SIPANEWS - SIPA - Columbia University

Figure 1: Average years of schooling for the 1938–40 and 1968–70 birth cohorts.
The Bad News
Rapid growth in the amount of time individuals
spend in school has not necessarily translated
into substantial increases in learning. This trend is
clear, despite significant data limitations in many
countries. For example, in many cases an evaluation
of achievement over time is not possible due
to the absence of time series data.
Despite the data deficiencies, international testing
results suggest learning outcomes are deficient,
to say the least. For example, standardized tests
recently administered in Latin America measured
varying levels of achievement in literacy. These
included students’ basic abilities to understand texts
(Level 1, Figure 2-A); to reproduce the elements of a
text in their own words (Level 2, Figure 2-B); and to
“fill in the blanks,” demonstrating an understanding
of advanced concepts like causation (Level 3, Figure
2-C). The data are displayed to show the percentage
of public and private school children that attain
different levels of reading readiness.
As the figures show, the majority of third-
and fourth-graders in the region have attained
proficiency at Level 1. Still, more than one in ten
children is unable to fulfill this benchmark in all
countries save Argentina, Brazil, and Chile. More
than half of all children fail to attain Level 3 proficiency
everywhere except Argentina and Chile.
The picture becomes even more discouraging
when the region is compared to wealthier
countries. Research by Lant Pritchett of Harvard’s
Kennedy School of Government compares educational
achievement in Latin America with that
in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
1938–40 1968–70
Note: The data are for males and are drawn from Duryea and Székely (2000). The data for
Argentina are only for Buenos Aires; those for Bolivia and Uruguay cover only urban areas.
Development (OECD) countries. Only about
three percent of Brazilian students outperform the
average Danish student. The average Brazilian
student’s level of achievement is comparable
to the lower two percent of Danish students’
achievements. By both absolute and relative
measures, therefore, learning in Latin America’s
educational system is lacking.
Unfortunately, our knowledge of how to
improve learning (including in the United States)
is rather limited. There is simply little rigorous
research on what works and what does not. Latin
American countries need to do more to evaluate
the success of their own educational policies and
initiatives. Countries in the region have undertaken
a large number of innovative and interesting
programs. To make progress, though, these
programs, from the outset, should be designed
with high-quality, experimental methods. This
collaboration between educators struggling to
build better programs and scholars skilled in
program evaluation would allow the identification
of successful models and, one hopes, lead
to the improvement of education for millions of
children throughout the region.
References
Duryea, S., and M. Székely (2000). “Labor Markets in Latin
America: A Look at the Supply Side.” Emerging Markets Review
1, 199–228.
Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la
Educación (2001). “Primer estudio internacional comparativo
sobre lenguaje, matemática y factores asociados para alumnus
de tercer y cuarto grado de la educación básica.” UNESCO.
Figure 2: Percentage of students who
attain given levels of reading proficiency.
Source: Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación
de la Calidad de la Educación (2001).
McEwan, P., M. Urquiola, and E. Vegas (2008). “School Choice,
Stratification, and Information on School Performance: Lessons
from Chile. Economia 8 (2), 1–28.
Pritchett, L. (2004). “Towards a New Consensus for Addressing
the Global Challenge of the Lack of Education.” Copenhagen
Consensus Challenge Paper.
Urquiola, M., and V. Calderón (2006). “Apples and Oranges:
Educational Enrollment and Attainment Across Countries in
Latin America and the Caribbean.” International Journal of Educational
Development 26 (6): 572–90.
Miguel Urquiola is assistant professor of International
and Public Affairs and Economics at Columbia University’s
School of International and Public Affairs.
SIPA NEWS 19