated University of
Burundi (Obura 2008, p.65). Around the same time, approximately 40% of students at
the teacher-training institute of Ngara were murdered (Ibid). In the countryside, Hutu
teachers were commonly tortured and killed, and school children even prepared lists
of their Hutu classmates for the Tutsi-led army to identify (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009a,
p.29).
Acknowledging the “profound structural distortions” within the education system (MoE,
1998 in Obura 2008, p.93), the government of Burundi abolished school fees in 2005,
pledging to achieve universal primary education (GPE 2014) and to start tackling
inequality in education (Batonon & Norton 2010). Yet with 45% of the total population
aged 14 years and under (UIS 2017) there is a huge strain on the system, with 52%
of classes running in double shifts in 2013 (GPE 2014) and average class sizes at
53.8 students in 2015 (UIS 2017). Moreover, transition from primary to secondary
school is low, with enrolment at just 41%, and repetition of primary school remains
high at 36.8% (World Bank 2014). Minorities, especially the Twa who are often
neglected from discussions, continue to be excluded from schooling (Rwantabagu
2015). A new curriculum for Grades 7-9 to support ‘Child Friendly Schools’ has been
developed with assistance from UNICEF since 2013, but progress is slow and
implementation is likely to take many years (UNICEF 2015). Additionally, disruption to
schooling is currently being experienced with mass internal and external migration
since 2015, delaying the school year and exams, and unsettling the everyday lives of
students and teachers (GPE online; HRW online). It is against this backdrop that
teachers are looked upon to deliver a critical pedagogy for social transformation.
The 4Rs
The 4Rs is an analytical framework that understands conflict to be frequently triggered
by inequality and sets out to address the economic, social, cultural and political
dimensions of injustice under the headings of Representation, Recognition,
Redistribution and Reconciliation (Novelli et al. 2015). In doing so, the framework
draws heavily from the work of feminist scholar Nancy Fraser who persuasively argued
that both equitable redistribution (understood as the economic structure of society)
and recognition (the status of individuals and groups) are required for social justice
(Fraser 1995). The 4Rs are aligned with Galtung’s distinctions between ‘positive’ and
‘negative’ peace (Sayed & Novelli 2016, p.27). Galtung explains that violence can be
understood as a triangular relationship between direct, structural and cultural violence
(Galtung 1990, p.294). Whilst the absence of direct, physical violence is a ‘negative’
form of peace, ‘positive’ peace requires the absence of all three forms of violence. The
4Rs framework aims to investigate forms of cultural and structural violence that prompt
direct violence.
Redistribution seeks to address vertical and horizontal inequality, paying
special attention to marginalised and disadvantaged groups, and ensuring equitable
access and resources. In turn, recognition is rooted in respectful acknowledgment of
difference whether that be of gender, language, politics, religion, ethnicity, culture or
ability. It requires that we pay attention to policies such as language of instruction and
how particular groups are presented in the curriculum. Representation builds on Nancy
Fraser’s understanding of the “parity of participation” (Fraser 1995, p.36). For Fraser,
participation has both ‘objective’ and ‘intersubjective’ conditions. Objectively, material
resources must be distributed in a way that ensures participants can have a voice
which is independent (that is, not coerced and manipulated due to financial need).
Intersubjectively, the institutionalised culture must value equal respect and opportunity
(Ibid). In education, this means that classrooms are safe environments that enable
dialogue and that political decision-making involves key stakeholders, for example,
through school-based management structures (Sayed & Novelli 2016, p.29; Cardozo
Lopes & Shah 2016, p.521). Finally, reconciliation can only occur if past injustice is
confronted and the material and psychosocial effects of conflict are dealt with. This
requires an emphasis on interpersonal relationships, trust and healing across divides
(Sayed & Novelli 2016; Cardozo Lopes & Shah 2016; Novelli et al. 2015). As such, the
4Rs framework is designed to be transformative, rather than restorative (Cardozo
Lopes & Shah 2016, p.516).
The Capabilities Approach
The Capabilities Approach was developed by Amartya Sen (1999) as an alternative to
welfare economics, seeking to understand human poverty as multidimensional. It
asks, what is this person able to be and do? It is therefore informed by an
understanding of normative individualism, treating each person as an end (Robeyns
2016, p.400) whilst appreciating human diversity. It is concerned with both the
possibilities open to an individual as well as the ultimate outcomes. In Sen’s words,
the approach is concerned “with the process of enhancing individual freedoms and the
social commitment to bring that about” (Sen 1999, p.298, my emphasis). Whilst
‘capabilities’ or ‘substantive freedoms’ are the opportunities one has reason to value,
‘functionings’ are the realisation of such opportunities. ‘Functionings’ might also be
referred to using the Aristotelian term, ‘flourishings’, to emphasise the humanity which
is central to the approach (Sen 1999, p.24; Alkire, S. 2000, p.52).
