reformas educativas en america latina estado actual y desafíos dr. pedro enrique rosales villarroel...
TRANSCRIPT
-
REFORMAS EDUCATIVAS EN AMERICA LATINA
Estado Actual y Desafos
Dr. Pedro Enrique Rosales VillarroelUniversidad Autnoma de Chile
-
Esquema de Presentacin
Agendas concertadasReformas en cursoLogros y deudasPrincipales desafos
-
Acuerdos y metas concertadas al nivel internacional
Educacin para Todos: seis objetivos a lograr al 2010Objetivos del Milenio: metas al 2015Prioridades y Estrategias del Banco Mundial y del BIDCumbres de Jefes de Estado y de Gobierno (Miami, Santiago y Qubec)Agendas regionales: propuesta CEPAL Unesco 1992Reuniones ministeriales regionales: PROMEDLACPactos educativos y agendas nacionales concertadas
-
Metas de la EPT y Objetivos del Milenio
Atencin y educacin de la primera infanciaAprendizaje de jvenes y adultosEquidad de gnero Enseanza primaria universal de calidadAlfabetizacinAprendizajes de calidad para todos medidos con base en pruebas de rendimiento
Asegurar que, al ao 2015 todos los nios, independientemente de su gnero, raza y origen social , habrn completado el ciclo bsico y logrado aprendizajes de calidadEliminar las disparidades de gnero en la educacin primaria y secundaria al ao 2005 y en todos los niveles de la enseanza al ao 2015
-
Prioridades Regionales ComunesPrioridad para la educacin en la agenda poltica de los pasesBusqueda de acuerdos bsicos para formular polticas de largo plazoMejorar la equidad y proveer una educacin sensible a las diferencias que discrimine en favor de los ms pobres y vulnerablesMejorar la calidad de la enseanza, aumentar las exigencias y focalizar la atencin en los resultados del aprendizajeProfesionalizar el trabajo docenteDescentralizar y reorganizar la gestin educativa y ofrecer ms autonoma a las escuelas Fortalecer la institucin escolar para ofrecer mejor capacidad de operacin y mayor responsabilidad por sus resultados
-
Prioridades y agendaConstruida con base en diagnsticos y propuestas emanadas de gobiernos y organismos internacionales as como los bancos multilateralesIncluye los conceptos de calidad (mejores resultados en trminos del aprendizaje escolar, trabajo productivo y actitudes sociales); eficiencia (mejor uso de los recursos y bsqueda de nuevas opciones financieras) y equidad (participacin y atencin prioritaria a los grupos excluidos)Se sustenta en cambios institucionales y estrategias descentralizadas de gestin; polticas de mejora de calidad y equidad; mejora de los sistemas de informacin y evaluacin de aprendizajes; nuevas formas de financiamiento, entre otras.
-
Cul ha sido el esfuerzo nacional en materia de reformas?
La aplicacin de las reformas no ha sido homognea y ha dependido fuertemente de las condiciones que existen en los pases y de la prioridad que se les asigna en la agenda del desarrollo nacionalDependiendo de factores sociales y polticos hoy existe un escenario donde se combinan situaciones de pases con condiciones avanzadas de reformas, condiciones parciales o mnimas condiciones para el cambio. En algunos no existen condiciones para implementarlos Comparado con dcadas anteriores lo que se observa en los pases es un escenario ms favorable a lo que se espera de una educacin reformada en la mayora de los pases.
-
Grupos de Pases y Condiciones de ReformaPases en proceso de transicin demogrfica avanzada, ingresos medios altos y contextos favorables al cambio educativo
Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, CubaPases en plena transicin demogrfica, ingresos medios y reformas educativas en desarrollo
Brasil, Colombia, Venezuela, Mxico, Panam, Costa RicaEl Salvador
-
Grupos de Pases y Condiciones de ReformaPases en transicin demogrfica incipiente y moderada, ingresos bajos y reformas parciales del sistema
Paraguay, Bolivia Guatemala, Honduras, NicaraguaPases con perfil demogrfico tradicional, ingresos muy bajos y mnimas condiciones para la reformaHaiti
-
Que ha predominado en materia de reformas
Reformas institucionales y de gestin (organizacin del sistema; cambios de dependencia; sistemas de informacin para la gestin; financiamiento)
Reformas para la mejora de la calidad y equidad de la educacin (reformas curriculares; reformas pedaggicas; medicin de logros de aprendizajes)
Reformas en el enfoque de la profesin docente (incentivos; evaluacin de desempeo)
-
Desde un punto de vista institucional
Mayor descentralizacin y tendencia a ampliar los espacios de decisin e innovacin a nivel de los establecimientosAvances en el fortalecimiento de la autonoma administrativa, curricular y pedaggica fortaleciendo el nivel central para manejar el diseo y supervisin de las polticas, compensar desigualdades, evaluar resultados y proveer informacion publicaEsfuerzos por otorgar prioridad a la responsabilidad por los resultados e introducir mecanismos de rendicin de cuentas
-
Tres modelos principales dedescentralizacin Modelo que sita un actor poltico intermediario en el centro del proceso: las provincias en Argentina, los Estados en Mxico, Municipalidades en Chile, Estados y Municipios en BrasilModelo de responsabilidad compartida a nivel subnacional con dos actores polticos principales en el proceso: Colombia con Departamentos y Municipios ms el situado fiscal; Bolivia con juntas distritales y departamentosModelo de autonoma de las escuelas o centroamericano de gestin ofrece autonoma administrativa y financiera a las escuelas y utiliza rganos intermediarios como apoyo tcnico. El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, algunos Estados de Brasil
-
Descentralizacin y AutonomaLa descentralizacin se est llevando a cabo pero existen pocas evaluaciones sobre sus resultados y la delegacin de responsabilidades raramente llega al nivel de las escuelas
Son pocos los pases donde se otorga a las escuelas y comunidades locales mayor control sobre la educacin y responsabilidad por ella
Procesos de fortalecimiento de autonoma escolar en Centroamrica y algunos Estados de Brasil son excepciones a la regla
-
En materia de mejoras de calidad y equidadLa focalizacin de los programas hacia los grupos ms vulnerables ya son aceptadas como parte de las nuevas funciones del Estado en la educacin
Existen programas de mejora de la calidad y equidad de la enseanza bsica y un relativo dominio de lo que funciona y no funciona en este campo
Se ha puesto en marcha reformas curriculares y se ha implementado programas universales de desarrollo y provision de materiales de enseanza alineados, en algunos pases, con el perfeccionamiento de maestros. La extensin de jornada escolar ha sido aplicada en Chile y, parcialmente, en Brasil.
