Policy implementation in workers education in Tanzania: case study of two factories

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the workers’ education policy in Tanzania. An attempt was made to compare policy statements and the actual operation of the policy in the workplaces. Two factories had been selected to serve as case study areas. Factory (X) was a paratatal enterprise and factory (Y) was a government ministry enterprise. In each of the two case study areas, a stratified sample was selected. In factory (X), a total number of 43 people were interviewed. In addition to the sample mentioned above, the researcher interviewed headquarters and regional officials of the Ministry of labour and Social welfare, education section, the Ministry of National Education, adult education section, and the National Union of Tanganyika Workers (NUTA). Two types of instruments were used in collecting data namely, the structured interview schedules and the interview check lists which were used for the unstructured interviews. In addition to the interviews, documentary sources and participant observations were also used. The data collected had been analysed through content analysis, and processed manually. The statistics used in analysis, and interpreting the data were described in frequencies and percentages. The results of the study showed that there were similarities as well as differences in the experiences of implementation between the two factories studied. A variety of workers’ education programmes were organized in factory (Y), while in factory (X), there was mainly one programme, literacy classes. It was also discovered that in factory (Y) since late 1973 up to 1976, an hour daily was set aside within the working hours for study purposes. In factory (X), time was not found the working hours to be used for workers’ education activities. The results of the study had further revealed the following: (a) There was variation of policy interpretation among the workers, the management and the agencies which were supposed to promote and co-ordinate workers’ education activities. (b) In factory (X) there was no registration and attendance records; workers’ education classes were being run without proper records; in factory (Y), registration and attendance were compulsory and therefore every worker attended the programmes organized at the factory. (c) Since the directive on the implementation of the workers’ education policy became effective in July, 1973 up to 1976, during the research period, factory (X) did not employ a qualified workers’ education officer, but factory (Y) did have qualified personnel to organize workers’ education programmes. (d) There was a problem of funds. In factory (X) the funds which were available were not used properly to promote workers’ education at the factory. In factory (Y), there was no