Page 8 of 8
1 6 7 8

Liberia’s Education Minister Werner to Appear Before Senate August 9

Africa/Liberia/05 de Agosto de 2016/Autor: Henry Karmo/Fuente: FromPageAfrica

RESUMEN:El pleno del Senado votó el jueves a favor de una moción que solicite la aparición del Ministro de Educación, George Werner,  para responder a las preocupaciones planteadas por algunos legisladores en un informe presentado a ellos por el ministro de la Asociación público privada (PPP) sobre lo planteado en un informe. Aunque el informe no se ha hecho público a los medios de comunicación, se escucharon algunos legisladores expresando su preocupación por el nombre de escuelas por condados, mientras que otros se quejaron de la exclusión de ciertas escuelas en la lista presentada a ellos. El Ministerio de Educación  dice que  el objetivo es comprometer a  todas las escuelas de educación infantil primaria y  a los proveedores privados para que cumplan con los estándares requeridos. El controvertido programa dio lugar a una guerra-de-palabras pública climatizada entre el ministro  Werner y el Relator Especial de la ONU sobre el derecho a la educación, Kishore Singh, quien describió el plan como sin precedentes en la escala que se propone en la actualidad y viola las obligaciones legales y morales de Liberia .

The plenary of the Senate on Thursday voted in favor of a motion that will request the appearance of the Minister of Education, George Werner, before that august body to answer to concerns raised by some Lawmakers in a report presented to them by the minister on the Public Private Partnership (PPP) agreement.

Though the report hasn’t been made public to the media, some Lawmakers were heard expressing concern over the name of schools per counties while others complained of exclusion of certain schools on the list presented to them.

FrontPageAfrica reported last month that Liberia’s much-heralded and far-reaching plan to outsource its entire pre-primary and primary education system to Bridge International Academies appears to have hit a snag.

FrontPageAfrica disclosed in its reportage that it had learnt from reliable sources and briefing notes from a confidential meeting held, that Minister George Werner appears to be expressing concerns over Bridge’s method amid reports that education partners may be contemplating walking away if the Minister insists on the Randomized Control Trial, which Bridge does not want to agree to.

“Until we know whether Bridge is going to step out of the RCT, we cannot proceed with randomization, and thus, finalizing school lists.

If Bridge opts to submit their own list of schools, we may need to remove some these schools from the lists allocated on Friday and this morning.

Bridge was speaking with their board today and we hope to have a decision imminently. As soon as we hear back, we will notify providers affected by the reallocation and we hope to proceed with randomization tomorrow – as planned (provided we all agree the rejection criteria)”, Minister Werner was quoted.

One source suggested that the move could prompt Bridge to take the Liberian government to court over what is building up to be a potential breach of the Memorandum of Understanding between the heralded academy management group and the Liberian government.

Under the public-private arrangement, Bridge was expected to pilot the programme in 50 public schools in 2016, as well as design curriculum materials, while phase two could have the company rollout mass implementation over five years, “with government exit possible each year dependent on provided performance from September 2017 onwards.

The MoE is said to be aiming to contract out all primary and early childhood education schools to private providers who meet the required standards over five-year period.

The controversial program resulted into a heated public war-of-words between Minister Werner and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Kishore Singh, who described the plan as “unprecedented at the scale currently being proposed and violates Liberia’s legal and moral obligations.”

Fuente: http://www.frontpageafricaonline.com/index.php/news/1630-liberia-s-education-minister-werner-to-appear-before-senate-august-9

 

Comparte este contenido:

Nueva Zelanda: Reimagining NSW tackling education inequality with early intervention and better research

Oceanía/Nueva Zelanda/05 de Agosto de 2016/Fuente: The Conversation

RESUMEN: Los políticos son aficionados  frente a la idea de que la educación saca a la gente de la pobreza y beneficia a la sociedad en su conjunto. Pero, ¿cómo pueden los gobiernos traducir esa idea en la política que se da a los contribuyentes el mejor provecho por su dinero? La respuesta, por lo que pensamos, consiste en mejorar las oportunidades educativas de los niños procedentes de entornos desfavorecidos – y el enfoque debería comenzar en el preescolar. También necesitamos mejores formas de saber lo que funciona; necesitamos, la investigación más independiente basada en la evidencia para evaluar el impacto de las políticas educativas. En las últimas décadas la desigualdad de ingresos ha aumentado de manera constante en la mayor parte del mundo desarrollado y Nueva Gales del Sur no es diferente. Y la desigualdad de ingresos puede alimentar la desigualdad en las oportunidades más amplias en la vida. El entorno familiar es también un determinante muy fuerte del logro educativo en Australia. Como prueba de ello, hay que echar un vistazo a la medida Programa de Evaluación Internacional de Estudiantes – una encuesta trienal internacional que tiene como objetivo evaluar los sistemas educativos mediante pruebas de las habilidades y conocimientos de los alumnos de 15 años de edad. Esa medida revela una brecha sustancial en las puntuaciones entre los niños de bajo nivel socio-económico y las familias de estatus socioeconómico más alto.