-
Reformas para la mejora de calidad y equidadProgramas y polticas de Accin Afirmativa y Educacin Compensatoria: Mxico, Chile, Argentina, ColombiaReformas Curriculares: Brasil, Chile, Argentina Reforma y provisin de textos y materiales de instruccinExtensin de jornada escolar/incremento de horas de clase: Chile y BrasilProgramas de mejoramiento e innovacin pedaggica: Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay
-
La evaluacin de logros de aprendizaje
Entre 1976 y 1996 todos los pases instalaron sistemas nacionales de medicin de logros de aprendizaje
An cuando la participacin en pruebas internacionales es extremadamente baja existe una mayor preocupacin por los resultados del aprendizaje y por la responsabilidad pblica de la escuela que se expresa en la universalizacin de los sistemas nacionales de medicin del rendimiento en las escuelas
-
En cuanto a la condicin del trabajo docentePersisten los problemas de remuneracin docente pero existen tendencias positivas en la mejora de la formacin inicial y perfeccionamiento que, de mantenerse, podran incidir en la calidad de la educacin y la enseanza
En algunos pases con reformas avanzadas se ha empezado a aplicar polticas de evaluacin de desempeo y establecido incentivos a partir de sus resultados
-
Reformas para la mejora de la condicin docente
Desarrollo profesional de los docentes: Mxico (Carrera Magisterial) Chile (Estatuto Docente), Argentina y Uruguay como componente de las reformas
Fortalecimiento de la formacin inicial y el perfeccionamiento de maestros: Argentina, Chile, Brasil, Mxico, Colombia, Costa Rica
Evaluacin y Remuneracin por desempeo: Chile, Brasil y Colombia
-
En materia de financiamiento
Como % del PIB, la inversion publica refleja un mayor esfuerzo de los pases por educar a sus nios.Inversin por alumno continua baja, controlando por diferencias en costos de vida entre los pases.A pesar de tendencias a financiar la bsica en algunos pases el gasto an se concentra en la educacin superior reforzando desigualdades de origen
-
LogrosAlcanzados
DeudasPendientes
-
Nueve Indicadores de Desempeo Puntajes en las pruebas de rendimiento Matrcula Escolar Permanencia y retencin Equidad Estndares Evaluaciones Autoridad y rendicin de cuentas Profesin Docente Inversin en los niveles primario y secundario
-
ResultadosLa buena noticia: disminuye el nmero de nios sin escolarizar y la mayora de los pases ha logrado la paridad de gnero en el nivel de la enseanza bsicaLa matrcula preescolar subi de 48% en 1985 a 61% en 2003; la primaria de 91% en 1995 a 95% en 2003 y la secundaria de 33% en 1995 a 64% en 2003
-
Algunos datos: la mayora de los nios completa la enseanza primariaSource: ECLAC, 2005. Data for Argentina and Uruguay are for urban areas only.
Chart5
97
96.6
96.3
92.6
91.5
90.8
90.2
89.7
89.4
88.7
88.1
87.6
81.9
81.6
80.8
74.3
68.4
64.5
60.8
Country
Percent
Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Figure 1
Figure 1. Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
CountryPercent at or below level 1
Indonesia78.1
Tunisia78
Brazil75.2
Mexico66
Thailand54
Turkey52.3
Uruguay48.1
Serbia42.1
Russia30.2
United States25.7
Latvia23.7
Spain23
OECD Average21.4
Liechtenstein12.3
Macao China11.1
Hong Kong-China10.4
Canada10.1
Korea9.6
Finland6.8
Note: Data shows student performing at or below level 1 on the combined mathematics scale and includes all participating non-OECD countries, USA, Canada, Mexico, Spain and top two OECD scorers. A full list of scores is available in Table A.6 in the append
Source: Based on data from OECD/UNESCO, Learning for Tomorrow's World, Table 2.5a, p. 354.
Figure 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent at or below level 1
Percent at or below level 1
Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 2
Figure 2. Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
1985199019952002/2003
Net Primary Enrollment85899195
Figure 2
0
0
0
0
Net Primary Enrollment
Year
Net Primary Enrollment, %
Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Figure 3
Figure 3. Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region, 1960-2000
Note: "Labor force" is defined as those aged 25 and over.
Source: Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, 2001.
196019701980199019952000
Developed countries7.07.58.79.39.69.8
World4.65.15.86.46.56.7
East Asia and Pacific2.33.34.45.46.06.5
Latin Amer/Carib3.13.54.15.05.45.7
Figure 3
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Developed countries
World
East Asia and Pacific
Latin Amer/Carib
Av. Years of schoolinga
Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region 1960-2000
Figure 4
Figure 4. Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Note: Data for Argentina and Uruguay are for urban areas only. Latin America figure is the weighted average for the countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Table III.1, pp. 89-90.
Primary Completion in 15-19 Age Group, Around 2002
2002
Chile97
Argentina96.6
Uruguay96.3
Mexico92.6
Panama91.5
Ecuador90.8
Venezuela90.2
Colombia89.7
Peru89.4
Costa Rica88.7
Latin America88.1
Brazil87.6
Dominican Rep.81.9
Bolivia81.6
Paraguay80.8
El Salvador74.3
Honduras68.4
Nicaragua64.5
Guatemala60.8
Figure 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Percent
Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Figure 5
Figure 5. Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Note: Data are upper secondary graduation rates and are for the most recent year 2000-02. Mexico's data may include some double counting.
Source: OECD Education at a Glance, 2001-2004.
2002
Korea91
Finland85
OCED81
United States73
Russia73
Jamaica73
Canada72
Spain68
Chile63
Peru63
Brazil62
Malaysia62
Philippines60
Thailand53
Argentina41
Paraguay40
Indonesia36
China35
India34
Mexico34
Figure 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Graduates per 100 person at the typical age of graduation
Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Figure 6
Figure 6. School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income, 1992-2001
Source: Souza, 2005, p.214.
19922001
Richest 20%9799
Quintile 49397
Quintile 38794
Quintile 28394
Poorest 20%7593
Figure 6
00000
00000
Richest 20%
Quintile 4
Quintile 3
Quintile 2
Poorest 20%
Year
% attending
School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income. 1992-2001
Figure 7
Figure 7. Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Note: Data show the number of points difference in average scores of students in the top and bottom quarters of the PISA index of economic, social, and cultural status. OECD data include all Latin American countries, plus two top-scoring OECD countries.
Source: Based on data from OECD, 2004, Learning for Tomorrows World, Table 4.4, p. 399.
CountryDifference
Hong Kong64
Finland70
Mexico91
Brazil98
Uruguay102
Figure 7
0
0
0
0
0
Difference
Country
# of points difference in average score
Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 8
Figure 8. Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Note: Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: Based on data from World Bank, 2004, Inequality, Table A.23, p. 308.
19952000
Jamaica1.21.2
Venezuela3.94.6
Chile5.35.0
Colombia5.65.0
El Salvador7.55.0
Uruguay4.55.0
Argentina4.65.1
Peru4.95.1
Ecuador5.05.2
Nicaragua4.95.2
Panama5.55.9
Paraguay5.45.9
Costa Rica5.36.0
Honduras4.96.0
Brazil6.96.9
Mexico6.06.9
Guatemala7.1
Bolivia6.77.4
Dominican Rep.3.8
Figure 8
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1995
2000
Country
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Figure 9
Figure 9. Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Note: Latin America figure is the simple average of countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Figure III.7, p. 94.