To achieve functionings, one must overcome certain unfreedoms which depend upon
one’s abilities and opportunities. These may be termed ‘conversion’ factors (Sen 1999,
p.74). Robeyns (2005) has expanded upon the notion of conversion factors which
either constrain or enable capabilities. These include personal conversion factors (for
example, intelligence and skills acquired through training); social conversion factors
(including cultural norms and power relations) and environmental conversion factors
(such as geography or logistics) (Robeyns 2005). Similarly, Nussbaum (2011)
distinguished between basic, internal and combined capabilities to highlight that
essential skills, personal characteristics and external socio-economic factors all
impact upon one’s freedoms.
Due to these concerns with the potential of individuals, and an accompanying
consideration of the underlying mechanisms which may inhibit or enable freedoms,
several academics have suggested that the Capabilities Approach can be grounded
in a Critical Realist philosophy (Martins, 2006; Smith and Seward, 2009 in Tao 2013).
Sharon Tao (2013), for example, has powerfully combined the Capabilities Approach
and Critical Realism in her work on teachers in Tanzania, providing great insight into
the structural challenges that constrain their behaviours.
Critical Realism, developed by Roy Bhaskar, is a philosophy primarily concerned with
separating epistemology from ontology (that is, knowledge from lived experience),
arguing that to reduce the former to the latter is to commit the ‘epistemic fallacy’
(Alderson 2013, p.45). Bhaskar argues that although necessary, knowledge alone “is
insufficient for freedom. For to be free is: (1) to know one’s real interests; (2) to possess
both (a) the ability and the resources, i.e. generically the power, and (b) the opportunity
to act in (towards) them; and (3) to be disposed to do so” (Archer et al. 1998, p.410).
The similarities with the Capabilities Approach are clear.
Critical Realism acknowledges that the world we live in is an ‘open system’ whereby
there might be multiple causes for an outcome and multiple social structures that foster
particular effects (Alderson 2013, p.55). Bhaskar proposes that there exist stratas of
reality – the empirical (what is experienced first-hand), the actual (the events that take
place) and the real (the unseen generative mechanisms) (Roy Bhaskar 2017). To
understand these stratas is essential for our individual freedom and social
transformation: “Emergence is a condition of explanation, which in turn is a condition
of emancipation” (Bhaskar in Archer et al. 1998, p.441).
The following sections will attempt to demonstrate the constraints of Burundian
teachers. I will consider how personal, social and environmental factors impact upon
their understanding of unseen oppressive structures and their ability to enact an
education for social transformation.
Personal Conversion Factors
Personal well-being, including not only physical health but also emotions and
sentiments, are important to a viable theory of critical pedagogy (Freire 1996, p.48;
Giroux 2004, p.44). This is because, as Sen explains, well-being and agency
“inevitably have a substantial intersection” (Sen 1999, p.190).
The literature on teachers in Burundi, though limited, is detailed in the trauma and
suffering experienced by individuals. Ndura-Ouédraogo (2009b, p.41) notes the
remarkable openness in which teachers share their first-hand experiences of the
conflict. For example:
“They caught me. I was pregnant. They struck me on the stomach with a gun. I
was six months pregnant. They took my money…they made me carry a gun. I
was barefoot, in my pajamas. They ordered me to sit and wait in front of the
health center. When I saw them leave, I hid behind the parish. I saw patients
who were hospitalized run with IVs in their arms. Pregnant women were
running…and I, too, started running as fast as I could.”
Immaculée, Teacher (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009b, p.42)
Often, accounts of personal trauma are directly related to the school environment:
“It was 1994. I was an elementary school principal…They took me away in the
presence of the teachers. They took me away in the presence of the entire
student population…I was tortured for six months… They broke two ribs on my
left side and three ribs on my right side…they starved me quite often,
sometimes for three or four days.…They convicted me without giving me a
chance to defend myself. I was incarcerated for 11 years and 6 months.”
Trésor, Secondary School Teacher (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009b, p.42)
Despite such emotionally scaring events, there continues to be no state support for
teacher well-being and "[m]ental illness is often seen as a fate for which nothing can
be done" (Batonon & Norton 2010, p.33). The failure to set up a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission (Sommers 2013, p.10) means that such injustices have
not been investigated and closure is not possible for the victims, many of whom are
teachers. In contrast, the reality is that human rights abuses are ongoing (FIDH 2016).
