Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta World Bank. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta World Bank. Mostrar todas las entradas

Escuela Nueva: An innovation within formal education (Colombia)






This article was published by IBE-UNESCO Prospects (1992, No 4). I wrote it while working as a Senior Education Adviser at UNICEF Headquarters in New York, and following a study visit (1991) to the Escuela Nueva (EN) Program with an official delegation from the Ecuadorian government. The article looks at the evolution of EN from its creation in 1975 to the early 1990s, period in which it expanded in Colombia, became a national policy for the rural areas, and a regular program within Colombia's Ministry of Education. We also discuss topics related to the survival, scaling up and replicability of the innovation.
In 1987, the Escuela Nueva Foundation was created by the team that developed EN in the 1970s, in order to help strengthen the program, diversify and adapt it to urban areas (Escuela Activa Urbana), and promote its expansion to other countries. The EN model has been experimented in 16 countries. Over the years, it has received numerous international awards, including a WISE Award in 2009 and the 2013 WISE Prize for Education given to Vicky Colbert, co-creator of the EN model together with Prof. Oscar Mogollón.


INTRODUCTION


Colombia's Escuela Nueva (EN) 'New School' Program has become an international reference. UNESCO, the World Bank and UNICEF have lent their support to the program and promoted it. UNESCO described it as "an experience of unquestionable international value." The World Bank recommends disseminating its lessons among education planners and policy-makers. Study missions visit Colombia to find out more about it. Several countries are interested in replicating it.

What makes EN so special? 1) the fact that it is an innovation within the formal school system; 2) the long time over which it has evolved; 3) the system approach adopted; 4) the focus on the curriculum and pedagogy; and 5) its results.

We examine here these five points and conclude with some considerations about the program's survival and potential for replicability in other contexts.

1. ESCUELA NUEVA: AN ALTERNATIVE WITHIN FORMAL EDUCATION

It is common to associate educational innovation with NGOs, grassroot organizations, out-of-school or non-formal education. Many people think Escuela Nueva is a NGO program, like other primary or basic education programs highlighted by international organizations (such as BRAC's non-formal primary schools in Bangladesh). However, perhaps EN's greatest merit is that it is a transformative innovation within the formal, public, mainstream education system. Colombia's EN shows that systemic innovation is possible within government structures.  

2. ESCUELA NUEVA: FROM LOCAL PROJECT TO NATIONAL POLICY

"Pilot projects" have lost credibility. Many pilot projects remain local experiments. At the same time, we also see massive-scale programs rushing without going through a gradual process. Escuela Nueva has grown from a micro experiment to a national education policy.

UNESCO's Unitary School model (1960s)

EN emerged from the Unitary School model promoted by UNESCO in 1961 at a Ministers of Education meeting held in Geneva and adopted in several "developing countries". The Unitary School was characterized by:

a) presence of one teacher in the school,
b) automatic promotion,
c) active learning, enabling children to learn at their own pace,
d) instructional cards ("fichas") for the teacher to work with various groups at the same time,
e) provision of a complete primary education cycle, and
f) application in disperse areas, with low population density.


In Colombia, the first Unitary School was set up at the Instituto Superior de Educación Rural (ISER) in Pamplona, department of Santander, under UNESCO Project 1 for Primary Education. The teacher in charge of that school was Oscar Mogollón, a public school teacher who would later become Escuela Nueva's National Coordinator at the Ministry of Education (See Note below)
- By the mid-1960s, the small unitary school had multiplied into 150 schools. 
- In 1967, the government adopted the Unitary School methodology for all single-teacher (multigrade) schools in the country. A Manual was published and Departments of Education started to train rural teachers in this methodology.
- In 1975, the Escuela Nueva Program was created on the basis of the Unitary School model and experience.
Oscar Mogollón, together with Vicky Colbert and Beryl Levinger, from the US Agency for International Development (USAID), worked on the EN model.
-
Between 1975 and 1978, with USAID support, EN was implemented in 500 schools in three departments. Later, with the support of the InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB),
private Colombian organizations such as the Coffee Growers Association, and FES (Foundation for Higher Education), the program expanded to 3,000 schools. 
- Between 1982 and 1986 EN expanded to the Pacific Coast. Learning Guides were adapted for this region, with UNICEF technical and financial co-operation.

- In 1985, the Colombian Government adopted EN as a strategy to achieve universal rural primary education. By then, there were 8,000 EN schools in the country.
- In the late 1970s and early 1980s the government negotiated a loan with the World Bank in order to expand and improve basic education in rural areas. In 1987, a second loan assisted the Universalization Plan. The EN program received educational materials, teacher training, sanitary installations, furniture and school improvements (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990). Investments were expanded until the mid 1990s.
- Since 1987 there was a rapid expansion. The program reached 17,984 schools by 1989.
- In 1990 EN received the Simón Bolívar national award. Internationally, it was chosen by the World Bank as one of the three most important basic education models for rural areas.

- In 1991, 20,000 of the 27,000 rural schools were involved in the program, with an estimated coverage of one million children. 
3. ESCUELA NUEVA: A SYSTEM APPROACH

Escuela Nueva is not a methodology. It is an integrated system that combines four components: (a) curriculum, (b) training, (c) administration, and (d) community. None of these components stands on its own. Their interrelationship is what makes the model both coherent and feasible.

(a) The curriculum
Emphasis is placed on the curriculum. Key features include: active learning, learning materials known as "Learning Guides", Study Corners, School Library, School Government, and Flexible Promotion.

The EN Program was devised for rural areas, primary education (five years in Colombia), and multigrade teaching (one or two teachers in charge of all grades). Children study in small groups using Learning Guides, supplied by the State free of charge. The Guides are organized by subjects (mathematics, natural science, social studies, and language) and by grade (from second to fifth grade; there are no guides for the first grade). They are designed for self-instruction, with graded activities and detailed instructions, so that students can work to a large extent on their own, helping one another. This saves teachers' time, reduces their burden, lessens the need for highly qualified teaching staff, and enables students to progress at their own pace. Teachers are trained to adapt the Guides to the specific characteristics of the children and the local environment -- although they seldom do it.

The Study Corners are arranged by field of study and comprise objects collected or made by the children or provided by the parents and the community.

Each school has a small Library: the idea is to encourage reading among children, teachers, families and the community. The school libraries have a stock of about 70 books, including reference books by subject, reference works (encyclopedias, dictionaries, atlases), literature, and materials on community-related topics.

The School Government is a student council responsible for organizing children's school activities. Its purpose is to involve children in school management, initiate them in civic and democratic behavior, and foster attitudes of cooperation and solidarity. The School Government comprises a President, Vice-President, Secretary, Committee Leaders and Assistants for each grade, is elected by the students following democratic procedures, and is renewed periodically to enable all children to gain leadership experience.

Assessment and grade promotion differ substantially from the conventional school system. Its main role is making teachers and students aware of areas needing reinforcement. There is Flexible (not automatic) Promotion. Each child moves on to the next grade when he/she achieves the educational objectives set. This can take more (or less) time than a regular academic year. Any children temporarily absent from school can resume their studies without having to drop out.

The learning environment expands beyond the classroom. EN schools have a vegetable patch and a garden; sports grounds and community facilities form part of the wider school environment. Inside the school, there is space for the study corners, library, kitchen, dining-room and washroom facilities. Teachers often have living facilities for them and their families on the school premises. The natural environment is the main object of study and provides most of the resources for teaching and learning.

(b) Teacher training
EN teachers have a role of facilitators - guiding, directing and evaluating learning - and of  community leaders and organizers. These roles imply major attitudinal changes. Therefore, attitude changes - pedagogical and social - are given emphasis in teacher training.

Initial training (for new teachers) includes three sequential workshops - 
initiation, methodology and organization - each of one week's duration, and use of the library. After the first and second workshops, there is a six-month and a three-month interval, respectively, so that teachers put in practice what they learned. Attending the first workshop is a requisite for including the school in the EN program and for teachers to start working with it. The idea is to reproduce in teacher training the methods and real-life situations that the teachers will encounter in their classrooms and in their relations with the students.

In-service training takes place through so-called Rural Micro-Centers, where teachers can exchange, update and upgrade their knowledge and experience on an ongoing basis. They operate with groups of 10 to 15 teachers from neighboring areas.


(c) The administrative component
This is the one that has received least attention. It is a crucial and complex area, involving political and institutional factors that go beyond administrative issues. Administration "has more to do with giving direction than with controlling" (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990), which means that administrative officials, too, must familiarize themselves with the program's objectives and components, and especially with its pedagogical aspects.

EN is a decentralized program. A coordinator and a small team (ten persons in 1991, most of them involved with EN in leadership positions since its inception) are responsible for co-ordinating and designing policies and strategies, and evaluating implementation. At the departmental level, the structure comprises a representative committee, a coordinator and a team of multiplier agents. From 1987 onwards - when the Plan for the Universalization of Rural Primary Education was launched and the EN expansion process began - several changes were introduced in the administrative structure with emphasis on decentralization. Two new structures were created: a universalization committee at national and departmental levels, and educational units (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990).