Indigenous/Afro-BrazilianNon-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Guatemala53.332.2
Nicaragua50.035.0
Panama45.45.8
Bolivia37.611.1
Paragua28.410.8
Brazil18.36.4
Ecuador18.07.6
Peru11.69.5
Chile4.62.9
Latin America29.713.5
Figure 9
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Indigenous/Afro-Brazilian
Non-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Country
Percentage
Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Table 1
PLACEHOLDER ONLY, PLEASE USE VERSION IN WORD DOCUMENT!!!!
Table 1. Level of Decision-Making in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 2004
Hiring/Firing of TeachersHiring/Firing of PrincipalsTeacher PromotionsSalariesBudget and use of resourcesMaintenanceBooksClassroom organization and schedulesCurriculum
Argentina**ProvincialProvincialProvincialProvincialNationalProvincialProvincialNational
Provincial[1]Provincial
BoliviaMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, DepartmentalNationalMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, Departmental, National
Municipal[2]
Brazil**Municipal, StateMunicipal, StateMunicipal, StateState[3]Municipal, StateState, National[4]
ChileMunicipalMunicipalMunicipalMunicipal, CentralMunicipalMunicipal
Colombia[5]Departmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalNationalDepartmental, MunicipalMunicipalMunicipalSchoolSchool
Costa RicaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalParents
Dom. RepublicNationalNationalNationalNationalPresidencySchoolNational
EcuadorNational[6]NationalNationalNationalNational/NationalNationalNationalNational[8]
School[7]
El SalvadorSchool (EDUCO); DepartmentalNational[9]NationalNationalSchool[10]SchoolNationalSchoolNational
Guatemala[11]National, Municipal, Parents (PRONADE)NationalNationalNational, MunicipalNationalNational, Municipal, ParentsNationalNational, ParentsNational
HondurasNational, DepartmentalNationalNationalNationalNational, Departmental[12]Departmental, SchoolNationalMunicipal,National
School
Jamaica
MexicoState, NationalStateState, NationalStateNational agencyStateState, NationalNational
NicaraguaMunicipal,Municipal,Departmental, Municipal,National,National,National, School CouncilNational,National,
School CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool Council
PanamaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalNational, SchoolNationalSchool, MunicipalNational
PeruNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organization, School, ParentsNational, SchoolNational, SchoolNational
Venezuela[13]National/stateNationalNational/StateNational/StateNational/StateNationalNational
Source: PREAL elaboration based on Kaufman and Nelson, 2004, Grindle, 2004, and PREAL report cards. Note: Classifications based on official distribution of decision-making. We have tried to note where legal frameworks differ from de facto distribution of
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Provincial[1]
Municipal[2]
State[3]
State, National[4]
Colombia[5]
National[6]
School[7]
National[8]
National[9]
School[10]
Guatemala[11]
National, Departmental[12]
Venezuela[13]
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Figure 10
Figure 10. Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 200203
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, UNESCO Global Education Digest 2004.
2002-2003
Primary
Cuba100
Guatemala100
China97
Chile93
East Asia92
Brazil92
Costa Rica88
World86
Trinidad & Tobago83
Jamaica80
Peru78
Latin America78
Panama75
Bolivia74
Nicaragua74
Ecuador70
Argentina67
Dominican Rep.59
Figure 10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
% with required training
Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 2002-03
Figure 11
Figure 11. Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Note: Data for 1997 are not available.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
199019911992199319941995199619981999200020012002-03
% GDP2.73.03.13.23.43.43.44.04.54.54.54.3
Figure 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% GDP
Year
% GDP
Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Figure 12
Figure 12. Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Note: Data for public current expenditure per pupil are expressed in constant 2000 dollar purchasing power parity ($PPP).
Source: UNESCO-UIS, 2005.
Public Current Expenditure on Primary Education per Pupil, US$ PPP (Constant 2000)
19982002
Spain3,0613,776
Korea2,580
Chile8641,452
Costa Rica1,357
Trinidad & Tobago9461,270
Mexico1,0111,252
Argentina5511,173
Malaysia8581,119
Colombia906
Uruguay691
Brazil663
Panama784645
Jamaica547
Paraguay518
El Salvador402462
Philippines496449
Bolivia224383
Guatemala330
Peru275318
Nicaragua187
user:Should be "Republic of Korea" before it was "Dem Rep" which is North Korea
Figure 12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002
Country
$PPP
Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Figure 13
Figure 13. Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
Note: Scores reflect average student performance across the three assessment areas. Expenditure is expressed in US dollars using purchasing power parities ($PPP).
Source: OECD/UNESCO-UIS, Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow, 2003, adapted from Figure 3.7b, p.113.
Cumulative spending per pupilAverage score across three areas
18,893401
55,987530
77,027514
49,489508
10,269368
59,808532
17,820403
22,606500
65,244497
47,854540
55,086507
44,800487
24,671461
21,997488
1,164377
34,329514
58,868474
54,737543
30,246541
12,189410
63,599501
3,479317
18,586477
41,166461
41,267487
54,845513
66,214506
46,175528
72,119499
Figure 13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cumulative expenditure per student ($PPP)
Average PISA score (reading, math, science)
Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
USA
Canada
Portugal
Indon.
Peru
Brazil
Mex.
Chile
Argentina
Korea
Poland
Spain
Figure 14
Figure 14. Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Note: Data are for the most recent year available from 1991-2001.
Source: Adapted from World Bank, World Development Report 2004, Table 3, p. 256.
Richest 20%Poorest 20%
Nicaragua3511
Ecuador2512
Brazil2518
Peru2215
Panama2112
Kenya2117
Costa Rica2021
Jamaica1522
Colombia1423
Figure 14
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Richest 20%
Poorest 20%
Countries
% spending
Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Figure 15
Figure 15. Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
Source: PREAL calculations based on data from World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, Table 2.10.
Expenditure per student (% of GDP per capita)
19982002-2003
PrimaryTertiaryRatioPrimaryTertiaryRatio
Korea18.07.00.416.67.30.4
El Salvador9.010.41.210.010.71.1
Chile13.022.51.715.817.71.1
Spain18.020.21.118.922.41.2
Argentina11.020.21.812.417.81.4
United States19.028.61.521.231.71.5
Colombia14.038.12.715.930.41.9
Uruguay....m11.022.52.0
World14.436.42.5
Mexico10.044.34.413.835.02.5
Cuba24.078.23.332.390.02.8
Bolivia14.051.43.715.544.02.8
Peru8.0..m7.021.33.0
Costa Rica16.055.03.416.250.63.1
Panama14.0..m10.432.73.1
Paraguay....m13.047.13.6
Trinidad & Tobago10.0112.811.316.170.64.4
Jamaica....m15.166.94.4
Brazil12.084.97.111.358.65.2
Malaysia....m17.0114.06.7
Nicaragua12.0..m8.962.47.0
Figure 15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002-2003 Ratio
Country
Ratio
Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
-
pero pocos terminan la educacin mediaSource: OECD, Education at a Glance 2001-2004.
