Sustainable Development Goals: Goal 4: Education

Rosa María Torres

Texto en español: Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible - Objetivo 4: Educación

At the UN Sustainable Development Summit (New York, 25-27 Sep. 2015) a new development agenda was adopted for 2015-2030. From 8 Millennium Development Goals and 21 targets - some of which were not met (see MDG 2015 Report) - we moved towards 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and 169 targets. 

Over 25 years educational aspirations reflected in global goals moved from basic education for children, youth and adults - Education for All (EFA) 1990-2000-2015 - to primary education for all children (completing four years of primary school) - Goal 2 of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) 2000-2015 - to access to quality education at all levels, including higher education, and lifelong learning opportunities for all - Goal 4 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 2015-2030. It is considered that the SDGs introduce a paradigm shift, described as "Moving from quantity to quality". (See EFA, MDG and SDG education goals in this table).

In fact, in September 2016, one year after the SDGs were approved, UNESCO announced that the new global education goals will not be met in 2030 (Global Education Monitoring Report 2016). It said that if current trends persist, universal primary education will be achieved in 2042, universal lower secondary education in 2059 and universal higher secondary education in 2084. 

I analyze here Goal 4 - "Ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote lifelong learning" - and its 10 targets. The targets include all levels of education, technical and vocational skills, youth and adult literacy, gender equality, education for sustainable development, scholarships, education facilities, and teacher training. They are centered around formal education. The overall aspiration is expanded schooling, 12 years (primary and secondary education) considered the minimum this time. Free and quality are key additions; the word quality is reiterated in every target. Again, as in EFA, references to early childhood and adulthood are particularly weak. Lifelong learning is mentioned as an addition to inclusive and quality education for all, not as the new education paradigm for the 21st century proposed by UNESCO.

Is it realistic to expect that ambitious education goals will be achieved by 2030 when much more modest goals were not achieved in 25 years of Education for All and 15 years of Millennium Development Goals?

After reading Goal 4 and its targets one wonders what are the lessons learned over the past 25 years of global goals and international initiatives for education.

Money is considered the main obstacle; however, as we know, education is one of those fields where how money is spent is more important than how much it is spent, and where money alone does not guarantee good policies or rapid, sustainable, change.

We find also the usual translation problems (English-Spanish).

Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote lifelong learning

Just one-third of countries have achieved all the measurable Education for All (EFA) goals. - See more at: http://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2015/education-all-2000-2015-achievements-and-challenges#sthash.yYyYBh6R.PLvDOXjA.dpuf

Main findings

• Just one-third of countries have achieved all the measurable Education for All (EFA) goals.
• In 2012, 121m children and adolescents were still out of school, down from 204m in 1999.
• Half of countries have now achieved Universal Primary Enrolment and 10% more are close.
• Poorest children are five times more likely not to complete primary school than richest.

- See more at: http://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2015/education-all-2000-2015-achievements-and-challenges#sthash.yYyYBh6R.PLvDOXjA.dpuf

» Lifelong learning (LLL) has been conceptualized by UNESCO as learning that takes place throughout life, from birth to death, in and out of the school system. It has also been proposed by UNESCO as a new paradigm for education in the 21st century. However, LLL is mentioned here as an addition to inclusive and quality education for all, and as separate from education. In fact, LLL should be considered an embracing concept that includes all targets of Goal 4. 
» Inclusive and quality remain strange and confusing terms for the majority of the population worldwide. Their interpretations and uses differ considerably even within the specialized education community. The same occurs with lifelong learning, a concept not fully understood and incorporated by the education community so far. All this must be kept in mind when communicating the Quality Education Goal in the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals.

■ By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and Goal-4 effective learning outcomes.

» This target is the first one in the list and is the most important one within Goal 4. Most financial efforts will probably be devoted to this target.
 
» It is important to remember that:
- Education for All (1990-2015) adopted six basic education goals, aimed at "meeting basic learning needs" of children, youth and adults, in and out of school. According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), basic education comprises primary education and lower secondary education. The six goals were not me in 25 years, and remained as "unfinished business".
- The Millennium Development Goals (2000-2015) proposed Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education ('primary education' understood as 4 years of schooling; no mention of free or quality). In 15 years, this modest goal was not met.

» In the final phase of EFA and of the MDGs a "global learning crisis" was acknowledged: after four years of schooling millions of children worldwide are not learning to read, write and do basic math.

