people and planet

23
By contrast, the focus of the global indicator on information
and communications technology (ICT) skills is much
narrower. Based on self-reported competencies related to
computer use, it is in fact inadequate. Instead, an emphasis
on digital literacy skills would represent an advance. While
still narrow, it is broader than ICT skills and has two concrete
advantages: it would focus on direct measurement of an
actual skill, which should be a priority for this agenda, and
it would focus on a skill likely to become very relevant as
a marker of disadvantage in the world of work for most,
if not all, people. Therefore, the international community
should learn how to better measure digital literacy skills.
Current school-based measures are culturally biased and
need to be further developed to be suitable for monitoring
beyond a select group of high income countries.
Target 4.5: In recent years, the World Inequality Database
on Education has helped bring disparity in education
opportunities between and within countries to the
attention of the wider public. The launch of the Inter-
Agency Group on Education Inequality Indicators will
now advance this agenda by making effective use of a
very large number of data sets.
Three major challenges remain. First, the choice of a
suitable inequality measure is still open. The parity index,
proposed as the global indicator, is easy to communicate
but has notable weaknesses. Second, despite progress in
global coordination, many education ministries do not yet
monitor disparity. Third, global comparisons are currently
possible only by sex, location and wealth. The search for
measures of other markers – notably disability, language,
migration and displacement – needs to continue.
Leaving no one behind, the rallying cry of the new
agenda, will not be answered solely by a proliferation of
disparity measures. It also calls for a concerted effort
to monitor the policies pursued by countries to address
education disadvantage, including policies outside
education. A mechanism is needed to allow countries to
collect and compare this
qualitative information.
A new mechanism is
needed to help countries
collect and compare
information about
policies successfully
addressing disadvantages
in education
Target 4.6: One example of
the gaps in monitoring adult
education opportunities is
the continuing absence of
information on participation
in adult literacy
programmes. After years of
advocacy, the new agenda
has embraced a shift to a
nuanced direct assessment
of a range of literacy and numeracy proficiency levels
instead of relying on dubious self-reported skills. However,
as with assessments of learning outcomes in basic
education, it is essential to help build national systems
to monitor these skills. In addition, diversity in literate
environment contexts and variations in national capacity
for collecting and analysing data must be accounted for.
Target 4.7: In response to explicit reference in the target to
knowledge and skills related to sustainable development
and global citizenship, the international community has
prioritized progress assessments based on the content of
education. This is positive, as it will encourage countries
to reflect on what is taught in classrooms. However,
it has not been clarified how such information is to be
collected and communicated at the global level.
UNESCO member states’ reports on implementation
of the 1974 Recommendation concerning Education
for International Understanding, Co-operation and
Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms are proposed as the mechanism
to monitor progress towards the target. But low
response rates and submission quality mean the process
is weak and needs to be complemented by a more
systematic and rigorous approach.
The GEM Report has proposed an approach that would
require a systematic listing of national curriculum
frameworks and a coding protocol to analyse curricular
materials. Such a mechanism would also require close
collaboration between education ministries and regional
or international organizations to ensure that the
quality of the information is good and that the process
is country-led. The mechanism could also cover other
aspects of national policies, including teacher education
programmes, learning assessments and textbooks.
Target 4.a: Interest in the concept of child-friendly
schools drove the formulation of this target. The
most meaningful measures of such environments are
observation-based, making this a particularly difficult
target for global monitoring. One potential entry point
is the growing interest in measures of school violence,
though further progress will require collaboration to
ensure that definitions in student surveys, currently
fragmented, are aligned. School infrastructure indicators
may be the easiest to measure but also the least likely
to capture the spirit of an effective learning environment.
Target 4.b: There is a surprising gap in information on
scholarships. Providers need to collaborate to develop
an entirely new global mechanism for reporting on
378
CHAPTER 23 | PRIORITIES FOR MONITORING EDUCATION IN THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS