Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010ACE and CDE schools achieve almost exactly the same average level of performance on the thirdgrade “PAESITA” standardized achievement test: 5.7. Likewise, the variability among ACE schoolsis similar to the variability among CDE schools. It is important to point out that, since ACE and CDEschools achieve exactly the same grade (emphasizing, however, that ACE schools achieve this despitebeing located in much poorer communities), and since the variability among ACE schools ranges from4.7 to 6.9 points (this refers to the range among the schools in the 5th to 95th percentiles) and amongCDE schools it ranges from 4.8 to 6.8 points, it is evident that the important variability in El Salvadoris “within” each type of school rather than between them. This suggests, as will be repeatedly stressedin this report, that there are considerable problems with quality control, standards, and accountabilitythroughout the system.However, ACE schools achieve the same average as CDE schools despite having significant socialdisadvantages. The proportion of ACE schools that are in municipalities with high, severe extremepoverty is almost double the proportion of CDE schools in municipalities with this poverty level (37%vs. 21%). The average poverty level in those municipalities is, also, slightly higher: 24.8% vs. 19.8%.Then, ACE schools operate at a disadvantage due to poverty. However, as they have the same outcomesas CDE schools, they appear to be more efficient; they offer, along these lines, greater value added.ACE schools seem to have more resources and supplies per student than CDE schools, althoughthey lack equal physical infrastructure compared to CDE schools. They are quite similar to CDEschools with regard to the nominal quantity and quality of teachers. ACE schools have a nominal disadvantage,naturally, because they do not have professional management with authority (the principals arenot responsible for the school). Then, with regard to advantages in resources, ACE and CDE schoolsare similar, in a net sense (better equipped, but worse infrastructure for ACE schools). Annex 2 explainshow the index for resources per student and for infrastructure was calculated.Being an ACE school means reducing the student-teacher ratio by 10 (or from 7 to 10, dependingon the model). 2 This implies, or reinforces, the idea that being an ACE school confers on the schoola degree of cost-effectiveness, or value-added, that is comparatively advantageous. It must be admitted,however, that the impact of both these variables is quite low in absolute terms: we are talking abouta matter of 1% in points on the PAESITA test. Then, to a certain extent, if this type of data is credible(and it does appear to be so), it is important to stress that the “secret” to educational improvement is notachieved by a “magic bullet” in the form of structural change, nor with the “magic bullet” of reducingthe teacher-student ratio. The only thing we wish to stress here is that when comparing two factors oropinions, neither of which is “magic” on its own, it is interesting to see that being a CDE school createsa decrease in cost-effectiveness equivalent to increasing the student-teacher ratio by 10.On this last point, there is a lot of literature on how to try to improve the academic performance ofschools by trying to lower the student-teacher ratio. In general, the best schools tend to have a lowerstudent-teacher ratio, but it is difficult to know if this is a correlation or a cause. Furthermore, it is182 A very simple regression analysis was done to inquire into this point. This analysis takes as the dependent variable third-grade academic achievement,and as “associated factors” or “controls” being or not being an ACE school (as a binomial or dummy variable), student-teacher ratio, teacher qualification,resources/student, poverty level of the communities, and school infrastructure. The coefficient of being or not being an ACE school shows that being or notbeing an ACE school means, with regard to its impact on student achievement, reducing the student-teacher ratio by 10.