Chart2
91
85
81
73
73
73
72
68
63
63
62
62
60
53
41
40
36
35
34
34
Country
Percent
Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Figure 1
Figure 1. Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
CountryPercent at or below level 1
Indonesia78.1
Tunisia78
Brazil75.2
Mexico66
Thailand54
Turkey52.3
Uruguay48.1
Serbia42.1
Russia30.2
United States25.7
Latvia23.7
Spain23
OECD Average21.4
Liechtenstein12.3
Macao China11.1
Hong Kong-China10.4
Canada10.1
Korea9.6
Finland6.8
Note: Data shows student performing at or below level 1 on the combined mathematics scale and includes all participating non-OECD countries, USA, Canada, Mexico, Spain and top two OECD scorers. A full list of scores is available in Table A.6 in the append
Source: Based on data from OECD/UNESCO, Learning for Tomorrow's World, Table 2.5a, p. 354.
Figure 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent at or below level 1
Percent at or below level 1
Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 2
Figure 2. Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
1985199019952002/2003
Net Primary Enrollment85899195
Figure 2
0
0
0
0
Net Primary Enrollment
Year
Net Primary Enrollment, %
Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Figure 3
Figure 3. Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region, 1960-2000
Note: "Labor force" is defined as those aged 25 and over.
Source: Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, 2001.
196019701980199019952000
Developed countries7.07.58.79.39.69.8
World4.65.15.86.46.56.7
East Asia and Pacific2.33.34.45.46.06.5
Latin Amer/Carib3.13.54.15.05.45.7
Figure 3
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Developed countries
World
East Asia and Pacific
Latin Amer/Carib
Av. Years of schoolinga
Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region 1960-2000
Figure 4
Figure 4. Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Note: Data for Argentina and Uruguay are for urban areas only. Latin America figure is the weighted average for the countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Table III.1, pp. 89-90.
Primary Completion in 15-19 Age Group, Around 2002
2002
Chile97
Argentina96.6
Uruguay96.3
Mexico92.6
Panama91.5
Ecuador90.8
Venezuela90.2
Colombia89.7
Peru89.4
Costa Rica88.7
Latin America88.1
Brazil87.6
Dominican Rep.81.9
Bolivia81.6
Paraguay80.8
El Salvador74.3
Honduras68.4
Nicaragua64.5
Guatemala60.8
Figure 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Percent
Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Figure 5
Figure 5. Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Note: Data are upper secondary graduation rates and are for the most recent year 2000-02. Mexico's data may include some double counting.
Source: OECD Education at a Glance, 2001-2004.
2002
Korea91
Finland85
OCED81
United States73
Russia73
Jamaica73
Canada72
Spain68
Chile63
Peru63
Brazil62
Malaysia62
Philippines60
Thailand53
Argentina41
Paraguay40
Indonesia36
China35
India34
Mexico34
Figure 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Graduates per 100 person at the typical age of graduation
Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Figure 6
Figure 6. School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income, 1992-2001
Source: Souza, 2005, p.214.
19922001
Richest 20%9799
Quintile 49397
Quintile 38794
Quintile 28394
Poorest 20%7593
Figure 6
00000
00000
Richest 20%
Quintile 4
Quintile 3
Quintile 2
Poorest 20%
Year
% attending
School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income. 1992-2001
Figure 7
Figure 7. Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Note: Data show the number of points difference in average scores of students in the top and bottom quarters of the PISA index of economic, social, and cultural status. OECD data include all Latin American countries, plus two top-scoring OECD countries.
Source: Based on data from OECD, 2004, Learning for Tomorrows World, Table 4.4, p. 399.
CountryDifference
Hong Kong64
Finland70
Mexico91
Brazil98
Uruguay102
Figure 7
0
0
0
0
0
Difference
Country
# of points difference in average score
Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 8
Figure 8. Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Note: Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: Based on data from World Bank, 2004, Inequality, Table A.23, p. 308.
19952000
Jamaica1.21.2
Venezuela3.94.6
Chile5.35.0
Colombia5.65.0
El Salvador7.55.0
Uruguay4.55.0
Argentina4.65.1
Peru4.95.1
Ecuador5.05.2
Nicaragua4.95.2
Panama5.55.9
Paraguay5.45.9
Costa Rica5.36.0
Honduras4.96.0
Brazil6.96.9
Mexico6.06.9
Guatemala7.1
Bolivia6.77.4
Dominican Rep.3.8
Figure 8
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1995
2000
Country
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Figure 9
Figure 9. Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Note: Latin America figure is the simple average of countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Figure III.7, p. 94.
Indigenous/Afro-BrazilianNon-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Guatemala53.332.2
Nicaragua50.035.0
Panama45.45.8
Bolivia37.611.1
Paragua28.410.8
Brazil18.36.4
Ecuador18.07.6
Peru11.69.5
Chile4.62.9
Latin America29.713.5
Figure 9
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Indigenous/Afro-Brazilian
Non-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Country
Percentage
Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Table 1
PLACEHOLDER ONLY, PLEASE USE VERSION IN WORD DOCUMENT!!!!
Table 1. Level of Decision-Making in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 2004
Hiring/Firing of TeachersHiring/Firing of PrincipalsTeacher PromotionsSalariesBudget and use of resourcesMaintenanceBooksClassroom organization and schedulesCurriculum
Argentina**ProvincialProvincialProvincialProvincialNationalProvincialProvincialNational
Provincial[1]Provincial
BoliviaMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, DepartmentalNationalMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, Departmental, National
Municipal[2]
Brazil**Municipal, StateMunicipal, StateMunicipal, StateState[3]Municipal, StateState, National[4]
ChileMunicipalMunicipalMunicipalMunicipal, CentralMunicipalMunicipal
Colombia[5]Departmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalNationalDepartmental, MunicipalMunicipalMunicipalSchoolSchool
Costa RicaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalParents
Dom. RepublicNationalNationalNationalNationalPresidencySchoolNational
EcuadorNational[6]NationalNationalNationalNational/NationalNationalNationalNational[8]
School[7]
El SalvadorSchool (EDUCO); DepartmentalNational[9]NationalNationalSchool[10]SchoolNationalSchoolNational
Guatemala[11]National, Municipal, Parents (PRONADE)NationalNationalNational, MunicipalNationalNational, Municipal, ParentsNationalNational, ParentsNational
HondurasNational, DepartmentalNationalNationalNationalNational, Departmental[12]Departmental, SchoolNationalMunicipal,National
School
Jamaica
MexicoState, NationalStateState, NationalStateNational agencyStateState, NationalNational
NicaraguaMunicipal,Municipal,Departmental, Municipal,National,National,National, School CouncilNational,National,
School CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool Council
PanamaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalNational, SchoolNationalSchool, MunicipalNational
PeruNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organization, School, ParentsNational, SchoolNational, SchoolNational
Venezuela[13]National/stateNationalNational/StateNational/StateNational/StateNationalNational
Source: PREAL elaboration based on Kaufman and Nelson, 2004, Grindle, 2004, and PREAL report cards. Note: Classifications based on official distribution of decision-making. We have tried to note where legal frameworks differ from de facto distribution of
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Provincial[1]
Municipal[2]
State[3]
State, National[4]
Colombia[5]
National[6]
School[7]
National[8]
National[9]
School[10]
Guatemala[11]
National, Departmental[12]
Venezuela[13]
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Figure 10
Figure 10. Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 200203
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, UNESCO Global Education Digest 2004.