» With this experience in mind, is it realistic to think that "free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education" with "effective learning outcomes" are attainable in the next 15 years? In the push for 'universal secondary education', won't we repeat the same - and worse - problems than those faced in the push for 'universal primary education'?.

» "All girls and boys" may not be a realistic goal for many countries.

» Not all is about money. Latin America's high school drop out should be taken into account: nearly half of young Latin Americans leave high school, mainly because of lack of interest and lack of purpose. In a region with historical high primary education enrollment rates, secondary education is viewed today as a major bottleneck.

» In today's world children are not the only ones attending primary and secondary education; in many countries, completion of primary and secondary education is being offered to young people and adults (second chance education programmes). Targets and indicators related to youth and adults (see below) might also incorporate primary and secondary education.

■ By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.

» Early childhood development, care and pre-primary education are important not to prepare children for primary education, but to better prepare them for learning (in and out of school) and for life. This debate has been going on for decades. For some reason, the SDGs decided to adopt the instrumental, school-oriented approach to early childhood development and education. We can only hope that the indicators do not reinforce the 'school preparedness' trend.

■ By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university.

» "Affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education" is hard to find in most countries around the world. Can you ensure access to something that, in many cases, will take much longer than 15 years to be in place? Again, all will have to be translated into a more realistic quantitative goals depending on each country.

■ By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship.

» See comments to previous target.

» It is difficult to agree on the "relevant skills for employment, decent jobs and enterpreneurship" that can be considered universal and useful in any context. Certainly, and given the weaknesses of the school system and of basic education, some of them will have to do not with "technical and professional skills" but with basic learning needs such as oral expression, and reading and writing properly and autonomously.

■ By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations.

 » Again: women, indigenous peoples, and people with disabilities are put together, in the "vulnerable" category. However, their vulnerabilities - and the ways they are discriminated - are very different and specific.

» It is time to consider equality, not juts parity - access and enrollment. Disparities are expressed in many areas: retention, repetition, roles played, expectations, learning outcomes, study and career options, etc.

» To be considered: in Latin America, education discrimination against indigenous peoples is stronger and more systematic than discrimination against girls/women. In other words: racism is stronger than machismo.

■ By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, both men and women, achieve literacy and numeracy.

» Youth and adult literacy is historically the least successful global education goal and remains a critical challenge worldwide (781 million illiterates, the usual two thirds represented by women). The challenge includes sound policy and goal formulation. "Achieving literacy and numeracy" remains a highly ambiguous notion. When can we say that someone has achieved literacy and numeracy? (It may be useful to describe clear competencies within this target).

» "Substantial proportion of adults" needs to be translated into a percentage that makes the goal not only achievable but successful.

■ By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.

» Clearly, promoting sustainable development is not only about knowledge and skills. The most developed, educated and informed countries in the world are the ones that contaminate the most. On the other hand, indigenous peoples preserve the planet.

» The description of knowledge and skills considered necessary is vague. In any case, acquiring them requires not only education but also information and communication efforts; not only the school system but also indigenous knowledge and practice, non-formal learning and informal learning at home, in the community, through the media and the internet, in the workplace, etc.

■ Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, nonviolent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

» It is important to highlight the need to differentiate and respond to specific realities and needs, rather than to homogenize. Need to add mention of facilities that are sensitive to different cultures (there are various cultures within a country - countries that are multiethnic and pluricultural, and as a result of migration processes). This is not covered by child, disability and gender sensitivity.

■ By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships available to developing countries, in particular least developed countries, small island developing States and African countries, for enrollment in higher education, including vocational training and information and communications technology, technical, engineering and scientific programmes, in developed countries and other developing countries.

» South-South cooperation and exchange are essential. So-called 'developing countries' are highly heterogeneous. Many such countries are in a condition to offer scholarships and exchange programmes that may be more relevant to other 'developing countries' than those offered by 'developed' ones.

■ By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing states.

» It is revealing that the target devoted to teachers appears last in the list (following scholarships, education facilities, etc.).

» It is fundamental to deepen the understanding and the debate - globally and in each national context - on the issue of teachers, teacher education and teacher quality. Qualified teachers and quality teachers may not necessarily be the same thing. Training is only one factor of quality teaching. Poor teacher training is very common and ineffective. Becoming a good teacher depends on character, vocation, school background, appreciation for learning, for reading and for experimenting, quality of teacher education and of teachers' working and learning conditions. There are many old conceptions and misconceptions on what good teacher and good teaching are. 

