Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta policies. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta policies. Mostrar todas las entradas

WISE Prize for Education Laureates: Bottom-up Innovators


Rosa María Torres

(Texto en español: Los Laureados con el Premio WISE a la Educación)


2011 WISE Prize for Education Laureate: Sir Fazle Hasan Abed (Bangladesh)
 
 
2012 WISE Prize Laureate: Dr. Madhav Chavan (India). Interview

   
2013 WISE Prize for Education Laureate:
Vicky Colbert (Colombia). Interview

 
2014 WISE Prize for Education Laureate: Ann Cotton (UK). Interview


"The WISE Prize for Education is the first distinction of its kind to recognize an individual or a team of up to six people working together for an outstanding, world-class contribution to education. Established in 2011 by Her Highness Sheikha Moza bint Nasser, Chairperson of Qatar Foundation, the WISE Prize for Education sets the standard for excellence in education, giving it similar status to other areas for which international prizes already exist, such as literature, peace and economics. The Laureate receives a monetary prize of $500,000 (US) and a gold medal. The WISE Prize for Education Laureate is honored as a global role model and ambassador for education."


What are the educational innovations that draw the attention of the global education community? The first four winners of the WISE Prize for Education (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014) and their respective education programs share several common characteristics. One of them: they are bottom-up innovators and innovations, that have started small and local, have become national and later expanded internationally over a long and sustained period of time. My personal knowledge of two of them, BRAC and Escuela Nueva, through study visits, research and follow up over many years, provides some insights into the specific nature and process of these inspiring educational models and experiences.  

BRAC - Bangladesh
The 2011 WISE Prize for Education was awarded to Sir Fazle Hasan Abed, Founder and Chairman of BRAC, "the largest development organization in the world." Created in 1972 in a remote rural village, BRAC (Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee) reaches today nearly 135 million people in 11 countries in Asia and Africa, and also in Haiti in the Caribbean. BRAC is not only an education-related NGO. Its holistic and multifaceted approach to development covers various areas and issues: microfinance, education, healthcare, legal services, community empowerment, and social enterprises. Education has been one of its key and most successful areas. So-called BRAC Non-Formal Primary Schools, which became internationally renowned in the 1990s, have spread as a viable and replicable primary school model. Starting with ver modest primary schools, BRAC has developed a whole education system, that includes today BRAC University.

WISE Jury and Committee 

Pratham - India
The 2012 WISE Prize for Education was awarded to Dr. Madhav Chavan, Co-founder and CEO of Pratham, the largest education NGO in India. Pratham's mission is "Every child in school and learning well". It was created in 1994 to provide pre-school education to children living in the slums of Mumbai. Community volunteers were recruited, trained, provided basic teaching-learning materials, and encouraged to organize classes in any space available in the communities (temples, offices, people’s houses, etc.). Pratham Balwadis (pre-school classes) multiplied in other locations. Today Pratham reaches millions of children in rural and urban areas in 19 of the country’s 28 states, through early childhood education, learning support to in-school and out-of-school children, mainstreaming of out-of-school children, computer literacy, vocational training for youth and special programs for vulnerable and working children. An area approach (whole community interventions) was adopted in 2002-2003. Pratham’s Learn to Read (L2R) technique is an accelerated learning technique targeted at teaching both in-school and out-of-school children how to read in 4- 8 weeks. Facilitated by Pratham, The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) is the largest survey undertaken in India by people outside the government. It measures the enrollment as well as the reading and arithmetic levels of children in the age group of 6-14 years.

WISE Jury and Committee

Escuela Nueva - Colombia
The 2013 WISE Prize for Education was awarded to Vicky Colbert, founder and director of Fundación Escuela Nueva, and co-creator (together with Prof. Oscar Mogollón) of the Escuela Nueva (EN) model. EN was initiated as a local project in 1975, covering a few public schools in rural areas, and grew as a regular program within Colombia's Ministry of Education. In 1985, EN was adopted by the Colombian government as a national policy to universalize quality primary education in rural areas. EN has shown that the multigrade school (one or two teachers in charge of all levels in a single classroom), if given appropriate conditions and treated as a multigrade system, can become a quality alternative rather than a "poor temporary solution for the poor". In fact, Colombia has been the only country in Latin America where students in rural areas have shown higher learning achievements than children in urban areas when UNESCO's LLECE tests were applied. EN has also shown that, even with many problems and ups and downs, radical and meaningful innovation can be developed within government structures and within formal, mainstream education. The Escuela Nueva Foundation was created in 1987 in order to help strengthen the program, adapt it to urban areas, and expand it to other countries (the EN model has been experimented in 16 countries). Over the years, EN has received numerous international awards, including a WISE Award in 2009.