2002-2003
Primary
Cuba100
Guatemala100
China97
Chile93
East Asia92
Brazil92
Costa Rica88
World86
Trinidad & Tobago83
Jamaica80
Peru78
Latin America78
Panama75
Bolivia74
Nicaragua74
Ecuador70
Argentina67
Dominican Rep.59
Figure 10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
% with required training
Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 2002-03
Figure 11
Figure 11. Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Note: Data for 1997 are not available.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
199019911992199319941995199619981999200020012002-03
% GDP2.73.03.13.23.43.43.44.04.54.54.54.3
Figure 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% GDP
Year
% GDP
Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Figure 12
Figure 12. Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Note: Data for public current expenditure per pupil are expressed in constant 2000 dollar purchasing power parity ($PPP).
Source: UNESCO-UIS, 2005.
Public Current Expenditure on Primary Education per Pupil, US$ PPP (Constant 2000)
19982002
Spain3,0613,776
Korea2,580
Chile8641,452
Costa Rica1,357
Trinidad & Tobago9461,270
Mexico1,0111,252
Argentina5511,173
Malaysia8581,119
Colombia906
Uruguay691
Brazil663
Panama784645
Jamaica547
Paraguay518
El Salvador402462
Philippines496449
Bolivia224383
Guatemala330
Peru275318
Nicaragua187
user:Should be "Republic of Korea" before it was "Dem Rep" which is North Korea
Figure 12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002
Country
$PPP
Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Figure 13
Figure 13. Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
Note: Scores reflect average student performance across the three assessment areas. Expenditure is expressed in US dollars using purchasing power parities ($PPP).
Source: OECD/UNESCO-UIS, Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow, 2003, adapted from Figure 3.7b, p.113.
Cumulative spending per pupilAverage score across three areas
18,893401
55,987530
77,027514
49,489508
10,269368
59,808532
17,820403
22,606500
65,244497
47,854540
55,086507
44,800487
24,671461
21,997488
1,164377
34,329514
58,868474
54,737543
30,246541
12,189410
63,599501
3,479317
18,586477
41,166461
41,267487
54,845513
66,214506
46,175528
72,119499
Figure 13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cumulative expenditure per student ($PPP)
Average PISA score (reading, math, science)
Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
USA
Canada
Portugal
Indon.
Peru
Brazil
Mex.
Chile
Argentina
Korea
Poland
Spain
Figure 14
Figure 14. Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Note: Data are for the most recent year available from 1991-2001.
Source: Adapted from World Bank, World Development Report 2004, Table 3, p. 256.
Richest 20%Poorest 20%
Nicaragua3511
Ecuador2512
Brazil2518
Peru2215
Panama2112
Kenya2117
Costa Rica2021
Jamaica1522
Colombia1423
Figure 14
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Richest 20%
Poorest 20%
Countries
% spending
Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Figure 15
Figure 15. Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
Source: PREAL calculations based on data from World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, Table 2.10.
Expenditure per student (% of GDP per capita)
19982002-2003
PrimaryTertiaryRatioPrimaryTertiaryRatio
Korea18.07.00.416.67.30.4
El Salvador9.010.41.210.010.71.1
Chile13.022.51.715.817.71.1
Spain18.020.21.118.922.41.2
Argentina11.020.21.812.417.81.4
United States19.028.61.521.231.71.5
Colombia14.038.12.715.930.41.9
Uruguay....m11.022.52.0
World14.436.42.5
Mexico10.044.34.413.835.02.5
Cuba24.078.23.332.390.02.8
Bolivia14.051.43.715.544.02.8
Peru8.0..m7.021.33.0
Costa Rica16.055.03.416.250.63.1
Panama14.0..m10.432.73.1
Paraguay....m13.047.13.6
Trinidad & Tobago10.0112.811.316.170.64.4
Jamaica....m15.166.94.4
Brazil12.084.97.111.358.65.2
Malaysia....m17.0114.06.7
Nicaragua12.0..m8.962.47.0
Figure 15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002-2003 Ratio
Country
Ratio
Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
-
La desigualdad contina siendo persistente y generalizadaSource: Based on data from World Bank, Inequality in Latin America: Breaking with History, 2004.
Chart31
1.21.2
3.94.6
5.35
5.65
7.55
4.55
4.65.1
4.95.1
55.2
4.95.2
5.55.9
5.45.9
5.36
4.96
6.96.9
66.9
Guatemala7.1
6.77.4
3.8Dominican Rep.
1995
2000
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Figure 1
Figure 1. Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
CountryPercent at or below level 1
Indonesia78.1
Tunisia78
Brazil75.2
Mexico66
Thailand54
Turkey52.3
Uruguay48.1
Serbia42.1
Russia30.2
United States25.7
Latvia23.7
Spain23
OECD Average21.4
Liechtenstein12.3
Macao China11.1
Hong Kong-China10.4
Canada10.1
Korea9.6
Finland6.8
Note: Data shows student performing at or below level 1 on the combined mathematics scale and includes all participating non-OECD countries, USA, Canada, Mexico, Spain and top two OECD scorers. A full list of scores is available in Table A.6 in the append
Source: Based on data from OECD/UNESCO, Learning for Tomorrow's World, Table 2.5a, p. 354.
Figure 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent at or below level 1
Percent at or below level 1
Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 2
Figure 2. Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
1985199019952002/2003
Net Primary Enrollment85899195
Figure 2
0
0
0
0
Net Primary Enrollment
Year
Net Primary Enrollment, %
Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Figure 3
Figure 3. Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region, 1960-2000
Note: "Labor force" is defined as those aged 25 and over.
Source: Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, 2001.
196019701980199019952000
Developed countries7.07.58.79.39.69.8
World4.65.15.86.46.56.7
East Asia and Pacific2.33.34.45.46.06.5
Latin Amer/Carib3.13.54.15.05.45.7
Figure 3
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Developed countries
World
East Asia and Pacific
Latin Amer/Carib
Av. Years of schoolinga
Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region 1960-2000
Figure 4
Figure 4. Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Note: Data for Argentina and Uruguay are for urban areas only. Latin America figure is the weighted average for the countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Table III.1, pp. 89-90.
Primary Completion in 15-19 Age Group, Around 2002
2002
Chile97
Argentina96.6
Uruguay96.3
Mexico92.6
Panama91.5
Ecuador90.8
Venezuela90.2
Colombia89.7
Peru89.4
Costa Rica88.7
Latin America88.1
Brazil87.6
Dominican Rep.81.9
Bolivia81.6
Paraguay80.8
El Salvador74.3
Honduras68.4
Nicaragua64.5
Guatemala60.8
Figure 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Percent
Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Figure 5
Figure 5. Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Note: Data are upper secondary graduation rates and are for the most recent year 2000-02. Mexico's data may include some double counting.