Politicians are fond of paying lip service to the idea that education lifts people out of poverty and benefits society as a whole. But how can governments translate that idea into policy that gives taxpayers the best bang for their buck?

The answer, we think, lies in improving the educational opportunities of children from disadvantaged backgrounds – and the focus should start in pre-school. We also need better ways of knowing what works; we need better independent, evidence-based research evaluating the impact of education policies.

It’s not just the fair thing to do; a large body of evidence also suggests this strategy could deliver better economic returns on investment for NSW and Australia.

We have a problem

Over recent decades income inequality has been steadily increasing in most of the developed world and NSW is no different. And income inequality can fuel inequality in broader opportunities in life.

Family background is also a very strong determinant of educational attainment in Australia. For proof, take a look at the Programme for International Student Assessment measure – a triennial international survey which aims to evaluate education systems by testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students. That measure reveals a substantial gap in scores between children from low socio-economic status and high socio-economic status families.

Recent research suggests that a child born into a well-off family can expect their educational attainment to be 30% or 40% higher than a child from a less well-off family.

Genes that are in common in parents and their children account for – in part – the poorer school performance of lower income households. But research in the field of behaviour genetics suggests that the effects of disadvantage remain after genetic factors are accounted for. These children may be underperforming due to socioeconomic constraints, behaviour problems, or something else. Whatever the mechanism, the unmet prospects are greatest among students performing poorly at school.

The magnitude of this effect is greater in countries with greater income inequality. For instance, Australia, England, Germany, Sweden and The Netherlands fare better than the US. In the US, the extent of unmet potential is even more pronounced at lower levels of school ability.

So the greatest potential to move students above and beyond their existing ability lies in delivering opportunities to students who are performing poorly at school. This emphasis will do the most to help achieve educational and wealth equality in NSW and Australia.

Tackling the problem early

What is the best way to improve opportunities for educational attainment among disadvantaged children? The current policy debate, and specifically the Gonski report, is focused on needs-based funding for primary and secondary schools.

That’s a no-brainer acknowledged by both major parties. The Coalition’s decision to withdraw the final two years (2017-18) of Gonski funding is motivated by concerns over mechanisms of delivery, rather than objections to the principle.

The poor performance arising from disadvantage is greatest in early childhood, so it makes sense to focus efforts on this age range where possible. Some existing policies are helping there, like the national agreement on Universal Access to Early Childhood Education of 2016-17. But more is needed.

Investing in cognitive and non-cognitive skills in early childhood lead to higher wages and productivity, reduced crime, fewer teenage pregnancies and improved health outcomes. And the earlier the intervention, the larger the returns from every dollar spent.

In the US, for instance, an early intervention program offering extra teaching support and home visits targeted to disadvantaged African-Americans showed a 7% to 10% per year return on investment based on increased schooling and wages. The program also reduced costs in remedial education, health and criminal justice.

The Australian context is different, of course, so it is important to use the best research methods for evaluating education policy in Australia.

Better evaluation for better outcomes

While in medicine, randomised experiments are the norm, social programs are hardly ever randomised in Australia.

The main argument against randomised experiments is that they are unfair on those in the control group, who are denied the benefit of a given program.

One counterargument is that it is unethical to spend scarce tax revenue on unproven programs – and there are ways to conduct experiments to test what policies work best without leaving some children at an overall disadvantage (like, for example, allowing the control group to complete the program after the experiment is over). Where evidence is not available “off-the-shelf”, we need to ensure we have the rigorous research in hand to know what is working and what’s not.

As some experts have flagged, Australia could make better use of what academics call “quasi-experimental research”. That means evaluating how a particular change might affect people over time, but without conducting a formal “experiment” (with all its constraints and limitations).

For example, while a formal experiment may use randomised controls, a quasi-experiment may look at how a particular policy change affects a certain group over time and compare it with another group that wasn’t affected by the policy change.

However, important progress is being made in developing better ways to assess education policies. In 2008, Australia-wide testing commenced for the National Assessment Plan; Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), which is administered annually at grades 3, 5, 7 and 9.

And in 2009 the tri-annual Australian Early Development Census started, assessing a range of physical, social and cognitive abilities in pre-school aged children.

With better evidence in hand, policy makers, academics and NGOs will be better able to work towards more equitable education and wealth for the state of NSW.

Fuente: https://theconversation.com/reimagining-nsw-tackling-education-inequality-with-early-intervention-and-better-research-57483

Fuente de la imagen: http://www.formacionyestudios.com/como-conseguir-trabajo-en-nueva-zelanda.html


Comparte este contenido:
Page 8 of 8
1 6 7 8