Teacher union leaders, for example, have been imprisoned and tortured in Burundi for
striking for higher wages so that teachers can adequately feed themselves and their
families (Bennell 2004, p.11). Teachers continue to be insufficiently paid and strike
(IWACU online). Clearly, distribution of pay and inadequate resources affects
individual well-being (Sayed & Novelli 2016, p.49). Such issues of personal well-being
hampers wider efforts for redistribution
2
by the Government of Burundi. This is
because teachers are both unwilling to relocate once they identify an area as ‘safe’
and also because they are unable to do so. Teachers can only feed themselves
adequately if they live on their own land where they can grow their own crops
(Rurihose 2001 in Obura 2008, p.107). Thus, due to the low wages, they cannot
relocate to poorer, remote regions no matter how great the need is for teachers in
these areas.
The well-being of teachers directly impacts on their agency. As Fraser notes, choice
can only exist when external factors do not constrain them (Fraser 1995, p.36). This
can be seen in the high levels of bribery by students for higher grades (Timpson et al.
2
Burundi’s Constitution (article 143) claims that all civil society roles must be representative and reflect the
diversity of the Burundian nation, including representative of ethnic, regional and gender groups (Vandeginste
2014, p.272).
2015, p.107) where teachers are unable to refuse (regardless of their personal moral
judgment) due to their poor pay. Teacher agency therefore fails what Fraser calls the
‘objective’ requirement for parity of participation. With a legacy of Tutsi wealth and
Hutu’s exclusion from education, bribery by richer students continues the cycle of
unfair and unequal representation frustrating steps towards positive peace. Similarly,
the well-being of teachers, as individuals, fails Fraser’s ‘intersubjective’ requirement
where cultural values are not equally respected. This is exemplified in Berckmoes’s
detailed discussion of two young men, Eduard and Gabriel, whose choice of political
affiliation (or lack thereof) leads to fractures in their relationships with friends and
families and impacts their employability (Berckmoes 2015). They express their lack of
agency, seeing opportunities and the ability to seize these as something beyond their
control, dependent on God or luck (Berckmoes 2015, p.31). For teachers in the
classroom, this political intolerance (itself a social conversion factor, discussed in more
detail below) might manifest itself as an inability to openly discuss politics and current
events without fostering dichotomous language and notions of ‘the other’. Indeed, as
in Rwanda (Rubagiza et al. 2016, p.219), teachers in Burundi have their own histories
– as victims and perpetrators – and they must negotiate their own prejudices and
understandings of ‘the other’.
Regardless, in their professional capacities teachers are seen to play a significant role
in the potential reconstruction and transformation of Burundi. Students look to their
teachers for guidance and hope: “Our schools and universities could teach us the
knowledge we need to avoid fighting and live in peace. Teachers can tell us how to
resolve problems, how we can arise out of poverty” (Hutu universtity student in
Timpson et al. 2015: 15). However, this highlights a significant challenge for teachers
hoping to deliver social transformation. Rather than engaging in deliberation and
dialogue, the student desires the teacher to “tell us” how to achieve peace. Such
statements are seen from teachers as well:
“Students trust education. If they are taught that killing is a good thing, they
believe it. It they are taught that killing is a bad thing, they believe it. […] We
must therefore educate them to become peace agents.”
Immaculée, Secondary School Principle (Timpson et al. 2015, p.8)
“We must live in peace. We, the older generation, sometimes don’t have a clear
vision. But our children do not have to continue living with these problems. We
must erase what has confused our generation from the minds of our children.”
Trésor, Secondary School Teacher (Ndura-Ouédraogo 2009b, pp.44–45)
Whilst Immaculée wishes for students to become peace agents, her quote highlights
the kind of banking education which Freire criticises, where students are seen to be
passive Objects (Freire 1996, p.53), believing whatever they are taught. Yet, it is clear
from the Rwandan experience that linear narratives of unified history are not simply
‘believed’ at face value (McLean Hilker 2011; Warshauer et al. 2008) and, in Burundi,
a plethora of personal, local counter-narratives are disclosed through an oral tradition
(Bird 2007, p.180). Similarly, Trésor desires to “erase” the difficulty of the past. This is
reflected in the notable absence of the conflict in the history curriculum where the
syllabus abruptly stops in the 1960s (Bentrovato 2016, p.230. 235). Indeed, other
educators voiced that it is “too soon and memories are too raw” to teach about the
conflict (Timpson et al. 2015, p.41). This approach to (not) teaching history has itself
led to confusion and suspicion, with one pupil commenting: “everyone in this country
has his own version that defends his side. [It makes me wonder], which one is the true
one?” (Bentrovato 2016, p.235).