Source: OECD Education at a Glance, 2001-2004.
2002
Korea91
Finland85
OCED81
United States73
Russia73
Jamaica73
Canada72
Spain68
Chile63
Peru63
Brazil62
Malaysia62
Philippines60
Thailand53
Argentina41
Paraguay40
Indonesia36
China35
India34
Mexico34
Figure 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Graduates per 100 person at the typical age of graduation
Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Figure 6
Figure 6. School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income, 1992-2001
Source: Souza, 2005, p.214.
19922001
Richest 20%9799
Quintile 49397
Quintile 38794
Quintile 28394
Poorest 20%7593
Figure 6
00000
00000
Richest 20%
Quintile 4
Quintile 3
Quintile 2
Poorest 20%
Year
% attending
School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income. 1992-2001
Figure 7
Figure 7. Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Note: Data show the number of points difference in average scores of students in the top and bottom quarters of the PISA index of economic, social, and cultural status. OECD data include all Latin American countries, plus two top-scoring OECD countries.
Source: Based on data from OECD, 2004, Learning for Tomorrows World, Table 4.4, p. 399.
CountryDifference
Hong Kong64
Finland70
Mexico91
Brazil98
Uruguay102
Figure 7
0
0
0
0
0
Difference
Country
# of points difference in average score
Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 8
Figure 8. Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Note: Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: Based on data from World Bank, 2004, Inequality, Table A.23, p. 308.
19952000
Jamaica1.21.2
Venezuela3.94.6
Chile5.35.0
Colombia5.65.0
El Salvador7.55.0
Uruguay4.55.0
Argentina4.65.1
Peru4.95.1
Ecuador5.05.2
Nicaragua4.95.2
Panama5.55.9
Paraguay5.45.9
Costa Rica5.36.0
Honduras4.96.0
Brazil6.96.9
Mexico6.06.9
Guatemala7.1
Bolivia6.77.4
Dominican Rep.3.8
Figure 8
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1995
2000
Country
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Figure 9
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1995
2000
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Table 1
Figure 9. Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Note: Latin America figure is the simple average of countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Figure III.7, p. 94.
Indigenous/Afro-BrazilianNon-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Guatemala53.332.2
Nicaragua50.035.0
Panama45.45.8
Bolivia37.611.1
Paragua28.410.8
Brazil18.36.4
Ecuador18.07.6
Peru11.69.5
Chile4.62.9
Latin America29.713.5
Table 1
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Indigenous/Afro-Brazilian
Non-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Country
Percentage
Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Figure 10
PLACEHOLDER ONLY, PLEASE USE VERSION IN WORD DOCUMENT!!!!
Table 1. Level of Decision-Making in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 2004
Hiring/Firing of TeachersHiring/Firing of PrincipalsTeacher PromotionsSalariesBudget and use of resourcesMaintenanceBooksClassroom organization and schedulesCurriculum
Argentina**ProvincialProvincialProvincialProvincialNationalProvincialProvincialNational
Provincial[1]Provincial
BoliviaMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, DepartmentalNationalMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, Departmental, National
Municipal[2]
Brazil**Municipal, StateMunicipal, StateMunicipal, StateState[3]Municipal, StateState, National[4]
ChileMunicipalMunicipalMunicipalMunicipal, CentralMunicipalMunicipal
Colombia[5]Departmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalNationalDepartmental, MunicipalMunicipalMunicipalSchoolSchool
Costa RicaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalParents
Dom. RepublicNationalNationalNationalNationalPresidencySchoolNational
EcuadorNational[6]NationalNationalNationalNational/NationalNationalNationalNational[8]
School[7]
El SalvadorSchool (EDUCO); DepartmentalNational[9]NationalNationalSchool[10]SchoolNationalSchoolNational
Guatemala[11]National, Municipal, Parents (PRONADE)NationalNationalNational, MunicipalNationalNational, Municipal, ParentsNationalNational, ParentsNational
HondurasNational, DepartmentalNationalNationalNationalNational, Departmental[12]Departmental, SchoolNationalMunicipal,National
School
Jamaica
MexicoState, NationalStateState, NationalStateNational agencyStateState, NationalNational
NicaraguaMunicipal,Municipal,Departmental, Municipal,National,National,National, School CouncilNational,National,
School CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool Council
PanamaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalNational, SchoolNationalSchool, MunicipalNational
PeruNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organization, School, ParentsNational, SchoolNational, SchoolNational
Venezuela[13]National/stateNationalNational/StateNational/StateNational/StateNationalNational
Source: PREAL elaboration based on Kaufman and Nelson, 2004, Grindle, 2004, and PREAL report cards. Note: Classifications based on official distribution of decision-making. We have tried to note where legal frameworks differ from de facto distribution of
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Provincial[1]
Municipal[2]
State[3]
State, National[4]
Colombia[5]
National[6]
School[7]
National[8]
National[9]
School[10]
Guatemala[11]
National, Departmental[12]
Venezuela[13]
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Figure 11
Figure 10. Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 200203
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, UNESCO Global Education Digest 2004.
2002-2003
Primary
Cuba100
Guatemala100
China97
Chile93
East Asia92
Brazil92
Costa Rica88
World86
Trinidad & Tobago83
Jamaica80
Peru78
Latin America78
Panama75
Bolivia74
Nicaragua74
Ecuador70
Argentina67
Dominican Rep.59
Figure 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
% with required training
Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 2002-03
Figure 12
Figure 11. Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Note: Data for 1997 are not available.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
199019911992199319941995199619981999200020012002-03
% GDP2.73.03.13.23.43.43.44.04.54.54.54.3
Figure 12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% GDP
Year
% GDP
Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Figure 13
Figure 12. Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Note: Data for public current expenditure per pupil are expressed in constant 2000 dollar purchasing power parity ($PPP).
Source: UNESCO-UIS, 2005.
Public Current Expenditure on Primary Education per Pupil, US$ PPP (Constant 2000)
19982002
Spain3,0613,776
Korea2,580
Chile8641,452
Costa Rica1,357
Trinidad & Tobago9461,270
Mexico1,0111,252
Argentina5511,173
Malaysia8581,119
Colombia906
Uruguay691
Brazil663
Panama784645
Jamaica547
Paraguay518
El Salvador402462
Philippines496449
Bolivia224383
Guatemala330
Peru275318
Nicaragua187
user:Should be "Republic of Korea" before it was "Dem Rep" which is North Korea
Figure 13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002
Country
$PPP
Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Figure 14
Figure 13. Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
Note: Scores reflect average student performance across the three assessment areas. Expenditure is expressed in US dollars using purchasing power parities ($PPP).
Source: OECD/UNESCO-UIS, Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow, 2003, adapted from Figure 3.7b, p.113.