WISE Jury and Committee

CAMFED - Zimbabwe, Zambia, Ghana, Tanzania and Malawi
The 2014 WISE Prize for Education was awarded to Ann Cotton, a UK citizen founder of CAMFED.
"When you educate a girl in Africa, everything changes. She’ll be three times less likely to get HIV/AIDS, earn 25 percent more income and have a smaller, healthier family."
Camfed is an international non-profit organisation that works in the poorest rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa. It wants to break the cycle of poverty and disease in rural areas by supporting girls to go to school and succeed, and empowering young women to step up as agents of change. Since 1993, Camfed has been working in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Ghana, Tanzania and Malawi, supporting over 1,202,000 students to attend primary and secondary school. Over 3 million children have been benefited. They are selected by the community as being the most in need. Camfed supports them throughout their development, from primary school until adulthood. In every country, Camfed works through national and local systems - with parents, teachers, government officials, and traditional authorities. It does not set up a parallel system. Programs are devised, managed, and monitored by the community, and all of Africa offices are staffed by nationals of that country. The Camfed Alumnae Association (CAMA) is a pan-African network of Camfed graduates, currently with 24,436-members. They receive training in health, financial literacy and ICT, as well as business development and entrepreneurship. They, in turn, support vulnerable children to stay in school, and deliver health and financial literacy training to over 150,000 students and community members in their own countries. Camfed's values are: 1. Focus on the Girl, 2. Involve the community, 3. Operate transparent, accountable programs. Camfed’s model has been recognised as best practice by the OECD for setting the standard for governance, sustainability and development innovation at scale.

WISE Jury and Committee  

What do these four education programs have in common?  

Two of them are located in Asia, in two of the "nine most populous countries" on earth, where education issues and problems are massive and extremely complex. One is located in Latin America, in comparatively small Colombia, affected by long-term violence, social inequity and conflict. One works in Sub-Saharan Africa - Zimbabwe, Zambia, Ghana, Tanzania and Malawi - where social and education challenges are extremely big. Very different "developing countries", each of them unique and specific within their own regions.

The four programmes:  

» Have a long history and process behind: BRAC started in 1972, Escuela Nueva in 1975, Camfed in 1993, Pratham in 1994.  

» Started local and small, before expanding and becoming national and later international models. This bottom-up approach, plus the long term effort, have been key to their sustainability and success.  

» Emerged as educational alternatives for the poor and some of the most disadvantaged groups in their respective societies. BRAC, Escuela Nueva and Camfed were rooted in rural areas. Their education models were tailored for the specific conditions of rural areas.   

» Serve children, through primary education in the case of BRAC and Escuela Nueva, early childhood and pre-school education in Pratham, and primary and secondary education in Camfed. BRAC started targetting girls, given the huge gender gap in primary education enrollment and attendance in Bangladesh at that time. Camfed is devoted to girls and women.  

» Expanded gradually beyond their original visions, missions and scopes, paying attention to the needs revealed by reality and by the learning process itself. They ventured into new areas, covered new ages and levels. All of them were aware of the importance of involving parents, families and communities, and have worked consistently in that direction.  

» Focus on ensuring the basics: reading, writing and numeracy, survival, life and social skills, family and community empowerment.  

» Give great importance to pedagogy and to pedagogical transformation, much more than to infrastructure, administration or technologies. They all adopt learner-centered pedagogies. 

» Have been developed by NGOs, with the exception of Escuela Nueva, which was built within the existing ministry of education structure. In this case, the NGO has played a key role in accompanying, sustaining and promoting the innovation. Camfed is an international NGO. 

» Are low cost: they take advantage of all human and material resources available in the school, the family and the community.  

» Have been supported by several international agencies, especially from the United Nations as well as from the World Bank and other regional banks and organizations. Also by the private sector. 

» Have received much recognition both at national and international levels.  

» Have a rather low technological profile. Technologies are not the driving force. Human beings, participation, volunteering, school-community relationship, pedagogical transformation, are the key.