(d) The school-community relationship
The EN school is expected to operate as an information center and a focal point for community integration. The school-community relationship is one of mutual benefit, with parents and the community joining in school activities, and the school promoting activities to foster local development and improve the quality of life of the population.

In order to facilitate teachers' understanding of the community and the local conditions, EN uses various tools: the Family Record (information about the agricultural activities of the area and its seasons), the Neighborhood Map and the District Monograph. Students, parents and the community participate in their elaboration.

EN tries various ways of involving parents in their children's activities and stimulating children's interest in learning more about their parents and their lives. The library, the school premises and cultural and recreational activities are open to the community. Achievement Days - days when academic results are announced and the school government reports on its activities - are opportunities for sharing school and community activities.

Demonstration Schools, organized in each department where the program operates, are schools in which the four components can be "seen" operating in exemplary conditions. Visiting a Demonstration School is a key strategy for teacher motivation and training.

4. ESCUELA NUEVA: A PEDAGOGICAL INNOVATION

Educational innovations often give prominence to organizational aspects and neglect the pedagogical ones. Many innovative experiences are recognized as such for the changes they introduce in management, planning and evaluation, infrastructure, and/or curriculum content. Teaching and learning relationships, approaches and methodologies, the corner-stone of educational change, are often overlooked. The central role of pedagogy and of pedagogical change is one of EN's most remarkable features.

EN combines features of progressive educational theory. The program is based on the philosophy of the Unitary School (derived from the Active School): multigrade teaching, individualized instruction, active learning, educational materials that enable the teacher to work with several groups at once, and automatic promotion.

EN's methodology includes learning by doing, linking theory and practice, individual and group work, study and play, guidance and self-instruction. Children learn to think for themselves, to analyze, investigate and apply what they have learned. Active learning principles are also applied to teachers in their own training and in their daily work in schools. The conventional duties of the teacher-instructor are shared the learning guides (contents and methods), the library (an additional reference source), the study corners (observation and experiment areas), the group of students (who work together and help each another) and the school government (where children learn democratic values and procedures).

Teacher training emphasizes teaching and the capacity to innovate. The micro-centers promote team work, experience sharing and critical analysis of teachers' practice.

EN's slogan "More and better primary education for rural children in rural areas", describes this attempt to reconcile quantity and quality. It is not just a matter of providing children in rural areas with access to education: they deserve and need good education. Departing from conventional teaching practice -- top-down, authoritarian, rote and passive learning -- is a crucial element in EN's development and achievements.

5. ESCUELA NUEVA RESULTS

Comprehensive evaluations of EN have been conducted so far by Psacharopoulos et al. (1992), and Rojas and Castillo (1988). Both utilize data collected in 1987 in 11 Colombian departments.

Psacharopoulos found that EN students achieve higher scores than their counterparts in conventional rural schools (except in fifth grade Mathematics) as well as improved self-esteem, creativity and civic behavior -- co-operation, responsibility and solidarity. EN has increased community participation in school-related activities and has reduced drop-out rate among children completing fifth grade (however, not third grade). Rojas and Castillo found that EN has had a significant impact on adult education, agricultural extension, athletic competitions, health campaigns, and community celebrations.

EN has changed the face of rural education in Colombia. It is proving that it is possible  to design an educational model tailored to the rural context, that includes both quality and efficiency. EN is showing that some of the traditional disadvantages of rural areas can be turned into advantages - ample space, linkages with nature, natural resources, contact with the community, central role played by the school and the teacher in community life, etc.

6. SOME CONCERNS 

As with other acclaimed innovative experiences, there is a tendency to deny or minimize problems and limitations. However, we know there are always discrepancies between the ideal, desired model and its implementation.

A study trip (1991) to see EN operating in the field allowed me first-hand contact with the many EN strengths and also with some of its weaknesses (Torres, 1991). So far I have referred to the former; I shall now refer to the latter.

There is room for improvement in all the components and elements described. In fact, the EN coordinating team is not satisfied with any of them. The Guides require thorough revision (three revisions have been carried out to date), especially in Mathematics and Language. Many contents and activities need to be better adjusted to the circumstances and needs of a rural child. Not many teachers are using the adaptation mechanism built into the Guides. There are limitations in the instructional design, too formal and inflexible for the requirements of do-it-yourself learning materials such as these.

There are shortcomings in teacher training -- coverage and quality. The rural micro-center strategy is not yet fully understood or established in all areas. School governments are not always set up or, where they are, not always as planned. A controlling or paternalistic approach by teachers and adherence to form and ritual may defeat the objective of the school government. The school-community relationship depends to a great extent on the teachers' initiative; their characteristics, training and personal motivation determine the quality of that relationship, which often replicates conventional school patterns.

The teaching of reading and writing - basic skills and the factor which largely determines children's academic future - is still one of EN's main shortcomings. As indicated, there are no Guides for first grade, leaving teachers free to choose the literacy methods and techniques they deem most appropriate. This is an open invitation to the conventional teaching approaches and outdated methods that prevail in literacy education. One of the major challenges facing EN is coming up with new ideas in this area, drawing on the important knowledge and experience gained in the region and internationally.

The teacher-student relationship proposed by EN has yet to be fully owned and applied. While some teachers are moving towards a new teaching role, others continue to apply conventional teaching approaches. Translating EN principles and strategies into practice implies a long and complex process.

EN demands two main roles from teachers: a teaching role and a community role. It is not easy to strike a balance between the two. Demonstration Schools seem to be placing more emphasis on the community relationship than on teaching. 


There is a conflictual institutional issue. Although EN is a government program framed within the Ministry of Education, the relationship is difficult and never fully clarified. From open boycott to passive resistance, EN has often had to swim against the tide or operate on the fringes of the system, looking for the support of international organizations and private Colombian organizations. Its precarious situation within the government structure weakens the program's capacity to consolidate and expand.

A long evolutionary process such as the one EN has witnessed can lead to development and progress, but also to stagnation. Efforts are necessary to rejuvenate it continually. The aging of Escuela Nueva is a recurrent concern among those involved in the program. 

Expansion has brought both an aggravation of old problems and a series of new ones. As stated (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990), the "cost of going for scale" has included "inevitable sacrifices in terms of effectiveness and efficiency" and has resulted in "a reduction in the number of days spent on training workshops or, in some places, a failure to provide the study guides in time for the training sessions. One consequence of these problems is, of course, a weakening of experiential learning in teachers' training, added to teacher apathy and criticism of the program." The new administrative structure that has emerged as a result of the program's expansion has led to conflict with the technical teams, not always consulted, and has caused a sharp rise in the number of administrative officials with training demands that the program has been unable to meet.

Another factor is the proliferation of "demonstration schools" during the expansion phase. Although such schools are considered to be a key strategy to maintain quality, their introduction on a massive scale may have the opposite effect.

6.1. IS ESCUELA NUEVA A MODEL THAT CAN BE REPLICATED?

The combination of innovation and replicability is highly valued, especially by international organizations. Innovative experiences are expected not only to expand, but also to adapt to other contexts.
In fact, many would like to find a magic one-size-fits-all formula for primary education in rural areas in "developing countries". A few comments on EN in this regard.

In the first place, the specific nature of EN as it has developed in Colombia must be born in mind. It is a formal, public, rural, multigrade, primary education program. These characteristics must not be overlooked when considering possible adaptations or variants. Nor must it be forgotten that EN is a system organized around four components (curriculum, training, administration, and community), not an assortment of isolated elements.

There are a number of factors of Colombia's EN Program that are unique and not readily available or easily replicable in other contexts. 


"Rural school"  "Rural schools" are very different in different places. Colombian "rural schools" are generally well endowed with infrastructure and equipment (government loans with the World Bank in the late 1970s and in the 1980s improved the physical infrastructure of rural schools in the country). Many EN schools have housing facilities for the teachers and their families. Many have a kitchen, a dining-room, washrooms, running water, electricity, television. This is not the reality of rural schools in many Latin American countries and in most "developing countries". 


Languages  Colombia is a rather homogenous country in linguistic terms. The EN program has a tremendous advantage in dealing with one language: Spanish. In the majority of Latin American countries and throughout the world, multilingualism is the norm. Introducing the EN model in bilingual or multilingual contexts means venturing into entirely new territory.

Teachers' educational background  According to the World Bank study (Psacharopoulos, 1992), most EN teachers have secondary or higher education. Also, compared with other rural schools in Colombia, EN has more teachers living on the school premises. Both factors - teachers' level of education and teachers living in the school - have a positive impact on students (a university education was associated with better cognitive outcomes; teachers residing in the school was associated with better scores in creativity and civic behavior).
 

A long process  EN has made a long and distinctive process. "In Escuela Nueva, the necessary technical conditions have been met, since the program has been designed and put to the test over a period of 15 years. Furthermore, the present government has fulfilled the necessary political conditions. In addition, adequate financial conditions have been assured through the allocation of government funds, a loan from the World Bank and the cooperation of UNICEF, which has lent its support to maintain the quality of the program as it expands" (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990). How many countries and governments can offer such a combination of technical, political and financial circumstances?

