Improving Secondary Education
description
Transcript of Improving Secondary Education
![Page 1: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Improving Secondary Education
Preparation for the Implementation of the 10th National Economic and
Social Development Plan
October 27, 2006Bangkok, Thailand
![Page 2: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
• Overview• Access and Equity
• Quality• Efficiency
• Addressing Next Generation of Challenges
![Page 3: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Secondary Education: Potential Roles
• Bridging basic education, tertiary education and labor market
• A key tool for alleviating poverty in Thailand, bringing broader income equality and social equity
• Contributing to higher social returns (e.g. in health)• Contributing to non-market public benefits (e.g. voting
rates, association with crime)
Overview
![Page 4: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Overview
• 1999 NEA “Equal right to receive 12 years of basic education of
quality without charge”
– Major reforms in all aspects, especially • learning reform learner-centered, curriculum• teacher reform teacher training, professional
standardization• education quality assurance internal and external
quality monitoring mechanisms
• 1997 Constitution– Local administration organization participation in
provision of education
Historical Background
![Page 5: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Education Transition PatternsOverview
![Page 6: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Education Attainment
• Consistent gradual rise of average years of education attainment overtime
• For population ages 15-21, average years of education attainment is nearly 10 years, suggesting successful compulsory education
Table 2.1: Average Years of Educational Attainment, 1999-2003
Age 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 15 and over 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8
15-21 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 15-59 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.8 7.9
60 and over 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9
Source: Office of Education Council 2004a
Access
![Page 7: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Education AttainmentFigure 2.A: Thailand Educational Attainment Profiles for Ages 16 to 19, 1994-2002
.2
.4
.6
.8
1P
ropo
rtion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade
1994 1996 19981999 2000 2002
All Thailand: 1994 to 2002
Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 1994, 2002
• 95% of 16-19 population completed primary education and 80% completed secondary education in 2002
• In 1994, only 50% of 16-19 population had completed secondary education
• Repetition is slight (1-2%) and most dropout occurs between levels
Access
![Page 8: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Gender Equity
• Gender gap has grown larger, and to the benefit of girls
• In 1994, NER for girls was 63% and 61% for boys
• In 2002, NER for girls was 72% and 64% for boys
Figure 2.C: School Participation Rates, Gross Enrollment Rates and Net Enrollment Rates by Sex and Gains, 1994-2002
61 3
63 9
68 5
69 12
74 9
75 14
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Male-NER
Female-NER
Male-GER
Female-GER
Male-SPR
Female-SPR
1994 2002
Access
![Page 9: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Rural-Urban Equity
• Coverage expanded to rural areas.
• Urban-rural gap for grade completion has decreased from 25% in 1994 to 8% in 2002.
Figure 2.D: Grade Completion by Urban/Rural Location, 1994 and 2002
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade
Urban
Rural
Urban/Rural: 1994
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade
Urban
Rural
Urban/Rural: 2002
Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 1994, 2002
Access
![Page 10: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
GER: International ComparisonFigure 2.G: Trends in Secondary Gross Enrollment Rates across Asian Countries, 1980-2003
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1980 1990 1995 2000 2003
Year
Perc
enta
ge
Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDRMalaysia Myanmar NepalPhilippines Thailand Vietnam
Note: Data for Thailand and Philippines in 2000 are from World Development Indicators 2003
Source: World Development Indicators Database, World Bank 2006
Access
![Page 11: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Reaching out to the Excluded
• Limited information on out-of-school children• Migrants, children with disabilities and ethnic
minorities are under-represented in secondary education
• In 2004, 175,000 children with disabilities enrolled in pre-primary to upper secondary level (1.27% of population ages 3-17).
• Financial constraints are often identified as the main obstacle keeping students out of schools
Access
![Page 12: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Measuring Quality Comparatively…Figure 3.A: PISA 2003 Test Score Results in Mathematics by Income Group
Source: di Gropello 2006
Figure 3.B: PISA 2000 Test Score Results in Reading Literacy by Income Group
Source: di Gropello 2006
0
20
40
60
80
100
Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper OECD Avg
Perc
entag
e of
Stu
dent
s in
each
Pro
ficie
ncy
Lev
el
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Mea
n Sc
ore
Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 Mean
Bra
zil
Ind
ones
ia
Thai
land
Mex
ico
Uru
guay
Japa
n
Kor
ea
Hon
g K
ong
• Thailand trails significantly behind Japan, Hong Kong SAR and Korea on international assessments.
• Compared to other lower middle income countries, Thailand performs better than its peers both in terms of mean test scores and proficiency level distribution.
• However, very few Thai children score in top proficiency levels (e.g. 40% at or below PISA level one in literacy and over 50% in Mathematics)
Quality
![Page 13: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Factors Affecting Student Achievement
Teacher
• 87% of OBEC secondary school teachers earned a bachelor’s degree.
