Social Policy: Education Development Economics (Hons) Nic Spaull Nicspaull.com/research 23 April 2014 Social Policy & Education Firstly, what is social policy? “Social policy primarily refers to the guidelines, principles, legislation and activities that affect the living conditions conducive to human welfare” “Public policy and practice in the areas of health care, human services, criminal justice, inequality, education, and labour” “Social Policy is defined as actions that affect the well-being of members of a society through shaping the distribution of and access to goods and resources in that society” Social Policy & Education • Secondly, how does education fit into it? – Most areas of social policy influence education (in some way), and are influenced by education (in some way) – Bidirectional causality – Multiple benefits of education… Ed Benefits of education H S E c $ Society Improved human rights Empowerment of women Reduced societal violence Promotion of a national (as opposed to regional or ethnic) identity Increased social cohesion Health Lower fertility Improved child health Preventative health care Demographic transition Economy Improvements in productivity Economic growth Reduction of inter-generational cycles of poverty Reductions in inequality Specific references: lower fertility (Glewwe, 2002), improved child health (Currie, 2009), reduced societal violence (Salmi, 2006), promotion of a national - as opposed to a regional or ethnic - identity (Glewwe, 2002), improved human rights (Salmi, 2006), increased social cohesion (Heyneman, 2003), Economic growth – see any decent Macro textbook, specifically for cognitive skills see (Hanushek & Woessman 2008) Social Policy & Education • Secondly, how does education fit into it? – Education itself affects society & the individual in real and meaningful ways: • Transforms individual capabilities, values, aspirations and desires (see Sen) • Allows individuals to think, feel and act in different ways • Enables new ways of organizing and supporting social action that depend on numeracy and literacy, technologies of communication and abstract thinking skills (Lewin, 2007). Democratic participation, knowledge creation etc. • Education increases peoples ability to add value (productivity) • “Modernising societies use educational access and attainment as a primary mechanism to sort and select subsequent generations into different social and economic roles” (Lewin, 2007: 3) Distribution of income – NB NB Education is different to the other forms of social policy in that it has the potential to change the GENERATIVE MECHANISMS of the income distribution, not simply re-allocating it once earned (as with grants) Theory: Human Capital Education increases peoples ability to add value (productivity) HCM + Man = Skills & health Incr MP of L Incr profits Incr wage “The failure to treat human resources explicitly as a form of capital, as a produced means of production, as the product of investment, has fostered the retention of the classical notion of labour as a capacity to do manual work requiring little knowledge and skill, a capacity with which, according to this notion, labourers are endowed about equally. This notion of labour was wrong in the classical period and it is patently wrong now. Counting individuals who can and want to work and treating such a count as a measure of the quantity of an economic factor is no more meaningful than it would be to count the number of all manner of machines to determine their economic importance” (Schultz, 1961, p. 3). Theory: Sorting & signalling • Education does not improve productivity or produce HC, instead acts as a signal of innate productivity/IQ/motivation. – Those with higher productivity/IQ/motivation will find it easier to get higher levels of education than those with lower P/IQ/M • Do we care if it is HCM or Signalling? – Yes! Implications for public investment. Elusive equity • Given the strong links between education and income, educational inequality is a fundamental determinant of income inequality. • Clear need to understand SA educational inequality if we are to understand SA income inequality. • High inequality + unemployment 2 of the most severe problems facing SA – Educational quality is intimately intertwined with both of these. • “Education shall be free, compulsory, universal and equal for all children” (Freedom Charter) • Fiske and Ladd’s (2004) notions of: 1. Equal treatment 2. Equal educational opportunity 3. Educational adequacy Not all schools are born equal ? Pretoria Boys High School SA public schools? 