The lack of guidance and training for teachers in Burundi means that the skills required
to enable democratic dialogue are not developed. It has been argued that pedagogy
is possibly more important than content, particularly in conflict and post-conflict
contexts. Some scholars have suggested that in Rwanda, for example, violent forms
of punishment combined with a didactic style of teaching that suppressed critical
thinking contributed to and exasperated the response to the genocide (Bird 2003 in
Davies 2011; Rutayisire et al. 2004 in McLean Hilker 2011, p.271). Although Giroux
has argued that critical pedagogy “can never be treated as a fixed set of principles and
practices that can be applied indiscriminately across a variety of pedagogical sites”
due to its inherently political and moral nature (Giroux 2004, p.37), some have
suggested that professional development could include skills such as political and
media literacy, human rights and how to teach controversial issues (Davies & Talbot
2008, p.169). In Burundi, the two initial teacher training systems that exist both
prioritize theoretical knowledge over practical experience and neglect subjects such
as Kiswahili, Social Ethics, English and HIV/AIDS Awareness (Rwantabagu 2014,
pp.58–59) as well as peace-building education, despite their importance to the
contemporary context. Whilst UNESCO have provided some peace-building and
conflict resolution training for teachers (and communities), this is one-off and limited
to certain parts of the country (UNESCO 2014). Continuous professional development
is neglected and does not include peacebuilding training (Rwantabagu 2014, p.60).
Despite being policy since 1998, 66% of secondary school teachers have never
received any follow-up training and this is even lower in rural areas (CRIDIS 2012 in
Rwantabagu 2014, pp.61–62). Thus, teachers lack the professional skills required for
a critical pedagogy of social transformation.
What is apparent from looking at these personal conversion factors is that: 1) teachers
are struggling to reconcile their own empirical experiences, where the trauma of
conflict restricts their well-being; 2) the lack of history curricula (a kind of generative
mechanism) means that teachers are struggling to reconcile the actual events that
took place, leading them to avoid engaging in dialogue with students about the past;
and 3) teachers lack the agency (and the support structures that could foster such
agency) required to grasp at the real. By highlighting the three stratified realities as
proposed by Bhaskar, I wish to emphasise the immense challenge facing teachers to
“emancipate”
3
(to use Bhaskar’s term) or “liberate” (to use Freire’s term) themselves
and their students from oppressive social structures. Peacebuilding education must
move beyond education about peace and the generic ‘rights-based’ discourse which
accompanies this, towards pedagogical approaches for peace that employ a critical
examination of structural issues of governance, access, quality and provision (Novelli
et al. 2015, p.6; Gill & Niens 2014, p.16). However, for this to occur, teachers must
have the personal conversion factors to enact such change; that is, they must be well,
safe, mentally and physically healthy, and they must have the skills to create
constructive and open dialogue with students provided through teacher professional
development. Finally, they must have the agency to enact this training, which, in turn,
depends on various social and environmental factors.
Social Conversion Factors
In Burundi, there is the saying ‘Umwana si uwumwe’ (‘a child does not belong to one
3
Bhaskar distinguishes between power1 and power2; only power1 is emancipatory and has a positive,
transformative capacity whilst power2 is negative, coercive and oppressive (Alderson 2013). There is some
synergy between this and Sen’s conception of agency, as well as Freire’s notion of the liberated. All three argue
that agency and well-being cannot be determined a priori but must be discovered and lived. For Freire, “banking
education anesthetizes and inhibits creative power, problem-posing education involves a constant unveiling of
reality. The former attempts to maintain the submersion of consciousness the latter strives for the emergence
of consciousness and critical intervention in reality” (Freire 1996, p.62)
person’ but to the community) (Rwantabagu 2010, p.348). In traditional Burundian
society, as in many African nations, the responsibility of raising children has been
shared by the community. Indeed, the close connection between society, the school
and the family is highlighted in the Government’s Vision for Burundi in 2025. One of
the eight stated key pillars for transformation is: “Progressive reestablishment of social
cohesion at the centre of its priorities, by once again honoring the fundamental cultural
values that have always characterized Burundian society”(GoB 2011, p.12). Sharing
one national language and culture arguably provides “a solid cultural heritage that
should provide the foundation for reconstituting national unity and reshaping identity
to ensure a better future for all” (Rwantabagu 2015, p.111). This move towards
‘sameness’ can provide both enabling and constraining social conversion factors for
teachers delivering an education for social transformation.