Technical capacities  Let us mention only one crucial component of EN: the Learning Guides. As acknowledged by the World Bank, elaborating good textbooks needs highly specialized technical competence that is not easy to find: "Translating curriculum specifications into good textbooks requires considerable expertise. Textbooks must have the appropriate content and reading level; be consistent in approach, method and exposition; be properly sequenced; motivate the students; and finally, be readily taught by less qualified teachers, yet allow good teachers to expand upon them. Throughout the world, few individuals possess the expertise required for writing good textbooks" (Lockheed and Verspoor, 1991). How many programs can avail themselves of such human and technical expertise?

Financing  In addition to government funds channeled through the Ministry of Education, EN has been receiving regular financial support from various international agencies - USAID, IDB, UNICEF, the World Bank - and from private organizations. The estimated cost of EN is between 5% and 10% higher than that of conventional schools (Schiefelbein, 1991), while teacher training costs at least three times higher (Psacharopoulos, 1992). Can similar financial support be expected in other countries? Can EN itself expect sustained support to enable it to continue to expand while improving its quality?

Survival  In a world where policies and programs are easily discontinued by government changes or international decisions, EN stands out as an exceptional innovative experience. How has EN been able to survive the political and administrative instability characteristic of Latin America and of Colombia specifically? Someone has attributed EN's success to "a mixture of advertisement, strategic support, academic standing of the developers, and simple luck" (Schiefelbein, 1991). The "luck" factor no doubt covers a wide range of unpredictable, inexplicable and non-reproducible factors.

Leadership  Studies show that one of the characteristics of successful programs and effective schools is the role played by specific individuals with drive, vision, leadership, charisma, and perseverance. This is true in the case of EN. The original team remained relatively stable. Individuals in key positions have had a decisive impact on the program's development, locally and nationally. "Even though Escuela Nueva has been institutionalized in the whole country, the support it receives in some provinces largely depends on the personal preferences of local administrators" (Psacharopoulos, 1992, p. 19).

Ten years elapsed between EN's official establishment as a program in 1975 and its adoption as a national education policy in 1985. The process has followed three stages (Ministry of Education-UNICEF, 1990): (a) learning to be effective (1975-1978), (b) learning to be efficient (1979-1986), and (c) learning to expand (since 1987). Even with the time, resources and planning that went into the program's development, everything indicates that EN was not equipped to cope with its rapid expansion, at least not without jeopardizing its quality. If this happens with a resourceful program such as EN, what can be expected of programs that are required to expand and even achieve universal implementation without having gone through the stages and met the requirements essential to their very survival? Pressure from governments and international organizations to reach big numbers, show results and become successful models in record times does not help real, transformative, sustainable innovation in the educational field.

There is a great deal that Colombia and other countries can learn from EN. There is also a great deal that can be done to consolidate and improve the program, while protecting it from the hazards of fashion and the risks of domestic shifts.

Radical changes required in education today takes second place when concerns continue to focus on access rather than on effective learning. Universalizing access to education without universalizing quality education, is delivering more of the same that produces non-learning, frustration, drop-out, repetition, and wastage of resources.

Transforming formal education is a major challenge. Schools must become less formal and more flexible, relevant, useful, creative, enjoyable, responsive to students' and teachers' needs, respectful of diversity, open to participation by parents and the community and accountable to society. EN is showing a way to do it in Colombia. It is important to know the program better and learn from its many lessons.
 

NOTES

[1] In 1992, professor Oscar Mogollón joined the Academy for Educational Development (AED) - a US-based non-profit -  to work on the design and implementation of the Active School approach in Guatemala, Nicaragua, Peru and Equatorial Guinea. He passed away in 2010. See: Oscar Mogollón and Marina Solano de Mogollón, Active Schools: Our Convictions for Improving the Quality of Education, AED, 2011.


REFERENCES

COLBERT, Vicky and Jairo Arboleda, "Universalization of Primary Education in Colombia: The New School Programme", UNESCO-UNICEF-WFP Co-operative Programme, Paris, July 1990. 


COLOMBIA Ministry of Education-UNICEF, El Programa de Escuela Nueva. Más y mejor educación primaria para los niños de las zonas rurales, Bogotá, 1990.

LOCKHEED, M. and VERSPOOR, A., Improving Primary Education in Developing Countries, Oxford University Press, a World Bank publication, Washington, 1991.

PSACHAROPOULOS, George, ROJAS, Carlos, and VELEZ, Eduardo, "Achievement Evaluation of Colombia's Escuela Nueva", in Working Papers, World Bank, Washington, D.C., April 1992.

SCHIEFELBEIN, Ernesto, In search of the school of the XXI century: is the Colombian Escuela the right pathfinder?, UNESCO-UNICEF, Santiago, 1991.

TORRES, Rosa María, Escuela Nueva: Una innovación desde el Estado, Fronesis, Colección Educación Nº 2, Quito, 1991.



Related texts in this blog 
» Rosa María Torres and Manzoor Ahmed, Reaching the Unreached: Non-formal approaches and Universal Primary Education
» Rosa María Torres, Transforming formal education from a Lifelong Learning perspective
» Rosa María Torres, On Innovation and Change in Education
» Rosa María Torres, "Antes, aquí era Escuela Vieja"

Six «Education for All» Goals ▸ Seis Metas de la «Educación para Todos»


Rosa María Torres


(ver español abajo)
 
▸ In 1990, at the World Conference on Education for All (Jomtien-Thailand), the Education for All (EFA) initiative was launched. The conference was organized by UNESCO, UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA and the World Bank.  Six «basic education» goals were approved, including children, youth and adults, in and out of school. The year 2000 was established as the deadline.

▸ In 2000, at the World Education Forum (Dakar-Senegal), the EFA decade evaluation showed that the six EFA goals had not been achieved. The goals were ratified, with some changes. It was decided to expand EFA's deadline until 2015, under UNESCO co-ordination.

2015 was the deadline for both EFA and Millennium Development Goals - MDG (2000-2015). After 25 years of EFA implementation, once again, the goals were not met. In 2015, EFA remains "an unfinished business"

▸ The very modest MDG goal for education - "all children completing primary education" (four years of schooling: "survival to grade 5") - was not met in many countries, among them the poorest in the world. And millions of children who complete those four years of schooling  do not learn even basic reading, writing and numeracy skills, given the low quality of the education received.

▸ In March 2015 at the World Education Forum 2015 held in Incheon, Republic of Korea, a new education agenda was agreed upon until 2030. The Incheon Declaration adopted "Education 2030: Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all". Will these much more ambitious goals be met in the next 15 years, when much more modest ones were not achieved in 25 years?


The table below compares EFA goals - Jomtien (1990-2000) and Dakar (2000-2015) - followed by a brief analysis of their similarities and differences.


Education for All (EFA) Goals

1990–2000: Jomtien
 2000–2015: Dakar

1. Expansion of early childhood care
and development activities, including family and community interventions, especially for poor, disadvantaged and disabled children.
1. Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.
2. Universal access to, and completion of,
primary education (or whatever higher
level  of education is considered “basic”) 
by 2000.
2. Ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls, children in difficult circumstances and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to and complete free and compulsory primary education of good quality.
3. Improvement in learning achievement
such that an agreed percentage of an appropriate age cohort (e.g. 80% of 14 year-olds) attains or surpasses a defined
level of necessary learning achievement.
3. Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life skills programmes.
4. Reduction in the adult illiteracy rate
(the appropriate age cohort to be determined
in each country) to, say, one-half its 1990 level by the year 2000, with sufficient emphasis on female literacy to significantly reduce the current disparity between the
male and female illiteracy rates.
4. Achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults.
5. Expansion of provision of basic education and training in other essential skills required by youth and adults, with programme effectiveness assessed in terms of
behavioural changes and impacts on health, employment and productivity.
5. Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls’ full and equal access to and achievement in basic education of good quality.
6. Increased acquisition by individuals
and families of the knowledge, skills
and values required for better living

and sound and sustainable development, made available through all educational channels including the mass media, other forms of modern and traditional communication, and social action, with effectiveness assessed in terms of
behavioural change.
6. Improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence for all so that recognized and measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills.



Similiarities and differences: EFA goals approved in 1990 (Jomtien) and in 2000 (Dakar)
(We have kept in the table the original English texts)

Basic education: Both 1990 and 2000 goals deal with the “expanded vision of basic education" adopted in Jomtien: basic learning needs of children youth and adults, in and out of school, including all ages: early childhood, childhood, youth and adulthood.

Early childhood: in 1990 the term used was “early childhood care and development” while in 2000 the term used was “early childhood care and education”. “Development” is more comprehensive than “education”; the term “comprehensive” is added in 2000. The 1990 version highlights the role of families and communities. The 2000 version refers not only to expansion but also to improvement.

Primary education: In both cases the primary education goal refers to children (and not also to youth and adults). Jomtien considered going beyond primary education (“primary education or whatever higher level of education is considered ‘basic' in each country). Both refer to access and completion; in Dakar improvement was added. Both prioritize disadvantaged children (poor, disabled). In Dakar girls are mentioned specifically.

Learning: in Jomtien, a specific goal was devoted to learning. In Dakar, that goal was eliminated. Learning is mentioned within a (new) goal referred to quality.

