private-schools-full-report

Recommendations

Info

The role and impact of private schools in developing countries: a rigorous review of the evidence government primary graduates benefit from government secondary schooling. She also explains that the government secondary schools tend to have more stringent admission requirements than the private secondary schools, and that the latter (in contrast to the primary sector) tend to have low status. Important caveats Comparing the effectiveness of ‘private’ with government schools in developing countries is problematic because a potentially very large proportion of schools are unregistered/unaided and therefore typically missing from the analysis (Tooley et al. 2011). If, as some studies have demonstrated, there is a difference between the performance of children in aided versus unaided 8 private schools (Kingdon 2008), then research that does not differentiate between them risks misrepresenting the ‘true’ private school effect. There is also variation in the degree to which empirical studies address the recognised methodological puzzle of accounting for unobserved/unmeasurable differences in the socio-economic backgrounds of private and public school pupils. These unobservables, which include home educational environment, or the degree to which parents are educationally motivated, affect academic performance but cannot be easily adjusted for in a statistical study. If they are not taken into account, however, then the private school advantage is likely to be over-estimated and while many may not be able to address the puzzle given data and methodological limitations, most studies do recognise it; some even address it reasonably convincingly through methods such as family fixed effects (Desai et al. 2008), panel data approaches (French and Kingdon 2010) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (Angrist et al. 2002, 2006). Another major caveat is that the debate about the relative quality of education should not detract from the fact that overall learning levels of children in rural areas in many countries remain worryingly low, whether at private or public schools. As the latest ASER report from Pakistan acknowledges, the private school effect is often calculated relative to incredibly low achievement levels in state schools, which ultimately questions the real measure of the advantage for children attending them (ASER Pakistan 2014). Notwithstanding the above caveats, the majority of the evidence reviewed here supports the assumption that children attending private schools do achieve better learning outcomes than their government counterparts, albeit to differing degrees, and with some significant exceptions. Importantly, however, the size of this advantage is sometimes small, always declines when unobservable and selection effects are controlled for, varies between countries, within them (between urban and rural areas), and between learning outcomes (e.g. numeracy, literacy) within schools. Additionally, it is widely recognised that while quantitative studies drawing on survey data can show correlation between school type and outcomes, they typically cannot explain the causal processes underlying the observed correlations. 8 Private aided schools receive grants from the government whereas unaided schools are entirely self-financed (Kingdon 1996). 18
4. Outline and assessment of the evidence Assumption 2: Teaching is better in private schools than in state schools No. of studies = 14: India (9), Pakistan (2), Nigeria (1), Kenya (1), South Africa (1), Tanzania (1) (one study covers two countries) *POSITIVE (12), Neutral (2) Summary assessment of evidence: A relatively high number of studies of mainly medium quality (including three high quality studies one of which is an experimental design). A relatively large range of countries were covered and there was a high level of consistency in the findings with the vast majority of studies supporting the assumption. Overall strength of evidence: STRONG Headline finding: Teaching in private schools tends to be better –in terms of more teacher presence and teaching activity, and teaching approaches that are more likely to lead to improved outcomes – than in state schools. Some evidence supports the explanation that this is due to increased accountability of teachers to employers in private schools. However, much of the evidence reviewed also indicates that private school teachers are often less formally qualified, have low salaries and weak job security; such conditions might in part explain the greater teacher effort in private schools. One of the prominent explanations frequently given to account for better educational outcomes in private schools is that they generally deploy better teaching practices. With a minority of exceptions, all of the studies we reviewed, representing a diverse range of country contexts, do indeed indicate that teaching – as measured through levels of teacher presence/absence, the extent and quality of teacher activity, teaching approaches and pupil–teacher ratios (PTRs)–is often more conducive to learning in private schools than it is in state schools. As in the section above, however, relativity is an important caveat here: while comparative studies of a quantitative and qualitative nature often conclude in favour of the quality of private school teaching, there is little consistency in terms of what researchers consider to be high quality teaching, or therefore how it is assessed. Most studies stop short of claiming explicitly that teaching in private schools is good per se. In the absence of any kind of rigorous comparative framework for assessing teaching quality, the findings presented here are not presently comparable, let alone generalisable, either between schools, or across countries. Neutral evidence A minority of neutral evidence relates to PTRs, teacher attendance and activity. Goyal and Pandey’s (2009) study of two states in India finds that teacher attendance and activity were similar for private and government schools in the same district or village. In Ohba’s (2012) study in Kibera, Kenya, ten out of the 12 private primary schools had lower PTRs than both of the (two) government primary schools in the sample. Since these schools were purposively selected for the study and the number of government schools in the sample is particularly small compared with the private schools, this finding is rated as neutral. However, these neutral findings contrast with the majority of evidence reviewed which supports the assumption (see below). 19
Page 1 and 2: Education Rigorous Literature Revie
Page 3 and 4: Contents Acronyms .................
Page 5 and 6: Executive summary Introduction This
Page 7 and 8: Executive summary schools in respon
Page 9 and 10: 1. Introduction schools or whether
Page 11 and 12: 2. Conceptual framework: the initia
Page 13 and 14: 3. Methodology The review was under
Page 15 and 16: 3. Methodology The geographical fo
Page 17 and 18: 3. Methodology The overall strength
Page 19 and 20: 4. Outline and assessment of the ev
Page 21: 4. Outline and assessment of the ev
Page 49 and 50: 5. Synthesis of the evidence and ga
Page 55 and 56: 6. Conclusion: the effects of priva
Page 57 and 58: References Akaguri L (2011) Quality
Page 59 and 60: References Galab S, Vennam U, Koman
Page 61 and 62: References Phillips KD, Stambach A
Page 63 and 64: Appendices Appendix 1: Authorship o
Page 65 and 66: Appendix 2: Studies included in the
Page 71 and 72: Appendix 3: Hypotheses (H) and coun
Page 73 and 74:
Appendix 4: Review process and sear
Page 75 and 76:
Appendix 5: Sources Ingentaconnect
Page 77 and 78:
Appendix 7: Tools for reviewing ind
Page 79 and 80:
Appendix 8: Assessment of overall s
Page 81:
This material has been funded by th
show all

private-schools-full-report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?