As noted above, political affiliation in Burundi is highly charged. Whilst in some areas
this can create a sense of social unity – where the local community share the same
ideology – it can simultaneously deepen political discrimination and social hatred. This
means that policies for teacher deployment that focus on redistribution can lead to
teachers being confronted by social challenges, being treated differently depending
on their political affiliation. For example, one study’s participants suggested that
teachers were actually punished for not supporting the party in power: “when they
select teachers to work in the most remote parts of the country, if you are not part of
[the right political party], you will always be sent there” (Lemon 2016, p.19).
Recognition, understood as “possible solutions to injustices that have to do with status
inequalities, that prevent some people from equal or full interaction in institutionalised
cultural hierarchies” (Novelli et al. 2015, p.12) is clearly lacking. Instead of an
appreciation of difference, and respect for political freedom, a culture of discrimination
exists. Whilst this previously focused on ‘Hutu’ or ‘Tutsi’ identity, it now discriminates
against political identity.
Additionally, teachers in Burundi are often the perpetrators of violence as well as the
victims of (direct and indirect) violence as detailed above. Corporal punishment, whilst
illegal, is frequent, as is gender-based violence in the form of transactional sex
between teachers and girls in secondary school (Sommers 2013, p.45). Teachers beat
their students for a variety of trivial offences, such as not being punctual (Obura 2008,
p.169). In Tanzania, Tao (2015) has shown that corporal punishment is encouraged
by parents and the community, impacting on how teachers discipline children,
regardless of their personal discomfort in enacting such punishment. In Burundi,
similar social pressures on teachers exist. This is seen even at the highest levels
where violence has been accepted as a social norm. For example, one government
official explains: “All parents in Burundi beat their children” (Sommers 2013, p.19).
Teacher violence is encouraged by parents. One Burundian father claims: “In Africa,
we believe that if you don’t beat your child, your child won’t learn anything. You have
to beat knowledge into them”. Another mother said: “We beat children to educate
them” (Ibid). As Galtung explains, cultural violence, which might include religion,
ideology, language, art, even science, “makes direct and structural violence look, even
feel, right - or at least not wrong" (Galtung 1990, p.291). In this context, we can see
that the social environment puts pressures on teachers to act in a certain way,
undermining any discourse about peace and peace-building which might occur in the
classroom. What’s more, in Rwanda, sexual violence against female students has a
particular ethnic dimension (McLean Hilker 2014) and, whilst there is no existing
evidence in the Burundian context to suggest that this is the same, this is an area
which needs further research.
Simultaneously, this closeness between teachers and communities means that
teachers in Burundi, which is a largely rural and illiterate country, can also play a
significant leadership role (Sayed & Novelli 2016, p.21). This is seen in the rise of
community junior secondary schools, cocos, where communities have acknowledged
the importance of education (Obura 2008, p.125). Unfortunately, these schools have
been driven by critical need and lack either political will or political ability to finance the
required number of secondary schools. Remarkably, the cocos made up 73% of all
secondary schools in 2002
4
(Obura 2008, p.132). These are financed by local
communities rather than the state and so, whilst collaborative, their very existence
simultaneously highlights the state’s failure to provide in rural areas, underscoring
issues of redistribution. In turn, the lack of funding and training for the teachers in the
cocos means that teaching quality is very poor (Ibid). The result is that those in
underserved rural areas will continue to be underrepresented in the future with a lack
of adequate education to secure jobs in positions of power.
4
More recent data is unavailable.
The above social conversion factors highlight just some of the challenges facing
teachers to enact their role as transformative agents. Despite these challenges, the
Burundian teachers can enact change as can be seen by some of the inclusive work
done by the cocos. Indeed, Waghid (2014) has persuasively argued in the context of
South Africa that embracing the distinctly African philosophy of ubuntu as humanness
in education can harness an enabling social environment. Through shared reflection,
respect, caring and communal trust, the pedagogical cultivation of ubuntu can ensure
that the education systems in Africa are not only “producing educated and trained
professionals” but also “cultivated and nurtured individuals” (Waghid 2014, p.66).
Taking this concept of ubuntu, it is suggested that the true, positive meaning of the
Burundian saying ‘Umwana si uwumwe’ could be realised.
Environmental Conversion Factors
Where teachers manage to overcome personal and social constraints, sometimes
their ability to engage in transformative education is limited by the structural and
environmental context. This might include the immediate environment of teachers
such as poor school infrastructure and lack of resources. Though the content of
textbooks did not need to be revised as in other conflict-affected countries (such as
Afghanistan), the availability of books continues to be shockingly low, being
undersupplied by as much as 85% even in the capital city of Bujumbura (Obura 2008,
p.105). Moreover, in the ‘post-conflict’ reconstruction phase, efforts to rebuild schools
by international agencies have served to reinforce ethnic and economic inequalities
as existing infrastructure in the most accessible areas was rebuilt first (UNESCO 2011,
p.181).