Citizen information and education: In Jomtien, a specific goal (Goal 6) was devoted to public information, using the education system and all available media. This goal was eliminated in Dakar.

Quality: In Dakar, a goal was created for quality. There is even mention of 'excellence'. References to 'improvement' appear also in other goals (goal 1: early childhood; goal 3: primary education).

List of goals: Both Jomtien and Dakar goals are organized as a list, with no visible connection between goals. Although the six goals refer to the lifespan (from early childhood to adulthood), there is no mention of lifelong education or lifelong learning.

Literacy/basic education: Both in Jomtien and in Dakar, literacy and basic education appear as two separate goals, referred to youth and adults. However, literacy is part of basic education.

No clear indicators: Both lack concrete indicators to measure the goals.

Language problems: Both use confusing terminology. There is lots of repetition. Confusion is particularly evident in the goals referred to youth and adults.

Unaccomplished goals: Neither the Jomtien nor the Dakar goals were accomplished in the agreed deadlines.

Focus on primary education: Both in 1990-2000 and in 2000-2015 priority in actual implementation was placed on children, primary education, access and enrollment. Early childhood and youth/adult goals were always sidelined. (In the case of adult illiteracy: in 1990, Jomtien EFA statistics acknowledged 895 million illiterate adults in the world; in 2012, they were 774 million).


ESPAÑOL

▸ En 1990, en la Conferencia Mundial sobre Educación para Todos (Jomtien-Tailandia), se lanzó la iniciativa mundial de 'Educación para Todos' (EPT), organizada por UNESCO, UNICEF, PNUD, FNUAP y el Banco Mundial. Allí se aprobaron seis metas de 'educación básica', destinadas a "satisfacer necesidades básicas de aprendizaje" de niños, jóvenes y adultos, dentro y fuera del sistema escolar. Se estableció el año 2000 como plazo para cumplir con dichas metas.

▸ En 2000, en el Foro Mundial de Educación (Dakar-Senegal), la evaluación de la década de EPT mostró que las metas no se habían cumplido. Se decidió ratificarlas, con algunos cambios, y prolongar el plazo hasta el año 2015, bajo la coordinación de la UNESCO.

2015 fue el plazo establecido tanto para las metas de la EPT como para los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio - ODM (2000-2015). La meta modesta para la educación dentro de los ODM -- "lograr la enseñanza primaria universal" (cuatro años se escolaridad: "supervivencia al quinto grado") - no se cumplió en muchos países, entre ellos los más pobres del mundo. Y millones de niños que completan el cuarto grado no han aprendido a leer, escribir y contar, dada la mala calidad de la oferta escolar.

▸ Después de 25 años de trayectoria de la EPT, las metas no se cumplieron, quedando la EPT como "un asunto inconcluso".

▸ En marzo 2013, UNESCO y UNICEF realizaron una Consulta Global Temática sobre Educación Post2015, también en Dakar. Se planteó redefinir las metas de la EPT y ampliar el plazo 15 años más, hasta el año 2030.

▸ En marzo 2015, en el Foro Mundial sobre la Educación realizado en Incheon, Corea del Sur, se acordó una nueva agenda educativa para 2015-2030. La Declaración de Incheon habla de "Educación 2030: Hacia una educación inclusiva y equitativa de calidad y un aprendizaje  a lo largo de la vida para todos". ¿Podrá lograrse en 15 años lo que no se logró en 25 con metas mucho más modestas?


A continuación una tabla que compara las metas de EPT acordadas en Jomtien (1990-2000) y en Dakar (2000-2015), así como un breve análisis de sus similitudes y diferencias.


Metas de la Educación para Todos (EPT)

1990–2000: Jomtien
 2000–2015: Dakar

1.Expansión de la asistencia y actividades de cuidado y desarrollo de la primera infancia, incluidas  intervenciones de la familia y la comunidad, especialmente para los niños pobres, desasistidos e impedidos. 1. Expandir y mejorar el cuidado infantil y la educación inicial integrales, especialmente para los niños y niñas más vulnerables y en desventaja.
2. Acceso universal a la educación primaria (o a cualquier nivel más alto considerado "básico") y terminación de
la misma, para el año 2000.
2. Asegurar que, para el 2015, todos los niños, y especialmente las niñas y los niños en circunstancias difíciles, tengan acceso y completen una educación primaria gratuita, obligatoria y de buena calidad.
3. Mejoramiento de los resultados del aprendizaje de modo que un porcentaje convenido de una muestra de edad determinada (ej. 80% de los mayores de 14 años) alcance o sobrepase un nivel dado de logros de aprendizaje considerados necesarios. 3. Asegurar la satisfacción de las necesidades de aprendizaje de jóvenes y adultos a través del acceso equitativo a programas apropiados de aprendizaje de habilidades para la vida y para la ciudadanía.
4. Reducción de la tasa de analfabetismo adulto a la mitad del nivel de 1990 para el 2000. El grupo de edad adecuado debe determinarse en cada país y hacerse suficiente hincapié en la alfabetización femenina a fin de modificar la desigualdad frecuente entre índices de alfabetización de hombres y mujeres. 4. Mejorar en 50% los niveles de alfabetización de adultos para el año 2015, especialmente entre las mujeres, y lograr el acceso equitativo a la educación básica y permanente para todas las personas adultas.
5. Ampliación de los servicios de educación básica y capacitación a otras competencias esenciales necesarias para los jóvenes y los adultos, evaluando la eficacia de los programas en función de la modificación
de la conducta y del impacto en la salud,
el empleo y la productividad.
5. Eliminar las disparidades de género en la educación primaria y secundaria para el año 2005, y lograr la equidad de géneros para el 2015, en particular asegurando a las niñas acceso a una educación básica de calidad y rendimientos plenos e igualitarios.
6. Aumento de la adquisición por parte
de los individuos y las familias de los conocimientos, capacidades y valores necesarios para vivir mejor y conseguir
un desarrollo racional y sostenido por medio
de todos los canales de la educación
-incluidos los medios de información modernos, otras formas de comunicación tradicionales y
modernas, y la acción social- evaluándose la eficacia de estas intervenciones en función de la modificación de la conducta.
6. Mejorar todos los aspectos de la calidad de la educación y asegurar la excelencia de todos, de modo que todos logren resultados de aprendizaje reconocidos y medibles, especialmente en torno a la alfabetización, el cálculo y las habilidades esenciales para la vida.


Similitudes y diferencias entre las metas fijadas en 1990 (Jomtien) y en 2000 (Dakar)
(Hemos mantenido en la tabla los textos originales de la traducción al español) 

Educación básica: Tanto en 1990 como en 2000, las metas de la Educación para Todos se enmarcan en la "visión ampliada de la educación básica" adoptada en Jomtien: necesidades básicas de aprendizaje de niños, jóvenes y adultos, dentro y fuera del sistema escolar, y a lo largo de la vida: primera infancia, edad escolar, juventud, edad adulta.

Primera infancia: En 1990, el término usado fue “cuidado y desarrollo infantil”; en 2000 el término usado fue “cuidado infantil y educación inicial". “Desarrollo” es más amplio que "educación"; a éste se le agregó "integral" en Dakar. En 1990 se destacaba el papel de la familia y la comunidad. Eso desapareció en la versión Dakar. En Dakar se agregó, en cambio, mejora y no solo  expansión.

Educación primaria: En Jomtien y en Dakar educación primaria se refiere a niños (y no también a jóvenes y adultos). En Jomtien se consideró ir más allá de la educación primaria  (“educación primaria o cualquier nivel de educación considerado 'básico' en cada país). En ambos casos la meta se refiere a acceso y completación; en Dakar, se agregó mejoramiento. En ambos casos se prioriza a niños y niñas desfavorecidos (pobres, discapacitados). En Dakar se menciona también a las niñas.

Aprendizaje: Una de las seis metas de Jomtien se dedicó al aprendizaje. En Dakar, esa meta se eliminó; el aprendizaje se menciona dentro de la meta dedicada al tema calidad.

Información pública y educación ciudadana: En Jomtien, una meta específica (Meta 6) giró en torno a la importancia de la información pública, usando el sistema educativo y todos los medios disponibles. Esta meta se eliminó en Dakar.

Calidad: En Dakar se creó una meta específica para calidad (meta 6). Hay incluso una mención a “excelencia”. Referencias a "mejoramiento" aparecen también en otras metas (meta 1 y meta 3).

Lista de metas: Tanto en Jomtien como en Dakar las metas se organizaron como un listado, sin que exista una conexión visible entre ellas. Pese a que las seis metas abarcan todas las edades, desde la primera infancia hasta la edad adulta, no se mencionan en ningún lado los conceptos de educación a lo largo de la vida o aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida.

Alfabetización/educacion básica: En ambos casos, la alfabetización (de adultos) aparece como una meta suelta, separada de la meta de educación básica de jóvenes y adultos. En verdad, la alfabetización es una necesidad basica de aprendizaje, como quedó dicho en la misma conferencia de Jomtien, y es por ende parte de la educación basica de toda persona.

Faltan indicadores claros: En ambos casos faltan indicadores concretos para medir el avance de las metas.