• Higher levels of teacher confidence associated with superior student scores (TIMSS 1999) … 55% of students taught by instructors who felt less than adequately prepared in math and 58% in science.
• Front-style lecture format. Limited opportunities to apply knowledge to new situations or exercise creative thinking during school days.
Quality
![Page 14: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Factors Affecting Student Achievement
School
• Class sizes in Asia tend to be large, but do not appear to have a negative impact on student test scores in Thailand.
• However, the relationship between class size and student achievement is difficult to extricate.
• Quality of school physical infrastructure rated around OECD country mean, but availability of educational resources is rated much lower (-0.82) and inequitably distributed.
• Less than 40% of students have access to a calculator.
Quality
![Page 15: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Factors Affecting Student Achievement
Household/ Individual
• The distribution of knowledge across income groups is fairly equitable.
• Socioeconomic status is not influential in shaping student aspirations for tertiary education.
• Higher income families willing to pay more for children’s education (Q5: 7,878 Bht vs Q1: 840 Bht per year)
Quality
![Page 16: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Public Spending on Education• 20% of total Government budget allocated to education (4% of
GDP)• Secondary education received 28% of total education budget
(1.13% of GDP)
Figure 4.A: Share of Education Budget by Spending Category, 1997-2004
Source: Ministry of Education
0% 5%
10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
35% 40% 45% 50%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Pre Primary and Primary Secondary Tertiary Services not defined by level Educational support Others
Efficiency
![Page 17: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Public Spending across Income QuintileEfficiency
Figure 4.C: Incidence of Public Expenditure across Income Quintiles by Education Level, 2002
3119
5
25
23
7
21
22
12
15
20
23
8 15
53
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Pre & Primary Secondary TertiaryEducation Level
Perc
enta
ge
Q1 (poorest) Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (richest)
Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 2002
• Pro-poor allocation of resources at primary level
• Quintile distribution for secondary education is relatively equitable
• Spending for tertiary education is clearly regressive
![Page 18: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Public Spending on Secondary Education
• Comparatively, Thailand under-spends in secondary education (1.13% of GDP):– OECD countries spend 2.1% of GDP– Lower middle income countries spend 1.86% of GDP
• Per student public spending on secondary education is 24% lower than for primary education– EAP: Unit cost for 2ry education was 74% greater than for 1ry
education– OECD: Unit cost for 2ry education was 39% greater than for 1ry
education
• Share of local government resources spent on education still low. Much reliance on central government
Efficiency
![Page 19: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Household Education Expenditure• Only 5% share of private resources in secondary
education.• Average household spending varies significantly across
regions and income quintiles.Table 4.3: Total Secondary Education Expenditure as % of GDP by Sources of Funding, 2003
Public Resources
Private Resources
(% of GDP)
(% of GDP)
Argentina Upper-middle 1.58 0.38 24%
Chile Upper-middle 1.49 0.7 47%
Colombia Lower-middle 1.53 1 65%
Hong Kong, SAR High 1.5 0.75 50%
Indonesia Lower-middle 0.48 0.28 58%
Mexico Upper-middle 1.52 0.4 26%
Philippines Lower-middle 0.69 0.58 84%
Korea High 1.83 0.6 32%
Thailand Lower-middle 1.13 0.06 5%
Source: UNESCO 2005
Income Level Share of Private
Resources in all Domestic Resources
Efficiency
![Page 20: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Raising Efficiency of Secondary Education Financing
• Does financing make a difference in schooling outcomes?– “The greater the socio-economic advantage, the greater the
advantage it has in terms of student performance” (OECD 2004)– Quality improvements are costlier at secondary level than at
primary level.• Need to assess inter-sectoral allocative efficiency and
benefit-incidence of public investments• Could there be savings from rationalizing student-teacher
ratio/school merging? delicate balance– Teachers/student and time spent at school analysis suggests
inefficiencies in teacher deployment– Lowering cost VS individualized attention to students– School location within a reasonable distance
Efficiency
![Page 21: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Increasing Access and Equity
• Improving data collection and analysis to better target the currently excluded.
• Alternative education service modalities can be strengthened. Greater flexibility in terms of learning sites, class schedule and curriculum.
• Financial disparities between provinces and income groups could be minimized through the use of a funding formula that factors in conditions and different needs across provinces and income groups.
Challenges
![Page 22: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Improving Quality• Enhancing pre-service and in-service teacher
development• Developing criteria and methods to upgrade teacher
standards and quality. Capacity building for both teachers and principals
• Further strengthening quality assurance mechanisms. Relevance and follow up need to be guaranteed
• Strengthening accountability of schools to communities as an incentive to improve educational quality
• Reinforcing step-by-step implementation plan for decentralization of education provision and management
Challenges
![Page 23: Improving Secondary Education](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081513/5681681f550346895dddaf8f/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Assuring Efficiency
• Explore reallocation of resources from other educational levels to secondary schooling
• Careful review of student-teacher ratio/class size• Encourage higher level of private spending on education
Challenges