International investment in education for development. Public good, or economic tool? Alexandra Draxler -- formerly UNESCO . The right to education: construction and evolution. Early 1960s the right to education was central. Lending for education was limited to infrastructure
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
International investment in education for development
Public good, or economic tool?
Alexandra Draxler -- formerly UNESCO
ANZCIES 2013 Newcastle, Australia
Early 1960s the right to education was central. Lending for education was limited to infrastructure
The identification of human capital as a force of economic growth both stimulated and justified advising developing countries to “invest” in education
Education became education”both a sign of wealth and a source of it.”
UNESCO’s first major report on the “World Education Crisis” (1968) adopted a largely human capital approach
In 1971 and again in 1996 UNESCO issued reports that were firmly rights-based, education being seen as a good in its own right
World Bank reports (1971, 1974, 2001) consistently pushed human capital and rates of return
ILO launch the notion of basic human needs (1976) that infused the debate for many years
Jomtien (1990), Dakar (2000) and the EFA “movement” stressed rights-based approaches but recognized and acknowledged the growing movement to invite privatization into the education development landscape
Education for All (1990, 2000) movement generated the annual and influential Global Monitoring Report, that has generally focused on capabilities, basic human needs, and reducing inequality
Public-private partnerships (i.e. devolving, through contract and government support substantial portions of education provision) have become part of the education landscape
Post 2015 : intense activity, UN S-G High-level panel, education goals are included in proposals; metrics and targets figure prominently; private sector closely involved in urging standardization across countries, metrics, and use of technology
Study on what PISA tells us about equity (2005) :
Policy makers should focus their attention on how basic skills vary between different groups of pupils and different schools within each country
High-level Panel :
Make data freely available to all for good governance
Disaggregation to ensure all groups and individuals are covered
first step a global strategy … Why? What good is complex data for the majority of people? Will it trickle down? Will it build local capacity? Does global data drive local policy and practice? What is the evidence?
International measurement and testing will in all probability remain in the hands of international groups, failing to develop national capacity, local standards and local responses
Rates of return make the attractiveness of education options dependent on crude and highly-contested statistics
EFA statistics that focus on national enrolment and achievement rates do not help tackle the biggest problem, that of inequality among groups and individuals
Solutions in search of relevant problems?
More and better international normsMore and better data
More and better standardized tests
More and better comparisons
Equality and comprehensiveness of opportunity and learning?
Development of standardized tests
Sales of delivery tools for learning (textbooks, computers, phones, tablets)
Data collection and analysis (sometimes public, sometimes proprietary)
Ownership and/or management of schools and training centers
Teacher training and certification
Management tools and training
Only public sector, however imperfect, has the regulatory power, democratic oversight and mission to ensure
Democratic and transparent processes
Reduction of inequality