Problemas de lenguaje y redacción: Ambos conjuntos de metas tienen problemas de redacción,  usan una terminología confusa, hay mucha repetición. La confusión es particularmente notoria en el campo de la educación de jóvenes y adultos.

Metas incumplidas: Ni las metas de Jomtien ni las de Dakar se cumplieron en los plazos previstos.

Enfasis en la educación primaria: Tanto en 1990-2000 como en 2000-2015 la implementación priorizó la meta 3 referida  a la educación primaria y a los niños en edad escolar. El énfasis se puso asimismo en el acceso y la matrícula. Las metas referidas a la primera infancia y a la educación de jóvenes y adultos han sido siempre dejadas de lado en la Educación para Todos.



Avances de la Educación para Todos 2000-2012
(Tomado del Informe Mundial de Seguimiento de la Educación para Todos 2012 - Resumen)
■ Objetivo 1: Las mejoras en el ámbito de la atención y educación de la primera infancia han sido demasiado lentas.
En 2008, aproximadamente el 28% aproximadamente de los niños de menos de cinco años padecían de retraso en el crecimiento, y menos de la mitad de los niños del mundo recibían una enseñanza preescolar.
■ Objetivo 2: Los progresos encaminados a hacer realidad la enseñanza primaria universal están perdiendo impulso. En 2010 seguía habiendo 61 millones de niños sin escolarizar en el mundo.
De 100 niños no escolarizados, se estima que 47 no lo estarán nunca.
■ Objetivo 3: Muchos jóvenes no disponen de competencias básicas.
En 123 países de bajos ingresos o ingresos medianos bajos, unos 200 millones de jóvenes que tienen entre 15 y 24 años ni siquiera han logrado terminar sus estudios primarios, lo que representa un joven de cada cinco.
■ Objetivo 4:  La alfabetización de los adultos sigue siendo un objetivo difícil de alcanzar.
El número de adultos analfabetos ha experimentado una disminución de solo un 12% entre 1990 y 2010. En 2010, unos 775 millones de adultos eran analfabetos, siendo las dos terceras partes mujeres.
■ Objetivo 5: Las disparidades entre varones y niñas cobran formas muy diversas.
En 2010, había todavía diecisiete países con menos de nueve niñas por diez varones en la enseñanza
primaria. En más de la mitad de los 96 países que no han logrado la paridad entre los sexos en la enseñanza secundaria, los varones están en situación de inferioridad.
■ Objetivo 6: La desigualdad en materia de resultados del aprendizaje sigue siendo muy marcada a escala mundial.
Asciende a nada menos que 250 millones el número de niños que podrían llegar al cuarto grado sin ser capaces de leer o de escribir.

Related texts by Rosa María Torres / Textos relacionados
▸ 25 años de Educación para Todos | 25 Years of Education for All (compilation)
▸ What happened at the World Education Forum (Dakar, 2000)?

▸ International Initiatives for Education  |  Iniciativas internacionales para la educación (compilation)

Lifelong Learning: Moving Beyond 'Education for All' (EFA)
2015
Education for All 2000-2015 - How did Latin America and the Caribbean do?


 

International Initiatives for Education ▸ Iniciativas internacionales para la educación

Rosa María Torres

Compilación de textos sobre iniciativas y actividades vinculadas a organismos internacionales publicados en este blog

Compilation of texts on initiatives and activities linked to international agencies published in this blog


International Co-operation ▸ Cooperación internacional
▸ Knowledge-based aid: Do we want it? Do we need it?

▸ About "good practice" in international co-operation in education


▸ El Banco Mundial y sus errores de política educativa
▸ The World Bank and its mistaken education policies


Avenidas promisorias y callejones sin salida

▸ Maldición de Malinche

Plans, Objectives and Goals for Education Reform ▸ Planes, Objetivos y Metas para la Reforma Educativa

1990-2030: Global education goals
1990-2030: Metas globales para la educación

Recipe for education reform
Receta para la reforma educativa

▸ América Latina: Seis décadas de metas para la educación (1957-2021)

▸ Latin America: Six decades of goals for education (1957-2021)

Adult Literacy in Latin America and the Caribbean: Plans and Goals 1980-2015
Alfabetización de adultos en América Latina y el Caribe: planes y metas 1980-2015

Education for All (EFA) ▸ Educación para Todos (EPT)

La década olvidada de la Educación para Todos (1990-2000)

Una década de Educación para Todos: La tarea pendiente (IIPE-UNESCO Buenos Aires, 2000)
One Decade of Education for All: The Challenge Ahead (IIPE-UNESCO Buenos Aires, 2000)

Basic Learning Needs: Different Frameworks

1990-2015: Education for All | Educación para Todos

25 años de Educación para Todos
25 Years of Education for All

Six 'Education for All' Goals
Seis metas de la 'Educación para Todos'

▸ La Educación para Todos se encogió

Educación para Todos: De Jomtien a Dakar (1990-2000)
Education for All: From Jomtien to Dakar (1990-2000)

▸ What happened at the World Education Forum (Dakar, 2000)?
▸ ¿Qué pasó en el Foro Mundial de Educación (Dakar, 2000)?
▸ Que s’est-il passé au Forum Mondial sur L’Éducation (Dakar, 2000)?

▸ Lifelong Learning: Moving Beyond Education for All (EFA)

Lifelong Learning for the North, Primary Education for the South?

▸ El Pronunciamiento Latinoamericano por una Educación para Todos

▸ Observatorio: Mitos y Metas de la Educación para Todos - blog
▸ Observatory: Myths and Goals on Education for All
- blog

▸ Military spending and education
▸ Gasto militar y educación

▸ 2005

Education for All 2000-2015: How did Latin America and the Caribbean do?

Millennium Development Goals (MDG) ▸ Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio (ODM)

What did the MDGs achieve?
¿Qué lograron los ODM?


▸ Educación para Todos y Objetivos del Milenio no son la misma cosa - entrevista con la Campaña Latinoamericana por el Derecho a la Educación (CLADE)

▸ Education First
▸ La Educación ante todo


Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) ▸ Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS)

Goal 4: Education - Sustainable Development Goals
Objetivo 4: Educación - Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible
SDG: Translation issues
ODS: Problemas de traducción

VI International Conference on Adult Education ▸ VI Conferencia Internacional sobre Educación de Adultos (CONFINTEA VI)

▸ From Literacy to Lifelong Learning
▸ De la alfabetización al aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida

▸ Youth and Adult Education and Lifelong Learning in Latin America and the Caribbean

United Nations Literacy Decade ▸ Decenio de Naciones Unidas para la Alfabetización (2003-2012)

▸ Literacy for All: A Renewed Vision
▸ Alfabetización para Todos: Una Visión Renovada


▸ Letter to UNESCO on the Literacy Decade (2003-2012)
▸ Carta a la UNESCO sobre el Decenio de la Alfabetización (2003-2012)

Indice de Desarrollo Humano - PNUD

Indice de Desarrollo Humano: América Latina y el mundo
El Ecuador y el Indice de Desarrollo Humano

Banco InterAmericano de Desarrollo - BID

Satisfacción excesiva con la educación en América Latina

Foro Económico Mundial - FME

El Foro Económico Mundial y la calidad de la educación

World Innovation Summit for Education - WISE (Qatar Foundation)

WISE Prize for Education Summit: Bottom-up innovators
Los laureados con el premios WISE a la educación

▸ On Learning Anytime, Anywhere (conference at WISE 2011)

PISA - Programa para la Evaluación Internacional de Alumnos (OCDE)

Artículos sobre PISA
Articles on PISA

Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación - LLECE (UNESCO)

América Latina y las pruebas del LLECE

Information Society ▸ Sociedad de la Información

Education in the Information Society
Educación en la Sociedad de la Información

Education as a Human Right ▸ La educación como derecho humano

▸ The 4 As as criteria to identify "good practices" in education
▸ Las 4A como criterios para identificar "buenas prácticas" en educación

Lifelong Learning (LLL) ▸ Aprendizaje a lo Largo de la Vida (ALV)

▸ ¿Aprendizaje 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?

▸ Literacy and Lifelong Learning: The Linkages

▸ On Learning Anytime, Anywhere

▸ Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning in the South: Critical Issues and Opportunities for Adult Education, Sida Studies 11, Sida, Stockholm, 2004.

Youth & Adult Education and Lifelong Learning in Latin America and the Caribbean


Rosa María Torres
 

(published in LLinE - Lifelong Learning in Europe, Vol. XXVI, No. 4, 2011)
 
1. Introduction

This paper draws from various studies I have conducted on adult education and on lifelong learning in Latin America and other regions. Two such studies (written in English) serve here as main references: 

- Youth and AdultEducation and Learning in Latin America and the Caribbean: Trends, Issues and Challenges. Regional report prepared for the Sixth International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA VI, Belém, Brazil, Dec. 2009), commissioned by the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL).[1]
 
- LifelongLearning in the South: Critical Issues and Opportunities for Adult Education, Sida Studies 11, Stockholm, 2004. Global study commissioned by Sida.

