Upload
jera
View
27
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Factors contributing to achievement growth in Chile. Gregory Elacqua Instituto of Public Policy School of Economics Universidad Diego Portales. CHILE 17,269,525 residents 3,395,845 students 11,511 schools Became an OECD country in 2009. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Factors contributing to achievement growth in Chile
Gregory Elacqua
Instituto of Public PolicySchool of Economics
Universidad Diego Portales
CHILE 17,269,525 residents 3,395,845 students 11,511 schools Became an OECD
country in 2009
Source: Hanushek, Peterson & Woessman (2012)
Chile second in annual rate of growth in student achievement (1995-2009)
Latvia Chile
Brazil
Portuga
l
Hong Kong
German
y
Poland
Slove
nia
Colombia
United Kingd
om
Switze
rlandGree
ce
Mexico
Israel
Finlan
dIta
ly
New Ze
aland
Denmark
Korea, R
ep.
Hungary
Iran
United St
ates
Canad
a
Australia
Russian
Fed.
Austria
Spain
Japan
Netherl
ands
Argentina
France
Irelan
d
Norway
Romania
Czech Rep
.
Slova
k Rep
.
Thaila
nd
Bulgaria
Swed
en-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Estim
ated
ann
ual t
est-
scor
e ga
ins
(% o
f sta
ndar
d de
viati
on)
Source: SIMCE
Same trend in national tests (SIMCE language and math 4th grade)
1999 2002 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011230
235
240
245
250
255
260
265
270
275
250
267
250
259
SIMCE lectura SIMCE Matemáticas
Chile in the 90’s
A. Low standard of living• GDP per capita $5,500 (ranked 6th in Latin America).
• About half of Chileans lived below the poverty line,
and 20% lived in extreme poverty.
• Only half of high school students graduated and 14%
enrolled in college.
B. Low educational expenditures
• USD$360 per student a year.
• Public spending on education 2.4% of GDP vs. 5.5% in
the Netherlands and 5.0% in the US.
C. Inadequate incentives1. Poorly designed voucher program
i. Flat voucher
ii. School selection
iii. School fees
2. No school accountabilityiv. No objective information on school quality
v. Schools not held accountable for outcomes
3. No incentives for teachersvi. No merit payvii. No teacher evaluation
Higher standard of living
Increased spending Incentives Educational
Improvement
Factors that help to explain achievement growth in Chile
I. HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING
Source: World Bank
A. GDP per capita increased by 3 fold (GDP per capita PPP, constant USD 2008)
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 $ -
$ 2,000
$ 4,000
$ 6,000
$ 8,000
$ 10,000
$ 12,000
$ 14,000
$ 16,000
$ 5,645
$ 14,599
Chile
Source: World Bank
B. Ranked 6 in Latin America, today #1 (GDP per capita PPP, constant USD 2008)
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 $ -
$ 2,000
$ 4,000
$ 6,000
$ 8,000
$ 10,000
$ 12,000
$ 14,000
$ 16,000
$ 5,645
$ 14,599
Argentina Brazil Chile Mexico Peru Uruguay
Source: CASEN
C. Cut poverty rate by two thirds
1987 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2003 2006 20090%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%45%
15%
Poverty rate
D. Eradicated extreme poverty (% extreme poverty)
1987 1990 1995 2000 20060
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
20.3 %
1.1 %
Argentina Brasil Chile México Perú UruguaySource: World Bank
E. High school graduation rates increased rapidly across SES groups (age 20-24, by income quintiles)
I II III IV V Total0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
27%
39%
53%
68%
85%
53%
64%
77%81%
89%
96%
82%
1990 2009
Source: Education at a Glance, 2008
F. Young adults have similar attainment as peers in OECD countries (% with at least upper secondary by age group)
Alem
ania
Irlan
da
Dina
mar
ca
Chile
Fran
cia
Noru
ega
Bélg
ica
Aust
ralia
Hola
nda
Rein
o Un
ido
Prom
edio
OEC
D
Nuev
a Ze
land
a
Grec
ia
Italia
Bras
il
Méx
ico
Turq
uía0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
55-64 años 25-34 años
1%
17%
11%
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
1935 1946 1956 1967 1973 1982 1990 2000 2011
Source: Brunner, 2008; INE; CASEN; MINEDUC.
1984: 180,000
2011: 1,015,000
G. Expansion of higher education
H. Parents of 15 years old students are more educated than in the past.
Source: SIMCE
Less than primary Primary completed
Less than high school
High school completed
College completed
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
27%
15%
19%
24%
15%13% 12%
16%
39%
20%
2001 2010
II. INCREASED EDUCATION SPENDING
Source: MINEDUC
B. Annual per student expenditure has increased fourfold since 1990. (USD 2011)
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 $ -
$ 200
$ 400
$ 600
$ 800
$ 1,000
$ 1,200
$ 1,400
$ 1,600
$360
$582
$851
$1,067
$1,479
Source: MINEDUC
C. Public and private education spending as % of GDP has doubled since 1990
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
2.4 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 3 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.9 4.1 4.2 4.1 3.9 3.73.3 3.6
