Presentation on theme: "Public good, or economic tool? Alexandra Draxler -- formerly UNESCO ANZCIES 2013 Newcastle, Australia."— Presentation transcript:
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 educationboth a sign of wealth and a source of it.
UNESCOs 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
More and better international norms More and better data More and better standardized tests More and better comparisons = Equality and comprehensiveness of opportunity and learning? Solutions in search of relevant problems?
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 Last mile Special needs Reduction of inequality Social cohesion
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.