9 Education and inequality? Quality of education Duration of education Type of education SA is the most unequal country in the world Between 78% and 85% of total inequality is explained by wage inequality Wages • IQ • Motivation • Social networks • Discrimination 11 Leibbrandt et al 2010 Type Labour Market High productivity jobs and incomes (17%) • • • • • • • 17% • Type of institution (FET or University) Quality of institution Type of qualification (diploma, degree etc.) Field of study (Engineering, Arts etc.) High quality primary school Some motivated, lucky or talented students make the transition Vocational training Affirmative action Low productivity jobs & incomes • • Often manual or low skill jobs Limited or low quality education Minimum wage can exceed productivity - SemiSkilled (31%) Quality • Mainly professional, managerial & skilled jobs Requires graduates, good quality matric or good vocational skills Historically mainly white High quality secondary school High SES background +ECD Minority (20%) Big demand for good schools despite fees Some scholarships/bursaries Unequal society Majority (80%) Low quality secondary school Low SES background Unskilled (19%) Unemployed (Broad - 33%) Low quality primary school Attainment • University/ FET 12 cf. Servaas van der Berg – QLFS 2011 .005 Kernel Density of Literacy Score by Race (KZN) .006 .004 Density .003 .002 .002 0 20 40 60 Literacy score (%) Black Indian 80 0 0 0 .001 .005 .01 .015 kdensity reading test score .004 .02 U-ANA 2011 100 0 0 200 White Asian 400 reading test score 600 200 800 Poorest 25% Second wealthiest 25% English/Afrikaans schools African language schools 400 600 Learner Reading Score 800 1000 Second poorest 25% Wealthiest 25% .025 PIRLS / TIMSS / SACMEQ / NSES / ANA / Matric… by Wealth / Language / Location / Dept… Kernel Density of School Literacy by Quintile .01 .02 Density .015 .01 0 0 0 Density .03 .02 .04 U-ANA 2011 .005 Density .008 Bimodality – indisputable fact 0 20 40 60 Numeracy score 2008 Ex-DET/Homelands schools 80 Historically white schools 100 20 40 60 Average school literacy score Quintile 1 Quintile 3 Quintile 5 80 100 Quintile 2 Quintile 4 13 Student performance 2003-2011 TIMSS (2003) PIRLS (2006) SACMEQ (2007) ANA (2011) TIMSS (2011) prePIRLS (2011) TIMSS 2003 (Gr8 Maths & Science) PIRLS 2006 (Gr 4/5 – Reading) • Out of 50 participating countries (including 6 African countries) SA came last SA came •SACMEQ Out of III 45 participating countries last 2007 (Gr6 – Reading & Maths) •• Only 10% reached low international benchmark 87% of gr410/15 and 78% of Gr 5 learners deemed to be •ANA SA came 8/15 for2003 maths 2011 (Grrisk 1-6offor Reading &and Maths) • No improvement from TIMSS 1999-TIMSS “at serious notreading learning to read” 600 560 520 480 440 400 360 320 280 240 200 Middle-income countries Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Independent and this is at the improved level of performance Russian Federation Lithuania Kazakhstan Ukraine Armenia Romania Turkey Lebanon Malaysia Georgia Thailand Macedonia, Rep. of Tunisia Chile Iran, Islamic Rep. of Jordan Palestinian Nat'l Auth. Botswana (Gr9) Indonesia Syrian Arab Republic Morocco South Africa (Gr9) Honduras (Gr9) Ghana TIMSS 2011 Mathematics score behind countries such as Swaziland, Kenya and •TIMSS Mean 35% 2011literacy (Gr9 – score Mathsgr3: & Science) Tanzania • SA has joint lowest performance 42 countries •prePIRLS2011 Mean numeracy score gr3:of28% (Gr 4 Reading) Improvement by 1.5 grade levels (2003-2011) ••• Mean literacy score gr6:completely 28% 29% SA Gr4 learners • 76% ofofgrade nine students in 2011 still had not • illiterate numeracy score gr6: 30% acquired a (cannot basic understanding about whole decode text in any • Mean NSES 2007/8/9 numbers, decimals, operations or basic graphs, langauge) South Africa (Gr9) • Systemic Evaluations 2007 • Matric exams 14 NSES question 42 NSES followed about 15000 students (266 schools) and tested them in Grade 3 (2007), Grade 4 (2008) and Grade 5 (2009). Grade 3 maths curriculum: “Can perform calculations using appropriate symbols to solve problems involving: division of at least 2-digit by 1-digit numbers” 100% Even at the end of Grade 5 most (55%+) quintile 1-4 students cannot answer this simple Grade-3-level problem. 