13
International Policy Dialogue Forum on Teacher Challenges for EFA in India 29-30 May 2012
International Policy Dialogue Forum on Teacher Challenges for EFA in India
29-30 May 2012
Education as a public good, and public sector as guardian of equal access to that public good
vs Hard realities of public sector
inadequacies and corresponding view that limiting government intervention is intrinsically good
5/20/2012 2
UN Global Compact (launched 2000 more than 600 members)
World Bank and IMF (specific program, EdInvest)
EFA high-level group has private sector participation
UNESCO and WEF
Bilateral donors (DFID, GTZ, Netherlands, USAID, among others)
New initiatives such as Global Compact on Learning and Global Business Coalition for Education
5/20/20123
On the one hand, trends towards ntional development plans, including donor cooperation
On the other hand, encouragement for private development efforts, that take place outside sector planning
5/20/20124
What the business sector is unlikely to contribute without regulation and accountability
Substantial additional new funding Disinterested contribution Long-term commitment Last mile/equity Spontaneous compliance with standards for access, provision
and learning outcomes Spontaneous compliance with public sector planning and
financing mechanisms Transparent financing and management
5/20/20125
There is no international standard gathering of information about private money going to education, aside from private education. Terminology varies, figures are partial or anectdotal.
Overall, private giving to public education is significant in sums but not in percentages of education budgets.
From US corporations to developing country education: $500 m/yearIncrease in philanthropy emerging countries, notably India and BrazilTeachers: no clear indicators of what PPPs do for them that have an impact on learning outomes
5/20/2012 6
Results in terms of learning outcomes vary: generally, when adjusted for socio-economic background, private education is no better. Can be much worse, where controls are lax.
•In private education or privately-supported education, family involvement is high;•Private schools attract cohorts from higher socio-economic status families;•When socio-economic background is taken into account, learning outcomes not consistently different : Pisa, WB studies, etc.;•Anecdotal evidence, and some statistics, show that private funds flow more to higher socio-economic cohorts, therefore potentially contributing to widening inequality
5/20/2012 7
Weak or non-existent regulation means weak oversight
Distortion of national plans by private sector interests
Public sector responsibility for cost overruns and TCO
Distortion of competition Additional costs of partnership Complex accountability:each partner with
own objectives, procedures
5/20/20128
Shared investment, risks and benefits Assigned responsibility for total cost of
ownership Joint decision-making and accountability Adherence to international norms and
standards
5/20/20129
Positive branding: demonstrated interest in the public good
Enhancing complementary aims: private sector gain in exchange for help with the last mile
Harnessing short-term investment for longer-term goals: consider national plans
Exchange of skills:, e.g. pedagogy ↔ innovation Share evaluation strategies and results:
understand what works5/20/2012
10
Definition of needs
Ownership by stakeholders
Focus on long-term impact
Transparency and democratic participation in mangement and decision-making
Strong regulation and accountability
Sustainability
5/20/201211
21st century skills Innovation in uses of ICTs for distribution
and new pedagogy Institutions of excellence Diversity and alternative approaches Education linked to local or regional
economy Whole community development Diversification pool of teachers Motivation
5/20/201212
