13.07.2015 Views

Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

PROGRESS TOWARDS THE <strong>EFA</strong> GOALSEstimating <strong>the</strong> cost of achieving Education for AllBox 2.26: Information used for <strong>the</strong> <strong>global</strong> cost estimatesThe study has drawn on <strong>the</strong> most recent cross-countrydata in preparing <strong>the</strong> <strong>global</strong> financing estimates.Variables covered include <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> school agepopulation, school system structure and capacity,student progression rates (e.g. promotion, repetitionand dropout rates) and key costs such as those forteachers, classrooms and textbooks. The three mainsources of data are:<strong>the</strong> United Nations World Population Prospectsdatabase, for information on school age populationsand projections of population growth;<strong>the</strong> UNESCO Institute for Statistics, for informationon enrolment, student progression rates, teachers,classrooms and education financing;<strong>the</strong> World Bank and International Monetary Fund,for information on overall government revenueand economic growth projections.These were supplemented by over thirty o<strong>the</strong>rsources, including national education sector <strong>report</strong>sand plans, and public expenditure reviews. Informationwas also collected directly from UNESCO offices ando<strong>the</strong>r studies commissioned for <strong>the</strong> costing exercise(Box 2.27). In <strong>the</strong> few cases where no national datawere available, regional aggregates were used. Therewere often large differences in <strong>report</strong>ed data for agiven country, particularly with respect to educationcosts. Every effort was made to use <strong>the</strong> best availabledata. However, in some cases <strong>the</strong>re are large marginsof error. Overall, <strong>the</strong> cost estimates should be treatedas indicative of <strong>the</strong> magnitude of financing gaps inlow-income countries.A detailed outline of <strong>the</strong> methodology, data andresults is available in EPDC and UNESCO (2009).However, <strong>the</strong>ir indicative and provisional natureis readily acknowledged.Estimating <strong>the</strong> financing required to meet <strong>the</strong>Education for All goals poses several problemsbecause <strong>the</strong> goals set in Dakar do not all includequantitative targets. In addition, quantifyingfinancing gaps means measuring <strong>the</strong> differencebetween estimated costs and domestic financingcapacity. Determining <strong>the</strong> latter involvesidentifying <strong>the</strong> degree to which low-incomecountries can make domestic resources available,taking into account economic growth prospectsand public spending levels. The followingsubsections set out <strong>the</strong> parameters for <strong>the</strong>seareas.Identifying <strong>the</strong> targetsIn <strong>the</strong> Dakar Framework for Action, governmentsmade a commitment to achieve universal primaryeducation by 2015. This is a clear, quantifiable andmeasurable goal, though its precise meaning isopen to interpretation. There are also quantifiabletargets for adult literacy. O<strong>the</strong>r goals of greatimportance lack clear targets. Examples include<strong>the</strong> injunctions to improve education quality andensure access to appropriate learningprogrammes for young people and adults. Insome cases, goals relating to quality and equitydefine important principles but do not establishclear benchmarks. Targets chosen for thiscosting exercise cover four areas (Table 2.8):Early childhood care and education. It is widelyrecognized that good early childhood educationis important not just in its own right but also asa way to improve participation and learningachievement in primary education. Buildingon previous work, this exercise adopts a targetof providing free pre-primary education to allchildren living below <strong>the</strong> poverty line (VanRavens and Aggio, 2007, 2008). This translatesinto an average gross enrolment ratio of 52%by 2015 for countries included in <strong>the</strong> exercise.Universal primary education. For <strong>the</strong> purposesof this exercise, it is assumed that all primaryschool age children enter school on time andprogress through school with limited repetitionand no dropout, implying a net enrolment ratioof 100% by 2015. 54Lower secondary education. The DakarFramework does not include targets forsecondary education, but increasingparticipation at this level is important. ThisReport <strong>the</strong>refore includes a costing exercisethat assumes that all children completingprimary education by 2015 will make <strong>the</strong>transition to lower secondary school, implyingan average gross enrolment ratio of about 88%by 2015 for countries included in <strong>the</strong> exercise.Adult literacy. The Dakar target of halvingadult illiteracy will require wide-ranginginterventions. Part of <strong>the</strong> target will be achievedThe costingexercise providesa comprehensivereview andreassessmentof <strong>the</strong> <strong>EFA</strong>financing gap54. This assumption has <strong>the</strong>effect of understating costsassociated with reachingover-age children currentlyout of primary school.121

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!