90% 35% 80% 70% 59% 57% 57% 55% 60% 50% 40% 13% 14% 14% 15% 20% 13% 10% 12% 12% 10% 16% 19% 17% 17% Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 30% 13% Still wrong in Gr5 14% Correct in Gr5 Correct in Gr4 Correct in Gr3 39% 0% “The powerful notions of ratio, rate and proportion are built upon the simpler concepts of whole number, multiplication and division, fraction and rational number, and are themselves the precursors to the development of yet more complex concepts such as triangle similarity, trigonometry, gradient and calculus” (Taylor & Reddi, 2013: 194) Q5 Question 42 (Spaull & Viljoen, forthcoming) 15 Of 100 students that started school in 2002 16% Do not reach matric Fail matric 2013 49% Pass matric 2013 24% Pass with university endorsement 2013 11% • 550,000 students drop out before matric • 99% do not get a non-matric qualification (Gustafsson, 2011: p11) • What happens to them? 50% youth unemployment. 16 Insurmountable learning deficits: 0.3 SD South African Learning Trajectories by National Socioeconomic Quintiles Based on NSES (2007/8/9) for grades 3, 4 and 5, SACMEQ (2007) for grade 6 and TIMSS (2011) for grade 9) 13 12 11 10 Effective grade 9 8 Quintile 1 7 Quintile 2 6 Quintile 3 5 Quintile 4 4 Quintile 5 Q1-4 Trajectory 3 Q5 Trajectory 2 1 0 Gr3 Gr4 (NSES 2007/8/9) Gr5 Gr6 (SACMEQ 2007) Gr7 Gr8 Projections Gr9 Gr10 (TIMSS 2011) Gr11 Gr12 Projections Actual grade (and data source) Spaull & Viljoen, 2014 (SAHRC Report) 17 The impact of SES on reading/maths Indication of wasted human capital potential (see Schleicher, 2009) 600 550 SEY MAU MAU 550 500 SWA KEN ZAN BOT KEN SACMEQ TAN ZIM SEY NAM SWA UGA MOZ LES 450500 In South Africa socioeconomic status largely determines outcomes (with a very small number of exceptions – see newspapers for examples) TAN SOU ZIM BOT SACMEQ SOU ZAN MOZ UGA LES ZAM MAL 400 450 • Average SACMEQ reading score • Almost 40% of SA student reading achievement can be explained by socioeconomic status (31 assets, books, parental education) alone. Average SACMEQ mathematics score • 650 600 (SACMEQ III – 2007 Gr 6) NAM MAL ZAM 0 0 1010 20 20 30 30 40 Percentage of variance in performance explained by household socioeconomic status (r-squared X 100) Percentage of variance in performance explained by household socioeconomic status (r-squared X 100) Spaull, 2013 Intergenerational poverty Ideal world (AKA Finland ) 1.Means blind – Ideally, an education system should be ‘means blind’ in that it offers equal educational opportunities to all students. 2.Meritocratic – Ideally, an individuals success at school (and later in the labour-market) should depend on ability and effort not class or wealth. •In SA, neither of these criteria are met. Low quality education is a poverty trap. Low quality education Low social mobility Hereditary poverty SA educational inequality Questions • If not the quality of education, what is the driving force behind income inequality? – Demand-side factors > supply-side?! • Why is it so difficult to change educational outcomes? (20 years since 1994!) • What are the key interactions between education and health/social-security? Conclusion Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege Low quality education Low social mobility Hereditary poverty • Educational inequality is at the heart of income inequality and poverty – Increasing wages for the majority of Black labour market entrants is necessary to lower income inequality – This is not possible without improving the quality of education they receive • SA has 2 education systems not one – Implications for reporting (means are misleading) – Implications for policy • SA cannot convert material advantage into cognitive skills – Inefficient use of resources Conclusions & Implications Low quality education Low social mobility Hereditary poverty Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege 23 Suggestions Acknowledge the extent of the problem • Low quality education is one of the three largest crises facing our country (along with HIV/AIDS and unemployment). Need the political will and public support for widespread reform. Experiment to figure out what works • More of the same hasn’t worked Need to try new things and rigorously evaluate them to see what works. – Workbooks & ANA’s are a positive sign (Workbook delivery?) – Failed programmes provide useful information when acknowledged & disseminated. • Leave existing salaries the same but pay good teachers more – why not? Increase accountability, information & transparency • Where is the money going? • Deal ruthlessly with corruption – this is a social crime. • For at least one grade (Gr6?) get ANA externally validated by an independent body like Umalusi and get this information to parents need to empower parents with information in an accessible format References • • • • • • • • • • • Becker, G. (1962). Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis. The Journal of Political Economy, 70(5), 9-49. Currie, J. (2009). Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise: Socioeconomic Status, Poor Health in Childhood, and Human Capital Development. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 87-122. Donalson, A. (1992). Content, Quality and Flexibility: The Economics of Education System Change. Spotlight 5/92. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations. Fleisch, B. (2008). Primary Education in Crisis: Why South African schoolchildren underachieve in reading and mathematics. Cape Town. : Juta & Co. Hanushek, E. & Woessmann, L. (2008). The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic Development. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Working Paper No. 07-34. Hoadley, U. (2010). What do we know about teaching and learning in primary schools in South Africa? Stellenbosch: Appendix B to Van der Berg, S; Meyer, H; Reeves, C; van Wyk, C; Hoadley, U; Bot, M; & Armstrong, P 2010. 'Grade 3 Improvement Project: Main report and Recommendations" for Western Cape Education Department. Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in Human Capital. The American Economic Review , 51 (1), 1-17. Shepherd, D. (2011). Constraints to School Effectiveness: What prevents poor schools from delivering results? Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 05/11. Spaull, N. (2011). Primary School Performance in Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa: A Comparative Analysis of SACMEQ III. SACMEQ Working Papers , 1-74. Taylor, S. (2011). Uncovering Indicators of Effective School Management in South Africa using the National School Effectiveness Study. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers . Van der Berg, S. (2007). Apartheid's Enduring Legacy: Inequalities in Education. Journal of African Economies, 16(5), 849-880. Thank you www.nicspaull.com/research nicholasspaull@gmail.com @NicSpaull ECD Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase Senior Phase FET Phase FET Phase Mother-tongue instruction De facto / De jure ? Primary school High school Main drop-out zone 27 Theory – education in SA SES at birth •Type of tertiary education (quality) - institution and field of study •Demand and supply •Individual motivation Cognitive ability in early childhood Labour market performance •Parental IQ (assortative mating) •Maternal health •Nutrition •Early cognitive stimulation: preschool (quantity & quality), home environment South Africa •Cost of tertiary education (explicit & implicit costs) •Parental & personal aspirations and perceptions •Society/culture Ultimate educational attainment and quality Educational performance in early school years •Average school SES •Language of learning & teaching (LOLT) •Teacher quality •Peer effects •Subject choice Educational achievement in matric (See Taylor, 2010) Overview of what we know about inequality and underperformance in South Africa Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase National School Effectiveness Study (NSES) •Grade 3 (2007); Grade 4 (2008); Grade 5 (2009) – Panel 268 schools • [All provinces except Gauteng] ___________________________________ _ Underperformance •Language: In 44% of Gr4 and 32% of Gr5 classes there was no paragraph writing done over the year (from best learner). •Mathematics: 88% of Gr5 maths teachers covered no more than 35 of the 89 topics (40%) in the gr5 maths curriculum Inequality •Frequency of paragraph writing (half a page or less) EC/KZN=1.7; WC=5.8 /year •Grade 3 students in historically white schools perform much better on the same test than grade 5 students from historically black schools Taylor, 2011 30 Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase •29% of gr4 students did not reach the low international benchmark – they could not read •SA performs similarly to Botswana, but 3 years learning behind average Columbian Gr4 .003 0 Underperformance .002 •Grade 4 – all 11 languages • 433 schools, 19259 students ___________________________________ _ .001 kdensity reading test score prePIRLS 2011 .004 .005 PIRLS 2006 – see Shepherd (2011) 0 200 •Linguistic inequalities: Large differences by home language – Xitsonga, Tshivenda and Sepedi students particularly disadvantaged •PIRLS (2006) showed LARGE differences between African language schools and Eng/Afr schools •*Data now available for download 800 English/Afrikaans schools prePIRLS 2011 Benchmark Performance by Test Language 47 53 53 Tshivenda 47 24 siSwati 0 0 76 0.25 Setswana 34 66 0.1 Sesotho 36 64 0.1 57 Sepedi 43 29 isiZulu 0.8 0.4 62 31 isiNdebele 0 71 38 isiXhosa •Howie et al (2011) 600 African language schools Xitsonga Inequality 400 reading test score 69 0.2 English 10 90 19 Afrikaans 12 88 15 South Africa 29 Did not reach High International Benchmark 71 6 Low International benchmark Advanced International benchmark 31 Intemediate International Benchmark Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase 0 .002 •Grade 6 – Numeracy and literacy •392 schools, 9071 students ___________________________________ _ Density SACMEQ 2007 .004 .006 .008 Foundation Phase 0 Underperformance Inequality •Large differences between quintiles (see table later) •Large inequalities in maths teacher content knowledge 400 600 Learner Reading Score Poorest 25% Second wealthiest 25% Mean Lower bound confidence interval (95%) 800 1000 Second poorest 25% Wealthiest 25% Upper bound confidence interval (95%) 950 Maths-teacher mathematics score •27% of students functionally illiterate •SA performs worse than many low-income African countries (Tanzania, Kenya, Swaziland, Zimbabwe) •No improvement between SACMEQ II (2000) and SACMEQ III (2007) •Although majority (98%) of students are enrolled, sometimes almost no learning 200 900 KEN 850 ZIM UGA TAN SWASEY BOT NAM MALSOU LESZAMMOZ 800 750 700 650 600 Q5-SOU Q4-SOU Q3-SOU Q2-SOU Q1-SOU ZAN 32 Gr 6 Teacher Content Knowledge - see McKay & Spaull (2013) SACMEQ III (Spaull & Taylor, 2012) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2 6 44 9 13 18 25 26 52 53 61 39 58 45 30 14 12 18 11 11 27 17 2 8 34 50 54 8 5 1 11 62 50 31 19 37 13 7 3 15 Literacy Enrolled and acquired higher order reading skills (Levels 6-8) by grade 6 Enrolled and acquired basic reading skills (Levels 3-5) by grade 6 Enrolled but functionally illiterate (Levels 1-2) by grade 6 Never enrolled or dropped out prior to Grade 6 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 0 29 34 59 3 2 2 46 50 53 50 10 10 5 58 64 77 11 15 8 11 13 71 51 44 12 8 14 7 37 11 34 11 39 24 2 8 Numeracy Enrolled and acquired higher order numeracy skills (Levels 6-8) by grade 6 Enrolled and acquired basic numeracy skills (Levels 3-5) by grade 6 Enrolled but functionally innumerate (Levels 1-2) by grade 6 Never enrolled or dropped out prior to grade 6 11 5 Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Intermediate Phase •Avg Q1/Q2 Gr9 student is 3yrs (4yrs) worth of learning behind the average Q5 student in maths (science) •Avg Gr 9 student in ECA is 2yrs worth of learning behind avg Gr9 student in GAU *Data now available for download 443 433 352 276 275 264 285 1995 1999 2002 2002 Grade 8 2011 Grade 9 332 2011 260 243 244 268 1995 1999 2002 2002 TIMSS middleincome country Gr8 mean TIMSS Mathematics 600 560 520 480 440 400 360 320 280 240 200 Grade 8 2011 Grade 9 2011 TIMSS middleincome country Gr8 mean TIMSS Science Middle-income countries Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Independent Underperformance •76% of Gr9 students had not acquired a basic understanding about whole numbers, decimals, operations or basic graphs (i.e. had not reached low int. benchmark) •Avg. Gr 9 SA student is 2yrs (2.8yrs) behind the average Gr8 student from a middle income country in maths (science) •Contrary to popular belief, even South Africa’s “top” schools do not perform well by international standards… Inequality 480 440 400 360 320 280 240 200 160 120 80 40 0 FET Phase Russian Federation Lithuania Ukraine Kazakhstan Turkey Iran, Islamic Rep. of Romania Chile Thailand Jordan Tunisia Armenia Malaysia Syrian Arab Republic Georgia Palestinian Nat'l Auth. Macedonia, Rep. of Indonesia Lebanon Botswana (Gr 9) Morocco Honduras (gr 9) South Africa (Gr 9) Ghana •Grade 9 – Maths and science •285 schools, 11969 students ___________________________________ _ TIMSS score TIMSS 2011 Senior Phase TIMSS 2011 Science score Foundation Phase 34 South Africa (Gr9) Performance of quintile five schools in TIMSS 2003 Maths .004 0 .002 Density .006 .008 – see Taylor MST (2011) 0 200 400 Grade 8 mathematics score