The political environment is characterized by violent repression. In October 2016, the
Burundian authorities suspended cooperation with the United Nations and withdrew
from the International Criminal Court, whilst systematically committing human rights
abuses against its population (HRW online; FIDH 2016). Military spending has
increased following the unrest since 2015, threatening the budget for education.
Although education spending had doubled in 2010 to accommodate for the pledge for
universal primary education (UNESCO 2011, p.10), the ongoing political turmoil
potentially signals a return to 2007 when spending on education was just one third of
what was allocated to the military (UNESCO 2011, p.148).
Finally, the international donor environment could have a positive impact on individual
teachers’ capacities to deliver education for social transformation. As this paper has
detailed, a lack of finance (among other things including political will) denies teachers
the necessary teaching resources, remuneration, specific peace-building training and
support structures that are required for them to deliver a critical pedagogy for social
transformation. Historically, aid flows to Burundi have been inconsistent and uncertain
(UNESCO 2011, p.17). Sadly, this reality is likely to continue. Burundi does not have
the attractive natural resources of neighbouring DRC, nor the image of post-genocide
Rwanda, making it little known and of little strategic interest to donors like USAID and
DFID (Obura 2008, p.20).
Conclusion
This paper has argued that teachers in Burundi have a fundamental role in
peacebuilding and social transformation and yet, as individuals, they face numerous
obstacles. These barriers encompass their own personal well-being and their
professional capacities, as well as politically tense social structures and materially
poor school environments. I have tried to illustrate, particularly with regard the
personal conversion factors, what Bhaskar argued in The Possibility of Naturalism –
that the dualism of “structure and agency had been wrongly conceived; that a structure
was always necessary for agency, and at the same time agency reproduced or
transformed structure”(Roy Bhaskar 2017, p.32). The agency of Burundi’s teachers to
enact social transformation depends upon socio-economic and political structures and
the agency of the teacher can either perpetuate or change such structures.
Such challenges have been highlighted in the hope that this critical reflection provides
a starting point for further research into how teachers can be supported. The process
of identifying constraints upon teachers’ freedoms has the potential to empower
teachers to become critical agents for peace through “a constant unveiling of reality”
that “strives for the emergence of consciousness and critical intervention in reality”
(Freire 1996, p.62). As Sen writes: “Freedoms are not only the primary ends of
development, they are also among the principal means” (Sen 1999, p.10). By tackling
these conversion factors, teachers’ personal and professional freedoms can be
realised.
Bibliography
Alderson, P., 2013. Childhoods Real and Imagined. Vol.1: An Introduction to Critical
Realism and Childhood Studies, Routledge.
Alkire, S., 2000. Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty
Reduction, New York: Oxford University Press.
Anon, Burundi country profile. World Bank. Available at:
http://data.worldbank.org/country/burundi [Accessed April 1, 2017].
Anon, 2014. Burundi National Education Profile 2014 Update,
Apple, M.W., 2015. Reframing the Question of Whether Education Can Change
Society. Educational Theory, 65(3), pp.299–315.
Archer, M. et al. eds., 1998. Critical Realism: Essential Readings, Oxon: Routledge.
Batonon, A.E. & Norton, K., 2010. Combating Social Exclusion in Post-Conflict
Recovery: Education and Disability in Burundi,
Bentrovato, D., 2016. Whose Past, What Future? Teaching Contested Histories in
Contemporary Rwanda and Burundi. In M. S. Denise Bentrovato, Karina V.
Korostelina, ed. History Can Bite: History Education in Divided and Postwar
Societies. V&R unipress GmbH, pp. 221–240.
Berckmoes, L., 2015. (Re)producing Ambiguity and Contradictions in Enduring and
Looming Crisis in Burundi. Ethnos, 0(0), pp.1–21. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00141844.2015.1106570.
Bird, L., 2007. Learning about War and Peace. Research in Comparative and
International Education, 2(3), pp.176–190.
Bush, K. & Saltarelli, D., 2000. The Two Faces of Education in Ethnic Conflict:
Towards a Peacebuilding Education for Children, Florence: UNICEF Innocenti
Research Centre.
Cardozo Lopes, M.T.A. & Shah, R., 2016. A conceptual framework to analyse the
multiscalar politics of education for sustainable peacebuilding (forthcoming).
Comparative Education, 68(September), pp.1–21. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2016.1220144.
