Education Equity Essay

The constitution of the get together Nations educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was adopted by 20 countries at the London Conference in November 1945 and entered into effect on 4 November 1946. The Organization currently has 191 Member States and six Associate Members.The main(prenominal) objective of UNESCO is to contribute to peace and security in the world by promoting collabo proportionn among nations with facts of life, science, culture and communication in order to foster universal respect for justice, the rule of law, and the human rights and fundamental freedoms that be corroborate for the peoples of the world, without distinction of ladder, sex, language or religion, by the Charter of the United Nations.To come across its mandate, UNESCO performs five principal functions 1) prospective studies on raising, science, culture and communication for tomorrows world 2) the advancement, transfer and sharing of knowledge through research, prep and teaching activities 3) standard-setting actions for the prepa proportionalityn and adoption of internal instruments and statutory recommendations 4) expertise through technical co-operation to Member States for their contractment policies and projects and 5) the exchange of specialized information.UNESCO is headquartered in Paris, France. UNESCO constitute for Statistics The UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) is the statistical office of UNESCO and is the UN depository for global statistics in the palm of gentility, science and technology, culture and communication. UIS was established in 1999. It was created to improve UNESCOs statistical programme and to develop and deliver the timely, accurate and insurance policy-relevant statistics requisite in directlys increasingly complex and rapidly changing social, political and sparing environments.UIS is based in Montreal, Canada. American Institutes for Research (AIR) Since its founding in 1946 as an independent, non-profit a nd non-partisan organization, the American Institutes for Research (AIR) has conducted more than 3,500 projects providing basic and applied research, technical complement and management services to government agencies, non-profit organizations and private companies. AIRs race in study spans both the domestic and international beas, with the latter including enormous work in comparative facts of life and international development.1000 doubting Thomas Jefferson Street NW Washington, DC 20007-3835 United States www. air. org. UNESCO Institute for Statistics P. O. Box 6128, Succursale Centre-Ville Montreal, Quebec H3C 3J7 Canada Tel (1 514) 343-6880 telecommunicate (1 514) 343-5740 Email worldly concernationsuis. unesco. org http//www. uis. unesco. org ISBN 92-9189-041-3 UNESCO-UIS 2007 Ref UIS/WP/06-03 Cover design JCNicholls Design Printed by ICAO administrator summary.The right to education has been recognised by the international community for the get half century and has led to increasing divert in the rectitude of countries education systems. However, the term candor is subject to a variety of interpretations. or so would agree that education systems that argon honorable provide high-quality education to acquitly children, regardless of their background or where they live. But from there, opinions diverge about what aspect of education should be distributed equitably to whom and about what levels of disparity argon equitable or inequitable.Recognising the lack of a common language for discussing the moment of truth in education, the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) undertook a train to bring in concert some of the diverse approaches to fair-mindedness and to provide a more organized approach to conceptualising and measuring the justice of countries education systems. This study comes at an authoritative time for policymakers, particularly in developing countries that argon striving to crap the goal of Education for All.With app ropriate tools in hand, policymakers will be in a better position to assess the law of their education systems and to develop and implement policies and programmes to address the most critical related issues. This report presents the results of the study in trinity components. First, it provides a context for understanding the current interest in educational blondness through a re look on of the evolution of international concerns about rectitude and previous efforts to define and measure honor more systematically.Second, it presents a manakin for measuring educational rectitude, along with methods for equivalence the righteousness of countries education systems exploitation a set of standard statistical measures. Finally, it demonstrates the application of the framework in 16 of the pear-shapedst, most-populous countries around the world. These include triplet countries in Africa (Egypt, Nigeria and southeastward Africa), five in Asia (Bangladesh, China, India, Indone sia and Pakistan), five in Latin America (Argentina, brazil nut, Ecuador, Mexico and Peru), along with Canada, the Russian alliance and the United States.The empirical synopsis conducted in this report centers on three specific objects of justice. One is a measure of access ( roll ratios) and two are measures of resources allocated to education (consumption per scholarly person and schoolchild-teacher ratios). The framework is applied using two main principles of law plain equity and pit educational hazard. plain equity examines disparities in access to education and resources for education inside countries, using selected measures of dispersion that reflect different concerns of education policy.Equal educational probability examines the family amidst wealth and the three objects of equity, as well as urban/rural differences in the formulation of access to education and educational resources. iii educational virtue and populace Policy In presenting the applicati on of the equity framework, geographical regions within countries are utilize as the unit of abbreviation. In federal countries, these units are mostly states, provinces and other political jurisdictions with authority over education in nonfederal countries, the units are usually the first administrative entity below the national level.The compendium of swimming equity focuses on disparities across these units in access and resources the analysis of equal educational opportunity relates regions wealth (measured as regional product per capita) and universe of discourse denseness (a proxy for urban/rural location) with the objects of equity. Coefficients of correlation are used to measure the direction and size of these family relationships. We recognise that regional disparities are non the first-string concern of policymakers in all countries and that disparities based on gender, race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status may be more significant than geographic disparities .We, therefore, suggest that the analyses presented in the report should not be used as the sole basis for judging whether a countrys education system is equitable or inequitable other analyses are needed to fully inform this issue. However, it is also important to note that geographic disparities are of great importance in many countries, particularly large federal countries, and that there is a long tradition of research on this composition in both developing and developed countries. In the former, the focus has ofttimes been on access to education, with urban/rural disparities at the core of policy debates.In the latter, the focus has historically been on disparities in resources provided for world education in recent years, the emphasis has shifted to education outcomes, particularly student achievement. We view the empirical work presented in this report as an extension of that float of research. Selected findings from the study This study attempted to compare countries on k ey aspects of educational policy and to assess the congenator equity of their education systems, based on differences in access to education and the provision of educational resources in study geographical divisions.Before presenting some of the key findings, a few caveats are in order. First, the findings presented represent a single but important symmetry of equity in education. Second, even within the analyses presented here, there is not complete consistency in countries ranks on all access and resource measures. Countries may rank highly on one measure of educational resources and not so well on another. Third, countries comparative rankings on educational equity may depend on the group of countries used in the comparisons.A different mix of countries could produce different determinations in our equity assessment. Finally, disparities within countries may often result from intended acts of policy (e. g. the provision of great resources in poorer areas to compensate for the ir lack) that are producing the desired results. It is therefore important not to over-interpret the findings regarding geographical disparities and to conclude categorically that one countrys education system is more equitable than anothers. iv Educational justice and populace Policy.Horizontal equity Regional disparities board A provides an overview of countries relative standing on horizontal equity, based on the three objects of equity examined in this study register ratios, consumption per schoolchild and pupil-teacher ratios. Countries that fall at the coronate of the rankings tend to corroborate comparatively miniscule disparities across regions countries in the come home tend to pass relatively large disparities while countries in the snapper tend to have cushion disparities relative to other countries. base on these findings, we find the following Access to education Enrolment ratios Among the lodge countries reporting record ratios for both principal(a ) and second-string education, only Mexico has relatively small disparities at both education levels. Egypt and the Russian fusion have talk over disparities in access to original and unoriginal education, while India and brazil-nut tree tend to have large regional disparities. Argentina and Peru have relatively small regional disparities in access to aboriginal education and moderate disparities in standby education, while the reverse is the case in southbound Africa.Indonesia has moderate disparities in access to pristine education and relatively large disparities at the petty(a) level. Among countries only reporting basal enrolment ratios, disparities are relatively small in China and relatively large in Bangladesh and Pakistan. At the secondary level, disparities in enrolment ratios are relatively small in Canada and the United States. Educational resources Expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratios Canada, Peru, South Africa and the United States show the sma llest interregional disparities in expending per pupil for primary and secondary education.Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the Russian Federation fall in the middle range, while China, Egypt and India have the largest disparities in use per pupil across their regions. Overall, there is a strong residue amid countries rankings on regional disparities in expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratios in primary and secondary education. Canada, Peru, South Africa and the United States are at or near the realize of the rankings on both measures, Brazil and the Russian Federation are in the middle, with Egypt and India at the bottom of the rankings. -v-.Educational Equity and popular Policy Disparities in pupil-teacher ratios in primary education are smallest in Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and Peru in the moderate range in Bangladesh, China, Ecuador and the United States and largest in Egypt, India, Nigeria and Pakistan. Disparities in pupil-teacher ratios at the secondary level show some similarities and some differences with primary education disparities are smallest in China, Indonesia, Mexico and Peru in the moderate range in Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, Nigeria and the United States and largest in Argentina, India and Pakistan. Table A.Country placements on horizontal equity analyses of enrolment ratios, expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratios Primary and secondary expenditure per pupil middle * middle prime bottom * bottom bottom * middle * * transgress middle assoil illuminate Primary and secondary pupilteacher ratio bottom * middle discharge middle middle bottom bottom middle top bottom middle top middle top top Country Argentina Bangladesh Brazil Canada China Ecuador Egypt India Indonesia Mexico Nigeria Pakistan Peru Russian Federation South Africa United States * not available. Primary enrolment ratio top bottom bottom * top * middle bottom middle top * bottom top middle middle *.Secondary enrolment ratio middle * bottom top * * mid dle bottom bottom top * * middle middle top top Primary pupilteacher ratio top middle top * middle middle bottom bottom top top bottom bottom top * * middle Secondary pupilteacher ratio bottom * middle * top middle middle bottom top top middle bottom top * * middle vi Educational Equity and Public Policy Equal educational opportunity Table B provides a summary of findings from the analysis of educational opportunity using the relationship amid regional wealth and regional enrolment ratios, expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratios.In the table, a dash (-) signifies that countries tend to have humble enrolment ratios, lower expenditure per pupil or lower pupil-teacher ratios in wealthier regions and a plus sign (+) signifies that countries tend to have higher enrolment ratios, higher expenditure per pupil or higher pupilteacher ratios in wealthier regions. An whizz (*) is used in instances where a country does not have a consistent relationship amongst regional wealth and a abandoned measure. Where the relationships are strongly positive or negative ( great than +0. 50 or less than -0.50), there are no additions to the designated signs. However, parentheses are used to presage relationships that are statistically weak ( amongst -0. 50 and -0. 25 or between 0. 25 and 0. 