Latin America and the Caribbean is a highly heterogeneous region, comprising two subregions (Latin America, the Caribbean) and 41 countries and territories with very different political, cultural, economic, social and educational realities. Some 600 languages are spoken; Spanish and Portuguese are the two most widespread official languages. Any regional generalization would be abusive, and space does not allow us to elaborate here more on each country. Also, the situation is very dynamic; trends may change considerably in a short period of time. In the current international context, and vis a vis the world and European crisis, Latin America appears strong and united, with economic and social indicators improving over the past few years.[2] On the other hand, Mexico and Chile, the two Latin American countries that are members of OECD, are facing major turmoils, their education systems being exposed and under heavy social scrutiny and criticism.

In most Latin American countries, the term used is Youth & Adult Education (henceforth YAE). The term “youth” was incorporated in the 1980s, acknowledging the increased presence of young people in adult education programmes as well as the need to address the specificity of youth in such programmes.

The information and analysis presented below refers basically to the 12-year period between CONFINTEA V (1997) and CONFINTEA VI (2009).

2. Reactivation of youth and adult education in the region in the past few years

Between the late 1980s and the late 1990s YAE practically disappeared in most countries, following World Bank recommendations to governments in “developing countries” in the sense of giving priority to primary education and to children as opposed to adults. (WB also rectified later its argument about the failure of adult literacy, which was ill-documented). The Education for All (henceforth EFA) world initiative coordinated by UNESCO (1900-2000-2015) has followed the same trend: out of the six EFA goals, Goal 2 referred to primary education has received the most attention while Goals 3 and 4 referred to youth and adult education have received the least attention, as acknowledged every year by EFA Global Monitoring Reports (henceforth EFA GMR). In fact, the 2009 EFA GMR, coinciding with the year of CONFINTEA VI, continued to ignore YAE, not considered of strategic importance to the achievement of EFA by 2015.

For various reasons, since the late 1990s there has been a visible reactivation of YAE in the region. CONFINTEA V contributed to enhance social mobilization and networking around YAE, both before and right after the Hamburg conference. Later on, we have witnessed the emergence of new supranational and international actors engaged in YAE, notably the Cuban government and its ‘Yo Sí Puedo’ (Yes, I Can) literacy programme, and the Organization of IberoAmerican States (OEI) which organized the Ibero-American Plan for Youth and Adult Literacy and Basic Education (PIA) 2007-2015.

Such reactivation is reflected among others in the following: 

Bialfa: Paraguay
Renewed emphasis on youth/adult literacy A new wave of ‘illiteracy eradication’ has taken over the region. Many countries resumed national literacy programmes or campaigns, even some countries with very low illiteracy rates (lower than 3%) such as Argentina and Uruguay. The exception is Cuba, declared ‘territory free of illiteracy’ almost half a century ago (1961), as well as several countries in the English-speaking Caribbean where governmental focus on literacy is on the formal system. There are also sub-national and local programmes run by local governments, religious groups, NGOs, social organizations and movements, and teacher unions.

Clearer institutionalization of YAE There are advances in legislation and policy in most countries. There is increased recognition of the right to (free) education as well as to linguistic and cultural diversity and to inter-culturality as a comprehensive approach to education.  In Cuba and Mexico for a long time, and more recently in countries such as Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia or Paraguay, YAE becomes more institutionalized, pointing towards the building of a system or subsystem, rather than the usual and discontinued ad-hoc interventions.

New actors and partnerships In most countries, there are government partnerships with NGOs, universities, religious groups and the private sector. In a few countries, partnerships have included teacher unions and strong social movements (e.g. in Argentina and Brazil). There are also several international actors engaged in YAE in the region. As indicated, the most active in recent times are the Spanish government/OEI and the Cuban government/IPLAC. Others include the Convenio Andrés Bello (Andrés Bello Agreement -CAB), an international inter-governmental organization focused on supranational integration (12 countries), based in Bogota and linked to OEI; and the Organization of American States (OAS), based in Washington, which coordinates the Summits of the Americas.

More and better information and knowledge on YAE  There is considerable growth in research and documentation at national, subregional and regional level in recent years.  Of course, there are also major differences between countries in terms of quantity, quality, topics and approaches related to research. Big countries such as Brazil and Mexico and also Chile report many surveys and studies.

Advances in evaluation Evaluation has become a central piece of school systems and reforms in the region since the 1990s, but its incorporation is rather recent in YAE. In Brazil, a Functional Literacy Indicator (INAF), based on actual evaluation of reading, writing and numeracy skills of the adult population (15-64 years of age), has been developed annually since 2001 by two private institutions. In Mexico, the National Institute for Adult Education (INEA) has its own evaluation system. In Chile, evaluation of student outcomes is under a National System for the Evaluation of Learning and Certification of Studies, which includes YAE. Both Mexico and Chile have adopted results-based schemes for paying the institutions and/or teaching staff hired for YAE programmes.

Aiquile, Bolivia. Photo: Rosa María Torres
Linkages between education/training and work as a field of research, policy and action  The linkages between education, the economy and work have become a field of concern, policy and action, within the overall concern with poverty, unemployment and social exclusion. Social Economy gains increased attention as an alternative economic model that generates also alternative approaches to education and training linked to production, commercialization, barter and other income-generation activities by families, cooperatives, and organized communities.

Increased attention to ‘special groups’ Visible attention has been given in recent years to the disabled, migrants and prison inmates. The use of traditional and modern technologies has facilitated this task, especially with the disabled and with the migrant population. Prison education has been enhanced since 2006 in the framework of the EUROsociAL programme of the European Commission. Initiatives aimed at the blind, the visually challenged and hearing impaired have been developed in recent years in many countries.

New technologies reaching the field   Radio has been a powerful ally of YAE for several decades and continues to be in many countries, especially in some of the poorest ones such as Haiti, Bolivia, and Paraguay. In the past few years, audiovisual media have become widespread mainly through the Cuba-assisted Yo Sí Puedo literacy and post-literacy programme operating in several countries since 2003. Computers and the Internet are also reaching YAE, particularly for the younger population. Tele-centers or info-centers (different from cybercafes, privately owned and for-profit) are part of basic education programmes in several countries. In remote rural areas, energy plants or solar panels are being installed. In many places today it is easier to find a cybercafe or a tele-center than a library, a computer than a book.

3. Some old and new weaknesses and limitations. Challenges for the future

The ‘Agenda for the Future’ approved at CONFINTEA V, its wide vision and ambitious proposals for adult learning, is not the one that has been implemented in this region since 1997. Neither is the 2000-2010 YAE Regional Framework for Action prepared as a follow up to CONFINTEA V. Advances coexist with old and new limitations related to governmental and non-governmental action as well as to international agencies intervening in the field.

Sectoral approaches and interventions Despite advances in cross-sectoral policies and collaboration with other government actors, YAE continues to be perceived as pertaining to the ‘education sector’, unconnected with major economic, political and social issues. YAE is in fact a transversal issue, but invisible unless it falls directly under an education authority and refers somewhere explicitly to the term ‘adult’.

Dominican Rep: Haitian Batey. Photo: Rosa María Torres
Continued low status of YAE The traditional low status of YAE is related to: (a) age (vis a vis children), and (b) socio-economic status. Estimations of costs of programmes and plans rarely consider infrastructure, equipment or even remunerated work. In many cases, YAE continues to be considered a ‘special regime’ together with other areas that challenge conventional classifications, such as bilingual intercultural education, special education, and multigrade schools.

Activism and discontinuity of efforts Activism has been a characteristic of YAE, often related to one-shot and isolated activities lacking continuity, monitoring, systematization, evaluation and feedback. Countries engage from time to time and over and over again in ‘illiteracy eradication’ or ‘illiteracy reduction’ initiatives. So far, policies have been unable to deal with literacy/basic education in a sustained and integral manner, linking school and out-of-school, children’s and adults’ education as part of one single strategy towards education for all.

Big distances between policies and implementation The right to free, quality education continues to be denied to a large portion of the population. National reports prepared for CONFINTEA VI say little about actual implementation. One key conclusion I drew from the field study on literacy and written culture by out-of-school youth and adults in nine countries of the region is that “policies in this field have become autonomous, with little or no contact with actual practice on the ground.”

Bogotá, Colombia. Photo: Rosa María Torres
High political, financial and administrative vulnerability of YAE YAE continues to be highly vulnerable to national/local political and administrative changes as well as of changes in international priorities. This implies a permanent threat to the continuity of policies and programmes, and to the building of national capacities and accumulated practical experience. A key component of such vulnerability are the meager financial resources available for education in general and for YAE in particular. Few national reports and studies provide concrete information on YAE funding and costs. This is marked in the case of the private sector. In many countries YAE budget represents less than 1% of educational spending. Brazil calculates that, budgetwise, an adult learner counts as 0.7% of a primary school child (Brazil CONFINTEA VI report).

Funding comes from various sources: government, churches, the private sector, social movements, and international agencies. There is scarce information on the financial contribution of bilateral and multilateral agencies to YAE, its uses and impact. In most countries, government plays the major role, especially in basic education levels. 

Government programmes generally do not charge fees and many of them provide access to free equipment and materials. Also, various countries have been adopting compensation policies or plans tied to studying.