» The teacher is a key factor in the quality of school education, but not the only one. The whole responsibility cannot be placed on teachers. All evaluations of student learning in school reiterate the critical role of poverty and of overall families' socio-economic conditions. Improving the learning conditions of the poor implies improving them both in and out of school (health, nutrition, well-being, lack of fear, affection, care, play, sleep, etc.).

Related texts in OTRA∃DUCACION

▸ Aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida
▸ De alumno a aprendiz
▸ Mujeres, indígenas y discapacitados
▸ Ojo con traducciones y traductores
▸ Madre Tierra
▸ Sumak Kawsay: Voces y saberes de la Amazonía ecuatoriana
▸ ¿Mejorar la educación para aliviar la pobreza? ¿O aliviar la pobreza para poder educar?
▸ ¿Atraer los mejores estudiantes para la docencia?
▸ Sobre aprendizaje de jóvenes y adultos | On youth and adult learning
▸ Escolarizado no es lo mismo que educado
▸ 1990-2030: Global education goals | Metas globales para la educación
▸ Educación para Todos y Objetivos del Milenio no son la misma cosa (entrevista) 
▸ Calidad educativa: ¿infraestructura, tecnologías y docentes?
▸ Education First | La educación primero 

▸ ¿Educación a lo largo de la vida para el Norte y educación primaria para el Sur? | Lifelong Learning for the North, primary education for the South?
▸ International Initiatives for Education | Iniciativas internacionales para la educación
▸ What did the Millennium Development Goals achieve?
▸ Formal, non-formal and informal learning

Now comes PISA for 'developing countries' (PISA-D)

 Rosa María Torres

Texto en español: PISA para "países en desarrollo" (PISA-D)

Some of the concerns raised around OECD's PISA tests (reading, mathematics and science, applied every three years to 15 year olds) refer to their inadequacy for "developing countries". 

Participating Latin American countries systematically occupy some of the lowest places in PISA rankings, far from "developed" OECD countries (in the past few years, Mexico, Chile and Colombia have been accepted as OECD countries; they are also at the bottom). 

PISA tests were developed by and for OECD countries. Later, non-OECD countries  have joined PISA, 10 of them from Latin America and the Caribbean: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Trinidad & Tobago, and Uruguay. (See: list of countries that have participated in PISA)

Issues related to the inadequacy or usefulness of PISA for non-OECD countries include the following:

» the need to contextualize the tests, responding to the great heterogeneity (socio-economic, cultural, etc.) of countries, within the same generic category of "developing";

» many 15 year olds are out of school because they never enrolled or because they dropped out (drop out rates are high in may countries, especially in secondary education);  
» there is no technical capacity in the majority of countries to administer a complex and massive standardized test such as PISA; 
» many countries participate in international tests (such as UNESCO's LLECE tests in the case of Latin America);
» devastating domestic effects in countries getting low results and rankings in PISA tests;

» the enormous attention dedicated by governments to improve scores and rankings in the next PISA test, distracting time and resources from critical structural issues and from learning as such. 

Some of these concerns have been aired in open letters addressed to OECD, such as the one sent in 2013 by Ministers of Education in Latin America (Los Ministros de Educación del MERCOSUR y la prueba PISA) or the one sent in 2014 by 92 academics from the US and other OECD countries (Stop PISA!). Concerns have also been raised in Chile (Bárbara Figueroa critica la Prueba PISA porque mide asuntos 'ajenos a la realidad educativa chilena') and in Ecuador vis a vis this country's decision to join PISA (PISA ¿para qué? ¿El Ecuador en PISA?). (See: Critical Voices of PISA in Latin America).

Responding to these and other concerns, the OECD proposed PISA for Development (PISA-D), an initiative addressed to middle and low income countries. The idea is to expand the participation of non-OECD countries in PISA. Nine countries - from Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean - expressed their interest to participate in the pilot project: Bhutan, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Senegal, and Zambia. (See: Technical meeting, June 2013); OECD Call for Tender 100000990, August 2014).

"PISA for Development aims to increase the policy relevance of PISA for developing countries through enhanced PISA survey instruments that are more relevant for the contexts found in developing countries but which produce scores that are on the same scales as the main PISA assessment. The project will also develop an approach and methodology for including out of school children in the surveys. The project’s objectives will be achieved over a 36 month period through a three-way partnership involving the OECD, concerned development partners (DAC members plus the World Bank, UNESCO and other UN bodies and other regional organisations) and partner countries from the developing world".