Cumulative spending per pupilAverage score across three areas
18,893401
55,987530
77,027514
49,489508
10,269368
59,808532
17,820403
22,606500
65,244497
47,854540
55,086507
44,800487
24,671461
21,997488
1,164377
34,329514
58,868474
54,737543
30,246541
12,189410
63,599501
3,479317
18,586477
41,166461
41,267487
54,845513
66,214506
46,175528
72,119499
Figure 14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cumulative expenditure per student ($PPP)
Average PISA score (reading, math, science)
Student Performance on PISA and Spending per Student, 2000
USA
Canada
Portugal
Indon.
Peru
Brazil
Mex.
Chile
Argentina
Korea
Poland
Spain
Figure 15
Figure 14. Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Note: Data are for the most recent year available from 1991-2001.
Source: Adapted from World Bank, World Development Report 2004, Table 3, p. 256.
Richest 20%Poorest 20%
Nicaragua3511
Ecuador2512
Brazil2518
Peru2215
Panama2112
Kenya2117
Costa Rica2021
Jamaica1522
Colombia1423
Figure 15
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Richest 20%
Poorest 20%
Countries
% spending
Share of Total Public Education Spending on the Richest and Poorest 20% of the Population, Selected Countries
Figure 15. Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
Source: PREAL calculations based on data from World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, Table 2.10.
Expenditure per student (% of GDP per capita)
19982002-2003
PrimaryTertiaryRatioPrimaryTertiaryRatio
Korea18.07.00.416.67.30.4
El Salvador9.010.41.210.010.71.1
Chile13.022.51.715.817.71.1
Spain18.020.21.118.922.41.2
Argentina11.020.21.812.417.81.4
United States19.028.61.521.231.71.5
Colombia14.038.12.715.930.41.9
Uruguay....m11.022.52.0
World14.436.42.5
Mexico10.044.34.413.835.02.5
Cuba24.078.23.332.390.02.8
Bolivia14.051.43.715.544.02.8
Peru8.0..m7.021.33.0
Costa Rica16.055.03.416.250.63.1
Panama14.0..m10.432.73.1
Paraguay....m13.047.13.6
Trinidad & Tobago10.0112.811.316.170.64.4
Jamaica....m15.166.94.4
Brazil12.084.97.111.358.65.2
Malaysia....m17.0114.06.7
Nicaragua12.0..m8.962.47.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2002-2003 Ratio
Country
Ratio
Ratio of Spending per Pupil: Higher vs. Primary Education, 2002-2003
-
Golpea ms fuerte a los ms pobresSource: ECLAC, 2005.
Chart4
53.332.2
5035
45.45.8
37.611.1
28.410.8
18.36.4
187.6
11.69.5
4.62.9
29.713.5
Indigenous/Afro-Brazilian
Non-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Country
Percentage
Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Figure 1
Figure 1. Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
CountryPercent at or below level 1
Indonesia78.1
Tunisia78
Brazil75.2
Mexico66
Thailand54
Turkey52.3
Uruguay48.1
Serbia42.1
Russia30.2
United States25.7
Latvia23.7
Spain23
OECD Average21.4
Liechtenstein12.3
Macao China11.1
Hong Kong-China10.4
Canada10.1
Korea9.6
Finland6.8
Note: Data shows student performing at or below level 1 on the combined mathematics scale and includes all participating non-OECD countries, USA, Canada, Mexico, Spain and top two OECD scorers. A full list of scores is available in Table A.6 in the append
Source: Based on data from OECD/UNESCO, Learning for Tomorrow's World, Table 2.5a, p. 354.
Figure 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent at or below level 1
Percent at or below level 1
Percentage of Students Performing at or below the Most Basic Level on the PISA Math Test, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 2
Figure 2. Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
1985199019952002/2003
Net Primary Enrollment85899195
Figure 2
0
0
0
0
Net Primary Enrollment
Year
Net Primary Enrollment, %
Primary Enrollment in Latin America, 1985-2003
Figure 3
Figure 3. Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region, 1960-2000
Note: "Labor force" is defined as those aged 25 and over.
Source: Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, 2001.
196019701980199019952000
Developed countries7.07.58.79.39.69.8
World4.65.15.86.46.56.7
East Asia and Pacific2.33.34.45.46.06.5
LAC3.13.54.15.05.45.7
Figure 3
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
Developed countries
World
East Asia and Pacific
LAC
Average years of schooling
Average Years of Schooling of the Labor Force, by Region 1960-2000
Figure 4
Figure 4. Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Note: Data for Argentina and Uruguay are for urban areas only. Latin America figure is the weighted average for the countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Table III.1, pp. 89-90.
Primary Completion in 15-19 Age Group, Around 2002
2002
Chile97
Argentina96.6
Uruguay96.3
Mexico92.6
Panama91.5
Ecuador90.8
Venezuela90.2
Colombia89.7
Peru89.4
Costa Rica88.7
Latin America88.1
Brazil87.6
Dominican Rep.81.9
Bolivia81.6
Paraguay80.8
El Salvador74.3
Honduras68.4
Nicaragua64.5
Guatemala60.8
Figure 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Percent
Primary School Completion among 15- to 19-Year-Olds, 2002
Figure 5
Figure 5. Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Note: Data are upper secondary graduation rates and are for the most recent year 2000-02. Mexico's data may include some double counting.
Source: OECD Education at a Glance, 2001-2004.
2002
Korea91
Finland85
OCED81
United States73
Russia73
Jamaica73
Canada72
Spain68
Chile63
Peru63
Brazil62
Malaysia62
Philippines60
Thailand53
Argentina41
Paraguay40
Indonesia36
China35
India34
Mexico34
Figure 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
Graduates per 100 person at the typical age of graduation
Secondary School Graduation Rates, 2002
Figure 6
Figure 6. School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income, 1992-2001
Source: Souza, 2005, p.214.
19922001
Richest 20%9799
Quintile 49397
Quintile 38794
Quintile 28394
Poorest 20%7593
Figure 6
00000
00000
Richest 20%
Quintile 4
Quintile 3
Quintile 2
Poorest 20%
Year
% attending
School Attendance Rates in Brazil, by Income. 1992-2001
Figure 7
Figure 7. Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Note: Data show the number of points difference in average scores of students in the top and bottom quarters of the PISA index of economic, social, and cultural status. OECD data include all Latin American countries, plus two top-scoring OECD countries.
Source: Based on data from OECD, 2004, Learning for Tomorrows World, Table 4.4, p. 399.
CountryDifference
Hong Kong64
Finland70
Mexico91
Brazil98
Uruguay102
Figure 7
0
0
0
0
0
Difference
Country
# of points difference in average score
Gap in Average PISA Math Scores between Richest and Poorest Quarter of Students, Selected Countries, 2003
Figure 8
Figure 8. Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Note: Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: Based on data from World Bank, 2004, Inequality, Table A.23, p. 308.