50). Access to education Enrolment ratios Egypt, Mexico and Peru perform most indisposed on this dimension of equity, with moderate to strong positive relationships between regional wealth and enrolments ratios in both primary and secondary education. In Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India, Indonesia, South Africa and the United States, wealthier regions also tend to have higher enrolment ratios in secondary education.Poorer regions tend to have higher enrolment ratios in primary education in four countries Argentina, Brazil, India and South Africa. However, India is the only country where the relationship is strong. Educational resources Expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratio s Wealthy regions tend to provide greater expenditure per pupil for primary and secondary education in the 10 countries with available data. The relationships are strong in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, South Africa and the United States, and moderate in Egypt, Mexico, Peru and the Russian Federation.Higher expenditure results in lower primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratios in wealthier regions in seven of these countries Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, India and Peru. Wealthier regions also tend to have lower pupil-teacher ratios in primary education in Argentina, Brazil, China, Egypt, India and Peru. The same sit is found in secondary education in these six countries, as well as in Mexico. vii Educational Equity and Public Policy Table B.Findings from the analysis of equal educational opportunity The relationship between regional wealth and regional enrolment ratios, expenditure per pupil and pupil-teacher ratios Primary and secondary expenditure per pupil + + + + (+) * n/a (+) n/a (+) (+) + + Primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratio (-) (-) (-) (-) * * * * * * Country Argentina Brazil Canada China Egypt India Indonesia Mexico Nigeria Peru Russian Federation South Africa United States Primary enrolment ratio (-) n/a (+) (+) * (+) n/a (+) * (-) n/a Secondary enrolment ratio + + + n/a (+) (+) (+) (+) n/a + * (+) +.Primary pupilteacher ratio (-) n/a (-) (-) (-) * (+) * (-) n/a n/a * Secondary pupilteacher ratio (-) (-) n/a (-) (-) (-) * (-) * (-) n/a n/a * n/a Data not available. * Not a statistically significant relationship (correlation between -0. 25 and +0. 25). octette Educational Equity and Public Policy Table of contents rascal Executive summary iii Acknowledgements .13 1. 2. Introduction .. 15 Contextualising and delimit educational equity 17 I. Efforts to support educational rights and equity.. 17 A. The United Nations .. 17 B. Other international efforts.. 18 C. Efforts to measure equity.. 19 II. Developing a framework to measure equity in education .. 20 The equity framework . 22 I. Targets of equity concerns 22 II. Objects 22 A. Access and progression.23 B. Resources. 23 C. Results 23 III. Equity principles . 24 A. Horizontal equity 24 B. Vertical equity . 24 C.Equal educational opportunity (EEO) .. 25 IV. Measuring equity 26 A. Measures of horizontal equity . 26 1. Range ratio .. 27 2. McLoone business leader/adjusted McLoone Index . 27 3. Coefficient of variation 28 4.Gini coefficient 28 B. Measures of just equity .. 30 C. Measures of equal educational opportunity.. 30 V. Overview 31 screening of the equity framework enrolment ratios 32 I. Introduction to the analysis32 A. Countries selected for analysis .. 32 B. Presentation of the analyses 36 II. Enrolment ratios . 37 A. Horizontal equity analysis . 38 1. Primary education. 38 2.Secondary education .. 40 B. Equal educational opportunity. 43 1. Regional wealth and enrolment ratios. 43 2. Regional universe constriction and enrolm ent ratios 44 C. Horizontal equity and equal educational opportunity 45 3. 4. -9- Educational Equity and Public Policy 5. Application of the equity framework Expenditure per pupil .47 I. Horizontal equity analysis.. 47 A. Composite rankings . 49 B. Consistency of rankings on equity measures.. 50 II. Equal educational opportunity . 51 A. Regional wealth and expenditure per pupil .. 51 B. Regional community density and expenditure per pupil..52 III. Horizontal equity and equal educational opportunity 53 IV. Changes in horizontal equity 54 V. Changes in equal educational opportunity 56 A. Regional wealth and expenditure per pupil .. 56 B. Regional tribe density and expenditure per pupil.. 57 Application of the equity framework Pupil-teacher ratios . 58 I.Horizontal equity analysis.. 58 A. Primary education . 60 1. Composite rankings . 61 2. Consistency of rankings on equity measures . 62 B. Secondary education .. 63 1. Composite rankings .63 2. Consistency of rankings on equity m easures . 65 C. Combined primary and secondary education.. 66 1. Composite rankings . 67 2. Consistency of rankings on equity measures . 68 D. Consistency of rankings on horizontal equity in primary, secondary and feature primary and secondary education .. 69 II. Equal educational opportunity .70 A. Regional wealth and pupil-teacher ratios .. 70 B. Regional population density and pupil-teacher ratios.. 72 III. Horizontal equity and equal educational opportunity 73 A. Primary education . 73 B. Secondary education .. 74 C. Combined primary and secondary education.. 75 D.Summary of findings 76 IV. Changes in horizontal equity 78 A. Primary education . 78 B. Secondary education .. 80 C. Primary and secondary education. 