4.2
1.5 1.6 1.71.9 2 2
2.22.2
2.62.9 2.9
2.9 3 3.13
2.9
2.72.5
2.7
Public spending Private spending
Source: MINEDUC
D. Expansion of % enrollment in schools with full school day.
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
8
61
27
72
Primary Secondary
Source: MINEDUC, Central Bank of Chile
E. Since 1990 teachers’ salaries have increased by 200% in real terms. (USD 2011)
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 $ -
$ 500
$ 1,000
$ 1,500
$ 2,000
$ 2,500
$ 218
$ 2,178
$ 135
$ 1,089
Teachers' mean salary Teachers' minimum salary (entry salary)
Source: Enlaces, 2010
F. Students/computer ratio declined in the last decade, 79 to 9.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
9079
9
Source: Enlaces, 2010
G. Targeted programs (P-900, Escuelas Criticas, Liceos Prioritarios, Montegrande)
III. INCENTIVES
A. Improvements to voucher design
i. Differentiated voucher
ii. School selection banned
iii. No school fees for low SES
students
Before SEP After SEP0
50
100
150
200
250
$ 123 $ 123
$ 80
$ 10
Base voucher Preferential voucherConcentration voucher
Source: MINEDUC, 2009
Source: MINEDUC
Private voucher school enrollment expands
1981 1990 2000 20100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
78
6056
43
15
3235
49
7 8 9 8
Municipal
Particular Subvencionado
Part Pagado
Source: MINEDUC
More than 1 million students attend for-profit schools in Chile (1/3 of enrollments
School type Schools % Schools Students % Students
Public 5.614 54% 1.498.352 46%
For-profit 3.256 31% 1.054.261 31%
Non-profit 954 9% 551.028 17%
Non-voucher 647 6% 232.821 7%
Total 10.471 100% 3.336.462 100%
Source: MINEDUC
More choice for low SES parents: In this low SES urban neighborhood in Santiago, the supply of schools almost doubled in 10 years.
Public Rankings of academic
results of schools
Information to parents about own school’s
academic result evolution and compared to similar
schools
Website focused in informing parents about school’s alternatives: price, academic
results, location, etc.
B. Test scores widely disseminated to parents, schools, and researchers
C. School accountability program
i. Schools are ranked by adjusted test scores and improvements
ii. High ranking schools have autonomy and low ranking schools must present improvement plans
iii. Failing schools schools can be closed
D. National teacher merit pay program and national public school teacher evaluation
E. Most growth explained by gains by low and middle SES students: test score gap reduced by ½ of a standard deviation in language 1/3 in mathematics on national test (SIMCE)
2002 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011200
220
240
260
280
300
320302 299
226
249
High Medium high Medium Medium low Low
76 50
Source: SIMCE
F. Most growth explained by gains by low and middle SES students: Chile is the country that made the most progress in narrowing the achievement gap between 2000 and 2009 in PISA literacy (13 points)
2000 2006 2009PISA: Literacy
300
350
400
450
500
550
479
512
359
405
High Medium high Medium Medium low Low
Liter
acy
scor
e in
PIS
A
120
107
Source: PISA
Conclusions
1. Higher standard of living
2. Increased spending
3. Incentives
Challenge: Still a long way to go
Source: PISA 2000, 2009
Finlan
dia
Canad
á
Nueva Ze
landa
Australi
a
Irlanda
Corea
Hong Kong-C
hina
Reino Unido
Japón
Sueci
aBélg
ica
Islandia
Austria
Noruega
Francia USA
Dinamarc
aSu
iza
Españ
a
República
Checa Italia
Aleman
ia
Liech
tenste
in
Hungría
PoloniaGrec
ia
Portuga
lRusia
Latvia
Israel
Luxemburgo
Tailan
dia
Bulgaria
México
Argentina
ChileBras
il
Indonesia
Albania
Perú0
100
200
300
400
500
600
PISA
200
0 re
sults
in Li
tera
cy
Corea
Finlan
dia
Hong Kong-C
hina
Canad
á
Nueva Ze
landa
Japón
Australia
Bélgica
Noruega
Suiza
Islandia
USA
Polonia
Liechten
steinSu
ecia
Aleman
ia
Irlanda
Francia
Dinamarc
a
Reino Unido
Hungría
Portuga
lIta
liaLat
viaGrec
ia
Españ
a
República
Checa Israel
Luxemburgo
Austria
RusiaChile
Bulgaria
México
Tailan
diaBras
il
Indonesia
Argentina
Albania
Perú0
100
200
300
400
500
600
PISA
200
9 re
sults
in li
tera
cy
PISA 2000
PISA 2009
Factors that help to explain achievement growth in Chile
Higher standard of livin
g
Increased spending
Better incentives
Educational Improvemen
t
Sense of urgency
Students and families put the quality of education at the center of the national debate
2006: High school students 2011: University students
Weak link: Chilean teachers lag behind Elementary-level future teachers’ mathematics content knowledge
Source: 2008 TEDS-MSource: 2008 TEDS-M
Georgia
Chile
Philippines
Botswana
Spain
Malaysia
Poland
International
Germany
United States
Norway
Thailand
Russian Federation
Switzerland
Singapore
Chinese Taipei
$ - $ 100 $ 200 $ 300 $ 400 $ 500 $ 600 $ 700
345
413
440
441
481
488
490
500
510
518
519
528
535
543
590
623
Weak link: Chilean teachers lag behind Elementary-level future teachers’ pedagogy content knowledge
Source: 2008 TEDS-MSource: 2008 TEDS-M
Georgia
Chile
Botswana
Philippines
Poland
Spain
International
Germany
Malaysia
Thailand
Russian Federation
Switzerland
United States
Norway
Chinese Taipei
Singapore
$ - $ 100 $ 200 $ 300 $ 400 $ 500 $ 600 $ 700
345
425
448
457
478
492
500
502
503
506
512
537
544
545
592
593
Weak link: Content and pedagogical knowledge
Source: INICIA 2011
Pedagogical knowledge Disciplinary knowledge0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
8%2%
50%
29%
42%
69%
Outstanding Acceptable Insufficient
% o
f Tea
cher
s in
eac
h le
vel
Factors contributing to achievement growth in Chile
Gregory Elacqua
Instituto of Public PolicySchool of Economics
Universidad Diego Portales