Rise of for-profit spirit and market mechanisms There is an important decline in volunteerism, social mobilization and political commitment traditionally linked to YAE. In many countries, NGOs are hired and paid by governments to implement programmes. On the other hand, the trend towards accreditation and certification (completion of primary/basic/secondary education) has attracted the for-profit private sector, introducing fees and other market mechanisms into the field.

Low attention to professionalization of adult educators The low status, poor training and bad working conditions of adult educators continue is an old vicious circle in YAE. Training is generally poor and short, and its deficits are even more visible in the case of indigenous educators prepared for intercultural bilingual education programmes. Availability of audiovisual and digital technologies are contributing to further reduce the importance of professionalization and of initial and in-service training,

Requisites for adult educators have been “upgraded” in some countries, including a professional teaching title or completion of secondary education rather than primary education only; such requisites tend to loosen in rural areas and in literacy programmes, which continue to operate in most cases with community volunteers. The question that remains concerns the desired profile and education/training of adult educators, and whether possessing a teacher certificate ensures good teaching.

Weak dissemination, use and impact of research and evaluation results Research, documentation and evaluation efforts lack sufficient and opportune dissemination. We found differentiated circuits, one closer to academic circles and another one closer to bureacucratic and government structures. Overall, there is little evidence that research results are informing and influencing policy-making, training or teaching practice. They have not contributed to modify long-entrenched ‘common sense’ in the field, including negative perceptions and terminologies linked to illiteracy (e.g. ‘scourge’, ‘plague’, ‘darkness’, ‘blindness’, ‘shackle’, ‘eradication’, etc.), the association between illiteracy and ignorance, between number of years of schooling and ‘functional literacy’, and between adult education, non-formal and remedial education. Also, most diagnoses and recommendations are based on literature reviews, with little connection to realities and little or no empirical research.

Age discrimination within YAE There is a consistent trend towards (a) giving priority to the younger segments of the adult population, establishing age limits (40, 35, in some cases less), and (b) segmenting educational opportunities by age: literacy offered to older generations and other programmes offered to youth. Cuba is the only country that has the elderly as a priority group in terms of educational and cultural attention by government. Uruguay – known for its high percentage of third age population - is also expanding the age of learners within YAE.

Perú - ARE. Photo: PYSN
Continued neglect of indigenous peoples The YAE Regional Framework for Action (2000-2010) identified four priority groups: indigenous, peasants, youth and women. Youth and women have in act been prioritized; indigenous and afro descendant groups have not. Racism is alive despite advances in national and international legislation, including the approval in 2007 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Brazil’s national illiteracy rate (2008) was 7,1%, and among  indigenous peoples 18% and among black people 16% (Brazil CONFINTEA VI report). In Mexico, the national illiteracy rate was 8.4%. and the illiteracy rate among indigenous groups was 36.1% (Mexico CONFINTEA VI report). Also, Intercultural Bilingual Education (IBE) continues to focus in rural areas. However, indigenous populations are also settled in urban areas, especially in large Latin American cities, following strong rural-urban migration patterns.

Continued neglect of rural areas Formal and non-formal education continue to concentrate in urban and the periphery of urban areas, thus maintaining and even deepening the urban-rural educational gap. Probabilities that youth and adults in rural areas get no or incipient education are twice as big as in urban areas, and in some countries three times bigger (SITEAL). Peru has the highest urban-rural school gap. Peru’s CONFINTEA VI report acknowledged that practically all educational institutions doing adult education are located in cities. In Brazil, illiterates in urban areas are 9.7 million against 4.7 million in rural areas; however, in percentile terms rural areas have almost three times more illiterates – 26.3% against 8.7% in urban areas.

Low coverage of programmes YAE programmes are very limited for actual needs. Despite being a prioritized age group, by 2007 less than 10% of 20-29 year olds who had not completed secondary education attended some educational programme. In large countries such as Brazil and Mexico, all efforts seem small and advances slow. According to Brazil’s CONFINTEA VI report, only 10% of the demand was served in 2008. Chile calculated that it would take 20 years to reach the 4 million people who have not completed basic education (Chile CONFINTEA VI report).

Quality and learning remain distant issues Quantitative indicators (enrolment and retention, number of groups organized, materials or equipments distributed, etc.) predominate as indicators of achievement and success. A minimum number of participants is often established as a requisite to start a programme or a center, thus leading often to cheating (e.g. manipulating the statistics, completing the list with family members, friends or persons who are not part of the target population, etc.).  In literacy programmes, goals continue to be set in terms of ‘eradicating’ or ‘reducing’ illiteracy rates, rather than in terms of learning and effective use of reading and writing. Only in very few cases have adult literacy programmes and campaigns been thoroughly evaluated. One such examples is Ecuador’s National Literacy Campaign ‘Monsignor Leonidas Proaño’ (1988-1990).

Continued weaknesses of technical and vocational education/training programmes There is skepticism in relation to the effectiveness of these programmes; several international organizations have commissioned studies and impact evaluations of the programmes they support. The “solution” of keeping or ‘re-inserting’ adolescents and youth in schools (often against their will) - the same unchanged schools that expelled them in the first place – is also debatable. An IIEP study of 52 programmes in 14 Latin American countries concluded that education/training programmes intended to prepare young people for work (a) take a simplistic view of youth inclusion in the labor market, (b) reach only a small portion of the potential population, (c) adopt a narrow approach focused on specific training, and (d) do not take sufficiently into account the importance of formal education, the competitiveness of the labor market and the scarcity of decent jobs.

“Best practices” selected without clear criteria Many practices selected as ‘good’ or ‘best’ practices in education and in YAE in particular are outdated, are based on documents, experts’ opinions or self-evaluation by their own actors, and lack evidence of their implementation, results and actual perceptions by participating learners. Few of them would pass the test of the four As - availability, accessibility, adaptability and acceptability. On the other hand, many relevant experiences remain unsystematized and unknown because of chronic lack of time and of resources in the field, their commitment to action and their many urgencies. Also, it is important to remember that ‘innovative’ does not necessarily mean ‘effective’, or generalizable. Innovations are specific, generally local and small-scale, and cannot be easily replicated or expanded on a massive scale.

Major coordination problems among national and international actors
Decentralization processes and diversification of educational provision have increased coordination and articulation problems amongst the diverse national actors: government across sectors and at the various levels, governmental and non-governmental bodies, profit and non-profit private sector, NGOs, universities, churches, etc. The same is true for the various international actors working in YAE, and in the literacy field in particular. Each of them has its own plans, objectives, goals, timeframes, diagnoses, approaches, methodologies, reporting and financing mechanisms. See table below for the case of literacy.

Table 1
Regional and international adult literacy goals (1980-2015)
MPE
Major Project for Education in Latin America and the Caribbean
EFA I-Jomtien
Education for All

EFA II–Dakar
Education for All

UNLD
United Nations Literacy Decade

PIA
Ibero-American Plan for Youth and Adult Literacy and Basic Education
1980-2000
1990-2000
2000-2015
2003-2012
2007-2015
UNESCO-OREALC
UNESCO-UNICEF-UNDP-World Bank
UNESCO
OEI
Eradicate
illiteracy by 2000
Reduce
illiteracy by half by 2000
Reduce
illiteracy by half by 2015
Reduce
illiteracy by half by 2012
Eradicate  illiteracy by 2015
Elaborated by R.M. Torres

4. Lifelong Learning (LLL) in Latin America and the Caribbean

The paradigm shift proposed worldwide – from education to learning, and from adult education to adult learning – has not been appropriated in this region. Although CONFINTEA V had strong regional resonance, the term learning was never introduced in its follow up. Youth and Adult Education (YAE) was the term used in the Regional Framework for Action following CONFINTEA V.

The Lifelong Learning (LLL) concept - emerged in the North closely related to economic growth, competitiveness and employability - is understood and utilized in most diverse ways worldwide. Generally: (a) LLL continues to be used interchangeably with Lifelong Education, without differentiating education and learning [3]; and (b) LLL is associated to adults rather than to the entire lifespan - ‘from the cradle to the grave’.

All this is reflected in Latin America and the Caribbean. LLL is mentioned in many legal and policy/programme documents, with the same biases and inconsistencies that are found internationally. LLL appears often as a separate line of action or goal rather than as embracing category. In Jamaica’s Ministry of Education’s structure, for example, LLL was added as a sixth section, next to the other five sections on early childhood, primary, secondary, tertiary and special education.

From the documents and websites reviewed, the LLL terminology appears to be more widespread - and more embedded in recent policies and plans - in the English-speaking Caribbean countries than in Latin American ones. In the Caribbean, LLL seems to follow the frameworks adopted in Europe. In Jamaica, for example, the LLL policy devised in 2005 was decided by the Human Employment and Resource Training-HEART Trust /National Training Agency-NTA, the institutions that coordinate workforce development in Jamaica.

Even new initiatives such as the Metas Educativas 2021 (2021 Education Goals) coordinated by OEI do not refer to Lifelong Learning but to Lifelong Education, and is considered a separate goal rather than a goal including all others.