Collier, P. & Hoeffler, A., 2012. Greed and grievance in civil war. International Affairs,
88(4), pp.757–777.
Curtis, D.E. a., 2015. Development assistance and the lasting legacies of rebellion in
Burundi and Rwanda. Third World Quarterly, 36(7), pp.1365–1381. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01436597.2015.1041103.
Darder, A., Mayo, P. & Paraskeva, J., 2016. International Critical Pedagogy Reader,
London; New York: Routledge.
Davies, L., 2011. Learning for state‐building: capacity development, education and
fragility. Comparative Education, 47(2), pp.157–180. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03050068.2011.554085.
Davies, L. & Talbot, C., 2008. Learning in Conflict and Postconflict Contexts Conflict
and Postconflict Societies. Comparative Education Review, 52(4), pp.509–517.
FIDH, 2016. Repression and pre-genocidal dynamics in Burundi,
Fraser, N., 1995. From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a “post-
socialist” age. New Left Review, 0(212), pp.69–93.
Freire, P., 2015. Cultural action and conscientization. In M. Apple & W. Au, eds.
Critical Education. Oxon: Routledge, pp. 5–26.
Freire, P., 2013. Education and conscientizaҫᾶo. Education for critical
consciousness, (2013), pp.39–54.
Freire, P., 1996. Pedagogy of the Oppressed, London; New York; Victoria; Ontario:
Penguin Group.
Galtung, J., 1990. Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), pp.291–305.
Gill, S. & Niens, U., 2014. Education as humanisation: a theoretical review on the
role of dialogic pedagogy in peacebuilding education. Compare: A Journal of
Comparative and International Education, 44(1), pp.10–31. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2013.859879.
Giroux, H.A., 2004a. Betraying the Intellectual Tradition: Public Intellectuals and the
Crisis of Youth. In A. M. Phipps & M. Guilherme, eds. Critical Pedagogy :
Political Approaches to Language and Intercultural Communication. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Giroux, H.A., 2004b. Critical Pedagogy and the Postmodern / Modern Divide:
Towards a Pedagogy of Democratization. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1),
pp.31–47. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23478412.
Giroux, H.A., 2010. Rethinking Education as the Practice of Freedom : Paulo Freire
and the promise of critical pedagogy. Policy Futures in Education, 8(6), pp.715–
721.
Giroux, H.A., 2001. Theory and Resistance in Education: Towards a Pedagogy for
the Opposition, Westport, USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.
GoB, 2011. Vision Burundi 2025,
GPE, GPE. Global Partnership for Education website. Available at:
http://www.globalpartnership.org/country/burundi [Accessed April 1, 2016].
GPE, 2014. Pledge from Burundi: Burundi’s commitment to universal primary
education 2015-2018, Brussels. Available at: https://www.globalpartnership.org/.
Horner, A.L. et al., 2015. Literature Review: The Role of Teachers in Peacebuilding. ,
(September).
HRW, Burundi: ICC Withdrawal Major Loss to Victims. Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/10/27/burundi-icc-withdrawal-major-loss-victims
[Accessed April 4, 2017a].
HRW, HRW. Human Rights Watch website. Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/africa/burundi [Accessed April 1, 2017b].
IWACU, Bitter dispute over quality education and care. Available at:
http://www.iwacu-burundi.org/englishnews/bitter-dispute-continues-over-quality-
of-education-and-teacher-care/ [Accessed April 4, 2017].
Lemarchand, R., 1995. Burundi; Ethnic Conflict and Genocide, London: Cambridge
University Press.
Lemon, A., 2016. Our Country, Our Future: A Community Empowerment Approach
for Non-Violence in Burundi,
McLaren, P., 2016. Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy in the
Foundations of Education Sixth., London; New York: Routledge.
McLean Hilker, L., 2011. The role of education in driving conflict and building peace:
The case of Rwanda. Prospects, 41(2), pp.267–282.
McLean Hilker, L.C., 2014. Navigating adolescence and young adulthood in Rwanda
during and after genocide: intersections of ethnicity, gender and age. Children’s
Geographies, 12(3), pp.354–368. Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14733285.2014.913784.
Ndura-Ouédraogo, E., 2009a. Grassroots Voices of Hope: Educators’ and Students’
Perspectives on Educating for Peace in post-conflict Burundi. In C. McGlynn et
al., eds. Peace Education in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies: Comparative
Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan US.
Ndura-Ouédraogo, E., 2009b. The role of education in peace‐building in the African
Great Lakes region: educators’ perspectives. Journal of Peace Education, 6(1),
pp.37–49.