19952000
Jamaica1.21.2
Venezuela3.94.6
Chile5.35.0
Colombia5.65.0
El Salvador7.55.0
Uruguay4.55.0
Argentina4.65.1
Peru4.95.1
Ecuador5.05.2
Nicaragua4.95.2
Panama5.55.9
Paraguay5.45.9
Costa Rica5.36.0
Honduras4.96.0
Brazil6.96.9
Mexico6.06.9
Guatemala7.1
Bolivia6.77.4
Dominican Rep.3.8
Figure 8
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1995
2000
Country
Years
Difference in Average Years of Schooling between Richest and Poorest 20% of 21- to 30-Year-Olds, 1995 and 2000
Figure 9
Figure 9. Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Note: Latin America figure is the simple average of countries. Data are for the most recent year within two years of the date listed.
Source: ECLAC, 2005, Figure III.7, p. 94.
Indigenous/Afro-BrazilianNon-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Guatemala53.332.2
Nicaragua50.035.0
Panama45.45.8
Bolivia37.611.1
Paragua28.410.8
Brazil18.36.4
Ecuador18.07.6
Peru11.69.5
Chile4.62.9
Latin America29.713.5
Figure 9
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Indigenous/Afro-Brazilian
Non-Indigenous/ Non-Afro-Brazilian
Country
Percentage
Population Aged 15-19 That Has Not Completed Primary Education, by Ethnic or Racial Group, 2002
Table 1
PLACEHOLDER ONLY, PLEASE USE VERSION IN WORD DOCUMENT!!!!
Table 1. Level of Decision-Making in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 2004
Hiring/Firing of TeachersHiring/Firing of PrincipalsTeacher PromotionsSalariesBudget and use of resourcesMaintenanceBooksClassroom organization and schedulesCurriculum
Argentina**ProvincialProvincialProvincialProvincialNationalProvincialProvincialNational
Provincial[1]Provincial
BoliviaMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, DepartmentalNationalMunicipal, DepartmentalMunicipal, Departmental, National
Municipal[2]
Brazil**Municipal, StateMunicipal, StateMunicipal, StateState[3]Municipal, StateState, National[4]
ChileMunicipalMunicipalMunicipalMunicipal, CentralMunicipalMunicipal
Colombia[5]Departmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalDepartmental, MunicipalNationalDepartmental, MunicipalMunicipalMunicipalSchoolSchool
Costa RicaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalParents
Dom. RepublicNationalNationalNationalNationalPresidencySchoolNational
EcuadorNational[6]NationalNationalNationalNational/NationalNationalNationalNational[8]
School[7]
El SalvadorSchool (EDUCO); DepartmentalNational[9]NationalNationalSchool[10]SchoolNationalSchoolNational
Guatemala[11]National, Municipal, Parents (PRONADE)NationalNationalNational, MunicipalNationalNational, Municipal, ParentsNationalNational, ParentsNational
HondurasNational, DepartmentalNationalNationalNationalNational, Departmental[12]Departmental, SchoolNationalMunicipal,National
School
Jamaica
MexicoState, NationalStateState, NationalStateNational agencyStateState, NationalNational
NicaraguaMunicipal,Municipal,Departmental, Municipal,National,National,National, School CouncilNational,National,
School CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool CouncilSchool Council
PanamaNationalNationalNationalNationalNationalNational, SchoolNationalSchool, MunicipalNational
PeruNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organizationNational, Intermediate organization, School, ParentsNational, SchoolNational, SchoolNational
Venezuela[13]National/stateNationalNational/StateNational/StateNational/StateNationalNational
Source: PREAL elaboration based on Kaufman and Nelson, 2004, Grindle, 2004, and PREAL report cards. Note: Classifications based on official distribution of decision-making. We have tried to note where legal frameworks differ from de facto distribution of
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Provincial[1]
Municipal[2]
State[3]
State, National[4]
Colombia[5]
National[6]
School[7]
National[8]
National[9]
School[10]
Guatemala[11]
National, Departmental[12]
Venezuela[13]
[1] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 339 (quoting Corrales) the national government transfers funds to the provincial governments, which have significant spending discretion. The national government can also finance its own iniciatives.
[2] Grindle, 2004: 185
[3] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe
[4] Kaufman and Nelson, 2004: 379, Draibe (states design curriculum, within bounds of national guidelines)
[5] Recent Colombian reforms put education management in the hands of departments and municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
[6] With the exception teachers/directors in the Intercultural Bilingual System.
[7] There are two experiences where schools have a certain capacity to administer resources: School Networks & SBM: Centros de Educacion Matriz (CEMs) & REDES amigas.
[8] Although curricular reforms allow schools are allowed to adapt their curriculum to local needs, in practice curriculum design is highly centralized.
[9] The selection and promotion of public school principals and teachers (excluding EDUCO) is the responsibility of the Tribunal Calificador de la Carrera Docente.
[10] Since 1997, schools have received quality vouchers to make minimal infrastructural improvements, to acquire educational materials, and to train teachers. The parameters for the use of the funds, however, are set nationally.
[11] Municipal and cooperative schools hire and fire teachers according to municipal legal norms. The municipality also finances teachers in municipal schools. As of yet there is no official and updated curriculum used universally by all sectors of the ed
[12] The departmental admnistration proposes but the Education Secretariat makes the final decision.
[13] Hiring firing, teacher promotions, salaries and budgets- states make some of these decisions when teachers/directors are de nomina estatal.
Figure 10
Figure 10. Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 200203
Note: Data are for the most recent year within one year of the date listed.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005, UNESCO Global Education Digest 2004.
2002-2003
Primary
Cuba100
Guatemala100
China97
Chile93
East Asia92
Brazil92
Costa Rica88
World86
Trinidad & Tobago83
Jamaica80
Peru78
Latin America78
Panama75
Bolivia74
Nicaragua74
Ecuador70
Argentina67
Dominican Rep.59
Figure 10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Country
% with required training
Proportion of Primary School Teachers with Required Training, 2002-03
Figure 11
Figure 11. Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Note: Data for 1997 are not available.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2005 and online database.
199019911992199319941995199619981999200020012002-03
% GDP2.73.03.13.23.43.43.44.04.54.54.54.3
Figure 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% GDP
Year
% GDP
Public Spending on Education in Latin America as a Percent of GDP, 1990-2003
Figure 12
Figure 12. Public Spending per Pupil on Primary Education ($PPP), 2002
Note: Data for public current expenditure per pupil are expressed in constant 2000 dollar purchasing power parity ($PPP).
Source: UNESCO-UIS, 2005.
Public Current Expenditure on Primary Education per Pupil, US$ PPP (Constant 2000)
19982002
Spain3,0613,776
Korea2,580
Chile8641,452
Costa Rica1,357
Trinidad & Tobago9461,270
Mexico1,0111,252
Argentina5511,173
Malaysia8581,119
Colombia906
Uruguay691
Brazil663
Panama784645
Jamaica547
Paraguay518
El Salvador402462
Philippines496449
Bolivia224383
Guatemala330
Peru275318
Nicaragua187
user:Should be "Republic of Korea" before it was "Dem Rep" which is North Korea
Figure 12
0
0
0