South Africa Quintile 5 Chile Quintile 5 Singapore Quintile 5 600 800 Chile Singapore Even Q5 schools in SA perform at a comparatively low level Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Intermediate Phase Senior Phase Matric Inequality •Subject combinations differ between rich and poor – differential access to higher education •Maths / Maths-lit case in point •Are more students taking maths literacy because THEY cannot do pure-maths, or because their TEACHERS cannot teach pure-maths? Number of students •Of 100 students that enroll in grade 1 approximately 50 will make it to matric, 40 will pass and 12 will qualify for university Grade 10 (2 years earlier) Grade 12 Those who pass matric Pass matric with maths Proportion of matrics taking mathematics •Grade 12 – Various •Roughly half the cohort ___________________________________ _ Underperformance FET Phase 1200000 60% 1000000 50% 800000 40% 600000 30% 400000 20% 200000 10% 0 0% Matric 2008 (Gr Matric 2009 (Gr Matric 2010 (Gr Matric 2011 (Gr 10 2006) 10 2007) 10 2008) 10 2009) 36 Proportion of matrics (%) Foundation Phase See Taylor (2012) Matric 1200000 •More students making it to grade 10 but not more making it to matric • Partially due to less repetition at lower grades •LARGE differences in the ability of provinces to “convert” grade 1 enrolments into matric passes •Why are more students taking maths literacy? 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 grade 10 Grade 12 The ratio of grade 2 enrolments ten years prior to matric to matric passes by province See Taylor (2012) Matric pass rate Media sees only this What are the root causes of low and unequal achievement? MATRI C Pre-MATRIC HUGE learning deficits… 38 • Social policy implications? Distribution of functional illiteracy and innumeracy by country and province 50 SACMEQ III LMP 40 TET ECA 30 NIA SOF S CAB KZN MPU MAN NAM FST NWP NCA 20 M OSHOMU ZAM HAR OHA SOU 10 GTNWES SOC CES B CEN N OMA KUN KAR KHO GAZ INH SHN NOR WCA CAP KAV MAP ERO OTJ CID GAB 10 20 30 40 50 60 Proportion functionally innumerate Botswana & provinces Mozambique & provinces Namibia & provinces South Africa & provinces 70 Questions, conclusions & recommendations Conclusions • Speaking of a single education system in SA is a misnomer – the average South African student does not exist in any meaningful sense. Bimodality is a fact. Low quality education Low social mobility Hereditary poverty • South Africa is not able to convert material advantage into cognitive skills Highly inefficient • While the survey was conducted in 2007, and things may have changed, the outcomes certainly haven’t (see ANA’s, 2011; and (?) PIRLS/TIMSS 2011) More of the same? Serious blight on the national conscience Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege When faced with an exceedingly low and unequal quality of education do we…. A) Increase accountability {US model} • Create a fool-proof highly specified, sequenced curriculum (CAPS/workbooks) • Measure learning better and more frequently (ANA) • Increase choice/information in a variety of ways B) Improve the quality of teachers {Finnish model} • Attract better candidates into teaching degrees draw candidates from the top (rather than the bottom) of the matric distribution • Increase the competence of existing teachers (Capacitation) • Long term endeavor which requires sustained, committed, strategic, thoughtful leadership (something we don’t have) C) All of the above {Utopian model} •Perhaps A while we set out on the costly and difficult journey of B?? 43 Suggestions Get the basics right – – – – – – – – – Teachers need to be in school teaching Every child (teacher) needs access to adequate learning (teaching) materials Every school should meet basic sanitation and health requirements Every child should receive one year of adequate quality preschool education No child should be hungry at school (for social & cognitive reasons) Continuous diagnostic testing to figure out what children actually know Make sure that the curriculum is tailored to the educational needs of the majority of students, not the top 15% Every student MUST master the basics of foundational numeracy and literacy – these are the building blocks of further education – weak foundations = recipe for disaster SA is a middle income country which spends 20% (!) of all government expenditure on education – this is not rocket science. [ANA’s and workbooks are a very good sign – (but) need consistency and time]