Novelli, M., Lopes Cardozo, M. & Smith, A., 2015. A Theoretical Framework for
Analysing the Contribution of Education to Sustainable Peacebuilding : 4Rs in
Conflict-Affected Contexts. , p.24.
Nussbaum, M., 2011. Creating Capabilities, Cambridge: Belknap Press.
Obura, A., 2008. Staying power: struggling to reconstruct education in Burundi since
1993,
Perumal, J.C., 2014. Critical pedagogies of place: Educators â€TM personal and
professional experiences of social (in)justice. Teaching and Teacher Education,
45(2015), pp.25–32. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.09.004.
Robeyns, I., 2016. Capabilitarianism. Journal of Human Development and
Capabilities, 17(3), pp.397–414.
Robeyns, I., 2005. The Capability Approach : a theoretical survey The Capability
Approach : a theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), pp.93–
117.
Roy Bhaskar, 2017. The Order of Natural Necessity – A Kind of Introduction to
Critical Realism G. Hawke, ed., London: The Authors.
Rwantabagu, H., 2015. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education: Studies of
Migration, Integration, Equity, and Cultural Survival Problems and Prospects in
the Education of a Marginal Minority: The Case of the Batwa Community in
Burundi Problems and Prospects in the. , 5692(March), pp.37–41.
Rwantabagu, H., 2010. Moral education in a post-conflict context: the case of
Burundi. Journal of Moral Education, 39(3, SI), pp.345–352.
Rwantabagu, H., 2014. Trends and Challenges in Burundi. In C. Wolhuter, ed. Book
Cover Education in East and Central Africa. Bloomsbury Academic, pp. 37–68.
Sayed, Y. & Novelli, M., 2016. The Role of Teachers in Cohesion The Research
Consortium on Education and Peacebuilding,
Sen, A., 1999. Development as Freedom, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skonhoft, C.G., 2000. “Why should I send my child to school?”: A study of Burundian
Hutu refugees’ experiences of exclusion from education and how this motivates
education in Tanzanian exile. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 54(3), pp.116–121.
Snauwaert, D., 2011. Social justice and the philosophical foundations of critical
peace education: Exploring Nussbaum, Sen, and Freire. Journal of Peace
Education, 8(3), pp.315–331.
Sommers, M., 2013. Adolescents and Violence Lessons from Burundi.
Tao, S., 2015. Corporal Punishment, Capabilities and Well-being: Tanzanian primary
school teachers’ perspectives. In J. Parkes, ed. Gender Violence in Poverty
Contexts: The educational challenge. London; New York: Routledge.
Tao, S., 2013. Why are teachers absent? Utilising the Capability Approach and
Critical Realism to explain teacher performance in Tanzania. International
Journal of Educational Development, 33(1), pp.2–14. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.01.003.
Taylor, D., 2014. Transitional justice and the TRC in Burundi: avoiding
inconsequential chatter? Contemporary Justice Review, 17(2), pp.195–215.
Available at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10282580.2014.915141.
Timpson, W.M., Ndura, E. & Bangayimbaga, A., 2015. Conflict, Reconciliation and
Peace Education: Moving Burundi Toward a Sustainable Future, London; New
York: Routledge.
UIS, 2017. Burundi Country Profile. Available at: http://uis.unesco.org/country/BI
[Accessed March 27, 2017].
UNDP, 2016. Human Development Report 2016: Burundi,
UNESCO, 2014. Education for All - Global Monitoring Report: Teaching and
Learning: Achieving quality for all, Paris.
UNESCO, 2011. Education For All - Global Monitoring Report: The hidden crisis:
armed conflict and education. EFA Global Monitoring Report, pp.0–37. Available
at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001907/190743e.pdf.
UNICEF, 2015. Burundi Annual Report 2015,
Vandeginste, S., 2014. Governing ethnicity after genocide: ethnic amnesia in
Rwanda versus ethnic power-sharing in Burundi. Journal of Eastern African
Studies, 8(2), pp.263–277. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2014.891784%5Cnhttp://www.tandfonline.co
m.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/17531055.2014.891784%5Cnhttp://w
ww.tandfonline.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/17531055.2014.891
784#.U44bFC_tpGE.
Waghid, Y., 2014. African Philosophy of Education Reconsidered, London; New
York: Routledge.
Warshauer, S., Weinstein, H.M. & Murphy, K., 2008. Teaching History after Identity-
Based Conflicts: The Rwanda Experience. Comparative Education Review,
52(4), pp.663–690.
World Bank, Burundi country profile. Available at:
http://data.worldbank.org/country/burundi [Accessed April 1, 2017]