Table 2
OEI: Metas Educativas 2021 (2021 Education Goals) 2012-2021

1. Participation of society in educational action.
2. Achieve educational equality and overcome discrimination.
3. Increase supply for early childhood education.
4. Universalize primary education and lower secondary education, and expand access to upper secondary education.
5. Improve the quality of education and of the school curriculum.
6. Facilitate the connection between education and employment through technical-professional education.
7. Offer every person lifelong education opportunities.
8. Strengthen the teaching profession.
9. Expand the Ibero-American Knowledge space and strengthen scientific research.
10. Invest more and better.
11. Evaluate the functioning of education systems and the 2021 Education Goals project.

Source: http://www.oei.es/metas2021/libro.htm Translation from Spanish: Rosa María Torres

5. A few conclusions


Given the big gap between rhetoric/policies/laws and practice, the inclusion of YAE in recent policies, reforms and legislative frameworks on paper should not lead to assumptions about effective implementation.
Quantitative gains – small as they are - are usually shadowed by quality and equity problems.
Priority given to youth has ended up marginalizing adults and the elderly, just as priority given to women ended up marginalizing men in several countries and programmes.
The acknowledgement of the importance of literacy has traditionally placed it at the heart of YA efforts, and is currently being overemphasized in many countries with too many programmes running in parallel and poor targeting of efforts.
▸ Literacy achievements are rarely sustained and complemented with policies and strategies aimed at making reading and writing accessible to the population, paying attention to their specific needs, languages and cultures.
Many vocational and technical training programmes continue to ignore the complex issues involved in the transition between education and work (not only employment), and of the world of work these days.
The important impulse towards completion of primary/secondary education and accreditation of studies needs to be accompanied by the necessary efforts to ensure effective, meaningful and useful learning.
Many hands involved often do not generate genuine ‘partnerships’ but rather enhanced lack of coordination, competitiveness, duplication of efforts and misuse of resources.
Experience indicates that decentralization and outsourcing not necessarily bring with them the advantages promised.
Expansion of ICTs for YAE purposes is counterbalanced with improvisation, poor use of such technologies, poor criteria to decide on the best one or the best combination to use in each specific case, and – most importantly - neglect of the essential interpersonal pedagogical relationship.
Cost-efficiency applied to YAE is often understood as ‘cheaper and quicker’, thus leading to an amplified vicious circle of low quality and poor results.

6. Challenges for the future

A common language The terminological labyrinth is an old concern in the field of education and especially of YAE worldwide. Glossaries have been proposed and produced over the past few decades, but the terminological/conceptual confusion persists and becomes more acute as new terms emerge. Once again during the CONFINTEA VI process, and specifically in the case of Latin America and the Caribbean, it was agreed that a common language is essential if we want to communicate better and also give more scientific consistency to the field.

Lack of evidence and lack of financial resources: two myths to be revisited Two myths must be revisited with regard to YAE and education in general: that in order to receive more attention what is needed is (a) more evidence and (b) more financial resources. In fact, there is plenty of research evidence, for several decades now, on the multiple benefits of investing in YAE, for learners themselves, for their families and communities, and for citizenship-building and national democracy. Abundant research shows that YAE has positive effects on the self-esteem and life opportunities of men and women as well as on their children’s wellbeing (child mortality, child birth, rearing practices, access to school, learning outcomes, etc.). It is clear that lack of attention to YAE is not related to insufficient data, evidence or conceptual clarity, as argued in the 2009 EFA Global Monitoring Report.[4] There is more than enough knowledge available on YAE – theoretical and empirical, regional and international - to indicate what needs to be done and to do it well. The main shortcoming concerns action, not information and knowledge.

On the other hand, the financial deficit is only a manifestation of a political deficit, namely the lack of political will to make education a priority and to invest in the poor on the basis of quality and equity. Addressing the political deficit is the real priority. Also, as evaluations in the field of school education reiterate, there is no direct and necessary connection between more financial resources and better education. What is needed is not only more – usually highlighted - but better use of available resources, precisely because they are scarce. Parameters of what is ‘good spending’ and ‘good international co-operation’ in YAE must be established.

Internationally, in 2005 the Global Campaign for Education proposed “at least 3% of the education budget” allocated to adult literacy in order to attain the EFA goal of reducing illiteracy by half by 2015. Regionally, the Final Document of the Mexico CONFINTEA VI Regional Conference (Sep. 2008) requested 3% for YAE in general, not only for literacy. Many countries have set financial benchmarks for the education sector in their constitutions, laws and/or policies. Most of them aim at reaching, over several years, 6% of the GNP allocated to education. It is thus clear that the fight for higher financial resources devoted to YAE must be associated with the fight for more and sustained financial resources and attention dedicated to education as a whole.

Time for action and for investing in people Lots of money is spent in research that has little relevance and impact on actual decision-making, on costly events and publications that reach only a few, on reiterated diagnoses that repeat the same problems and the same information. It is time to revise the allocation of scarce financial resources at all levels, from governments and international agencies to organizations of civil societies. It is time for action, for making sure that policies and laws are effectively implemented, that what is already known is translated into practice. It is time for investing in the people, in the capacities and qualities of those engaged in YAE at all levels, not only facilitators on the ground, but also those in planning, organizing and managing positions.

Holistic approach Whatever the advances or inertias, they cannot be attributed solely to education in general and to YAE in particular, but also and primarily to the political, social and economic contexts in which education operates. YAE deals with the most disadvantageous situations and with the most vulnerable segments of society, those most affected by poverty, exclusion, and subordination in many aspects: political, economic, social, cultural, linguistic. How much more or better could be done under the concrete circumstances in each case, remains an open question with at least one clear answer: unless there are important economic and social changes in the overall conditions of the population served by YAE, YAE will not be able to fulfill its mission. It is time to rethink the equation: education by itself cannot fight poverty and exclusion, unless specific and intended economic and social policies – not just compensatory programmes – are in place to deal with them in a radical manner. YAE is not an independent variable.

Recuperate the transformative role of education and of YAE specifically The role of education is not to ensure enrolment, retention, completion and accreditation. The ultimate mission is to enhance personal and social change, to ensure relevant learning, awareness raising, critical and creative thinking, informed and committed action, citinzenship building. YAE’s historical critical and transformative nature has been lost and must be recuperated, challenging conformity and mere social adaptation promoted by current times and ideologies dominating the world. Learners must be educated as citizens, not only as people in need of certain basic skills, but in need of knowing their rights and duties so as to be better able to fight for them.

From literacy to lifelong learning  “From literacy to lifelong learning” was the title chosen for the CONFINTEA VI regional preparatory conference held in Mexico (Sep. 2008). In other words, the challenge to move from usual narrow understandings of adult education as equivalent to adult literacy, from adult education to adult learning and to lifelong learning, anywhere and anytime: in the family, in the community, at work, through the media, through art, social participation and through the active exercise of citizenship. The right to education today is no longer the right to basic literacy, to access school or to complete a number of years of schooling, but the right to learn and to learn throughout life, from early childhood to late adulthood.



[1] This regional report analyzed a large volume of documents, including: national reports submitted to UIL by Ministries of Education/Adult Education Departments based on the questionnaire circulated by UIL; documentation produced in the framework of the Ibero-American Plan for Youth and Adult Literacy and Basic Education (2006-2015) promoted by the Spanish cooperation for Ibero-American countries (it excludes French- and English-speaking countries in the region); national studies on the state of the art of Youth and Adult Education produced in 2007 in the framework of a CREFAL-CEAAL regional study on the subject (available in Spanish, and in Portuguese for the case of Brazil); cross-national field study on “Literacy and access to the written culture by youth and adults excluded from the school system in Latin America and the Caribbean”, conducted in 2006-2008 together with CREFAL in nine Latin American and Caribbean countries; and international and regional documentation produced for CONFINTEA V (Hamburg 1997) and its regional follow-up.

[2] About the current situation of the region, see: ECLAC’s Social Panorama of Latin America 2011 “Poverty and Indigence Levels Are the Lowest in 20 Years in Latin America”
“Good tidings from the south: Less poor, and less unequal”, The Economist, 3 Dec. 2011.

[3] Lifelong Learning in Spanish is Aprendizaje a lo largo de toda la vida. Most translators continue to use education and learning in an undifferentiated manner. The Delors Report entitled “Learning, the Treasure within” was translated into Spanish as “La educación encierra un tesoro”. The1st World Forum on LifelongLearning (Paris, October 2008) was translated as Foro Mundial para la Educación y la Formación a lo largo de la vida and into French as Forum Mondial pour l'Education et la Formation Tout au Long de la Vie.

[4] Also, “the fact that no clear quantitative targets were established at Dakar, apart from the main literacy target, may have contributed to a lack of urgency. In addition, the language of the commitment is ambiguous. Some read goal 3 as calling for universal access to learning and life-skills programmes, but others, including the drafters of the Dakar Framework, understand no such intent.” (EFA GMR 2009, 2008: 91).

Related texts in this blog:
» Rosa María Torres, Adult Literacy in Latin America and the Caribbean: Plans and Goals 1980-2015
» Rosa María Torres, From Literacy to Lifelong Learning ▸ De la alfabetización al aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida
» Rosa María Torres, Literacy and Lifelong Learning: The Linkages
» Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning: moving beyond Education for All
» Letter to UNESCO on the Literacy Decade (2003-2012)

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...