81 D. Summary of findings 82 V. Changes in equal educational opportunity 84 A. Regional wealth and pupil-teacher ratios .. 84 B. Regional population density and pupil-teacher ratios.. 85 Sources, methods and technical notes .. 87 References. 105 Glossary..113 Equity -related education laws, policies and research in core countries.. 118 10 6. Appendix 1. Appendix 2. Appendix 3. Appendix 4. Educational Equity and Public Policy Tables Page 3. 1 3. 2 3. 3 4. 1 4. 2 4. 3 4. 4 4. 5 4. 6 4. 7 4. 8 4. 9 5. 1 5. 2 5. 3 5. 4 5. 5 5. 6 5. 7 6. 1 6. 2 6. 3 6. 4 6. 5 6. 6 6. 7 6. 8 6. 9 6. 10 6. 11 6. 12 6. 13 6. 14 6. 15 6. 16 6. 17 6. 18 Types of objects ..22 Illustration of Gini coefficient dispersal of pupil-teacher ratios for country A 29 Illustration of Gini coefficient distribution of pupil-teacher ratios for country B 30 Type of government, name of regions and number of regions in countries.. 33 Population and area of countries 33 Gross product per capita and population density35 National primary enrolment ratios .. 38 Horizontal equity measures of primary enrolment ratios. 39 Ranking order on horizontal equity measures of primary enrolment ratios .. 39 National secondary enrolment ratios. 41 Horizontal equity measures of secondary enrolment ratios ..41 Ranking order on horizontal equity measures of secondary enrolment ratios. 42 National prevalent combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil .. 48 Horizontal equity measures of national combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil. 48 Ranking order on horizontal equity measures of public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil . 49 Change in national average public primary and secondary expenditure per pupil 55 Horizontal equity measures of public primary and secondary expenditure per pupil, 1995 and 2002 . 55 correlativity between GRP per capita and public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil, 1995 and 2002.. 56 Correlation between regional population density and public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil, 1995 and 2002..57 National public primary pupil-teacher ratios .. 59 National public secondary pupil-teacher ratios 59 Horizontal equity measures of public primary pupil-teacher ratios 60 Ranking ord er on horizontal equity measures of public primary pupil-teacher ratios .. 60 Horizontal equity measures of public secondary pupil-teacher ratios..63 Ranking order on horizontal equity measures of public secondary pupil-teacher ratios 63 Horizontal equity measures of public combined primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratios. 66 Ranking order on horizontal equity measures of public combined primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratios . 66 Correlation between GRP per capita and public pupil-teacher ratios ..71 Correlation between regional population density and public pupil-teacher ratios.. 72 Change in national average public primary pupil-teacher ratios . 79 Horizontal equity measures of public primary pupil-teacher ratios, 1995 and 2002 . 79 Change in national average public secondary pupil-teacher ratios .. 80 Horizontal equity measures of public secondary pupil-teacher ratios, 1995 and 2002 ..81 Change in national average public combined primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratio s . 81 Horizontal equity measures of public combined primary and secondary pupil-teacher ratios, 1995 and 2002.. 82 Correlation between GRP per capita and public pupil-teacher ratios, 1995 and 2002 84 Correlation between regional population density and public pupil-teacher ratios, 1995 and 2002 .86 11 Figures Page 3. 1 3. 2 3. 3 3. 4 4. 1 4. 2 4. 3 4. 4 4. 5 5. 1 5. 2 5. 3 5. 4 5. 5 6. 1 6. 2 6. 3 6. 4 6. 5 6. 6 6. 7 6. 8 6. 9 6. 10 6. 11 6. 12 6. 13 6. 14 Objects and targets of equity 23 Interpreting horizontal equity measures .. 27 Illustration of the Gini coefficient .29 Overview of the equity framework.. 31 Primary enrolment ratio ranking orders on horizontal equity measures . 40 Secondary enrolment ratio ranking orders on horizontal equity measures 42 Correlation between GRP per capita and primary and secondary enrolment ratios 43 Correlation between population density and primary and secondary enrolment ratios ..44 Country positions on horizontal equity and equal education al opportunity measures of enrolment ratios in primary (P) and secondary (S) education 45 Average rankings on horizontal equity measures of public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil . 50 Public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil ranking orders on horizontal equity measures .51 Correlation between GRP per capita and public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil . 52 Correlation between regional population density and public combined primary and secondary expenditure per pupil . 53 Country positions on horizontal equity and equal educational opportunity measures of expenditure per pupil in public combined primary and secondary education.