Enhancing Pedagogy In Cambodia (EPIC)
I just participated in an education conference in Siem Reap, Cambodia. I was pleasantly surprised by a genuine desire to improve Cambodian education, by government officials, NGOs, and foreign agencies. Notably absent was any input from private schools, as though they were not interested in enhancing education. Why?
When I came to Cambodia 30 years ago, the country was a basket case, coming out of the Khmer Rouge era, when some 95% of all teachers had been killed. Education was especially weak, with teachers earning only a dollar a day, the exam system thoroughly corrupt, etc.
Private schools and colleges grew up as an alternative to the nearly nonexistent public sector. This was an attempt to bring some form of education to this failed state.
However, public education gradually but greatly improved over the next 30 years, to the point where it became at least an affordable alternative to the private schools. The private schools more and more were seen as only marginally better than the public schools.
Today, as I learned from the Conference, public education is forging ahead with reforms, while the private schools are mired in the status quo. Worse, the private schools have turned to marketing, in an effort to project an image of success and wealth, at the expense of quality education. The goal is now to attract rich families as a status symbol. Fancy new buildings and showy equipment increasingly replace raising salaries for qualified teachers.
Private universities, intent on increasing profits, have switched to Khmer instruction in order to increase student enrollment. While they call themselves ‘International’ universities, they have in fact cut off all their international contacts because their students cannot understand English. Public institutions, on the other hand, can offer courses in English, thereby attracting foreign professors, exchanges, and projects.
Another reason that public institutions, especially universities, have surpassed private ones is that only public universities are eligible for generous grants from foreign governments, World Bank, and the like.
One private university’s original “Mission Statement” included a phrase to the effect that it would help disadvantaged students. After a few years, the university’s owner quietly dropped that phrase.
What’s sad is that there are dedicated teachers in the private schools, who want only the best for their students, but they run up against a brick wall in the administrators and owners, who are willing to sacrifice students’ education in order to polish the school’s wealthy image.
To return to the question of why private schools are not interested in improving public education, the answer is now clear: they are in competition. Any improvement in public education diminishes whatever advantage the private schools may have over them. More students may opt for the improved public schools, and that will diminish the profits of the private schools. The private, for-profit schools don’t want that.