- In: OECD Post-2015, Element 2, Paper 1: The OECD's contribution on education to the post-2015 framework: PISA for Development.

The OECD sees the following advantages of PISA for Development:

• "A single reference against which to rigorously gauge the degree of progress
made towards targets for educational quality and equity.

• A comparable and robust measure of progress to allow all countries – regardless of their starting point – to establish themselves on an improvement trajectory to achieve targets referenced to common international goals.

• Credible and comparable results: PISA requires participating countries to follow common technical, institutional and administrative standards for the assessment.

• An opportunity to help build institutional capacity. Countries are responsible for overseeing PISA implementation; therefore, participation in PISA can also drive improvements in institutions. This capacity building could be implemented directly with development partners in a way that creates spill-over benefits to other parts of the educational sector."

PISA-D is an OECD strategy for the post-2015 period. 2015 marked the deadline for two major world initiatives: Education for All (EFA, 1990-2000-2015) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG, 2000-2015). In 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the 2030 Agenda were approved.

International awareness around a "global learning crisis" - millions of children worldwide not learning to read, write and calculate after attending school for four years or more - acknowledges for the first time the precariousness of learning in primary schools in most "developing countries" and is contributing to finally place learning as an explicit and fundamental goal. Unfortunately, that goes also with an emphasis on learning assessment starting now in pre-primary education. In that context, OECD/PISA appear as key global partners.

"Developing a universal measure of educational success" is one of eleven areas in which OECD plans to contribute to the 2030 Agenda (Beyond the MDGs: Towards an OECD contribution to the post-2015 agenda). In other words: the aim is to establish ONE definition of 'educational success' and ONE way to measure it worldwide, in the North and in the South. PISA-D is the strategy and the instrument to incorporate that "other part of the world" still absent from the global education evaluation race.

A big player and evaluation enthusiast such as the World Bank blesses global learning benchmarks and recommends them especially for "developing countries."

"In a global economy the primary benchmark for success is no longer improvement by national standards, but the best-performing education systems internationally. (Having said that, it’s also important for countries to set and measure learning goals that reflect their own national priorities and values.) This usually means participating in one of the many international assessment programs that test the math, science, problem solving or other competencies of students at the same grade or age level in different education systems around the world. Countries – particularly developing and emerging economies – may feel at a disadvantage in this global benchmarking, but should keep in mind that steady improvement over time is the important thing." (Education: Measuring for Success in Today’s World, 9 May 2014).

Issues that may need more focused attention and discussion 

The following issues were mentioned in "The PISA for Development initiative moves forward: Have my wishes been fulfilled?" (2 Feb. 2015):

- A test with questions that 15-year-olds in emerging and developing economies can actually answer.

The OECD’s original plan was to draw solely on their existing pool of 337 PISA questions to create the PISA for Development test. One and a half year later, the OECD started to explore using  questions from other regional and international assessments to supplement the PISA questions. The idea is to make sure 15-year-olds in emerging and developing countries can actually answer.

- A test that emerging and developing economies can afford.

The PISA for Development pilot is about twice as expensive as the regular PISA exercise, since it  involves lots of developmental work, in an effort to adapt the questionnaires to the contexts of these countries and to develop a methodology to include out-of-school students. Donors such as the World Bank have provided financial support to facilitate countries' participation. It is essential, however, to take a hard look at the long-term sustainability of PISA for Development, if countries are expected to cover the costs on their own.

- A test that contributes to learning for all.

The pilot faced the challenge of collecting learning data on the entire 15-year-old cohort in a country, including those who are out of school. This may include youth who never went to school or who are semi-literate.

PISA-D is administered both in and outside of school. Eight countries – Bhutan, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia – participated  in the school-based implementation of PISA-D, which was carried out from 2015 to 2018. Six countries administered the out-of-school assessment: Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia. 

PISA-D countries can compare their results to the more than 80 countries participating in PISA.

PISA-D results

PISA-D results were released by OECD on 11 December, 2018, in Quito. Results included seven countries: Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Senegal and Zambia. Bhutan is not included since it arrived late.

Cambodia
Ecuador
Guatemala
Honduras
Paraguay
Senegal
Zambia
oe.cd/il/PISA4Dev

Related texts in this blog
Sobre evaluación en educación  | On Evaluation in Education
Artículos sobre PISA  | Articles on PISA
25 Years of Education for All  | 25 años de Educación para Todos