Block, Leslie S. “National development policy and outcomes at the University of Dar es Salaam” in African Studies Review

Block, Leslie S. “National development policy and outcomes at the University of Dar es Salaam” in African Studies Review, v. 27., no. 1. pages 97-115.

African nations undertook development strategies that did not fully follow either of the two most prominent Western paradigms – modernization & dialectical materialism (Marxism). Tanzania, by way of the example used in this article, takes up aspects of each paradigm, but places its definitions in indigenous economic forms.

p. 98: Tanzania is one country that has systematically attempted to devise educational programs to counter the residual effects of colonialism [and neo-colonialism] and promote an appropriate form of economic development for productive rural living.”

Arusha Declaration’s three principles:
(1) self-reliance – development through mobilization of domestic human and capital resources
(2) social equity – disbursing benefits to the entire society to inhibit wide disparity in income and wealth between rural and urban areas;
(3) cooperative effort – encouraging economic activities undertaken through collectivism.

Manpower measures as seen in the context of faculty and staff appointments at UDASA itself: in 1968, only 25% of filled Category A teaching positions were held by Tanzanians. By 1976, Tanzanians took up 67% of all filled positions – a relative expansion of indigenous manpower. Still, in absolute terms, there were more expatriate Category A faculty at UDASA in 1978 (212) than there had been in 1967 (47). Yes, the university expanded explosively in terms of its offerings, but it lagged somewhat in filling teaching positions “from within”.

In civil society more broadly, Tanzania experienced greater success at its project of LOCALIZATION.

P. 106: “At the Party’s biennial conference in Musoma in 1974, the Education for Self-Reliance policy was assessed. The Party was shocked by the anti-egalitarian and anti-socialist attitudes of post-primary graduates. The secondary school and university graduates were status conscious rather than pro-egalitarian and saw education as the vehicle for becoming members of Tanzania’s upper echelons.

In quantitative terms, Tanzania’s educational system displays elitist tendencies. Post-primary education is accessible to a very limited number of individuals who continue to develop into a new social and political elite. By design, the absorptive capacity of secondary schools and the university are constrained by manpower demand and financial resources available, not the number of qualified entrants available. Subsequently, the increase in primary enrollment and graduates has not been accompanied by a proportionate increase at the secondary and university levels of education, thus, producing an educated elite.”

p. 107: “Realizing that socialist education is not worthy of this distinction if work is not integrated into it at all levels, the Party resolved that after 1974 all entrants to the university must have worked a minimum of two years after the completion of secondary school; meet educational qualifications required by the university; obtain a satisfactory report from their employer; and be recommended by the Party.”

p. 108: “To pursue high-level manpower demands without creating an elitist class and sacrificing egalitarian goals has been a difficult task for Nyerere and the Party. All entry into the post-primary education was to be directly related to manpower demands, and unwarranted expansion of secondary and university enrollment and output had to be inhibited. Therein lies the dilemma: seeking short-term manpower goals sharply limits provisions for post-primary education for all qualified candidates. The party has attempted to hold down over-expansion at post-primary levels, but in so doing has created an educated elite.”