Formulation
International NGOs’ became strongly involved in the provisions of education upon the founding’s of the EFA and MDGs. International global society, governments, and the IFIs’ came together at the beginning of the 90’s and again at the turn of the century to create a formula for the application of education that was prepared according to specific procedures for modernization and globalization of nation-states (Novelli, 2010, Pillay, 2010; Rose, 2009). The MDGs believe that the central challenge that the world faces is to ensure that Globalization becomes a positive force for all of the world’s people. The declaration contends that Globalization offers great opportunities, but that its benefits are very unevenly shared, and its costs are unevenly distributed. The goals assert that developing countries and countries with economies in transition face special difficulties in responding to this central challenge.
Therefore, the goals of these initiatives state that through broad and sustained efforts to create a shared future, based upon common conceptions of humanity in all its diversity, Globalization can be made fully inclusive and equitable. To accomplish these goals efforts, policies and measures, formulated at the global level must include the needs of developing countries and economies in transition and are formulated and implemented with their effective participation (MDG, 2000). Education was formulated as a tool to help bring the Global South onto a more equal economic and social footing with the Global North. However, it is debated whether a system that was designed to keep the Global North with the power, money and prosperity while simultaneously keeping the Global South impoverished, excluded and exploited, can ever create equality (Coates, 2003; Mullaly, 2007; Shiva, 2005). The literature clearly reflects that the involvement of the Global South within the formulation of educational initiatives has been lacking, and that the role of international NGOs has purposely and forcefully kept the cultural needs of the Global South out (Novelli, 2010; Pillay, 2010; Rose, 2009; Strutt & Kepe, 2010).
Therefore, the goals of these initiatives state that through broad and sustained efforts to create a shared future, based upon common conceptions of humanity in all its diversity, Globalization can be made fully inclusive and equitable. To accomplish these goals efforts, policies and measures, formulated at the global level must include the needs of developing countries and economies in transition and are formulated and implemented with their effective participation (MDG, 2000). Education was formulated as a tool to help bring the Global South onto a more equal economic and social footing with the Global North. However, it is debated whether a system that was designed to keep the Global North with the power, money and prosperity while simultaneously keeping the Global South impoverished, excluded and exploited, can ever create equality (Coates, 2003; Mullaly, 2007; Shiva, 2005). The literature clearly reflects that the involvement of the Global South within the formulation of educational initiatives has been lacking, and that the role of international NGOs has purposely and forcefully kept the cultural needs of the Global South out (Novelli, 2010; Pillay, 2010; Rose, 2009; Strutt & Kepe, 2010).
The creation of the MDGs and EFA goals formulated a framework for education, which ensured the role of the international global society (Strutt & Kepe, 2010). International aid is filtered through foreign governments, IFI’S and international NGOs, and used to help fill in the gaps of educational programming in the Global South (Blum, 2009; Coclough & De, 2010; Miller-Grandvaux et Al, 2006; Nishimuko, 2010; Novelli, 2010, Pillay, 2010; Rose, 2010; Strutt & Kepe, 2010). Through these actions international NGOs’ have become dominant actors in the educational development sector and are multi-billion dollar industries (Pillay, 2010, Rose, 2009). This status has enabled international NGOs to influence other organizations and agencies to change their educational policies and approaches based in their agendas (Novelli, 2010; Pillay, 2010). They have been able to use this power to influence the structures of the world’s politics both through increasing influence within existing international institutions and through their capacity to leverage change in individual nation-states (Pillay, 2010).
International NGOs’ have this power because of their ability to acquire aid donor resources. As a registered non-profit, NGOs’ can receive aid money from private, government and IFI funds (Rose, 2009), usually the acceptance or the soliciting of aid is done because the agency holds or advocates for a certain agenda. Given that the world’s financial resources mainly reside in the hands of few elite neo-liberals, it would follow that their rich donators shape international NGOs’ agenda. As a registered NGO those working for the organizations are often beneficiaries of donor resources. They may, for example, receive preferential salaries or other pecuniary benefits compared with those working within the national educational forums. This implies that their motivation for pushing agendas can be both financial as well as philanthropic (Rose, 2009). That is NGOs’ are often required to push agendas’ and meet specific outcomes based on the needs of their donors, often over the needs of the people they serve.
.
Based on the critical literature it appears that at this level NGOs attempt to push advocacy projects aimed at putting pressure on governments to fulfill their commitment to the EFA and MDGs (which are strongly based in western values) (Pillay, 2010). Often NGO involvement is provided on the condition that recipient government’s implement a string of neo-liberal educational reforms linked to structural adjustment policies and fiscal constraints (Novelli, 2010). Through this role NGOs appear to create educational policies and programs filtered through an economic lens. That is, through a neo- liberal perspective NGOs are motivated to modernize educational initiatives for the masses in a one size fits all models, as a means of transforming the behaviour and attitudes of the poor (Novelli, 2010; Rose, 2009). NGOs also play a role in the development of education to push a security agenda; as education is seen as a key element of any successful whole-of-government counterterrorism and counter insurgency effort (Novelli, 2010).
At this level NGOs appear to take "top-down" approaches to provide neo-liberal, globalized education. The critical literature seems to indicate that international NGOs formulate education as method for economic development to meet a neo-liberal agenda. The goals and targets of EFA and MDGs' were created by international agencies and the realization of these goals has been driven by the formation of the global policy based on neo-liberal architecture (Strutt & Kepe, 2010). That is, it seems clear that there is a power hierarchy between the international NGOs and the Global South at the formulation level. Education is formulated based on the criteria of the donor and partnerships are created based on leaders and followers. That is, you will receive support if you follow our (neo-liberal) agenda. Therefore the formulation of education as a tool for development is instigated by international agencies with little southern input (Strutt & Kepe, 2010).
This role has given greater control to international NGOs’ over the educational direction, purposes, schooling experience, linguistic content and cultural content of sovereign nations (Pillay, 2010). The role of NGOs’ at the formulation level of education is similar to that of colonizers because of NGOs’ roles as oppresser. This role is taken in an attempt to homogenize economies, cultures and livelihoods, and they fail to meet the cultural needs of communities (Rose, 2009). This in turn has stifled efforts to secure international socail welfare.
This role has given greater control to international NGOs’ over the educational direction, purposes, schooling experience, linguistic content and cultural content of sovereign nations (Pillay, 2010). The role of NGOs’ at the formulation level of education is similar to that of colonizers because of NGOs’ roles as oppresser. This role is taken in an attempt to homogenize economies, cultures and livelihoods, and they fail to meet the cultural needs of communities (Rose, 2009). This in turn has stifled efforts to secure international socail welfare.