Related texts in this blog
Rosa María Torres and Manzoor Ahmed, Reaching the Unreached: Non-formal Approaches and Universal Primary Education   
No hay comentarios:
Etiquetas: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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"

No hay comentarios:
Etiquetas: , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 issues in Finnish education ▸ 10 problemas en la educación finlandesa


Photo Tiina Kokko / Yle

En español, abajo

Most of what we read about education in Finland is good news. However, it is difficult to believe that the Finnish education model is problem-free. Finnish education expert Pasi Sahlberg - author of Finnish Lessons - shared on Twitter (May 2013) his views on the Top 10 issues Finland's education faces today. I translated them into Spanish (see below). 

Issues Finnish education if facing now (by Pasi Sahlberg) - 2013
What are the issues Finnish education system is facing now? I'll tweet my Top 10 within the next two weeks starting now. Reactions welcome.

Issue 1: Finns have lost inspiring vision that would spark system-wide renewal. Students and teachers say change is necessary now!

Issue 2: Finnish teachers fear that there'll be more central control & standardized testing in the future. Many would consider another job.

Issue 3: Finnish kids say they don’t like school. But they like education. Old model of school is dead. What would wake up Finns to change?

Issue 4: 3000 16-year-olds don’t continue education after basic school. Some never study again. Some find school irrelevant for life. Sad.

Issue 5: Finland has invested heavily in technology in schools during the last 2 decades. It remains underused in many schools. What next?

Issue 6: ‘School shopping’ is becoming common in cities. Neighborhood schools are no more places for community action -> segregation.

Issue 7: Public funding for schools is decreasing. Local governments are in trouble – small schools disappear, inequality increases.

Issue 8: Pundits and politicians rather than experts and practitioners dominate public discussion in Finland; opinions before expertise.

Issue 9: Finnish school system has no engine for innovation. PD is thought to be enough. School-driven innovation is haphazard and rare.

Issue 10: Teachers feel their authority to manage student behavior is decreasing. Jobs are at risk due to unclear lines of authority.



Casi todo lo que leemos sobre la educación en Finlandia son buenas nuevas. No obstante, resulta difícil creer que el modelo educativo finlandés esté exento de problemas. Pasi Sahlberg - autor de Lecciones Finlandesas - compartió en su cuenta de Twitter (mayo 2013) 10 desafíos que, a su juicio, enfrenta hoy la educación en Finlandia. Los he traducido aquí al español.

10 problemas de la educación finlandesa, hoy (por Pasi Sahlberg) - 2013

1. Los finlandeses han perdido una visión inspiradora capaz de desatar una renovación de todo el sistema. Estudiantes y profesores dicen que el cambio es necesario ¡ahora!

2. Los profesores finlandeses temen que haya más control centralizado y pruebas estandarizadas en el futuro. Muchos considerarían cambiar de trabajo.

3. Niños y niñas finlandesas dicen que no les gusta la escuela. Pero les gusta la educación. El viejo modelo de escuela está muerto. ¿Qué moverá a los finlandeses a cambiar?

4. 3.000 adolescentes de 16 años no continúan su educación más allá de la educación básica. Algunos no vuelven a estudiar nunca más. Algunos encuentran que la escuela es irrelevante para la vida. Triste.

5. Finlandia ha invertido fuertemente en tecnología para las escuelas durante las dos últimas décadas. Esta permanece subutilizada en muchas escuelas. ¿Qué sigue?

6.  Las "compras escolares" se están volviendo comunes en las ciudades. Las escuelas del barrio ya no son lugares para la acción comunitaria -> segregación.

7. El financiamiento público para las escuelas está decreciendo. Los gobiernos locales están en problemas: las escuelas pequeñas desaparecen, la inequidad aumenta.

8. "Comentaristas" (pundits) y políticos, antes que expertos y practicantes, dominan la discusión pública en Finlandia. Opiniones más que conocimiento y pericia.

9. El sistema escolar finlandés carece de motor para la innovación. Se asume que tener un Ph.D. basta. La innovación basada en la escuela es más bien esporádica y rara.

10. Los profesores sienten que está disminuyendo su autoridad para manejar el comportamiento de los estudiantes. Su trabajo está en riesgo debido a líneas de autoridad poco claras.


Otros textos relacionados en este blog

- Por qué Finlandia dejó de estar en el «top» de PISA
No hay comentarios:
Etiquetas: , , , , , , , , ,

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?


 
No hay comentarios:
Etiquetas: , , , , , ,
Suscribirse a: Entradas (Atom)

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...